Community Health, Health Care Access, And COVID-19 Booster Uptake In Massachusetts.

Booster vaccination offers vital protection against COVID-19, particularly for communities in which many people have chronic conditions. Although vaccination has been widely and freely available, people who have experienced barriers to care might be deterred from being vaccinated. We examined the relationship between COVID-19 booster uptake and small area-level demographics, chronic disease prevalence, and measures of health care access in 462 Massachusetts communities during the period September 2021-April 2022. Unadjusted analyses found that booster uptake was higher in older and wealthier areas, lower in areas with more Hispanic and Black residents, and lower in areas with a high prevalence of chronic conditions. In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, uptake was lower in communities with more uninsured residents and those in which fewer residents received routine medical check-ups. Adjusted analyses found that areas with more vaccine providers and primary care physicians had higher booster uptake, but this association was not significant in unadjusted analyses. Results suggest a need for innovative outreach efforts, as well as structural changes such as expansion of health care coverage and universal access to care to mitigate the inequitable burden of COVID-19.

Inequities in COVID-19 vaccine and booster coverage across Massachusetts ZIP codes after the emergence of Omicron: A population-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Inequities in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine and booster coverage may contribute to future disparities in morbidity and mortality within and between Massachusetts (MA) communities. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a population-based cross-sectional study of primary series vaccination and booster coverage 18 months into the general population vaccine rollout. We obtained public-use data on residents vaccinated and boosted by ZIP code (and by age group: 5 to 19, 20 to 39, 40 to 64, 65+) from MA Department of Public Health, as of October 10, 2022. We constructed population denominators for postal ZIP codes by aggregating census tract population estimates from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey. We excluded nonresidential ZIP codes and the smallest ZIP codes containing 1% of the state's population. We mapped variation in ZIP code-level primary series vaccine and booster coverage and used regression models to evaluate the association of these measures with ZIP code-level socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. Because age is strongly associated with COVID-19 severity and vaccine access/uptake, we assessed whether observed socioeconomic and racial/ethnic inequities persisted after adjusting for age composition and plotted age-specific vaccine and booster coverage by deciles of ZIP code characteristics. We analyzed data on 418 ZIP codes. We observed wide geographic variation in primary series vaccination and booster rates, with marked inequities by ZIP code-level education, median household income, essential worker share, and racial/ethnic composition. In age-stratified analyses, primary series vaccine coverage was very high among the elderly. However, we found large inequities in vaccination rates among younger adults and children, and very large inequities in booster rates for all age groups. In multivariable regression models, each 10 percentage point increase in "percent college educated" was associated with a 5.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9 to 6.3, p < 0.001) percentage point increase in primary series vaccine coverage and a 5.4 (95% CI 4.5 to 6.4, p < 0.001) percentage point increase in booster coverage. Although ZIP codes with higher "percent Black/Latino/Indigenous" and higher "percent essential workers" had lower vaccine coverage (-0.8, 95% CI -1.3 to -0.3, p < 0.01; -5.5, 95% CI -7.3 to -3.8, p < 0.001), these associations became strongly positive after adjusting for age and education (1.9, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.8, p < 0.001; 4.8, 95% CI 2.6 to 7.1, p < 0.001), consistent with high demand for vaccines among Black/Latino/Indigenous and essential worker populations within age and education groups. Strong positive associations between "median household income" and vaccination were attenuated after adjusting for age. Limitations of the study include imprecision of the estimated population denominators, lack of individual-level sociodemographic data, and potential for residential ZIP code misreporting in vaccination data. CONCLUSIONS: Eighteen months into MA's general population vaccine rollout, there remained large inequities in COVID-19 primary series vaccine and booster coverage across MA ZIP codes, particularly among younger age groups. Disparities in vaccination coverage by racial/ethnic composition were statistically explained by differences in age and education levels, which may mediate the effects of structural racism on vaccine uptake. Efforts to increase booster coverage are needed to limit future socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.

Did Massachusetts COVID-19 vaccine lottery increase vaccine uptake?

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether the Massachusetts COVID-19 vaccine lottery increased vaccine uptake. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 Vaccine Tracker to identify total number of adults aged 18 to 64 who received at least first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine or who were fully vaccinated in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Vermont during the study period of March 6 -July 31, 2021. Each of the five states contributed 148 days of a daily report on cumulative number of vaccinated people, comprising 740 state-days as the total sample size. We conducted multivariable, state-day level difference-in-differences (DID) regression using a negative binomial regression model that compared the change in outcomes for Massachusetts to those of four geographically adjacent comparison states without the lotteries, before and after the Massachusetts vaccine lottery announcement (June 15, 2021). Our analyses controlled for key state-level characteristics obtained from the American Community Survey as well as day fixed-effects to capture secular trends in the outcomes. RESULTS: Massachusetts COVID-19 vaccine lottery was not associated with a significant increase in the number of adults aged 18 to 64 who were fully vaccinated or received at least one dose of the vaccine, compared with other states [Full dose, incidence rate ratio (IRR): 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97 to 1.11, P > 0.05; At least one dose, IRR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.06, P > 0.05]. CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence to conclude that Massachusetts COVID-19 vaccine lottery was associated with increased number of adult COVID-19 vaccinations.

SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and preterm birth in Massachusetts from March 2020 through March 2021.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy has been linked to preterm birth, but this association is not well understood. OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and spontaneous and provider-initiated preterm birth (PTB), and how timing of infection, and race/ethnicity as a marker of structural inequality, may modify this association. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among pregnant people who delivered singleton, liveborn infants (22-44 weeks gestation) from 1 March 2020 to 31 March 2021 (n = 68,288). We used Cox proportional hazards models to compare the hazard of PTB between pregnant people with and without laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. We evaluated this association according to the trimester of infection, timing from infection to birth, and timing of PTB. We also examined the joint associations of SARS-CoV-2 infection and race/ethnicity with PTB using the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI). RESULTS: Positive SARS-CoV-2 tests were identified for 2195 pregnant people (3.2%). The prevalence of PTB was 7.2% (3.8% spontaneous, 3.6% provider-initiated). SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy was associated with an increased risk of PTB overall (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34, 1.74), and provider-initiated PTB (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.50, 2.12) but not spontaneous PTB (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.89, 1.36). Second trimester infections were associated with an increased risk of provider-initiated PTB, and third trimester infections were associated with an increased risk of both PTB subtypes. A joint inverse association between White non-Hispanic race/ethnicity and SARS-CoV-2 infection and spontaneous PTB (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34, 0.94; RERI -0.6, 95% CI -1.0, -0.2) was also observed. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infections were primarily associated with an increased risk for provider-initiated PTB in this study. These findings highlight the importance of promoting infection-prevention strategies among pregnant people.

Lifting Universal Masking in Schools - Covid-19 Incidence among Students and Staff.

BACKGROUND: In February 2022, Massachusetts rescinded a statewide universal masking policy in public schools, and many Massachusetts school districts lifted masking requirements during the subsequent weeks. In the greater Boston area, only two school districts - the Boston and neighboring Chelsea districts - sustained masking requirements through June 2022. The staggered lifting of masking requirements provided an opportunity to examine the effect of universal masking policies on the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) in schools. METHODS: We used a difference-in-differences analysis for staggered policy implementation to compare the incidence of Covid-19 among students and staff in school districts in the greater Boston area that lifted masking requirements with the incidence in districts that sustained masking requirements during the 2021-2022 school year. Characteristics of the school districts were also compared. RESULTS: Before the statewide masking policy was rescinded, trends in the incidence of Covid-19 were similar across school districts. During the 15 weeks after the statewide masking policy was rescinded, the lifting of masking requirements was associated with an additional 44.9 cases per 1000 students and staff (95% confidence interval, 32.6 to 57.1), which corresponded to an estimated 11,901 cases and to 29.4% of the cases in all districts during that time. Districts that chose to sustain masking requirements longer tended to have school buildings that were older and in worse condition and to have more students per classroom than districts that chose to lift masking requirements earlier. In addition, these districts had higher percentages of low-income students, students with disabilities, and students who were English-language learners, as well as higher percentages of Black and Latinx students and staff. Our results support universal masking as an important strategy for reducing Covid-19 incidence in schools and loss of in-person school days. As such, we believe that universal masking may be especially useful for mitigating effects of structural racism in schools, including potential deepening of educational inequities. CONCLUSIONS: Among school districts in the greater Boston area, the lifting of masking requirements was associated with an additional 44.9 Covid-19 cases per 1000 students and staff during the 15 weeks after the statewide masking policy was rescinded.

COVID-19 infections among HCWs exposed to a patient with a delayed diagnosis of COVID-19.

We report on COVID-19 risk among HCWs exposed to a patient diagnosed with COVID-19 on day 13 of hospitalization. There were 44 HCWs exposed to the patient before contact and droplet precautions were implemented: of these, 2 of 44 (5%) developed COVID-19 potentially attributable to the exposure.

Innovation: It's in Our DNA.

Colleen M. Kigin, PT, DPT, MS, MPA, FAPTA, the 52nd Mary McMillan Lecturer, is a consultant focused on innovation. She is a visiting clinical professor at the University of Colorado physical therapy program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, and an adjunct associate professor at the MGH Institute of Health Professions (MGH IHP). From 1998-2014, she held the positions of chief of staff and program manager for the Center of Integration of Medicine and Innovative Technology, a 12-institution consortium based in Boston, Massachusetts, developing innovative solutions to health care problems. She subsequently has served as a consultant to such efforts as the University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, United Kingdom, to develop an innovation culture. In 1994, she joined the newly formed Partners HealthCare System in Boston, coordinating the system's cost reduction efforts through 1998. Kigin previously served as director of physical therapy services at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) (1977-1984) and as assistant professor at MGH IHP (1980-1994). While at MGH, she was responsible for the merger of 2 separate physical therapy departments, the establishment of the first nonphysician specialist position, and practice without referral for the physical therapy services. Kigin has held numerous positions within the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA), serving on the Board of Directors from 1988-1997, including as vice president; co-chair of The Physical Therapy Summit in 2007; and co-chair of FiRST, the Frontiers in Rehabilitation, Science and Technology Council. She also served as prior chair of the APTA Committee on Clinical Residencies and served on the American Board of Physical Therapy Specialties. Kigin earned a bachelor of science degree in physical therapy at the University of Colorado, a master of science degree at Boston University, a master's degree in public administration from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, and a doctor in physical therapy degree from the MGH IHP.

Lessons Learned: The Varied Responses of Massachusetts' Local Health Departments During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

CONTEXT: Massachusetts' decentralized public health model holds tightly to its founding principle of home rule and a board of health system established in 1799. Consequently, Massachusetts has more local health departments (n = 351) than any other state. During COVID-19, each health department, steeped in centuries of independence, launched its own response to the pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To analyze local public health resources and responses to COVID-19. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews and a survey gathered quantitative and qualitative information about communities' responses and resources before and during the pandemic. Municipality demographics (American Community Survey) served as a proxy for community health literacy. We tracked the frequency and content of local board of health meetings using minutes and agendas; we rated the quality of COVID-19 communications on town Web sites. SETTING: The first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Massachusetts: March-August 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Health directors and agents in 10 south-central Massachusetts municipalities, identified as the point of contact by the Academic Public Health Corps. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured municipality resources using self-reported budgets, staffing levels, and demographic-based estimates of community health literacy. We identified COVID-19 responses through communities' self-reported efforts, information on town Web sites, and meeting minutes and agendas. RESULTS: Municipalities excelled in communicating with residents, local businesses, and neighboring towns but lacked the staffing and funding for an efficient and coordinated response. On average, municipal budgets ranged from $5 to $16 per capita, and COVID-19 consumed 75% of health department staff time. All respondents noted extreme workload increases. While municipal Web sites received high scores for Accurate Information, other categories (Navigability; Timeliness; Information Present) were less than 50%. CONCLUSIONS: Increased support for regionalization and sustained public health funding would improve local health responses during complex emergencies in states with local public health administration.

Pediatric biorepository participation during the COVID-19 pandemic: predictors of enrollment and biospecimen donation.

BACKGROUND: Patient-level predictors of enrollment in pediatric biorepositories are poorly described. Especially in pandemic settings, understanding who is likely to enroll in a biorepository is critical to interpreting analyses conducted on biospecimens. We describe predictors of pediatric COVID-19 biorepository enrollment and biospecimen donation to identify gaps in COVID-19 research on pediatric biospecimens. METHODS: We compared data from enrollees and non-enrollees aged 0-25 years with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection who were approached for enrollment in the Massachusetts General Hospital pediatric COVID-19 biorepository between April 12, 2020, and May 28, 2020, from community or academic outpatient or inpatient settings. Demographic and clinical data at presentation to care were from automatic and manual chart extractions. Predictors of enrollment and biospecimen donation were assessed with Poisson regression models. RESULTS: Among 457 individuals approached, 214 (47%) enrolled in the biorepository. A COVID-19 epidemiologic risk factor was recorded for 53%, and 15% lived in a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-defined COVID-19 hotspot. Individuals living in a COVID-19 hotspot (relative risk (RR) 2.4 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8-3.2]), with symptoms at presentation (RR 1.8 [95% CI: 1.2-2.7]), or admitted to hospital (RR 1.8 [95% CI: 1.2-2.8]) were more likely to enroll. Seventy-nine percent of enrollees donated any biospecimen, including 97 nasopharyngeal swabs, 119 oropharyngeal swabs, and 105 blood, 16 urine, and 16 stool specimens, respectively. Age, sex, race, ethnicity, and neighborhood-level socioeconomic status based on zip code did not predict enrollment or biospecimen donation. CONCLUSIONS: While fewer than half of individuals approached consented to participate in the pediatric biorepository, enrollment appeared to be representative of children affected by the pandemic. Living in a COVID-19 hotspot, symptoms at presentation to care and hospital admission predicted biorepository enrollment. Once enrolled, most individuals donated a biospecimen.

Impact of Massachusetts law prohibiting flavored tobacco products sales on cross-border cigarette sales.

BACKGROUND: In June 2020, Massachusetts implemented a law prohibiting the sale of all flavored tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes. This law was associated with significant declines in overall cigarette and menthol cigarette sales in Massachusetts, however it is unknown whether the law has increased cross-border sales in neighboring states where menthol cigarettes are still sold. METHODS: U.S. cigarette retail scanner data were licensed from the IRi Company. Cigarette pack sales were summed in 4-week periods during January 2020-December 2021 (n = 832). Outcomes were state-level pack sales per 1000 population, overall and by flavor status (menthol and non-flavored). A difference-in-differences analysis was used to examine adjusted sales for Massachusetts border states (New Hampshire, Connecticut, Vermont, and Rhode Island) before (January 2020-May 2020) and after (June 2020-December 2021) the Massachusetts's law, compared to 28 non-border states. Control variables included state and time fixed effects; real price per pack; tobacco control policies; COVID-19 cases and deaths, and related statewide closure; and state sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Following the law, unadjusted sales of menthol, non-flavored, and overall cigarettes trended upward in border states; however, these increases were not statistically significant or different from sales patterns in non-border states. This finding persisted after accounting for product prices, tobacco control policies, the COVID-19 pandemic, sociodemographic factors, and fixed effects. CONCLUSION: Laws prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco products, including menthol products, reduce access to these products, while having no significant impact on cross-border sales in neighboring states where menthol cigarettes are sold.

Evaluation of a state-wide effort to improve COVID-19 infection control in Massachusetts nursing homes.

BACKGROUND: During the deadly 2020 SARS-CoV-2 surge in nursing homes (NHs), Massachusetts (MA) initiated a multicomponent infection control intervention to mitigate its spread. METHODS: We aimed to assess the intervention's impact by comparing the weekly risk of PCR-confirmed infections among MA NH residents to those in neighboring New England states, all managed similarly by a single NH provider. We studied 2085 residents in 20 MA NHs and 4493 residents in 45 comparator facilities. The intervention included: (1) A 28-item infection control checklist of best practices, (2) incentive payments to NHs contingent on scoring ≥24 on the checklist, meeting 6 core competencies, testing residents and staff for SARS-COV-2 RNA, uploading data, and enabling virtual visits; (3) on-site and virtual infection control consultations for deficient facilities; (4) 6 weekly webinars; (5) continuous communication with the MA Department of Public Health; and (6) access to personal protective equipment, temporary staff, and SARS-CoV-2 testing. Weekly rates of infection were adjusted for county COVID-19 prevalence. RESULTS: The adjusted risk of infection started higher in MA, but declined more rapidly in its NHs compared to similarly managed facilities in other states. The decline in infection risk during the early intervention period was 53% greater in MA than in Comparator States (state-by-time interaction HR = 0.47; 95% CI 0.37-0.59). By the late intervention period, the risk of infection continued to decline in both groups, and the change from baseline in MA was marginally greater than that in the Comparator States (interaction HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.64-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The MA NH intervention was associated with a more rapid reduction in the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infections compared to similarly managed NHs in neighboring states. Although several unmeasured factors may have confounded our results, implementation of the MA model may help rapidly reduce high rates of infection and prevent future COVID-19 surges in NHs.

Oral treatments for outpatient COVID-19: Effectiveness and value.

DISCLOSURES: Ms Beinfeld and Nahn and Drs Whittington, Mohammed, and Pearson report grants from Arnold Ventures, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., The Patrick and Catherine Weldon Donaghue Medical Research Foundation, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, and The Commonwealth Foundation, during the conduct of the study; and other from America's Health Insurance Plans, Anthem, AbbVie, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Blue Shield of CA, Cambia Health Services, CVS, Editas, Express Scripts, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Harvard Pilgrim, Health Care Service Corporation, Health Partners, Johnson & Johnson (Janssen), Kaiser Permanente, LEO Pharma, Mallinckrodt, Merck, Novartis, National Pharmaceutical Council, Premera, Prime Therapeutics, Regeneron, Sanofi, United Healthcare, HealthFirst, Pfizer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, uniQure, Humana, Sun Life, and Envolve Pharmacy Solutions, outside the submitted work. Dr Yeung received a contract from ICER to be an evidence author for COVID-19 outpatient treatments.

Trends in buprenorphine treatment disparities during the COVID pandemic in Massachusetts.

Background: Racial, sex, and age disparities in buprenorphine treatment have previously been demonstrated. We evaluated trends in buprenorphine treatment disparities before and after the onset of the COVID pandemic in Massachusetts. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from an integrated health system comparing 12-months before and after the March 2020 Massachusetts COVID state of emergency declaration, excluding March as a washout period. Among patients with a clinical encounter during the study periods with a diagnosis of opioid use disorder or opioid poisoning, we extracted outpatient buprenorphine prescription rates by age, sex, race and ethnicity, and language. Generating univariable and multivariable Poisson regression models, we calculated the probability of receiving buprenorphine. Results: Among 4,530 patients seen in the period before the COVID emergency declaration, 57.9% received buprenorphine. Among 3,653 patients seen in the second time period, 55.1% received buprenorphine. Younger patients (<24) had a lower likelihood of receiving buprenorphine in both time periods (adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR), 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42-0.75 before vs. aPR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96 after). Male patients had a greater likelihood of receiving buprenorphine compared to female patients in both time periods (aPR: 1.05; 95% CI, 1.00-1.11 vs. aPR: 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.16). Racial disparities emerged in the time period following the COVID pandemic, with non-Hispanic Black patients having a lower likelihood of receiving buprenorphine compared to non-Hispanic white patients in the second time period (aPR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99). Conclusions: Following the onset of the COVID pandemic in Massachusetts, ongoing racial, age, and gender disparities were evident in buprenorphine treatment with younger, Black, and female patients less likely to be treated with buprenorphine across an integrated health system.

Implementation Evaluation of HUGS/Abrazos During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Program to Foster Resiliency in Pregnancy and Early Childhood.

Early life adversity can significantly impact child development and health outcomes throughout the life course. With the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbating preexisting and introducing new sources of toxic stress, social programs that foster resilience are more necessary now than ever. The Helping Us Grow Stronger (HUGS/Abrazos) program fills a crucial need for protective buffers during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has escalated toxic stressors affecting pregnant women and families with young children. HUGS/Abrazos combines patient navigation, behavioral health support, and innovative tools to ameliorate these heightened toxic stressors. We used a mixed-methods approach, guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, to evaluate the implementation of the HUGS/Abrazos program at Massachusetts General Hospital from 6/30/2020-8/31/2021. Results of the quality improvement evaluation revealed that the program was widely adopted across the hospital and 392 unique families were referred to the program. The referred patients were representative of the communities in Massachusetts disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, 79% of referred patients followed up with the initial referral, with sustained high participation rates throughout the program course; and they were provided with an average of four community resource referrals. Adoption and implementation of the key components in HUGS/Abrazos were found to be appropriate and acceptable. Furthermore, the implemented program remained consistent to the original design. Overall, HUGS/Abrazos was well adopted as an emergency relief program with strong post-COVID-19 applicability to ameliorate continuing toxic stressors while decreasing burden on the health system.