Mobile COVID-19 testing program in Phoenix: A retrospective observational cohort study of results, trends, and positivity rates.

Over 3 years since the onset of the coronavirus (COVID-19), the COVID-19 pandemic remains a global health challenge. At the same time, review of the response to the current pandemic is required for planning for future pandemics and global health crises. Approximately 2.5 million cases of COVID-19 have been reported in Arizona, a state with a 7.2 million population. Analyzing trends in COVID-19 case and positivity rates is crucial in planning to ensure public health safety for both this and future pandemics. This current observational study analyzes the trends in COVID-19 testing and positivity rates in the Phoenix metropolitan area, from data collected from a mobile testing program between December 2020 and April 2022. A total of 72,827 COVID-19 tests were performed, with a total of 8666 positive cases, yielding an overall positivity rate of 11.9%. Case counts and positivity rates increased during the fall and winter months, peaking in January (January 2021: 13.96% and January 2022: 24.84%). These cyclical trends cyclical can help with planning and mitigation. Continued public health awareness, including vaccinations and testing, is required in controlling COVID-19 transmission.

Trends in COVID-19 Testing and Positivity Rates from a Mobile Testing Program in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic continues to be a global concern, with over 150 million cases worldwide. Arizona, which was recently a hotspot for COVID-19, has over 860 thousand cases. Reviewing the COVID-19 trends over time is crucial in understanding the pandemic and evaluating the impact of mitigation techniques. This current study analyzes the trends in COVID-19 testing and positivity rates from a mobile testing program in the Phoenix metropolitan area between December 2020 and April 2021. Of the 32,234 tests performed there was a total of 3654 COVID positive cases, yielding an overall positivity rate of 11.3%. COVID-19 positivity rates were significantly higher in December (12.9%) and January (12.7%), compared to February (7.5%), March (4.9%), and April (6.7%), p < 0.05. The peak of COVID-19 cases is likely attributable to the holiday season and family gatherings, followed by a steady decline, likely due to fewer gatherings and an increase in individuals receiving the COVID-19 vaccines. Continued public health measures, including vaccinations, are critical in reducing COVID-19 transmission.

COVID-19 Trends in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area from a Mobile Testing Program: Last Quarter of 2020.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic continues to be a public health concern, and Arizona has once again been a COVID-19 hotspot, peaking at 118.3 cases per 100,000. Understanding the trends in COVID-19 positivity rates over time is crucial in planning and mitigation of the virus. This current study analyzes the trends in COVID-19 testing, and COVID-19 antigen and antibody positivity rates over a 3-month time-span from October to December 2020. A retrospective study was conducted collecting data from a mobile testing program during October to December 2020 in the Phoenix metropolitan area. COVID-19 antigen and antibody positivity rates were analyzed. A total of 6710 patients were included in the study. As the months progressed, more patients were tested (October: 1635; November: 2037; December: 3038). The COVID-19 antigen positivity rate was significantly higher in December, compared to October and November (13.43% vs. 11.43 and 10.86%, p = 0.021). COVID-19 IgG rates were also significantly higher in November and December, compared to October (16.65 and 16.50% vs. 8.74%, p < 0.001). There was a progressive increase in COVID-19 positivity cases towards the end of 2020, likely attributed to factors including social gatherings during the holidays and the relaxing of the closure restrictions. Continued public health measures is crucial in preventing the spread of COVID-19.

COVID-19 Exposure Among First Responders in Arizona.

OBJECTIVE: The number of COVID-19 cases in Arizona is rapidly increasing, leading the country in the rate of new daily cases. Exposure among first responders remains unknown. METHODS: Rates of SARS-CoV-2 IgG among first responders in Arizona were determined, and attitudes/views about the impact of COVID-19 on their work life was analyzed. RESULTS: Of 3326 first responders, 50 (1.50%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG. Most first responders thought antibody testing would help ease their anxieties (62.5%) and be beneficial to their work-life (60.6%). CONCLUSION: The rate of COVID-19 exposure among first responders in Arizona is low-1.50%. COVID-19 is a concern among many of the first responders, and antibody testing was beneficial in easing their anxieties about going to work and performing work-related duties.

A randomized trial of endoscopic and fluoroscopic placement of postpyloric feeding tubes in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Early postpyloric feeding is considered the accepted method of nutrition support in critically ill patients. Endoscopic and fluoroscopic techniques are associated with the highest percentage of successful placement. The purpose of this study was to compare endoscopic vs fluoroscopic placement of postpyloric feeding tubes in critically ill patients. METHODS: This is a randomized prospective clinical trial. Forty-three patients were randomized to receive feeding tubes by endoscopic or fluoroscopic technique. All procedures were performed at the bedside in the critical care unit. A soft small-bore nonweighted feeding tube was used in all cases. Successful placement was confirmed by either an abdominal x-ray for endoscopic technique or a fluoroscopic radiograph for fluoroscopic technique. RESULTS: Postpyloric feeding tubes were successfully placed in 41 of 43 patients (95%). The success rate using endoscopic technique was 96% (25 of 26), whereas the rate using fluoroscopy was 94% (16 of 17). The average time of successful placement was 15.2 +/- 2.9 (mean +/- SEM) minutes for endoscopic placement and 16.2 +/- 3.2 minutes for fluoroscopic placement, which was not statistically significant (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic and fluoroscopic placement of postpyloric feeding tubes can safely and accurately be performed at the bedside in critically ill patients. Our results showed no significant difference in the success rate or time of placement between endoscopic vs fluoroscopic placement of postpyloric feeding tubes.