Continuous Eligibility And Coverage Policies Expanded Children's Medicaid Enrollment.

We examined children's Medicaid participation during 2019-21 and found that as of March 2021, states newly adopting continuous Medicaid coverage for children during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced a 4.62 percent relative increase in children's Medicaid participation compared to states with previous continuous eligibility policies.

Resident Mortality And Worker Infection Rates From COVID-19 Lower In Union Than Nonunion US Nursing Homes, 2020-21.

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, nursing home residents have accounted for roughly one of every six COVID-19 deaths in the United States. Nursing homes have also been very dangerous places for workers, with more than one million nursing home workers testing positive for COVID-19 as of April 2022. Labor unions may play an important role in improving workplace safety, with potential benefits for both nursing home workers and residents. We examined whether unions for nursing home staff were associated with lower resident COVID-19 mortality rates and worker COVID-19 infection rates compared with rates in nonunion nursing homes, using proprietary data on nursing home-level union status from the Service Employees International Union for all forty-eight continental US states from June 8, 2020, through March 21, 2021. Using negative binomial regression and adjusting for potential confounders, we found that unions were associated with 10.8 percent lower resident COVID-19 mortality rates, as well as 6.8 percent lower worker COVID-19 infection rates. Substantive results were similar, although sometimes smaller and less precisely estimated, in sensitivity analyses.

Eviction Moratoria Expiration and COVID-19 Infection Risk Across Strata of Health and Socioeconomic Status in the United States.

IMPORTANCE: Housing insecurity induced by evictions may increase the risk of contracting COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association of lifting state-level eviction moratoria, which increased housing insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study included individuals with commercial insurance or Medicare Advantage who lived in a state that issued an eviction moratorium and were diagnosed with COVID-19 as well as a control group comprising an equal number of randomly selected individuals in these states who were not diagnosed with COVID-19. Data were collected from OptumLabs Data Warehouse, a database of deidentified administrative claims. The study used a difference-in-differences analysis among states that implemented an eviction moratorium between March 13, 2020, and September 4, 2020. EXPOSURES: Time since state-level eviction moratoria were lifted. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was a binary variable indicating whether an individual was diagnosed with COVID-19 for the first time in a given week with International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision code U07.1. The study analyzed changes in COVID-19 diagnosis before vs after a state lifted its moratorium compared with changes in states that did not lift it. For sensitivity analyses, models were reestimated on a 2% random sample of all individuals in the claims database during this period in these states. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 509 694 individuals (254 847 [50.0%] diagnosed with COVID-19; mean [SD] age, 47.0 [23.6] years; 239 056 [53.3%] men). During the study period, 43 states and the District of Columbia implemented an eviction moratorium and 7 did not. Among the states that implemented a moratorium, 26 (59.1%) lifted their moratorium before the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued their national moratorium, while 18 (40.1%) maintained theirs. In a Cox difference-in-differences regression model, individuals living in a state that lifted its eviction moratorium experienced higher hazards of a COVID-19 diagnosis beginning 5 weeks after the moratorium was lifted (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-1.76; P = .004), reaching an HR of 1.83 (95% CI, 1.36-2.46; P < .001) 12 weeks after. Hazards increased in magnitude among individuals with preexisting comorbidities and those living in nonaffluent and rent-burdened areas. Individuals with a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 3 or greater had an HR of 2.37 (95% CI, 1.67-3.36; P < .001) at the end of the study period. Those living in nonaffluent areas had an HR of 2.14 (95% CI, 1.51-3.05; P < .001), while those living in areas with a high rent burden had an HR of 2.31 (95% CI, 1.64-3.26; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this difference-in-differences analysis suggest that eviction-led housing insecurity may have exacerbated the COVID-19 pandemic.

County-Level Socioeconomic and Political Predictors of Distancing for COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, governments have implemented social distancing measures to slow viral transmission. This work aims to determine the extent to which socioeconomic and political conditions have shaped community-level distancing behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially how these dynamics have evolved over time. METHODS: This study used daily data on physical distancing from 15‒17 million cell phone users in 3,037 U.S. counties. County-level changes in the average distance traveled per person were estimated relative to prepandemic weeks as a proxy for physical distancing. Pooled ordinary least squares regressions estimated the association between physical distancing and a variety of county-level demographic, socioeconomic, and political characteristics by week from March 9, 2020 to January 17, 2021. Data were collected until January 2021, at which point the analyses were finalized. RESULTS: Lower per capita income and greater Republican orientation were associated with significantly reduced physical distancing throughout nearly all the study period. These associations persisted after adjusting for a variety of county-level demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Other county-level characteristics, such as the shares of Black and Hispanic residents, were associated with reduced distancing at various points during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the importance of dynamic socioeconomic and political gradients in preventive behavior and imply the need for nimble policy responses.

Correction: Social distancing to slow the US COVID-19 epidemic: Longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003244.].

Social distancing to slow the US COVID-19 epidemic: Longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study.

BACKGROUND: Social distancing measures to address the US coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic may have notable health and social impacts. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study to estimate the change in COVID-19 case growth before versus after implementation of statewide social distancing measures in the US. The primary exposure was time before (14 days prior to, and through 3 days after) versus after (beginning 4 days after, to up to 21 days after) implementation of the first statewide social distancing measures. Statewide restrictions on internal movement were examined as a secondary exposure. The primary outcome was the COVID-19 case growth rate. The secondary outcome was the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate. All states initiated social distancing measures between March 10 and March 25, 2020. The mean daily COVID-19 case growth rate decreased beginning 4 days after implementation of the first statewide social distancing measures, by 0.9% per day (95% CI -1.4% to -0.4%; P < 0.001). We did not observe a statistically significant difference in the mean daily case growth rate before versus after implementation of statewide restrictions on internal movement (0.1% per day; 95% CI -0.04% to 0.3%; P = 0.14), but there is substantial difficulty in disentangling the unique associations with statewide restrictions on internal movement from the unique associations with the first social distancing measures. Beginning 7 days after social distancing, the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate decreased by 2.0% per day (95% CI -3.0% to -0.9%; P < 0.001). Our analysis is susceptible to potential bias resulting from the aggregate nature of the ecological data, potential confounding by contemporaneous changes (e.g., increases in testing), and potential underestimation of social distancing due to spillover effects from neighboring states. CONCLUSIONS: Statewide social distancing measures were associated with a decrease in the COVID-19 case growth rate that was statistically significant. Statewide social distancing measures were also associated with a decrease in the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate beginning 7 days after implementation, although this decrease was no longer statistically significant by 10 days.