Anxiety Screening: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Anxiety is commonly seen in primary care and associated with substantial burden. Objective: To review the benefits and harms of screening and treatment for anxiety and the accuracy of instruments to detect anxiety among primary care patients. Data Sources: MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Cochrane library through September 7, 2022; references of existing reviews; ongoing surveillance for relevant literature through November 25, 2022. Study Selection: English-language original studies and systematic reviews of screening or treatment compared with control conditions and test accuracy studies of a priori-selected screening instruments were included. Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles for inclusion. Two investigators independently rated study quality. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Meta-analysis results were included from existing systematic reviews where available; meta-analyses were conducted on original research when evidence was sufficient. Main Outcomes and Measures: Anxiety and depression outcomes; global quality of life and functioning; sensitivity and specificity of screening tools. Results: Of the 59 publications included, 40 were original studies (N = 275 489) and 19 were systematic reviews (including ≈483 studies [N≈81 507]). Two screening studies found no benefit for screening for anxiety. Among test accuracy studies, only the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) GAD-2 and GAD-7 screening instruments were evaluated by more than 1 study. Both screening instruments had adequate accuracy for detecting generalized anxiety disorder (eg, across 3 studies the GAD-7 at a cutoff of 10 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.94] and specificity of 0.89 [95% CI, 0.83 to 0.94]). Evidence was limited for other instruments and other anxiety disorders. A large body of evidence supported the benefit of treatment for anxiety. For example, psychological interventions were associated with a small pooled standardized mean difference of -0.41 in anxiety symptom severity in primary care patients with anxiety (95% CI, -0.58 to -0.23]; 10 RCTs [n = 2075]; I2 = 40.2%); larger effects were found in general adult populations. Conclusions and Relevance: Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions about the benefits or harms of anxiety screening programs. However, clear evidence exists that treatment for anxiety is beneficial, and more limited evidence indicates that some anxiety screening instruments have acceptable accuracy to detect generalized anxiety disorder.

Depression and Suicide Risk Screening: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Depression is common and associated with substantial burden. Suicide rates have increased over the past decade, and both suicide attempts and deaths have devastating effects on individuals and families. Objective: To review the benefits and harms of screening and treatment for depression and suicide risk and the accuracy of instruments to detect these conditions among primary care patients. Data Sources: MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Cochrane library through September 7, 2022; references of existing reviews; ongoing surveillance for relevant literature through November 25, 2022. Study Selection: English-language studies of screening or treatment compared with control conditions, or test accuracy of screening instruments (for depression, instruments were selected a priori; for suicide risk, all were included). Existing systematic reviews were used for treatment and test accuracy for depression. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently rated study quality. Findings were synthesized qualitatively, including reporting of meta-analysis results from existing systematic reviews; meta-analyses were conducted on original research when evidence was sufficient. Main Outcomes and Measures: Depression outcomes; suicidal ideation, attempts, and deaths; sensitivity and specificity of screening tools. Results: For depression, 105 studies were included: 32 original studies (N=385 607) and 73 systematic reviews (including ≈2138 studies [N ≈ 9.8 million]). Depression screening interventions, many of which included additional components beyond screening, were associated with a lower prevalence of depression or clinically important depressive symptomatology after 6 to 12 months (pooled odds ratio, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.50-0.73]; reported in 8 randomized clinical trials [n=10 244]; I2 = 0%). Several instruments demonstrated adequate test accuracy (eg, for the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire at a cutoff of 10 or greater, the pooled sensitivity was 0.85 [95% CI, 0.79-0.89] and specificity was 0.85 [95% CI, 0.82-0.88]; reported in 47 studies [n = 11 234]). A large body of evidence supported benefits of psychological and pharmacologic treatment of depression. A pooled estimate from trials used for US Food and Drug Administration approval suggested a very small increase in the absolute risk of a suicide attempt with second-generation antidepressants (odds ratio, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.09-2.15]; n = 40 857; 0.7% of antidepressant users had a suicide attempt vs 0.3% of placebo users; median follow-up, 8 weeks). Twenty-seven studies (n = 24 826) addressed suicide risk. One randomized clinical trial (n=443) of a suicide risk screening intervention found no difference in suicidal ideation after 2 weeks between primary care patients who were and were not screened for suicide risk. Three studies of suicide risk test accuracy were included; none included replication of any instrument. The included suicide prevention studies generally did not demonstrate an improvement over usual care, which typically included specialty mental health treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: Evidence supported depression screening in primary care settings, including during pregnancy and postpartum. There are numerous important gaps in the evidence for suicide risk screening in primary care settings.

Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Emergency Department Visits, and Hospitalizations Because of COVID-19 Among Persons Aged ≥12 Years, by COVID-19 Vaccination Status - Oregon and Washington, July 4-September 25, 2021.

Population-based rates of infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) and related health care utilization help determine estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and averted illnesses, especially since the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant began circulating in June 2021. Among members aged ≥12 years of a large integrated health care delivery system in Oregon and Washington, incidence of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations were calculated by COVID-19 vaccination status, vaccine product, age, race, and ethnicity. Infection after full vaccination was defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 molecular test result ≥14 days after completion of an authorized COVID-19 vaccination series.* During the July-September 2021 surveillance period, SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred among 4,146 of 137,616 unvaccinated persons (30.1 per 1,000 persons) and 3,009 of 344,848 fully vaccinated persons (8.7 per 1,000). Incidence was higher among unvaccinated persons than among vaccinated persons across all demographic strata. Unvaccinated persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection were more than twice as likely to receive ED care (18.5%) or to be hospitalized (9.0%) than were vaccinated persons with COVID-19 (8.1% and 3.9%, respectively). The crude mortality rate was also higher among unvaccinated patients (0.43 per 1,000) than in fully vaccinated patients (0.06 per 1,000). These data support CDC recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination, including additional and booster doses, to protect individual persons and communities against COVID-19, including illness and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant (1).

Risk for Subdeltoid Bursitis After Influenza Vaccination: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Subdeltoid bursitis has been reported as an adverse event after intramuscular vaccination in the deltoid muscle. Most published case reports involved influenza vaccine. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the risk for subdeltoid bursitis after influenza vaccination. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The Vaccine Safety Datalink, which contains health encounter data for 10.2 million members of 7 U.S. health care organizations. PATIENTS: Persons who received an inactivated influenza vaccine during the 2016-2017 influenza season. MEASUREMENTS: Potential incident cases were identified by searching administrative data for persons with a shoulder bursitis diagnostic code within 180 days after receiving an injectable influenza vaccine in the same arm. The date of reported bursitis symptom onset was abstracted from the medical record. A self-controlled risk interval analysis was used to calculate the incidence rate ratio of bursitis in a risk interval of 0 to 2 days after vaccination versus a control interval of 30 to 60 days, which represents the background rate. The attributable risk was also estimated. RESULTS: The cohort included 2 943 493 vaccinated persons. Sixteen cases of symptom onset in the risk interval and 51 cases of symptom onset in the control interval were identified. The median age of persons in the risk interval was 57.5 years (range, 24 to 98 years), and 69% were women. The incidence rate ratio was 3.24 (95% CI, 1.85 to 5.68). The attributable risk was 7.78 (CI, 2.19 to 13.38) additional cases of bursitis per 1 million persons vaccinated. LIMITATION: The results may not be generalizable to vaccinations done in other types of health care settings. CONCLUSION: Although an increased risk for bursitis after vaccination was present, the absolute risk was small. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Factors associated with recruitment, surveillance participation, and retention in an observational study of pregnant women and influenza.

BACKGROUND: This report describes the results of recruitment efforts and the subsequent participation of pregnant women in study activities in a 2010-2012 observational study focused on influenza illness and vaccination in California and Oregon, USA. METHODS: Socio-demographic and health characteristics extracted from electronic medical records were compared among pregnant women who enrolled in the study, refused to participate, or were never reached for study invitation. These characteristics plus additional self-reported information were compared between women who enrolled in two study tracks: a prospective cohort vs. women enrolled following an acute respiratory illness (ARI) medical encounter. The characteristics of women who participated in weekly ARI surveillance (cohort enrollees, year one) and a 6-month follow-up interview (all enrollees) were also examined. RESULTS: In year one, we reached 51% (6938/13,655) of the potential participants we tried to contact by telephone, and 20% (1374/6938) of the women we invited agreed to join the prospective cohort. Women with chronic medical conditions, pregnancy complications, and medical encounters for ARI (prior to pregnancy or during the study period) were more likely to be reached for recruitment and more likely to enroll in the cohort. Twenty percent of cohort enrollees never started weekly surveillance reports; among those who did, reports were completed for 55% of the surveillance weeks. Receipt of the influenza vaccine was higher among women who joined the cohort (76%) than those who refused (56%) or were never reached (54%). In contrast, vaccine uptake among medical enrollees in year one (54%; 53/98) and two (52%; 79/151) was similar to other pregnant women in those years. Study site, white race, non-Hispanic ethnicity, and not having a child aged < 13 years at home were most consistently associated with joining as a cohort or medical enrollee and completing study activities after joining. CONCLUSIONS: We observed systematic differences in socio-demographic and health characteristics across different levels of participant engagement and between cohort and medical enrollees. More methodological research and innovation in conducting prospective observational studies in this population are needed, especially when extended participant engagement and ongoing surveillance are required.

Interventions to Prevent Perinatal Depression: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Depression during pregnancy and the postpartum period is relatively common and can have adverse effects on both mother and child. Objective: To systematically review benefits and harms of primary care-relevant interventions to prevent perinatal depression, a major or minor depressive episode during pregnancy or up to 1 year after childbirth, to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources: MEDLINE, PubMED (for publisher-supplied records only), PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; surveillance through December 5, 2018. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled intervention studies of interventions (eg, behavior-based, antidepressants, dietary supplements) to prevent perinatal depression in general populations of pregnant and postpartum individuals or in those at increased risk of perinatal depression. Large cohort studies were considered for harms of antidepressant use only. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles and quality rated included studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the benefits of the interventions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Depression status; depression symptoms; maternal, infant, and child health outcomes. Results: Fifty studies (N = 22 385) that met inclusion criteria were identified. Counseling interventions were the most widely studied interventions. Compared with controls, counseling interventions were associated with a lower likelihood of onset of perinatal depression (pooled risk ratio [RR], 0.61 [95% CI, 0.47-0.78]; 17 RCTs [n = 3094]; I2 = 39.0%). The absolute difference in the risk of perinatal depression ranged from 1.3% greater reduction in the control group to 31.8% greater reduction in the intervention group. Health system interventions showed a benefit in 3 studies (n = 5321) and had a pooled effect size similar to that of the counseling interventions, but the pooled effect was not statistically significant using a method appropriate for pooling a small number of studies (restricted maximum likelihood RR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.22-1.53]; n = 4738; I2 = 66.3%; absolute risk reduction range, -3.1% to -13.1%). None of the behavior-based interventions reported on harms directly. A smaller percentage of participants prescribed sertraline had a depression recurrence compared with those prescribed placebo (7% vs 50%, P = .04) at 20 weeks postpartum in 1 very small RCT (n = 22 analyzed) but with an increased risk of adverse effects to the mother. Conclusions and Relevance: Counseling interventions can be effective in preventing perinatal depression, although most evidence was limited to women at increased risk for perinatal depression. A variety of other intervention approaches provided some evidence of effectiveness but lacked a robust evidence base and need further research.

Screening for Syphilis Infection in Nonpregnant Adults and Adolescents: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

This systematic review to support the 2022 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement on screening for syphilis infection summarizes published evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for syphilis infection in asymptomatic, nonpregnant adults and adolescents at increased risk for syphilis infection.

Primary Care Interventions to Support Breastfeeding: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Although 80% of infants in the United States start breastfeeding, only 22% are exclusively breastfed up to around 6 months as recommended by a number of professional organizations. Objective: To systematically review the evidence on the benefits and harms of breastfeeding interventions to support the US Preventive Services Task Force in updating its 2008 recommendation. Data Sources: MEDLINE, PubMed, Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO for studies published in the English language between January 1, 2008, and September 25, 2015. Studies included in the previous review were re-evaluated for inclusion. Surveillance for new evidence in targeted publications was conducted through January 26, 2016. Study Selection: Review of randomized clinical trials and before-and-after studies with concurrent controls conducted in a developed country that evaluated a primary care-relevant breastfeeding intervention among mothers of full- or near-term infants. Of 211 full-text articles reviewed, 52 studies met inclusion criteria. Thirty-one studies were newly identified, and 21 studies were carried forward from the previous review. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Independent critical appraisal of all provisionally included studies. Data were independently abstracted by one reviewer and confirmed by another. Main Outcomes and Measures: Child and maternal health outcomes, rates and duration of breastfeeding, and harms related to interventions as prespecified before data collection. Results: Fifty-two studies (n = 66 757) in 57 publications were included. Six trials (n = 2219) reported inconsistent effects of the interventions on infant health outcomes; no studies reported maternal health outcomes. Pooled estimates based on random-effects meta-analyses using the DerSimonian and Laird method indicated beneficial associations between individual-level breastfeeding interventions and any breastfeeding for less than 3 months (risk ratio [RR], 1.07 [95% CI, 1.03-1.11]; 26 studies [n = 11 588]), at 3 to less than 6 months (RR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.04-1.18]; 23 studies [n = 8942]), and for exclusive breastfeeding for less than 3 months (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.11-1.33]; 22 studies [n = 8246]), 3 to less than 6 months (RR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.05-1.38]; 18 studies [n = 7027]), and at 6 months (RR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.02-1.32]; 17 studies [n = 7690]). Absolute differences in the rates of any breastfeeding ranged from 14.1% in favor of the control group to 18.4% in favor of the intervention group. There was no significant association between interventions and breastfeeding initiation (RR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.99-1.02]; 14 studies [n = 9428]). There was limited mixed evidence of an association between system-level interventions and rates of breastfeeding from well-controlled studies as well as for harms related to breastfeeding interventions, including maternal anxiety scores, decreased confidence, and concerns about confidentiality. Conclusions and Relevance: The updated evidence confirms that breastfeeding support interventions are associated with an increase in the rates of any and exclusive breastfeeding. There are limited well-controlled studies examining the effectiveness of system-level policies and practices on rates of breastfeeding or child health and none for maternal health.

Severity of influenza and noninfluenza acute respiratory illness among pregnant women, 2010-2012.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to identify characteristics of influenza illness contrasted with noninfluenza acute respiratory illness (ARI) in pregnant women. STUDY DESIGN: ARI among pregnant women was identified through daily surveillance during 2 influenza seasons (2010-2012). Within 8 days of illness onset, nasopharyngeal swabs were collected, and an interview was conducted for symptoms and other characteristics. A follow-up telephone interview was conducted 1-2 weeks later, and medical records were extracted. Severity of illness was evaluated by self-assessment of 12 illness symptoms, subjective ratings of overall impairment, highest reported temperature, illness duration, and medical utilization. RESULTS: Of 292 pregnant women with ARI, 100 tested positive for influenza viruses. Women with influenza illnesses reported higher symptom severity than those with noninfluenza ARI (median score, 18 vs 16 of 36; P < .05) and were more likely to report severe subjective feverishness (18% vs 5%; P < .001), myalgia (28% vs 14%; P < .005), cough (46% vs 30%; P < .01), and chills (25% vs 13%; P < .01). More influenza illnesses were associated with fever greater than 38.9°C (20% vs 5%; P < .001) and higher subjective impairment (mean score, 5.9 vs 4.8; P < .001). Differences in overall symptom severity, fever, cough, chills, early health care-seeking behavior, and impairment remained significant in multivariate models after adjusting for study site, season, age, vaccination status, and number of days since illness onset. CONCLUSION: Influenza had a greater negative impact on pregnant women than noninfluenza ARIs, as indicated by symptom severity and greater likelihood of elevated temperature. These results highlight the importance of preventing and treating influenza illnesses in pregnant women.

Effectiveness of seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine for preventing influenza virus illness among pregnant women: a population-based case-control study during the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 influenza seasons.

BACKGROUND: Although vaccination with trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) is recommended for all pregnant women, no vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies of TIV in pregnant women have assessed laboratory-confirmed influenza outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study over 2 influenza seasons (2010-2011 and 2011-2012) among Kaiser Permanente health plan members in 2 metropolitan areas in California and Oregon. We compared the proportion vaccinated among 100 influenza cases (confirmed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) with the proportions vaccinated among 192 controls with acute respiratory illness (ARI) who tested negative for influenza and 200 controls without ARI (matched by season, site, and trimester). RESULTS: Among influenza cases, 42% were vaccinated during the study season compared to 58% and 63% vaccinated among influenza-negative controls and matched ARI-negative controls, respectively. The adjusted VE of the current season vaccine against influenza A and B was 44% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5%-67%) using the influenza-negative controls and 53% (95% CI, 24%-72%) using the ARI-negative controls. Receipt of the prior season's vaccine, however, had an effect similar to receipt of the current season's vaccine. As such, vaccination in either or both seasons had statistically similar adjusted VE using influenza-negative controls (VE point estimates range = 51%-76%) and ARI-negative controls (48%-76%). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination reduced the risk of ARI associated with laboratory-confirmed influenza among pregnant women by about one-half, similar to VE observed among all adults during these seasons.

Classification Accuracy and Description of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome in an Integrated Health Care System, 2006-2017.

INTRODUCTION: Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a chronic illness characterized by marked functional limitations and fatigue. Electronic health records can be used to estimate incidence of ME/CFS but may have limitations. METHODS: The authors used International Classification of Diseases (ICD) diagnosis codes to identify all presumptive cases of ME/CFS among 9- to 39-year-olds from 2006 to 2017. The authors randomly selected 200 cases for medical record review to classify cases as confirmed, probable, or possible, based on which and how many current clinical criteria they met, and to further characterize their illness. The authors calculated crude annual rates of ME/CFS coding stratified by age and sex using only those ICD codes that had identified confirmed, probable, or possible ME/CFS cases in the medical record review. RESULTS: The authors identified 522 individuals with presumptive ME/CFS based on having ≥ 1 ICD codes for ME/CFS in their electronic medical record. Of the 200 cases selected, records were available and reviewed for 188. Thirty (15%) were confirmed or probable ME/CFS cases, 39 (19%) were possible cases, 119 (60%) were not cases, and 12 (6%) had no medical record available. Confirmed/probable cases commonly had chronic pain (80%) or anxiety/depression (70%), and only 13 (43%) had completed a sleep study. Overall, 37 per 100,000 had ICD codes that identified confirmed, probable, or possible ME/CFS. Rates increased between 2006 and 2017, with the largest absolute increase among those 30-39 years old. CONCLUSIONS: Using ICD diagnosis codes alone inaccurately estimates ME/CFS incidence.

Post-COVID conditions following COVID-19 vaccination: a retrospective matched cohort study of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

COVID-19 vaccinations protect against severe illness and death, but associations with post-COVID conditions (PCC) are less clear. We aimed to evaluate the association between prior COVID-19 vaccination and new-onset PCC among individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection across eight large healthcare systems in the United States. This retrospective matched cohort study used electronic health records (EHR) from patients with SARS-CoV-2 positive tests during March 2021-February 2022. Vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 cases were matched on location, test date, severity of acute infection, age, and sex. Vaccination status was ascertained using EHR and integrated data on externally administered vaccines. Adjusted relative risks (RRs) were obtained from Poisson regression. PCC was defined as a new diagnosis in one of 13 PCC categories 30 days to 6 months following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. The study included 161,531 vaccinated COVID-19 cases and 161,531 matched unvaccinated cases. Compared to unvaccinated cases, vaccinated cases had a similar or lower risk of all PCC categories except mental health disorders (RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10). Vaccination was associated with ≥10% lower risk of sensory (RR: 0.90, 0.86-0.95), circulatory (RR: 0.88, 0.83-0.94), blood and hematologic (RR: 0.79, 0.71-0.89), skin and subcutaneous (RR: 0.69, 0.66-0.72), and non-specific COVID-19 related disorders (RR: 0.53, 0.51-0.56). In general, associations were stronger at younger ages but mostly persisted regardless of SARS-CoV-2 variant period, receipt of ≥3 vs. 1-2 vaccine doses, or time since vaccination. Pre-infection vaccination was associated with reduced risk of several PCC outcomes and hence may decrease the long-term consequences of COVID-19.

Attitudes Toward COVID-19 Vaccines Among Pregnant and Recently Pregnant Individuals.

Importance: Pregnant people and infants are at high risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Understanding changes in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant and recently pregnant people is important for public health messaging. Objective: To assess attitudinal trends regarding COVID-19 vaccines by (1) vaccination status and (2) race, ethnicity, and language among samples of pregnant and recently pregnant Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) members from 2021 to 2023. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional surveye study included pregnant or recently pregnant members of the VSD, a collaboration of 13 health care systems and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Unvaccinated, non-Hispanic Black, and Spanish-speaking members were oversampled. Wave 1 took place from October 2021 to February 2022, and wave 2 took place from November 2022 to February 2023. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to September 2023. Exposures: Self-reported or electronic health record (EHR)-derived race, ethnicity, and preferred language. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported vaccination status and attitudes toward monovalent (wave 1) or bivalent Omicron booster (wave 2) COVID-19 vaccines. Sample- and response-weighted analyses assessed attitudes by vaccination status and 3 race, ethnicity, and language groupings of interest. Results: There were 1227 respondents; all identified as female, the mean (SD) age was 31.7 (5.6) years, 356 (29.0%) identified as Black race, 555 (45.2%) identified as Hispanic ethnicity, and 445 (36.3%) preferred the Spanish language. Response rates were 43.5% for wave 1 (652 of 1500 individuals sampled) and 39.5% for wave 2 (575 of 1456 individuals sampled). Respondents were more likely than nonrespondents to be White, non-Hispanic, and vaccinated per EHR. Overall, 76.8% (95% CI, 71.5%-82.2%) reported 1 or more COVID-19 vaccinations; Spanish-speaking Hispanic respondents had the highest weighted proportion of respondents with 1 or more vaccination. Weighted estimates of somewhat or strongly agreeing that COVID-19 vaccines are safe decreased from wave 1 to 2 for respondents who reported 1 or more vaccinations (76% vs 50%; χ21 = 7.8; P < .001), non-Hispanic White respondents (72% vs 43%; χ21 = 5.4; P = .02), and Spanish-speaking Hispanic respondents (76% vs 53%; χ21 = 22.8; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: Decreasing confidence in COVID-19 vaccine safety in a large, diverse pregnant and recently pregnant insured population is a public health concern.

Care trajectories for patients utilizing electronic visits for COVID-like symptoms in a large healthcare delivery system: May 2020-December 2021.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information about how on-line screening tools developed by integrated systems facilitated management of COVID-like illness patients. METHODS: Using the Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW) Electronic Health Record, we identified adult plan members who accessed online COVID-19 screening e-visits and enumerated their subsequent medical encounters, tests for SARS-CoV-2, and test outcomes. RESULTS: Between May 2020 and December 2021, members completed 55,139 e-visits, with disproportionate representation among females (65% vs. 53% in the overall membership) and members aged <45 years (61% vs. 39%). Thirty percent of patients (16,953) were managed entirely through e-visits and 70% received subsequent in-person care. The percent of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals was highest among the 1055 individuals triaged to inpatient care (17.9%), compared to 9.5% among those escalated to additional ambulatory care. CONCLUSIONS: The e-visit on-line screening tool helped KPNW assist thousands of patients with COVID-19 symptoms, avoid unnecessary in-person patient encounters, and preserved KPNW infection control and pandemic surge capacity.

Epidemiology of Upper Limb Complex Regional Pain Syndrome in a Retrospective Cohort of Persons Aged 9-30 Years, 2002-2017.

Introduction This paper describes the epidemiology and clinical presentation of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) in a large, integrated health care delivery system; and CRPS incidence rates (IRs) over a time period spanning human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine licensure and published case reports of CRPS following HPV vaccination. Methods The authors examined CRPS diagnoses in patients aged 9-30 years between January 2002 and December 2017 using electronic medical records, excluding patients with lower limb diagnoses only. Medical record abstraction and adjudication were conducted to verify diagnoses and describe clinical characteristics. CRPS IRs were calculated for 3 periods: Period 1 (2002-2006: before HPV vaccine licensure), Period 2 (2007-2012: after licensure but before published case reports), and Period 3 (2013-2017: after published case reports). Results A total of 231 individuals received an upper limb or unspecified CRPS diagnosis code during the study period; 113 cases were verified through abstraction and adjudication. Most verified cases (73%) were associated with a clear precipitating event (eg, non-vaccine-related injury, surgical procedure). The authors identified only 1 case in which a practitioner attributed CRPS onset to HPV vaccination. Twenty-five incident cases occurred in Period 1 (IR = 4.35/100,000 person-years (PY), 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.94-6.44), 42 in Period 2 (IR = 5.94/100,000 PY, 95% CI = 4.39-8.04), and 29 in Period 3 (IR = 4.53/100,000 PY, 95% CI = 3.15-6.52); differences between periods were not statistically significant. Conclusion These data provide a comprehensive assessment of the epidemiology and characteristics of CRPS in children and young adults and provide further reassurance about the safety of HPV vaccination.

Medication for Opioid Use Disorder During Pregnancy - Maternal and Infant Network to Understand Outcomes Associated with Use of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder During Pregnancy (MAT-LINK), 2014-2021.

Problem: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is recommended for persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) during pregnancy. However, knowledge gaps exist about best practices for management of OUD during pregnancy and these data are needed to guide clinical care. Period Covered: 2014-2021. Description of the System: Established in 2019, the Maternal and Infant Network to Understand Outcomes Associated with Medication for Opioid Use Disorder During Pregnancy (MAT-LINK) is a surveillance network of seven clinical sites in the United States. Boston Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, The Ohio State University, and the University of Utah were the initial clinical sites in 2019. In 2021, three clinical sites were added to the network (the University of New Mexico, the University of Rochester, and the University of South Florida). Persons receiving care at the seven clinical sites are diverse in terms of geography, urbanicity, race and ethnicity, insurance coverage, and type of MOUD received. The goal of MAT-LINK is to capture demographic and clinical information about persons with OUD during pregnancy to better understand the effect of MOUD on outcomes and, ultimately, provide information for clinical care and public health interventions for this population. MAT-LINK maintains strict confidentiality through robust information technology architecture. MAT-LINK surveillance methods, population characteristics, and evaluation findings are described in this inaugural surveillance report. This report is the first to describe the system, presenting detailed information on funding, structure, data elements, and methods as well as findings from a surveillance evaluation. The findings presented in this report are limited to selected demographic characteristics of pregnant persons overall and by MOUD treatment status. Clinical and outcome data are not included because data collection and cleaning have not been completed; initial analyses of clinical and outcome data will begin in 2023. Results: The MAT-LINK surveillance network gathered data on 5,541 reported pregnancies with a known pregnancy outcome during 2014-2021 among persons with OUD from seven clinical sites. The mean maternal age was 29.7 (SD = ±5.1) years. By race and ethnicity, 86.3% of pregnant persons were identified as White, 25.4% as Hispanic or Latino, and 5.8% as Black or African American. Among pregnant persons, 81.6% had public insurance, and 84.4% lived in urban areas. Compared with persons not receiving MOUD during pregnancy, those receiving MOUD during pregnancy were more likely to be older and White and to have public insurance. The evaluation of the surveillance system found that the initial four clinical sites were not representative of demographics of the South or Southwest regions of the United States and had low representation from certain racial and ethnic groups compared with the overall U.S. population; however, the addition of three clinical sites in 2021 made the surveillance network more representative. Automated extraction and processing improved the speed of data collection and analysis. The ability to add new clinical sites and variables demonstrated the flexibility of MAT-LINK. Interpretation: MAT-LINK is the first surveillance system to collect comprehensive, longitudinal data on pregnant person-infant dyads with perinatal outcomes associated with MOUD during pregnancy from multiple clinical sites. Analyses of clinical site data demonstrated different sociodemographic characteristics between the MOUD and non-MOUD treatment groups. Public Health Actions: MAT-LINK is a timely and flexible surveillance system with data on approximately 5,500 pregnancies. Ongoing data collection and analyses of these data will provide information to support clinical and public health guidance to improve health outcomes among pregnant persons with OUD and their children.

Health Care Utilization in the 6 Months Following SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Importance: After SARS-CoV-2 infection, many patients present with persistent symptoms for at least 6 months, collectively termed post-COVID conditions (PCC). However, the impact of PCC on health care utilization has not been well described. Objectives: To estimate COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization following acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and describe utilization for select PCCs among patients who had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (including reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and antigen tests) compared with control patients whose results were negative. Design, Setting, and Participants: This matched retrospective cohort study included patients of all ages from 8 large integrated health care systems across the United States who completed a SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test during March 1 to November 1, 2020. Patients were matched on age, sex, race and ethnicity, site, and date of SARS-CoV-2 test and were followed-up for 6 months. Data were analyzed from March 18, 2021, to June 8, 2022. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ratios of rate ratios (RRRs) for COVID-19-associated health care utilization were calculated with a difference-in-difference analysis using Poisson regression models. RRRs were estimated overall, by health care setting, by select population characteristics, and by 44 PCCs. COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization was estimated by health care setting. Results: The final matched cohort included 127 859 patients with test results positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 127 859 patients with test results negative for SARS-CoV-2. The mean (SD) age of the study population was 41.2 (18.6) years, 68 696 patients in each group (53.7%) were female, and each group included 66 211 Hispanic patients (51.8%), 9122 non-Hispanic Asian patients (7.1%), 7983 non-Hispanic Black patients (6.2%), and 34 326 non-Hispanic White patients (26.9%). Overall, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a 4% increase in health care utilization over 6 months (RRR, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.03-1.05]), predominantly for virtual encounters (RRR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.12-1.16]), followed by emergency department visits (RRR, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.04-1.12]). COVID-19-associated utilization for 18 PCCs remained elevated 6 months from the acute stage of infection, with the largest increase in COVID-19-associated utilization observed for infectious disease sequelae (RRR, 86.00 [95% CI, 5.07-1458.33]), COVID-19 (RRR, 19.47 [95% CI, 10.47-36.22]), alopecia (RRR, 2.52 [95% CI, 2.17-2.92]), bronchitis (RRR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.62-2.12]), pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis (RRR, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.36-2.23]), and dyspnea (RRR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.61-1.86]). In total, COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization amounted to an estimated 27 217 additional medical encounters over 6 months (212.9 [95% CI, 146.5-278.4] visits per 1000 patients). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study documented an excess health care burden of PCC in the 6 months after the acute stage of infection. As health care systems evolve during a highly dynamic and ongoing global pandemic, these data provide valuable evidence to inform long-term strategic resource allocation for patients previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Association of the COVID-19 Pandemic With Routine Childhood Vaccination Rates and Proportion Up to Date With Vaccinations Across 8 US Health Systems in the Vaccine Safety Datalink.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected routine vaccine delivery in the US and globally. The magnitude of these disruptions and their association with childhood vaccination coverage are unclear. Objectives: To compare trends in pediatric vaccination before and during the pandemic and to evaluate the proportion of children up to date (UTD) with vaccinations by age, race, and ethnicity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This surveillance study used a prepandemic-postpandemic control design with data from 8 health systems in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, and Wisconsin in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Children from age groups younger than 24 months and 4 to 6, 11 to 13, and 16 to 18 years were included if they had at least 1 week of health system enrollment from January 5, 2020, through October 3, 2020, over periods before the US COVID-19 pandemic (January 5, 2020, through March 14, 2020), during age-limited preventive care (March 15, 2020, through May 16, 2020), and during expanded primary care (May 17, 2020, through October 3, 2020). These individuals were compared with those enrolled during analogous weeks in 2019. Exposures: This study evaluated UTD status among children reaching specific ages in February, May, and September 2020, compared with those reaching these ages in 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Weekly vaccination rates for routine age-specific vaccines and the proportion of children UTD for all age-specific recommended vaccines. Results: Of 1 399 708 children in 2019 and 1 402 227 in 2020, 1 371 718 were female (49.0%) and 1 429 979 were male (51.0%); 334 216 Asian individuals (11.9%), 900 226 were Hispanic individuals (32.1%), and 201 619 non-Hispanic Black individuals (7.2%). Compared with the prepandemic period and 2019, the age-limited preventive care period was associated with lower weekly vaccination rates, with ratios of rate ratios of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.80-0.85) among those younger than 24 months, 0.18 (95% CI, 0.16-0.20) among those aged 4 to 6 years, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.14-0.17) among those aged 11 to 13 years, and 0.10 (95% CI, 0.08-0.13) among those aged 16 to 18 years. Vaccination rates during expanded primary care remained lower for most ages (ratios of rate ratios: <24 months, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.93-0.98]; 11-13 years, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.76-0.86]; 16-18 years, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.51-0.63]). In September 2020, 74% (95% CI, 73%-76%) of infants aged 7 months and 57% (95% CI, 56%-58%) of infants aged 18 months were UTD vs 81% (95% CI, 80%-82%) and 61% (95% CI, 60%-62%), respectively, in September 2019. The proportion UTD was lowest in non-Hispanic Black children across most age groups, both during and prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (eg, in May 2019, 70% [95% CI, 64%-75%] of non-Hispanic Black infants aged 7 months were UTD vs 82% [95% CI, 81%-83%] in all infants aged 7 months combined). Conclusions and Relevance: As of September 2020, childhood vaccination rates and the proportion who were UTD remained lower than 2019 levels. Interventions are needed to promote catch-up vaccination, particularly in populations at risk for underimmunization.

Feasibility of a pilot intervention to reduce pain and syncope during adolescent vaccination.

PURPOSE: Vaccines recommended for adolescents are considered safe and effective, however administration may occasionally result in acute pain at the injection site or syncope (fainting). These adverse effects pose a risk to patient safety and are potential barriers to adherence to future vaccinations. We assessed a novel intervention designed to help prevent acute pain and syncope associated with adolescent vaccinations. METHODS: We conducted a 3-month pilot study to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a vaccination comfort menu within two Kaiser Permanente Northwest pediatric clinics. The menu offered a variety of comfort items (e.g., cold packs, squeeze balls) that children could select prior to their vaccination. We surveyed parents of recently vaccinated adolescents and interviewed providers to assess the implementation and effectiveness of the intervention. RESULTS: Response rate for the parent survey was 33% (378/1136). Only 20% of the parents reported that their provider offered the comfort menu during the vaccination visit. Approximately 50% of the adolescents who were offered the menu selected a comfort item and most of these participants reported that the item was very (35%) or somewhat (38%) helpful in improving their vaccination experience. Per provider interviews, common barriers to implementing the intervention included lack of time and convenience, and the brevity of the pilot period. CONCLUSIONS: The comfort menu may improve the vaccination experience of youth and increase the likelihood of adherence with future vaccinations. However, only 20% of the parents reported that their provider offered the menu during the vaccination visit. Additional research is needed to determine the feasibility of implementing this intervention on a larger scale, as well as assessing whether the intervention has a significant impact on reducing adverse events.

Dental provider practices and perceptions regarding adolescent vaccination.

OBJECTIVE: To assess dental providers' clinical practices and perceptions regarding adolescent vaccinations. METHODS: We surveyed 234 dental providers in an integrated health care setting in Portland, Oregon, in March-April 2015. We assessed participants' knowledge of adolescent vaccines, barriers to recommending vaccines, and their perceived role in the promotion of vaccination and preventive medical care. RESULTS: Over 80 percent of respondents correctly identified influenza, tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis, and human papillomavirus as vaccinations recommended for adolescents; 60 percent correctly identified meningococcal conjugate. Forty-four percent of providers reported previously discussing vaccination with their adolescent patients. Lack of knowledge (66 percent), uncertainty about whether patients would accept recommendations (62 percent), and lack of time (61 percent) were commonly reported barriers. While few providers expressed personal concerns about the safety (13 percent) and effectiveness (10 percent) of adolescent vaccines, most believed parents had concerns about safety (70 percent) and effectiveness (60 percent). Although 80 percent endorsed the premise that providers should discuss preventive medical care with their patients, only 54 percent said they should discuss vaccinations specifically. CONCLUSIONS: Dental providers reported several barriers to recommending vaccines. While comfortable with discussing preventive medical care in general, providers are less comfortable making vaccine recommendations to their patients. Vaccine recommendations are not a traditional practice among dental providers and may require additional education and communication tools.