A decomposition of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on changes in the motor vehicle collision related mortality in Alabama.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Motor vehicle collisions are the leading cause of unintentional injury death in Alabama and at various points during the COVID-19 pandemic there were documented increases in the following risk driving behaviors: speeding, driving under the influence, and seat belt citations. Thus, the objective was to characterize the overall motor vehicle collision (MVC)-related mortality rate in Alabama and the contribution of each component over the first two years of the pandemic compared to before the pandemic by three different road classes: urban arterials, rural arterials, and all other road classes. METHODS: MVC data were derived from the Alabama eCrash database, an electronic crash reporting system used by police officers across the state. Data on vehicle miles traveled each year were collected from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration estimates of traffic volume trends. MVC-related mortality in Alabama was the primary outcome and year of MVC was the exposure. The novel decomposition method broke down population mortality rate into four parts: deaths per MVC injury, injury per MVC, MVC per vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and VMT per population. Poisson models with scaled deviance were used to estimate rate ratios of each component. Relative contribution (RC) of each component was calculated by taking the absolute value of the component's beta coefficient and dividing by the sum of the absolute values of all components' beta coefficients. Models were stratified by road class. RESULTS: Across all road classes combined, there were no significant changes to the overall MVC-related mortality rate (per population) and its components when comparing 2020-2022 to 2017-2019; this was due to the increased case fatality rate (CFR) being offset by decreases in the VMT rate and MVC injury rate. In 2020, among rural arterials a non-significant increased mortality rate was offset by a decreased VMT rate (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84-0.98, RC 19.2%) and MVC injury rate (RR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82-0.97, RC: 22.2%) when compared to 2017-2019. For non-arterials, a non-significant decreased MVC mortality rate was observed in 2020 when compared to 2017-2019 (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71-1.03). When considering 2021-2022 versus 2020, the only significant component for any road class was a decreased MVC injury rate for non-arterials (RR: 0.90,95% CI: 0.89-0.93) but this was offset by an increased MVC rate and CFR, resulting in no significant change to the mortality rate (per population). CONCLUSIONS: In a state with one of the highest MVC-related mortality rates in the country, despite decreases in VMTs per population and injuries per MVC, the MVC mortality rate per population did not change during the pandemic due in part to the contributions of an increase in the case fatality rate. Future research should determine whether the increase in CFR was associated with risky driving behaviors during the pandemic.

Role of Visit Modality in the HIV-Related No-Shows During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multisite Retrospective Cohort Study.

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated rapid expansion of telehealth as part of healthcare delivery. This study compared HIV-related no-shows by visit type (in-person; video; telephone) during the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020-September 2021) from the Data for Care Alabama project. Using all primary care provider visits, each visit's outcome was categorized as no-show or arrived. A logistic regression model using generalized estimating equations accounting for repeat measures in individuals and within sites calculated odds ratios (OR) and their accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI) for no-shows by visit modality. The multivariable models adjusted for sociodemographic factors. In-person versus telephone visits [OR (95% CI) 1.64 (1.48-1.82)] and in-person versus video visits [OR (95% CI) 1.53 (1.25-1.85)] had higher odds of being a no-show. In-person versus telephone and video no-shows were significantly higher. This may suggest success of telehealth visits as a method for HIV care delivery even beyond COVID-19.

Geographic Access to Primary Healthcare Services among Latinos/as/x in Western Alabama.

OBJECTIVES: Alabama's Latino/a/x population grew 278% from 2000 to 2018. Tuscaloosa County, located in the largely rural region of western Alabama, also experienced a significant influx of Latino/as/x during this time frame. Geographic healthcare access (GHA) to primary care and hospitals is crucial for immigrant Latino/as/x to care for their health, but few studies have characterized it. The goals of this article were to describe the availability (defined as number of provider locations) and accessibility (defined as travel impedance between potential patients and provider locations) of primary healthcare services and to discuss potential strategies to address these healthcare access challenges. METHODS: We drew data from the US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates, Blue Cross Blue Shield national doctor and hospital finder database, the Alabama Department of Public Health, and Tuscaloosa Transit Authority. We used geographic data, geographic information systems, and spatial analyses to characterize the availability and accessibility of primary care services and hospitals for Latinos/as/x in Tuscaloosa County using ESRI, ArcGIS 10.6.1. We showed the distribution of Latinos/as/x by census tract with choropleth mapping and mapped primary healthcare providers alongside public transit routes and hospital driving times to support our findings. RESULTS: This work demonstrated that Latinos/as/x in Tuscaloosa County were concentrated in more rural areas surrounding the county's city center, presenting significant barriers to GHA. These areas had fewer primary care providers and limited public transit. Many Latinos/as/x in this county had to travel ≥45 minutes to a hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Outreach and technology-based approaches, including home visit programs, mobile health units, and telemedicine, may be particularly important in bridging the GHA gaps for this and other largely rural populations the southeastern United States. Some of this potential was unlocked during the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis. These gains should be leveraged toward sustainable healthcare access initiatives for rural Latino/a/x populations.

COVID-19 Vaccine Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices in Alabama: The Case for Primary Health Care Providers.

OBJECTIVE: To examine knowledge, attitudes, and practices about COVID-19 in Alabama, with a primary focus on vaccination perception and utilization. DESIGN: We used a COVID-19 Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices survey and recruited adult Alabama residents in April-May 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Initial surveys from 1324 Alabamian participants were considered for analysis; after careful review of incomplete responses, 953 were ultimately included for analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Vaccine behavior and hesitancy comprise a self-reported response contained in the survey instrument. Three primary vaccine groups were used to assess differences in demographic characteristics, health status, perception of susceptibility and severity of COVID-19, sources of information, and trust about COVID-19. RESULTS: Of the 953 survey participants included for analysis, 951 had self-identified vaccine status in which 153 (16.1%) reported to have received the vaccine at the time of the survey, 375 (39.4%) were very likely or somewhat likely to get an approved COVID-19 vaccine if it was offered, and 423 (44.5%) were somewhat unlikely or very unlikely to get an approved COVID-19 vaccine. Health care providers were the most trusted sources of information, regardless of vaccine status. For participants unlikely to receive a vaccine, social media and local news sources were consistently more trusted and utilized than those who were vaccinated or were likely to be. CONCLUSIONS: The perceptions among unvaccinated participants are actionable and provide teachable opportunities to decrease vaccine apprehension.

Implementing the COVID-19 Rapid Community Assessment on Vaccine Confidence: Lessons Learned From Alabama and Georgia.

Engaging communities is a key strategy to increase COVID-19 vaccination. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence Rapid Community Assessment Guide was developed for community partners to obtain insights about barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake and to engage community partners in designing interventions to build vaccine confidence. In spring 2021, 3 CDC teams were deployed to Alabama and Georgia to conduct a rapid community assessment in selected jurisdictions. Data collection included interviews, listening sessions, observations, and street intercept surveys. We identified 3 facilitators and barriers to vaccine uptake: (1) planning and coordination, (2) capacity and implementation, and (3) attitudes and beliefs. We found that the use of the rapid community assessment in Alabama and Georgia was feasible to implement, useful in eliciting unique community concerns and dispelling assumptions, and useful in informing intervention strategies. Our results underscore the importance of community engagement in COVID-19 mitigation strategies.

Use of a Screening Protocol to Identify Asymptomatic COVID-19 in a Free Community Health Clinic in Shelby County, Alabama, October 2020-February 2021.

OBJECTIVE: Community of Hope Health Clinic (CHHC), a free and charitable clinic in Shelby County, Alabama, developed a screening protocol to identify patients with asymptomatic COVID-19 with the goal of minimizing infection risk for other patients, health care providers, and staff. We sought to determine whether the use of the CHHC screening protocol identified asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2 before their scheduled clinic visits. METHODS: The CHHC screening protocol included the use of an adapted Centers for Disease Control and Prevention questionnaire via telephone 48-72 hours before a scheduled clinic appointment, coupled with a second administration of the questionnaire and a temperature check immediately before the patient's scheduled visit. Patients with positive responses to any questions or whose temperatures were greater than 100.4 °F were refused entry to the clinic, their appointments were rescheduled, and a SARS-CoV-2 test was recommended. SARS-CoV-2 laboratory testing was conducted on all patients with an appointment from October 26, 2020, through February 18, 2021, to verify whether the screening protocol was effective. RESULTS: Of 298 patient encounters, 20 patients screened positive on the SARS-CoV-2 patient screen. Another 278 patients screened negative, were seen for patient care, and received a SARS-CoV-2 test via nasal swab; 274 (98.6%) patients received a negative test result, and 4 (1.4%) patients received a positive test result. CONCLUSIONS: The CHHC SARS-CoV-2 screening protocol, as validated by SARS-CoV-2 assay, was effective in screening out asymptomatic patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 before they were seen in clinic. As clinics and office practices return to prepandemic volumes, the use of such a screening protocol can help mitigate the risk of serious COVID-19 infection, especially for unvaccinated patients, health care providers, and staff.

SARS-CoV-2 transmission potential and rural-urban disease burden disparities across Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi, March 2020 - May 2021.

PURPOSE: To quantify and compare SARS-CoV-2 transmission potential across Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi and selected counties. METHODS: To determine the time-varying reproduction number Rt of SARS-CoV-2, we applied the R package EpiEstim to the time series of daily incidence of confirmed cases (mid-March 2020 - May 17, 2021) shifted backward by 9 days. Median Rt percentage change when policies changed was determined. Linear regression was performed between log10-transformed cumulative incidence and log10-transformed population size at four time points. RESULTS: Stay-at-home orders, face mask mandates, and vaccinations were associated with the most significant reductions in SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the three southern states. Rt across the three states decreased significantly by ≥20% following stay-at-home orders. We observed varying degrees of reductions in Rt across states following other policies. Rural Alabama counties experienced higher per capita cumulative cases relative to urban ones as of June 17 and October 17, 2020. Meanwhile, Louisiana and Mississippi saw the disproportionate impact of SARS-CoV-2 in rural counties compared to urban ones throughout the study period. CONCLUSION: State and county policies had an impact on local pandemic trajectories. The rural-urban disparities in case burden call for evidence-based approaches in tailoring health promotion interventions and vaccination campaigns to rural residents.

The Impact of COVID-19 Related Changes on Air Quality in Birmingham, Alabama, United States.

Air pollution is responsible for a wide range of health effects in exposed populations. Variations in local air pollution can affect local population health outcomes. The strict regulations imposed during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic ('lockdowns') resulted in a unique situation where human mobility was limited significantly, resulting in improved air quality in several major cities. The main goal of this study was to investigate if lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted air quality in Birmingham, Alabama-a city with a history of high air pollution levels-with a focus on PM2.5 (Particulate Matter with an aerodynamic diameter ≤2.5 µm) and NO2 (Nitrogen dioxide). Daily air pollutant and traffic data were obtained for the Birmingham Metropolitan Area for the period January to October 2020, and previous years. Mean PM2.5 and NO2 concentrations and traffic volumes during the official city/state lockdown period (24 March to 30 April 2020) were compared to pre- and post-lockdown means. The mean PM2.5 and NO2 concentrations during the lockdown did not significantly differ from that of the pre- or post-lockdown periods. However, NO2 significantly decreased even after the lockdown order was removed, with the mean decreasing significantly compared to pre-lockdown and lockdown periods. Both PM2.5 and NO2 annual means in 2020 were significantly lower than the annual means in 2019, indicating the occurrence of significant changes over the longer term that were not limited by defined lockdown periods. Traffic significantly increased after the lockdown order was removed but did not correlate with the two pollutants studied. Therefore, we conclude that the Stay at Home/lockdown regulations and other COVID-19 restrictions had an impact on the air quality of Birmingham Alabama; although these lockdown impacts varied for each pollutant and were not limited only by the official lockdown dates/periods.

How did the COVID-19 pandemic affect road crashes and crash outcomes in Alabama?

With the rising number of cases and deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic, nations and local governments, including many across the U.S., imposed travel restrictions on their citizens. This travel restriction order led to a significant reduction in traffic volumes and a generally lower exposure to crashes. However, recent preliminary statistics in the US suggest an increase in fatal crashes over the period of lockdown in comparison to the same period in previous years. This study sought to investigate how the pandemic affected road crashes and crash outcomes in Alabama. Daily vehicle miles traveled and crashes were obtained and explored. To understand the factors associated with crash outcomes, four crash-severity models were developed: (1) Single-vehicle (SV) crashes prior to lockdown order (Normal times SV); (2) multi-vehicle (MV) crashes prior to lockdown order (Normal times MV); (3) Single-vehicle crashes after lockdown order (COVID times SV); and (4) Multi-vehicle crashes after lockdown order (COVID times MV). The models were developed using the first 28 weeks of crashes recorded in 2020. The findings of the study reveal that although traffic volumes and vehicle miles traveled had significantly dropped during the lockdown, there was an increase in the total number of crashes and major injury crashes compared to the period prior to the lockdown order, with speeding, DUI, and weekends accounting for a significant proportion of these crashes. These observations provide useful lessons for road safety improvements during extreme events that may require statewide lockdown, as has been done with the COVID-19 pandemic. Traffic management around shopping areas and other areas that may experience increased traffic volumes provide opportunities for road safety stakeholders to reduce the occurrence of crashes in the weeks leading to an announcement of any future statewide or local lockdowns. Additionally, increased law enforcement efforts can help to reduce risky driving activities as traffic volumes decrease.

The Association Between Neighborhood Social Vulnerability and COVID-19 Testing, Positivity, and Incidence in Alabama and Louisiana.

Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in COVID-19 burden have been widely reported. Using data from the state health departments of Alabama and Louisiana aggregated to residential Census tracts, we assessed the relationship between social vulnerability and COVID-19 testing rates, test positivity, and incidence. Data were cumulative for the period of February 27, 2020 to October 7, 2020. We estimated the association of the 2018 Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) overall score and theme scores with COVID-19 tests, test positivity, and cases using multivariable negative binomial regressions. We adjusted for rurality with 2010 Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes. Regional effects were modeled as fixed effects of counties/parishes and state health department regions. The analytical sample included 1160 Alabama and 1105 Louisiana Census tracts. In both states, overall social vulnerability and vulnerability themes were significantly associated with increased COVID-19 case rates (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.45-1.70 for Alabama; RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.26-1.46 for Louisiana). There was increased COVID-19 testing with higher overall vulnerability in Louisiana (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.14-1.38), but not in Alabama (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.89-1.02). Consequently, test positivity in Alabama was significantly associated with social vulnerability (RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.57-1.75), whereas no such relationship was observed in Louisiana (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98-1.12). Social vulnerability is a risk factor for COVID-19 infection, particularly among racial/ethnic minorities and those in disadvantaged housing conditions without transportation. Increased testing targeted to vulnerable communities may contribute to reduction in test positivity and overall COVID-19 disparities.

Factors Associated with Perceived Susceptibility to COVID-19 Among Urban and Rural Adults in Alabama.

We examined factors associated with and reasons for perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 among urban and rural adults in Alabama. We surveyed 575 eligible participants' engagement in preventive behaviors, concern about COVID-19 in their communities, perceived susceptibility to the virus, and reasons for susceptibility across three response options (Yes, No, and Don't Know/Not Sure). Bivariate analyses compared characteristics by level of perceived susceptibility to COVID-19. A multinomial logistic regression model evaluated the association of demographics, health insurance coverage, and chronic illness status with perceived susceptibility. Participants' race, gender, and educational attainment were significantly associated with perceived susceptibility to COVID-19. African Americans and males had higher odds of responding 'No', compared to 'Yes' and 'Don't Know/Not Sure' than Whites and females. Participants with a high school education and lower had higher odds of responding 'Don't Know/Not Sure' versus 'Yes' compared to those with college or higher education. Those unconcerned about COVID-19 in their community had higher odds of responding 'No' (OR = 2.51, CI 1.35-4.68) and 'Don't Know/Not Sure' (OR = 2.51, CI 1.26-4.99) versus 'Yes', as compared to those who were concerned. Possibility of exposure at work was the most frequent reasons for perceiving themselves susceptible to COVID-19, engagement in recommended preventive measures was the most frequent reason among respondents who indicated 'No', and uncertainty/perception that everyone is at risk was the most frequent reason among the ones who indicated 'Don't Know/Not Sure'. Results indicate that tailored efforts to heighten perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 among specific demographics are needed.