A global spatial analysis of factors associated with case and mortality rates for coronavirus disease 2019 during the first year of the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: A increasing number of studies have revealed associations between country-level determinants and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. This ecological study was conducted to analyze country-level parameters related to COVID-19 infections and deaths during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: The examined predictors comprised demographics, economic factors, disease prevalence and healthcare system status, and the relevant data were obtained from public databases. The index dates were set to 15 July 2020 (Time 1) and 15 December 2020 (Time 2). The adjusted spatial autoregression models used a first-order queen contiguity spatial weight for the main analysis and a second-order queen contiguity spatial weight for a sensitivity analysis to examine the predictors associated with COVID-19 case and mortality rates. RESULTS: Obesity was significantly and positively associated with COVID-19 case and mortality rates in both the main and sensitivity analyses. The sensitivity analysis revealed that a country's gross domestic product, population density, life expectancy and proportion of the population older than 65 y are positively associated with COVID-19 case and mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: With the increasing global prevalence of obesity, the relationship between obesity and COVID-19 disease at the country level must be clarified and continually monitored.

Invited Commentary: To Make Long-Term Gains Against Infection Inequity, Infectious Disease Epidemiology Needs to Develop a More Sociological Imagination.

In a recent article in the Journal, Noppert et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2023;192(3):475-482) articulated in detail the mechanisms connecting high-level "fundamental social causes" of health inequity to inequitable infectious disease outcomes, including infection, severe disease, and death. In this commentary, we argue that while intensive focus on intervening mechanisms is welcome and necessary, it cannot occur in isolation from examination of the way that fundamental social causes-including racism, socioeconomic inequity, and social stigma-sustain infection inequities even when intervening mechanisms are addressed. We build on the taxonomy of intervening mechanisms laid out by Noppert et al. to create a road map for strengthening the connection between fundamental cause theory and infectious disease epidemiology and discuss its implications for future research and intervention.

Social and ideological determinants of COVID-19 vaccination status in Spain.

OBJECTIVES: This study analysed the association between social and ideological determinants with COVID-19 vaccine accessibility and hesitancy in the Spanish adult population. STUDY DESIGN: This was a repeated cross-sectional study. METHODS: The data analysed are based on monthly surveys conducted by the Centre for Sociological Research between May 2021 and February 2022. Individuals were classified according to their COVID-19 vaccination status into (1) vaccinated (reference group); (2) willing to vaccinate but not vaccinated, proxy of lack of vaccine accessibility; and (3) hesitant, proxy of vaccine hesitancy. Independent variables included social (educational attainment, gender) and ideological determinants (voting in the last elections, importance attached to the health vs the economic impact of the pandemic, and political self-placement). We estimated odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) conducting one age-adjusted multinomial logistic regression model for each determinant and then stratified them by gender. RESULTS: Both social and ideological determinants had a weak association with the lack of vaccine accessibility. Individuals with medium educational attainment had higher odds of vaccine hesitancy (OR = 1.44, CI 1.08-1.93) compared with those with high educational attainment. People self-identified as conservative (OR = 2.90; CI 2.02-4.15) and those who prioritised the economic impact (OR = 3.80; CI 2.62-5.49) and voted for parties opposed to the Government (OR = 2.00; CI 1.54-2.60) showed higher vaccine hesitancy. The stratified analysis showed a similar pattern for both men and women. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the determinants of vaccine uptake and hesitancy could help to design strategies that increase immunisation at the population level and minimise health inequities.

Covid-19 vaccination uptake by Hapu Mama - How are we progressing?

The Covid-19 vaccine has been recommended for pregnant people (hapu mama) in Aotearoa New Zealand since June 2021. We surveyed people birthing in a tertiary hospital regarding their vaccination status and reasons for this. There were 74% (142/191) of pregnant people who were fully vaccinated. Motivators for vaccination included protection against Covid-19 and antibody transfer to the baby (pepe). Unvaccinated participants worried about vaccine safety. Concerns were raised about the change in official advice without well-communicated reasons for the change. Future vaccine and booster rollouts must be delivered equitably and hapu mama must be a priority group.Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. © 2022 The Authors. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

Telehealth for Chronic Disease Management Among Vulnerable Populations.

Chronic diseases disproportionately affect patients in low-income minority groups who traditionally use in-person healthcare services. COVID-19 disrupted their routines and limited options for people to receive care; this could exacerbate health inequities. The study examined telehealth chronic disease management among low-income minority groups. We used Florida Medicaid claims data from March to December 2020 and the American Consumer Survey to examine the study objectives. Data were analyzed using Linear and Logistic Regression. We retrieved claim records of 52,904 unique patients; 31,999 were female and 49% of the sample had at least one telehealth visit. Medicaid patients were 8% less likely to use telehealth and 21% more likely to have audio visits when compared to Medicare patients. The analyses suggest that Non-Hispanic Black patients and individuals with a lack of education experience significant health inequities. People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5%) and heart failure (14%) were less likely to use telehealth than patients with diabetes. Telehealth will continue to be a health delivery option; thus we recommend that strategies are enacted to educate, and resources are provided to promote equity among Non-Hispanic Black patients. Without priority attention to people among low-income minority populations, health inequities will continue to plague this community.

Race, rhetorical veneers and the virulence of colonial violence during COVID

COVID has exposed how health and racial inequities are deeply entangled. This article seeks to examine how race is made present but also erased in words, bodies and institutions. It takes as its point of departure two Australian health campaigns and their use of the promotional rhetoric of ‘the race' to urgently increase immunisations and organ donation registrations at the time of COVID. In a critical analysis of the public policy and political discourse that emerged in and around these promotions, I show how racialised oppression materialised and was obscured in linguistic veneers of inclusivity and diversity. The race to improve health outcomes articulated social imaginaries of the ‘level playing field' in a projection to the future that omitted the historical production of uneven terrains. Reorienting this temporal direction, the article historicises the present, tracing back racial inequities from the frontline and dividing lines of coronavirus, to the frontiers and foundations of the Australian nation. In so doing, it argues for a more critical engagement with health discourse and promotions that target racialised groups and (re)present histories of violence. © The Author(s) 2023.

Coronavirus Health Inequities in the United States Highlight Need for Continued Community Development Efforts*

The coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic of 2020 has shown a spotlight on inequity in the USA. Although these inequities have long existed, the coronavirus and its disparate impact on health in different communities have raised the visibility of these deeply ingrained inequities to a level that has created a new awareness across the US population and an opportunity to use this heightened awareness of the existing conditions for change. ‘Community and social development' efforts in the post-pandemic USA can be informed by a health justice framework, across economic, societal and cultural, environmental and social dimensions. Dimensions which have all been implicated in the coronavirus response and complement other social and community development models. Although health disparities and inequities did not begin with coronavirus and will not end in the post-pandemic USA, social and community development efforts which value health justice and concentrate on social determinants of health can provide needed policies and programmes for a more equitable US health system.

Racism, colonialism and the implications for nursing scholarship: A discussion paper.

AIM: A critical discussion of the intersections between racism and colonialism as social determinants of health and explore how these discriminatory ideologies shape nursing inquiry. DESIGN: Discussion paper. DATA SOURCES: A review of pertinent discourse on racism and colonialism in nursing from 2000 to 2022. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: The failure to address health inequity plaguing racialized and marginalized populations locally and globally affects all groups, as illustrated in the COVID-19 pandemic. Racism and colonialism are inextricably linked, creating potent forces that influence nursing scholarship and adversely affect the health of a culturally and racially diverse society. Power differentials exist within and between countries creating structural challenges that lead to inequitable distribution of resources and othering. Nursing cannot be abstracted from the sociopolitical context in which it exists. There have been calls to address the social drivers that influence the health of the communities. More still needs to be done to support an antiracist agenda and decolonize nursing. CONCLUSION: Nurses, as the largest healthcare workforce, can be critical in addressing health disparities. However, nurses have failed to eliminate racism within their ranks, and essentialism ideology has been normalized. A multidimensional approach that includes interventions aimed at nursing education, direct patient care, community health, nursing organizations and policy is needed to address problematic nursing discourse rooted in colonialism and racism ideologies. Since knowledge generated from scholarship informs nursing education, practice and policy, it is imperative to implement antiracist policies that eliminate racist assumptions and practices from nursing scholarship. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The paper is a discursive paper using pertinent nursing literature. IMPACT: For nursing to attain its potential as a leader in healthcare, standards of scientific vigour should be embedded within history, culture and politics. Recommendations are provided on possible strategies to identify, confront and abolish racism and colonialism in nursing scholarship.

We Charge Vaccine Apartheid?

Vaccine apartheid is creating conditions that make for premature death, poverty, and disease in racialized ways. Invoking vaccine apartheid as opposed to euphemisms like vaccine nationalism, is necessary to highlight the racialized distributional consequences of vaccine inequities witnessed with COVID-19. This commentary clarifies the concept of vaccine apartheid against the historical and legal usage of apartheid. It reflects on the connections and important disjunctions between the two. It places the intellectual property regime under heightened scrutiny for reform and transformation. This commentary finds that drawing on the intersections between a human rights and health justice approach can provide creative and novel approaches for anti-subordination. It concludes that acknowledging and naming the structural injustice of vaccine apartheid is only the first step towards providing redress.

The Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic Policy on Social Needs Across the State of Kansas and Western Missouri: Paired Survey Response Testing.

BACKGROUND: Studying patients' social needs is critical to the understanding of health conditions and disparities, and to inform strategies for improving health outcomes. Studies have shown that people of color, low-income families, and those with lower educational attainment experience greater hardships related to social needs. The COVID-19 pandemic represents an event that severely impacted people's social needs. This pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020, and contributed to food and housing insecurity, while highlighting weaknesses in the health care system surrounding access to care. To combat these issues, legislators implemented unique policies and procedures to help alleviate worsening social needs throughout the pandemic, which had not previously been exerted to this degree. We believe that improvements related to COVID-19 legislature and policy have positively impacted people's social needs in Kansas and Missouri, United States. In particular, Wyandotte County is of interest as it suffers greatly from issues related to social needs that many of these COVID-19-related policies aimed to improve. OBJECTIVE: The research objective of this study was to evaluate the change in social needs before and after the COVID-19 pandemic declaration based on responses to a survey from The University of Kansas Health System (TUKHS). We further aimed to compare the social needs of respondents from Wyandotte County from those of respondents in other counties in the Kansas City metropolitan area. METHODS: Social needs survey data from 2016 to 2022 were collected from a 12-question patient-administered survey distributed by TUKHS during a patient visit. This provided a longitudinal data set with 248,582 observations, which was narrowed down into a paired-response data set for 50,441 individuals who had provided at least one response before and after March 11, 2020. These data were then bucketed by county into Cass (Missouri), Clay (Missouri), Jackson (Missouri), Johnson (Kansas), Leavenworth (Kansas), Platte (Missouri), Wyandotte (Kansas), and Other counties, creating groupings with at least 1000 responses in each category. A pre-post composite score was calculated for each individual by adding their coded responses (yes=1, no=0) across the 12 questions. The Stuart-Maxwell marginal homogeneity test was used to compare the pre and post composite scores across all counties. Additionally, McNemar tests were performed to compare responses before and after March 11, 2020, for each of the 12 questions across all counties. Finally, McNemar tests were performed for questions 1, 7, 8, 9, and 10 for each of the bucketed counties. Significance was assessed at P<.05 for all tests. RESULTS: The Stuart-Maxwell test for marginal homogeneity was significant (P<.001), indicating that respondents were overall less likely to identify an unmet social need after the COVID-19 pandemic. McNemar tests for individual questions indicated that after the COVID-19 pandemic, respondents across all counties were less likely to identify unmet social needs related to food availability (odds ratio [OR]=0.4073, P<.001), home utilities (OR=0.4538, P<.001), housing (OR=0.7143, P<.001), safety among cohabitants (OR=0.6148, P<.001), safety in their residential location (OR=0.6172, P<.001), child care (OR=0.7410, P<0.01), health care access (OR=0.3895, P<.001), medication adherence (OR=0.5449, P<.001), health care adherence (OR=0.6378, P<.001), and health care literacy (0.8729, P=.02), and were also less likely to request help with these unmet needs (OR=0.7368, P<.001) compared with prepandemic responses. Responses from individual counties were consistent with the overall results for the most part. Notably, no individual county demonstrated a significant reduction in social needs relating to a lack of companionship. CONCLUSIONS: Post-COVID-19 responses showed improvement across almost all social needs-related questions, indicating that the federal policy response possibly had a positive impact on social needs across the populations of Kansas and western Missouri. Some counties were impacted more than others and positive outcomes were not limited to urban counties. The availability of resources, safety net services, access to health care, and educational opportunities could play a role in this change. Future research should focus on improving survey response rates from rural counties to increase their sample size, and to evaluate other explanatory variables such as food pantry access, educational status, employment opportunities, and access to community resources. Government policies should be an area of focused research as they may affect the social needs and health of the individuals considered in this analysis.

A commitment to hope

On April 1, we made the decision to reconfigure our scheduled special issue on Behavioral Health to the topic of this issue - Sustaining a Focus on Human Experience in the Face of COVID-19. In the midst of crisis, we were uncertain how people would respond to this call or even if they could in the face of the realities they were addressing each day. Yet, the research, cases and stories started to arrive. The contributions in this special issue represent a patchwork of powerful insights and a historic record to document this moment. What we have brought together includes the best of real-time insights and research, powerful stories and personal reflections that are so central to this time, one that has called on all of us to dig deeper, ask ourselves personal and essential questions and remind ourselves what really matters overall. We are deeply moved and inspired by the speed, thoughtfulness and comprehensive nature with which our contributors engaged, many of whom were tackling this crisis but still took time to contribute to a conversation beyond themselves. That may be the most powerful lesson of all: that in struggling with each of our own personal or individual organizational issues, we remained called to come together to share something beyond ourselves. As you review the pages that follow, we challenge you to uncover a new idea or practice;discover an inspiration or opportunity to reflect, release or breathe;find a seed of hope. For in the generous and both heartful and thoughtful words of our contributors, we not only capture this moment in our history, we also feed the roots of possibility from which we will all spring in the days ahead. © The Author(s), 2020.

Health Experiences of Sexual and Gender Minority People Living With Dementia and Their Care Partners: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: People living with dementia and their care partners who identify as a sexual and gender minority (SGM) often experience specific health inequities and disparities due to discrimination related to age, cognitive impairment, and being SGM. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this scoping review is to identify, explore, and synthesize the state of the science regarding the health and health care experiences of SGM people living with dementia and their care partners. This review also aims to identify gaps in research and set forth key recommendations to improve the health and health care experiences of SGM people living with dementia and their care partners by advancing health equity through research, policy, and practice. METHODS: The protocol follows the guidelines set forth by Joanna Briggs Institute protocol for scoping reviews. Steps of this framework that will be followed include (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant studies; (3) study selection; (4) charting the data; (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and (6) consultation. This scoping review will explore several electronic databases, including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AgeLine, PsychINFO, and Scopus. Health librarians will conduct the initial search for articles that are in English, include people living with dementia who identify as SGM, SGM people living with dementia and their care partners, or SGM care partners caring for people with dementia. Studies must be peer reviewed and focus on the phenomenon of interest, which is the health and health care experiences of participants. Covidence will be used to review abstracts and full-text articles and to screen articles. After the search has been completed, 2 independent reviewers will screen article titles and abstracts to identify eligibility. Discrepancies will be discussed and decided upon by the 2 reviewers. Relevant studies will be collected, and data will be extracted and charted to summarize key findings. Key findings will be presented to a community stakeholder group of SGM care partners and people living with dementia, and a listening session will be convened. RESULTS: This scoping review will identify the state of the science of health and health care experiences of people living with dementia and their care partners who identify as SGM. We will identify gaps and provide recommendations to inform future research, policy, and practice to improve health and health care experiences of SGM people living with dementia and their care partners. CONCLUSIONS: Little is known about people living with dementia and their care partners who identify as SGM. This scoping review will be one of the first to identify the health and health care experiences of people living with dementia and their care partners who identify as SGM. The results of this review will be used to guide future interventions and to inform future policy and practice to improve health care and reduce health disparities in this population. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/44918.

COVID-19 infection rate but not severity is associated with availability of greenness in the United States.

Human exposure to greenness is associated with COVID-19 prevalence and severity, but most relevant research has focused on the relationships between greenness and COVID-19 infection rates. In contrast, relatively little is known about the associations between greenness and COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths, which are important for risk assessment, resource allocation, and intervention strategies. Moreover, it is unclear whether greenness could help reduce health inequities by offering more benefits to disadvantaged populations. Here, we estimated the associations between availability of greenness (expressed as population-density-weighted normalized difference vegetation index) and COVID-19 outcomes across the urban-rural continuum gradient in the United States using generalized additive models with a negative binomial distribution. We aggregated individual COVID-19 records at the county level, which includes 3,040 counties for COVID-19 case infection rates, 1,397 counties for case hospitalization rates, and 1,305 counties for case fatality rates. Our area-level ecological study suggests that although availability of greenness shows null relationships with COVID-19 case hospitalization and fatality rates, COVID-19 infection rate is statistically significant and negatively associated with more greenness availability. When performing stratified analyses by different sociodemographic groups, availability of greenness shows stronger negative associations for men than for women, and for adults than for the elderly. This indicates that greenness might have greater health benefits for the former than the latter, and thus has limited effects for ameliorating COVID-19 related inequity. The revealed greenness-COVID-19 links across different space, time and sociodemographic groups provide working hypotheses for the targeted design of nature-based interventions and greening policies to benefit human well-being and reduce health inequity. This has important implications for the post-pandemic recovery and future public health crises.

The influence of share buybacks on ill-health and health inequity: an exploratory analysis using a socio-ecological determinants of health lens.

INTRODUCTION: Share buybacks, when a corporation buys back its own shares, are recognised as having potentially harmful impacts on society. This includes by contributing to economic inequalities, and by impeding investments with the potential to protect and promote the welfare of various stakeholders. Share buybacks, however, have received minimal analytical attention in the public health literature. This paper aimed to explore the potential influence of share buybacks on population health and health inequity using a socio-ecological determinants of health lens. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive analysis of share buybacks made by corporations listed on United States (US) stock exchanges between 1982 and 2021, using quantitative data sourced from Compustat. We examined annual trends in share buyback expenditure, including comparisons to dividend, net income, capital expenditure, and research and development expenditure data. We then purposively sampled a set of corporations to provide illustrative examples of how share buybacks potentially influence key socio-ecological determinants of health. The examples were: i) three COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers; ii) five of the world's largest fossil fuel corporations; and iii) US car manufacturer General Motors. For these, we conducted an analysis of data from Compustat, company reports and grey literature materials, focusing on key sources of profits and their allocation to share buybacks and particular investments. RESULTS: US-listed corporations spent an estimated US$9.2 trillion in real terms on share buybacks between 2012 and 2021 (nearly 12 times more than from 1982 to 1991). The contribution of share buybacks to total shareholder 'returns' increased from 11% in 1982 to 55% in 2021, with expenditure on shareholder returns increasing considerably relative to capital, research and development expenditure over this period. The three examples illustrated how some corporations have prioritised the short-term financial interests of their shareholders, including via implementing large share buyback programs, over investments with considerable potential to protect and promote the public's health. CONCLUSION: The potentially substantial impacts of share buybacks on health warrant increased research and policy attention. Arguably, more must be done to regulate share buybacks as part of efforts to address the corporate drivers of ill-health and inequity.

Agent-Based Simulation of Social Determinants of Health for Equitable COVID-19 Intervention

In the COVID-19 pandemic, one-size-flts-all interventions have been implemented based on COVID-19 disease models which simulate disease spread on a more generalized scale, lacking specificity for communities in different settings. This approach, not considering the important local health indicators Social Determinants of Health (SDOH), renders inequities and disparity in intervention effectiveness at the local level. This research answers the following questions: how specific SDOH risk profiles impact COVID-19 outbreak severity and how should interventions be implemented to achieve net positive health impact? A novel agent-based disease model was developed using NetLogo to simulate COVID-19 transmission and intervention using relevant SDOH in specific localities. The model is fitted with COVID-19 variant-specific constants such as susceptibility, mortality rate, recovery time, incubation period, mask efficacy, vaccine efficacy, and reinfection rate. Those constants are further calibrated with SDOH such as healthcare access (vaccination and booster rates) and social context (population size, population density, racial profile, and age demographics). Model inputs also include intervention used (mask mandate, testing and isolation, lockdown) and compliance rate to such interventions. The model was validated in Westchester County, NY for two different time periods with Alpha and Omicron yielding 84.2% and 68.5% accuracy respectively. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated: 1) a higher elderly population, lower young population, lower vaccination rate, and higher Hispanic and Black population were all factors that increased outbreak severity;2) all variants had similar death rate after reaching ~25% of population vaccinated;and 3) boosters affected Omicron more than other variants, especially in reducing breakthroughs. Scenario analyses were conducted for four U.S. counties: Hunterdon, NJ;Levy, FL;Monterey, CA;and Coles, IL. These analyses showed that 1) informed interventions based on localities' SDOH would dramatically reduce inequity, 2) interventions have higher impact in localities with higher risk SDOH, and 3) weighing other health and social economic consequences against predicted COVID-19 mortality can achieve holistic equity. The model enables local officials to assess the type, intensity, and timing of interventions to achieve maximum health outcomes. They can weigh the benefits of interventions against the socioeconomic or other risks of inequity to local populations. This research empowers local officials in diverse settings with an accessible modeling tool to remain nimble, stay conscious of health disparities, and better focus limited resources in health related decisions for their communities. © 2022 IEEE.

Knowledge and decisions about maternal immunisation by pregnant women in Aotearoa New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Maternal vaccinations for influenza and pertussis are recommended in New Zealand to protect mothers and their infant from infection. However, maternal immunisation coverage in New Zealand is suboptimal. Furthermore, there is unacceptable inequitable maternal immunisation rates across the country with Maori and Pacific women having significantly lower maternal immunisation rates than those of other New Zealanders. METHODS: This research set out to explore what pregnant/recently pregnant Maori and Pacific women knew about immunisation during pregnancy and what factors influenced their decision to be vaccinated. A semi-structured interview guide was developed with questions focusing on knowledge of pertussis and influenza vaccination during pregnancy and decision-making. Maori and Pacific women aged over 16 years were purposively sampled and interviewed in Dunedin and Gisborne, New Zealand between May and August 2021. Interviews were analysed following a directed qualitative content approach. Data were arranged into coding nodes based on the study aims (deductive analysis) informed by previous literature and within these participant experiences were inductively coded into themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Not all women were aware of maternal vaccine recommendations or they diseases they protected against. Many underestimated how dangerous influenza and pertussis could be and some were more concerned about potential harms of the vaccine. Furthermore, understanding potential harms of infection and protection provided by vaccination did not necessarily mean women would choose to be vaccinated. Those who decided to vaccinate felt well-informed, had vaccination recommended by their healthcare provider, and did so to protect their and their infant's health. Those who decided against vaccination were concerned about safety of the vaccines, lacked the information they needed, were not offered the vaccine, or did not consider vaccination a priority. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of understanding about vaccine benefits and risks of vaccine-preventable diseases which can result in the reinforcement of negative influences such as the fear of side effects. Furthermore, if vaccine benefits are not understood, inaccessibility of vaccines and the precedence of other life priorities may prevent uptake. Being well-informed and supported to make positive decisions to vaccinate in pregnancy is likely to improve vaccine coverage in Maori and Pacific Island New Zealanders.

The COVID-19 Pandemic and Health Inequities in the State of Sergipe / A Pandemia de COVID-19 e Iniquidades em Saúde no Estado de Sergipe

O estudo analisa a associação das taxas de incidência e mortalidade por COVID-19 nos municípios do estado de Sergipe ­ Brasil com indicadores de vulnerabilidade social e desenvolvimento humano utilizados no país; e com a taxa de realização de exames RT PCR para diagnóstico da doença realizados por município. Trata-se de estudo ecológico dos casos e óbitos por COVID-19 acumulados de março de 2020 a março de 2021, ocorridos no Estado de Sergipe por município; e sua correlação com o Índice de Vulnerabilidade Social (IVS), Índice de Desenvolvimento Humano Municipal (IDHM) e quantidade de testes RT PCR realizados para diagnóstico da doença, utilizando a correlação de Spearman (ρ). Contrariando nossas hipóteses e a literatura científica, os municípios com maiores índices de vulnerabilidade social e menor desenvolvimento humano tiveram menos casos da doença e óbitos por habitante, ao mesmo tempo que testaram menos para o diagnóstico da COVID-19. O estudo aponta a iniquidade como fator a ser superado no enfrentamento da pandemia, por prejudicar um diagnóstico de cenário mais próximo da realidade, comprometendo o planejamento e implementação de medidas de saúde coletiva.

This study analyzes the association of incidence and mortality rates by COVID-19 in the municipalities of the state of Sergipe, Brazil with indicators of social vulnerability and human development used in the country, as well as with the rate of RT-PCR exams for the diagnosis of the disease performed by each municipality. This is an ecological study of COVID-19 cases and deaths accumulated from March 2020 to March 2021, which occurred in the State of Sergipe by municipality; and its correlation with the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), Municipal Human Development Index (MHDI), and number of RT-PCR tests performed to diagnose the disease, using Spearman's correlation (ρ). Contrary to our hypotheses and the scientific literature, municipalities with higher rates of social vulnerability and lower human development had fewer cases of the disease and deaths per inhabitant, while testing less for the diagnosis of COVID-19. The study points to inequity as a factor to be overcome in the face of the pandemic, as it impairs a proper diagnosis of the scenario closer to reality, compromising the planning and implementation of collective health measures.

Census Tract Patterns and Contextual Social Determinants of Health Associated With COVID-19 in a Hispanic Population From South Texas: A Spatiotemporal Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that various social determinants of health (SDOH) may have contributed to the disparities in COVID-19 incidence and mortality among minorities and underserved populations at the county or zip code level. OBJECTIVE: This analysis was carried out at a granular spatial resolution of census tracts to explore the spatial patterns and contextual SDOH associated with COVID-19 incidence from a Hispanic population mostly consisting of a Mexican American population living in Cameron County, Texas on the border of the United States and Mexico. We performed age-stratified analysis to identify different contributing SDOH and quantify their effects by age groups. METHODS: We included all reported COVID-19-positive cases confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing between March 18 (first case reported) and December 16, 2020, in Cameron County, Texas. Confirmed COVID-19 cases were aggregated to weekly counts by census tracts. We adopted a Bayesian spatiotemporal negative binomial model to investigate the COVID-19 incidence rate in relation to census tract demographics and SDOH obtained from the American Community Survey. Moreover, we investigated the impact of local mitigation policy on COVID-19 by creating the binary variable "shelter-in-place." The analysis was performed on all COVID-19-confirmed cases and age-stratified subgroups. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that the relative incidence risk (RR) of COVID-19 was higher among census tracts with a higher percentage of single-parent households (RR=1.016, 95% posterior credible intervals [CIs] 1.005, 1.027) and a higher percentage of the population with limited English proficiency (RR=1.015, 95% CI 1.003, 1.028). Lower RR was associated with lower income (RR=0.972, 95% CI 0.953, 0.993) and the percentage of the population younger than 18 years (RR=0.976, 95% CI 0.959, 0.993). The most significant association was related to the "shelter-in-place" variable, where the incidence risk of COVID-19 was reduced by over 50%, comparing the time periods when the policy was present versus absent (RR=0.506, 95% CI 0.454, 0.563). Moreover, age-stratified analyses identified different significant contributing factors and a varying magnitude of the "shelter-in-place" effect. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, SDOH including social environment and local emergency measures were identified in relation to COVID-19 incidence risk at the census tract level in a highly disadvantaged population with limited health care access and a high prevalence of chronic conditions. Results from our analysis provide key knowledge to design efficient testing strategies and assist local public health departments in COVID-19 control, mitigation, and implementation of vaccine strategies.

Desperately Seeking Intersectionality in Digital Health Disparity Research: Narrative Review to Inform a Richer Theorization of Multiple Disadvantage.

BACKGROUND: Digital consultations between patients and clinicians increased markedly during the COVID-19 pandemic, raising questions about equity. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to review the literature on how multiple disadvantage-specifically, older age, lower socioeconomic status, and limited English proficiency-has been conceptualized, theorized, and studied empirically in relation to digital consultations. We focused mainly on video consultations as they have wider disparities than telephone consultations and relevant data on e-consultations are sparse. METHODS: Using keyword and snowball searching, we identified relevant papers published between 2012 and 2022 using Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed. The first search was completed in July 2022. Papers meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed thematically and summarized, and their key findings were tabulated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research criteria. Explanations for digital disparities were critically examined, and a search was undertaken in October 2022 to identify theoretical lenses on multiple disadvantage. RESULTS: Of 663 articles from the initial search, 27 (4.1%) met our inclusion criteria. In total, 37% (10/27) were commentaries, and 63% (17/27) were peer-reviewed empirical studies (11/27, 41% quantitative; 5/27, 19% qualitative; 1/27, 4% mixed methods; 1/27, 4% systematic reviews; and 1/27, 4% narrative reviews). Empirical studies were mostly small, rapidly conducted, and briefly reported. Most studies (25/27, 93%) identified marked digital disparities but lacked a strong theoretical lens. Proposed solutions focused on identifying and removing barriers, but the authors generally overlooked the pervasive impact of multiple layers of disadvantage. The data set included no theoretically informed studies that examined how different dimensions of disadvantage combined to affect digital health disparities. In our subsequent search, we identified 3 theoretical approaches that might help account for these digital disparities. Fundamental cause theory by Link and Phelan addresses why the association between socioeconomic status and health is pervasive and persists over time. Digital capital theory by Ragnedda and Ruiu explains how people mobilize resources to participate in digitally mediated activities and services. Intersectionality theory by Crenshaw states that systems of oppression are inherently bound together, creating singular social experiences for people who bear the force of multiple adverse social structures. CONCLUSIONS: A limitation of our initial sample was the sparse and undertheorized nature of the primary literature. The lack of attention to how digital health disparities emerge and play out both within and across categories of disadvantage means that solutions proposed to date may be oversimplistic and insufficient. Theories of multiple disadvantage have bearing on digital health, and there may be others of relevance besides those discussed in this paper. We call for greater interdisciplinary dialogue between theoretical research on multiple disadvantage and empirical studies on digital health disparities.

COVID-19-Specific Mortality among World Trade Center Health Registry Enrollees Who Resided in New York City.

We examined the all-cause and COVID-19-specific mortality among World Trade Center Health Registry (WTCHR) enrollees. We also examined the socioeconomic factors associated with COVID-19-specific death. Mortality data from the NYC Bureau of Vital Statistics between 2015-2020 were linked to the WTCHR. COVID-19-specific death was defined as having positive COVID-19 tests that match to a death certificate or COVID-19 mentioned on the death certificate via text searching. We conducted step change and pulse regression to assess excess deaths. Limiting to those who died in 2019 (n = 210) and 2020 (n = 286), we examined factors associated with COVID-19-specific deaths using multinomial logistic regression. Death rate among WTCHR enrollees increased during the pandemic (RR: 1.70, 95% CL: 1.25-2.32), driven by the pulse in March-April 2020 (RR: 3.38, 95% CL: 2.62-4.30). No significantly increased death rate was observed during May-December 2020. Being non-Hispanic Black and having at least one co-morbidity had a higher likelihood of COVID-19-associated mortality than being non-Hispanic White and not having any co-morbidity (AOR: 2.43, 95% CL: 1.23-4.77; AOR: 2.86, 95% CL: 1.19-6.88, respectively). The racial disparity in COVID-19-specific deaths attenuated after including neighborhood proportion of essential workers in the model (AOR:1.98, 95% CL: 0.98-4.01). Racial disparities continue to impact mortality by differential occupational exposure and structural inequality in neighborhood representation. The WTC-exposed population are no exception. Continued efforts to reduce transmission risk in communities of color is crucial for addressing health inequities.