Reminders, but not monetary incentives, increase COVID-19 booster uptake.

Despite substantially decreasing the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19, COVID-19 booster vaccination rates remain low around the world. A key question for public health agencies is how to increase booster vaccination rates, particularly among high-risk groups. We conducted a large preregistered randomized controlled trial (with 57,893 study subjects) in a county health system in northern California to test the impact of personal reminder messages and small financial incentives of $25 on booster vaccination rates. We found that reminders increased booster vaccination rates within 2 wk by 0.86 percentage points (P = 0.000) or nearly 33% off the control mean of 2.65%. Monetary incentives had no additional impact on vaccination rates. The results highlight the potential of low-cost targeted messages, but not small financial incentives, to increase booster vaccination rates.

Can financial incentives and other nudges increase COVID-19 vaccinations among the vaccine hesitant? A randomized trial.

Despite rapid initial uptake, COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States stalled within a few months of widespread rollout in 2021. In response, many state and local governments, employers and health systems used public health messaging, financial incentives and creative scheduling tools to increase vaccine uptake. Although these approaches drew on evidence from influenza and other vaccination efforts, they were largely untested in the context of SARS-CoV-2. In mid-2021, months after vaccines were widely available, we evaluated vaccination intentions and vaccine uptake using a randomized control trial. To do this, we recruited unvaccinated members of a Medicaid managed care plan in California (n = 2,701) and randomly assigned them to different public health messages, $10 or $50 financial incentives for vaccination, a simple vaccination appointment scheduler, or control. While messages increased vaccination intentions, none of the interventions increased vaccination rates. Estimates for financial incentives rule out even relatively small increases in vaccination rates. Small financial incentives and other behavioral nudges do not meaningfully increase COVID-19 vaccination rates amongst the vaccine hesitant.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in SARS-CoV-2 Testing and COVID-19 Outcomes in a Medicaid Managed Care Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Socioeconomic differences may confound racial and ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 testing and COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of racial/ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 testing and positive tests and COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths among adults impaneled at a Northern California regional medical center and enrolled in the county Medicaid managed care plan (N=84,346) as of March 1, 2020. Logistic regressions adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and neighborhood characteristics. RESULTS: Nearly 30% of enrollees were ever tested for SARS-CoV-2, and 4% tested positive. A total of 19.7 per 10,000 were hospitalized for and 9.4 per 10,000 died of COVID-19. Those identified as Asian, Black, or of other/unknown race had lower testing rates, whereas those identified as Latino had higher testing rates than Whites. Enrollees of Asian or other/unknown race had slightly higher odds of a positive test, and Latinos had much higher odds of a positive test (OR=3.77, 95% CI=3.41, 4.17) than Whites. The odds of hospitalization (OR=2.85, 95% CI=1.85, 4.40) and death (OR=4.75, 95% CI=2.23, 10.12) were higher for Latino than for White patients, even after adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and neighborhood characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In a Medicaid managed care population, where socioeconomic differences may be reduced, the odds of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, COVID-19 hospitalization, and COVID-19 death were higher for Latino but not Black patients than for White patients. Racial/ethnic disparities depend on local context. The substantially higher risk facing Latinos should be a key consideration in California's strategies to mitigate disease transmission and harm.

Evaluation of a microkeratome-based limbal harvester device for limbal stem cell transplantation.

PURPOSE: To assess the cut quality and reproducibility using a novel microkeratome-based limbal harvester. METHODS: An enlarged microkeratome head and stainless steel blades were coupled with a nitrogen gas-driven turbine (15,000 blade oscillations/min) of a microkeratome. A large, 16-mm-diameter suction ring was attached to the globe. A lamellar sclerokeratectomy using head depths of 170 and 200 microm was performed in human donor research eyes. Obtained lenticule thickness was measured by ultrasound pachymetry and the bed size by planimetry. Histologic and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analyses of the samples were performed. RESULTS: Central lenticule thickness was 294 microm (standard deviation [SD] 37) for the 170 head and 277 microm (SD 91) for the 200 head (p = 0.720). Lenticule diameter was larger in the horizontal meridian using the 170 head (12.8 mm [SD 0.8] vs. 11.9 mm [SD 0.7], p = 0.028), but similar in vertical meridian (12.0 [SD 0.6] versus 11.4 mm [SD 0.6], p = 0.093). Histology showed a multilayer epithelial cell pattern at the lenticule periphery. The SEM showed a smooth cut surface in both the stromal bed and the lenticule. CONCLUSION: Cut reproducibility and quality are similar to those found using standard microkeratomes for corneal lamellar cuts. This system ensures, in a straightforward way, the presence of epithelial cells in the edges of a mechanical sclerokeratectomy for limbal stem cell transplantation.