Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 24
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263820, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1793524

ABSTRACT

Many factors play a role in outcomes of an emerging highly contagious disease such as COVID-19. Identification and better understanding of these factors are critical in planning and implementation of effective response strategies during such public health crises. The objective of this study is to examine the impact of factors related to social distancing, human mobility, enforcement strategies, hospital capacity, and testing capacity on COVID-19 outcomes within counties located in District of Columbia as well as the states of Maryland and Virginia. Longitudinal data have been used in the analysis to model county-level COVID-19 infection and mortality rates. These data include big location-based service data, which were collected from anonymized mobile devices and characterize various social distancing and human mobility measures within the study area during the pandemic. The results provide empirical evidence that lower rates of COVID-19 infection and mortality are linked with increased levels of social distancing and reduced levels of travel-particularly by public transit modes. Other preventive strategies and polices also prove to be influential in COVID-19 outcomes. Most notably, lower COVID-19 infection and mortality rates are linked with stricter enforcement policies and more severe penalties for violating stay-at-home orders. Further, policies that allow gradual relaxation of social distancing measures and travel restrictions as well as those requiring usage of a face mask are related to lower rates of COVID-19 infections and deaths. Additionally, increased access to ventilators and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) beds, which represent hospital capacity, are linked with lower COVID-19 mortality rates. On the other hand, gaps in testing capacity are related to higher rates of COVID-19 infection. The results also provide empirical evidence for reports suggesting that certain minority groups such as African Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Big Data , COVID-19/prevention & control , Physical Distancing , Public Health , Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Maryland/epidemiology , Masks/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Quarantine , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Virginia/epidemiology
2.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0263893, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736502

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Covid-19 pandemic and its accompanying public-health orders (PHOs) have led to (potentially countervailing) changes in various risk factors for overdose. To assess whether the net effects of these factors varied geographically, we examined regional variation in the impact of the PHOs on counts of nonfatal overdoses, which have received less attention than fatal overdoses, despite their public health significance. METHODS: Data were collected from the Overdose Detection Mapping Application Program (ODMAP), which recorded suspected overdoses between July 1, 2018 and October 25, 2020. We used segmented regression models to assess the impact of PHOs on nonfatal-overdose trends in Washington DC and the five geographical regions of Maryland, using a historical control time series to adjust for normative changes in overdoses that occurred around mid-March (when the PHOs were issued). RESULTS: The mean level change in nonfatal opioid overdoses immediately after mid-March was not reliably different in the Covid-19 year versus the preceding control time series for any region. However, the rate of increase in nonfatal overdose was steeper after mid-March in the Covid-19 year versus the preceding year for Maryland as a whole (B = 2.36; 95% CI, 0.65 to 4.06; p = .007) and for certain subregions. No differences were observed for Washington DC. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic and its accompanying PHOs were associated with steeper increases in nonfatal opioid overdoses in most but not all of the regions we assessed, with a net effect that was deleterious for the Maryland region as a whole.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Opiate Overdose/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Humans , Maryland/epidemiology , Naloxone/administration & dosage , Narcotic Antagonists/administration & dosage , Pandemics , Public Health/trends , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Time Factors
3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(3): e220984, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1729076

ABSTRACT

Importance: Although social determinants of health (SDOH) are important factors in health inequities, they have not been explicitly associated with COVID-19 mortality rates across racial and ethnic groups and rural, suburban, and urban contexts. Objectives: To explore the spatial and racial disparities in county-level COVID-19 mortality rates during the first year of the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed data for all US counties in 50 states and the District of Columbia for the first full year of the COVID-19 pandemic (January 22, 2020, to February 28, 2021). Counties with a high concentration of a single racial and ethnic population and a high level of COVID-19 mortality rate were identified as concentrated longitudinal-impact counties. The SDOH that may be associated with mortality rate across these counties and in urban, suburban, and rural contexts were examined. The 3 largest racial and ethnic groups in the US were selected: Black or African American, Hispanic or Latinx, and non-Hispanic White populations. Exposures: County-level characteristics and community health factors (eg, income inequality, uninsured rate, primary care physicians, preventable hospital stays, severe housing problems rate, and access to broadband internet) associated with COVID-19 mortality. Main Outcomes and Measures: Data on county-level COVID-19 mortality rates (deaths per 100 000 population) reported by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were analyzed. Four indexes were used to measure multiple dimensions of SDOH: socioeconomic advantage index, limited mobility index, urban core opportunity index, and mixed immigrant cohesion and accessibility index. Spatial regression models were used to examine the associations between SDOH and county-level COVID-19 mortality rate. Results: Of the 3142 counties included in the study, 531 were identified as concentrated longitudinal-impact counties. Of these counties, 347 (11.0%) had a large Black or African American population compared with other counties, 198 (6.3%) had a large Hispanic or Latinx population compared with other counties, and 33 (1.1%) had a large non-Hispanic White population compared with other counties. A total of 489 254 COVID-19-related deaths were reported. Most concentrated longitudinal-impact counties with a large Black or African American population compared with other counties were spread across urban, suburban, and rural areas and experienced numerous disadvantages, including higher income inequality (297 of 347 [85.6%]) and more preventable hospital stays (281 of 347 [81.0%]). Most concentrated longitudinal-impact counties with a large Hispanic or Latinx population compared with other counties were located in urban areas (114 of 198 [57.6%]), and 130 (65.7%) of these counties had a high percentage of people who lacked health insurance. Most concentrated longitudinal-impact counties with a large non-Hispanic White population compared with other counties were in rural areas (23 of 33 [69.7%]), included a large group of older adults (26 of 33 [78.8%]), and had limited access to quality health care (24 of 33 [72.7%]). In urban areas, the mixed immigrant cohesion and accessibility index was inversely associated with COVID-19 mortality (coefficient [SE], -23.38 [6.06]; P < .001), indicating that mortality rates in urban areas were associated with immigrant communities with traditional family structures, multiple accessibility stressors, and housing overcrowding. Higher COVID-19 mortality rates were also associated with preventable hospital stays in rural areas (coefficient [SE], 0.008 [0.002]; P < .001) and higher socioeconomic status vulnerability in suburban areas (coefficient [SE], -21.60 [3.55]; P < .001). Across all community types, places with limited internet access had higher mortality rates, especially in urban areas (coefficient [SE], 5.83 [0.81]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found an association between different SDOH measures and COVID-19 mortality that varied across racial and ethnic groups and community types. Future research is needed that explores the different dimensions and regional patterns of SDOH to address health inequity and guide policies and programs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/ethnology , COVID-19/mortality , Health Status Disparities , Spatial Analysis , Cross-Sectional Studies , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Humans , Regression Analysis , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Determinants of Health
4.
Am J Prev Med ; 61(5 Suppl 1): S16-S25, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1453987

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In 2019, the District of Columbia recorded a 20-year low rate in new HIV infections but also had near-record numbers of gonorrhea and chlamydia infections. District of Columbia Department of Health has supported numerous forms of community-based in-person screening but not direct at-home testing. METHODS: In summer 2020, the District of Columbia Department of Health launched GetCheckedDC.org for District of Columbia residents to order home-based oral HIV antibody test and urogenital, pharyngeal, and rectal chlamydia and gonorrhea tests. Initial and follow-up surveys were completed by individuals for both test modalities. RESULTS: A retrospective analysis was conducted for the first 5 months of the program. During that period, 1,089 HIV and 1,262 gonorrhea and chlamydia tests (535 urogenital, 520 pharyngeal, 207 rectal) were ordered by 1,245 District of Columbia residents. The average age was 33.1 (median=31, range=14-78) years; 51.6% of requestors identified as Black; 39.3% identified as men who have sex with men; 16.2% reported no form of insurance; and 8.1% and 10.4% reported never being testing for HIV and sexually transmitted infections, respectively. More than half of people requesting tests reported convenience and COVID-19 as the reasons. In total, 39.5% of sexually transmitted infection tests were returned; 7.22% of people testing for sexually transmitted infections received a positive result, and 10.35% of rectal tests were positive. No individuals reported a positive HIV self-test that was confirmed; 98.5% of respondents said that they would recommend the HIV self-test kit. CONCLUSIONS: Mail-out HIV and sexually transmitted infection testing was readily taken up among high-priority demographics within a diverse, urban, high-morbidity jurisdiction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Extragenital testing for gonorrhea and chlamydia should be included in all at-home screening tests given the high positivity rate.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Chlamydia Infections , Gonorrhea , HIV Infections , Sexual and Gender Minorities , Sexually Transmitted Diseases , Adult , Chlamydia Infections/diagnosis , Chlamydia Infections/epidemiology , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Gonorrhea/diagnosis , Gonorrhea/epidemiology , HIV Infections/diagnosis , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Homosexuality, Male , Humans , Male , Mass Screening , Pandemics , Postal Service , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Sexually Transmitted Diseases/diagnosis , Sexually Transmitted Diseases/epidemiology , Washington/epidemiology
5.
J Health Care Poor Underserved ; 32(3): 1166-1172, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1369549

ABSTRACT

During academic clinical suspensions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, a group of medical students in Washington, D.C. collaborated with a local federally qualified health center to launch a free COVID-19 testing site to increase access to testing in the community. The patients who accessed the testing site were predominantly Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino, some of whom were uninsured or without access to testing or a timely physician's referral. In this article, medical students reflect on their experiences at this testing site and provide commentary on how existing racial and socioeconomic health disparities have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. While under the extremely unusual circumstance of a suspension from their clinical rotations, medical students elaborate on the lessons learned from this experience and the continued work required to engage deeply in the issues of equality and racial justice now and in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , Community Health Services , Students, Medical , African Americans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , Pandemics , Volunteers
6.
Am J Cardiol ; 157: 42-47, 2021 10 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1356116

ABSTRACT

Cardiac involvement in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been established. This is manifested by troponin elevation and associated with worse patient prognosis. We evaluated whether patient outcomes improved as experience accumulated during the pandemic. We analyzed COVID-19-positive patients with myocardial injury (defined as troponin elevation) who presented to the MedStar Health system (11 hospitals in Washington, DC, and Maryland) during the "Early Phase" of the pandemic (March 1 - June 30, 2020) and compared their characteristics and outcomes to the COVID-19-positive patients with the presence of troponin elevation in the "Later Phase" of the pandemic (October 1, 2020 - January 31, 2021). The cohort included 788 COVID-19-positive admitted patients for whom troponin was elevated, 167 during the "Early Phase" and 621 during the "Later Phase." Maximum troponin-I in the "Early Phase" was 13.46±34.72 ng/mL versus 11.21±20.57 ng/mL in the "Later Phase" (p = 0.553). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the "Later Phase" (50.3% vs. 24.6%; p<0.001), as were incidence of intensive-care-unit admission (77.8% vs. 46.1%; p<0.001) and need for mechanical ventilation (61.7% versus 28%; p<0.001). In addition, more "Early Phase" patients underwent coronary angiography (6% vs. 2.3%; p=0.013). Finally, 3% of "Early Phase" and 0.8% of "Later Phase" patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (p=0.025). In conclusion, treatment outcomes have significantly improved since the beginning of the pandemic in COVID-19-positive patients with troponin elevation. This may be attributed to awareness, severity of the disease, improvements in therapies, and provider experience.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Troponin I/blood , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Clinical Competence , Cohort Studies , Coronary Angiography/statistics & numerical data , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Maryland/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Pandemics , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data
7.
Med Intensiva (Engl Ed) ; 45(6): 325-331, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343315

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19, particularly the association of renal replacement therapy to mortality. DESIGN: A single-center prospective observational study was carried out. SETTING: ICU of a tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Consecutive adults with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU. INTERVENTION: Renal replacement therapy. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Demographic data, medical history, illness severity, type of oxygen therapy, laboratory data and use of renal replacement therapy to generate a logistic regression model describing independent risk factors for mortality. RESULTS: Of the total of 166 patients, 51% were mechanically ventilated and 26% required renal replacement therapy. The overall hospital mortality rate was 36%, versus 56% for those requiring renal replacement therapy, and 68% for those with both mechanical ventilation and renal replacement therapy. The logistic regression model identified four independent risk factors for mortality: age (adjusted OR 2.8 [95% CI 1.8-4.4] for every 10-year increase), mechanical ventilation (4.2 [1.7-10.6]), need for continuous venovenous hemofiltration (2.3 [1.3-4.0]) and C-reactive protein (1.1 [1.0-1.2] for every 10mg/L increase). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy was associated to a high mortality rate similar to that associated to the need for mechanical ventilation, while multiorgan failure necessitating both techniques implied an extremely high mortality risk.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , COVID-19/complications , Critical Illness/therapy , Renal Replacement Therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Acute Kidney Injury/mortality , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , COVID-19/blood , Comorbidity , Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy , Critical Illness/mortality , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals, University/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Multiple Organ Failure/etiology , Multiple Organ Failure/mortality , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Procedures and Techniques Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Prospective Studies , Renal Replacement Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Risk Factors , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
9.
Pediatr Infect Dis J ; 40(7): e272-e274, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1258811

ABSTRACT

The estimated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 seroprevalence in children was found to be 9.46% for the Washington Metropolitan area. Hispanic/Latinx individuals were found to have higher odds of seropositivity. While chronic medical conditions were not associated with having antibodies, previous fever and body aches were predictive symptoms.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/epidemiology , Adolescent , COVID-19/ethnology , Child , Child, Preschool , Chronic Disease/epidemiology , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Healthy Volunteers , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Maryland/epidemiology , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Virginia/epidemiology , West Virginia/epidemiology , Young Adult
10.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(20): 744-748, 2021 May 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1237003

ABSTRACT

The occurrence of cases of COVID-19 reported by child care facilities among children, teachers, and staff members is correlated with the level of community spread (1,2). To describe characteristics of COVID-19 cases at child care facilities and facility adherence to guidance and recommendations, the District of Columbia (DC) Department of Health (DC Health) and CDC reviewed COVID-19 case reports associated with child care facilities submitted to DC Health and publicly available data from the DC Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) during July 1-December 31, 2020. Among 469 licensed child care facilities, 112 (23.9%) submitted 269 reports documenting 316 laboratory-confirmed cases and three additional cases identified through DC Health's contact tracers. Outbreaks associated with child care facilities,† defined as two or more laboratory-confirmed and epidemiologically linked cases at a facility within a 14-day period (3), occurred in 27 (5.8%) facilities and accounted for nearly one half (156; 48.9%) of total cases. Among the 319 total cases, 180 (56.4%) were among teachers or staff members. The majority (56.4%) of facilities reported cases to DC Health on the same day that they were notified of a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, by staff members or parents.§ Facilities were at increased risk for an outbreak if they had been operating for <3 years, if symptomatic persons sought testing ≥3 days after symptom onset, or if persons with asymptomatic COVID-19 were at the facility. The number of outbreaks associated with child care facilities was limited. Continued implementation and maintenance of multiple prevention strategies, including vaccination, masking, physical distancing, cohorting, screening, and reporting, are important to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in child care facilities and to facilitate a timely public health response to prevent outbreaks.¶.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Child Day Care Centers , Disease Outbreaks , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , Child , Child Day Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Child, Preschool , Community-Acquired Infections/epidemiology , Community-Acquired Infections/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Humans , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
11.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 18: E50, 2021 05 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1236917

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Effective communication approaches are necessary to reach food-security program participants. Accessing food-security programs has been especially challenging during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social media can play an important role in reducing some communication barriers. We examined interest in receiving nutrition information via social media among adults participating in food-security programs in Washington, DC. METHODS: We developed and administered a 22-item survey to adults participating in food-security programs (N = 375). Participants were recruited at Martha's Table, in Washington, DC, from January through March 2020. We performed bivariate analyses and multinomial logistic regressions to examine predictors of interest in receiving nutrition information via social media. RESULTS: Sixty-nine percent of participants reported using social media, and 49% expressed interest in receiving nutrition information via social media. Higher levels of self-efficacy and belief in the value of digital technology were associated with greater likelihood of interest in receiving nutrition information via social media (χ2 6 = 139.0; Nagelkerke R2 = 0.35; P < .001). We found no differences by sex or digital technology access in interest in receiving nutrition information via social media. CONCLUSION: Social media is a widely used and a feasible method to reach food-security program participants. Understanding program participants' interest in receiving health information via social media may help food-security programs plan effective communication strategies to improve food security, especially when in-person participation is limited, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Food Supply/standards , Nutritional Status , Pandemics , Program Evaluation , Social Media , Cross-Sectional Studies , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies
13.
Am J Perinatol ; 38(8): 766-772, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1211314

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to examine the incidence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in women diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, also known as COVID-19). STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of all women who delivered at MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington, DC from April 8, 2020 to July 31, 2020. Starting April 8, 2020, universal testing for COVID-19 infection was initiated for all women admitted to labor and delivery. Women who declined universal testing were excluded. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy were diagnosed based on American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Task Force definitions.1 Maternal demographics, clinical characteristics, and labor and delivery outcomes were examined. Neonatal outcomes were also collected. Laboratory values from admission were evaluated. Our primary outcome was the incidence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy among women who tested positive for COVID-19. The incidence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy was compared between women who tested positive for COVID-19 and women who tested negative. RESULTS: Of the 1,008 women included in the analysis, 73 (7.2%) women tested positive for COVID-19, of which 12 (16.4%) were symptomatic at the time of admission. The incidence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy was 34.2% among women who tested positive for COVID-19 and 22.9% women who tested negative for COVID-19 (p = 0.03). After adjusting for race, antenatal aspirin use, chronic hypertension, and body mass index >30, the risk of developing any hypertensive disorder of pregnancy was not statistically significant (odds ratio: 1.58 [0.91-2.76]). CONCLUSION: After adjusting for potential confounders, the risk of developing a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy in women who tested positive for COVID-19 compared with women who tested negative for COVID-19 was not significantly different. KEY POINTS: · There is an increased incidence of hypertensive disorders in women who test positive for COVID-19.. · Characteristics of pregnant women with COVID-19 are similar to those with hypertensive disorders.. · Liver function tests were similar between pregnant women with COVID-19 and women without COVID-19..


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Adult , Case-Control Studies , Cohort Studies , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
14.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(6): 777-785, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1110712

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Predicting the clinical trajectory of individual patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is challenging but necessary to inform clinical care. The majority of COVID-19 prognostic tools use only data present upon admission and do not incorporate changes occurring after admission. OBJECTIVE: To develop the Severe COVID-19 Adaptive Risk Predictor (SCARP) (https://rsconnect.biostat.jhsph.edu/covid_trajectory/), a novel tool that can provide dynamic risk predictions for progression from moderate disease to severe illness or death in patients with COVID-19 at any time within the first 14 days of their hospitalization. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTINGS: Five hospitals in Maryland and Washington, D.C. PATIENTS: Patients who were hospitalized between 5 March and 4 December 2020 with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) confirmed by nucleic acid test and symptomatic disease. MEASUREMENTS: A clinical registry for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 was the primary data source; data included demographic characteristics, admission source, comorbid conditions, time-varying vital signs, laboratory measurements, and clinical severity. Random forest for survival, longitudinal, and multivariate (RF-SLAM) data analysis was applied to predict the 1-day and 7-day risks for progression to severe disease or death for any given day during the first 14 days of hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 3163 patients admitted with moderate COVID-19, 228 (7%) became severely ill or died in the next 24 hours; an additional 355 (11%) became severely ill or died in the next 7 days. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) for 1-day risk predictions for progression to severe disease or death was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.88 to 0.90) and 0.89 (CI, 0.87 to 0.91) during the first and second weeks of hospitalization, respectively. The AUC for 7-day risk predictions for progression to severe disease or death was 0.83 (CI, 0.83 to 0.84) and 0.87 (CI, 0.86 to 0.89) during the first and second weeks of hospitalization, respectively. LIMITATION: The SCARP tool was developed by using data from a single health system. CONCLUSION: Using the predictive power of RF-SLAM and longitudinal data from more than 3000 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, an interactive tool was developed that rapidly and accurately provides the probability of an individual patient's progression to severe illness or death on the basis of readily available clinical information. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Hopkins inHealth and COVID-19 Administrative Supplement for the HHS Region 3 Treatment Center from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/pathology , Hospital Mortality , Patient Acuity , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Risk Assessment/methods , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Disease Progression , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Maryland/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Registries , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(2): 669-672, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1048942

ABSTRACT

Despite mitigation efforts, 2 coronavirus disease outbreaks were identified among office workers in Washington, DC. Moderate adherence to workplace mitigation efforts was reported in a serologic survey; activities outside of the workplace were associated with infection. Adherence to safety measures are critical for returning to work during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Workplace/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Health Plan Implementation , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Seroepidemiologic Studies
16.
World Neurosurg ; 146: e1191-e1201, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1026721

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to affect all aspects of health care delivery, and neurosurgical practices are not immune to its impact. We aimed to evaluate neurosurgical practice patterns as well as the perioperative incidence of COVID-19 in neurosurgical patients and their outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of neurosurgical and neurointerventional cases at 2 tertiary centers during the first 3 months of the first peak of COVID-19 pandemic (March 8 to June 8) as well as following 3 months (post-peak pandemic; June 9 to September 9) was performed. Baseline characteristics, perioperative COVID-19 test results, modified Medically Necessary, Time-Sensitive (mMeNTS) score, and outcome measures were compared between COVID-19-positive and-negative patients through bivariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In total, 652 neurosurgical and 217 neurointerventional cases were performed during post-peak pandemic period. Cervical spine, lumbar spine, functional/pain, cranioplasty, and cerebral angiogram cases were significantly increased in the postpandemic period. There was a 2.9% (35/1197) positivity rate for COVID-19 testing overall and 3.6% (13/363) positivity rate postoperatively. Age, mMeNTS score, complications, length of stay, case acuity, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, and disposition were significantly different between COVID-19-positive and-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: A significant increase in elective case volume during the post-peak pandemic period is feasible with low and acceptable incidence of COVID-19 in neurosurgical patients. COVID-19-positive patients were younger, less likely to undergo elective procedures, had increased length of stay, had more complications, and were discharged to a location other than home. The mMeNTS score plays a role in decision-making for scheduling elective cases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Neurosurgical Procedures/trends , Perioperative Care/trends , Tertiary Care Centers/trends , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Neurosurgical Procedures/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Perioperative Care/methods , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
17.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 27 Suppl 1, COVID-19 and Public Health: Looking Back, Moving Forward: S29-S38, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-947691

ABSTRACT

US states and big cities acted to protect the residents of their jurisdictions from the threat of SARS-CoV-2 infection and reduce COVID-19 transmission. As there were no known pharmacologic interventions to prevent COVID-19 at the outset of the pandemic, public health and elected leaders implemented a host of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to slow the spread of the virus. This article discusses variation among states and cities in their implementation of 3 NPIs: stay-at-home/shelter-in-place orders, gathering restrictions, and mask mandates. We illustrate how frequently each was used by states and big cities, discuss state and local authorities to implement such interventions, and consider how these NPIs and accompanying public adherence to public health orders may vary considerably in different regions of the country and by local and state laws specific to state preemption of public health authority.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Policy , Pandemics/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Public Health/standards , Cities/epidemiology , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
18.
PLoS One ; 15(11): e0241949, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-917997

ABSTRACT

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmingly demonstrated the need to accurately evaluate the effects of implementing new or altering existing nonpharmaceutical interventions. Since these interventions applied at the societal level cannot be evaluated through traditional experimental means, public health officials and other decision makers must rely on statistical and mathematical epidemiological models. Nonpharmaceutical interventions are typically focused on contacts between members of a population, and yet most epidemiological models rely on homogeneous mixing which has repeatedly been shown to be an unrealistic representation of contact patterns. An alternative approach is individual based models (IBMs), but these are often time intensive and computationally expensive to implement, requiring a high degree of expertise and computational resources. More often, decision makers need to know the effects of potential public policy decisions in a very short time window using limited resources. This paper presents a computation algorithm for an IBM designed to evaluate nonpharmaceutical interventions. By utilizing recursive relationships, our method can quickly compute the expected epidemiological outcomes even for large populations based on any arbitrary contact network. We utilize our methods to evaluate the effects of various mitigation measures in the District of Columbia, USA, at various times and to various degrees. Rcode for our method is provided in the supplementry material, thereby allowing others to utilize our approach for other regions.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Models, Theoretical , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Algorithms , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Disease Outbreaks , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Humans , Masks , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Quarantine , SARS-CoV-2
19.
J Racial Ethn Health Disparities ; 8(5): 1300-1314, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-871605

ABSTRACT

Previous research has demonstrated that the burden of household food insecurity is disproportionately high among racial/ethnic minority groups, yet no peer-reviewed studies have systematically examined racial/ethnic disparities in household food insecurity in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-sectional study on household food insecurity during COVID-19 used data from a nationally representative sample of US households through the 2020 Household Pulse Survey (HPS) (including all 50 states and the District of Columbia, n = 74,413 households). Six generalized estimating equation (GEE) models were estimated, and the results indicated that households headed by Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, or other racial/ethnic minorities were not significantly more food insecure than White households during the pandemic. However, among food-insecure households, Black households were more likely to report that they could not afford to buy more food; Asian and Hispanic households were more likely to be afraid to go out to buy food; Asian households were more likely to face transportation issues when purchasing food; while White households were more likely to report that stores did not have the food they wanted. Moreover, racial/ethnic minorities were significantly less confident about their household food security for the next 4 weeks than Whites. The coronavirus pandemic crisis has exposed and exacerbated the food injustice in American society. Policymakers and local officials should take concerted actions to improve the capacity of food supply and ensure food equality across all racial/ethnic groups.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Food Insecurity , Pandemics , /statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , District of Columbia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL