Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 848
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Nursing ; 52(1): 38-43, 2022 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1612691

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: This article discusses the interconnection between the syndemic effect of racial inequities and disparities as well as the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Black Americans. It also highlights meaningful reforms and priorities to achieve health equity in Black communities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Racism , Health Status Disparities , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Syndemic , United States/epidemiology
2.
South Med J ; 114(10): 649-656, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1608690

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Although disparities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevalence are known, knowledge of the recent surge of COVID-19 in Texas and factors affecting fatality rates is limited. Understanding the health disparities associated with COVID-19 can help healthcare professionals determine the populations that are most in need of COVID-19 preventive care and treatment. The aim of this study was to assess COVID-19-related case and mortality rates. METHODS: Our cross-sectional analysis used Texas Department of State Health Services COVID-19 case surveillance counts. Case, hospitalization, and mortality counts were obtained from March to July 2020. RESULTS: From March to July 2020, there were 420,397 COVID-19-related cases and 6954 deaths in Texas. There were 3277 new cases and 104 deaths in March, and 261,876 new cases and 3660 deaths in July. The number of new COVID-19 cases was the highest from March to April (relative risk 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.76-1.78). Although the death rate in June was a 30% increase over the rate in May, death rates nearly tripled by the end of July, for a total of 3660 deaths. Of the 3958 deaths, demographic data were available for 753 deaths. Of these, 440 were male, 16 Asian, 95 Black, 221 Hispanic, 325 White, and 96 were "Other" or "Unknown." Males were associated with a slightly higher chance of acquiring COVID-19 than females (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% CI 1.09-1.14) and nearly a 29% higher chance of dying of COVID-19 compared with females (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.11-1.49). Bivariate analysis revealed that the probability of acquiring COVID-19 was 12% higher in older adults compared with individuals younger than 65 years old (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.08-1.16), and older adults had an 18.8 times higher risk of death when compared with the rate of younger individuals (OR 18.79, 95% CI 15.93-22.15). Hispanics and Blacks were 70% and 48%, respectively, more likely to contract COVID-19 than Whites. All races had lower significant chance of death when compared with Whites. At the end of July, there was a total of 430,485 Texas COVID-19 cases and 6387 fatalities (8.8% of all cases and 4% of all deaths in the United States.). Case fatality ratios were the highest in older adults. As we continued to observe data, in contrast to previous study time points, we found that Asians and Hispanics had no significant difference in COVID mortality rates and were comparable in terms of mortality odds and death case ratios when compared with Whites. CONCLUSIONS: This time period represents the highest COVID-19 surge time in Texas. Although our data consist of a short time period of population-level data in an ongoing pandemic and are limited by information reported to the Texas Department of State Health Services, older age, male sex, Hispanics, and Blacks are currently associated with higher infection rates, whereas older age, male sex, and Whites are associated with higher mortality rates. Clinicians and decision makers should be aware of the COVID-19 health disparities and risk factors for mortality to better promote targeted interventions and allocate resources accordingly.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/economics , Health Status Disparities , /statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/ethnology , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Prevalence , Risk Factors , State Government , Texas/epidemiology
4.
Rural Remote Health ; 21(3): 6596, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1579427

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Face masks are widely recommended as a COVID-19 prevention strategy. State mask mandates have generally reduced the spread of the disease, but decisions to wear a mask depend on many factors. Recent increases in case rates in rural areas following initial outbreaks in more densely populated areas highlight the need to focus on prevention and education. Messaging about disease risk has faced challenges in rural areas in the past. While surges in cases within some communities are likely an impetus for behavior change, rising case rates likely explain only part of mask-wearing decisions. The current study examined the relationship between county-level indicators of rurality and mask wearing in the USA. METHODS: National data from the New York Times' COVID-19 cross-sectional mask survey was used to identify the percentage of a county's residents who reported always/frequently wearing a mask (2-14 July 2020). The New York Times' COVID-19 data repository was used to calculate county-level daily case rates for the 2 weeks preceding the mask survey (15 June - 1 July 2020), and defined county rurality using the Index of Relative Rurality (n=3103 counties). Multivariate linear regression was used to predict mask wearing across levels of rurality. The model was adjusted for daily case rates and other relevant county-level confounders, including county-level indicators of age, race/ethnicity, gender, political partisanship, income inequality, and whether each county was subject to a statewide mask mandate. RESULTS: Large clusters of counties with high rurality and low mask wearing were observed in the Midwest, upper Midwest, and mountainous West. Holding daily case rates and other county characteristics constant, the predicted probability of wearing a mask decreased significantly as counties became more rural (β=-0.560; p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Upticks in COVID-19 cases and deaths in rural areas are expected to continue, and localized outbreaks will likely occur indefinitely. The present findings highlight the need to better understand the mechanisms underlying perceptions of COVID-19 risk in rural areas. Dissemination of scientifically correct and consistent information is critical during national emergencies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Status Disparities , Masks/trends , Rural Population/trends , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Linear Models , Male , Severity of Illness Index , Socioeconomic Factors
5.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 686, 2021 Jul 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1571742

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Associations between community-level risk factors and COVID-19 incidence have been used to identify vulnerable subpopulations and target interventions, but the variability of these associations over time remains largely unknown. We evaluated variability in the associations between community-level predictors and COVID-19 case incidence in 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts from March to October 2020. METHODS: Using publicly available sociodemographic, occupational, environmental, and mobility datasets, we developed mixed-effect, adjusted Poisson regression models to depict associations between these variables and town-level COVID-19 case incidence data across five distinct time periods from March to October 2020. We examined town-level demographic variables, including population proportions by race, ethnicity, and age, as well as factors related to occupation, housing density, economic vulnerability, air pollution (PM2.5), and institutional facilities. We calculated incidence rate ratios (IRR) associated with these predictors and compared these values across the multiple time periods to assess variability in the observed associations over time. RESULTS: Associations between key predictor variables and town-level incidence varied across the five time periods. We observed reductions over time in the association with percentage of Black residents (IRR = 1.12 [95%CI: 1.12-1.13]) in early spring, IRR = 1.01 [95%CI: 1.00-1.01] in early fall) and COVID-19 incidence. The association with number of long-term care facility beds per capita also decreased over time (IRR = 1.28 [95%CI: 1.26-1.31] in spring, IRR = 1.07 [95%CI: 1.05-1.09] in fall). Controlling for other factors, towns with higher percentages of essential workers experienced elevated incidences of COVID-19 throughout the pandemic (e.g., IRR = 1.30 [95%CI: 1.27-1.33] in spring, IRR = 1.20 [95%CI: 1.17-1.22] in fall). Towns with higher proportions of Latinx residents also had sustained elevated incidence over time (IRR = 1.19 [95%CI: 1.18-1.21] in spring, IRR = 1.14 [95%CI: 1.13-1.15] in fall). CONCLUSIONS: Town-level COVID-19 risk factors varied with time in this study. In Massachusetts, racial (but not ethnic) disparities in COVID-19 incidence may have decreased across the first 8 months of the pandemic, perhaps indicating greater success in risk mitigation in selected communities. Our approach can be used to evaluate effectiveness of public health interventions and target specific mitigation efforts on the community level.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Occupations/statistics & numerical data , Social Environment , Transportation/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/ethnology , Female , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Incidence , Income/statistics & numerical data , Male , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Movement/physiology , Pandemics , Residence Characteristics/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Socioeconomic Factors , Time Factors , Vulnerable Populations/ethnology , Vulnerable Populations/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
7.
J Trauma Stress ; 34(5): 1061-1067, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1568217

ABSTRACT

The papers in this Journal of Traumatic Stress special issue on disproportionate adversity cover the gamut of discrimination traumas and stressors, including microaggressions, a more insidious forms of discrimination, and their often-devastating and wide-ranging mental health sequelae, in disproportionately affected disenfranchised groups. Discrimination based on race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation commonly confers cumulative and chronic effects. In the field of traumatic stress studies, several types of identity-linked traumatic events have been identified and empirically investigated as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-producing experiences. Collectively, the 13 papers included in this special issue raise questions about the definition, conceptualization, and categorization of various forms of explicit and implicit identity-linked trauma. These papers highlight the need for acceptance of a shared nomenclature and better differentiation of both causal and correlational associations with acute and chronic PTSD, depression, suicide risk, alcohol misuse, and other mental health outcomes. In this commentary, the discussion is extended to COVID-19, a disease that has been globally devastating for many. On multiple levels (i.e., physical, mental, emotional, economic, and social), COVID-19 has magnified the prepandemic fault lines of race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Applying a syndemic framework to the health impact of COVID-19 and, arguably, the most pervasive identity linked epidemic worldwide-systemic racism-brings perspective to the biological and social forces that are likely to be driving the convergence of COVID-19, systemic racism, and chronic health inequities, and may be informative in guiding evidence-based strategies for managing racial trauma in the context of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Crime Victims/psychology , Health Status Disparities , Social Discrimination/psychology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Sexual and Gender Minorities/psychology
8.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(12): e2138464, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1567894

ABSTRACT

Importance: Persons experiencing homelessness (PEH) are at higher risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe illness due to COVID-19 because of a limited ability to physically distance and a higher burden of underlying health conditions. Objective: To describe and assess a hotel-based protective housing intervention to reduce incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among PEH in Chicago, Illinois, with increased risk of severe illness due to COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study analyzed PEH who were provided protective housing in individual hotel rooms in downtown Chicago during the COVID-19 pandemic from April 2 through September 3, 2020. Participants were PEH at increased risk for severe COVID-19, defined as (1) aged at least 60 years regardless of health conditions, (2) aged at least 55 years with any underlying health condition posing increased risk, or (3) aged less than 55 years with any underlying health condition posing substantially increased risk (eg, HIV/AIDS). Exposures: Participants were housed in individual hotel rooms to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection; on-site health care workers provided daily symptom monitoring, regular SARS-CoV-2 testing, and care for chronic health conditions. Additional on-site services included treatment of mental health and substance use disorders and social services. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome measured was SARS-CoV-2 incidence, with SARS-Cov2 infection defined as a positive upper respiratory specimen using any polymerase chain reaction diagnostic assay authorized for emergency use by the Food and Drug Administration. Secondary outcomes were blood pressure control, glycemic control as measured by hemoglobin A1c, and housing placements at departure. Results: Of 259 participants from 16 homeless shelters in Chicago, 104 (40.2%) were aged at least 65 years, 190 (73.4%) were male, 185 (71.4%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 49 (18.9%) were non-Hispanic White. There was an observed reduction in SARS-CoV-2 incidence during the study period among the protective housing cohort (54.7 per 1000 people [95% CI, 22.4-87.1 per 1000 people]) compared with citywide rates for PEH residing in shelters (137.1 per 1000 people [95% CI, 125.1-149.1 per 1000 people]; P = .001). There was also an adjusted change in systolic blood pressure at a rate of -5.7 mm Hg (95% CI, -9.3 to -2.1 mm Hg) and hemoglobin A1c at a rate of -1.4% (95% CI, -2.4% to -0.4%) compared with baseline. More than half of participants (51% [n = 132]) departed from the intervention to housing of some kind (eg, supportive housing). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that protective housing was associated with a reduction in SARS-CoV-2 infection among high-risk PEH during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Chicago. These findings suggest that with appropriate wraparound supports (ie, multisector services to address complex needs), such housing interventions may reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, improve noncommunicable disease control, and provide a pathway to permanent housing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Homeless Persons , Housing , Noncommunicable Diseases , Program Evaluation , Adult , Aged , Blood Pressure , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Testing , Chicago , Chronic Disease , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Noncommunicable Diseases/epidemiology , Noncommunicable Diseases/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Problems
9.
Hum Resour Health ; 19(1): 112, 2021 09 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1533262

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nurses and midwives play a critical role in the provision of care and the optimization of health services resources worldwide, which is particularly relevant during the current COVID-19 pandemic. However, they can only provide quality services if their work environment provides adequate conditions to support them. Today the employment and working conditions of many nurses worldwide are precarious, and the current pandemic has prompted more visibility to the vulnerability to health-damaging factors of nurses' globally. This desk review explores how employment relations, and employment and working conditions may be negatively affecting the health of nurses in countries such as Brazil, Croatia, India, Ireland, Italy, México, Nepal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. MAIN BODY: Nurses' health is influenced by the broader social, economic, and political system and the redistribution of power relations that creates new policies regarding the labour market and the welfare state. The vulnerability faced by nurses is heightened by gender inequalities, in addition to social class, ethnicity/race (and caste), age and migrant status, that are inequality axes that explain why nurses' workers, and often their families, are exposed to multiple risks and/or poorer health. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, informalization of nurses' employment and working conditions were unfair and harmed their health. During COVID-19 pandemic, there is evidence that the employment and working conditions of nurses are associated to poor physical and mental health. CONCLUSION: The protection of nurses' health is paramount. International and national enforceable standards are needed, along with economic and health policies designed to substantially improve employment and working conditions for nurses and work-life balance. More knowledge is needed to understand the pathways and mechanisms on how precariousness might affect nurses' health and monitor the progress towards nurses' health equity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Nurses , Employment , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Int J Equity Health ; 20(1): 248, 2021 11 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1533259

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic shows the presence of health disparities, especially in terms of morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence on the association of racial/ethnic and socioeconomic status (SES) with health outcomes and access to healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We retrieved published evidence from late December 2019 through March 1, 2021. The target population was the population of the countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. The exposures were defined as belonging to racial/ethnic minority groups and/or low SES. The primary outcomes of interest include (1) death from COVID-19, (2) COVID-19 incidence/infection, (3) COVID-19 hospitalization, (4) ICU admission, (5) need for mechanical ventilation, (6) confirmed diagnosis, and (7) access to testing. We systematically synthesized the findings from different studies and provided a narrative explanation of the results. RESULTS: After removing the duplicate results and screening for relevant titles and abstracts, 77 studies were selected for full-text review. Finally, 52 studies were included in the review. The majority of the studies were from the United States (37 studies). Despite the significant incongruity among the studies, most of them showed that racial/ethnic minority groups had higher risks of COVID-19 infection and hospitalization, confirmed diagnosis, and death. Additionally, most of the studies cited factors such as low level of education, poverty, poor housing conditions, low household income, speaking in a language other than the national language in a country, and living in overcrowded households as risk factors of COVID-19 incidence/infection, death, and confirmed diagnosis. However, findings in terms of the association of lack of health insurance coverage and unemployment with the outcome measures as well as the association of requiring mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and access to testing for COVID-19 with race/ethnicity were limited and inconsistent. CONCLUSION: It is evident that racial/ethnic minority groups and those from low SES are more vulnerable to COVID-19; therefore, public health policymakers, practitioners, and clinicians should be aware of these inequalities and strive to narrow the gap by focusing on vulnerable populations. This systematic review also revealed a major incongruity in the definition of the racial/ethnic minority groups and SES among the studies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020190105.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Minority Groups , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Class , United States/epidemiology
11.
Int J Equity Health ; 20(1): 249, 2021 11 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1529925

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Reducing health inequalities in the UK has been a policy priority for over 20 years, yet, despite efforts to create a more equal society, progress has been limited. Furthermore, some inequalities have widened and become more apparent, particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic. With growing recognition of the uneven distribution of life expectancy and of mental and physical health, the current research was commissioned to identify future research priorities to address UK societal and structural health inequalities. METHODS: An expert opinion consultancy process comprising an anonymous online survey and a consultation workshop were conducted to investigate priority areas for future research into UK inequalities. The seven-question survey asked respondents (n = 170) to indicate their current role, identify and prioritise areas of inequality, approaches and evaluation methods, and comment on future research priorities. The workshop was held to determine areas of research priority and attended by a closed list of delegates (n = 30) representing a range of academic disciplines and end-users of research from policy and practice. Delegates self-selected one of four breakout groups to determine research priority areas in four categories of inequality (health, social, economic, and other) and to allocate hypothetical sums of funding (half, one, five, and ten million pounds) to chosen priorities. Responses were analysed using mixed methods. RESULTS: Survey respondents were mainly 'academics' (33%), 'voluntary/third sector professionals' (17%), and 'creative/cultural professionals'(16%). Survey questions identified the main areas of inequality as 'health' (58%), 'social care' (54%), and 'living standards' (47%). The first research priority was 'access to creative and cultural opportunities' (37%), second, 'sense of place' (23%), and third, 'community' (17%). Approaches seen to benefit from more research in relation to addressing inequalities were 'health/social care' (55%), 'advice services' (34%), and 'adult education/training' (26%). Preferred evaluation methods were 'community/participatory' (76%), 'action research' (62%), and 'questionnaires/focus groups' (53%). Survey respondents (25%) commented on interactions between inequalities and issues such as political and economic decisions, and climate. The key workshop finding from determining research priorities in areas of inequality was that health equity could only be achieved by tackling societal and structural inequalities, environmental conditions and housing, and having an active prevention programme. CONCLUSIONS: Research demonstrates a clear need to assess the impact of cultural and natural assets in reducing inequality. Collaborations between community groups, service providers, local authorities, health commissioners, GPs, and researchers using longitudinal methods are needed within a multi-disciplinary approach to address societal and structural health inequalities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Status Disparities , Adult , Health Services Research , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom
12.
S Afr Med J ; 111(11): 1084-1091, 2021 11 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1534500

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are limited in-depth analyses of COVID-19 differential impacts, especially in resource-limited settings such as South Africa (SA). OBJECTIVES: To explore context-specific sociodemographic heterogeneities in order to understand the differential impacts of COVID-19. METHODS: Descriptive epidemiological COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality data were drawn from daily hospital surveillance data, National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD) update reports (6 March 2020 - 24 January 2021) and the Eastern Cape Daily Epidemiological Report (as of 24 March 2021). We examined hospitalisations and mortality by sociodemographics (age using 10-year age bands, sex and race) using absolute numbers, proportions and ratios. The data are presented using tables received from the NICD, and charts were created to show trends and patterns. Mortality rates (per 100 000 population) were calculated using population estimates as a denominator for standardisation. Associations were determined through relative risks (RRs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and p-values <0.001. RESULTS: Black African females had a significantly higher rate of hospitalisation (8.7% (95% CI 8.5 - 8.9)) compared with coloureds, Indians and whites (6.7% (95% CI 6.0 - 7.4), 6.3% (95% CI 5.5 - 7.2) and 4% (95% CI 3.5 - 4.5), respectively). Similarly, black African females had the highest hospitalisation rates at a younger age category of 30 - 39 years (16.1%) compared with other race groups. Whites were hospitalised at older ages than other races, with a median age of 63 years. Black Africans were hospitalised at younger ages than other race groups, with a median age of 52 years. Whites were significantly more likely to die at older ages compared with black Africans (RR 1.07; 95% CI 1.06 - 1.08) or coloureds (RR 1.44; 95% CI 1.33 - 1.54); a similar pattern was found between Indians and whites (RR 1.59; 95% CI 1.47 - 1.73). Women died at older ages than men, although they were admitted to hospital at younger ages. Among black Africans and coloureds, females (50.9 deaths per 100 000 and 37 per 100 000, respectively) had a higher COVID-19 death rate than males (41.2 per 100 000 and 41.5 per 100 000, respectively). However, among Indians and whites, males had higher rates of deaths than females. The ratio of deaths to hospitalisations by race and gender increased with increasing age. In each age group, this ratio was highest among black Africans and lowest among whites. CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed the heterogeneous nature of COVID-19 impacts in SA. Existing socioeconomic inequalities appear to shape COVID-19 impacts, with a disproportionate effect on black Africans and marginalised and low socioeconomic groups. These differential impacts call for considered attention to mitigating the health disparities among black Africans.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Status Disparities , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , /statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Sex Distribution , Socioeconomic Factors , South Africa/epidemiology , Young Adult
13.
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci ; 76(7): e268-e274, 2021 08 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526159

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Mexico is among the countries in Latin America hit hardest by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A large proportion of older adults in Mexico have high prevalence of multimorbidity and live in poverty with limited access to health care services. These statistics are even higher among adults living in rural areas, which suggest that older adults in rural communities may be more susceptible to COVID-19. The objectives of the article were to compare clinical and demographic characteristics for people diagnosed with COVID-19 by age group, and to describe cases and mortality in rural and urban communities. METHOD: We linked publicly available data from the Mexican Ministry of Health and the Census. Municipalities were classified based on population as rural (<2,500), semirural (≥2,500 and <15,000), semiurban (≥15,000 and <100,000), and urban (≥100,000). Zero-inflated negative binomial models were performed to calculate the total number of COVID-19 cases, and deaths per 1,000,000 persons using the population of each municipality as a denominator. RESULTS: Older adults were more likely to be hospitalized and reported severe cases, with higher mortality rates. In addition, rural municipalities reported a higher number of COVID-19 cases and mortality related to COVID-19 per million than urban municipalities. The adjusted absolute difference in COVID-19 cases was 912.7 per million (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79.0-1746.4) and mortality related to COVID-19 was 390.6 per million (95% CI: 204.5-576.7). DISCUSSION: Urgent policy efforts are needed to mandate the use of face masks, encourage handwashing, and improve specialty care for Mexicans in rural areas.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Health Status Disparities , Poverty/statistics & numerical data , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Mexico/epidemiology , Rural Health Services/organization & administration , Urban Health Services/organization & administration
15.
J Gen Intern Med ; 36(11): 3545-3549, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525605

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has underscored the structural inequities facing communities of color and its consequences in lives lost. However, little is known about the COVID-related disparities facing Asian Americans amidst the heightened racism and violence against this community. We analyze the mortality toll of COVID-19 on Asian Americans using multiple measures. In 2020, one in seven Asian American deaths was attributable to COVID-19. We find that while Asian Americans make up a small proportion of COVID-19 deaths in the USA, they experience significantly higher excess all-cause mortality (3.1 times higher), case fatality rate (as high as 53% higher), and percentage of deaths attributed to COVID-19 (2.1 times higher) compared to non-Hispanic Whites. Mounting evidence suggest that disproportionately low testing rates, greater disease severity at care presentation, socioeconomic factors, and racial discrimination contribute to the observed disparities. Improving data reporting and uniformly confronting racism are key components to addressing health inequities facing communities of color.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Racism , Asian Americans , Health Status Disparities , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
16.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0259803, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511832

ABSTRACT

Racial/ethnic disparities are among the top-selective underlying determinants associated with the disproportional impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on human mobility and health outcomes. This study jointly examined county-level racial/ethnic differences in compliance with stay-at-home orders and COVID-19 health outcomes during 2020, leveraging two-year geo-tracking data of mobile devices across ~4.4 million point-of-interests (POIs) in the contiguous United States. Through a set of structural equation modeling, this study quantified how racial/ethnic differences in following stay-at-home orders could mediate COVID-19 health outcomes, controlling for state effects, socioeconomics, demographics, occupation, and partisanship. Results showed that counties with higher Asian populations decreased most in their travel, both in terms of reducing their overall POIs' visiting and increasing their staying home percentage. Moreover, counties with higher White populations experienced the lowest infection rate, while counties with higher African American populations presented the highest case-fatality ratio. Additionally, control variables, particularly partisanship, median household income, percentage of elders, and urbanization, significantly accounted for the county differences in human mobility and COVID-19 health outcomes. Mediation analyses further revealed that human mobility only statistically influenced infection rate but not case-fatality ratio, and such mediation effects varied substantially among racial/ethnic compositions. Last, robustness check of racial gradient at census block group level documented consistent associations but greater magnitude. Taken together, these findings suggest that US residents' responses to COVID-19 are subject to an entrenched and consequential racial/ethnic divide.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Status Disparities , Pandemics , Racism/psychology , African Americans/psychology , Aged , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Income , Mediation Analysis , Middle Aged , Minority Groups/psychology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
19.
Br J Nurs ; 30(20): 1208-1209, 2021 11 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1513212
20.
Pediatr Clin North Am ; 68(6): 1157-1169, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504878

ABSTRACT

Pediatric gastroenterologists took on a variety of challenges during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, including learning about a new disease and how to recognize and manage it, prevent its spread among their patients and health professions colleagues, and make decisions about managing patients with chronic gastrointestinal and liver problems in light of the threat. They adapted their practice to accommodate drastically decreased numbers of in-person visits, adopting telehealth technologies, and instituting new protocols to perform endoscopies safely. The workforce pipeline was also affected by the impact of the pandemic on trainee education, clinical experience, research, and job searches.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Child Welfare/statistics & numerical data , Gastroenterology/organization & administration , Health Equity/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Social Determinants of Health , Child , Health Services Accessibility/organization & administration , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Socioeconomic Factors , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...