Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 28(5): 478-485, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2029155

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: It is well established that rural communities face geographic and socioeconomic challenges linked to higher rates of health disparities across the United States, though the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) impact on rural communities is less certain. OBJECTIVE: To understand the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on rural communities in Tennessee, investigate differences in rural-urban mortality rates after controlling for confounding variables, and inform state pandemic response policy. DESIGN: A cross-sectional analysis of cumulative COVID-19 morality rates. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Tennessee county-level COVID-19 mortality data from March 1, 2020, to January 31, 2021, were matched with county-level sociodemographic and health data from public datasets: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Social Determinants of Health, PLACES: Local Data for Better Health County Data, and the US Census Bureau. County status was defined using the 2013 National Center for Health Statistics Urban-Rural Classification. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A negative binomial regression model estimated adjusted incidence rate ratio and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for rural compared with urban mortality. Unadjusted rate ratios and rate differences for COVID-19 mortality in rural versus urban counties were compared with those for influenza and pneumonia and all-cause mortality over the past 5 years. RESULTS: During the study period, 9650 COVID-19 deaths occurred across 42 urban and 53 rural counties. Controlling for county-level sociodemographic characteristics, health care access, and comorbidities, incidence rate ratio was 1.13 (95% CI, 1.00-1.28, P < .05) for rural as compared with urban deaths. Unadjusted COVID-19 mortality risk difference between rural and urban counties was greater (61.85, 95% CI, 54.31-69.31) than 5-year influenza and pneumonia rural-urban risk difference (12.57, 95% CI, 11.16-13.00) during 2015-2019. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 mortality rates were greater for populations living in Tennessee's rural as compared with urban counties during the study period. This differential impact must be considered in public health decision making to mitigate COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Policy , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Pandemics , Rural Population , United States/epidemiology , Urban Population
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Nov 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2017777

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A) was reported in association with the COVID-19 pandemic. MIS-A was included in the list of adverse events to be monitored as part of the emergency use authorizations issued for COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: Reports of MIS-A patients received by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) after COVID-19 vaccines became available were assessed. Data collected on the patients included clinical and demographic characteristics and their vaccine status. The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) was also reviewed for possible cases of MIS-A. RESULTS: From December 14, 2020 to April 30, 2021, 20 patients who met the case definition for MIS-A were reported to CDC. Their median age was 35 years (range, 21-66 years), and 13 (65%) were male. Overall, 16 (80%) patients had a preceding COVID-19-like illness a median of 26 days (range 11-78 days) before MIS-A onset. All 20 patients had laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Seven MIS-A patients (35%) received COVID-19 vaccine a median of 10 days (range, 6-45 days) before MIS-A onset; 3 patients received a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine 4, 17, and 22 days before MIS-A onset. Patients with MIS-A predominantly had gastrointestinal and cardiac manifestations and hypotension or shock. CONCLUSIONS: Although 7 patients were reported to have received COVID-19 vaccine, all had evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Given the widespread use of COVID-19 vaccines, the lack of reporting of MIS-A associated with vaccination alone, without evidence of underlying SARS-CoV-2 infection, is reassuring.

3.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 28(4): 833-836, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1760184

ABSTRACT

We report an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 involving 3 Malayan tigers (Panthera tigris jacksoni) at a zoo in Tennessee, USA. Investigation identified naturally occurring tiger-to-tiger transmission; genetic sequence change occurred with viral passage. We provide epidemiologic, environmental, and genomic sequencing data for animal and human infections.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Tigers , Animals , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Tennessee/epidemiology , Tigers/genetics
4.
J Zoo Wildl Med ; 52(4): 1224-1228, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1581615

ABSTRACT

Natural infection of three captive Malayan tigers (Panthera tigris jacksoni) with SARS-CoV-2 caused mild to moderate symptoms of lethargy, anorexia, and coughing. Each tiger was longitudinally sampled opportunistically via consciously obtained oral, nasal, and/or fecal samples during and after resolution of clinical signs, until 2 wk of negative results were obtained. Persistent shedding of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material was detected via reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction in feces up to 29 d after initial onset of clinical signs, but not in nasal or oral samples. Tigers became resistant to behavioral training to obtain nasal samples but tolerated longitudinal oral sampling. Serum was obtained from two tigers, and antibody titers revealed a robust antibody response within 9 d of onset of clinical signs, which was sustained for at least 3 mon. The tigers were infected despite the use of masks and gloves by husbandry personnel. No known cause of the outbreak was identified, despite extensive investigational efforts by the regional health department. No forward cross-species transmission was observed in primates housed in nearby enclosures. The increasing regularity of reports of SARS-CoV-2 infection in nondomestic felids warrants further investigations into shedding and immunity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Felidae , Tigers , Animals , COVID-19/veterinary , Feces , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 8(Suppl 1):114-115, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1564197

ABSTRACT

Background Human-to-feline and airborne transmission among cats of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been described, though documented feline-to-human transmission has not been reported. In October 2020, all 3 Malayan tigers at a Tennessee AZA accredited zoo were diagnosed with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. We investigated to determine source and prevent further transmission. Methods Tiger nasal swab specimens were tested at the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL). An environmental assessment at the zoo was completed. We interviewed 18 staff who interacted with the tigers during the 2 weeks before animal symptom onset. Confirmed human cases were defined as persons testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR during September 28–October 29, with tiger interaction during their 14-day incubation period. Interviewed staff had repeat SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and serum IgG testing on October 29. Tigers and staff testing positive had specimens sent to CDC for genomic sequencing. Tiger sequences were compared phylogenetically with 30 geographically associated human cases collected within 2 weeks of the outbreak and > 200 background sequences from TN. Results NVSL confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in all 3 tigers. Environmental assessment identified fencing between humans and animals allowing airflow and an open outdoor exhibit observation point above the habitat. Confirmed cases were identified in a tiger keeper and veterinary assistant;both developed symptoms after exposure to symptomatic tigers and one sample was genotyped. Staff did not report known contact with ill visitors. All staff were negative for SARS-CoV-2 IgG. The tigers and most temporally and geographically associated cases had genetic sequences in clade 20G and B.1.2. Tiger sequences were 3-6 single nucleotide polymorphisms different from the positive tiger keeper (Figure). Figure. Whole-genome phylogenetic analysis. Whole-genome phylogenetic analysis from a portion of clade 20G showing divergence estimates from SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan-Hu-1 reference genome with sequences from humans living in Tennessee and Malayan tigers sampled during the outbreak investigation in October 2020. Sequence analysis showed 3-6 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) differences between one human tiger keeper and all three tiger sequences. Differences are indicated by one-step edges (lines) between colored dots (individual SARS-CoV-2 sequenced infections). Numbers indicate unique sequences. Note not all analyzed sequences are shown in this figure. Conclusion Using a One Health approach, we concluded the index tiger was likely infected via transmission from an ill visitor at an exhibit observation point or unidentified asymptomatic staff. Infection spread to the other 2 tigers and tiger-to-human transmission to 2 staff is possible thereafter. The zoo was advised on infection control practices for humans and animals, and no additional cases were identified. Disclosures William Schaffner, MD, VBI Vaccines (Consultant)

7.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(11): 2914-2918, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504024

ABSTRACT

We describe a fatal case of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in an adult with onset 22 days after a second dose of mRNA coronavirus disease vaccine. Serologic and clinical findings indicated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection occurred before vaccination. The immunopathology of this syndrome, regardless of vaccination status, remains poorly understood.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Syndrome , Vaccination
8.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(6): e2115850, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1251884

ABSTRACT

Importance: Contact tracing is a multistep process to limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Gaps in the process result in missed opportunities to prevent COVID-19. Objective: To quantify proportions of cases and their contacts reached by public health authorities and the amount of time needed to reach them and to compare the risk of a positive COVID-19 test result between contacts and the general public during 4-week assessment periods. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study took place at 13 health departments and 1 Indian Health Service Unit in 11 states and 1 tribal nation. Participants included all individuals with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and their named contacts. Local COVID-19 surveillance data were used to determine the numbers of persons reported to have laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were interviewed and named contacts between June and October 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: For contacts, the numbers who were identified, notified of their exposure, and agreed to monitoring were calculated. The median time from index case specimen collection to contact notification was calculated, as were numbers of named contacts subsequently notified of their exposure and monitored. The prevalence of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test among named and tested contacts was compared with that jurisdiction's general population during the same 4 weeks. Results: The total number of cases reported was 74 185. Of these, 43 931 (59%) were interviewed, and 24 705 (33%) named any contacts. Among the 74 839 named contacts, 53 314 (71%) were notified of their exposure, and 34 345 (46%) agreed to monitoring. A mean of 0.7 contacts were reached by telephone by public health authorities, and only 0.5 contacts per case were monitored. In general, health departments reporting large case counts during the assessment (≥5000) conducted smaller proportions of case interviews and contact notifications. In 9 locations, the median time from specimen collection to contact notification was 6 days or less. In 6 of 8 locations with population comparison data, positive test prevalence was higher among named contacts than the general population. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of US local COVID-19 surveillance data, testing named contacts was a high-yield activity for case finding. However, this assessment suggests that contact tracing had suboptimal impact on SARS-CoV-2 transmission, largely because 2 of 3 cases were either not reached for interview or named no contacts when interviewed. These findings are relevant to decisions regarding the allocation of public health resources among the various prevention strategies and for the prioritization of case investigations and contact tracing efforts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Contact Tracing , Public Health , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Contact Tracing/statistics & numerical data , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disclosure/statistics & numerical data , Health Services, Indigenous , Humans , Incidence , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2 , Telephone , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL