Assessing the Impact of COVID-19 on HIV Outcomes in the United States: A Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted sexual behaviors and the HIV continuum of care in the United States, reducing HIV testing and diagnosis, and use of preexposure prophylaxis and antiretroviral therapy. We aimed to understand the future implications of these effects through a modeling study. METHODS: We first ran our compartmental model of HIV transmission in the United States accounting for pandemic-related short-term changes in transmission behavior and HIV prevention and care provision in 2020 to 2021 only. We then ran a comparison scenario that did not apply pandemic effects but assumed a continuation of past HIV prevention and care trends. We compared results from the 2 scenarios through 2024. RESULTS: HIV incidence was 4·4% lower in 2020 to 2021 for the pandemic scenario compared with the no-pandemic scenario because of reduced levels of transmission behavior, despite reductions in HIV prevention and care caused by the pandemic. However, reduced care led to less viral load suppression among people with HIV in 2020, and in turn, our model resulted in a slightly greater incidence of 2·0% from 2022 to 2024 in the COVID-19 scenario, as compared with the non-COVID scenario. DISCUSSION: Disruptions in HIV prevention and care services during COVID-19 may lead to somewhat higher postpandemic HIV incidence than assuming prepandemic trends in HIV care and prevention continued. These results underscore the importance of continuing to increase HIV prevention and care efforts in the coming years.

Patient flow time data of COVID-19 vaccination clinics in 23 sites, United States, April and May 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Public health department (PHD) led COVID-19 vaccination clinics can be a critical component of pandemic response as they facilitate high volume of vaccination. However, few patient-time analyses examining patient throughput at mass vaccination clinics with unique COVID-19 vaccination challenges have been published. METHODS: During April and May of 2021, 521 patients in 23 COVID-19 vaccination sites counties of 6 states were followed to measure the time spent from entry to vaccination. The total time was summarized and tabulated by clinic characteristics. A multivariate linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the association between vaccination clinic settings and patient waiting times in the clinic. RESULTS: The average time a patient spent in the clinic from entry to vaccination was 9 min 5 s (range: 02:00-23:39). Longer patient flow times were observed in clinics with higher numbers of doses administered, 6 or fewer vaccinators, walk-in patients accepted, dedicated services for people with disabilities, and drive-through clinics. The multivariate linear regression showed that longer patient waiting times were significantly associated with the number of vaccine doses administered, dedicated services for people with disabilities, the availability of more than one brand of vaccine, and rurality. CONCLUSIONS: Given the standardized procedures outlined by immunization guidelines, reducing the wait time is critical in lowering the patient flow time by relieving the bottleneck effect in the clinic. Our study suggests enhancing the efficiency of PHD-led vaccination clinics by preparing vaccinators to provide vaccines with proper and timely support such as training or delivering necessary supplies and paperwork to the vaccinators. In addition, patient wait time can be spent answering questions about vaccination or reviewing educational materials on other public health services.

Assessment of the Costs of Implementing COVID-19 Vaccination Clinics in 34 Sites, United States, March 2021.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the costs to implement public health department (PHD)-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. DESIGN: Retrospectively reported data on COVID-19 vaccination clinic characteristics and resources used during a high-demand day in March 2021. These resources were combined with national average wages, supply costs, and facility costs to estimate the operational cost and start-up cost of clinics. SETTING: Thirty-four PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics across 8 states and 1 metropolitan statistical area. PARTICIPANTS: Clinic managers at 34 PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. INTERVENTION: Large-scale COVID-19 vaccination clinics were implemented by public health agencies as part of the pandemic response. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: Operational cost per day, operational cost per vaccination, start-up cost per clinic. RESULTS: Median operational cost per day for a clinic was $10 314 (range, $637-$95 163) and median cost per vaccination was $38 (range, $9-$206). There was a large range of operational costs across clinics. Clinics used an average of 99 total staff hours per 100 patients vaccinated. Median start-up cost per clinic was $15 348 (range, $1 409-$165 190). CONCLUSIONS: Results show that clinics require a large range of resources to meet the high throughput needs of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Estimating the costs of PHD-run vaccination clinics for the pandemic response is essential for ensuring that resources are available for clinic success. If clinics are not adequately supported, they may stop functioning, which would slow the pandemic response if no other setting or approach is possible.

Estimating the cost-effectiveness of the Sodium Reduction in Communities Program.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Sodium Reduction in Communities Program (SRCP). DESIGN: We collected implementation costs and performance measure indicators from SRCP recipients and their partner food service organisations. We estimated the cost per person and per food service organisation reached and the cost per menu item impacted. We estimated the short-term effectiveness of SRCP in reducing sodium consumption and used it as an input in the Prevention Impact Simulation Model to project the long-term impact on medical cost savings and quality-adjusted life-years gained due to a reduction in CVD and estimate the cost-effectiveness of SRCP if sustained through 2025 and 2040. SETTING: CDC funded eight recipients as part of the 2016-2021 round of the SRCP to work with food service organisations in eight settings to increase the availability and purchase of lower-sodium food options. PARTICIPANTS: Eight SRCP recipients and twenty of their partners. RESULTS: At the recipient level, average cost per person reached was $10, and average cost per food service organisation reached was $42 917. At the food service organisation level, median monthly cost per food item impacted by recipe modification or product substitution was $684. Cost-effectiveness analyses showed that, if sustained, the programme is cost saving (i.e. the reduction in medical costs is greater than the implementation costs) in the target population by $1·82 through 2025 and $2·09 through 2040. CONCLUSIONS: By providing evidence of the cost-effectiveness of a real-world sodium reduction initiative, this study can help inform decisions by public health organisations about related CVD prevention interventions.

State-Level Health Care Expenditures Associated With Disability.

OBJECTIVE: Given the growth in national disability-associated health care expenditures (DAHE) and the changes in health insurance-specific DAHE distribution, updated estimates of state-level DAHE are needed. The objective of this study was to update state-level estimates of DAHE. METHODS: We combined data from the 2013-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, 2013-2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and 2014 National Health Expenditure Accounts to calculate state-level DAHE for US adults in total, per adult, and per (adult) person with disability (PWD). We adjusted expenditures to 2017 prices and assessed changes in DAHE from 2003 to 2015. RESULTS: In 2015, DAHE were $868 billion nationally (range, $1.4 billion in Wyoming to $102.8 billion in California) accounting for 36% of total health care expenditures (range, 29%-41%). From 2003 to 2015, total DAHE increased by 65% (range, 35%-125%). In 2015, DAHE per PWD were highest in the District of Columbia ($27 839) and lowest in Alabama ($12 603). From 2003 to 2015, per-PWD DAHE increased by 13% (range, -20% to 61%) and per-capita DAHE increased by 28% (range, 7%-84%). In 2015, Medicare DAHE per PWD ranged from $10 067 in Alaska to $18 768 in New Jersey. Medicaid DAHE per PWD ranged from $9825 in Nevada to $43 365 in the District of Columbia. Nonpublic-health insurer per-PWD DAHE ranged from $7641 in Arkansas to $18 796 in Alaska. CONCLUSION: DAHE are substantial and vary by state. The public sector largely supports the health care costs of people with disabilities. State policy makers and other stakeholders can use these results to inform the development of public health programs that support and provide ongoing health care to people with disabilities.

Validation of the Prevention Impacts Simulation Model (PRISM).

INTRODUCTION: Demonstrating the validity of a public health simulation model helps to establish confidence in the accuracy and usefulness of a model's results. In this study we evaluated the validity of the Prevention Impacts Simulation Model (PRISM), a system dynamics model that simulates health, mortality, and economic outcomes for the US population. PRISM primarily simulates outcomes related to cardiovascular disease but also includes outcomes related to other chronic diseases that share risk factors. PRISM is openly available through a web application. METHODS: We applied the model validation framework developed independently by the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and the Society for Medical Decision Making modeling task force to validate PRISM. This framework included model review by external experts and quantitative data comparison by the study team. RESULTS: External expert review determined that PRISM is based on up-to-date science. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that no parameter affected results by more than 5%. Comparison with other published models, such as ModelHealth, showed that PRISM produces lower estimates of effects and cost savings. Comparison with surveillance data showed that projected model trends in risk factors and outcomes align closely with secular trends. Four measures did not align with surveillance data, and those were recalibrated. CONCLUSION: PRISM is a useful tool to simulate the potential effects and costs of public health interventions. Results of this validation should help assure health policy leaders that PRISM can help support community health program planning and evaluation efforts.

National Health Care Expenditures Associated With Disability.

BACKGROUND: In 2003, national disability-associated health care expenditures (DAHE) were $398 billion. Updated estimates will improve our understanding of current DAHE. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate national DAHE for the US adult population and analyze spending by insurance and service categories and to assess changes in spending over the past decade. RESEARCH DESIGN: Data from the 2013-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey were used to estimate DAHE for noninstitutionalized adults. These estimates were reconciled with National Health Expenditure Accounts (NHEA) data and adjusted to 2017 medical prices. Expenditures for institutionalized adults were added from NHEA data. MEASURES: National DAHE in total, by insurance and service categories, and percentage of total expenditures associated with disability. RESULTS: DAHE in 2015 were $868 billion (at 2017 prices), representing 36% of total national health care spending (up from 27% in 2003). DAHE per person with disability increased from $13,395 in 2003 to $17,431 in 2015, whereas nondisability per-person spending remained constant (about $6700). Public insurers paid 69% of DAHE. Medicare paid the largest portion ($324.7 billion), and Medicaid DAHE were $277.2 billion. More than half (54%) of all Medicare expenditures and 72% of all Medicaid expenditures were associated with disability. CONCLUSIONS: The share of health care expenditures associated with disability has increased substantially over the past decade. The high proportion of DAHE paid by public insurers reinforces the importance of public programs designed to improve health care for people with disabilities and emphasizes the need for evaluating programs and health services available to this vulnerable population.

Analysis of the profitability of adult vaccination in 13 private provider practices in the United States.

Vaccination coverage among adults remains low in the United States. Understanding the barriers to provision of adult vaccination is an important step to increasing vaccination coverage and improving public health. To better understand financial factors that may affect practice decisions about adult vaccination, this study sought to understand how costs compared with payments for adult vaccinations in a sample of U.S. physician practices. We recruited a convenience sample of 19 practices in nine states in 2017. We conducted a time-motion study to assess the time costs of vaccination activities and conducted a survey of practice managers to assess materials, management, and dose costs and payments for vaccination. We received complete cost and payment data from 13 of the 19 practices. We calculated annual income from vaccination services by comparing estimated costs with payments received for vaccine doses and vaccine administration. Median annual total income from vaccination services was $90,343 at family medicine practices (range: $3968-$249,628), $28,267 at internal medicine practices (-$32,659-$141,034) and $2886 at obstetrics and gynecology practices (-$73,451-$23,820). Adult vaccination was profitable at the median of our sample, but there is wide variation in profitability due to differences in costs and payment rates across practices. This study provides evidence on the financial viability of adult vaccination and supports actions for improving financial viability. These results can help inform practices' decisions whether to provide adult vaccines and contribute to keeping adults up-to-date with the recommended vaccination schedule.

Estimating the Costs and Income of Providing Vaccination to Adults and Children.

INTRODUCTION: Vaccinations are recommended to prevent serious morbidity and mortality. However, providers' concerns regarding costs and payments for providing vaccination services are commonly reported barriers to adult vaccination. Information on the costs of providing vaccination is limited, especially for adults. METHODS: We recruited 4 internal medicine, 4 family medicine, 2 pediatric, 2 obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) practices, and 2 community health clinics in North Carolina to participate in a study to assess the economic costs and benefits of providing vaccination services for adults and children. We conducted a time-motion assessment of vaccination-related activities in the provider office and a survey to providers on vaccine management costs. We estimated mean cost per vaccination, minimum and maximum payments received, and income. RESULTS: Across all provider settings, mean cost per vaccine administration was $14 with substantial variation by practice setting (pediatric: $10; community health clinics: $15; family medicine: $17; OBGYN: $23; internal medicine: $23). When receiving the maximum payment, all provider settings had positive income for vaccination services. When receiving the minimum reported payments for vaccination services, pediatric and family medicine practices had positive income, internal medicine, and OBGYN practices had approximately equal costs and payments, and community health clinics had losses or negative income. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, vaccination service providers appeared to have small positive income from vaccination services. In some cases, providers experienced negative income, which underscores the need for providers and policymakers to design interventions and system improvements to make vaccination services financially sustainable for all provider types.

Provider time and costs to vaccinate adult patients: Impact of time counseling without vaccination.

Amid provider reports of financial barriers as an impediment to adult immunization, this study explores the time and costs of vaccination in adult provider practices. Both a Vaccination Time-Motion Study and Vaccine Practice Management Survey were conducted (March - October 2017) in a convenience sample of 19 family medicine (FM), internal medicine (IM), and obstetrician-gynecology (OBGYN) practices, in nine states. Practices were directly observed during a one week period; estimates were collected of time spent on activities that could not be directly observed. Cost estimates were calculated by converting staff time for performed activities. In the time-motion study, FM and IM practices spent similar time conducting vaccination activities (median = 5 min per vaccination), while OBGYN practices spent more time (median = 29 min per vaccination). Combining results from the time-motion study and the practice management survey, the median costs of vaccination remained similar for FM practices and IM practices at $7 and $8 per vaccination, respectively, but was substantially higher for OBGYN practices at $43 per vaccination. Factors that contributed to higher costs among OBGYN practices were the increased time to counsel patients, administer vaccines, and to plan and manage vaccine supplies. In addition, 68% of OBGYN patients who were offered and counseled to receive vaccines declined to receive them. Counseling patients who ultimately do not go on to receive a vaccine may be an important cost factor. Lower costs of vaccination services may be achieved by increasing efficiencies in workflow or the volume of vaccinations.