Evaluation of Vaccination Strategies to Compare Efficient and Equitable Vaccine Allocation by Race and Ethnicity Across Time.

Importance: Identifying the most efficient COVID-19 vaccine allocation strategy may substantially reduce hospitalizations and save lives while ensuring an equitable vaccine distribution. Objective: To simulate the association of different vaccine allocation strategies with COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality and their distribution across racial and ethnic groups. Design Setting and Participants: We developed and internally validated the risk of COVID-19 infection and risk of hospitalization models on randomly split training and validation data sets. These were used in a computer simulation study of vaccine prioritization among adult health plan members who were drawn from an integrated health care delivery system. The study was conducted from January 3, 2021, to June 1, 2021, in Oakland, California, and the data were analyzed during the same period. Main Outcomes and Measures: We simulated the association of different vaccine allocation strategies, including (1) random, (2) a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) proxy, (3) age based, and (4) combinations of models for the risk of adverse outcomes (CRS) and COVID-19 infection (PROVID), with COVID-19-related hospitalizations between May 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, that were randomly permuted by month across 250 simulations and assessed vaccine allocation by race and ethnicity and the neighborhood deprivation index across time. Results: The study included 3 202 679 adult patients (mean [SD] age, 48.2 [18.0] years; 1 677 637 women [52.4%]; 1 525 042 men [47.6%]; 611 154 Asian [19.1%], 206 363 Black [6.4%], 642 344 Hispanic [20.1%], and 1 390 638 White individuals [43.4%]), of whom 36 137 (1.1%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2. A risk-based strategy (CRS/PROVID) showed the largest avoidable hospitalization estimates (4954; 95% CI, 3452-5878) followed by age-based (4362; 95% CI, 2866-5175) and CDC proxy (4085; 95% CI, 2805-5109) strategies. Random vaccination showed substantially lower reductions in adverse outcomes. Risk-based strategies also showed the largest number of avoidable COVID-19 deaths (joint CRS/PROVID) and household transmissions. Risk-based (PROVID) and CDC proxy strategies were estimated to vaccinate the highest percentage of Hispanic and Black patients in 8 months (joint CRS/PROVID: 642 570 [100%] Hispanic, 185 530 [90%] Black; PROVID: 642 570 [100%] Hispanic, 198 480 [96%] Black; CDC proxy: 605 770 [95%] Hispanic and 151 772 [74%] Black) compared with an age-based approach (438 423 [68%] Hispanic, 154 714 [75%] Black). Overall, the PROVID and joint CRS/PROVID risk-based strategies were estimated to be followed by the most patients from areas with high neighborhood deprivation index being vaccinated early. Conclusions and Relevance: In this simulation modeling study of adults from a large integrated health care delivery system, risk-based strategies were associated with the largest estimated reductions in COVID-19 hospitalizations, deaths, and household transmissions compared with the CDC proxy and age-based strategies, with a higher proportion of Hispanic and Black patients were estimated to be vaccinated early in the process compared with the CDC strategy.

Evaluation of Vaccination Strategies to Compare Efficient and Equitable Vaccine Allocation by Race and Ethnicity Across Time

Key Points Question What is the association of different vaccine allocation strategies with COVID-19–related morbidity and mortality and their distribution by racial and ethnic groups across time? Findings In this decision analytical model, the use of risk-based, age-based, and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)–phased vaccine allocation strategies was simulated. Risk-based strategies were associated with the largest estimated reductions in nonelective hospitalizations, death, and household transmissions compared with the CDC- and age-based strategies, with a similar proportion of Hispanic and Black patients being vaccinated early in the process compared with the CDC strategy. Meaning The study findings suggest that risk-based vaccine prioritization strategies could have the greatest effectiveness on reducing COVID-19–related deaths and household transmissions while ensuring equitable vaccine distribution. Importance Identifying the most efficient COVID-19 vaccine allocation strategy may substantially reduce hospitalizations and save lives while ensuring an equitable vaccine distribution. Objective To simulate the association of different vaccine allocation strategies with COVID-19–associated morbidity and mortality and their distribution across racial and ethnic groups. Design, Setting, and Participants We developed and internally validated the risk of COVID-19 infection and risk of hospitalization models on randomly split training and validation data sets. These were used in a computer simulation study of vaccine prioritization among adult health plan members who were drawn from an integrated health care delivery system. The study was conducted from January 3, 2021, to June 1, 2021, in Oakland, California, and the data were analyzed during the same period. Main Outcomes and Measures We simulated the association of different vaccine allocation strategies, including (1) random, (2) a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) proxy, (3) age based, and (4) combinations of models for the risk of adverse outcomes (CRS) and COVID-19 infection (PROVID), with COVID-19-related hospitalizations between May 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, that were randomly permuted by month across 250 simulations and assessed vaccine allocation by race and ethnicity and the neighborhood deprivation index across time. Results The study included 3 202 679 adult patients (mean [SD] age, 48.2 [18.0] years;1 677 637 women [52.4%];1 525 042 men [47.6%];611 154 Asian [19.1%], 206 363 Black [6.4%], 642 344 Hispanic [20.1%], and 1 390 638 White individuals [43.4%]), of whom 36 137 (1.1%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2. A risk-based strategy (CRS/PROVID) showed the largest avoidable hospitalization estimates (4954;95% CI, 3452-5878) followed by age-based (4362;95% CI, 2866-5175) and CDC proxy (4085;95% CI, 2805-5109) strategies. Random vaccination showed substantially lower reductions in adverse outcomes. Risk-based strategies also showed the largest number of avoidable COVID-19 deaths (joint CRS/PROVID) and household transmissions. Risk-based (PROVID) and CDC proxy strategies were estimated to vaccinate the highest percentage of Hispanic and Black patients in 8 months (joint CRS/PROVID: 642 570 [100%] Hispanic, 185 530 [90%] Black;PROVID: 642 570 [100%] Hispanic, 198 480 [96%] Black;CDC proxy: 605 770 [95%] Hispanic and 151 772 [74%] Black) compared with an age-based approach (438 423 [68%] Hispanic, 154 714 [75%] Black). Overall, the PROVID and joint CRS/PROVID risk-based strategies were estimated to be followed by the most patients from areas with high neighborhood deprivation index being vaccinated early. Conclusions and Relevance In this simulation modeling study of adults from a large integrated health care delivery system, risk-based strategies were associated with the largest estimated reductions in COVID-19 hospitalizations, deaths, and household transmissions compared with the CDC roxy and age-based strategies, with a higher proportion of Hispanic and Black patients were estimated to be vaccinated early in the process compared with the CDC strategy. This decision analytical model simulates the association of different vaccine allocation strategies with COVID-19–associated morbidity and mortality and their distribution across racial and ethnic groups.

Racial Disparities in COVID-19 Testing and Outcomes : Retrospective Cohort Study in an Integrated Health System.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities exist in outcomes after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the contribution of race/ethnicity in SARS-CoV-2 testing, infection, and outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study (1 February 2020 to 31 May 2020). SETTING: Integrated health care delivery system in Northern California. PARTICIPANTS: Adult health plan members. MEASUREMENTS: Age, sex, neighborhood deprivation index, comorbid conditions, acute physiology indices, and race/ethnicity; SARS-CoV-2 testing and incidence of positive test results; and hospitalization, illness severity, and mortality. RESULTS: Among 3 481 716 eligible members, 42.0% were White, 6.4% African American, 19.9% Hispanic, and 18.6% Asian; 13.0% were of other or unknown race. Of eligible members, 91 212 (2.6%) were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection and 3686 had positive results (overall incidence, 105.9 per 100 000 persons; by racial group, White, 55.1; African American, 123.1; Hispanic, 219.6; Asian, 111.7; other/unknown, 79.3). African American persons had the highest unadjusted testing and mortality rates, White persons had the lowest testing rates, and those with other or unknown race had the lowest mortality rates. Compared with White persons, adjusted testing rates among non-White persons were marginally higher, but infection rates were significantly higher; adjusted odds ratios [aORs] for African American persons, Hispanic persons, Asian persons, and persons of other/unknown race were 2.01 (95% CI, 1.75 to 2.31), 3.93 (CI, 3.59 to 4.30), 2.19 (CI, 1.98 to 2.42), and 1.57 (CI, 1.38 to 1.78), respectively. Geographic analyses showed that infections clustered in areas with higher proportions of non-White persons. Compared with White persons, adjusted hospitalization rates for African American persons, Hispanic persons, Asian persons, and persons of other/unknown race were 1.47 (CI, 1.03 to 2.09), 1.42 (CI, 1.11 to 1.82), 1.47 (CI, 1.13 to 1.92), and 1.03 (CI, 0.72 to 1.46), respectively. Adjusted analyses showed no racial differences in inpatient mortality or total mortality during the study period. For testing, comorbid conditions made the greatest relative contribution to model explanatory power (77.9%); race only accounted for 8.1%. Likelihood of infection was largely due to race (80.3%). For other outcomes, age was most important; race only contributed 4.5% for hospitalization, 12.8% for admission illness severity, 2.3% for in-hospital death, and 0.4% for any death. LIMITATION: The study involved an insured population in a highly integrated health system. CONCLUSION: Race was the most important predictor of SARS-CoV-2 infection. After infection, race was associated with increased hospitalization risk but not mortality. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Permanente Medical Group, Inc.