RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The global burden of viral hepatitis B is substantial, and monitoring infections across the care cascade is important for elimination efforts. There is little information on care disparities by immigration status, and we aimed to quantify disease burden among immigrant subgroups. APPROACH AND RESULTS: In this population-based, retrospective cohort study, we used linked laboratory and health administrative records to describe the HBV care cascade in five distinct stages: (1) lifetime prevalence; (2) diagnosis; (3) engagement with care; (4) treatment initiation; and (5) treatment continuation. Infections were identified based on at least one reactive antigen or nucleic acid test, and lifetime prevalence was estimated as the sum of diagnosed and estimated undiagnosed cases. Care cascades were compared between long-term residents and immigrant groups, including subgroups born in hepatitis B endemic countries. Stratified analyses and multivariable Poisson regression were used to identify drivers for cascade progression. Between January 1997 and December 2014, 2,014,470 persons were included, 50,475 with infections, of whom 30,118 were engaged with care, 11,450 initiated treatment, and 6554 continued treatment >1 year. Lifetime prevalence was estimated as 163,309 (1.34%) overall, 115,722 (3.42%) among all immigrants, and 50,876 (9.37%) among those from highly endemic countries. Compared to long-term residents, immigrants were more likely to be diagnosed (adjusted rate ratio [aRR], 4.55; 95% CI, 4.46, 4.63), engaged with care (aRR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.09), and initiate treatment (aRR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03, 1.16). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, immigrants fared well compared to long-term residents along the care cascade, having higher rates of diagnosis and slightly better measures in subsequent cascade stages, although intensified screening efforts and better strategies to facilitate linkage to care are still needed.
Asunto(s)
Continuidad de la Atención al Paciente/organización & administración , Emigrantes e Inmigrantes/estadística & datos numéricos , Antígenos de Superficie de la Hepatitis B/aislamiento & purificación , Antígenos e de la Hepatitis B/aislamiento & purificación , Hepatitis B , Tamizaje Masivo , Administración del Tratamiento Farmacológico/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Cohortes , Monitoreo Epidemiológico , Femenino , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud , Hepatitis B/diagnóstico , Hepatitis B/epidemiología , Hepatitis B/terapia , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ontario/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Although severe COVID-19 illness and hospitalization are more common among older adults, children can also be affected (1). More than 3 million cases of COVID-19 had been reported among infants and children aged <5 years (children) as of December 2, 2022 (2). One in four children hospitalized with COVID-19 required intensive care; 21.2% of cases of COVID-19-related multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) occurred among children aged 1-4 years, and 3.2% of MIS-C cases occurred among infants aged <1 year (1,3). On June 17, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 6 months-5 years and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 6 months-4 years. To assess COVID-19 vaccination coverage among children aged 6 months-4 years in the United States, coverage with ≥1 dose* and completion of the 2-dose or 3-dose primary vaccination series were assessed using vaccine administration data for the 50 U.S. states and District of Columbia submitted from June 20 (after COVID-19 vaccine was first authorized for this age group) through December 31, 2022. As of December 31, 2022, ≥1-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage among children aged 6 months-4 years was 10.1% and was 5.1% for series completion. Coverage with ≥1 dose varied by jurisdiction (range = 2.1% [Mississippi] to 36.1% [District of Columbia]) as did coverage with a completed series (range = 0.7% [Mississippi] to 21.4% [District of Columbia]), respectively. By age group, 9.7 % of children aged 6-23 months and 10.2% of children aged 2-4 years received ≥1 dose; 4.5% of children aged 6-23 months and 5.4% of children aged 2-4 years completed the vaccination series. Among children aged 6 months-4 years, ≥1-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage was lower in rural counties (3.4%) than in urban counties (10.5%). Among children aged 6 months-4 years who received at least the first dose, only 7.0% were non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black), and 19.9% were Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic), although these demographic groups constitute 13.9% and 25.9% of the population, respectively (4). COVID-19 vaccination coverage among children aged 6 months-4 years is substantially lower than that among older children (5). Efforts are needed to improve vaccination coverage among children aged 6 months-4 years to reduce COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Lactante , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Humanos , Niño , Adolescente , Anciano , Cobertura de Vacunación , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunación , District of Columbia , DemografíaRESUMEN
AIMS: Certain combinations of medications can be harmful and may lead to serious adverse drug events (ADEs). Identifying potentially problematic medication clusters could help guide prescribing and/or deprescribing decisions in hospital. The aim of this study is to characterize medication prescribing patterns at hospital discharge and determine which medication clusters were associated with an increased risk of ADEs in the 30-day posthospital discharge. METHODS: All residents of the province of Ontario in Canada aged 66 years or older admitted to hospital between March 2016 and February 2017 were included. Identification of medication clusters prescribed at hospital discharge was conducted using latent class analysis. Cluster identification and categorization were based on medications dispensed up to 30-day posthospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the potential association between membership to a particular medication cluster and ADEs postdischarge, while also evaluating other patient characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 188 354 patients were included in the study cohort. Median age (interquartile range) was 77 (71-84) years, and patients had a median (IQR) (interquartile range [IQR]) of 9 (6-13) medications dispensed prior to admission. Within the study population, 6 separate clusters of dispensing patterns were identified: cardiovascular (14%), respiratory (26%), complex care needs (12%), cardiovascular and metabolic (15%), infection (10%), and surgical (24%). Overall, 12 680 (7%) patients had an ADE in the 30 days following discharge. After considering other patient characteristics, those belonging to the respiratory cluster had the highest risk of ADEs (adjusted odds ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.17) compared with all the other clusters, while those in the complex care needs cluster had the lowest risk (adjusted odds ratio: 0.82, 95% confidence interval: 0.77-0.87). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that ADEs post hospital discharge can be linked with identifiable medication clusters. This information may help clinicians and researchers better understand patient populations that are more or less likely to benefit from peri-hospital discharge interventions aimed at reducing ADEs.
Asunto(s)
Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos , Alta del Paciente , Humanos , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Cuidados Posteriores , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos/epidemiología , Hospitales , Ontario/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Walk-in clinics are typically viewed as high-volume locations for managing acute issues but also may serve as a location for primary care, including cancer screening, for patients without a family physician. In this population-based cohort study, we compared breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening up-to-date status for people living in the Canadian province of Ontario who were formally enrolled to a family physician versus those not enrolled but who had at least one encounter with a walk-in clinic physician in the previous year. Using provincial administrative databases, we created two mutually exclusive groups: i) those who were formally enrolled to a family physician, ii) those who were not enrolled but had at least one visit with a walk-in clinic physician from April 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020. We compared up to date status for three cancer screenings as of April 1, 2020 among screen-eligible people. We found that people who were not enrolled and had seen a walk-in clinic physician in the previous year consistently were less likely to be up to date on cancer screening than Ontarians who were formally enrolled with a family physician (46.1% vs. 67.4% for breast, 45.8% vs. 67.4% for cervical, 49.5% vs. 73.1% for colorectal). They were also more likely to be foreign-born and to live in structurally marginalized neighbourhoods. New methods are needed to enable screening for people who are reliant on walk-in clinics and to address the urgent need in Ontario for more primary care providers who deliver comprehensive, longitudinal care.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Médicos , Humanos , Ontario , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios de Cohortes , Tamizaje MasivoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Variability in antimicrobial prescribing may indicate an opportunity for improvement in antimicrobial use. We sought to measure physician-level antimicrobial prescribing in adult general medical wards, assess the contribution of patient-level factors to antimicrobial prescribing and evaluate the association between antimicrobial prescribing and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Using the General Medicine Inpatient Initiative (GEMINI) database, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of physician-level volume and spectrum of antimicrobial prescribing in adult general medical wards in 4 academic teaching hospitals in Toronto, Ontario, between April 2010 and December 2019. We stratified physicians into quartiles by hospital site based on volume of antimicrobial prescribing (days of therapy per 100 patient-days and antimicrobial-free days) and antibacterial spectrum (modified spectrum score). The modified spectrum score assigns a value to each antibacterial agent based on the breadth of coverage. We assessed patient-level differences among physician quartiles using age, sex, Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score, discharge diagnosis and Charlson Comorbidity Index. We evaluated the association of clinical outcomes (in-hospital 30-day mortality, length of stay, intensive care unit [ICU] transfer and hospital readmission) with antimicrobial volume and spectrum using multilevel modelling. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 124 physicians responsible for 124 158 hospital admissions. The median physician-level volume of antimicrobial prescribing was 56.1 (interquartile range 51.7-67.5) days of therapy per 100 patient-days. We did not find any differences in baseline patient characteristics by physician prescribing quartile. The difference in mean prescribing between quartile 4 and quartile 1 was 15.8 days of therapy per 100 patient-days (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.6-22.0), representing 30% higher antimicrobial prescribing in the fourth quartile than the first quartile. Patient in-hospital deaths, length of stay, ICU transfer and hospital readmission did not differ by physician quartile. In-hospital mortality was higher among patients cared for by prescribers with higher modified spectrum scores (odds ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.04-1.24). INTERPRETATION: We found that physician-level variability in antimicrobial prescribing was not associated with differences in patient characteristics or outcomes in academic general medicine wards. These findings provide support for considering the lowest quartile of physician antimicrobial prescribing within each hospital as a target for antimicrobial stewardship.
Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Antiinfecciosos/uso terapéutico , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Hospitales , Bases de Datos FactualesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Functional decline is common following acute hospitalization and is associated with hospital readmission, institutionalization, and mortality. People with functional decline may have difficulty accessing post-discharge medical care, even though early physician follow-up has the potential to prevent poor outcomes and is integral to high-quality transitional care. We sought to determine whether recent functional decline was associated with lower rates of post-discharge physician follow-up, and whether this association changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, given that both functional decline and COVID-19 may affect access to post-discharge care. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using health administrative data from Ontario, Canada. We included patients over 65 who were discharged from an acute care facility during March 1st, 2019 - January 31st, 2020 (pre-COVID-19 period), and March 1st, 2020 - January 31st, 2021 (COVID-19 period), and who were assessed for home care while in hospital. Patients with and without functional decline were compared. Our primary outcome was any physician follow-up visit within 7 days of discharge. We used propensity score weighting to compare outcomes between those with and without functional decline. RESULTS: Our study included 21,771 (pre-COVID) and 17,248 (COVID) hospitalized patients, of whom 15,637 (71.8%) and 12,965 (75.2%) had recent functional decline. Pre-COVID, there was no difference in physician follow-up within 7 days of discharge (Functional decline 45.0% vs. No functional decline 44.0%; RR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.98-1.06). These results did not change in the COVID-19 period (Functional decline 51.1% vs. No functional decline 49.4%; RR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.99-1.08, Z-test for interaction p = 0.72). In the COVID-19 cohort, functional decline was associated with having a 7-day physician virtual visit (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.08-1.24) and a 7-day physician home visit (RR 1.64; 95% CI 1.10-2.43). CONCLUSIONS: Functional decline was not associated with reduced 7-day post-discharge physician follow-up in either the pre-COVID-19 or COVID-19 periods. In the COVID-19 period, functional decline was positively associated with 7-day virtual and home-visit follow-up.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pacientes Ambulatorios , Humanos , Alta del Paciente , Cuidados Posteriores , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios de Seguimiento , Pandemias , Estudios Retrospectivos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/terapia , Hospitales , Ontario/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Funding changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic supported the growth of direct-to-consumer virtual walk-in clinics in several countries. Little is known about patients who attend virtual walk-in clinics or how these clinics contribute to care continuity and subsequent health care use. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to describe the characteristics and measure the health care use of patients who attended virtual walk-in clinics compared to the general population and a subset that received any virtual family physician visit. METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study in Ontario, Canada. Patients who had received a family physician visit at 1 of 13 selected virtual walk-in clinics from April 1 to December 31, 2020, were compared to Ontario residents who had any virtual family physician visit. The main outcome was postvisit health care use. RESULTS: Virtual walk-in patients (n=132,168) had fewer comorbidities and lower previous health care use than Ontarians with any virtual family physician visit. Virtual walk-in patients were also less likely to have a subsequent in-person visit with the same physician (309/132,168, 0.2% vs 704,759/6,412,304, 11%; standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.48), more likely to have a subsequent virtual visit (40,030/132,168, 30.3% vs 1,403,778/6,412,304, 21.9%; SMD 0.19), and twice as likely to have an emergency department visit within 30 days (11,003/132,168, 8.3% vs 262,509/6,412,304, 4.1%; SMD 0.18), an effect that persisted after adjustment and across urban/rural resident groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to Ontarians attending any family physician virtual visit, virtual walk-in patients were less likely to have a subsequent in-person physician visit and were more likely to visit the emergency department. These findings will inform policy makers aiming to ensure the integration of virtual visits with longitudinal primary care.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Atención Primaria de Salud , Telemedicina , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Atención a la Salud , Ontario , Médicos de Familia , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of patients who are discharged from hospital for an acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) are readmitted within 30 days. To reduce this, it is important both to identify all individuals admitted with AECOPD and to predict those who are at higher risk for readmission. OBJECTIVES: To develop two clinical prediction models using data available in electronic medical records: 1) identifying patients admitted with AECOPD and 2) predicting 30-day readmission in patients discharged after AECOPD. METHODS: Two datasets were created using all admissions to General Internal Medicine from 2012 to 2018 at two hospitals: one cohort to identify AECOPD and a second cohort to predict 30-day readmissions. We fit and internally validated models with four algorithms. RESULTS: Of the 64,609 admissions, 3,620 (5.6%) were diagnosed with an AECOPD. Of those discharged, 518 (15.4%) had a readmission to hospital within 30 days. For identification of patients with a diagnosis of an AECOPD, the top-performing models were LASSO and a four-variable regression model that consisted of specific medications ordered within the first 72 hours of admission. For 30-day readmission prediction, a two-variable regression model was the top performing model consisting of number of COPD admissions in the previous year and the number of non-COPD admissions in the previous year. CONCLUSION: We generated clinical prediction models to identify AECOPDs during hospitalization and to predict 30-day readmissions after an acute exacerbation from a dataset derived from available EMR data. Further work is needed to improve and externally validate these models.
Asunto(s)
Readmisión del Paciente , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Humanos , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/epidemiología , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/terapia , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Factores de Riesgo , Hospitalización , Hospitales , Progresión de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
We analyzed first-dose coronavirus disease vaccination coverage among US children 5-11 years of age during November-December 2021. Pediatric vaccination coverage varied widely by jurisdiction, age group, and race/ethnicity, and lagged behind vaccination coverage for adolescents aged 12-15 years during the first 2 months of vaccine rollout.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Niño , Preescolar , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Vacunación , Cobertura de VacunaciónRESUMEN
To identify demographic factors associated with delaying or not receiving a second dose of the 2-dose primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccine series, we matched 323 million single Pfizer-BioNTech (https://www.pfizer.com) and Moderna (https://www.modernatx.com) COVID-19 vaccine administration records from 2021 and determined whether second doses were delayed or missed. We used 2 sets of logistic regression models to examine associated factors. Overall, 87.3% of recipients received a timely second dose (≤42 days between first and second dose), 3.4% received a delayed second dose (>42 days between first and second dose), and 9.4% missed the second dose. Persons more likely to have delayed or missed the second dose belonged to several racial/ethnic minority groups, were 18-39 years of age, lived in more socially vulnerable areas, and lived in regions other than the northeastern United States. Logistic regression models identified specific subgroups for providing outreach and encouragement to receive subsequent doses on time.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Etnicidad , Humanos , Grupos Minoritarios , ARN Mensajero , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , VacunaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a major cause of chronic liver disease, which can progress to cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. A timely diagnosis allows for antiviral treatment, which can prevent liver-related complications. Conversely, a late diagnosis signals a missed opportunity for earlier care and treatment. Our objective was to measure the proportion of chronic HBV diagnoses that are made within 6 months of presentation with a liver disease-related complication and examine associated factors and trends over time. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We used provincial laboratory data to identify patients with chronic HBV diagnosed from 2003 to 2014. We measured the proportion who experienced a liver disease complication (decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, or liver transplant) within ±6 months of their HBV diagnosis date. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with HBV diagnosis pericomplication. Of 18,434 patients with chronic HBV, 1,279 (6.9%) developed an HBV-related complication during the follow-up period. Among these, 570 (44.6%) had a first diagnosis pericomplication. HBV diagnosis pericomplication did not decrease over time and was independently associated with older age at HBV diagnosis, rural residence, alcohol use, and moderate to high levels of comorbidity. Female patients, immigrants, and those with more outpatient physician visits were less likely to have an HBV diagnosis pericomplication. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of patients with HBV-related complications are first diagnosed with HBV pericomplication. These signal missed opportunities for earlier detection and treatment. Our findings support expansion of HBV screening.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular/etiología , Hepatitis B Crónica/diagnóstico , Cirrosis Hepática/etiología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/etiología , Consumo de Bebidas Alcohólicas/efectos adversos , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/epidemiología , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/prevención & control , Emigrantes e Inmigrantes/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Hepatitis B Crónica/complicaciones , Hepatitis B Crónica/epidemiología , Humanos , Cirrosis Hepática/epidemiología , Cirrosis Hepática/prevención & control , Neoplasias Hepáticas/epidemiología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/prevención & control , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Análisis Multivariante , Ontario/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Población RuralRESUMEN
No population-based study exists to demonstrate the full-spectrum impact of COVID-19 on hindering incident cancer detection in a large cancer system. Building upon our previous publication in JNCCN, we conducted an updated analysis using 12 months of new data accrued in the pandemic era (extending the study period from September 26, 2020, to October 2, 2021) to demonstrate how multiple COVID-19 waves affected the weekly cancer incidence volume in Ontario, Canada, and if we have fully cleared the backlog at the end of each wave.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Ontario/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Resource restrictions were established in many jurisdictions to maintain health system capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Disrupted healthcare access likely impacted early cancer detection. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the pandemic on weekly reported cancer incidence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a population-based study involving individuals diagnosed with cancer from September 25, 2016, to September 26, 2020, in Ontario, Canada. Weekly cancer incidence counts were examined using segmented negative binomial regression models. The weekly estimated backlog during the pandemic was calculated by subtracting the observed volume from the projected/expected volume in that week. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 358,487 adult patients with cancer. At the start of the pandemic, there was an immediate 34.3% decline in the estimated mean cancer incidence volume (relative rate, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.75), followed by a 1% increase in cancer incidence volume in each subsequent week (relative rate, 1.009; 95% CI, 1.001-1.017). Similar trends were found for both screening and nonscreening cancers. The largest immediate declines were seen for melanoma and cervical, endocrinologic, and prostate cancers. For hepatobiliary and lung cancers, there continued to be a weekly decline in incidence during the COVID-19 period. Between March 15 and September 26, 2020, 12,601 fewer individuals were diagnosed with cancer, with an estimated weekly backlog of 450. CONCLUSIONS: We estimate that there is a large volume of undetected cancer cases related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Incidence rates have not yet returned to prepandemic levels.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Adulto , Masculino , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Pandemias , Ontario/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
COVID-19 can lead to severe outcomes in children, including multisystem inflammatory syndrome, hospitalization, and death (1,2). On November 2, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices issued an interim recommendation for use of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine in children aged 5-11 years for the prevention of COVID-19; however, vaccination coverage in this age group remains low (3). As of June 7, 2022, 36.0% of children aged 5-11 years in the United States had received ≥1 of COVID-19 vaccine (3). Among factors that might influence vaccination coverage is the availability of vaccine providers (4). To better understand how provider availability has affected COVID-19 vaccination coverage among children aged 5-11 years, CDC analyzed data on active COVID-19 vaccine providers and county-level vaccine administration data during November 1, 2021-April 25, 2022. Among 2,586 U.S. counties included in the analysis, 87.5% had at least one active COVID-19 vaccine provider serving children aged 5-11 years. Among the five assessed active provider types, most counties had at least one pharmacy (69.1%) or public health clinic (61.3%), whereas fewer counties had at least one pediatric clinic (29.7%), family medicine clinic (29.0%), or federally qualified health center (FQHC)* (22.8%). Median county-level vaccination coverage was 14.5% (IQR = 8.9%-23.6%). After adjusting for social vulnerability index (SVI) and urbanicity, the analysis found that vaccination coverage among children aged 5-11 years was higher in counties with at least one active COVID-19 vaccine provider than in counties with no active providers (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] = 1.66). For each provider type, presence of at least one provider in the county was associated with higher coverage; the largest difference in vaccination coverage was observed between counties with and without pediatric clinics (aRR = 1.37). Ensuring broad access to COVID-19 vaccines, in addition to other strategies to address vaccination barriers, could help increase vaccination coverage among children aged 5-11 years.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas , Instituciones de Atención Ambulatoria , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Niño , Humanos , Síndrome de Respuesta Inflamatoria Sistémica , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Vacunación , Cobertura de VacunaciónRESUMEN
Higher COVID-19 incidence and mortality rates in rural than in urban areas are well documented (1). These disparities persisted during the B.1.617.2 (Delta) and B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant surges during late 2021 and early 2022 (1,2). Rural populations tend to be older (aged ≥65 years) and uninsured and are more likely to have underlying medical conditions and live farther from facilities that provide tertiary medical care, placing them at higher risk for adverse COVID-19 outcomes (2). To better understand COVID-19 vaccination disparities between urban and rural populations, CDC analyzed county-level vaccine administration data among persons aged ≥5 years who received their first dose of either the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine or a single dose of the Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) COVID-19 vaccine during December 14, 2020-January 31, 2022, in 50 states and the District of Columbia (DC). COVID-19 vaccination coverage with ≥1 doses in rural areas (58.5%) was lower than that in urban counties (75.4%) overall, with similar patterns across age groups and sex. Coverage with ≥1 doses varied among states: 46 states had higher coverage in urban than in rural counties, one had higher coverage in rural than in urban counties. Three states and DC had no rural counties; thus, urban-rural differences could not be assessed. COVID-19 vaccine primary series completion was higher in urban than in rural counties. However, receipt of booster or additional doses among primary series recipients was similarly low between urban and rural counties. Compared with estimates from a previous study of vaccine coverage among adults aged ≥18 years during December 14, 2020-April 10, 2021, these urban-rural disparities among those now eligible for vaccination (aged ≥5 years) have increased more than twofold through January 2022, despite increased availability and access to COVID-19 vaccines. Addressing barriers to vaccination in rural areas is critical to achieving vaccine equity, reducing disparities, and decreasing COVID-19-related illness and death in the United States (2).
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Cobertura de Vacunación , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Población Rural , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Población UrbanaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Local health leaders and the Director General of the World Health Organization alike have observed that COVID-19 "does not discriminate." Nevertheless, the disproportionate representation of people of low socioeconomic status among those infected resembles discrimination. This population-based retrospective cohort study examined COVID-19 case counts and publicly funded healthcare costs in Ontario, Canada, with a focus on marginalization. METHODS: Individuals with their first positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test from January 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020, were linked to administrative databases and matched to negative/untested controls. Mean net (COVID-19-attributable) costs were estimated for 30 days before and after diagnosis, and differences among strata of age, sex, comorbidity, and measures of marginalization were assessed using analysis of variance tests. RESULTS: We included 28 893 COVID-19 cases (mean age 54 years, 56% female). Most cases remained in the community (20 545, 71.1%) or in long-term care facilities (4478, 15.5%), whereas 944 (3.3%) and 2926 (10.1%) were hospitalized, with and without intensive care unit, respectively. Case counts were skewed across marginalization strata with 2 to 7 times more cases in neighborhoods with low income, high material deprivation, and highest ethnic concentration. Mean net costs after diagnosis were higher for males ($4752 vs $2520 for females) and for cases with higher comorbidity ($1394-$7751) (both P < .001) but were similar across levels of most marginalization dimensions (range $3232-$3737, all P ≥ .19). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that allocating resources unequally to marginalized individuals may improve equality in outcomes. It highlights the importance of reducing risk of COVID-19 infection among marginalized individuals to reduce overall costs and increase system capacity.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ontario/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Clase SocialRESUMEN
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a common and treatable cause of cirrhosis and its complications, yet many chronically infected individuals remain undiagnosed until a late stage. We sought to identify the frequency of and risk factors for HCV diagnosis peri-complication, that is within six months of an advanced liver disease complication. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Ontario residents diagnosed with chronic HCV infection between 2003 and 2014. HCV diagnosis peri-complication was defined as the occurrence of decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma or liver transplant within ±6 months of HCV diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for peri-complication diagnosis among all those diagnosed with HCV infection. RESULTS: Our cohort included 39,515 patients with chronic HCV infection, of whom 4.2% (n = 1645) were diagnosed peri-complication; these represented 31.6% of the 5,202 patients who developed complications in the follow-up period. Peri-complication diagnosis became more common over the study period and was associated with increasing age among baby boomers, alcohol use, diabetes mellitus, chronic HBV co-infection and moderate to high levels of morbidity. Female sex, immigrant status, having more previous outpatient physician visits, a previous emergency department visit, a history of drug use or mental health visits were associated with reduced risk of peri-complication diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Over a quarter of HCV-infected patients with complications were diagnosed peri-complication. This problem increased over time, suggesting a need to further expand HCV screening.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Hepatitis C Crónica , Hepatitis C , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Femenino , Hepatitis C Crónica/complicaciones , Hepatitis C Crónica/diagnóstico , Hepatitis C Crónica/epidemiología , Humanos , Cirrosis Hepática/epidemiología , Ontario/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Viral hepatitis C represents a major global burden, particularly among immigrant-receiving countries such as Canada, where knowledge of disparities in hepatitis C virus among immigrant groups for micro-elimination efforts is lacking. We quantify the hepatitis C cascades of care among immigrants and long-term residents prior to the introduction of direct-acting antiviral medications. METHODS: Using laboratory and health administrative records, we described the hepatitis C virus cascades of care in terms of diagnosis, engagement with care, treatment initiation, and clearance in Ontario, Canada (1997-2014). We stratified the cascade by immigrant and long-term resident groups and identify drivers at each stage using multivariable Poisson regression. RESULTS: We included 940 245 individuals in the study with an estimated hepatitis C prevalence of 167 923 (1.4%) overall, 23 759 (0.7%) among all immigrants, and 6019 (1.1%) among immigrants from hepatitis C endemic countries. Overall there were 104 616 individuals with reactive antibody results, 73 861 tested for viral RNA, 52 388 with viral RNA detected, 50 805 genotyped, 13 159 on treatment and 3919 with evidence of viral clearance. Compared to long-term residents, immigrants showed increased nucleic-acid testing (aRR: 1.09 [95%CI: 1.08, 1.10]), treatment initiation (aRR: 1.46 [95%CI: 1.38, 1.54]), and higher clearance rates (aRR: 1.07 [95%CI: 1.03, 1.11]). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatitis C virus is more prevalent among long-term residents compared to immigrants overall, however, immigrants from endemic countries are an important subgroup to consider for future screening and linkage to care initiatives. These findings are prior to the introduction of newer medications and provide a population-based benchmark for follow-up studies and evaluation of treatment programs and surveillance activities.
Asunto(s)
Emigrantes e Inmigrantes , Hepatitis C Crónica , Hepatitis C , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Hepatitis C/diagnóstico , Hepatitis C/tratamiento farmacológico , Hepatitis C/epidemiología , Hepatitis C Crónica/diagnóstico , Hepatitis C Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Hepatitis C Crónica/epidemiología , Humanos , Ontario/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) is highly effective at preventing hospitalization due to SARS-CoV-2 infection and booster and additional primary dose COVID-19 vaccinations increase protection (1-3). During August-November 2021, a series of Emergency Use Authorizations and recommendations, including those for an additional primary dose for immunocompromised persons and a booster dose for persons aged ≥18 years, were approved because of reduced immunogenicity in immunocompromised persons, waning vaccine effectiveness over time, and the introduction of the highly transmissible B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant (4,5). Adults aged ≥65 years are at increased risk for COVID-19-associated hospitalization and death and were one of the populations first recommended a booster dose in the U.S. (5,6). Data on COVID-19 vaccinations reported to CDC from 50 states, the District of Columbia (DC), and eight territories and freely associated states were analyzed to ascertain coverage with booster or additional primary doses among adults aged ≥65 years. During August 13-November 19, 2021, 18.7 million persons aged ≥65 years received a booster or additional primary dose of COVID-19 vaccine, constituting 44.1% of 42.5 million eligible* persons in this age group who previously completed a primary vaccination series. Coverage was similar by sex and age group, but varied by primary series vaccine product and race and ethnicity, ranging from 30.3% among non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native persons to 50.5% among non-Hispanic multiple/other race persons. Strategic efforts are needed to encourage eligible persons aged ≥18 years, especially those aged ≥65 years and those who are immunocompromised, to receive a booster and/or additional primary dose to ensure maximal protection against COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Femenino , Humanos , Esquemas de Inmunización , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Influenza causes considerable morbidity and mortality in the United States. Between 2010 and 2020, an estimated 9-41 million cases resulted in 140,000-710,000 hospitalizations and 12,000-52,000 deaths annually (1). As the United States enters the 2021-22 influenza season, the potential impact of influenza illnesses is of concern given that influenza season will again coincide with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which could further strain overburdened health care systems. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends routine annual influenza vaccination for the 2021-22 influenza season for all persons aged ≥6 months who have no contraindications (2). To assess the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on influenza vaccination coverage, the percentage change between administration of at least 1 dose of influenza vaccine during September-December 2020 was compared with the average administered in the corresponding periods in 2018 and 2019. The data analyzed were reported from 11 U.S. jurisdictions with high-performing state immunization information systems.* Overall, influenza vaccine administration was 9.0% higher in 2020 compared with the average in 2018 and 2019, combined. However, in 2020, the number of influenza vaccine doses administered to children aged 6-23 months and children aged 2-4 years, was 13.9% and 11.9% lower, respectively than the average for each age group in 2018 and 2019. Strategic efforts are needed to ensure high influenza vaccination coverage among all age groups, especially children aged 6 months-4 years who are not yet eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Administration of influenza vaccine and a COVID-19 vaccine among eligible populations is especially important to reduce the potential strain that influenza and COVID-19 cases could place on health care systems already overburdened by COVID-19.