Vicarious Racism, Direct Racism, and Mental Health Among Racialized Minority Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: Racism-related stress is a root cause of racial and ethnic disparities in mental health outcomes. An individual may be exposed to racism directly or vicariously by hearing about or observing people of the same racial and/or ethnic group experience racism. Although the healthcare setting is a venue by which healthcare workers experience both direct and vicarious racism, few studies have assessed the associations between direct and vicarious racism and mental health outcomes among healthcare workers. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the relationships between direct and vicarious racism and symptoms of posttraumatic stress, depression, and anxiety among healthcare workers in the USA in 2022. RESULTS: Our sample consisted of 259 healthcare workers identifying as a racialized minority, including 68 (26.3%) who identified as mixed-race, 61 (23.6%) East Asian, 36 (13.9%) Black, 33 (12.7%) South Asian, 22 (8.5%) Southeast Asian, 21 (8.1%) Middle Eastern/North African, and 18 (6.9%) another race. The mean age was 37.9 years (SD 10.1). In multivariable linear regression models that adjusted for demographics, work stressors, and social stressors, we found that increased reporting of vicarious racism was associated with greater symptoms of anxiety (B = 0.066, standard error = 0.034, p = .049). We did not identify significant relationships between vicarious and direct racism and symptoms of posttraumatic stress or depression in the fully adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings should be considered by academic health systems to mitigate the negative impact of racism on healthcare workers' mental health.

A user-centred implementation strategy for tuberculosis contact investigation in Uganda: protocol for a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis(TB) is among the leading causes of infectious death worldwide. Contact investigation is an evidence-based, World Health Organisation-endorsed intervention for timely TB diagnosis, treatment, and prevention but has not been widely and effectively implemented. METHODS: We are conducting a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised, hybrid Type III implementation-effectiveness trial comparing a user-centred to a standard strategy for implementing TB contact investigation in 12 healthcare facilities in Uganda. The user-centred strategy consists of several client-focused components including (1) a TB-education booklet, (2) a contact-identification algorithm, (3) an instructional sputum-collection video, and (4) a community-health-rider service to transport clients, CHWs, and sputum samples, along with several healthcare-worker-focused components, including (1) collaborative improvement meetings, (2) regular audit-and-feedback reports, and (3) a digital group-chat application designed to develop a community of practice. Sites will cross-over from the standard to the user-centred strategy in six, eight-week transition steps following a randomly determined site-pairing scheme and timeline. The primary implementation outcome is the proportion of symptomatic close contacts completing TB evaluation within 60 days of TB treatment initiation by the index person with TB. The primary clinical effectiveness outcomes are the proportion of contacts diagnosed with and initiating active TB disease treatment and the proportion initiating TB preventative therapy within 60 days. We will assess outcomes from routine source documents using intention-to-treat analyses. We will also conduct nested mixed-methods studies of implementation fidelity and context and perform cost-effectiveness and impact modelling. The Makerere School of Public Health IRB(#554), the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology(#HS1720ES), and the Yale Institutional Review Board(#2000023199) approved the study and waived informed consent for the main trial implementation-effectiveness outcomes. We will submit results for publication in peer-reviewed journals and disseminate findings to local policymakers and representatives of affected communities. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic, quasi-experimental implementation trial will inform efforts to find and prevent undiagnosed persons with TB in high-burden settings using contact investigation. It will also help assess the suitability of human-centred design and communities of practice for tailoring implementation strategies and sustaining evidence-based interventions in low-and-middle-income countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered(ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT05640648) on 16 November 2022, after the trial launch on 7 March 2022.

A user-centred implementation strategy for tuberculosis contact investigation in Uganda: Protocol for a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial.

Background Tuberculosis (TB) is among the leading causes of infectious death worldwide. Contact investigation is an evidence-based, World Health Organisation-endorsed intervention for timely TB diagnosis, treatment, and prevention but has not been widely and effectively implemented. Methods We are conducting a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised, hybrid Type III implementation-effectiveness trial comparing a user-centred to a standard strategy for implementing TB contact investigation in 12 healthcare facilities in Uganda. The user-centred strategy consists of several client-focused components including 1) a TB-education booklet, 2) a contact-identification algorithm, 3) an instructional sputum-collection video, and 4) a community-health-rider service to transport clients, CHWs, and sputum samples, along with several healthcare-worker-focused components, including 1) collaborative improvement meetings, 2) regular audit-and-feedback reports, and 3) a digital group-chat application designed to develop a community of practice. Sites will cross from the standard to the user-centred strategy in six, eight-week transition steps following a randomly determined site-pairing scheme and timeline. The primary implementation outcome is the proportion of symptomatic close contacts completing TB evaluation within 60 days of TB treatment initiation by the index person with TB. The primary clinical effectiveness outcomes are the proportion of contacts diagnosed with and initiating active TB disease treatment and the proportion initiating TB preventative therapy within 60 days. We will assess outcomes from routine source documents using intention-to-treat analyses. We will also conduct nested mixed-methods studies of implementation fidelity and context and perform cost-effectiveness and impact modelling. The Makerere School of Public Health IRB (#554), the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (#HS1720ES), and the Yale Institutional Review Board (#2000023199) approved the study with a waiver of informed consent for the main trial implementation-effectiveness outcomes. We will submit trial results for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminate findings to local shareholders, including policymakers and representatives of affected communities. Discussion This pragmatic, quasi-experimental implementation trial will inform efforts to find and prevent undiagnosed persons with TB in high-burden setting using contact investigation. It will help assess the suitability of human-centred design and communities of practice for tailoring implementation strategies and sustain evidence-based interventions in low-and-middle-income countries. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05640648.

Gender Discrimination and Mental Health Among Health Care Workers: Findings from a Mixed Methods Study.

Background: Gender discrimination among healthcare workers (HCWs) negatively impacts their mental health and career development; however, few studies have explored how experiences of gender discrimination change during times of health system strain. Methods: This survey-based study assesses the associations between gender discrimination and four stress-related mental health outcomes (posttraumatic stress, depression, anxiety, and burnout), as well as the qualitative experiences of gender discrimination in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Among women, increased gender discrimination was associated with heightened symptoms of posttraumatic stress, depression, anxiety, and burnout after adjusting for demographics and pandemic-related stressors; however, among men, increased gender discrimination was only associated with heightened symptoms of depression. Using thematic analysis, we identified five themes that describe experiences of gender discrimination faced by women in healthcare, including differential valuing of work and contributions, gendered roles and assumptions about roles, maternal discrimination, objectification, and "old boys club." We also identified two themes describing how men perceived gender discrimination, including instances of symbolic discrimination and woman provider preference. Conclusion: These findings suggest that experiences of gender discrimination persist during times of health system strain and negatively impact women HCWs' mental health.

Pre- and peri-traumatic event stressors drive gender differences in chronic stress-related psychological sequelae: A prospective cohort study of COVID-19 frontline healthcare providers.

Women are at heightened risk for chronic stress-related psychological sequelae (SRPS), including major depressive disorder (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in response to potentially traumatic events, including the COVID-19 pandemic. However, few studies have examined pre- and peri-event stressors that could account for gender differences in chronic SRPS. To address this gap, we conducted a prospective cohort study of healthcare providers (HCPs) caring for patients with COVID-19 at a large tertiary care hospital in New York City, and measured mental health risk factors and symptoms of MDD, GAD, and PTSD at baseline (April 2020) and at a 7-month follow-up (December 2020). We defined chronic SRPS as the presence of probable MDD, GAD, and/or PTSD at both timepoints. We conducted a mediation analysis to evaluate whether pre- and peri-event stressors explained women's increased risk for chronic SRPS. Among our sample of 786 HCPs, 571 (72.6%) were women. Compared with men, women were twice as likely to have chronic SRPS (18.7% vs. 8.8%, χ2[1] = 11.38, p < 0.001). However, after accounting for pre- and peri-event stressors, being a woman was no longer associated with chronic SRPS (p = 0.58). The pre- and peri-event stressors that accounted for this heightened risk among women included being in a woman-prevalent profession (specifically nursing; estimate = 0.08, SE = 0.04, p = 0.05), pre-pandemic burnout (estimate = 0.11, SE = 0.05, p = 0.04), greater family-related (estimate = 0.09, SE = 0.03, p = 0.004), infection-related (estimate = 0.06, SE = 0.02, p = 0.007), and work-related concerns (estimate = 0.11, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001), and lower leadership support (estimate = 0.07, SE = 0.03, p = 0.005). These findings can inform institutional interventions to mitigate the risk of chronic SRPS among women HCPs.

Gender discrimination among women healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Gender discrimination among women healthcare workers (HCWs) negatively impacts job satisfaction, mental health, and career development; however, few studies have explored how experiences of gender discrimination change during times of health system strain. Thus, we conducted a survey study to characterize gender discrimination during a time of significant health system strain, i.e., the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used a convenience sampling approach by inviting department chairs of academic medical centers in the United States to forward our online survey to their staff in January 2021. The survey included one item assessing frequency of gender discrimination, and an open-ended question asking respondents to detail experiences of discrimination. The survey also included questions about social and work stressors, such as needing additional childcare support. We used ordinal logistic regression models to identify predictors of gender discrimination, and grounded theory to characterize themes that emerged from open-ended responses. RESULTS: Among our sample of 716 women (mean age = 37.63 years, SD = 10.97), 521 (72.80%) were White, 102 (14.20%) Asian, 69 (9.60%) Black, 53 (7.4%) Latina, and 11 (1.50%) identified as another race. In an adjusted model that included demographic characteristics and social and work stressors as covariates, significant predictors of higher gender discrimination included younger age (OR = 0.98, 95%CI = 0.96, 0.99); greater support needs (OR = 1.26, 95%CI = 1.09,1.47); lower team cohesion (OR = 0.94, 95%CI = 0.91, 0.97); greater racial discrimination (OR = 1.07, 95%CI = 1.05,1.09); identifying as a physician (OR = 6.59, 95%CI = 3.95, 11.01), physician-in-training (i.e., residents and fellows; OR = 3.85, 95%CI = 2.27,6.52), or non-clinical worker (e.g., administrative assistants; OR = 3.08, 95%CI = 1.60,5.90), compared with nurses; and reporting the need for a lot more childcare support (OR = 1.84, 95%CI = 1.15, 2.97), compared with reporting no childcare support need. In their open-ended responses, women HCWs described seven themes: 1) belittlement by colleagues, 2) gendered workload distributions, 3) unequal opportunities for professional advancement, 4) expectations for communication, 5) objectification, 6) expectations of motherhood, and 7) mistreatment by patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study underscores the severity of gender discrimination among women HCWs. Hospital systems should prioritize gender equity programs that improve workplace climate during and outside of times of health system strain.

Development and Validation of the Vicarious Racism in Healthcare Workers Scale.

Vicarious racism occurs when hearing about or observing people of the same racial and/or ethnic group experience racism. Healthcare workers may face unique experiences of vicarious racism through witnessing or hearing about racism that their patients and colleagues face. However, there are no validated measures of vicarious racism for the healthcare worker population. In this study, we developed and conducted an initial evaluation of the Vicarious Racism in Healthcare Workers Scale. We developed the 12-item scale based on a qualitative study exploring the experiences of racism among healthcare workers and existing literature on the topic. We administered the scale to a cohort of 259 healthcare workers identifying as a racialized minority to evaluate its factor structure, internal consistency, and construct validity. Factor analysis yielded two factors: racism in social networks and racism in society at-large. This two-factor solution had good model fit (standardized root mean square residual = 0.061). The internal consistencies of the overall scale, social networks subscale, and society subscale were excellent (α = 0.93, 0.92, and 0.89, respectively). We found evidence in support of convergent validity; scale scores were higher among Black healthcare workers compared with non-Black healthcare workers and those with greater social support needs. Scale scores were positively correlated with directly experienced racism and symptoms of posttraumatic stress, depression, and anxiety. The scale demonstrated discriminant validity; scale scores did not differ based on gender or job. The Vicarious Racism in Healthcare Workers Scale demonstrated favorable psychometric properties and may be used to assess vicarious racism in this population.

Stakeholder perspectives on scaling up medical device reprocessing: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The United States health care sector is one of the largest polluting industries, which has significant adverse effects on human health. Medical device reprocessing (MDR) is a sustainability solution that has the potential to decrease hospital waste, cut carbon emissions, reduce spending, and improve supply chain resiliency; however, only a small proportion of FDA-approved devices are actually reprocessed. Thus, we conducted a qualitative study to understand barriers and facilitators of scaling up MDR. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 17 stakeholders (exceeding thematic saturation) at a large academic health system in New England and national MDR organizations. We also collected observations through site visits at the health system. We recruited participants from June 2021 to April 2022 through purposive sampling. Using an analytic approach guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we applied inductive and deductive codes related to key implementation constructs. We then conducted a thematic analysis and identified five overarching themes related to barriers and facilitators of MDR. First, respondents explained that regulatory bodies and original equipment manufacturers determine which devices can be reprocessed. For example, some respondents described that original equipment manufacturers use tactics of forced obsolescence that prevent their devices from being reprocessed. Second, respondents explained that MDR has variable compatibility with hospital priorities; for example, the potential cost savings of MDR is compatible with their priorities, while the perception of decreased functionality of reprocessed medical devices is incompatible. Third, respondents described that physician preferences influence which reprocessed devices get ordered. Fourth, respondents explained that variable staff knowledge and beliefs about MDR influence their motivations to select and collect reprocessable devices. Lastly, respondents emphasized that there was a lack of infrastructure for evaluating and maintaining MDR programs within their health system. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we have outlined a number of recommendations that target these barriers and facilitators so that the environmental and financial benefits of MDR can be realized at this health system and nationally. For example, implementing federal policies that prevent original equipment manufacturers from using tactics of forced obsolescence can facilitate the scale-up of MDR nationally. Additionally, providing life cycle assessments that compare the environmental effects of single-use disposable, reprocessable disposable, and reusable devices could facilitate health systems' purchasing decisions. Creating and disseminating audit and feedback reports to hospital staff might also facilitate their continued engagement in the program. Lastly, hiring a full-time program manager that leads MDR programs within health systems could improve program sustainability.

Psychosocial family-level mediators in the intergenerational transmission of trauma: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Family-level psychosocial factors appear to play a critical role in mediating the intergenerational transmission of trauma; however, no review article has quantitatively synthesized causal mechanisms across a diversity of trauma types. This study aims to systematically consolidate the epidemiological research on family-level psychosocial mediators and moderators to ultimately produce causal diagram(s) of the intergenerational transmission of trauma. METHODS: We will identify epidemiological peer-reviewed publications, dissertations, and conference abstracts that measure the impact of at least one psychosocial family-level factor mediating or moderating the relationship between parental trauma exposure and a child mental health outcome. English, French, Kinyarwanda, and Spanish articles will be eligible. We will search MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PTSDpubs, Scopus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and will conduct forward citation chaining of included documents. Two reviewers will perform screening independently. We will extract reported mediators, moderators, and relevant study characteristics for included studies. Findings will be presented using narrative syntheses, descriptive analyses, mediation meta-analyses, moderating meta-analyses, and causal diagram(s), where possible. We will perform a risk of bias assessment and will assess for publication bias. DISCUSSION: The development of evidence-based causal diagram(s) would provide more detailed understanding of the paths by which the psychological impacts of trauma can be transmitted intergenerationally at the family-level. This review could provide evidence to better support interventions that interrupt the cycle of intergenerational trauma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration ID #CRD42021251053.

"I can't do it": A qualitative study exploring case and contact experiences with COVID-19 contact tracing.

BACKGROUND: Low engagement in contact tracing for COVID-19 dramatically reduces its impact, but little is known about how experiences, environments and characteristics of cases and contacts influence engagement. METHODS: We recruited a convenience sample of COVID-19 cases and contacts from the New Haven Health Department's contact tracing program for interviews about their contact tracing experiences. We analyzed transcripts thematically, organized themes using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior (COM-B) model, and identified candidate interventions using the linked Behavior Change Wheel Framework. RESULTS: We interviewed 21 cases and 12 contacts. Many felt physically or psychologically incapable of contact tracing participation due to symptoms or uncertainty about protocols. Environmental factors and social contacts also influenced engagement. Finally, physical symptoms, emotions and low trust in and expectations of public health authorities influenced motivation to participate. CONCLUSION: To improve contact tracing uptake, programs should respond to clients' physical and emotional needs; increase clarity of public communications; address structural and social factors that shape behaviors and opportunities; and establish and maintain trust. We identify multiple potential interventions that may help achieve these goals.

Centering Health Equity Within COVID-19 Contact Tracing: Connecticut's Community Outreach Specialist Program.

CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted vulnerable populations, including those who are non-English-speaking and those with lower socioeconomic status; yet, participation of these groups in contact tracing was initially low. Distrust of government agencies, anticipated COVID-19-related stigma, and language and cultural barriers between contact tracers and communities are common challenges. PROGRAM: The Community Outreach Specialist (COS) program was established within the Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH) COVID-19 contact tracing program to encourage participation in contact tracing and address a need for culturally competent care and social and material support among socially vulnerable and non-English-speaking populations in 11 high-burden jurisdictions in Connecticut. IMPLEMENTATION: In partnership with state and local health departments, we recruited 25 COS workers with relevant language skills from target communities and trained them to deliver contact tracing services to vulnerable and non-English speaking populations. EVALUATION: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from ContaCT, DPH's enterprise contact tracing system. Overall, the COS program enrolled 1938 cases and 492 contacts. The proportion of residents reached (ie, called and interviewed) in the COS program was higher than that in the regular contact tracing program for both cases (70% vs 57%, P < .001) and contacts (84% vs 64%, P < .001). After adjusting for client age, sex, race and ethnicity, language, and jurisdiction, we found that the COS program was associated with increased reach for contacts (odds ratio [OR] = 1.52; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.17-1.99) but not for cases (OR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.88). Rapid qualitative analysis of programmatic field notes and meeting reports provided evidence that the COS program was feasible and acceptable to clients and contributed to COVID-19 education and communication efforts. CONCLUSION: A COS program employing a client-centered, community-engaged strategy for reaching vulnerable and non-English-speaking populations was feasible and more effective at reaching contacts than standard COVID-19 contact tracing.

Narrative identity among people with disabilities in the United States during the Covid-19 pandemic: The interdependent self.

This study examines narrative identity among a large, diverse sample of people with disabilities (PWDs) in the United States during the "second wave" of the Covid-19 pandemic (October-December 2020). The study relied on abductive analyses, combining a purely inductive phase of inquiry followed by two rounds of investigation that filtered inductive insights through three theoretical lenses: social-ecological theory, the theory of narrative identity, and perspectives from the interdisciplinary field of disability studies. The central result was the identification of a particular configuration of self, one that was demonstrably interdependent with both immediate interpersonal contexts and with broader cultural contexts. This interdependent self was interpreted in both positive and negative ways by PWDs. These findings invite future inquiry into commonplace conceptualizations of an independent self at the center of personality research and suggest that dominant conceptualizations of "the good life" may overly emphasize independence.

Core components of a Community of Practice to improve community health worker performance: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Communities of Practice (CoPs) offer an accessible strategy for healthcare workers to improve the quality of care through knowledge sharing. However, not enough is known about which components of CoPs are core to facilitating behavior change. Therefore, we carried out a qualitative study to address these important gaps in the literature on CoPs and inform planning for an interventional study of CoPs. METHODS: We organized community health workers (CHWs) from two tuberculosis (TB) clinics in Kampala, Uganda, into a CoP from February to June 2018. We conducted interviews with CoP members to understand their perceptions of how the CoP influenced delivery of TB contact investigation. Using an abductive approach, we first applied inductive codes characterizing CHWs' perceptions of how the CoP activities affected their delivery of contact investigation. We then systematically mapped these codes into their functional categories using the Behavior Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy and the Behavior Change Wheel framework. We triangulated all interview findings with detailed field notes. RESULTS: All eight members of the CoP agreed to participate in the interviews. CHWs identified five CoP activities as core to improving the quality of their work: (1) individual review of feedback reports, (2) collaborative improvement meetings, (3) real-time communications among members, (4) didactic education sessions, and (5) clinic-wide staff meetings. These activities incorporated nine different BCTs and five distinct intervention functions. CHWs reported that these activities provided a venue for them to share challenges, exchange knowledge, engage in group problem solving, and benefit from social support. CHWs also explained that they felt a shared sense of ownership of the CoP, which motivated them to propose and carry out innovations. CHWs described that the CoP strengthened their social and professional identities within and outside the group, and improved their self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: We identified the core components and several mechanisms through which CoPs may improve CHW performance. Future studies should evaluate the importance of these mechanisms in mediating the effects of CoPs on program effectiveness.

"They Wanted to Talk to a 'Real Doctor'": Predictors, Perpetrators, and Experiences of Racial and Ethnic Discrimination Among Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic diversity of healthcare workers have benefits on team functioning and patient care. However, a significant barrier to retaining diverse providers is discrimination. OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictors, perpetrators, and narratives of racial discrimination among healthcare workers. DESIGN: Survey study. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare workers employed at academic hospitals. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed prevalence and perpetrators of racial and ethnic discrimination using the General Ethnic Discrimination Scale. We included an open-ended question asking respondents to recount experiences of discrimination and analyzed responses using grounded theory. KEY RESULTS: Of the 997 participants, 12.2% were females from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine (URM), 4.0% URM males, 10.1% Asian females, 4.7% Asian males, 49.1% non-Hispanic White females, and 19.8% non-Hispanic White males. Among healthcare workers of color, 85.2% reported discrimination. Over half of URM females (51.4%), URM males (52.6%), and Asian females (62.5%) reported discrimination by patients. About 20-25% of URM females, URM males, and Asian females reported discrimination by teachers, supervisors, co-workers, and institutions. In adjusted binary logistic models, URM females had 10.14 odds (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 5.13, 20.02, p<.001), URM males 6.23 odds (95%CI: 2.59, 14.98, p<.001), Asian females 7.90 odds (95%CI: 4.07, 15.33, p<.001), and Asian males 2.96 odds (95% CI: 1.47, 5.97, p=.002) of reporting discrimination compared with non-Hispanic White males. Needing more support was associated with 2.51 odds (95%CI: 1.54, 4.08, p<.001) of reporting discrimination. Our qualitative findings identified that the murder of George Floyd intensified URM healthcare workers' experiences of discrimination through increased fear of violence and requests for unpaid diversity work. Asian healthcare workers reported that pandemic-related anti-Asian violence shaped their experiences of discrimination through increased fear of violence and care refusal from patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide insights into experienced discrimination among healthcare workers and opportunities for hospitals to create programs that improve inclusivity.

Implementation, interrupted: Identifying and leveraging factors that sustain after a programme interruption.

Many implementation efforts experience interruptions, especially in settings with developing health systems. Approaches for evaluating interruptions are needed to inform re-implementation strategies. We sought to devise an approach for evaluating interruptions by exploring the sustainability of a programme that implemented diabetes mellitus (DM) screening within tuberculosis clinics in Uganda in 2017. In 2019, we conducted nine interviews with clinic staff and observed clinic visits to determine their views and practices on providing integrated care. We mapped themes to a social ecological model with three levels derived from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR): outer setting (i.e. community), inner setting (i.e. clinic), and individuals (i.e. clinicians). Respondents explained that DM screening ceased due to disruptions in the national supply chain for glucose test strips, which had cascading effects on clinics and clinicians. Lack of screening supplies in clinics limited clinicians' opportunities to perform DM screening, which contributed to diminished self-efficacy. However, culture, compatibility and clinicians' beliefs about DM screening sustained throughout the interruption. We propose an approach for evaluating interruptions using the CFIR and social ecological model; other programmes can adapt this approach to identify cascading effects of interruptions and target them for re-implementation.

Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the General Self-Efficacy Scale in Ugandan Community Health Workers.

Self-efficacy is central to community health workers' capacity and motivation to deliver evidence-based care; thus, validated measures of self-efficacy are needed to assess the effectiveness of community health worker programs. In this study, we culturally adapted and evaluated the General Self-Efficacy Scale among community health workers in Uganda using multiple methods. We adapted the ten-item General Self-Efficacy Scale through cross-cultural discussions within our multidisciplinary research team, translation from English into Luganda and back-translation into English, and six cognitive interviews with community health workers. We administered the adapted scale in a staged, two-part cross-sectional study, including a total of 147 community health workers. Exploratory factor analysis yielded three factors, which we labeled problem-solving, persistence, and resourcefulness. This three-factor solution had good model fit (standardized root mean square residual = 0.07) and explained 53.4% of the variance. We found evidence of convergent validity, as scores for the total scale were positively correlated with years of experience (r = 0.48; p < .001) and perceived social support (r = 0.39, p < .001). Scores were also higher among those with higher educational attainment in one-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni-corrected post hoc tests [F (2,72) = 9.16, p < .001]. We also found evidence of discriminant validity, as scores for the total scale were not correlated with age (r = - 0.07, p = .55), in agreement with literature showing that general self-efficacy is an age-independent construct. The internal consistency of the adapted scale was within the acceptable range for a pilot study (Cronbach's α = 0.61). This evaluation of a Uganda-adapted General Self-Efficacy Scale demonstrated promising psychometric properties; however, larger studies with repeated measures are warranted to further assess the adapted scale's factor structure, validity, reliability, and stability over time.

Lessons Learned From COVID-19 Contact Tracing During a Public Health Emergency: A Prospective Implementation Study.

Background: Contact tracing is a core element of the public health response to emerging infectious diseases including COVID-19. Better understanding the implementation context of contact tracing for pandemics, including individual- and systems-level predictors of success, is critical to preparing for future epidemics. Methods: We carried out a prospective implementation study of an emergency volunteer contact tracing program established in New Haven, Connecticut between April 4 and May 19, 2020. We assessed the yield and timeliness of case and contact outreach in reference to CDC benchmarks, and identified individual and programmatic predictors of successful implementation using multivariable regression models. We synthesized our findings using the RE-AIM implementation framework. Results: Case investigators interviewed only 826 (48%) of 1,705 cases and were unable to reach 545 (32%) because of incomplete information and 334 (20%) who missed or declined repeated outreach calls. Contact notifiers reached just 687 (28%) of 2,437 reported contacts, and were unable to reach 1,597 (66%) with incomplete information and 153 (6%) who missed or declined repeated outreach calls. The median time-to-case-interview was 5 days and time-to-contact-notification 8 days. However, among notified contacts with complete time data, 457 (71%) were reached within 6 days of exposure. The least likely groups to be interviewed were elderly (adjusted relative risk, aRR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.89, p = 0.012, vs. young adult) and Black/African-American cases (aRR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.97, pairwise p = 0.01, vs. Hispanic/Latinx). However, ties between cases and their contacts strongly influenced contact notification success (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) 0.60). Surging caseloads and high volunteer turnover (case investigator n = 144, median time from sign-up to retirement from program was 4 weeks) required the program to supplement the volunteer workforce with paid public health nurses. Conclusions: An emergency volunteer-run contact tracing program fell short of CDC benchmarks for time and yield, largely due to difficulty collecting the information required for outreach to cases and contacts. To improve uptake, contact tracing programs must professionalize the workforce; better integrate testing and tracing services; capitalize on positive social influences between cases and contacts; and address racial and age-related disparities through enhanced community engagement.

Racial and Gender Discrimination Predict Mental Health Outcomes among Healthcare Workers Beyond Pandemic-Related Stressors: Findings from a Cross-Sectional Survey.

Racial and gender discrimination are risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes in the general population; however, the effects of discrimination on the mental health of healthcare workers needs to be further explored, especially in relation to competing stressors. Thus, we administered a survey to healthcare workers to investigate the associations between perceived racial and gender discrimination and symptoms of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress, and burnout during a period of substantial stressors related to the COVID-19 pandemic and a national racial reckoning. We used multivariable linear regression models, which controlled for demographics and pandemic-related stressors. Of the 997 participants (Mean Age = 38.22 years, SD = 11.77), 688 (69.01%) were White, 148 (14.84%) Asian, 86 (8.63%) Black, 73 (7.32%) Latinx, and 21 (2.11%) identified as another race. In multivariable models, racial discrimination predicted symptoms of depression (B = 0.04; SE: 0.02; p = .009), anxiety (B = 0.05; SE: 0.02; p = .004), and posttraumatic stress (B = 0.01; SE: 0.01; p = .006) and gender discrimination predicted posttraumatic stress (B = 0.11; SE: 0.05; p = .013) and burnout (B = 0.24; SE: 0.07; p = .001). Discrimination had indirect effects on mental health outcomes via inadequate social support. Hospital-wide diversity and inclusion initiatives are warranted to mitigate the adverse mental health effects of discrimination.

Implementation of a volunteer contact tracing program for COVID-19 in the United States: A qualitative focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Contact tracing is an important tool for suppressing COVID-19 but has been difficult to adapt to the conditions of a public health emergency. This study explored the experiences and perspectives of volunteer contact tracers in order to identify facilitators, challenges, and novel solutions for implementing COVID-19 contact tracing. METHODS: As part of a study to evaluate an emergently established volunteer contact tracing program for COVID-19 in New Haven, Connecticut, April-June 2020, we conducted focus groups with 36 volunteer contact tracers, thematically analyzed the data, and synthesized the findings using the RE-AIM implementation framework. RESULTS: To successfully reach cases and contacts, participants recommended identifying clients' outreach preferences, engaging clients authentically, and addressing sources of mistrust. Participants felt that the effectiveness of successful isolation and quarantine was contingent on minimizing delays in reaching clients and on systematically assessing and addressing their nutritional, financial, and housing needs. They felt that successful adoption of a volunteer-driven contact tracing model depended on the ability to recruit self-motivated contact tracers and provide rapid training and consistent, supportive supervision. Participants noted that implementation could be enhanced with better management tools, such as more engaging interview scripts, user-friendly data management software, and protocols for special situations and populations. They also emphasized the value of coordinating outreach efforts with other involved providers and agencies. Finally, they believed that long-term maintenance of a volunteer-driven program requires monetary or educational incentives to sustain participation. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to qualitatively examine implementation of a volunteer-run COVID-19 contact tracing program. Participants identified facilitators, barriers, and potential solutions for improving implementation of COVID-19 contact tracing in this context. These included standardized communication skills training, supportive supervision, and peer networking to improve implementation, as well as greater cooperation with outside agencies, flexible scheduling, and volunteer incentives to promote sustainability.