Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
BMC Public Health ; 24(1): 1013, 2024 Apr 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38609903

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Facing a surge of COVID-19 cases in late August 2021, the U.S. state of Illinois re-enacted its COVID-19 mask mandate for the general public and issued a requirement for workers in certain professions to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or undergo weekly testing. The mask mandate required any individual, regardless of their vaccination status, to wear a well-fitting mask in an indoor setting. METHODS: We used Illinois Department of Public Health's COVID-19 confirmed case and vaccination data and investigated scenarios where masking and vaccination would have been reduced to mimic what would have happened had the mask mandate or vaccine requirement not been put in place. The study examined a range of potential reductions in masking and vaccination mimicking potential scenarios had the mask mandate or vaccine requirement not been enacted. We estimated COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted by changes in masking and vaccination during the period covering October 20 to December 20, 2021. RESULTS: We find that the announcement and implementation of a mask mandate are likely to correlate with a strong protective effect at reducing COVID-19 burden and the announcement of a vaccinate-or-test requirement among frontline professionals is likely to correlate with a more modest protective effect at reducing COVID-19 burden. In our most conservative scenario, we estimated that from the period of October 20 to December 20, 2021, the mask mandate likely prevented approximately 58,000 cases and 1,175 hospitalizations, while the vaccinate-or-test requirement may have prevented at most approximately 24,000 cases and 475 hospitalizations. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that mask mandates and vaccine-or-test requirements are vital in mitigating the burden of COVID-19 during surges of the virus.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , Public Health , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Illinois/epidemiology , Vaccination
2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 72(14): 372-376, 2023 Apr 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37022984

ABSTRACT

Improving ventilation has been one of several COVID-19 prevention strategies implemented by kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) schools to stay open for safe in-person learning. Because transmission of SARS-CoV-2 occurs through inhalation of infectious viral particles, it is important to reduce the concentration of and exposure time to infectious aerosols (1-3). CDC examined reported ventilation improvement strategies among U.S. K-12 public school districts using telephone survey data collected during August-December 2022. Maintaining continuous airflow through school buildings during active hours was the most frequently reported strategy by school districts (50.7%); 33.9% of school districts reported replacement or upgrade of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems; 28.0% reported installation or use of in-room air cleaners with high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters; and 8.2% reported installation of ultraviolet (UV) germicidal irradiation (UVGI) devices, which use UV light to kill airborne pathogens, including bacteria and viruses. School districts in National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) city locales, the West U.S. Census Bureau region, and those designated by U.S. Census Bureau Small Area Income Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) as high-poverty districts reported the highest percentages of HVAC system upgrades and HEPA-filtered in-room air cleaner use, although 28%-60% of all responses were unknown or missing. Federal funding remains available to school districts to support ventilation improvements. Public health departments can encourage K-12 school officials to use available funding to improve ventilation and help reduce transmission of respiratory diseases in K-12 settings.


Subject(s)
Air Pollution, Indoor , COVID-19 , Humans , United States/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventilation , Air Conditioning , Schools , Air Pollution, Indoor/prevention & control
3.
PLoS One ; 17(4): e0265888, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35442951

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the unemployment rate in the United States peaked at 14.8% in April 2020. We examined patterns in unemployment following this peak in counties with rapid increases in COVID-19 incidence. METHOD: We used CDC aggregate county data to identify counties with rapid increases in COVID-19 incidence (rapid riser counties) during July 1-October 31, 2020. We used a linear regression model with fixed effect to calculate the change of unemployment rate difference in these counties, stratified by the county's social vulnerability (an indicator compiled by CDC) in the two months before the rapid riser index month compared to the index month plus one month after the index month. RESULTS: Among the 585 (19% of U.S. counties) rapid riser counties identified, the unemployment rate gap between the most and least socially vulnerable counties widened by 0.40 percentage point (p<0.01) after experiencing a rapid rise in COVID-19 incidence. Driving the gap were counties with lower socioeconomic status, with a higher percentage of people in racial and ethnic minority groups, and with limited English proficiency. CONCLUSION: The widened unemployment gap after COVID-19 incidence rapid rise between the most and least socially vulnerable counties suggests that it may take longer for socially and economically disadvantaged communities to recover. Loss of income and benefits due to unemployment could hinder behaviors that prevent spread of COVID-19 (e.g., seeking healthcare) and could impede response efforts including testing and vaccination. Addressing the social needs within these vulnerable communities could help support public health response measures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Ethnicity , Humans , Incidence , Minority Groups , Pandemics , Social Vulnerability , Unemployment , United States/epidemiology
4.
Ann Epidemiol ; 57: 46-53, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33596446

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Community mitigation strategies could help reduce COVID-19 incidence, but there are few studies that explore associations nationally and by urbanicity. In a national county-level analysis, we examined the probability of being identified as a county with rapidly increasing COVID-19 incidence (rapid riser identification) during the summer of 2020 by implementation of mitigation policies prior to the summer, overall and by urbanicity. METHODS: We analyzed county-level data on rapid riser identification during June 1-September 30, 2020 and statewide closures and statewide mask mandates starting March 19 (obtained from state government websites). Poisson regression models with robust standard error estimation were used to examine differences in the probability of rapid riser identification by implementation of mitigation policies (P-value< .05); associations were adjusted for county population size. RESULTS: Counties in states that closed for 0-59 days were more likely to become a rapid riser county than those that closed for >59 days, particularly in nonmetropolitan areas. The probability of becoming a rapid riser county was 43% lower among counties that had statewide mask mandates at reopening (adjusted prevalence ratio = 0.57; 95% confidence intervals = 0.51-0.63); when stratified by urbanicity, associations were more pronounced in nonmetropolitan areas. CONCLUSIONS: These results underscore the potential value of community mitigation strategies in limiting the COVID-19 spread, especially in nonmetropolitan areas.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Incidence , Masks , United States/epidemiology
5.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(1): 14-19, 2021 Jan 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33411699

ABSTRACT

During early August 2020, county-level incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) generally decreased across the United States, compared with incidence earlier in the summer (1); however, among young adults aged 18-22 years, incidence increased (2). Increases in incidence among adults aged ≥60 years, who might be more susceptible to severe COVID-19-related illness, have followed increases in younger adults (aged 20-39 years) by an average of 8.7 days (3). Institutions of higher education (colleges and universities) have been identified as settings where incidence among young adults increased during August (4,5). Understanding the extent to which these settings have affected county-level COVID-19 incidence can inform ongoing college and university operations and future planning. To evaluate the effect of large colleges or universities and school instructional format* (remote or in-person) on COVID-19 incidence, start dates and instructional formats for the fall 2020 semester were identified for all not-for-profit large U.S. colleges and universities (≥20,000 total enrolled students). Among counties with large colleges and universities (university counties) included in the analysis, remote-instruction university counties (22) experienced a 17.9% decline in mean COVID-19 incidence during the 21 days before through 21 days after the start of classes (from 17.9 to 14.7 cases per 100,000), and in-person instruction university counties (79) experienced a 56.2% increase in COVID-19 incidence, from 15.3 to 23.9 cases per 100,000. Counties without large colleges and universities (nonuniversity counties) (3,009) experienced a 5.9% decline in COVID-19 incidence, from 15.3 to 14.4 cases per 100,000. Similar findings were observed for percentage of positive test results and hotspot status (i.e., increasing among in-person-instruction university counties). In-person instruction at colleges and universities was associated with increased county-level COVID-19 incidence and percentage test positivity. Implementation of increased mitigation efforts at colleges and universities could minimize on-campus COVID-19 transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Universities/organization & administration , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Middle Aged , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(42): 1535-1541, 2020 Oct 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33090977

ABSTRACT

Poverty, crowded housing, and other community attributes associated with social vulnerability increase a community's risk for adverse health outcomes during and following a public health event (1). CDC uses standard criteria to identify U.S. counties with rapidly increasing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence (hotspot counties) to support health departments in coordinating public health responses (2). County-level data on COVID-19 cases during June 1-July 25, 2020 and from the 2018 CDC social vulnerability index (SVI) were analyzed to examine associations between social vulnerability and hotspot detection and to describe incidence after hotspot detection. Areas with greater social vulnerabilities, particularly those related to higher representation of racial and ethnic minority residents (risk ratio [RR] = 5.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.4-6.4), density of housing units per structure (RR = 3.1; 95% CI = 2.7-3.6), and crowded housing units (i.e., more persons than rooms) (RR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.8-2.3), were more likely to become hotspots, especially in less urban areas. Among hotspot counties, those with greater social vulnerability had higher COVID-19 incidence during the 14 days after detection (212-234 cases per 100,000 persons for highest SVI quartile versus 35-131 cases per 100,000 persons for other quartiles). Focused public health action at the federal, state, and local levels is needed not only to prevent communities with greater social vulnerability from becoming hotspots but also to decrease persistently high incidence among hotspot counties that are socially vulnerable.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Residence Characteristics/statistics & numerical data , Social Determinants of Health , COVID-19 , Crowding , Humans , Incidence , Pandemics , Poverty , Risk Assessment , United States/epidemiology
7.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(33): 1122-1126, 2020 Aug 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32817602

ABSTRACT

During January 1, 2020-August 10, 2020, an estimated 5 million cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were reported in the United States.* Published state and national data indicate that persons of color might be more likely to become infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, experience more severe COVID-19-associated illness, including that requiring hospitalization, and have higher risk for death from COVID-19 (1-5). CDC examined county-level disparities in COVID-19 cases among underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in counties identified as hotspots, which are defined using algorithmic thresholds related to the number of new cases and the changes in incidence.† Disparities were defined as difference of ≥5% between the proportion of cases and the proportion of the population or a ratio ≥1.5 for the proportion of cases to the proportion of the population for underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in each county. During June 5-18, 205 counties in 33 states were identified as hotspots; among these counties, race was reported for ≥50% of cumulative cases in 79 (38.5%) counties in 22 states; 96.2% of these counties had disparities in COVID-19 cases in one or more underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. Hispanic/Latino (Hispanic) persons were the largest group by population size (3.5 million persons) living in hotspot counties where a disproportionate number of cases among that group was identified, followed by black/African American (black) persons (2 million), American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) persons (61,000), Asian persons (36,000), and Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander (NHPI) persons (31,000). Examining county-level data disaggregated by race/ethnicity can help identify health disparities in COVID-19 cases and inform strategies for preventing and slowing SARS-CoV-2 transmission. More complete race/ethnicity data are needed to fully inform public health decision-making. Addressing the pandemic's disproportionate incidence of COVID-19 in communities of color can reduce the community-wide impact of COVID-19 and improve health outcomes.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/ethnology , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Health Status Disparities , Pneumonia, Viral/ethnology , Racial Groups/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
8.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(33): 1127-1132, 2020 Aug 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32817606

ABSTRACT

The geographic areas in the United States most affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have changed over time. On May 7, 2020, CDC, with other federal agencies, began identifying counties with increasing COVID-19 incidence (hotspots) to better understand transmission dynamics and offer targeted support to health departments in affected communities. Data for January 22-July 15, 2020, were analyzed retrospectively (January 22-May 6) and prospectively (May 7-July 15) to detect hotspot counties. No counties met hotspot criteria during January 22-March 7, 2020. During March 8-July 15, 2020, 818 counties met hotspot criteria for ≥1 day; these counties included 80% of the U.S. population. The daily number of counties meeting hotspot criteria peaked in early April, decreased and stabilized during mid-April-early June, then increased again during late June-early July. The percentage of counties in the South and West Census regions* meeting hotspot criteria increased from 10% and 13%, respectively, during March-April to 28% and 22%, respectively, during June-July. Identification of community transmission as a contributing factor increased over time, whereas identification of outbreaks in long-term care facilities, food processing facilities, correctional facilities, or other workplaces as contributing factors decreased. Identification of hotspot counties and understanding how they change over time can help prioritize and target implementation of U.S. public health response activities.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Humans , Incidence , United States/epidemiology
9.
BMC Infect Dis ; 19(1): 221, 2019 Mar 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30832594

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Self-protective behaviors of social distancing and vaccination uptake vary by demographics and affect the transmission dynamics of influenza in the United States. By incorporating the socio-behavioral differences in social distancing and vaccination uptake into mathematical models of influenza transmission dynamics, we can improve our estimates of epidemic outcomes. In this study we analyze the impact of demographic disparities in social distancing and vaccination on influenza epidemics in urban and rural regions of the United States. METHODS: We conducted a survey of a nationally representative sample of US adults to collect data on their self-protective behaviors, including social distancing and vaccination to protect themselves from influenza infection. We incorporated this data in an agent-based model to simulate the transmission dynamics of influenza in the urban region of Miami Dade county in Florida and the rural region of Montgomery county in Virginia. RESULTS: We compare epidemic scenarios wherein the social distancing and vaccination behaviors are uniform versus non-uniform across different demographic subpopulations. We infer that a uniform compliance of social distancing and vaccination uptake among different demographic subpopulations underestimates the severity of the epidemic in comparison to differentiated compliance among different demographic subpopulations. This result holds for both urban and rural regions. CONCLUSIONS: By taking into account the behavioral differences in social distancing and vaccination uptake among different demographic subpopulations in analysis of influenza epidemics, we provide improved estimates of epidemic outcomes that can assist in improved public health interventions for prevention and control of influenza.


Subject(s)
Influenza Vaccines/immunology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Psychological Distance , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Epidemics , Female , Health Behavior , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Theoretical , Rural Population , United States/epidemiology , Urban Population , Vaccination , Young Adult
10.
PeerJ ; 6: e5171, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30013841

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The study objective is to analyze influenza vaccination status by demographic factors, perceived vaccine efficacy, social influence, herd immunity, vaccine cost, health insurance status, and barriers to influenza vaccination among adults 18 years and older in the United States. BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccination coverage among adults 18 years and older was 41% during 2010-2011 and has increased and plateaued at 43% during 2016-2017. This is below the target of 70% influenza vaccination coverage among adults, which is an objective of the Healthy People 2020 initiative. METHODS: We conducted a survey of a nationally representative sample of adults 18 years and older in the United States on factors affecting influenza vaccination. We conducted bivariate analysis using Rao-Scott chi-square test and multivariate analysis using weighted multinomial logistic regression of this survey data to determine the effect of demographics, perceived vaccine efficacy, social influence, herd immunity, vaccine cost, health insurance, and barriers associated with influenza vaccination uptake among adults in the United States. RESULTS: Influenza vaccination rates are relatively high among adults in older age groups (73.3% among 75 + year old), adults with education levels of bachelor's degree or higher (45.1%), non-Hispanic Whites (41.8%), adults with higher incomes (52.8% among adults with income of over $150,000), partnered adults (43.2%), non-working adults (46.2%), and adults with internet access (39.9%). Influenza vaccine is taken every year by 76% of adults who perceive that the vaccine is very effective, 64.2% of adults who are socially influenced by others, and 41.8% of adults with health insurance, while 72.3% of adults without health insurance never get vaccinated. Facilitators for adults getting vaccinated every year in comparison to only some years include older age, perception of high vaccine effectiveness, higher income and no out-of-pocket payments. Barriers for adults never getting vaccinated in comparison to only some years include lack of health insurance, disliking of shots, perception of low vaccine effectiveness, low perception of risk for influenza infection, and perception of risky side effects. CONCLUSION: Influenza vaccination rates among adults in the United States can be improved towards the Healthy People 2020 target of 70% by increasing awareness of the safety, efficacy and need for influenza vaccination, leveraging the practices and principles of commercial and social marketing to improve vaccine trust, confidence and acceptance, and lowering out-of-pocket expenses and covering influenza vaccination costs through health insurance.

11.
Vaccine ; 35(29): 3621-3638, 2017 06 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28554500

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To examine current vaccine sentiment on social media by constructing and analyzing semantic networks of vaccine information from highly shared websites of Twitter users in the United States; and to assist public health communication of vaccines. BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy continues to contribute to suboptimal vaccination coverage in the United States, posing significant risk of disease outbreaks, yet remains poorly understood. METHODS: We constructed semantic networks of vaccine information from internet articles shared by Twitter users in the United States. We analyzed resulting network topology, compared semantic differences, and identified the most salient concepts within networks expressing positive, negative, and neutral vaccine sentiment. RESULTS: The semantic network of positive vaccine sentiment demonstrated greater cohesiveness in discourse compared to the larger, less-connected network of negative vaccine sentiment. The positive sentiment network centered around parents and focused on communicating health risks and benefits, highlighting medical concepts such as measles, autism, HPV vaccine, vaccine-autism link, meningococcal disease, and MMR vaccine. In contrast, the negative network centered around children and focused on organizational bodies such as CDC, vaccine industry, doctors, mainstream media, pharmaceutical companies, and United States. The prevalence of negative vaccine sentiment was demonstrated through diverse messaging, framed around skepticism and distrust of government organizations that communicate scientific evidence supporting positive vaccine benefits. CONCLUSION: Semantic network analysis of vaccine sentiment in online social media can enhance understanding of the scope and variability of current attitudes and beliefs toward vaccines. Our study synthesizes quantitative and qualitative evidence from an interdisciplinary approach to better understand complex drivers of vaccine hesitancy for public health communication, to improve vaccine confidence and vaccination coverage in the United States.


Subject(s)
Data Collection/methods , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Social Media , Vaccination/psychology , Vaccines/administration & dosage , Humans , Semantic Web , United States
12.
Vaccine ; 35(16): 1987-1995, 2017 04 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28320592

ABSTRACT

The study objective was to identify facilitators and barriers of parental attitudes and beliefs toward school-located influenza vaccination in the United States. In 2009, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expanded their recommendations for influenza vaccination to include school-aged children. We conducted a systematic review of studies focused on facilitators and barriers of parental attitudes toward school-located influenza vaccination in the United States from 1990 to 2016. We reviewed 11 articles by use of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework. Facilitators were free/low cost vaccination; having belief in vaccine efficacy, influenza severity, and susceptibility; belief that vaccination is beneficial, important, and a social norm; perception of school setting advantages; trust; and parental presence. Barriers were cost; concerns regarding vaccine safety, efficacy, equipment sterility, and adverse effects; perception of school setting barriers; negative physician advice of contraindications; distrust in vaccines and school-located vaccination programs; and health information privacy concerns. We identified the facilitators and barriers of parental attitudes and beliefs toward school-located influenza vaccination to assist in the evidence-based design and implementation of influenza vaccination programs targeted for children in the United States and to improve influenza vaccination coverage for population-wide health benefits.


Subject(s)
Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Parents/psychology , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Schools , Vaccination/psychology , Humans , United States
13.
Proc IEEE Int Conf Big Data ; 2014: 6-10, 2014 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26280026

ABSTRACT

The study objective is to develop an epidemiological model of brucellosis transmission dynamics among cattle in India and to estimate the impact of different prevention and control strategies. The prevention and control strategies are test-and-slaughter, transmission rate reduction, and mass vaccination. We developed a mathematical model based on the susceptible-infectious-recovered epidemic model to simulate brucellosis transmission dynamics, calibrated to the endemically stable levels of bovine brucellosis prevalence of cattle in India. We analyzed the epidemiological benefit of different rates of reduced transmission and vaccination. Test-and-slaughter is an effective strategy for elimination and eradication of brucellosis, but socio-cultural constraints forbid culling of cattle in India. Reducing transmission rates lowered the endemically stable levels of brucellosis prevalence correspondingly. One-time vaccination lowered prevalence initially but increased with influx of new susceptible births. While this epidemiological model is a basic representation of brucellosis transmission dynamics in India and constrained by limitations in surveillance data, this study illustrates the comparative epidemiological impact of different bovine brucellosis prevention and control strategies.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...