Use of sotrovimab in vaccinated versus unvaccinated COVID-19 patients in a resource-limited emergency department during the omicron surge.

Objective: The treatment of outpatient COVID-19 patients at high risk of disease progression has been challenging, as both the virus and available therapeutics change. Here, we sought to evaluate the effect of vaccination status on the use of sotrovimab during the early phase of the Omicron surge. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study performed at El Centro Regional Medical Center, a rural hospital on the southern Californian border. The electronic medical record was queried for all emergency department (ED) patients who received an infusion of sotrovimab between January 6 and February 6, 2022. We obtained patient demographics, COVID-19 vaccination status, medical comorbidities, and whether patients returned to the ED within 30 days. We stratified our cohort according to vaccination status and performed a multivariable logistic regression model to evaluate the relationship between these factors. Results: One hundred seventy patients received an infusion of sotrovimab in the ED. The patient cohort had a median age of 65 years, 78.2% were Hispanic, and obesity (63.5%) was the most common comorbidity. A total of 73.5% of patients were vaccinated against COVID-19. A total of 12/125 (9.6%) of vaccinated patients returned to the ED within 30 days, versus 10/45 (22.2%) in the unvaccinated cohort, which was statically significant (P = 0.03). The presence of medical comorbidities was not associated with the primary outcome. Conclusion: Of patients who received sotrovimab, those who were vaccinated were less likely to return to the ED within 30 days compared to those who were unvaccinated. Given the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, and with the emergence of new variants, it is unclear what role monoclonal antibody therapy should play in the treatment of outpatient COVID-19 patients.

Implementing a Peer Advocate Mental Health Digital Intervention Program for Ohio Youth: Descriptive Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, millions of adolescents report poor mental health, where 1 in 5 teenagers considers suicide. Reducing stigma and fostering peer support remains critical for positive mental health interventions and programs. Increasingly, digital mental health tools have emerged with great promise, leveraging social networks. Despite the potential, limited understanding of such comprehensive programs and their implementation exist. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study investigates a piloted digital mental health training program (Be Present) for youth, specifically describing the impact on youth behavioral outcomes and user engagement and identifying high-risk youth in the early phases of prevention. METHODS: Eligibility included Ohio residents (aged 14 to 22 years) to be enrolled as either a Friend or a Peer Advocate. From May 1 to June 1, 2019, participants completed the Advocate training course, taking pretest and posttest surveys. Single-arm descriptive analyses measured youth outcomes (self-efficacy, intentions, behaviors, social support, knowledge, and sources of strength) and engagement and assessed risk based on survey responses. RESULTS: A total of 65 adolescents participated, with 54 completing both pretest and posttest surveys. The majority of participants included non-Hispanic White females. Findings illustrated a significant increase in self-report of referrals for mental health services as well as in perceptions that youth had of experiencing social support; however, no significant differences were found for measures of self-efficacy, knowledge, and sources of strength between pretest and posttest surveys. Roughly two-thirds of the participants completed all of the Advocate training modules, and we observed a gradual decline in engagement. Most respondents who received escalated high-risk response messages identified as female. CONCLUSIONS: The pilot presented promise for implementing a digital mental health program focused on peer support, specifically observing reported youth behavioral outcomes and user engagement and identifying high-risk youth. Various limitations exist given the small nonrepresentative sample and lack of control group. All findings should be considered preliminary to a larger trial and underscore the feasibility of delivering online training programs to bolster adolescent mental health. Such formative evaluation proved critical for future implementation and research, offering opportunity for substantial improvements for real-world digital mental health programs.

Dissemination of Information About Climate Change by State and Local Public Health Departments: United States, 2019-2020.

Objectives. To determine if and how state and local public health departments present information about climate change on their Web sites, their most public-facing platform.Methods. We collected data from every functioning state (n = 50), county (n = 2090), and city (n = 585) public health department Web site in the United States in 2019 and 2020. We analyzed data for presence and type of climate-related content and to determine whether there existed clear ways to find climate change information. We analyzed Web sites providing original content about climate change for explanatory or attributional language.Results. Fewer than half (40%) of state health department Web sites, and only 1.6% of county and 3.9% of city Web sites, provided clear ways to find climate change information, whether through provision of original content or links to external agencies' Web sites. Among Web sites providing original content, 48% provided no explanation of climate change causes.Conclusions. National and global public health associations have identified climate change as a public health emergency, but most state and local public health departments are not delivering that message. These departments must be better supported to facilitate dissemination of reliable, scientific information about climate change and its effects on health.

Using Telehealth for Hospice Reauthorization Visits: Results of a Quality Improvement Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Increasing hospice need, a growing shortage of hospice providers, and concerns about in-person services because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) require hospices to innovate care delivery. MEASURES: This project compared outcomes between hospice reauthorization visits conducted via telehealth and in person. After each visit, providers, patients, and caregivers completed telehealth acceptance surveys, and providers recorded reauthorization recommendations. INTERVENTION: Providers conducted 88 concurrent in-person and telehealth visits between June and November 2019. OUTCOMES: No statistically significant differences in reauthorization recommendations were found between telehealth and in-person visits. Satisfaction with telehealth was high; 88% of patients/caregivers and 78% of providers found telehealth services as effective as in-person visits. CONCLUSIONS/LESSONS LEARNED: Results indicate that telehealth can successfully support clinical decision making for hospice reauthorization. These findings show telehealth to be reliable and acceptable for certain types of hospice care even before COVID-19, which emphasizes its importance both during and after the current public health emergency.