COVID-19 vaccine uptake among non-US-born populations in the United States, 2020-2022.

BACKGROUND: In the United States (US), COVID-19 vaccination rates among non-US-born individuals (i.e., refugees, immigrants, and migrants [RIM]) are variable. Understanding baseline COVID-19 vaccine coverage among these populations and determining if disparities exist is essential for quality improvement initiatives and public health interventions. METHODS: Baseline COVID-19 vaccination rates for both primary series and booster doses were calculated at four health systems located in Minnesota, Colorado, and Pennsylvania participating in the Minnesota Department of Health's Center of Excellence in Newcomer Health. Patients aged ≥5 years as of 1/1/22, seen for ≥1 primary care visit during 7/1/2019-6/30/22 were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for three measures of COVID-19 vaccine coverage during 12/14/2020-6/30/2022: 1) initiation of primary series; 2) completion of primary series; 3) completion of first booster. We calculated vaccine coverage rates for the entire population and stratified by subgroup including country of origin, refugee status, and primary language preference. RESULTS: We included 1,624,573 patients eligible for COVID-19 primary series vaccine and 907,749 eligible for COVID-19 booster vaccination. The percent of eligible patients who completed a COVID-19 primary series (63.4 %) and booster dose (66.2 %) were similar. Completion of the primary series was higher for non-US-born persons (72.7 %) compared with US born persons (65.4 %), similar among refugees (63.5 %) and non-refugees (63.4 %), and lower in patients with language preference other than English (62.7 %) compared with English preferring patients (63.6 %). Booster completion was lower for non-US-born persons (61.8 %), refugees (46.7 %), and patients with language preference other than English (55.3 %) compared with US-born (70 %), non-refugees (66.3 %), and English preferring patients (67.3 %) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation identified disparities in COVID-19 vaccination rates among non-US-born persons and persons with a language preference other than English living in the US. Targeted outreach efforts may be beneficial in reaching these populations.

Integration of Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) in Primary Care Settings.

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) has been shown to improve food and economic security, advance health and educational outcomes, and reduce health costs. Despite proven benefits, 54% of those eligible for WIC in Denver County are not enrolled, likely due to documented barriers including stigma, psychological costs, administrative resources, and physical access. In partnership with Denver County WIC, Denver Health's Federally Qualified Health Centers collaborated to create a Specialized WIC Co-Enrollment program to integrate WIC services into pediatric well-child and obstetric visits. WIC Co-Enrollment programmatic data were collected using a REDCap database. Program participant feedback and experiences were gathered through a bilingual survey after visits were completed. Program staff feedback and experiences were collected through third-party interviews and anonymous surveys. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inductive thematic analysis. Between March 2021 and December 2022, 1,870 families were served in Specialized WIC Co-Enrollment appointments, serving a total of 3,347 individuals. Participants noted positive experiences and that receiving WIC services during healthcare visits saved them time, money, childcare, and transportation. Staff and providers noted the program was convenient for families and offered system-level benefits such as improved interprofessional collaboration and clinic efficiency. Specialized WIC Co-Enrollment has been popular among participants, providers, and staff. Integrating WIC services in a health system leverages existing touchpoints with Medicaid beneficiaries and eliminates barriers to accessing the WIC program, which could be beneficial in other communities where assistance program enrollment gaps exist.

Increasing COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage for Newcomer Communities: The Importance of Disaggregation by Language.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected refugee, immigrant, and migrant populations. Vaccines are essential for decreasing transmission and severity of COVID-19 infection. Understanding differences in vaccination coverage based on preferred language is crucial for focusing efforts to decrease COVID-19-related disparities. Four sites in the Minnesota Center of Excellence in Newcomer Health collaboratively evaluated completion of primary COVID-19 vaccination series on or before December 31, 2021, for patients who were 12 years or older on June 30, 2021, by preferred language. The non-English/non-Spanish speaking population included 46,714 patients who spoke 174 languages; COVID-19 vaccination coverage by language ranged from 26.2% to 88.0%. Stratifying vaccination coverage by specific language is a critical first step toward dismantling disparities and shaping interventions that best meet the needs of communities served.

Disproportionate Incidence of COVID-19 Infection, Hospitalizations, and Deaths Among Persons Identifying as Hispanic or Latino - Denver, Colorado March-October 2020.

Persons identifying as Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) represent the second largest racial/ethnic group in the United States (1), yet understanding of the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in this population is limited. To evaluate COVID-19 health disparities in the community and inform public health, health system, and community-based interventions, local public health authorities analyzed the sociodemographic characteristics of persons who were diagnosed, hospitalized, and who died with COVID-19 in Denver, Colorado. During the first 7 months of the COVID-19 epidemic in Denver (March 6-October 6, 2020) the majority of adult COVID-19 cases (54.8%), hospitalizations (62.1%), and deaths (51.2%) were among persons identifying as Hispanic, more than double the proportion of Hispanic adults in the Denver community (24.9%) (1). Systemic drivers that influence how Hispanic persons live and work increase their exposure risks: compared with non-Hispanic persons, Hispanic persons with COVID-19 in Denver reported larger household sizes and were more likely to report known exposures to household and close contacts with COVID-19, working in an essential industry, and working while ill. Reducing the disproportionate incidence of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among Hispanic persons will require implementation of strategies that address upstream social and environmental factors that contribute to an increased risk for both infection and transmission and that facilitate improved access to culturally congruent care.

Housing Quality and Mental Health: the Association between Pest Infestation and Depressive Symptoms among Public Housing Residents.

Housing quality, which includes structural and environmental risks, has been associated with multiple physical health outcomes including injury and asthma. Cockroach and mouse infestations can be prime manifestations of diminished housing quality. While the respiratory health effects of pest infestation are well documented, little is known about the association between infestation and mental health outcomes. To address this gap in knowledge and given the potential to intervene to reduce pest infestation, we assessed the association between household pest infestation and symptoms of depression among public housing residents. We conducted a cross-sectional study in 16 Boston Housing Authority (BHA) developments from 2012 to 2014 in Boston, Massachusetts. Household units were randomly selected and one adult (n = 461) from each unit was surveyed about depressive symptoms using the Center for Epidemiologic Study-Depression (CES-D) Scale, and about pest infestation and management practices. In addition, a home inspection for pests was performed. General linear models were used to model the association between pest infestation and high depressive symptoms. After adjusting for important covariates, individuals who lived in homes with current cockroach infestation had almost three times the odds of experiencing high depressive symptoms (adjusted OR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.9-4.4) than those without infestation. Dual infestation (cockroach and mouse) was associated with over five times the odds (adjusted odds = 5.1, 95% CI 3.0-8.5) of experiencing high depressive symptoms. Using a robust measure of cockroach and mouse infestation, and a validated depression screener, we identified associations between current infestation and depressive symptoms. Although the temporal directionality of this association remains uncertain, these findings suggest that the health impact of poor housing conditions extend beyond physical health to include mental health. The study adds important information to the growing body of evidence that housing contributes to population health and improvements in population health may not be possible without addressing deficiencies in the housing infrastructure.

For Low-Income Americans, Living ≤1 Mile (≤1.6 km) from the Nearest Supermarket Is Not Associated with Self-Reported Household Food Security.

Background: Motivated by concern over lack of access to nutritious food in low-income neighborhoods, healthy food financing initiatives have encouraged the introduction of new supermarkets. Extensive research on the association between the food retail environment and nutrition outcomes has shown mixed results. There has been less research specifically on food security outcomes. Objective: We assessed the association between multiple food environment measures and food security for low-income US households. Methods: By using the USDA's nationally representative 2012-2013 Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (FoodAPS; n = 4826 households), which provides unique information about neighborhood- and household-level food retailer access, we quantified cross-sectional associations between food environment characteristics and household-level outcomes, with and without regression controls. Logistic regression analysis was used for binary household food security outcomes. Results: Most households bypassed the nearest retailer to select a primary retailer farther from home. For low-income households, distance to the nearest supermarket and to the primary retailer was not associated with food security. In comparison to shopping with households' own automobile, the odds of being food secure were lower for households that used another automobile (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.90) or other transportation (OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.17, 0.61) to reach the primary retailer. Conclusions: Having a closest supermarket ≤1 mile from home was not associated with household food security. In contrast, the mode of transportation used to access the primary retailer was associated with household food security. In future research, it may be valuable to not only focus on the distance to the nearest supermarket but to investigate the qualities of the food retail environment at distances >1 mile that are most strongly associated with food security outcomes.