Population Attributable Fraction of Nonvaccination of COVID-19 Due to Vaccine Hesitancy, United States, 2021.

Understanding the extent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) nonvaccination attributable to vaccine hesitancy versus other barriers can help prioritize approaches for increasing vaccination uptake. Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Research and Development Survey, a nationally representative survey fielded from May 1 to June 30, 2021 (n = 5,458), we examined the adjusted population attribution fraction (PAF) of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy attributed to nonvaccination according to sociodemographic characteristics and health-related variables. Overall, the adjusted PAF of nonvaccination attributed to vaccine hesitancy was 76.1%. The PAF was highest among adults who were ≥50 years of age (87.9%), were non-Hispanic White (83.7%), had a bachelor's degree or higher (82.7%), had an annual household income of at least $75,000 (85.5%), were insured (82.4%), and had a usual place for health care (80.7%). The PAF was lower for those who were current smokers (65.3%) compared with never smokers (77.9%), those who had anxiety or depression (65.2%) compared with those who did not (80.1%), and those who had a disability (64.5%) compared with those who did not (79.2%). Disparities in PAF suggest areas for prioritization of efforts for intervention and development of messaging campaigns that address all barriers to uptake, including hesitancy and access, to advance health equity and protect individuals from COVID-19.

Household conditions, COVID-19, and equity: Insight from two nationally representative surveys.

Background: With people across the United States spending increased time at home since the emergence of COVID-19, housing characteristics may have an even greater impact on health. Therefore, we assessed associations between household conditions and COVID-19 experiences. Methods: We used data from two nationally representative surveys: the Tufts Equity Study (TES; n = 1449 in 2021; n = 1831 in 2022) and the Household Pulse Survey (HPS; n = 147,380 in 2021; n = 62,826 in 2022). In the TES, housing conditions were characterized by heating/cooling methods; smoking inside the home; visible water damage/mold; age of housing unit; and self-reported concern about various environmental factors. In TES and HPS, household size was assessed. Accounting for sampling weights, we examined associations between each housing exposure and COVID-19 outcomes (diagnosis, vaccination) using separate logistic regression models with covariates selected based on an evidence-based directed acyclic graph. Results: Having had COVID-19 was more likely among people who reported poor physical housing condition (odds ratio [OR] = 2.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.17-4.59; 2021), visible water damage or mold/musty smells (OR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.10-2.03; 2022), and larger household size (5+ versus 1-2 people; OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.34-1.75, HPS 2022). COVID-19 vaccination was less likely among participants who reported smoke exposure inside the home (OR = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.31-0.90; 2022), poor water quality (OR = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.21-0.85; 2021), noise from industrial activity/construction (OR = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.19-0.99; 2022), and larger household size (OR = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.46-0.71; HPS 2022). Vaccination was also positively associated with poor indoor air quality (OR = 1.96; 95% CI = 1.02-3.72; 2022) and poor physical housing condition (OR = 2.27; 95% CI = 1.01-5.13; 2022). Certain heating/cooling sources were associated with COVID-19 outcomes. Conclusions: Our study found poor housing conditions associated with increased COVID-19 burden, which may be driven by systemic disparities in housing, healthcare, and financial access to resources during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Medical mistrust, discrimination, and COVID-19 vaccine behaviors among a national sample U.S. adults.

Background: COVID-19 vaccine uptake has been suboptimal and disparities in uptake have exacerbated health inequities. It has been postulated that mistrust in the healthcare system and experiences of discrimination or unfair treatment in other settings may be barriers to uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine, although few studies to date have investigated medical mistrust and perceived discrimination together. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey between April 23-May 3, 2021, among a national sample of U.S. adults ages 18 years and older. We assessed receipt of and intention to be vaccinated for COVID-19 and associations with the validated Medical Mistrust Index and Everyday Discrimination Scale. Results: 1449 individuals responded, of whom 70.2% either had ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine or reported that they were 'very' or 'somewhat' likely to be vaccinated in the future. In bivariate analyses, vaccination status was significantly associated with age, race/ethnicity, education, income, employment, marital status, health insurance, and political party affiliation. In multivariable analyses comparing those who had ≥1 vaccine dose or were likely to get vaccinated in the future with those who had not had any vaccine doses or did not intend to be vaccinated, each additional point in the Medical Mistrust Index was independently associated with a 16% decrease in the odds of vaccination (adjusted odds ratio = 0.84; 95% confidence interval = 0.81, 0.86). Discriminatory experiences were not associated with vaccination behavior or intention in bivariate or multivariable analyses. Conclusions: Medical mistrust is significantly associated with vaccination status and intentions. Increasing uptake of COVID-19 vaccines will likely require substantive efforts on the part of public health and healthcare officials to build trust with those who are not yet fully vaccinated. We recommend that these efforts focus on building the 'trustworthiness' of these entities, an approach that will require a paradigm shift away from a focus on correcting individual beliefs and knowledge, to acknowledging and addressing the root causes underlying mistrust.

Prior COVID-19 Infection, Mental Health, Food and Financial Insecurity, and Association With COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage and Intent Among College-Aged Young Adults, US, 2021.

INTRODUCTION: More than 700,000 COVID-19 cases have been linked to American colleges and universities since the beginning of the pandemic. However, studies are limited on the effects of the pandemic on college-aged young adults and its association with their COVID-19 vaccination status and intent. METHODS: Using the Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey (HPS), a large, nationally representative survey fielded from April 14 through May 24, 2021, we assessed the effects of the pandemic (COVID-19 infection, mental health, food and financial security) on COVID-19 vaccination coverage (≥1 dose) and intentions toward vaccination among college-aged young adults in the United States (N = 6,758). We examined factors associated with vaccination coverage and intent, and reasons for not getting vaccinated. RESULTS: Approximately one-fifth (19.6%) of college-aged young adults had a previous diagnosis of COVID-19, 43.5% and 39.1% reported having anxiety or depression, respectively, 10.9% reported that they sometimes or often did not have enough food to eat, and 22.6% and 12.3% found it somewhat or very difficult, respectively, to pay for household expenses. Of college-aged young adults, 63.1% had received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, 15.4% probably would be vaccinated or were unsure about getting the vaccine, and 14.0% probably will not or definitely will not get vaccinated. Adults who were non-Hispanic Black (vs non-Hispanic White) or had food or financial insecurities (vs did not) were less likely to be vaccinated or intend to be vaccinated. Among adults who probably will not or definitely will not be vaccinated, more than one-third said that they did not believe a vaccine was needed. CONCLUSION: Ensuring high and equitable vaccination coverage among college-aged young adults is critical for safely reopening in-person learning and resuming prepandemic activities.

Changes in COVID-19 vaccination receipt and intention to vaccinate by socioeconomic characteristics and geographic area, United States, January 6 - March 29, 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies suggested that almost one-third of U.S. adults did not plan to get a COVID-19 vaccine once it is available to them. The purpose of this study was to examine changes in vaccine intentions and attitudes by sociodemographic characteristics and geographic areas, factors associated with vaccination intent, and reasons for non-vaccination among a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults. METHODS: Data from six waves of the Household Pulse Survey (6 January - 29 March 2021) were analyzed. Differences between January and March were assessed using t-tests. Factors associated with vaccination intent were examined in multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: From early January to late March, vaccination receipt of ≥1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine or intention to definitely get vaccinated increased from 54.7 to 72.3%; however, disparities in vaccination intent continued to exist by age group, race/ethnic groups, and socioeconomic characteristics. Vaccine receipt and the intent were the lowest for region 4 (southeastern U.S.) throughout this period. Adults who had a previous COVID-19 diagnosis or were unsure if they have had COVID-19 were less likely to intend to get vaccinated [prevalence ratio = 0.92 (95%CI: 0.90-0.93) and 0.80 (95%CI: 0.74-0.85), respectively]. The belief that a vaccine is not needed increased by more than five percentage points from early January to late March. CONCLUSION: Intent to definitely get a COVID-19 vaccine increased by almost 18 percentage points from early January to late March; however, younger adults, adults who are non-Hispanic Black or other races, adults of lower socioeconomic status, and adults living in the southeastern U.S. region (Region 4) continue to have higher coverage gaps and levels of vaccine hesitancy. Emphasizing the importance of vaccination among all populations, and removing barriers to vaccines, may lead to a reduction of COVID-19 incidence and bring an end to the pandemic.KEY MESSAGESReceipt of ≥1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and intent to probably or definitely get vaccinated increased from early January to late March; however, disparities in vaccine intent continued to exist by age group, race/ethnic groups, and socioeconomic characteristics.Vaccine receipt and the intent were the lowest for region 4 (southeastern U.S.) compared to other regions during this period.Adults who had a previous COVID-19 diagnosis or were unsure if they have had COVID-19 were less likely to intend to get vaccinated; overall, the belief that a vaccine is not needed to be increased by more than 5% points from early January to late March.[Formula: see text].

COVID-19 Vaccination Intent, Perceptions, and Reasons for Not Vaccinating Among Groups Prioritized for Early Vaccination - United States, September and December 2020.

As of February 8, 2021, 59.3 million doses of vaccines to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had been distributed in the United States, and 31.6 million persons had received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (1). However, national polls conducted before vaccine distribution began suggested that many persons were hesitant to receive COVID-19 vaccination (2). To examine perceptions toward COVID-19 vaccine and intentions to be vaccinated, in September and December 2020, CDC conducted household panel surveys among a representative sample of U.S. adults. From September to December, vaccination intent (defined as being absolutely certain or very likely to be vaccinated) increased overall (from 39.4% to 49.1%); the largest increase occurred among adults aged ≥65 years. If defined as being absolutely certain, very likely, or somewhat likely to be vaccinated, vaccination intent increased overall from September (61.9%) to December (68.0%). Vaccination nonintent (defined as not intending to receive a COVID-19 vaccination) decreased among all adults (from 38.1% to 32.1%) and among most sociodemographic groups. Younger adults, women, non-Hispanic Black (Black) persons, adults living in nonmetropolitan areas, and adults with lower educational attainment, with lower income, and without health insurance were most likely to report lack of intent to receive COVID-19 vaccine. Intent to receive COVID-19 vaccine increased among adults aged ≥65 years by 17.1 percentage points (from 49.1% to 66.2%), among essential workers by 8.8 points (from 37.1% to 45.9%), and among adults aged 18-64 years with underlying medical conditions by 5.3 points (from 36.5% to 41.8%). Although confidence in COVID-19 vaccines increased during September-December 2020 in the United States, additional efforts to tailor messages and implement strategies to further increase the public's confidence, overall and within specific subpopulations, are needed. Ensuring high and equitable vaccination coverage across all populations is important to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and mitigate the impact of the pandemic.

Tobacco Use, Secondhand Smoke, and Smoke-Free Home Rules in Multiunit Housing.

INTRODUCTION: Multiunit housing (MUH) residents are particularly susceptible to involuntary secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure in their home, which can enter their living units from nearby units and shared areas where smoking occurs. To date, no study has assessed non-cigarette tobacco use among MUH residents. This study assessed the prevalence and sociodemographic correlates of tobacco use (combustible, noncombustible, any tobacco use including electronic cigarettes), smoke-free home rules, and SHS incursions among U.S. MUH residents. METHODS: Data came from the 2013-2014 National Adult Tobacco Survey, a telephone survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years. Analyses were conducted in 2015. Prevalence of current tobacco use and smoke-free home rules were assessed overall and by sociodemographics, stratified by housing type (single family versus MUH). Prevalence and adjusted odds of SHS incursions among MUH residents with smoke-free home rules were assessed. RESULTS: Tobacco use was higher among adults living in MUH (24.7%) than those in single-family housing (18.9%, p<0.05). Smoke-free home rules were higher among adults living in single-family housing (86.7%) than those in MUH (80.9%, p<0.05). Among MUH residents with smoke-free homes, 34.4% experienced SHS incursions. Adjusted odds of SHS incursions were greater among women, younger adults, non-Hispanic blacks, Hispanics, and those with lower income. CONCLUSIONS: One quarter of MUH residents use tobacco, and one third of MUH residents with smoke-free rules experience SHS incursions. Interventions are warranted to promote tobacco cessation and smoke-free building policies to protect all MUH residents, employees, and visitors from the dangers of tobacco use and SHS.

Trends in awareness and use of electronic cigarettes among US adults, 2010-2013.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) marketing has increased considerably since the product entered the US market in 2007, thereby warranting additional surveillance to monitor recent trends in population-level awareness and utilization. We assessed the prevalence, characteristics, and trends in e-cigarette awareness and use among nationally representative samples of US adults during 2010-2013. METHODS: Data came from the 2010-2013 HealthStyles survey, an annual consumer-based web survey of US adults aged ≥ 18 years. Sample sizes ranged from 2,505 (2010) to 4,170 (2012). Descriptive statistics were used to assess e-cigarette awareness, ever use, and current use (use within the past 30 days) overall and by sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, income, US region, and cigarette smoking status. Trends were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: During 2010-2013, increases (p < .05) were observed for e-cigarette awareness (40.9%-79.7%), ever use (3.3%-8.5%), and current use (1.0%-2.6%). Awareness increased among all socio demographic subpopulations during 2010-2013 (p < .05); an increase in ever use of e-cigarettes occurred among all sociodemographic groups except those aged 18-24 years, Hispanics, and those living in the Midwest (p < .05). During 2010-2013, ever use increased among current (9.8%-36.5%) and former (2.5%-9.6%) cigarette smokers (p < .05), but it remained unchanged among never smokers (1.3%-1.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Awareness and use of e-cigarettes increased considerably among US adults during 2010-2013. In 2013, more than one-third of current cigarette smokers reported having ever used e-cigarettes. Given the uncertain public health impact of e-cigarettes, continued surveillance of emerging use patterns is critical for public health planning.

Quality-of-life and cost-benefit analysis of a home environmental assessment program in Connecticut.

BACKGROUND: The National Asthma Education Prevention Program's (NAEPP) Expert Panel Report 3 (EPR3) guidelines have stressed the need for environmental control measures for asthma, but there is limited evidence of their efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of an in-home asthma intervention program for children and adults in Connecticut, we conducted a panel study to analyze quality-of-life indicators for asthmatic patients and the cost-benefit relationship in preventive care versus acute care. METHODS: The Asthma Indoor Reduction Strategies (AIRS) program was developed to reduce acute asthma episodes and improve asthma control through patient education and a home environmental assessment. Follow-up was conducted at 2-week, 3-month, and 6-month intervals. Measured quality-of-life indicators included number of unscheduled acute care visits, days absent from school/work due to asthma, times rescue inhaler used, and number of symptom-free days. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine whether significant differences exist in quality-of-life indicators at follow-up compared to that at the initial visit. Cost-benefit analysis was conducted by tabulating costs associated with physician office visits and emergency department (ED) visits due to asthma for children and adults separately. RESULTS: Twenty percent of participants in the program met the criteria for well-controlled asthma, 16% for not well-controlled asthma, and 64% for very poorly controlled asthma. At 6 months follow-up, the mean number of unscheduled acute care visits, days absent from school/work due to asthma, and times rescue inhaler used in the past week decreased by 87%, 82%, and 74%, respectively, whereas the mean number of symptom-free days increased by 27% compared to the initial visit. Furthermore, the percent of participants with very poorly controlled asthma decreased from 64% at initial visit to 13% at 6 months follow-up. All changes were statistically significant at p < 0.05. A net savings of $26,720 per 100 participants was estimated at 6 months follow-up due to decreases in unscheduled acute care visits for adults and children. CONCLUSION: Significant improvement in quality-of-life and decreases in healthcare resource utilization and costs were found after implementation of the AIRS program in Connecticut.