RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Differences in acute COVID-19 associated morbidity based on race, ethnicity, and gender have been well described; however, less is known about differences in subsequent longer term health-related quality of life and well-being. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included symptomatic adults tested for SARS-CoV-2 who completed baseline and 3-month follow-up surveys. Using the PROMIS-29 tool, a validated measure of health and well-being, we compared outcomes at 3 months and change in outcomes from baseline to 3 months among groups with different races, ethnicities, and/or sexes. RESULTS: Among 6044 participants, 4113 (3202 COVID +) were included. Among COVID + participants, compared to non-Hispanic White participants, Black participants had better PROMIS T-scores for cognitive function (3.6 [1.1, 6.2]) and fatigue (- 4.3 [- 6.6, - 2.0]) at 3 months and experienced more improvement in fatigue over 3 months (- 2.7 [- 4.7, - 0.8]). At 3 months, compared with males, females had worse PROMIS T-scores for cognitive function (- 4.1 [- 5.6, - 2.6]), physical function (- 2.1 [- 3.1, - 1.0]), social participation (- 2.8 [- 4.2, - 1.5]), anxiety (2.8 [1.5, 4.1]), fatigue (5.1 [3.7, 6.4]), and pain interference (2.0 [0.9, 3.2]). Females experienced less improvement in fatigue over 3 months (3.1 [2.0, 4.3]). Transgender/non-binary/other gender participants had worse 3-month scores in all domains except for sleep disturbance and pain interference. CONCLUSIONS: Three months after the initial COVID-19 infection, Black participants reported better cognitive function and fatigue, while females and other gender minoritized groups experienced lower well-being. Future studies are necessary to better understand how and why social constructs, specifically race, ethnicity, and gender, influence differences in COVID-19-related health outcomes. Trials Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04610515.
RESUMEN
While the early effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the United States labor market are well-established, less is known about the long-term impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection and Long COVID on employment. To address this gap, we analyzed self-reported data from a prospective, national cohort study to estimate the effects of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms at three months post-infection on missed workdays and return to work. The analysis included 2,939 adults in the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE) study who tested positive for their initial SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of enrollment, were employed before the pandemic, and completed a baseline and three-month electronic survey. At three months post-infection, 40.8% of participants reported at least one SARS-CoV-2 symptom and 9.6% of participants reported five or more SARS-CoV-2 symptoms. When asked about missed work due to their SARS-CoV-2 infection at three months, 7.2% of participants reported missing ≥10 workdays and 13.9% of participants reported not returning to work since their infection. At three months, participants with ≥5 symptoms had a higher adjusted odds ratio of missing ≥10 workdays (2.96, 95% CI 1.81-4.83) and not returning to work (2.44, 95% CI 1.58-3.76) compared to those with no symptoms. Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 symptoms were common, affecting 4-in-10 participants at three-months post-infection, and were associated with increased odds of work loss, most pronounced among adults with ≥5 symptoms at three months. Despite the end of the federal Public Health Emergency for COVID-19 and efforts to "return to normal", policymakers must consider the clinical and economic implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on people's employment status and work absenteeism, particularly as data characterizing the numerous health and well-being impacts of Long COVID continue to emerge. Improved understanding of risk factors for lost work time may guide efforts to support people in returning to work.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Femenino , Masculino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Estudios Prospectivos , Reinserción al Trabajo/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Empleo , Autoinforme , Pandemias , Absentismo , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccine uptake is low among underserved populations whose primary health care access occurs in emergency departments. We sought to determine whether implementation of two interventions would increase 30-day influenza vaccine uptake in unvaccinated patients in the emergency department. METHODS: This three-group, prospective, cluster-randomized controlled trial compared two interventions with a control group in noncritically ill, adult patients in the emergency department who were not vaccinated for influenza in the current vaccine season. The unit of randomization was individual calendar days. Participants received either Intervention M (an influenza vaccine messaging platform consisting of a video, one-page flyer, and scripted message, followed by a vaccine acceptance question and provider notification if participants indicated vaccine acceptance), Intervention Q (no messaging but the vaccine acceptance question and provider notification), or control (usual care/no intervention). The primary outcome was receipt of an influenza vaccine at 30 days ascertained by electronic health record review and telephone follow-up, comparing the Intervention M group with the control group. Secondary outcomes included comparisons of 30-day vaccine uptake in Intervention Q versus control and Intervention M versus Intervention Q. RESULTS: Between October 2022 and February 2023, a total of 767 trial participants were enrolled at six emergency departments in five U.S. cities. Median age was 46 years; 353 (46%) participants were female, 274 (36%) were African American, and 158 (21%) were Latinx; 126 (16%) lacked health insurance, and 244 (32%) lacked primary care. The Intervention M, Intervention Q, and control groups had 30-day vaccine uptakes of 41%, 32%, and 15%, respectively (P<0.0001 for Intervention M vs. control). Comparing Intervention M versus Intervention Q, the adjusted difference in 30-day vaccine uptake was 8.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -0.1 to 17.6 percentage points). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of influenza vaccine messaging platforms (video clips, printed materials, and verbal scripts) improved 30-day vaccine uptake among unvaccinated patients in the emergency department. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05836818.).
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Humanos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Femenino , Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Adulto , Estudios Prospectivos , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Promoción de la Salud/métodos , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
Background: A better understanding of refugee mobility is needed to optimize HIV care in refugee settlements. Objectives: We aimed to characterize mobility patterns among people living with HIV in refugee settlements in Uganda and evaluate the association between mobility and retention in HIV care. Methods: Refugees and Ugandan nationals accessing HIV services at seven health centers in refugee settlements across Uganda, with access to a phone, were recruited and followed for six months. Participants received an intake survey and monthly phone surveys on mobility and HIV. Clinic visit and viral suppression data were extracted from clinic registers. Mobility and HIV data were presented descriptively, and an alluvial plot was generated characterizing mobility for participants' most recent trip. Bivariate Poisson regression models were used to describe the associations between long-term mobility (≥1 continuous month away in the past year) and demographic characteristics, retention (≥1 clinic visit/6 months) and long-term mobility, and retention and general mobility (during any follow-up month: ≥2 trips, travel outside the district or further, or spending >1-2 weeks (8-14 nights) away). Findings: Mobility data were provided by 479 participants. At baseline, 67 participants (14%) were considered long-term mobile. Male sex was associated with an increased probability of long-term mobility (RR 2.02; 95%CI: 1.30-3.14, p < 0.01). In follow-up, 185 participants (60% of respondents) were considered generally mobile. Reasons for travel included obtaining food or supporting farming activities (45% of trips) and work or trade (33% of trips). Retention in HIV care was found for 417 (87%) participants. Long-term mobility was associated with a 14% (RR 0.86; 95%CI: 0.75-0.98) lower likelihood of retention (p = 0.03). Conclusions: Refugees and Ugandan nationals accessing HIV care in refugee settlements frequently travel to support their survival needs. Mobility is associated with inferior retention and should be considered in interventions to optimize HIV care.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por VIH , Refugiados , Humanos , Masculino , Infecciones por VIH/epidemiología , Uganda/epidemiología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , ViajeRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Human trafficking is a global public health issue that is associated with serious short- and long-term morbidity. To address and prevent human trafficking, vulnerabilities to human trafficking and forces sustaining it need to be better understood among specific subpopulations. We aimed to explore risk and protective factors for human trafficking, the health impact of exploitation, and barriers and facilitators of seeking help throughout the human trafficking trajectory among forced labor and sex trafficking victims in Kampala, Uganda. METHODS: Between March and November 2020, in-depth, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 108 victims of forced labor and sex trafficking who had completed a human trafficking survey conducted by the Uganda Youth Development Link (UYDEL). Participants who experienced various forms of exploitation were purposively invited for qualitative interviews and a convenience sample was interviewed. Interviews explored personal history, trafficking recruitment, experiences of exploitation and abuse, and experiences seeking help. Interviews were analyzed using a combination of deductive and inductive thematic analysis. Themes and subthemes were organized using an adapted conceptual framework of human trafficking. RESULTS: Poverty and an abusive home life, frequently triggered by the death of a caretaker, underpinned vulnerability to human trafficking recruitment. Limited education, lack of social support, and survival needs pushed victims into exploitative situations. Victims of human trafficking were systematically exploited and exposed to dangerous working conditions. Victims suffered from sexually transmitted diseases, incontinence, traumatic fistulae, musculoskeletal injuries, and mental health symptoms. Lack of awareness of resources, fear of negative consequences, restrictions on movement, and dependence on the trafficker and exploitation income prevented victims from seeking help. The police and healthcare workers were the few professionals that they interacted with, but these interactions were oftentimes negative experiences. CONCLUSIONS: To address and prevent human trafficking, localized interventions are needed at all stages of the human trafficking trajectory. Health impacts of human trafficking are severe. As some of the few professionals trafficking victims interact with, police and healthcare workers are important targets for anti-trafficking training. Improved understanding of human trafficking drivers and barriers and facilitators to seeking help can inform the design of necessary interventions.
Asunto(s)
Trata de Personas , Adolescente , Humanos , Trata de Personas/prevención & control , Trata de Personas/psicología , Uganda , Factores de Riesgo , Personal de Salud/psicología , Salud MentalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Minoritized communities including refugees are at an increased risk of poorly controlled hypertension. Evidence indicates that self-measured blood pressure monitoring (SMBP) is an effective method to improve blood pressure control in patients with hypertension. However, it has not been studied among refugee populations. The objective of this study is to examine barriers and facilitators to SMBP among Arab refugees resettled in the United States (US) with diagnosed hypertension. METHODS: A total of 109 participants were recruited through a Federally Qualified Health Center system that is a major provider of healthcare to refugees in San Diego, California. Participants completed a questionnaire and were interviewed using in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed and translated, and data were coded using inductive thematic analysis and organized based on the theory of care-seeking behavior. RESULTS: Several barriers to engaging in effective SMBP monitoring were identified. Clinical and sociodemographic barriers included reliance on public monitors and poor hypertension literacy. Psychosocial barriers of affect, norms, and habits included fear and anxiety from hypertension, cultural stigma of illness, and conditional SMBP with symptoms, respectively. Utility psychosocial barriers included lack of SMBP prioritization in treatment and perceived inaccuracy of home monitors. Family members' support with home monitoring served as an important facilitator to SMBP. CONCLUSIONS: There are several barriers to effective SMBP among the US-resettled Arab refugee population that may reflect unique cultural and care-seeking behaviors. Tailored public health and clinical interventions are needed to support refugee patients and providers to improve hypertension self-management behaviors for this unique population.
Asunto(s)
Hipertensión , Refugiados , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Presión Sanguínea/fisiología , Refugiados/psicología , Árabes , Investigación CualitativaRESUMEN
To further the understanding of post-COVID conditions, and provide a more nuanced description of symptom progression, resolution, emergence, and reemergence after SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-like illness, analysts examined data from the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE), a prospective multicenter cohort study. This report includes analysis of data on self-reported symptoms collected from 1,296 adults with COVID-like illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using a Food and Drug Administration-approved polymerase chain reaction or antigen test at the time of enrollment and reported symptoms at 3-month intervals for 12 months. Prevalence of any symptom decreased substantially between baseline and the 3-month follow-up, from 98.4% to 48.2% for persons who received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (COVID test-positive participants) and from 88.2% to 36.6% for persons who received negative SARS-CoV-2 test results (COVID test-negative participants). Persistent symptoms decreased through 12 months; no difference between the groups was observed at 12 months (prevalence among COVID test-positive and COVID test-negative participants = 18.3% and 16.1%, respectively; p>0.05). Both groups reported symptoms that emerged or reemerged at 6, 9, and 12 months. Thus, these symptoms are not unique to COVID-19 or to post-COVID conditions. Awareness that symptoms might persist for up to 12 months, and that many symptoms might emerge or reemerge in the year after COVID-like illness, can assist health care providers in understanding the clinical signs and symptoms associated with post-COVID-like conditions.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Enfermedad Aguda/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , COVID-19/epidemiología , Prueba de COVID-19 , Síndrome Post Agudo de COVID-19/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In conflict-affected settings, access to primary healthcare for displaced populations is constrained by multiple challenges. These include geographical, cultural, communication, logistical and financial barriers, as well as risks posed to health workers and the population by insecurity. Different models of care are used to provide primary healthcare to affected communities. However, there is a paucity of evidence on how these models are selected and implemented by organisations working in conflict and displacement-affected settings. Our aim was to explore the different primary healthcare delivery models used in conflict-affected settings to understand gaps in existing healthcare delivery models. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. The review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. We searched six databases for manuscripts published from January 1992 to December 2020. Publications were included if they reported primary healthcare models of care in conflict-affected settings of Africa. Data was analyzed descriptively and thematically using tables, charts and text. RESULTS: Forty-eight primary research articles were included for analysis from which thirty-three were rated as "high" quality. The results showed that the models of care in place in these conflict-affected settings include health facility-based, community-based, mobile clinics, outreach and home visits. Primary healthcare for internally displaced persons and refugees is provided by a wide range of actors including national and international organisations. A range of services is offered, most commonly nutrition, mental health and sexual/reproductive health. Some organisations offer vertical (stand-alone) services, while others use an integrated service delivery model. Multiple cadres of healthcare workers provide services, frequently lay healthcare workers such as Community Health Workers. CONCLUSION: Understanding the different modalities of primary healthcare delivery in conflict-affected settings is important to identify existing practices and gaps in service delivery. Service delivery using community health workers in conflict-affected settings is a low-cost primary care delivery strategy that may help optimize contributions of existing personnel through task shifting.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Perspectives on COVID-19 risk and the willingness and ability of persons living in refugee settlements to adopt COVID-19 prevention strategies have not been rigorously evaluated. The realities of living conditions in Ugandan refugee settlements may limit the extent to which refugees can uptake strategies to mitigate COVID-19 risk. METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted between April 2021 and April 2022 to assess COVID-19 knowledge, risk perception, prevention strategy adoption including COVID-19 vaccination, and COVID-19 impact on living conditions in refugee settlements in Uganda. Interview participants included 28 purposively selected refugees who called into "Dial-COVID", a free telephone COVID-19 information collection and dissemination platform that was advertised in refugee settlements by community health workers. Interviews were analyzed using a combination of deductive and inductive content analysis. Emerging themes were mapped onto the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify domains influencing prevention behavior. Results were synthesized to provide intervention and policy recommendations for risk mitigation in refugee settlements for COVID-19 and future infectious disease outbreaks. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic detrimentally impacted economic and food security as well as social interactions in refugee settlements. Youth were considered especially impacted, and participants reported incidents of child marriage and teenage pregnancy following school closures. Participants displayed general knowledge of COVID-19 and expressed willingness to protect themselves and others from contracting COVID-19. Risk mitigation strategy uptake including COVID-19 vaccination was influenced by COVID-19 knowledge, emotions surrounding COVID-19, the environmental context and resources, personal goals, beliefs about the consequences of (non)adoption, social influences, and behavior reinforcement. Resource constraints, housing conditions, and competing survival needs challenged the adoption of prevention strategies and compliance decreased over time. CONCLUSIONS: Contextual challenges impact the feasibility of COVID-19 risk mitigation strategy uptake in refugee settlements. Pre-existing hardships in this setting were amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic and related lockdowns. Targeted dispelling of myths, alignment of information across communication mediums, supporting survival needs and leveraging of respected role models are strategies that may hold potential to mitigate risk of infectious diseases in this setting. REGISTRATION DETAILS: World Pandemic Research Network - 490,652.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Refugiados , Adolescente , Niño , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , Refugiados/psicología , Uganda/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Pandemias/prevención & control , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , VacunaciónRESUMEN
Background: While prior work examining severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern focused on hospitalization and death, less is known about differences in clinical presentation. We compared the prevalence of acute symptoms across pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron. Methods: We conducted an analysis of the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE), a cohort study enrolling symptomatic SARS-CoV-2-positive participants. We determined the association between the pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron time periods and the prevalence of 21 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute symptoms. Results: We enrolled 4113 participants from December 2020 to June 2022. Pre-Delta vs Delta vs Omicron participants had increasing sore throat (40.9%, 54.6%, 70.6%; P < .001), cough (50.9%, 63.3%, 66.7%; P < .001), and runny noses (48.9%, 71.3%, 72.9%; P < .001). We observed reductions during Omicron in chest pain (31.1%, 24.2%, 20.9%; P < .001), shortness of breath (42.7%, 29.5%, 27.5%; P < .001), loss of taste (47.1%, 61.8%, 19.2%; P < .001), and loss of smell (47.5%, 55.6%, 20.0%; P < .001). After adjustment, those infected during Omicron had significantly higher odds of sore throat vs pre-Delta (odds ratio [OR], 2.76; 95% CI, 2.26-3.35) and Delta (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.69-2.28). Conclusions: Participants infected during Omicron were more likely to report symptoms of common respiratory viruses, such as sore throat, and less likely to report loss of smell and taste. Trial registration: NCT04610515.
RESUMEN
Background: The prevalence, incidence, and interrelationships of persistent symptoms after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection vary. There are limited data on specific phenotypes of persistent symptoms. Using latent class analysis (LCA) modeling, we sought to identify whether specific phenotypes of COVID-19 were present 3 months and 6 months post-infection. Methods: This was a multicenter study of symptomatic adults tested for SARS-CoV-2 with prospectively collected data on general symptoms and fatigue-related symptoms up to 6 months postdiagnosis. Using LCA, we identified symptomatically homogenous groups among COVID-positive and COVID-negative participants at each time period for both general and fatigue-related symptoms. Results: Among 5963 baseline participants (4504 COVID-positive and 1459 COVID-negative), 4056 had 3-month and 2856 had 6-month data at the time of analysis. We identified 4 distinct phenotypes of post-COVID conditions (PCCs) at 3 and 6 months for both general and fatigue-related symptoms; minimal-symptom groups represented 70% of participants at 3 and 6 months. When compared with the COVID-negative cohort, COVID-positive participants had higher occurrence of loss of taste/smell and cognition problems. There was substantial class-switching over time; those in 1 symptom class at 3 months were equally likely to remain or enter a new phenotype at 6 months. Conclusions: We identified distinct classes of PCC phenotypes for general and fatigue-related symptoms. Most participants had minimal or no symptoms at 3 and 6 months of follow-up. Significant proportions of participants changed symptom groups over time, suggesting that symptoms present during the acute illness may differ from prolonged symptoms and that PCCs may have a more dynamic nature than previously recognized. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04610515.
RESUMEN
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Little is known about COVID-19 booster vaccine hesitancy. We sought to determine the uptake of booster vaccines, as well as the prevalence of and reasons for booster hesitancy in emergency department (ED) patients. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey study of adult patients at 5 safety-net hospital EDs in 4 US cities from mid-January to mid-July 2022. Participants were fluent in English or Spanish and had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine. We assessed the following parameters: (1) the prevalence of nonboosted status and reasons for not getting a booster; (2) the prevalence of booster vaccine hesitancy and reasons for hesitancy; and (3) the association of hesitancy with demographic variables. RESULTS: Of 802 participants, 373 (47%) were women, 478 (60%) were non-White, 182 (23%) lacked primary care, 110 (14%) primarily spoke Spanish, and 370 (46%) were publicly insured. Of the 771 participants who completed their primary series, 316 (41%) had not received a booster vaccine; the primary reason for nonreceipt was lack of opportunity (38%). Of the nonboosted participants, 179 (57%) expressed hesitancy, citing need for more information (25%), concerns about side effects (24%), and the belief that a booster was unnecessary after the initial series (20%). In the multivariable analysis, Asian participants were less likely to be booster hesitant than White participants (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05 to 0.93), non-English-speaking participants were more likely to be booster hesitant than English-speaking participants (aOR 2.35, 95% CI 1.49 to 3.71), and Republican participants were more likely to be booster hesitant than Democrat participants (aOR 6.07, 95% CI 4.21 to 8.75). CONCLUSION: Of almost half of this urban ED population who had not received a COVID-19 booster vaccine, more than one third stated that lack of opportunity to receive one was the primary reason. Furthermore, more than half of the nonboosted participants were booster hesitant, with many expressing concerns or a desire for more information that may be addressed with booster vaccine education.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Estudios Transversales , Vacilación a la Vacunación , Servicio de Urgencia en HospitalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In conflict-affected settings, access to health care for displaced populations is constrained by barriers including geographical, cultural, communication, logistical, financial and insecurity. A six year humanitarian crises in the North West and South West regions of Cameroon has caused 27% of health facilities to be non-functional. The eleven year crisis in North-East Nigeria, has caused the closure of 26% of health facilities. These closure of health facilities and population displacement led to health care delivery using humanitarian funding by multiple different agencies. However, there is a paucity of evidence on the selection and design of the primary health care delivery models used in humanitarian settings. To ensure efficient use of resources and quality of services, model of care selection should be evidence based and informed by the specific humanitarian context. This research protocol aims to explore how primary health care models are selected by humanitarian organizations. METHODS: We will conduct a cross sectional quantitative survey to map the range of primary health care delivery models used by humanitarian organisations in Cameroon and Nigeria. Using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with staff from humanitarian organizations and internally displaced persons, we will explore the factors influencing the selection of primary health care models in these settings and determine the coverage and gaps in services across the different primary health care models. Quantitative data will be analysed in a descriptive manner and qualitative data will be analysed thematically. DISCUSSION: Different models of care have been reported to be used by humanitarian organisations in conflict-affected settings, yet evidence on how different models are selected is lacking. A detailed understanding of the rationale for selection, the design and quality considerations of the strategies used to deliver health care will be obtained using a survey, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions.
Asunto(s)
Atención a la Salud , Organizaciones , Humanos , Camerún , Nigeria , Estudios TransversalesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Persons living in refugee settlements in sub-Saharan Africa may be at increased risk for COVID-19 and experience barriers to accessing COVID-19 information. We aimed to evaluate the implementation of "Dial-COVID" a multi-lingual, toll free, telephone platform that uses interactive voice response (IVR) to track COVID-19 symptoms/exposure and disseminate COVID-19 health information in refugee settlements in Uganda. We hypothesized that IVR could provide an alternative way to screen for COVID-19 and communicate public health information to humanitarian populations when physical access and testing capacity were limited. METHODS: The Dial-COVID IVR platform was created in ten languages and advertised by community health workers in refugee settlements for participants to call into toll free. In a recorded IVR symptom survey, participants were screened for COVID-19 symptoms/exposures and based on their responses, received tailored public health messages about COVID-19 risk mitigation in accordance with Uganda Ministry of Health guidelines. Here we report the challenges and lessons learned implementing this research during the pandemic. RESULTS: Between February 2021 and March 2022, 15,465 calls were received by the Dial-COVID platform from all 31 refugee settlements in Uganda through which 6,913 symptom surveys were completed and 10,411 public health messages were disseminated in all study languages. Uptake of Dial-COVID fluctuated with the national COVID-19 caseload and was impacted by phone ownership and connectivity in refugee settlements. Intensified advertising efforts promoted Dial-COVID uptake. Flexibility to adapt IVR messages was contingent on translation capacity. CONCLUSION: Refugees living in refugee settlements across Uganda accessed Dial-COVID to share and obtain COVID-19 information suggesting that IVR holds potential for rapid information dissemination and screening of humanitarian populations during future infectious disease outbreaks and may be a valuable tool for routine public health programs. IVR adaptation flexibility and reach are influenced by language constraints and by contextual factors related to platform access. REGISTRATION DETAILS: World Pandemic Research Network- 490652.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Teléfono Celular , Refugiados , Humanos , Uganda , Tecnología , Difusión de la InformaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Most research on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants focuses on initial symptomatology with limited longer-term data. We characterized prevalences of prolonged symptoms 3 months post-SARS-CoV-2 infection across 3 variant time-periods (pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron). METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study of adults with acute illness tested for SARS-CoV-2 compared fatigue severity, fatigue symptoms, organ system-based symptoms, and ≥3 symptoms across variants among participants with a positive ("COVID-positive") or negative SARS-CoV-2 test ("COVID-negative") at 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 testing. Variant periods were defined by dates with ≥50% dominant strain. We performed multivariable logistic regression modeling to estimate independent effects of variants adjusting for sociodemographics, baseline health, and vaccine status. RESULTS: The study included 2402 COVID-positive and 821 COVID-negative participants. Among COVID-positives, 463 (19.3%) were pre-Delta, 1198 (49.9%) Delta, and 741 (30.8%) Omicron. The pre-Delta COVID-positive cohort exhibited more prolonged severe fatigue (16.7% vs 11.5% vs 12.3%; P = .017) and presence of ≥3 prolonged symptoms (28.4% vs 21.7% vs 16.0%; P < .001) compared with the Delta and Omicron cohorts. No differences were seen in the COVID-negatives across time-periods. In multivariable models adjusted for vaccination, severe fatigue and odds of having ≥3 symptoms were no longer significant across variants. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 infection were more common among participants infected during pre-Delta than with Delta and Omicron; however, these differences were no longer significant after adjusting for vaccination status, suggesting a beneficial effect of vaccination on risk of long-term symptoms. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04610515.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Prueba de COVID-19 , Estudios Prospectivos , Fatiga/epidemiología , Fatiga/etiologíaRESUMEN
Importance: Large segments of the US population's primary health care access occurs in emergency departments (EDs). These groups have disproportionately high COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and lower vaccine uptake. Objective: To determine whether provision of COVID-19 vaccine messaging platforms in EDs increases COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake in unvaccinated patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted at 7 hospital EDs in 4 US cities from December 6, 2021, to July 28, 2022. Noncritically ill adult patients who had not previously received COVID-19 vaccines were enrolled. Interventions: A 3-pronged COVID-19 vaccine messaging platform (an English- or Spanish-language 4-minute video; a 1-page informational flyer; and a brief, scripted message from an ED physician or nurse) was delivered during patient waiting times. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 2 primary outcomes were (1) COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, assessed by survey responses in the ED, and (2) receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine within 30 days, ascertained by ED confirmation of vaccination, electronic health record review, and telephone follow-up. Results: Of the 496 participants enrolled (221 during intervention weeks and 275 during control weeks), the median (IQR) age was 39 (30-54) years, 205 (41.3%) were female, 193 (38.9%) were African American, 97 (19.6%) were Latinx, and 218 (44.0%) lacked primary care physicians. More intervention group participants, compared with control participants, stated that they would accept the vaccine in the ED (57 [25.8%] vs 33 [12.0%]; adjusted difference, 11.9 [95% CI, 4.5-19.3] percentage points; number needed to treat [NNT], 8 [95% CI, 5-22]). More intervention group participants than control participants received a COVID-19 vaccine within 30 days of their ED visit (44 [20.0%] vs 24 [8.7%]; adjusted difference, 7.9 [95% CI, 1.7-14.1] percentage points; NNT, 13 [95% CI, 7-60]). The intervention group had greater outcome effect sizes than the control group in participants who lacked a primary care physician (acceptance, 38 of 101 [37.6%] vs 16 of 117 [13.7%] [P for interaction = .004]; uptake, 31 of 101 [30.7%] vs 11 of 117 [9.4%] [P for interaction = .006]), as well as in Latinx persons (acceptance, 23 of 52 [44.2%] vs 5 of 48 [10.4%] [P for interaction = .004]; uptake, 22 of 52 [42.3%] vs 4 of 48 [8.3%] [P for interaction < .001]). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cluster randomized clinical trial showed that with low NNT, implementation of COVID-19 vaccine messaging platforms in EDs leads to greater vaccine acceptance and uptake in unvaccinated ED patients. Broad implementation in EDs could lead to greater COVID-19 vaccine delivery to underserved populations whose primary health care access occurs in EDs. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05142332.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Efforts to promote COVID-19 vaccine acceptance must consider the critical role of the emergency department (ED) in providing health care to underserved patients. Focusing on patients who lacked primary care, we sought to elicit the perspectives of unvaccinated ED patients regarding COVID-19 vaccination concerns and potential approaches that might increase their vaccine acceptance. METHODS: We conducted this qualitative interview study from August to November 2021 at four urban EDs in San Francisco, California; Seattle, Washington; Durham, North Carolina; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We included ED patients who were ≥18 years old, fluent in English or Spanish, had not received a COVID-19 vaccine, and did not have primary care physicians or clinics. We excluded patients who were unable to complete an interview, in police custody, under suspicion of active COVID-19 illness, or presented with a psychiatric chief complaint. We enrolled until we reached thematic saturation in relevant domains. We analyzed interview transcripts with a content analysis approach focused on identifying concerns about COVID-19 vaccines and ideas regarding the promotion of vaccine acceptance and potential trusted messengers. RESULTS: Of 65 patients enrolled, 28 (43%) identified as female, their median age was 36 years (interquartile range 29-49), and 12 (18%) interviews were conducted in Spanish. Primary concerns about COVID-19 vaccines included risk of complications, known and unknown side effects, and fear of contracting COVID-19 from vaccines. Trust played a major role for patients in deciding which sources to use for vaccine information and in engendering vaccine acceptance. Health care providers and family or friends were commonly cited as trusted messengers of information. CONCLUSIONS: We characterized concerns about COVID-19 vaccines, uncovered themes that may promote vaccine acceptance, and identified trusted messengers-primarily health care professionals. These data may inform the development of nuanced COVID-19 vaccine messaging platforms to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among underserved ED populations.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Vacilación a la Vacunación , Adolescente , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Vacunas , Vacilación a la Vacunación/psicologíaRESUMEN
Introduction: Data on ethnic and racial differences in symptoms and health-related impacts following SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited. We aimed to estimate the ethnic and racial differences in symptoms and health-related impacts 3 and 6 months after the first SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: Participants included adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection enrolled in a prospective multicenter US study between 12/11/2020 and 7/4/2022 as the primary cohort of interest, as well as a SARS-CoV-2-negative cohort to account for non-SARS-CoV-2-infection impacts, who completed enrollment and 3-month surveys (N = 3,161; 2,402 SARS-CoV-2-positive, 759 SARS-CoV-2-negative). Marginal odds ratios were estimated using GEE logistic regression for individual symptoms, health status, activity level, and missed work 3 and 6 months after COVID-19 illness, comparing each ethnicity or race to the referent group (non-Hispanic or white), adjusting for demographic factors, social determinants of health, substance use, pre-existing health conditions, SARS-CoV-2 infection status, COVID-19 vaccination status, and survey time point, with interactions between ethnicity or race and time point, ethnicity or race and SARS-CoV-2 infection status, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status and time point. Results: Following SARS-CoV-2 infection, the majority of symptoms were similar over time between ethnic and racial groups. At 3 months, Hispanic participants were more likely than non-Hispanic participants to report fair/poor health (OR: 1.94; 95%CI: 1.36-2.78) and reduced activity (somewhat less, OR: 1.47; 95%CI: 1.06-2.02; much less, OR: 2.23; 95%CI: 1.38-3.61). At 6 months, differences by ethnicity were not present. At 3 months, Other/Multiple race participants were more likely than white participants to report fair/poor health (OR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.25-2.88), reduced activity (somewhat less, OR: 1.72; 95%CI: 1.21-2.46; much less, OR: 2.08; 95%CI: 1.18-3.65). At 6 months, Asian participants were more likely than white participants to report fair/poor health (OR: 1.88; 95%CI: 1.13-3.12); Black participants reported more missed work (OR, 2.83; 95%CI: 1.60-5.00); and Other/Multiple race participants reported more fair/poor health (OR: 1.83; 95%CI: 1.10-3.05), reduced activity (somewhat less, OR: 1.60; 95%CI: 1.02-2.51; much less, OR: 2.49; 95%CI: 1.40-4.44), and more missed work (OR: 2.25; 95%CI: 1.27-3.98). Discussion: Awareness of ethnic and racial differences in outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection may inform clinical and public health efforts to advance health equity in long-term outcomes.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Autoinforme , Factores Raciales , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estado de Salud , BlancoRESUMEN
Importance: Long-term sequelae after symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection may impact well-being, yet existing data primarily focus on discrete symptoms and/or health care use. Objective: To compare patient-reported outcomes of physical, mental, and social well-being among adults with symptomatic illness who received a positive vs negative test result for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was a planned interim analysis of an ongoing multicenter prospective longitudinal registry study (the Innovative Support for Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry [INSPIRE]). Participants were enrolled from December 11, 2020, to September 10, 2021, and comprised adults (aged ≥18 years) with acute symptoms suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of receipt of a SARS-CoV-2 test approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. The analysis included the first 1000 participants who completed baseline and 3-month follow-up surveys consisting of questions from the 29-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29; 7 subscales, including physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, social participation, sleep disturbance, and pain interference) and the PROMIS Short Form-Cognitive Function 8a scale, for which population-normed T scores were reported. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 status (positive or negative test result) at enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean PROMIS scores for participants with positive COVID-19 tests vs negative COVID-19 tests were compared descriptively and using multivariable regression analysis. Results: Among 1000 participants, 722 (72.2%) received a positive COVID-19 result and 278 (27.8%) received a negative result; 406 of 998 participants (40.7%) were aged 18 to 34 years, 644 of 972 (66.3%) were female, 833 of 984 (84.7%) were non-Hispanic, and 685 of 974 (70.3%) were White. A total of 282 of 712 participants (39.6%) in the COVID-19-positive group and 147 of 275 participants (53.5%) in the COVID-19-negative group reported persistently poor physical, mental, or social well-being at 3-month follow-up. After adjustment, improvements in well-being were statistically and clinically greater for participants in the COVID-19-positive group vs the COVID-19-negative group only for social participation (ß = 3.32; 95% CI, 1.84-4.80; P < .001); changes in other well-being domains were not clinically different between groups. Improvements in well-being in the COVID-19-positive group were concentrated among participants aged 18 to 34 years (eg, social participation: ß = 3.90; 95% CI, 1.75-6.05; P < .001) and those who presented for COVID-19 testing in an ambulatory setting (eg, social participation: ß = 4.16; 95% CI, 2.12-6.20; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, participants in both the COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative groups reported persistently poor physical, mental, or social well-being at 3-month follow-up. Although some individuals had clinically meaningful improvements over time, many reported moderate to severe impairments in well-being 3 months later. These results highlight the importance of including a control group of participants with negative COVID-19 results for comparison when examining the sequelae of COVID-19.