Engagement With the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Coronavirus Self-Checker and Guidance Provided to Users in the United States From March 23, 2020, to April 19, 2021: Thematic and Trend Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States experienced surges in healthcare needs, which challenged capacity throughout the healthcare system. Stay-at-home orders in many jurisdictions, cancellation of elective procedures, and closures of outpatient medical offices disrupted patient access to care. To inform symptomatic persons about when to seek care and potentially help alleviate the burden on the healthcare system, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and partners developed the CDC Coronavirus Self-Checker ("Self-Checker"). This interactive tool assists individuals seeking information about COVID-19 to determine the appropriate level of care by asking demographic, clinical, and nonclinical questions during an online "conversation." OBJECTIVE: This paper describes user characteristics, trends in use, and recommendations delivered by the Self-Checker between March 23, 2020, and April 19, 2021, for pursuing appropriate levels of medical care depending on the severity of user symptoms. METHODS: User characteristics and trends in completed conversations that resulted in a care message were analyzed. Care messages delivered by the Self-Checker were manually classified into three overarching conversation themes: (1) seek care immediately; (2) take no action, or stay home and self-monitor; and (3) conversation redirected. Trends in 7-day averages of conversations and COVID-19 cases were examined with development and marketing milestones that potentially impacted Self-Checker user engagement. RESULTS: Among 16,718,667 completed conversations, the Self-Checker delivered recommendations for 69.27% (n=11,580,738) of all conversations to "take no action, or stay home and self-monitor"; 28.8% (n=4,822,138) of conversations to "seek care immediately"; and 1.89% (n=315,791) of conversations were redirected to other resources without providing any care advice. Among 6.8 million conversations initiated for self-reported sick individuals without life-threatening symptoms, 59.21% resulted in a recommendation to "take no action, or stay home and self-monitor." Nearly all individuals (99.8%) who were not sick were also advised to "take no action, or stay home and self-monitor." CONCLUSIONS: The majority of Self-Checker conversations resulted in advice to take no action, or stay home and self-monitor. This guidance may have reduced patient volume on the medical system; however, future studies evaluating patients' satisfaction, intention to follow the care advice received, course of action, and care modality pursued could clarify the impact of the Self-Checker and similar tools during future public health emergencies.

Trends in the Use of Telehealth During the Emergence of the COVID-19 Pandemic - United States, January-March 2020.

In February 2020, CDC issued guidance advising persons and health care providers in areas affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to adopt social distancing practices, specifically recommending that health care facilities and providers offer clinical services through virtual means such as telehealth.* Telehealth is the use of two-way telecommunications technologies to provide clinical health care through a variety of remote methods.† To examine changes in the frequency of use of telehealth services during the early pandemic period, CDC analyzed deidentified encounter (i.e., visit) data from four of the largest U.S. telehealth providers that offer services in all states.§ Trends in telehealth encounters during January-March 2020 (surveillance weeks 1-13) were compared with encounters occurring during the same weeks in 2019. During the first quarter of 2020, the number of telehealth visits increased by 50%, compared with the same period in 2019, with a 154% increase in visits noted in surveillance week 13 in 2020, compared with the same period in 2019. During January-March 2020, most encounters were from patients seeking care for conditions other than COVID-19. However, the proportion of COVID-19-related encounters significantly increased (from 5.5% to 16.2%; p<0.05) during the last 3 weeks of March 2020 (surveillance weeks 11-13). This marked shift in practice patterns has implications for immediate response efforts and longer-term population health. Continuing telehealth policy changes and regulatory waivers might provide increased access to acute, chronic, primary, and specialty care during and after the pandemic.

Timely Antiviral Administration During an Influenza Pandemic: Key Components.

Prompt treatment of ill persons with influenza antivirals will be an important part of a future pandemic influenza response. This essay reviews key lessons learned from the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and the changing landscape of antiviral drug availability, and identifies and describes the multiple components needed to ensure the timely administration of antiviral drugs during a future pandemic. Fortunately, many of these planning efforts can take place before a pandemic strikes to improve outcomes during a future public health emergency.

Contraception as a Medical Countermeasure to Reduce Adverse Outcomes Associated With Zika Virus Infection in Puerto Rico: The Zika Contraception Access Network Program.

The Zika Contraception Access Network established a network of 153 physicians across Puerto Rico as a short-term emergency response during the 2016-2017 Zika virus outbreak to provide client-centered contraceptive counseling and same-day contraception services at no cost for women who chose to prevent pregnancy. Between May 2016 and August 2017, 21 124 women received services. Contraception was used as a medical countermeasure to reduce adverse Zika-related reproductive outcomes during the outbreak and may be considered a key strategy in other emergencies.

Cost-effectiveness of Increasing Access to Contraception during the Zika Virus Outbreak, Puerto Rico, 2016.

We modeled the potential cost-effectiveness of increasing access to contraception in Puerto Rico during a Zika virus outbreak. The intervention is projected to cost an additional $33.5 million in family planning services and is likely to be cost-saving for the healthcare system overall. It could reduce Zika virus-related costs by $65.2 million ($2.8 million from less Zika virus testing and monitoring and $62.3 million from avoided costs of Zika virus-associated microcephaly [ZAM]). The estimates are influenced by the contraception methods used, the frequency of ZAM, and the lifetime incremental cost of ZAM. Accounting for unwanted pregnancies that are prevented, irrespective of Zika virus infection, an additional $40.4 million in medical costs would be avoided through the intervention. Increasing contraceptive access for women who want to delay or avoid pregnancy in Puerto Rico during a Zika virus outbreak can substantially reduce the number of cases of ZAM and healthcare costs.

Estimates of the demand for mechanical ventilation in the United States during an influenza pandemic.

An outbreak in China in April 2013 of human illnesses due to avian influenza A(H7N9) virus provided reason for US public health officials to revisit existing national pandemic response plans. We built a spreadsheet model to examine the potential demand for invasive mechanical ventilation (excluding "rescue therapy" ventilation). We considered scenarios of either 20% or 30% gross influenza clinical attack rate (CAR), with a "low severity" scenario with case fatality rates (CFR) of 0.05%-0.1%, or a "high severity" scenario (CFR: 0.25%-0.5%). We used rates-of-influenza-related illness to calculate the numbers of potential clinical cases, hospitalizations, admissions to intensive care units, and need for mechanical ventilation. We assumed 10 days ventilator use per ventilated patient, 13% of total ventilator demand will occur at peak, and a 33.7% weighted average mortality risk while on a ventilator. At peak, for a 20% CAR, low severity scenario, an additional 7000 to 11,000 ventilators will be needed, averting a pandemic total of 35,000 to 55,000 deaths. A 30% CAR, high severity scenario, will need approximately 35,000 to 60,500 additional ventilators, averting a pandemic total 178,000 to 308,000 deaths. Estimates of deaths averted may not be realized because successful ventilation also depends on sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff, needed supplies (eg, drugs, reliable oxygen sources, suction apparatus, circuits, and monitoring equipment) and timely ability to match access to ventilators with critically ill cases. There is a clear challenge to plan and prepare to meet demands for mechanical ventilators for a future severe pandemic.

Estimating the United States demand for influenza antivirals and the effect on severe influenza disease during a potential pandemic.

Following the detection of a novel influenza strain A(H7N9), we modeled the use of antiviral treatment in the United States to mitigate severe disease across a range of hypothetical pandemic scenarios. Our outcomes were total demand for antiviral (neuraminidase inhibitor) treatment and the number of hospitalizations and deaths averted. The model included estimates of attack rate, healthcare-seeking behavior, prescription rates, adherence, disease severity, and the potential effect of antivirals on the risks of hospitalization and death. Based on these inputs, the total antiviral regimens estimated to be available in the United States (as of April 2013) were sufficient to meet treatment needs for the scenarios considered. However, distribution logistics were not examined and should be addressed in future work. Treatment was estimated to avert many severe outcomes (5200-248,000 deaths; 4800-504,000 hospitalizations); however, large numbers remained (25,000-425,000 deaths; 580,000-3,700,000 hospitalizations), suggesting that the impact of combinations of interventions should be examined.

Potential demand for respirators and surgical masks during a hypothetical influenza pandemic in the United States.

BACKGROUND: To inform planning for an influenza pandemic, we estimated US demand for N95 filtering facepiece respirators (respirators) by healthcare and emergency services personnel and need for surgical masks by pandemic patients seeking care. METHODS: We used a spreadsheet-based model to estimate demand for 3 scenarios of respirator use: base case (usage approximately follows epidemic curve), intermediate demand (usage rises to epidemic peak and then remains constant), and maximum demand (all healthcare workers use respirators from pandemic onset). We assumed that in the base case scenario, up to 16 respirators would be required per day per intensive care unit patient and 8 per day per general ward patient. Outpatient healthcare workers and emergency services personnel would require 4 respirators per day. Patients would require 1.2 surgical masks per day. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Assuming that 20% to 30% of the population would become ill, 1.7 to 3.5 billion respirators would be needed in the base case scenario, 2.6 to 4.3 billion in the intermediate demand scenario, and up to 7.3 billion in the maximum demand scenario (for all scenarios, between 0.1 and 0.4 billion surgical masks would be required for patients). For pandemics with a lower attack rate and fewer cases (eg, 2009-like pandemic), the number of respirators needed would be higher because the pandemic would have longer duration. Providing these numbers of respirators and surgical masks represents a logistic challenge for US public health agencies. Public health officials must urgently consider alternative use strategies for respirators and surgical masks during a pandemic that may vary from current practices.

Systems for rapidly detecting and treating persons with ebola virus disease--United States.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), CDC, other U.S. government agencies, the World Health Organization (WHO), and international partners are taking multiple steps to respond to the current Ebola virus disease (Ebola) outbreak in West Africa to reduce its toll there and to reduce the chances of international spread. At the same time, CDC and HHS are working to ensure that persons who have a risk factor for exposure to Ebola and who develop symptoms while in the United States are rapidly identified and isolated, and safely receive treatment. HHS and CDC have actively worked with state and local public health authorities and other partners to accelerate health care preparedness to care for persons under investigation (PUI) for Ebola or with confirmed Ebola. This report describes some of these efforts and their impact.

Novel framework for assessing epidemiologic effects of influenza epidemics and pandemics.

The effects of influenza on a population are attributable to the clinical severity of illness and the number of persons infected, which can vary greatly between seasons or pandemics. To create a systematic framework for assessing the public health effects of an emerging pandemic, we reviewed data from past influenza seasons and pandemics to characterize severity and transmissibility (based on ranges of these measures in the United States) and outlined a formal assessment of the potential effects of a novel virus. The assessment was divided into 2 periods. Because early in a pandemic, measurement of severity and transmissibility is uncertain, we used a broad dichotomous scale in the initial assessment to divide the range of historic values. In the refined assessment, as more data became available, we categorized those values more precisely. By organizing and prioritizing data collection, this approach may inform an evidence-based assessment of pandemic effects and guide decision making.

Video Telemedicine Experiences In COVID-19 Were Positive, But Physicians And Patients Prefer In-Person Care For The Future.

To help inform policy discussions about postpandemic telemedicine reimbursement and regulations, we conducted dual nationally representative surveys among primary care physicians and patients. Although majorities of both populations reported satisfaction with video visits during the pandemic, 80 percent of physicians would prefer to provide only a small share of care or no care via telemedicine in the future, and only 36 percent of patients would prefer to seek care by video or phone. Most physicians (60 percent) felt that the quality of video telemedicine care was generally inferior to the quality of in-person care, and both patients and physicians cited the lack of physical exam as a key reason (90 percent and 92 percent, respectively). Patients who were older, had less education, or were Asian were less likely to want to use video for future care. Although improvements to home-based diagnostic tools could improve both the quality of and the desire to use telemedicine, virtual primary care will likely be limited in the immediate future. Policies to enhance quality, sustain virtual care, and address inequities in the online setting may be needed.

Returning to the workplace during the COVID-19 pandemic: A framework to inform business decision-making.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many officebased workplaces closed and a large proportion of the workforce switched to working remotely. Plans to return to the office, however, have been delayed on several occasions due to surges in cases related to virus variants. Recognising that businesses need to know when and how to return safely to their offices, this paper provides a six-part framework to help guide their decisions regarding workplace re-entry.

Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak: Now is the time to refresh pandemic plans.

This article outlines practical steps that businesses can take now to prepare for a pandemic. Given the current growing spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) around the world, it is imperative that businesses review their pandemic plans and be prepared in case this epidemic expands and affects more people and communities. Preparing for a potential infectious disease pandemic from influenza or a novel corona virus is an essential component of a business continuity plan, especially for businesses that provide critical healthcare and infrastructure services. Although many businesses and organisations have a pandemic plan or address pandemic preparedness in their business continuity plans, few have recently tested and updated their plans. Pandemics can not only interrupt an organisation's operations and compromise long-term viability of an enterprise, but also disrupt the provision of critical functions. Businesses that regularly test and update their pandemic plan can significantly reduce harmful impacts to the business, play a key role in protecting employees' and customers' health and safety, and limit the negative impact of a pandemic on the community and economy.

Strategies to Inform Allocation of Stockpiled Ventilators to Healthcare Facilities During a Pandemic.

During a severe pandemic, especially one causing respiratory illness, many people may require mechanical ventilation. Depending on the extent of the outbreak, there may be insufficient capacity to provide ventilator support to all of those in need. As part of a larger conceptual framework for determining need for and allocation of ventilators during a public health emergency, this article focuses on the strategies to assist state and local planners to allocate stockpiled ventilators to healthcare facilities during a pandemic, accounting for critical factors in facilities' ability to make use of additional ventilators. These strategies include actions both in the pre-pandemic and intra-pandemic stages. As a part of pandemic preparedness, public health officials should identify and query healthcare facilities in their jurisdiction that currently care for critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation to determine existing inventory of these devices and facilities' ability to absorb additional ventilators. Facilities must have sufficient staff, space, equipment, and supplies to utilize allocated ventilators adequately. At the time of an event, jurisdictions will need to verify and update information on facilities' capacity prior to making allocation decisions. Allocation of scarce life-saving resources during a pandemic should consider ethical principles to inform state and local plans for allocation of ventilators. In addition to ethical principles, decisions should be informed by assessment of need, determination of facilities' ability to use additional ventilators, and facilities' capacity to ensure access to ventilators for vulnerable populations (eg, rural, inner city, and uninsured and underinsured individuals) or high-risk populations that may be more susceptible to illness.

CDC's Flu on Call Simulation: Testing a National Helpline for Use During an Influenza Pandemic.

During an influenza pandemic, healthcare facilities are likely to be filled to capacity, leading to delays in seeing a provider and obtaining treatment. Flu on Call is a collaborative effort between the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and partners to develop a toll-free telephone helpline to reduce the burden on healthcare facilities and improve access to antivirals for people who are ill during an influenza pandemic. This study tested the feasibility of Flu on Call during a 1-day simulation using a severe pandemic scenario. Trained volunteer actors placed calls to the helpline using prepared scripts that were precoded for an expected outcome ("disposition") of the call. Scripts represented callers who were ill, those calling for someone else who was ill, and callers who were only seeking information. Information specialists and medical professionals managed the calls. Results demonstrated that Flu on Call may effectively assist callers during a pandemic, increase access to antiviral prescriptions, and direct patients to the appropriate level of care. Overall, 84% of calls exactly matched the expected call disposition; few calls (2%) were undermanaged (eg, the caller was ill but not transferred to a medical professional or received advice from the medical professional that was less intensive than what was warranted). Callers indicated a high level of satisfaction (83% reported their needs were met). Because of the high volume of calls that may be received during a severe pandemic, the Flu on Call platform should evolve to include additional triage channels (eg, through internet, chat, and/or text access).

An Assessment of State Laws Providing Gubernatorial Authority to Remove Legal Barriers to Emergency Response.

Legal Perspectives is aimed at informing healthcare providers, emergency planners, public health practitioners, and other decision makers about important legal issues related to public health and healthcare preparedness and response. The articles describe these potentially challenging topics and conclude with the authors' suggestions for further action. The articles do not provide legal advice. Therefore, those affected by the issues discussed in this column should seek further guidance from legal counsel. Readers may submit topics of interest to the column's editor, Lainie Rutkow, JD, PhD, MPH, at lrutkow@jhu.edu. Governors play a fundamental role in emergency preparedness and can help facilitate rapid responses to emergencies. However, laws that operate successfully under normal circumstances can inadvertently create barriers during emergencies, delaying a timely response. State laws could thus limit, or even prohibit, necessary response efforts. To combat this risk, legislatures have passed emergency powers laws in each state granting governors the authority to declare a state of emergency and to exercise certain emergency powers to meet the needs of the emergency. Researchers conducted a 50-state legal assessment, which identified and examined state laws that give governors the discretion to modify existing laws or create new laws to respond effectively to any type of declared emergency. This article outlines the findings of that assessment, which identified 35 states that explicitly permit governors to suspend or amend both statutes and regulations; 7 states in which governors are permitted to amend regulations during a declared emergency but are not explicitly authorized to modify or remove statutes; and 8 states and the District of Columbia that provide no explicit authority to governors to change statutes or regulations during a declared emergency. The article also provides examples of how this power has been used in the past to demonstrate the utility and scope of this authority in a variety of public health threats.

A Control Banding Framework for Protecting the US Workforce from Aerosol Transmissible Infectious Disease Outbreaks with High Public Health Consequences.

Recent high-profile infectious disease outbreaks illustrate the importance of selecting appropriate control measures to protect a wider range of employees, other than those in healthcare settings. In such settings, where routine exposure risks are often high, control measures may be more available, routinely implemented, and studied for effectiveness. In the absence of evidence-based guidelines or established best practices for selecting appropriate control measures, employers may unduly rely on personal protective equipment (PPE) because of its wide availability and pervasiveness as a control measure, circumventing other effective options for protection. Control banding is one approach that may be used to assign job tasks into risk categories and prioritize the application of controls. This article proposes an initial control banding framework for workers at all levels of risk and incorporates a range of control options, including PPE. Using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) risk groups as a surrogate for toxicity and combining the exposure duration with the exposure likelihood, we can generate the risk of a job task to the worker.

Public response to community mitigation measures for pandemic influenza.

We report the results of a national survey conducted to help public health officials understand the public's response to community mitigation interventions for a severe outbreak of pandemic influenza. Survey results suggest that if community mitigation measures are instituted, most respondents would comply with recommendations but would be challenged to do so if their income or job were severely compromised. The results also indicate that community mitigation measures could cause problems for persons with lower incomes and for racial and ethnic minorities. Twenty-four percent of respondents said that they would not have anyone available to take care of them if they became sick with pandemic influenza. Given these results, planning and public engagement will be needed to encourage the public to be prepared.