Accuracy of Case-Based Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Maricopa County, Arizona.

We conducted a community seroprevalence survey in Arizona, from September 12 to October 1, 2020, to determine the presence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We used the seroprevalence estimate to predict SARS-CoV-2 infections in the jurisdiction by applying the adjusted seroprevalence to the county's population. The estimated community seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections was 4.3 times greater (95% confidence interval = 2.2, 7.5) than the number of reported cases. Field surveys with representative sampling provide data that may help fill in gaps in traditional public health reporting. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(1):38-42. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306568).

Safe Use and Storage of Cleaners, Disinfectants, and Hand Sanitizers: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices among U.S. Adults during the COVID-19 Pandemic, May 2020.

Cleaning and disinfection of frequently touched surfaces and frequent hand hygiene are recommended measures to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, poison center calls regarding exposures to cleaners, disinfectants, and hand sanitizers have increased as compared with prior years, indicating a need to evaluate household safety precautions. An opt-in Internet panel survey of 502 U.S. adults was conducted in May 2020. Survey items evaluated knowledge regarding use and storage of cleaners, disinfectants, and hand sanitizers; attitudes about household cleaning and disinfection; and safety precautions practiced during the prior month. We assigned a knowledge score to each respondent to quantify knowledge of safety precautions and calculated median scores by demographic characteristics and attitudes. We identified gaps in knowledge regarding safe use and storage of cleaners, disinfectants, and hand sanitizers; the overall median knowledge score was 5.17 (95% CI: 4.85-5.50; maximum 9.00). Knowledge scores were lower among younger than older age-groups and among black non-Hispanic and Hispanic respondents compared with white non-Hispanic respondents. A greater proportion of respondents expressed knowledge of safety precautions than the proportion who engaged in these precautions. Tailored communication strategies should be used to reach populations with lower knowledge of cleaning and disinfection safety. In addition, as knowledge alone did not shape individual engagement in safety precautions, health promotion campaigns may specifically emphasize the health risks of unsafe use and storage of cleaners, disinfectants, and hand sanitizers to address risk perception.

Estimated Community Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies - Two Georgia Counties, April 28-May 3, 2020.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is ongoing in many communities throughout the United States. Although case-based and syndromic surveillance are critical for monitoring the pandemic, these systems rely on persons obtaining testing or reporting a COVID-19-like illness. Using serologic tests to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is an adjunctive strategy that estimates the prevalence of past infection in a population. During April 28-May 3, 2020, coinciding with the end of a statewide shelter-in-place order, CDC and the Georgia Department of Public Health conducted a serologic survey in DeKalb and Fulton counties in metropolitan Atlanta to estimate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the population. A two-stage cluster sampling design was used to randomly select 30 census blocks in each county, with a target of seven participating households per census block. Weighted estimates were calculated to account for the probability of selection and adjusted for age group, sex, and race/ethnicity. A total of 394 households and 696 persons participated and had a serology result; 19 (2.7%) of 696 persons had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies detected. The estimated weighted seroprevalence across these two metropolitan Atlanta counties was 2.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4-4.5). Non-Hispanic black participants more commonly had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies than did participants of other racial/ethnic groups (p<0.01). Among persons with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, 13 (weighted % = 49.9; 95% CI = 24.4-75.5) reported a COVID-19-compatible illness,* six (weighted % = 28.2; 95% CI = 11.9-53.3) sought medical care for a COVID-19-compatible illness, and five (weighted % = 15.7; 95% CI = 5.1-39.4) had been tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection, demonstrating that many of these infections would not have been identified through case-based or syndromic surveillance. The relatively low seroprevalence estimate in this report indicates that most persons in the catchment area had not been infected with SARS-CoV-2 at the time of the survey. Continued preventive measures, including social distancing, consistent and correct use of face coverings, and hand hygiene, remain critical in controlling community spread of SARS-CoV-2.

Knowledge and Practices Regarding Safe Household Cleaning and Disinfection for COVID-19 Prevention - United States, May 2020.

A recent report described a sharp increase in calls to poison centers related to exposures to cleaners and disinfectants since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (1). However, data describing cleaning and disinfection practices within household settings in the United States are limited, particularly concerning those practices intended to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. To provide contextual and behavioral insight into the reported increase in poison center calls and to inform timely and relevant prevention strategies, an opt-in Internet panel survey of 502 U.S. adults was conducted in May 2020 to characterize knowledge and practices regarding household cleaning and disinfection during the COVID-19 pandemic. Knowledge gaps were identified in several areas, including safe preparation of cleaning and disinfectant solutions, use of recommended personal protective equipment when using cleaners and disinfectants, and safe storage of hand sanitizers, cleaners, and disinfectants. Thirty-nine percent of respondents reported engaging in nonrecommended high-risk practices with the intent of preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, such as washing food products with bleach, applying household cleaning or disinfectant products to bare skin, and intentionally inhaling or ingesting these products. Respondents who engaged in high-risk practices more frequently reported an adverse health effect that they believed was a result of using cleaners or disinfectants than did those who did not report engaging in these practices. Public messaging should continue to emphasize evidence-based, safe practices such as hand hygiene and recommended cleaning and disinfection of high-touch surfaces to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in household settings (2). Messaging should also emphasize avoidance of high-risk practices such as unsafe preparation of cleaning and disinfectant solutions, use of bleach on food products, application of household cleaning and disinfectant products to skin, and inhalation or ingestion of cleaners and disinfectants.

Cleaning and Disinfectant Chemical Exposures and Temporal Associations with COVID-19 - National Poison Data System, United States, January 1, 2020-March 31, 2020.

On January 19, 2020, the state of Washington reported the first U.S. laboratory-confirmed case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2 (1). As of April 19, a total of 720,630 COVID-19 cases and 37,202 associated deaths* had been reported to CDC from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and four U.S. territories (2). CDC recommends, with precautions, the proper cleaning and disinfection of high-touch surfaces to help mitigate the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (3). To assess whether there might be a possible association between COVID-19 cleaning recommendations from public health agencies and the media and the number of chemical exposures reported to the National Poison Data System (NPDS), CDC and the American Association of Poison Control Centers surveillance team compared the number of exposures reported for the period January-March 2020 with the number of reports during the same 3-month period in 2018 and 2019. Fifty-five poison centers in the United States provide free, 24-hour professional advice and medical management information regarding exposures to poisons, chemicals, drugs, and medications. Call data from poison centers are uploaded in near real-time to NPDS. During January-March 2020, poison centers received 45,550 exposure calls related to cleaners (28,158) and disinfectants (17,392), representing overall increases of 20.4% and 16.4% from January-March 2019 (37,822) and January-March 2018 (39,122), respectively. Although NPDS data do not provide information showing a definite link between exposures and COVID-19 cleaning efforts, there appears to be a clear temporal association with increased use of these products.

Community Assessments for Mosquito Prevention and Control Experiences, Attitudes, and Practices - U.S. Virgin Islands, 2017 and 2018.

Aedes aegypti, the mosquito that carries dengue, chikungunya, and Zika viruses, is present throughout the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI). To reduce mosquitoborne disease transmission, the USVI Department of Health (VIDOH) is responsible for integrated mosquito management. During January 2016-January 2018, USVI experienced its first Zika outbreak, with most cases reported during January-December 2016, as well as two Category 5 hurricanes (Irma on St. Thomas/St. John on September 6, 2017, and Maria on St. Croix on September 19, 2017). The hurricanes severely damaged mosquito protection-related building structures (e.g., screens, roofs) and infrastructure (e.g., electricity, air conditioning) and might have created an environment more conducive to mosquito breeding. VIDOH, with requested technical assistance from CDC, conducted three Community Assessments for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPERs) to provide rapid community information at the household level. The three CASPERs were conducted to inform 1) the Zika outbreak response, 2) the hurricane response, and 3) the hurricane recovery. The CASPERs assessed mosquito prevention and control-related experiences, attitudes, and practices; household and environmental conditions associated with mosquito breeding, prevention, and control; and other nonmosquito-related information to inform outbreak and disaster response planning. Approximately 40% of households were very concerned about contracting Zika virus during the Zika outbreak and hurricane responses. Environmental conditions were reported to become more favorable for mosquito breeding between the Zika outbreak and hurricane response. Between 75%-80% of the community supported mosquito-spraying in all assessments. VIDOH used these data to support real-time outbreak and hurricane response planning. Mosquito prevention and control community assessments can provide rapid, actionable information to advise both mosquito education and control and emergency response and recovery efforts. The CASPER design can be used by vector control programs to enhance routine and response operations.

Getting the Message Out: Social Media and Word-of-Mouth as Effective Communication Methods during Emergencies.

Effective communication is a critical part of managing an emergency. During an emergency, the ways in which health agencies normally communicate warnings may not reach all of the intended audience. Not all communities are the same, and households within communities are diverse. Because different communities prefer different communication methods, community leaders and emergency planners need to know their communities' preferred methods for seeking information about an emergency. This descriptive report explores findings from previous community assessments that have collected information on communication preferences, including television (TV), social media, and word-of-mouth (WoM) delivery methods. Data were analyzed from 12 Community Assessments for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPERs) conducted from 2014-2017 that included questions regarding primary and trusted communication sources. A CASPER is a rapid needs assessment designed to gather household-based information from a community. In 75.0% of the CASPERs, households reported TV as their primary source of information for specific emergency events (range = 24.0%-83.1%). Households reporting social media as their primary source of information differed widely across CASPERs (3.2%-41.8%). In five of the CASPERs, nearly one-half of households reported WoM as their primary source of information. These CASPERs were conducted in response to a specific emergency (ie, chemical spill, harmful algal bloom, hurricane, and flood). The CASPERs conducted as part of a preparedness activity had lower percentages of households reporting WoM as their primary source of information (8.3%-10.4%). The findings in this report demonstrate the need for emergency plans to include hybrid communication models, combining traditional methods with newer technologies to reach the broadest audience. Although TV was the most commonly reported preferred source of information, segments of the population relied on social media and WoM messaging. By using multiple methods for risk communication, emergency planners are more likely to reach the whole community and engage vulnerable populations that might not have access to, trust in, or understanding of traditional news sources. Multiple communication channels that include user-generated content, such as social media and WoM, can increase the timeliness of messaging and provide community members with message confirmation from sources they trust encouraging them to take protective public health actions.WolkinAF, SchnallAH, NakataNK, EllisEM. Getting the message out: social media and word-of-mouth as effective communication methods during emergencies. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2019;34(1):89-94.

Use of Community Assessments for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPERs) to Rapidly Assess Public Health Issues - United States, 2003-2012.

INTRODUCTION: Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) is an epidemiologic technique designed to provide quick, inexpensive, accurate, and reliable household-based public health information about a community's emergency response needs. The Health Studies Branch at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provides in-field assistance and technical support to state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) health departments in conducting CASPERs during a disaster response and in non-emergency settings. Data from CASPERs conducted from 2003 through 2012 were reviewed to describe uses of CASPER, ascertain strengths of the CASPER methodology, and highlight significant findings. METHODS: Through an assessment of the CDC's CASPER metadatabase, all CASPERs that involved CDC support performed in US states and territories from 2003 through 2012 were reviewed and compared descriptively for differences in geographic distribution, sampling methodology, mapping tool, assessment settings, and result and action taken by decision makers. RESULTS: For the study period, 53 CASPERs were conducted in 13 states and one US territory. Among the 53 CASPERS, 38 (71.6%) used the traditional 2-stage cluster sampling methodology, 10 (18.8%) used a 3-stage cluster sampling, and two (3.7%) used a simple random sampling methodology. Among the CASPERs, 37 (69.9%) were conducted in response to specific natural or human-induced disasters, including 14 (37.8%) for hurricanes. The remaining 16 (30.1%) CASPERS were conducted in non-disaster settings to assess household preparedness levels or potential effects of a proposed plan or program. The most common recommendations resulting from a disaster-related CASPER were to educate the community on available resources (27; 72.9%) and provide services (18; 48.6%) such as debris removals and refills of medications. In preparedness CASPERs, the most common recommendations were to educate the community in disaster preparedness (5; 31.2%) and to revise or improve preparedness plans (5; 31.2%). Twenty-five (47.1%) CASPERs documented on the report or publications the public health action has taken based on the result or recommendations. Findings from 27 (50.9%) of the CASPERs conducted with CDC assistance were published in peer-reviewed journals or elsewhere. CONCLUSION: The number of CASPERs conducted with CDC assistance has increased and diversified over the past decade. The CASPERs' results and recommendations supported the public health decisions that benefitted the community. Overall, the findings suggest that the CASPER is a useful tool for collecting household-level disaster preparedness and response data and generating information to support public health action.

The role of applied epidemiology methods in the disaster management cycle.

Disaster epidemiology (i.e., applied epidemiology in disaster settings) presents a source of reliable and actionable information for decision-makers and stakeholders in the disaster management cycle. However, epidemiological methods have yet to be routinely integrated into disaster response and fully communicated to response leaders. We present a framework consisting of rapid needs assessments, health surveillance, tracking and registries, and epidemiological investigations, including risk factor and health outcome studies and evaluation of interventions, which can be practiced throughout the cycle. Applying each method can result in actionable information for planners and decision-makers responsible for preparedness, response, and recovery. Disaster epidemiology, once integrated into the disaster management cycle, can provide the evidence base to inform and enhance response capability within the public health infrastructure.

Using poison center data for postdisaster surveillance.

The role of public health surveillance in disaster response continues to expand as timely, accurate information is needed to mitigate the impact of disasters. Health surveillance after a disaster involves the rapid assessment of the distribution and determinants of disaster-related deaths, illnesses, and injuries in the affected population. Public health disaster surveillance is one mechanism that can provide information to identify health problems faced by the affected population, establish priorities for decision makers, and target interventions to meet specific needs. Public health surveillance traditionally relies on a wide variety of data sources and methods. Poison center (PC) data can serve as data sources of chemical exposures and poisonings during a disaster. In the US, a system of 57 regional PCs serves the entire population. Poison centers respond to poison-related questions from the public, health care professionals, and public health agencies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) uses PC data during disasters for surveillance of disaster-related toxic exposures and associated illnesses to enhance situational awareness during disaster response and recovery. Poison center data can also be leveraged during a disaster by local and state public health to supplement existing surveillance systems. Augmenting traditional surveillance data (ie, emergency room visits and death records) with other data sources, such as PCs, allows for better characterization of disaster-related morbidity and mortality. Poison center data can be used during a disaster to detect outbreaks, monitor trends, track particular exposures, and characterize the epidemiology of the event. This timely and accurate information can be used to inform public health decision making during a disaster and mitigate future disaster-related morbidity and mortality.

Mortality from a tornado outbreak, Alabama, April 27, 2011.

OBJECTIVES: We describe the demographics of the decedents from the tornado outbreak in Alabama on April 27, 2011; examine the circumstances of death surrounding these fatalities; and identify measures to prevent future tornado-related fatalities. METHODS: We collected information about the decedents from death certificates, disaster-related mortality surveillance, and interview data collected by American Red Cross volunteers from the decedent's families. We describe demographic characteristics, circumstances and causes of death, and sheltering behaviors before death. RESULTS: Of the 247 fatalities, females and older adults were at highest risk for tornado-related deaths. Most deaths were directly related to the tornadoes, on scene, and trauma-related. The majority of the deceased were indoors in single-family homes. Word of mouth was the most common warning mechanism. CONCLUSIONS: This tornado event was the third deadliest in recent US history. Our findings support the need for local community shelters, enhanced messaging to inform the public of shelter locations, and encouragement of word-of-mouth warnings and personal and family preparedness planning, with a special focus on assisting vulnerable individuals in taking shelter.

Disaster-related injuries and illnesses treated by American Red Cross disaster health services during Hurricanes Gustav and Ike.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the injuries and illnesses treated by the American Red Cross (Red Cross) during Hurricanes Gustav and Ike disaster relief operations reported on a new Aggregate Morbidity Report Form. METHODS: From August 28 to October 18, 2008, 119 Red Cross field service locations in Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Texas addressed the healthcare needs of people affected by the hurricanes. From these locations, individual client visit data were retrospectively collated per site onto new 24-hour Aggregate Morbidity Report Forms. RESULTS: A total of 3863 clients were treated. Of the clients, 48% were girls and women and 44% were boys and men; 61% were 19 to 64 years old. Ninety-eight percent of the visits occurred in shelters. The reasons for half of the visits were acute illness and symptoms (eg, pain) and 16% were for routine follow-up care. The majority (65%) of the 2516 visits required treatment at a field location, although 34%, or 1296 visits, required a referral, including 543 healthcare facility transfers. CONCLUSIONS: During the hurricanes, a substantial number of displaced evacuees sought care for acute and routine healthcare needs. The capacity of the Red Cross to address the immediate and ongoing health needs of sheltered clients for an extended period of time is a critical resource for local public health agencies, which are often overwhelmed during a disaster. This article highlights the important role that this humanitarian organization fills, to decrease surge to local healthcare systems and to monitor health effects following a disaster. The Aggregate Morbidity Report Form has the potential to assist greatly in this role, and thus its utility for real-time reporting should be evaluated further.

Evaluation of a standardized morbidity surveillance form for use during disasters caused by natural hazards.

INTRODUCTION: Surveillance for health outcomes is critical for rapid responses and timely prevention of disaster-related illnesses and injuries after a disaster-causing event. The Disaster Surveillance Workgroup (DSWG) of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed a standardized, single-page, morbidity surveillance form, called the Natural Disaster Morbidity Surveillance Individual Form (Morbidity Surveillance Form), to describe the distribution of injuries and illnesses, detect outbreaks, and guide timely interventions during a disaster. PROBLEM: Traditional data sources can be used during a disaster; however, supplemental active surveillance may be required because traditional systems often are disrupted, and many persons will seek care outside of typical acute care settings. Generally, these alternative settings lack health surveillance and reporting protocols. The need for standardized data collection was demonstrated during Hurricane Katrina, as the multiple surveillance instruments that were developed and deployed led to varied and uncoordinated data collection methods, analyses, and morbidity data reporting. Active, post-event surveillance of affected populations is critical for rapid responses to minimize and prevent morbidity and mortality, allocate resources, and target public health messaging. METHODS: The CDC and the Georgia Department of Public Health (GDPH) conducted a study to evaluate a Morbidity Surveillance Form to determine its ability to capture clinical presentations. The form was completed for each patient evaluated in an emergency department (ED) during triage from 01 August, 2007 through 07 August, 2007. Data from the form were compared with the ED discharge diagnoses from electronic medical records, and kappa statistics were calculated to assess agreement. RESULTS: Nine hundred forty-nine patients were evaluated, 41% were male and 57% were Caucasian. According to the forms, the most common reasons for seeking treatment were acute illness, other (29%); pain (12%); and gastrointestinal illness (8%). The frequency of agreement between discharge diagnoses and the form ranged from 3 to 100%. Kappa values ranged from 0.23-1.0, with nine of the 12 categories having very good or good agreement. CONCLUSION: With modifications to increase sensitivity for capturing certain clinical presentations, the Morbidity Surveillance Form can be a useful tool for capturing data needed to guide public health interventions during a disaster. A validated collection instrument for a post-disaster event facilitates rapid and standardized comparison and aggregation of data across multiple jurisdictions, thus, improving the coordination, timeliness, and accuracy of public health responses. The DSWG revised the Morbidity Surveillance Form based on information from this study.