Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
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
2.
Health Secur ; 18(6): 489-495, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33326332

ABSTRACT

Hurricanes can destroy or overwhelm communities and cause or exacerbate health conditions. Legal mechanisms and practices may aid or impede hurricane response. In the United States, where states have primary public health responsibility, state governors possess legal powers to address hurricanes. They often exercise these powers using executive orders and proclamations-legal mechanisms that direct public and private parties. Although executive orders and proclamations are critical for hurricane preparedness and response, how governors use them to respond to hurricanes is not fully understood. Using legal epidemiology, we systematically identified and analyzed hurricane-related executive orders and proclamations issued in the United States from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2018. We found 468 relevant executive orders and proclamations, 14% of which were issued, at least in part, to benefit a jurisdiction other than the issuer's state. We observed variations in when and where such orders and proclamations were issued. Executive orders and proclamations were most commonly used to direct government response or recovery (32%), handle and administer government resources (31%), and suspend legal requirements perceived to inhibit response (27%). Fewer orders and proclamations regulated private parties (10%). Understanding how governors use executive orders and proclamations to respond to hurricanes can bolster future preparedness and response efforts.


Subject(s)
Cyclonic Storms , State Government , Disaster Planning , Humans , Public Health/legislation & jurisprudence , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...