Tailored vs. General COVID-19 prevention for adults with mental disabilities residing in group homes: a randomized controlled effectiveness-implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: People with serious mental illness (SMI) and people with intellectual disabilities/developmental disabilities (ID/DD) are at higher risk for COVID-19 and more severe outcomes. We compare a tailored versus general best practice COVID-19 prevention program in group homes (GHs) for people with SMI or ID/DD in Massachusetts (MA). METHODS: A hybrid effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized control trial compared a four-component implementation strategy (Tailored Best Practices: TBP) to dissemination of standard prevention guidelines (General Best-Practices: GBP) in GHs across six MA behavioral health agencies. GBP consisted of standard best practices for preventing COVID-19. TBP included GBP plus four components including: (1) trusted-messenger peer testimonials on benefits of vaccination; (2) motivational interviewing; (3) interactive education on preventive practices; and (4) fidelity feedback dashboards for GHs. Primary implementation outcomes were full COVID-19 vaccination rates (baseline: 1/1/2021-3/31/2021) and fidelity scores (baseline: 5/1/21-7/30/21), at 3-month intervals to 15-month follow-up until October 2022. The primary effectiveness outcome was COVID-19 infection (baseline: 1/1/2021-3/31/2021), measured every 3 months to 15-month follow-up. Cumulative incidence of vaccinations were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox frailty models evaluate differences in vaccination uptake and secondary outcomes. Linear mixed models (LMMs) and Poisson generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) were used to evaluate differences in fidelity scores and incidence of COVID-19 infections. RESULTS: GHs (n=415) were randomized to TBP (n=208) and GBP (n=207) including 3,836 residents (1,041 ID/DD; 2,795 SMI) and 5,538 staff. No differences were found in fidelity scores or COVID-19 incidence rates between TBP and GBP, however TBP had greater acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. No overall differences in vaccination rates were found between TBP and GBP. However, among unvaccinated group home residents with mental disabilities, non-White residents achieved full vaccination status at double the rate for TBP (28.6%) compared to GBP (14.4%) at 15 months. Additionally, the impact of TBP on vaccine uptake was over two-times greater for non-White residents compared to non-Hispanic White residents (ratio of HR for TBP between non-White and non-Hispanic White: 2.28, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Tailored COVID-19 prevention strategies are beneficial as a feasible and acceptable implementation strategy with the potential to reduce disparities in vaccine acceptance among the subgroup of non-White individuals with mental disabilities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04726371, 27/01/2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04726371 .

Shifting the HIV Training and Research Paradigm to Address Disparities in HIV Outcomes.

Tailored programs to diversify the pool of HIV/AIDS investigators and provide sufficient training and support for minority investigators to compete successfully are uncommon in the US and abroad. This paper encourages a shift in the HIV/AIDS training and research paradigm to effectively train and mentor Latino researchers in the US, Latin America and the Caribbean. We suggest three strategies to accomplish this: (1) coaching senior administrative and academic staff of HIV/AIDS training programs on the needs, values, and experiences unique to Latino investigators; (2) encouraging mentors to be receptive to a different set of research questions and approaches that Latino researchers offer due to their life experiences and perspectives; and (3) creating a virtual infrastructure to share resources and tackle challenges faced by minority researchers. Shifts in the research paradigm to include, retain, and promote Latino HIV/AIDS researchers will benefit the scientific process and the patients and communities who await the promise of HIV/AIDS research.

Beyond quarantine: a history of leprosy in Puerto Rico, 1898-1930s.

From biblical times to the modern period, leprosy has been a disease associated with stigma. This mark of disgrace, physically present in the sufferers' sores and disfigured limbs, and embodied in the identity of a "leper", has cast leprosy into the shadows of society. This paper draws on primary sources, written in Spanish, to reconstruct the social history of leprosy in Puerto Rico when the United States annexed this island in 1898. The public health policies that developed over the period of 1898 to the 1930s were unique to Puerto Rico because of the interplay between political events, scientific developments and popular concerns. Puerto Rico was influenced by the United States' priorities for public health, and the leprosy control policies that developed were superimposed on vestiges of the colonial Spanish public health system. During the United States' initial occupation, extreme segregation sacrificed the individual rights and liberties of these patients for the benefit of society. The lives of these leprosy sufferers were irrevocably changed as a result.

Beyond quarantine: a history of leprosy in Puerto Rico, 1898-1930s

Usa fontes primárias, escritas em espanhol, para reconstruir a história social da lepra em Porto Rico a partir de 1898, quando os Estados Unidos anexaram a ilha a seu território. As políticas de saúde pública desenvolvidas em Porto Rico até a década de 1930 foram específicas, devido a uma combinaçäo de fatores políticos, científicos e sociais. O país sofreu a influência das prioridades sanitárias dos Estados Unidos e desenvolveu suas políticas de controle da lepra sobre os vestígios do sistema de saúde da Espanha colonial. No início da ocupaçäo norte-americana, extrema segregaçäo agrediu a liberdade e os direitos individuais dos pacientes, em nome da proteçäo à sociedade. Como resultado, as vidas desses hansenianos foram irrevogavelmente transformadas.