Deployment of the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System during the 2022-23 mpox outbreak in the United States-Opportunities and challenges with case notifications during public health emergencies.

Timely case notifications following the introduction of an uncommon pathogen, such as mpox, are critical for understanding disease transmission and for developing and implementing effective mitigation strategies. When Massachusetts public health officials notified the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) about a confirmed orthopoxvirus case on May 17, 2023, which was later confirmed as mpox at CDC, mpox was not a nationally notifiable disease. Because existing processes for new data collections through the National Notifiable Disease Surveillance System were not well suited for implementation during emergency responses at the time of the mpox outbreak, several interim notification approaches were established to capture case data. These interim approaches were successful in generating daily case counts, monitoring disease transmission, and identifying high-risk populations. However, the approaches also required several data collection approvals by the federal government and the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists, the use of four different case report forms, and the establishment of complex data management and validation processes involving data element mapping and record-level de-duplication steps. We summarize lessons learned from these interim approaches to inform and improve case notifications during future outbreaks. These lessons reinforce CDC's Data Modernization Initiative to work in close collaboration with state, territorial, and local public health departments to strengthen case-based surveillance prior to the next public health emergency.

Hepatitis B Care Continuum Models-Data to Inform Public Health Action.

The application of a care continuum model (CCM) can identify gaps in diagnosis, care, and treatment of populations with a common condition, but challenges are inherent in developing a CCM for chronic hepatitis B. In contrast with treatment for HIV or hepatitis C, treatment is not indicated for all people with chronic hepatitis B, clinical endpoints are not clear for those receiving treatment, and those for whom treatment is not indicated remain at risk for complications. This topical review examines the data elements necessary to develop and apply chronic hepatitis B CCMs at the jurisdictional health department level. We conducted a nonsystematic review of US-based publications in Ovid MEDLINE (1946-present), Ovid Embase (1974-present), and Scopus (not date limited) databases, which yielded 724 publications for review. Jurisdictional health departments, if properly supported, could develop locale-specific focused CCMs using person-level chronic hepatitis B registries, updated longitudinally using electronic laboratory reporting data and case reporting data. These CCMs could be applied to identify disparities and improve rates in testing and access to care and treatment, which are necessary to reduce liver disease and chronic hepatitis B mortality. Investments in public health surveillance infrastructure, including substantial enhancements in electronic laboratory reporting and case reporting and the use of supplementary data sources, could enable jurisdictional health departments to develop modified CCMs for chronic hepatitis B that focus, at least initially, on "early" CCM steps, which emphasize optimization of hepatitis B diagnosis, linkage to care, and ongoing clinical follow-up of diagnosed people, all of which can lead to improved outcomes.

Rate and durability of the clearance of HBsAg in Alaska Native persons with long-term HBV infection: 1982-2019.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A functional cure and therapeutic end point of chronic HBV infection is defined as the clearance of HBsAg from serum. Little is known about the long-term durability of HBsAg loss in the Alaskan Native population. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Alaska Native patients with chronic HBV-monoinfection from January 1982 through December 2019. The original group in this cohort was identified during a 1982 to 1987 population-based screening for 3 HBV serologic markers in 53,000 Alaska Native persons. With close to 32,000 years of follow-up, we assessed the frequency and duration of HBsAg seroclearance (HBsAg-negative for > 6 mo). We examined factors associated with HBsAg clearance and followed persons for a median of 13.1 years afterward to assess the durability of HBsAg clearance. Among 1079 persons with an average length of follow-up of 33 years, 260 (24%) cleared HBsAg at a constant rate of 0.82% per person/per year. Of the 260 persons who cleared, 249 (96%) remained HBsAg-negative, while 11 persons had ≥ 2 transient HBsAg-positive results in subsequent follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Of the patients with chronic HBV monoinfection, 0.82% of people per year achieved a functional cure. HBsAg seroclearance was durable for treated and nontreated patients and lasted, on average, over 13 years without seroreversion.

Screening and Testing for Hepatitis B Virus Infection: CDC Recommendations - United States, 2023.

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection can lead to substantial morbidity and mortality. Although treatment is not considered curative, antiviral treatment, monitoring, and liver cancer surveillance can reduce morbidity and mortality. Effective vaccines to prevent hepatitis B are available. This report updates and expands CDC's previously published Recommendations for Identification and Public Health Management of Persons with Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Infection (MMWR Recomm Rep 2008;57[No. RR-8]) regarding screening for HBV infection in the United States. New recommendations include hepatitis B screening using three laboratory tests at least once during a lifetime for adults aged ≥18 years. The report also expands risk-based testing recommendations to include the following populations, activities, exposures, or conditions associated with increased risk for HBV infection: persons incarcerated or formerly incarcerated in a jail, prison, or other detention setting; persons with a history of sexually transmitted infections or multiple sex partners; and persons with a history of hepatitis C virus infection. In addition, to provide increased access to testing, anyone who requests HBV testing should receive it, regardless of disclosure of risk, because many persons might be reluctant to disclose stigmatizing risks.

Relative Effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination and Booster Dose Combinations Among 18.9 Million Vaccinated Adults During the Early Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Omicron Period-United States, 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2022.

BACKGROUND: Small sample sizes have limited prior studies' ability to capture severe COVID-19 outcomes, especially among Ad26.COV2.S vaccine recipients. This study of 18.9 million adults aged ≥18 years assessed relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) in three recipient cohorts: (1) primary Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and Ad26.COV2.S booster (2 Ad26.COV2.S), (2) primary Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and mRNA booster (Ad26.COV2.S+mRNA), (3) two doses of primary mRNA vaccine and mRNA booster (3 mRNA). METHODS: We analyzed two de-identified datasets linked using privacy-preserving record linkage (PPRL): insurance claims and retail pharmacy COVID-19 vaccination data. We assessed the presence of COVID-19 diagnosis during January 1-March 31, 2022 in: (1) any claim, (2) outpatient claim, (3) emergency department (ED) claim, (4) inpatient claim, and (5) inpatient claim with intensive care unit (ICU) admission. rVE for each outcome comparing three recipient cohorts (reference: two Ad26.COV2.S doses) was estimated from adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Compared with two Ad26.COV2.S doses, Ad26.COV2.S+mRNA and three mRNA doses were more effective against all COVID-19 outcomes, including 57% (95% CI: 52-62) and 62% (95% CI: 58-65) rVE against an ED visit; 44% (95% CI: 34-52) and 54% (95% CI: 48-59) rVE against hospitalization; and 48% (95% CI: 22-66) and 66% (95% CI: 53-75) rVE against ICU admission, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that Ad26.COV2.S + mRNA doses were as good as three doses of mRNA, and better than two doses of Ad26.COV2.S. Vaccination continues to be an important preventive measure for reducing the public health impact of COVID-19.

Association between thromboembolic events and COVID-19 infection within 30 days: a case-control study among a large sample of adult hospitalized patients in the United States, March 2020-June 2021.

The association between thromboembolic events (TE) and COVID-19 infection is not completely understood at the population level in the United States. We examined their association using a large US healthcare database. We analyzed data from the Premier Healthcare Database Special COVID-19 Release and conducted a case-control study. The study population consisted of men and non-pregnant women aged ≥ 18 years with (cases) or without (controls) an inpatient ICD-10-CM diagnosis of TE between 3/1/2020 and 6/30/2021. Using multivariable logistic regression, we assessed the association between TE occurrence and COVID-19 diagnosis, adjusting for demographic factors and comorbidities. Among 227,343 cases, 15.2% had a concurrent or prior COVID-19 diagnosis within 30 days of their index TE. Multivariable regression analysis showed a statistically significant association between a COVID-19 diagnosis and TE among cases when compared to controls (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.75, 95% CI 1.72-1.78). The association was more substantial if a COVID-19 diagnosis occurred 1-30 days prior to index hospitalization (aOR 3.00, 95% CI 2.88-3.13) compared to the same encounter as the index hospitalization. Our findings suggest an increased risk of TE among persons within 30 days of being diagnosed COVID-19, highlighting the need for careful consideration of the thrombotic risk among COVID-19 patients, particularly during the first month following diagnosis.

Mortality Risk Among Patients Hospitalized Primarily for COVID-19 During the Omicron and Delta Variant Pandemic Periods - United States, April 2020-June 2022.

The risk for COVID-19-associated mortality increases with age, disability, and underlying medical conditions (1). Early in the emergence of the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients was lower than that during previous pandemic peaks (2-5), and some health authorities reported that a substantial proportion of COVID-19 hospitalizations were not primarily for COVID-19-related illness,* which might account for the lower mortality among hospitalized patients. Using a large hospital administrative database, CDC assessed in-hospital mortality risk overall and by demographic and clinical characteristics during the Delta (July-October 2021), early Omicron (January-March 2022), and later Omicron (April-June 2022) variant periods† among patients hospitalized primarily for COVID-19. Model-estimated adjusted mortality risk differences (aMRDs) (measures of absolute risk) and adjusted mortality risk ratios (aMRRs) (measures of relative risk) for in-hospital death were calculated comparing the early and later Omicron periods with the Delta period. Crude mortality risk (cMR) (deaths per 100 patients hospitalized primarily for COVID-19) was lower during the early Omicron (13.1) and later Omicron (4.9) periods than during the Delta (15.1) period (p<0.001). Adjusted mortality risk was lower during the Omicron periods than during the Delta period for patients aged ≥18 years, males and females, all racial and ethnic groups, persons with and without disabilities, and those with one or more underlying medical conditions, as indicated by significant aMRDs and aMRRs (p<0.05). During the later Omicron period, 81.9% of in-hospital deaths occurred among adults aged ≥65 years and 73.4% occurred among persons with three or more underlying medical conditions. Vaccination, early treatment, and appropriate nonpharmaceutical interventions remain important public health priorities for preventing COVID-19 deaths, especially among persons most at risk.

Declines in the utilization of hospital-based care during COVID-19 pandemic.

The disruptions of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted the delivery and utilization of healthcare services with potential long-term implications for population health and the hospital workforce. Using electronic health record data from over 700 US acute care hospitals, we documented changes in admissions to hospital service areas (inpatient, observation, emergency room [ER], and same-day surgery) during 2019-2020 and examined whether surges of COVID-19 hospitalizations corresponded with increased inpatient disease severity and death rate. We found that in 2020, hospitalizations declined by 50% in April, with greatest declines occurring in same-day surgery (-73%). The youngest patients (0-17) experienced largest declines in ER, observation, and same-day surgery admissions; inpatient admissions declined the most among the oldest patients (65+). Infectious disease admissions increased by 52%. The monthly measures of inpatient case mix index, length of stay, and non-COVID death rate were higher in all months in 2020 compared with respective months in 2019.

Telehealth and Public Health Practice in the United States-Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Telehealth is the use of electronic information and telecommunication technologies to provide care when the patient and the provider are not in the same room at the same time. Telehealth accounted for less than 1% of all Medicare Fee-for-Service outpatient visits in the United States in 2019 but grew to account for 46% of all visits in April 2020. Changes in reimbursement and licensure policies during the COVID-19 pandemic appeared to greatly facilitate this increased use. Telehealth will continue to account for a substantial portion of care provided in the United States and globally. A better understanding of telehealth approaches and their evidence base by public health practitioners may help improve their ability to collaborate with health care organizations to improve population health. The article summarizes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) approach to understanding the evidence base for telehealth in public health practice, possible applications for telehealth in public health practice, and CDC's use of telehealth to improve population health.

Post-COVID-19 Symptoms and Conditions Among Children and Adolescents - United States, March 1, 2020-January 31, 2022.

Post-COVID-19 (post-COVID) symptoms and conditions* are new, recurring, or ongoing health problems that occur 4 or more weeks after infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19). Previous studies have characterized and estimated the incidence of post-COVID conditions among adults (1,2), but data among children and adolescents are limited (3-8). Using a large medical claims database, CDC assessed nine potential post-COVID signs and symptoms (symptoms) and 15 potential post-COVID conditions among 781,419 U.S. children and adolescents aged 0-17 years with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (patients with COVID-19) compared with 2,344,257 U.S. children and adolescents without recognized COVID-19 (patients without COVID-19) during March 1, 2020-January 31, 2022. The analysis identified several symptoms and conditions with elevated adjusted hazard ratios among patients with COVID-19 (compared with those without). The highest hazard ratios were recorded for acute pulmonary embolism (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.01), myocarditis and cardiomyopathy (1.99), venous thromboembolic event (1.87), acute and unspecified renal failure (1.32), and type 1 diabetes (1.23), all of which were rare or uncommon in this study population. Conversely, symptoms and conditions that were most common in this study population had lower aHRs (near or below 1.0). Patients with COVID-19 were less likely than were patients without to experience respiratory signs and symptoms, symptoms of mental conditions, muscle disorders, neurological conditions, anxiety and fear-related disorders, mood disorders, and sleeping disorders. COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination for all eligible children and adolescents, are critical to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent illness, including post-COVID symptoms and conditions (9).

Cardiac Complications After SARS-CoV-2 Infection and mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination - PCORnet, United States, January 2021-January 2022.

Cardiac complications, particularly myocarditis and pericarditis, have been associated with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection (1-3) and mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (2-5). Multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS) is a rare but serious complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection with frequent cardiac involvement (6). Using electronic health record (EHR) data from 40 U.S. health care systems during January 1, 2021-January 31, 2022, investigators calculated incidences of cardiac outcomes (myocarditis; myocarditis or pericarditis; and myocarditis, pericarditis, or MIS) among persons aged ≥5 years who had SARS-CoV-2 infection, stratified by sex (male or female) and age group (5-11, 12-17, 18-29, and ≥30 years). Incidences of myocarditis and myocarditis or pericarditis were calculated after first, second, unspecified, or any (first, second, or unspecified) dose of mRNA COVID-19 (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) vaccines, stratified by sex and age group. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated to compare risk for cardiac outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection to that after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. The incidence of cardiac outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was highest for males aged 12-17 years after the second vaccine dose; however, within this demographic group, the risk for cardiac outcomes was 1.8-5.6 times as high after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after the second vaccine dose. The risk for cardiac outcomes was likewise significantly higher after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after first, second, or unspecified dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination for all other groups by sex and age (RR 2.2-115.2). These findings support continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons aged ≥5 years.

Cost-Effectiveness of Hepatitis B Testing and Vaccination of Adults Seeking Care for Sexually Transmitted Infections.

BACKGROUND: The estimated number of people living with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection acquired through sexual transmission was 103,000 in 2018, with an estimated incidence of 8300 new cases per year. Although hepatitis B (HepB) vaccination is recommended by the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices for persons seeking evaluation and treatment for sexually transmitted infections (STIs), prevaccination testing is not yet recommended. Screening may link persons with chronic hepatitis B to care and reduce unnecessary vaccination. METHODS: We used a Markov model to calculate the health impact and cost-effectiveness of 1-time HBV testing combined with the first dose of the HepB vaccine for adults seeking care for STI. We ran a lifetime, societal perspective analysis for a hypothetical population of 100,000 aged 18 to 69 years. The disease progression estimates were taken from recent cohort studies and meta-analyses. In the United States, an intervention that costs less than $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) is generally considered cost-effective. The strategies that were compared were as follows: (1) vaccination without HBV screening, (2) vaccination and hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) screening, (3) vaccination and screening with HBsAg and anti-HBs, and (4) vaccination and screening with HBsAg, anti-HBs, and anti-HBc. Data were obtained from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid services reimbursement, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccine price list, and additional cost-effectiveness literature. RESULTS: Compared with current recommendations, the addition of 1-time HBV testing is cost-saving and would prevent an additional 138 cases of cirrhosis, 47 cases of decompensated cirrhosis, 90 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma, 33 liver transplants, and 163 HBV-related deaths, and gain 2185 QALYs, per 100,000 adults screened. Screening with the 3-test panel would save $41.6 to $42.7 million per 100,000 adults tested compared with $41.5 to $42.5 million for the 2-test panel and $40.2 to $40.3 million for HBsAg alone. CONCLUSIONS: One-time HBV prevaccination testing in addition to HepB vaccination for unvaccinated adults seeking care for STI would save lives and prevent new infections and unnecessary vaccination, and is cost-saving.

Assessing the Cost-Utility of Universal Hepatitis B Vaccination Among Adults.

BACKGROUND: Although effective against hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, hepatitis B (HepB) vaccination is only recommended for infants, children, and adults at higher risk. We conducted an economic evaluation of universal HepB vaccination among US adults. METHODS: Using a decision analytic model with Markov disease progression, we compared current vaccination recommendations (baseline) with either 3-dose or 2-dose universal HepB vaccination (intervention strategies). In simulated modeling of 1 million adults distributed by age and risk groups, we quantified health benefits (quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) and costs for each strategy. Multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analyses identified key inputs. All costs reported in 2019 US dollars. RESULTS: With incremental base-case vaccination coverage up to 50% among persons at lower risk and 0% increment among persons at higher risk, each of 2 intervention strategies averted nearly one-quarter of acute HBV infections (3-dose strategy, 24.8%; 2-dose strategy, 24.6%). Societal incremental cost per QALY gained of $152 722 (interquartile range, $119 113-$235 086) and $155 429 (interquartile range, $120 302-$242 226) were estimated for 3-dose and 2-dose strategies, respectively. Risk of acute HBV infection showed the strongest influence. CONCLUSIONS: Universal adult vaccination against HBV may be an appropriate strategy for reducing HBV incidence and improving resulting health outcomes.

Trends in Clinical Severity of Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019-Premier Hospital Dataset, April 2020-April 2021.

BACKGROUND: Clinical severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may vary over time; trends in clinical severity at admission during the pandemic among hospitalized patients in the United States have been incompletely described, so a historical record of severity over time is lacking. METHODS: We classified 466677 hospital admissions for COVID-19 from April 2020 to April 2021 into 4 mutually exclusive severity grades based on indicators present on admission (from most to least severe): Grade 4 included intensive care unit (ICU) admission and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV); grade 3 included non-IMV ICU and/or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation; grade 2 included diagnosis of acute respiratory failure; and grade 1 included none of the above indicators. Trends were stratified by sex, age, race/ethnicity, and comorbid conditions. We also examined severity in states with high vs low Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant burden. RESULTS: Severity tended to be lower among women, younger adults, and those with fewer comorbidities compared to their counterparts. The proportion of admissions classified as grade 1 or 2 fluctuated over time, but these less-severe grades comprised a majority (75%-85%) of admissions every month. Grades 3 and 4 consistently made up a minority of admissions (15%-25%), and grade 4 showed consistent decreases in all subgroups, including states with high Alpha variant burden. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical severity among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has varied over time but has not consistently or markedly worsened over time. The proportion of admissions classified as grade 4 decreased in all subgroups. There was no consistent evidence of worsening severity in states with higher vs lower Alpha prevalence.

Risk Factors for Severe COVID-19 Outcomes Among Persons Aged ≥18 Years Who Completed a Primary COVID-19 Vaccination Series - 465 Health Care Facilities, United States, December 2020-October 2021.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is highly effective at preventing COVID-19-associated hospitalization and death; however, some vaccinated persons might develop COVID-19 with severe outcomes† (1,2). Using data from 465 facilities in a large U.S. health care database, this study assessed the frequency of and risk factors for developing a severe COVID-19 outcome after completing a primary COVID-19 vaccination series (primary vaccination), defined as receipt of 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) or a single dose of JNJ-78436735 [Janssen (Johnson & Johnson)] ≥14 days before illness onset. Severe COVID-19 outcomes were defined as hospitalization with a diagnosis of acute respiratory failure, need for noninvasive ventilation (NIV), admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) including all persons requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, or death (including discharge to hospice). Among 1,228,664 persons who completed primary vaccination during December 2020-October 2021, a total of 2,246 (18.0 per 10,000 vaccinated persons) developed COVID-19 and 189 (1.5 per 10,000) had a severe outcome, including 36 who died (0.3 deaths per 10,000). Risk for severe outcomes was higher among persons who were aged ≥65 years, were immunosuppressed, or had at least one of six other underlying conditions. All persons with severe outcomes had at least one of these risk factors, and 77.8% of those who died had four or more risk factors. Severe COVID-19 outcomes after primary vaccination are rare; however, vaccinated persons who are aged ≥65 years, are immunosuppressed, or have other underlying conditions might be at increased risk. These persons should receive targeted interventions including chronic disease management, precautions to reduce exposure, additional primary and booster vaccine doses, and effective pharmaceutical therapy as indicated to reduce risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes. Increasing COVID-19 vaccination coverage is a public health priority.

Suspected Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) Reinfections: Incidence, Predictors, and Healthcare Use Among Patients at 238 US Healthcare Facilities, 1 June 2020 to 28 February 2021.

In a retrospective cohort study, among 131 773 patients with previous coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) was suspected in 253 patients (0.2%) at 238 US healthcare facilities between 1 June 2020 and 28 February 2021. Women displayed a higher cumulative reinfection risk. Healthcare burden and illness severity were similar between index and reinfection encounters.

Estimated Prevalence and Number of Persons With Isolated Antibody to Hepatitis B Core Antigen and Associated Occult Hepatitis B, United States, 2001-2018.

Persons with isolated antibody to hepatits B virus (HBV) core antigen (IAHBc) may have occult HBV infection (OBI), which is associated with reactivation and potential risk for hepatocellular carcinoma and HBV transmission. We used National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data to estimate US IAHBc prevalence and published studies of IAHBc-associated OBI prevalence to estimate OBI burden. During 2001-2018, the prevalence of IAHBc was 0.8% (approximately 2.1 million persons), and the OBI burden range was 35 500-83 600 persons. These data support the need for more robust estimates of IAHBc-associated OBI prevalence in the general US population.

Cost-Effectiveness of 1-Time Universal Screening for Chronic Hepatitis B Infection in Adults in the United States.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 862 000 to 2.4 million people have chronic hepatitis B infection (CHB). Hepatitis B screening is recommended for pregnant women and populations with increased CHB risk. However, diagnosis rates remain low, with only 33% of people with CHB aware of their infection. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of universal adult screening for CHB. METHODS: We used a Markov model to calculate the costs, population health impact, and cost-effectiveness of 1-time universal screening and CHB monitoring and treatment compared with current practice. Sensitivity analysis was performed on model parameters to identify thresholds for cost-saving or cost-effectiveness based on a willingness to pay of $50 000/quality-adjusted life-year. The analysis assumed testing would be performed during routine healthcare visits and that generic tenofovir or entecavir would be dispensed for treatment. Testing costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates. RESULTS: At an estimated 0.24% prevalence of undiagnosed CHB, universal hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) screening in adults aged 18-69 years is cost-saving compared with current practice if antiviral treatment drug costs remain below $894/year. Compared with current practice, universal screening would avert an additional 7.4 cases of compensated cirrhosis, 3.3 cases of decompensated cirrhosis, 5.5 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma, 1.9 liver transplants, and 10.3 hepatitis B virus-related deaths at a saving of $263 000/100 000 adults screened. CONCLUSIONS: Universal HBsAg screening of adults in the US general population for CHB is cost-effective and likely cost-saving compared with current CHB screening recommendations.

Estimation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalization Costs From a Large Electronic Administrative Discharge Database, March 2020-July 2021.

BACKGROUND: Information on the costs of inpatient care for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is very limited. This study estimates the per-patient cost of inpatient care for adult COVID-19 patients seen at >800 US hospitals. METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with ≥1 hospitalization during March 2020-July 2021 with a COVID-19 diagnosis code in a large electronic administrative discharge database were included. We used validated costs when reported; otherwise, costs were calculated using charges multiplied by cost-to-charge ratios. We estimated costs of inpatient care per patient overall and by severity indicator, age, sex, underlying medical conditions, and acute complications of COVID-19 using a generalized linear model with log link function and gamma distribution. RESULTS: The overall cost among 654673 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 was $16.2 billion. Estimated per-patient hospitalization cost was $24 826. Among surviving patients, estimated per-patient cost was $13 090 without intensive care unit (ICU) admission or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), $21 222 with ICU admission alone, and $59 742 with IMV. Estimated per-patient cost among patients who died was $27 017. Adjusted cost differential was higher among patients with certain underlying conditions (eg, chronic kidney disease [$12 391], liver disease [$8878], cerebrovascular disease [$7267], and obesity [$5933]) and acute complications (eg, acute respiratory distress syndrome [$43 912], pneumothorax [$25 240], and intracranial hemorrhage [$22 280]). CONCLUSIONS: The cost of inpatient care for COVID-19 patients was substantial through the first 17 months of the pandemic. These estimates can be used to inform policy makers and planners and cost-effectiveness analysis of public health interventions to alleviate the burden of COVID-19.

Association Between COVID-19 and Myocarditis Using Hospital-Based Administrative Data - United States, March 2020-January 2021.

Viral infections are a common cause of myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle (myocardium) that can result in hospitalization, heart failure, and sudden death (1). Emerging data suggest an association between COVID-19 and myocarditis (2-5). CDC assessed this association using a large, U.S. hospital-based administrative database of health care encounters from >900 hospitals. Myocarditis inpatient encounters were 42.3% higher in 2020 than in 2019. During March 2020-January 2021, the period that coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, the risk for myocarditis was 0.146% among patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during an inpatient or hospital-based outpatient encounter and 0.009% among patients who were not diagnosed with COVID-19. After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, patients with COVID-19 during March 2020-January 2021 had, on average, 15.7 times the risk for myocarditis compared with those without COVID-19 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 14.1-17.2); by age, risk ratios ranged from approximately 7.0 for patients aged 16-39 years to >30.0 for patients aged <16 years or ≥75 years. Overall, myocarditis was uncommon among persons with and without COVID-19; however, COVID-19 was significantly associated with an increased risk for myocarditis, with risk varying by age group. These findings underscore the importance of implementing evidence-based COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination, to reduce the public health impact of COVID-19 and its associated complications.