Seroincidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to and during the rollout of vaccines in a community-based prospective cohort of U.S. adults.

This study used repeat serologic testing to estimate infection rates and risk factors in two overlapping cohorts of SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative U.S. adults. One mostly unvaccinated sub-cohort was tracked from April 2020 to March 2021 (pre-vaccine/wild-type era, n = 3421), and the other, mostly vaccinated cohort, from March 2021 to June 2022 (vaccine/variant era, n = 2735). Vaccine uptake was 0.53% and 91.3% in the pre-vaccine and vaccine/variant cohorts, respectively. Corresponding seroconversion rates were 9.6 and 25.7 per 100 person-years. In both cohorts, sociodemographic and epidemiologic risk factors for infection were similar, though new risk factors emerged in the vaccine/variant era, such as having a child in the household. Despite higher incidence rates in the vaccine/variant cohort, vaccine boosters, masking, and social distancing were associated with substantially reduced infection risk, even through major variant surges.

Safety, Efficacy, and Ill Intent: Examining COVID-19 Vaccine Perceptions among the New Undervaccinated Moveable Middle in a U.S. Cohort, October 2022.

Individuals who received their primary vaccine series only (with no subsequent booster) may be a new type of "moveable middle" given their receipt of the original COVID-19 vaccination. One population within the moveable middle for whom tailored interventions may be needed is individuals with common mental disorders (CMD). The purpose of this paper is to understand the vaccine perceptions among this new moveable middle-the undervaccinated-and within the undervaccinated to examine the extent to which COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and motivations differ among those with and without symptoms of CMD. Using data from the CHASING COVID Cohort, we examine the relationship between vaccination status, CMD, and vaccine perceptions in the undervaccinated. Among 510 undervaccinated participants who had completed the primary vaccine series but were not boosted, the most common reasons for undervaccination focused on efficacy (not seeing a need for an additional dose, 42.4%; there not being enough evidence that a booster dose is effective, 26.5%; already having had COVID-19, 19.6%). Other concerns were related to safety (long-term side effects, 21.0%; short-term side effects, 17.6%) and logistics (plan to get a booster but haven't had time yet, 18.8%). Overall, the greatest vaccine concerns (over 30%) for the undervaccinated focused on efficacy and safety issues. Symptoms of depression or anxiety were associated with lower levels of vaccine efficacy and greater safety concerns in adjusted models. The implications of our study are that campaigns that are hoping to maximize vaccination uptake should consider focusing on and emphasizing messaging on efficacy and safety issues.

Seroincidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to and during the rollout of vaccines in a community-based prospective cohort of U.S. adults.

Background: Infectious disease surveillance systems, which largely rely on diagnosed cases, underestimate the true incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, due to under-ascertainment and underreporting. We used repeat serologic testing to measure N-protein seroconversion in a well-characterized cohort of U.S. adults with no serologic evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection to estimate the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and characterize risk factors, with comparisons before and after the start of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and variant eras. Methods: We assessed the incidence rate of infection and risk factors in two sub-groups (cohorts) that were SARS-CoV-2 N-protein seronegative at the start of each follow-up period: 1) the pre-vaccine/wild-type era cohort (n=3,421), followed from April to November 2020; and 2) the vaccine/variant era cohort (n=2,735), followed from November 2020 to June 2022. Both cohorts underwent repeat serologic testing with an assay for antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 N protein (Bio-Rad Platelia SARS-CoV-2 total Ab). We estimated crude incidence and sociodemographic/epidemiologic risk factors in both cohorts. We used multivariate Poisson models to compare the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the pre-vaccine/wild-type era cohort (referent group) to that in the vaccine/variant era cohort, within strata of vaccination status and epidemiologic risk factors (essential worker status, child in the household, case in the household, social distancing). Findings: In the pre-vaccine/wild-type era cohort, only 18 of the 3,421 participants (0.53%) had ≥1 vaccine dose by the end of follow-up, compared with 2,497/2,735 (91.3%) in the vaccine/variant era cohort. We observed 323 and 815 seroconversions in the pre-vaccine/wild-type era and the vaccine/variant era and cohorts, respectively, with corresponding incidence rates of 9.6 (95% CI: 8.3-11.5) and 25.7 (95% CI: 24.2-27.3) per 100 person-years. Associations of sociodemographic and epidemiologic risk factors with SARS-CoV-2 incidence were largely similar in the pre-vaccine/wild-type and vaccine/variant era cohorts. However, some new epidemiologic risk factors emerged in the vaccine/variant era cohort, including having a child in the household, and never wearing a mask while using public transit. Adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR), with the entire pre-vaccine/wild-type era cohort as the referent group, showed markedly higher incidence in the vaccine/variant era cohort, but with more vaccine doses associated with lower incidence: aIRRun/undervaccinated=5.3 (95% CI: 4.2-6.7); aIRRprimary series only=5.1 (95% CI: 4.2-7.3); aIRRboosted once=2.5 (95% CI: 2.1-3.0), and aIRRboosted twice=1.65 (95% CI: 1.3-2.1). These associations were essentially unchanged in risk factor-stratified models. Interpretation: In SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative individuals, large increases in incidence and newly emerging epidemiologic risk factors in the vaccine/variant era likely resulted from multiple co-occurring factors, including policy changes, behavior changes, surges in transmission, and changes in SARS-CoV-2 variant properties. While SARS-CoV-2 incidence increased markedly in most groups in the vaccine/variant era, being up to date on vaccines and the use of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), such as masking and social distancing, remained reliable strategies to mitigate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, even through major surges due to immune evasive variants. Repeat serologic testing in cohort studies is a useful and complementary strategy to characterize SARS-CoV-2 incidence and risk factors.

Impact of an HIV Care Coordination Program on the Timeliness of Viral Suppression and Immune Recovery Among Clients Newly Diagnosed with HIV.

We compared the time to immune recovery and viral suppression (VS) among people newly diagnosed with HIV who enrolled in the HIV Care Coordination Program (CCP), a comprehensive medical case management program, with a propensity matched group of newly diagnosed people who did not enroll. CCP enrollees had more rapid VS (≤ 200 copies/mL) [hazards ratio (HR) 1.17; 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.34] but no more rapid immune recovery (≥ two successive CD4 counts > 500 cells/mm3) (HR 0.98; 0.84-1.13). Relative to usual care, the CCP may expedite VS (though not immune recovery) for newly diagnosed HIV patients and therefore lower forward transmission risk.

Impact of an HIV Care Coordination Program on Durable Viral Suppression.

BACKGROUND: To assess long-term effectiveness of an intensive and comprehensive Ryan White Part A-funded HIV Care Coordination Program recruiting people living with HIV with a history of suboptimal HIV care outcomes. METHODS: We merged programmatic data on CCP clients with surveillance data on all adults diagnosed with HIV. Using propensity score matching, we identified a contemporaneous, non-CCP-exposed comparison group. Durable viral suppression (DVS) was defined as regular viral load (VL) monitoring and all VLs ≤200 copies per milliliter in months 13-36 of follow-up. RESULTS: Ninety percent of the combined cohort (N = 12,414) had ≥1 VL ≤200 during the follow-up period (December 1, 2009-March 31, 2016), and nearly all had routine VL monitoring, but only 36.8% had DVS. Although DVS did not differ overall (relative risk: 0.99, 95% confidence interval: 0.95 to 1.03), CCP clients without any VL suppression (VLS) in the 12-month pre-enrollment showed higher DVS versus "usual care" recipients (21.3% versus 18.4%; relative risk: 1.16, 95% confidence interval: 1.04 to 1.29). CONCLUSIONS: Enrollment in an intensive intervention modestly improved DVS among those unsuppressed before CCP enrollment. This program shows promise for meeting treatment-as-prevention goals and advancing progress along the HIV care continuum, if people without evidence of VLS are prioritized for CCP enrollment over those with recent evidence of VLS. Low overall DVS (<40%) levels underscore a need for focused adherence maintenance interventions, in a context of high treatment access.

Short-term effectiveness of HIV care coordination among persons with recent HIV diagnosis or history of poor HIV outcomes.

The New York City HIV Care Coordination Program (CCP) combines multiple evidence-based strategies to support persons living with HIV (PLWH) at risk for, or with a recent history of, poor HIV outcomes. We assessed the comparative effectiveness of the CCP by merging programmatic data on CCP clients with population-based surveillance data on all New York City PLWH. A non-CCP comparison group of similar PLWH who met CCP eligibility criteria was identified using surveillance data. The CCP and non-CCP groups were matched on propensity for CCP enrollment within four baseline treatment status groups (newly diagnosed or previously diagnosed and either consistently unsuppressed, inconsistently suppressed or consistently suppressed). We compared CCP to non-CCP proportions with viral load suppression at 12-month follow-up. Among the 13,624 persons included, 15∙3% were newly diagnosed; among the 84∙7% previously diagnosed, 14∙2% were consistently suppressed, 28∙9% were inconsistently suppressed, and 41∙6% were consistently unsuppressed in the year prior to baseline. At 12-month follow-up, 59∙9% of CCP and 53∙9% of non-CCP participants had viral load suppression (Relative Risk = 1.11, 95%CI:1.08-1.14). Among those newly diagnosed and those consistently unsuppressed at baseline, the relative risk of viral load suppression in the CCP versus non-CCP participants was 1.15 (95%CI:1.09-1.23) and 1.32 (95%CI:1.23-1.42), respectively. CCP exposure shows benefits over no CCP exposure for persons newly diagnosed or consistently unsuppressed, but not for persons suppressed in the year prior to baseline. We recommend more targeted case finding for CCP enrollment and increased attention to viral load suppression maintenance.

Using Registry Data to Construct a Comparison Group for Programmatic Effectiveness Evaluation: The New York City HIV Care Coordination Program.

Many nonrandomized interventions rely upon a pre-post design to evaluate effectiveness. Such designs cannot account for events external to the intervention that may produce the outcome. We describe a method to construct a surveillance registry-based comparison group, which allows for estimating the effectiveness of the intervention while controlling for secular trends in the outcome of interest. Using data from the population-based, human immunodeficiency virus Surveillance Registry in New York City, we created a contemporaneous comparison group for persons enrolled in the New York City human immunodeficiency virus Care Coordination Program (CCP) from December 2009 to March 2013. Inclusion in the Registry-based (non-CCP) comparison group required meeting CCP eligibility criteria. To control for secular trends in the outcome, we randomly assigned persons in the non-CCP, Registry-based comparison group a pseudoenrollment date such that the distribution of pseudoenrollment dates matched the distribution of enrollment dates among CCP enrollees. We then matched CCP to non-CCP persons on propensity for enrollment in the CCP, enrollment dates, and baseline viral load. Registry-based comparison group estimates were attenuated relative to pre-post estimates of program effectiveness. These methods have broad applicability for observational intervention effectiveness studies and programmatic evaluations for conditions with surveillance registries.

Psychometric properties of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form in an ethnically diverse U.K. sample.

OBJECTIVE: To psychometrically assess the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF) among a multicultural U.K. sample and to examine the relationship between breastfeeding self-efficacy and maternal demographic variables. DESIGN: A cohort study where breastfeeding women completed questionnaires in-hospital and at 4 weeks postpartum. SAMPLE: 165 breastfeeding women at the maternity ward in Birmingham Women's Hospital inpatient department. MEASUREMENTS: BSES-SF. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha co-efficient was .90 and evidence for predictive validity was demonstrated through exclusively breastfeeding mothers at 4 weeks postpartum having significantly higher in-hospital BSES-SF scores (M=49.4, SD=12.9) than mothers who were partially breastfeeding (M=44.7, SD=9.5) or bottle-feeding, M=42.4, SD=11.7; F(2)=1.62, p<.001. Caucasian mothers had significantly lower mean scores (M=44.4, SD=12.1) than those of other ethnicity, M=48.4, SD=12.9, t(163)=-2.06, p=.04. CONCLUSIONS: This study builds upon previous research and provides additional evidence suggesting that the BSES-SF has sound psychometric properties and can be utilized among diverse samples, including Southeast Asian mothers.