Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 34
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0249214, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605662

ABSTRACT

The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus. Despite strong efforts that have been taking place to control the pandemic globally, the virus is on the rise in many countries. Hence, this study assessed the maternal health care services utilization amidst the COVID-19 pandemic in West Shoa zone, Central Ethiopia. A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 844 pregnant women or those who gave birth in the last 6 months before the study. A multi-stage sampling technique was used to select the study participants. The data were collected through face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured questionnaire. Logistic regressions were performed to identify the presence of significant associations, and an adjusted odds ratio with 95%CI was employed for the strength and directions of association between the independent and outcome variables. A P-value of <0.05 was used to declare statistical significance. The prevalence of maternal health service utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic was 64.8%. The odds of maternal health service utilization was higher among mothers who had primary (AOR = 2.16, 95%CI: 1.29-3.60), secondary (AOR = 1.97, 95%CI: 1.13-3.44), and college and above education (AOR = 2.89, 95%CI: 1.34-6.22) than those who could not read and write. Besides, mothers who did travel 30-60 minutes (AOR = 0.37, 95%CI: 0.23-0.59) and 60-90minutes (AOR = 0.10, 95%CI: 0.05-0.19) to reach the health facility had a lower odds of maternal health service utilization than those who did travel <30 minutes. Moreover, mothers who earn 1000-2000 (AOR = 3.10, 95%CI: 1.73-5.55) and > 2000 birrs (AOR = 2.66 95%CI: 1.52-4.64) had higher odds of maternal health service utilization than those who earn <500 birrs. Similarly, the odds of utilizing maternal health service were higher among mothers who did not fear COVID-19 infection (AOR = 2.79, 95%CI: 1.85-4.20), who had not had to request permission from husband to visit the health facility (AOR = 7.24, 95%CI: 2.65-19.75), who had practicedCOVID-19 prevention measure (AOR = 5.82, 95%CI: 3.87-8.75), and used face mask (AOR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.28-3.31) than their counterpart. Empowering mothers and creating awareness on COVID-19 preventionis recommended to improve maternal health service utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Maternal Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Educational Status , Ethiopia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Masks , Odds Ratio , Pandemics , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Social Class , Young Adult
2.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0260270, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1523455

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is a newly emerging pandemic affecting more than 120 million people globally. Compliance with preventive practices is the single most effective method to overcome the disease. Although several studies have been conducted regarding COVID-19, data on healthcare provider's adherence to COVID-19 preventive practices during childbirth through direct observation is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to assess healthcare provider's adherence to COVID-19 preventive practices during childbirth in northwest Ethiopia. METHODS: A multicenter study was conducted at hospitals in northwest Ethiopia among 406 healthcare providers from November 15 /2020 to March 10 /2021. A simple random sampling technique was employed to select the study subjects. Data were collected via face-to-face interviews and direct observation using a structured questionnaire and standardized checklist respectively. EPI INFO version 7.1.2 and SPSS 25 were used for data entry and analysis respectively. Binary logistic regression analyses were undertaken to identify associated factors. The level of significance was decided based on the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with a 95% confidence interval at a p-value of ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: The proportion of healthcare providers having good adherence to COVID-19 preventive practices during intrapartum care was 46.1% (95% CI: 41.2, 50.9). Healthcare providers who had job satisfaction (AOR = 3.18; 95% CI: 1.64, 6.13), had smartphone and/or computer (AOR = 2.75; 95% CI: 1.62, 4.65), ever received training on infection prevention (AOR = 3.58; 95% CI: 2.20, 5.84), earned higher monthly income (AOR = 2.15; 95% CI: 1.30, 3.57), and worked at health facility in the urban area (AOR = 1.72; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.77) had a significant association with adherence to COVID-19 preventive practices. Moreover, the most commonly mentioned barriers for not adhering to the preventive practice of COVID-19 were crowdedness of the delivery room, non-availability of personal protective equipment, and shortage of alcohol or sanitizer. CONCLUSION: The healthcare provider's adherence to COVID-19 preventive practices was low. Hence, stakeholders need to pay special attention to increase healthcare provides' job satisfaction. In addition, the provision of continuous training on infection prevention would be helpful. Furthermore, personal protective equipment, alcohol, and sanitizer supply must be provided for healthcare providers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/prevention & control , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Ethiopia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
3.
Med Care ; 60(1): 3-12, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504829

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Equitable access to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing is important for reducing disparities. We sought to examine differences in the health care setting choice for SARS-CoV-2 testing by race/ethnicity and insurance. Options included traditional health care settings and mobile testing units (MTUs) targeting communities experiencing disproportionately high coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rates. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational study among patients in a large health system in the Southeastern US. Descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression analyses were employed to evaluate associations between patient characteristics and health care setting choice for SARS-CoV-2 testing, defined as: (1) outpatient (OP) care; (2) emergency department (ED); (3) urgent care (UC); and (4) MTUs. Patient characteristics included race/ethnicity, insurance, and the existence of an established relationship with the health care system. RESULTS: Our analytic sample included 105,386 adult patients tested for SARS-CoV-2. Overall, 55% of patients sought care at OP, 24% at ED, 12% at UC, and 9% at MTU. The sample was 58% White, 24% Black, 11% Hispanic, and 8% other race/ethnicity. Black patients had a higher likelihood of getting tested through the ED compared with White patients. Hispanic patients had the highest likelihood of testing at MTUs. Patients without a primary care provider had a higher relative risk of being tested through the ED and MTUs versus OP. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities by race/ethnicity were present in health care setting choice for SARS-CoV-2 testing. Health care systems may consider implementing mobile care delivery models to reach vulnerable populations. Our findings support the need for systemic change to increase primary care and health care access beyond short-term pandemic solutions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/ethnology , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Health Status Disparities , Adolescent , Adult , African Americans/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/ethnology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors , United States , Young Adult
5.
PLoS One ; 16(6): e0253110, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1496435

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends inpatient hospital treatment of young infants up to two months old with any sign of possible serious infection. However, each sign may have a different risk of death. The current study aims to calculate the case fatality ratio for infants with individual or combined signs of possible serious infection, stratified by inpatient or outpatient treatment. METHODS: We analysed data from the African Neonatal Sepsis Trial conducted in five sites in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya and Nigeria. Trained study nurses classified sick infants as pneumonia (fast breathing in 7-59 days old), severe pneumonia (fast breathing in 0-6 days old), clinical severe infection [severe chest indrawing, high (> = 38°C) or low body temperature (<35.5°C), stopped feeding well, or movement only when stimulated] or critical illness (convulsions, not able to feed at all, or no movement at all), and referred them to a hospital for inpatient treatment. Infants whose caregivers refused referral received outpatient treatment. The case fatality ratio by day 15 was calculated for individual and combined clinical signs and stratified by place of treatment. An infant with signs of clinical severe infection or severe pneumonia was recategorised as having low- (case fatality ratio ≤2%) or moderate- (case fatality ratio >2%) mortality risk. RESULTS: Of 7129 young infants with a possible serious infection, fast breathing (in 7-59 days old) was the most prevalent sign (26%), followed by high body temperature (20%) and severe chest indrawing (19%). Infants with pneumonia had the lowest case fatality ratio (0.2%), followed by severe pneumonia (2.0%), clinical severe infection (2.3%) and critical illness (16.9%). Infants with clinical severe infection had a wide range of case fatality ratios for individual signs (from 0.8% to 11.0%). Infants with pneumonia had similar case fatality ratio for outpatient and inpatient treatment (0.2% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.74). Infants with clinical severe infection or severe pneumonia had a lower case fatality ratio among those who received outpatient treatment compared to inpatient treatment (1.9% vs. 6.5%, p<0.0001). We recategorised infants into low-mortality risk signs (case fatality ratio ≤2%) of clinical severe infection (high body temperature, or severe chest indrawing) or severe pneumonia and moderate-mortality risk signs (case fatality ratio >2%) (stopped feeding well, movement only when stimulated, low body temperature or multiple signs of clinical severe infection). We found that both categories had four times lower case fatality ratio when treated as outpatient than inpatient treatment, i.e., 1.0% vs. 4.0% (p<0.0001) and 5.3% vs. 22.4% (p<0.0001), respectively. In contrast, infants with signs of critical illness had nearly two times higher case fatality ratio when treated as outpatient versus inpatient treatment (21.7% vs. 12.1%, p = 0.097). CONCLUSIONS: The mortality risk differs with clinical signs. Young infants with a possible serious infection can be grouped into those with low-mortality risk signs (high body temperature, or severe chest indrawing or severe pneumonia); moderate-mortality risk signs (stopped feeding well, movement only when stimulated, low body temperature or multiple signs of clinical severe infection), or high-mortality risk signs (signs of critical illness). New treatment strategies that consider differential mortality risks for the place of treatment and duration of inpatient treatment could be developed and evaluated based on these findings. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry under ID ACTRN 12610000286044.


Subject(s)
Fever/complications , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Infant Mortality/trends , Infections/mortality , Pneumonia/mortality , Anti-Infective Agents/therapeutic use , Body Temperature , Democratic Republic of the Congo/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Infections/drug therapy , Infections/epidemiology , Kenya/epidemiology , Male , Nigeria/epidemiology , Pneumonia/drug therapy , Pneumonia/epidemiology
6.
PLoS One ; 16(10): e0257381, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456085

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare providers represent a limited resource, and their mental health is crucial for patient care and for ensuring containment of the pandemics. We aimed to explore how healthcare workers experienced the preparedness period of COVID-19 pandemic, in order to ascertain the perceived weaknesses and strengths. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 17 participants encompassing senior physicians, residents, and nurses. They were audio-recorded, and the transcription was verbatim. We used thematic analysis. RESULTS: We identified four themes, with subsequent subthemes: dealing with the unknown, human versus doctors, sense of helplessness, and a bridge to heaven, which explore how healthcare workers experienced the lack of knowledge, their feeling of losing control, and how they managed their internal fights. The disappointment provoked by the authorities and their colleagues was further evaluated. We identified factors involved in their well-being. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 pandemic represented and will still pose a challenge for healthcare workers (HCWs) from all over the world. They felt unprepared for such a crisis. Further measures should be implemented in every hospital to maintain HCWs awareness and to prevent physical imbalance. Appropriate standards of care should be further stated by the authorities so that the healthcare providers may find easier a balance between their safety and their patients' needs. Conducting qualitative research involving HCWs during pandemic times may help in informing more significant policy decisions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/psychology , Qualitative Research , Adult , Attitude of Health Personnel , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Romania/epidemiology
7.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(38): 1355-1359, 2020 Sep 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1389855

ABSTRACT

Pregnant women might be at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), possibly related to changes in their immune system and respiratory physiology* (1). Further, adverse birth outcomes, such as preterm delivery and stillbirth, might be more common among pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (2,3). Information about SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy is rapidly growing; however, data on reasons for hospital admission, pregnancy-specific characteristics, and birth outcomes among pregnant women hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infections are limited. During March 1-May 30, 2020, as part of Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)† surveillance of COVID-19 hospitalizations, 105 hospitalized pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified, including 62 (59%) hospitalized for obstetric reasons (i.e., labor and delivery or another pregnancy-related indication) and 43 (41%) hospitalized for COVID-19 illness without an obstetric reason. Overall, 50 (81%) of 62 pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection who were admitted for obstetric reasons were asymptomatic. Among 43 pregnant women hospitalized for COVID-19, 13 (30%) required intensive care unit (ICU) admission, six (14%) required mechanical ventilation, and one died from COVID-19. Prepregnancy obesity was more common (44%) among pregnant women hospitalized for COVID-19 than that among asymptomatic pregnant women hospitalized for obstetric reasons (31%). Likewise, the rate of gestational diabetes (26%) among pregnant women hospitalized for COVID-19 was higher than it was among women hospitalized for obstetric reasons (8%). Preterm delivery occurred in 15% of pregnancies among 93 women who delivered, and stillbirths (fetal death at ≥20 weeks' gestation) occurred in 3%. Antenatal counseling emphasizing preventive measures (e.g., use of masks, frequent hand washing, and social distancing) might help prevent COVID-19 among pregnant women,§ especially those with prepregnancy obesity and gestational diabetes, which might reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/therapy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/virology , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
8.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256086, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1357436

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Quality water, sanitation, and hygiene facilities act as barricades to the transmission of COVID-19 in health care facilities. These facilities ought to also be available, accessible, and functional in temporary treatment centers. Despite numerous studies on health care facilities, however, there is limited information on the status of WASH facilities in such centers. METHODS: The assessment of health care facilities for the COVID-19 response checklist and key informant interviews, were used for data collection. 35 treatment centers in Southern Ethiopia were surveyed. Eightkey informants were interviewed to gain an understanding of the WASH conditions in the treatment centers. The Quantitative data was entered using EPI-INFO 7 and exported to SPSS 20 for analysis. Results are presented using descriptive statistics. Open Code 4.02 was used for the thematic analysis of the qualitative data. RESULTS: Daily water supply interruptions occurred at 27 (77.1%) of the surveyed sites. Only 30 (85.72%) had bathrooms that were segregated for personnel and patients, and only 3 (3.57%) had toilets that were handicapped accessible. 20(57.2%) of the treatment centers did not have a hand hygiene protocol that satisfied WHO guidelines. In terms of infection prevention and control, 16 (45.71%) of the facilities lacked adequate personal protective equipment stocks. Between urban and rural areas, there was also a significant difference in latrine maintenance, hand hygiene protocol design and implementation, and incineration capacity. CONCLUSION: The results reveal crucial deficiencies in the provision of WASH in the temporary COVID-19 treatment centers. Efforts to improve WASH should offer priority to hygiene service interventions to minimize the risk of healthcare-acquired infections. The sustainable provision of hygiene services, such as hand washing soap, should also be given priority.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Hygiene , Quarantine/statistics & numerical data , Sanitation/statistics & numerical data , Water Quality , COVID-19/prevention & control , Ethiopia , Health Facilities/standards , Humans , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Quarantine/standards , Sanitation/standards
9.
Eur J Clin Invest ; 51(11): e13669, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1354478

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2020, early U.S. COVID-19 testing sites offered diagnostic capacity to patients and were important sources of epidemiological data about the spread of the novel pandemic disease. However, little research has comprehensively described American testing sites' distribution by race/ethnicity and sought to identify any relation to known disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: Locations of U.S. COVID-19 testing sites were gathered from 16 April to 28 May 2020. Geographic testing disparities were evaluated with comparisons of the demographic makeup of zip codes around each testing site versus Monte Carlo simulations, aggregated to statewide and nationwide levels. State testing disparities were compared with statewide disparities in mortality observed one to 3 weeks later using multivariable regression, controlling for confounding disparities and characteristics. RESULTS: Nationwide, COVID-19 testing sites geographically overrepresented White residents on 7 May, underrepresented Hispanic residents on 16 April, 7 May and 28 May and overrepresented Black residents on 28 May compared with random distribution within counties, with new sites added over time exhibiting inconsistent disparities for Black and Hispanic populations. For every 1 percentage point increase in underrepresentation of Hispanic populations in zip codes with testing, mortality among the state's Hispanic population was 1.04 percentage points more over-representative (SE = 0.415, p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: American testing sites were not distributed equitably by race during this analysis, often underrepresenting minority populations who bear a disproportionate burden of COVID-19 cases and deaths. With an easy-to-implement measure of geographic disparity, these results provide empirical support for the consideration of access when distributing preventive resources.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Mortality , African Americans , COVID-19/mortality , Geography , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Monte Carlo Method , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
10.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251434, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1236587

ABSTRACT

A nationwide questionnaire survey about community-acquired infection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was conducted in July 2020 to identify the characteristics of and measures taken by Japanese medical facilities providing maternity services. A case-control study was conducted by including medical facilities with (Cases) and without (Control) community-acquired infection of COVID-19. Responses from 711 hospitals and 707 private clinics were assessed (72% of all hospital and 59% all private clinics provided maternity service in Japan). Seventy-five COVID-19-positive pregnant women were treated in 52 facilities. Community-acquired infection was reported in 4.1% of the facilities. Of these, 95% occurred in the hospital. Nine patients developed a community-acquired infection in the maternity ward or obstetric department. Variables that associated with community-acquired infection of COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]) were found to be state of emergency prefecture (4.93 [2.17-11.16]), PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 on admission (2.88 [1.59-5.24]), and facility that cannot treat COVID-19 positive patients (0.34 [0.14-0.82]). In conclusion, community-acquired infection is likely to occur in large hospitals that treat a higher number of patients than private clinics do, regardless of the preventive measures used.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Community-Acquired Infections/epidemiology , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Adult , Female , Humans , Incidence , Japan , Pregnancy
11.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251382, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1218947

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The presence of COVID-19 has led to the disruption of health systems globally, including essential reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) services. This study aimed to assess the challenges faced by women who used RMNCH services in Nigeria's epicentre, their satisfaction with care received during the COVID-19 pandemic and the factors associated with their satisfaction. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted in Lagos, southwest Nigeria among 1,241 women of reproductive age who had just received RMNCH services at one of twenty-two health facilities across the primary, secondary and tertiary tiers of health care. The respondents were selected via multi-stage sampling and face to face exit interviews were conducted by trained interviewers. Client satisfaction was assessed across four sub-scales: health care delivery, health facility, interpersonal aspects of care and access to services. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to assess the relationship between personal characteristics and client satisfaction. RESULTS: About 43.51% of respondents had at least one challenge in accessing RMNCH services since the COVID-19 outbreak. Close to a third (31.91%) could not access service because they could not leave their houses during the lockdown and 18.13% could not access service because there was no transportation. The mean clients' satisfaction score among the respondents was 43.25 (SD: 6.28) out of a possible score of 57. Satisfaction scores for the interpersonal aspects of care were statistically significantly lower in the PHCs and general hospitals compared to teaching hospitals. Being over 30 years of age was significantly associated with an increased clients' satisfaction score (ß = 1.80, 95%CI: 1.10-2.50). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 lockdown posed challenges to accessing RMNCH services for a significant proportion of women surveyed. Although overall satisfaction with care was fairly high, there is a need to provide tailored COVID-19 sensitive inter-personal care to clients at all levels of care.


Subject(s)
Child Health Services , Maternal Health Services , Patient Satisfaction , Reproductive Health Services , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Nigeria/epidemiology , Pandemics , Patient Satisfaction/statistics & numerical data , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Young Adult
13.
PLoS One ; 16(4): e0249133, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1167108

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several research efforts have evaluated the impact of various factors including a) socio-demographics, (b) health indicators, (c) mobility trends, and (d) health care infrastructure attributes on COVID-19 transmission and mortality rate. However, earlier research focused only on a subset of variable groups (predominantly one or two) that can contribute to the COVID-19 transmission/mortality rate. The current study effort is designed to remedy this by analyzing COVID-19 transmission/mortality rates considering a comprehensive set of factors in a unified framework. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We study two per capita dependent variables: (1) daily COVID-19 transmission rates and (2) total COVID-19 mortality rates. The first variable is modeled using a linear mixed model while the later dimension is analyzed using a linear regression approach. The model results are augmented with a sensitivity analysis to predict the impact of mobility restrictions at a county level. Several county level factors including proportion of African-Americans, income inequality, health indicators associated with Asthma, Cancer, HIV and heart disease, percentage of stay at home individuals, testing infrastructure and Intensive Care Unit capacity impact transmission and/or mortality rates. From the policy analysis, we find that enforcing a stay at home order that can ensure a 50% stay at home rate can result in a potential reduction of about 33% in daily cases. CONCLUSIONS: The model framework developed can be employed by government agencies to evaluate the influence of reduced mobility on transmission rates at a county level while accommodating for various county specific factors. Based on our policy analysis, the study findings support a county level stay at home order for regions currently experiencing a surge in transmission. The model framework can also be employed to identify vulnerable counties that need to be prioritized based on health indicators for current support and/or preferential vaccination plans (when available).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care , Demography/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Socioeconomic Factors , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/transmission , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Health Policy , Humans , Risk Factors , United States
14.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 447, 2021 03 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1119419

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, governments, health experts, and ethicists have proposed guidelines about ICU triage and priority access to a vaccine. To increase political legitimacy and accountability, public support is important. This study examines what criteria beyond medical need are deemed important to be perceived of priority COVID-19 healthcare access. METHOD: Two conjoint experiments about priority over ICU treatment and early COVID-19 vaccination were implemented in a probability-based sample of 1461 respondents representative of the Netherlands. Respondents were asked who should receive treatment out of two fictitious healthcare claimants that differed in in age, weight, complying with corona policy measures, and occupation, all randomly assigned. Average marginal coefficient effects are estimated to assess the relative importance of the attributes; attributes were interacted with relevant respondent characteristics to find whether consensus exists in this relative ranking. RESULTS: The Dutch penalize those not complying with coronavirus policy measures, and the obese, but prioritize those employed in 'crucial' sectors. For these conditions, there is consensus among the population. For age, young people are prioritized for ICU treatment, while the middle-aged are given priority over a vaccine, with younger respondents favoring healthcare for elderly claimants, while older respondents favor support for young cohorts. CONCLUSION: People who have no control over their social risk and are able to reciprocate to society are considered as more deserving of priority of COVID-19 healthcare. Our findings provide fair support for the implemented ethical guidelines about ICU-treatment and COVID-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/standards , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Health Facilities/standards , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Vaccination/standards , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Consensus , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Pandemics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
15.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(4): 114-117, 2021 Jan 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1112896

ABSTRACT

During September 3-November 16, 2020, daily confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (WDHS) increased at a rate of 24% per week, from a 7-day average of 674 (August 28-September 3) to 6,426 (November 10-16) (1). The growth rate during this interval was the highest to date in Wisconsin and among the highest in the United States during that time (1). To characterize potential sources of this increase, the investigation examined reported outbreaks in Wisconsin that occurred during March 4-November 16, 2020, with respect to their setting and number of associated COVID-19 cases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Public Health Surveillance , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Laboratories , Long-Term Care , Prisons/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Universities/statistics & numerical data , Wisconsin/epidemiology
16.
Radiol Med ; 126(5): 717-721, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1107863

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: COVID-19 constitutes a worldwide threat, prompting Italian Government to implement specific measures on March 8, 2020, to protect patients and health workers from disease transmission. The impact of preventive measures on daily activity of a radiotherapy facility may hamper the ability to fulfill normal workload burden. Thus, we assessed the number of delivered treatments in a specific observation period after the adoption of preventive measures (since March 11 to April 24, 2020) and compared it with the corresponding period of the year 2019. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall number of delivered fractions was related to actual time of platform daily activity and reported as a ratio between number of delivered fractions and activity hours (Fr/Hrs). Fr/Hrs were calculated and compared for two different periods of time, March 11-April 24, 2019 (Fr/Hrs1), and March 11-April 24, 2020 (Fr/Hrs2). RESULTS: Fr/Hrs1 and Fr/Hrs2 were 2.66 and 2.54 for year 2019 and 2020, respectively, for a Fr/Hrsratio of 1.07 (95% CI 1.03-1.12, p = 0.0005). Fr/Hrs1 was significantly higher than Fr/Hrs2 for SliR and PreciseR, with Fr/Hrsratio of 1.92 (95% CI 1.66-2.23, p < 0.0001) and 1.11 (95% CI 1.03-1.2, p = 0.003), respectively. No significant difference was reported for SynergyR and CyberknifeR with Fr/Hrsratio of 0.99 (95% CI 0.91-1.08, p = 0.8) and 0.9 (95% CI 0.77-1.06, p = 0.2), respectively. Fr/Hrs1 was significantly lower than Fr/Hrs2 for TomotherapyR, with Fr/Hrsratio of 0.88 (95% CI 0.8-0.96, p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Preventive measures did not influence workload burden performed. Automation in treatment delivery seems to compensate effectively for health workers number reduction.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Radiotherapy/statistics & numerical data , Workload/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Italy/epidemiology
17.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(7): 240-244, 2021 Feb 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1089242

ABSTRACT

Telehealth can facilitate access to care, reduce risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]), conserve scarce medical supplies, and reduce strain on health care capacity and facilities while supporting continuity of care. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)-funded health centers* expanded telehealth† services during the COVID-19 pandemic (1). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services eliminated geographic restrictions and enhanced reimbursement so that telehealth services-enabled health centers could expand telehealth services and continue providing care during the pandemic (2,3). CDC and HRSA analyzed data from 245 health centers that completed a voluntary weekly HRSA Health Center COVID-19 Survey§ for 20 consecutive weeks to describe trends in telehealth use. During the weeks ending June 26-November 6, 2020, the overall percentage of weekly health care visits conducted via telehealth (telehealth visits) decreased by 25%, from 35.8% during the week ending June 26 to 26.9% for the week ending November 6, averaging 30.2% over the study period. Weekly telehealth visits declined when COVID-19 cases were decreasing and plateaued as cases were increasing. Health centers in the South and in rural areas consistently reported the lowest average percentage of weekly telehealth visits over the 20 weeks, compared with health centers in other regions and urban areas. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, maintaining and expanding telehealth services will be critical to ensuring access to care while limiting exposure to SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/trends , Health Care Surveys , Humans , United States/epidemiology
18.
Malar J ; 19(1): 410, 2020 Nov 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1067237

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the past decade substantial reduction in malaria morbidity and mortality has been observed through well-implemented case management and vector control strategies. India has also achieved a significant reduction in malaria burden in 2018 and has committed to eliminate malaria by 2030. The Mandla Malaria Elimination Demonstration Project (MEDP) was started in 2017 in 1233 villages of District Mandla to demonstrate malaria elimination in a tribal district with hard-to-reach areas was possible using active and passive surveillance, case management, vector control, and targeted information, education and communication campaigns. An operational plan was developed to strengthen the existing surveillance and malaria elimination systems, through fortnightly active case detection to ensure that all cases including those that are introduced into the communities are rapidly identified and treated promptly. The plan also focused on the reduction of human-mosquito contact through the use of Long-Lasting Insecticial Nets (LLINs) and Indoor Residual Spray (IRS). The operational plan was modified in view of the present COVID-19 pandemic by creating systems of assistance for the local administration for COVID-related work while ensuring the operational integrity of malaria elimination efforts. RESULTS: The use of MEDP study design and operational plan, with its built-in management control systems, has yielded significant (91%) reduction of indigenous cases of malaria during the period from June 2017 to May 2020. The malaria positivity rate was 0.33% in 2017-18, 0.13% in 2018-19, and 0.06% in 2019-20. Mass screening revealed 0.18% malaria positivity in September-October 2018, followed by 0.06% in June 2019, and 0.03% in December 2019, and these were mostly asymptomatic cases in the community. The project has been able to sustain the gains of the past three years during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: This paper provides the study design and the operational plan for malaria elimination in a high-burden district of Central India, which presented difficulties of hard to reach areas, forest malaria, and complex epidemiology of urban and rural malaria. The lessons learned could be used for malaria elimination efforts in rest of the country and other parts of South Asia with comparable demography and epidemiology.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Endemic Diseases/prevention & control , Malaria/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Population Surveillance/methods , Altitude , Animals , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Endemic Diseases/statistics & numerical data , Forests , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , India/epidemiology , Insecticide-Treated Bednets , Malaria/epidemiology , Mosquito Control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Prevalence , Rain , Rural Population , Urban Population
19.
J Hosp Infect ; 108: 189-196, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1019281

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Understanding how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is spread within the hospital setting is essential in order to protect staff, implement effective infection control measures, and prevent nosocomial transmission. METHODS: The presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the air and on environmental surfaces around hospitalized patients, with and without respiratory symptoms, was investigated. Environmental sampling was undertaken within eight hospitals in England during the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak. Samples were analysed using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and virus isolation assays. FINDINGS: SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected on 30 (8.9%) of 336 environmental surfaces. Cycle threshold values ranged from 28.8 to 39.1, equating to 2.2 x 105 to 59 genomic copies/swab. Concomitant bacterial counts were low, suggesting that the cleaning performed by nursing and domestic staff across all eight hospitals was effective. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in four of 55 air samples taken <1 m from four different patients. In all cases, the concentration of viral RNA was low and ranged from <10 to 460 genomic copies/m3 air. Infectious virus was not recovered from any of the PCR-positive samples analysed. CONCLUSIONS: Effective cleaning can reduce the risk of fomite (contact) transmission, but some surface types may facilitate the survival, persistence and/or dispersal of SARS-CoV-2. The presence of low or undetectable concentrations of viral RNA in the air supports current guidance on the use of specific personal protective equipment for aerosol-generating and non-aerosol-generating procedures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Disinfection/statistics & numerical data , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Aerosols , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/transmission , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Disinfection/methods , England/epidemiology , Female , Fomites/statistics & numerical data , Fomites/virology , Health Personnel/education , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Male , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , RNA, Viral/genetics , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
20.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(50): 1902-1905, 2020 Dec 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1016443

ABSTRACT

Early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, in-person ambulatory health care visits declined by 60% across the United States, while telehealth* visits increased, accounting for up to 30% of total care provided in some locations (1,2). In March 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released updated regulations and guidance changing telehealth provisions during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, including the elimination of geographic barriers and enhanced reimbursement for telehealth services† (3-6). The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) administers a voluntary weekly Health Center COVID-19 Survey§ to track health centers' COVID-19 testing capacity and the impact of COVID-19 on operations, patients, and staff. CDC and HRSA analyzed data from the weekly COVID-19 survey completed by 1,009 HRSA-funded health centers (health centers¶) for the week of July 11-17, 2020, to describe telehealth service use in the United States by U.S. Census region,** urbanicity,†† staffing capacity, change in visit volume, and personal protective equipment (PPE) supply. Among the 1,009 health center respondents, 963 (95.4%) reported providing telehealth services. Health centers in urban areas were more likely to provide >30% of health care visits virtually (i.e., via telehealth) than were health centers in rural areas. Telehealth is a promising approach to promoting access to care and can facilitate public health mitigation strategies and help prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory illnesses, while supporting continuity of care. Although CMS's change of its telehealth provisions enabled health centers to expand telehealth by aligning guidance and leveraging federal resources, sustaining expanded use of telehealth services might require additional policies and resources.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Surveys , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Telemedicine/organization & administration , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...