Federal Retail Pharmacy Program Contributions to Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 Vaccinations Across Sociodemographic Characteristics - United States, September 1, 2022-September 30, 2023.

The Federal Retail Pharmacy Program (FRPP) facilitated integration of pharmacies as partners in national efforts to scale up vaccination capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic emergency response. To evaluate FRPP's contribution to vaccination efforts across various sociodemographic groups, data on COVID-19 bivalent mRNA vaccine doses administered during September 1, 2022-September 30, 2023, were evaluated from two sources: 1) FRPP data reported directly to CDC and 2) jurisdictional immunization information systems data reported to CDC from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories, and freely associated states. Among 59.8 million COVID-19 bivalent vaccine doses administered in the United States during this period, 40.5 million (67.7%) were administered by FRPP partners. The proportion of COVID-19 bivalent doses administered by FRPP partners ranged from 5.9% among children aged 6 months-4 years to 70.6% among adults aged 18-49 years. Among some racial and ethnic minority groups (e.g., Hispanic or Latino, non-Hispanic Black or African American, non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and non-Hispanic Asian persons), ≥45% of COVID-19 bivalent vaccine doses were administered by FRPP partners. Further, in urban and rural areas, FRPP partners administered 81.6% and 60.0% of bivalent vaccine doses, respectively. The FRPP partnership administered approximately two thirds of all bivalent COVID-19 vaccine doses in the United States and provided vaccine access for persons across a wide range of sociodemographic groups, demonstrating that this program could serve as a model to address vaccination services needs for routine vaccines and to provide health services in other public health emergencies.

Relative Effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination and Booster Dose Combinations Among 18.9 Million Vaccinated Adults During the Early Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Omicron Period-United States, 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2022.

BACKGROUND: Small sample sizes have limited prior studies' ability to capture severe COVID-19 outcomes, especially among Ad26.COV2.S vaccine recipients. This study of 18.9 million adults aged ≥18 years assessed relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) in three recipient cohorts: (1) primary Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and Ad26.COV2.S booster (2 Ad26.COV2.S), (2) primary Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and mRNA booster (Ad26.COV2.S+mRNA), (3) two doses of primary mRNA vaccine and mRNA booster (3 mRNA). METHODS: We analyzed two de-identified datasets linked using privacy-preserving record linkage (PPRL): insurance claims and retail pharmacy COVID-19 vaccination data. We assessed the presence of COVID-19 diagnosis during January 1-March 31, 2022 in: (1) any claim, (2) outpatient claim, (3) emergency department (ED) claim, (4) inpatient claim, and (5) inpatient claim with intensive care unit (ICU) admission. rVE for each outcome comparing three recipient cohorts (reference: two Ad26.COV2.S doses) was estimated from adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Compared with two Ad26.COV2.S doses, Ad26.COV2.S+mRNA and three mRNA doses were more effective against all COVID-19 outcomes, including 57% (95% CI: 52-62) and 62% (95% CI: 58-65) rVE against an ED visit; 44% (95% CI: 34-52) and 54% (95% CI: 48-59) rVE against hospitalization; and 48% (95% CI: 22-66) and 66% (95% CI: 53-75) rVE against ICU admission, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that Ad26.COV2.S + mRNA doses were as good as three doses of mRNA, and better than two doses of Ad26.COV2.S. Vaccination continues to be an important preventive measure for reducing the public health impact of COVID-19.

Digitally-enabled remote critical care: the challenges of geography and history?

The COVID-19 pandemic has rejuvenated interest in the possibility of using telemedicine as an approach to providing critical care services to patients in remote areas. Conceptual and governance considerations remain unaddressed. We summarise the first steps in a recent collaborative effort between key organisations in Australia, India, New Zealand, and the UK, and call for an international consensus on standards with due considerations to governance and regulation of this emerging clinical practice.

Comparative incidence of early and late bloodstream and respiratory tract co-infection in patients admitted to ICU with COVID-19 pneumonia versus Influenza A or B pneumonia versus no viral pneumonia: wales multicentre ICU cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim is to characterise early and late respiratory and bloodstream co-infection in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with SARS-CoV-2-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) needing respiratory support in seven ICUs within Wales, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We compare the rate of positivity of different secondary pathogens and their antimicrobial sensitivity in three different patient groups: patients admitted to ICU with COVID-19 pneumonia, Influenza A or B pneumonia, and patients without viral pneumonia. DESIGN: Multicentre, retrospective, observational cohort study with rapid microbiology data from Public Health Wales, sharing of clinical and demographic data from seven participating ICUs. SETTING: Seven Welsh ICUs participated between 10 March and 31 July 2020. Clinical and demographic data for COVID-19 disease were shared by each participating centres, and microbiology data were extracted from a data repository within Public Health Wales. Comparative data were taken from a cohort of patients without viral pneumonia admitted to ICU during the same period as the COVID-19 cohort (referred to as no viral pneumonia or 'no viral' group), and to a retrospective non-matched cohort of consecutive patients with Influenza A or B admitted to ICUs from 20 November 2017. The comparative data for Influenza pneumonia and no viral pneumonia were taken from one of the seven participating ICUs. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 299 consecutive patients admitted to ICUs with COVID-19 pneumonia were compared with 173 and 48 patients admitted with no viral pneumonia or Influenza A or B pneumonia, respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was to calculate comparative incidence of early and late co-infection in patients admitted to ICU with COVID-19, Influenza A or B pneumonia and no viral pneumonia. Secondary outcome was to calculate the individual group of early and late co-infection rate on a per-patient and per-sample basis, with their antimicrobial susceptibility and thirdly to ascertain any statistical correlation between clinical and demographic variables with rate of acquiring co-infection following ICU admission. RESULTS: A total of 299 adults (median age 57, M/F 2:1) were included in the COVID-19 ICU cohort. The incidence of respiratory and bloodstream co-infection was 40.5% and 15.1%, respectively. Staphylococcus aureus was the predominant bacterial pathogen within the first 48 h. Gram-negative organisms from Enterobacterales group were predominantly seen after 48 h in COVID-19 cohort. Comparative no viral pneumonia cohort had lower rates of respiratory tract infection and bloodstream infection. The influenza cohort had similar rates respiratory tract infection and bloodstream infection. Mortality in all three groups was similar, and no clinical or demographic variables were found to increase the rate of co-infection and ICU mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Higher incidence of bacterial co-infection was found in COVID-19 cohort as compared to the no viral pneumonia cohort admitted to ICUs for respiratory support.

Differential attainment and recruitment to Intensive Care Medicine Training in the UK, 2018-2020.

BACKGROUND: Differences exist among doctors in examination performance, clinical and academic career progression, and prevalence of performance assessment by professional regulatory bodies. Some of these differences have been reported in relation to individual characteristics. The purpose of this study is to establish whether any specific individual characteristics are associated with performance in selection for entry into specialty training in Intensive Care in the United Kingdom. METHODS: We evaluated data of 509 candidates from the national recruitment rounds of 2018/19 and 2019/20. The outcome evaluated was "success at interview". Variables reaching statistical significance at univariate logistic regression analysis were fed in the multivariable analysis to identify independent predictors of success, with additional exploratory analyses performed, where indicated. RESULTS: The candidates' median age was 31.5 (interquartile range, IQR 30-33.7) years, 324 (63.7%) were male, 256 (50.3%) not married/in civil partnership, 6 (1.2%) pregnant. The majority (316, 62.1%) were White British, 99 (19.5%) of Asian background, other ethnicities represented less than 20% of the sample. Of the 509 candidates, 155 (30.5%) were Atheist, 140 (27.5%) Christian; most were heterosexual (440, 86.4%); 432 (84.9%) reported no disability, while 4 (0.8%) had a minor and 1 (0.2%) had a major disability; 432 (84.9%) candidates held a UK medical degree; 77 (15.1%) a non-UK degree. At univariate logistic regression analysis (LRA) multiple factors were found to be associated with a lower likelihood of success, the strongest being an international medical graduate (IMG, holding a non-UK medical degree); others were increasing age, male gender, being married, Asian or mixed ethnicity, specific religious beliefs (Buddhism, Islam and Hinduism). After feeding all factors significant at univariate analysis, the only two retained as independent predictors at multivariable regression were Asian ethnicity and holding a non-UK degree. Asian UK graduates success rate was 92.7%, comparable to the national average of 92.3%, the Asian IMGs success rate was significantly lower, at 45.5%. CONCLUSIONS: As the imbalances seen within the candidates of Asian background are explained by considering the country of primary medical training, the variations in performance is likely to reflect differences in training systems and understanding of the UK NHS.

Assessment of the Costs of Implementing COVID-19 Vaccination Clinics in 34 Sites, United States, March 2021.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the costs to implement public health department (PHD)-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. DESIGN: Retrospectively reported data on COVID-19 vaccination clinic characteristics and resources used during a high-demand day in March 2021. These resources were combined with national average wages, supply costs, and facility costs to estimate the operational cost and start-up cost of clinics. SETTING: Thirty-four PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics across 8 states and 1 metropolitan statistical area. PARTICIPANTS: Clinic managers at 34 PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. INTERVENTION: Large-scale COVID-19 vaccination clinics were implemented by public health agencies as part of the pandemic response. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: Operational cost per day, operational cost per vaccination, start-up cost per clinic. RESULTS: Median operational cost per day for a clinic was $10 314 (range, $637-$95 163) and median cost per vaccination was $38 (range, $9-$206). There was a large range of operational costs across clinics. Clinics used an average of 99 total staff hours per 100 patients vaccinated. Median start-up cost per clinic was $15 348 (range, $1 409-$165 190). CONCLUSIONS: Results show that clinics require a large range of resources to meet the high throughput needs of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Estimating the costs of PHD-run vaccination clinics for the pandemic response is essential for ensuring that resources are available for clinic success. If clinics are not adequately supported, they may stop functioning, which would slow the pandemic response if no other setting or approach is possible.

Side-Chain Control of Topochemical Polymer Single Crystals with Tunable Elastic Modulus.

Topochemical polymerizations hold the promise of producing high molecular weight and stereoregular single crystalline polymers by first aligning monomers before polymerization. However, monomer modifications often alter the crystal packing and result in non-reactive polymorphs. Here, we report a systematic study on the side chain functionalization of the bis(indandione) derivative system that can be polymerized under visible light. Precisely engineered side chains help organize the monomer crystals in a one-dimensional fashion to maintain the topochemical reactivity. By optimizing the side chain length and end group of monomers, the elastic modulus of the resulting polymer single crystals can also be greatly enhanced. Lastly, using ultrasonication, insoluble polymer single crystals can be processed into free-standing and robust polymer thin films. This work provides new insights on the molecular design of topochemical reactions and paves the way for future applications of this fascinating family of materials.

Influenza Vaccinations During the COVID-19 Pandemic - 11 U.S. Jurisdictions, September-December 2020.

Influenza causes considerable morbidity and mortality in the United States. Between 2010 and 2020, an estimated 9-41 million cases resulted in 140,000-710,000 hospitalizations and 12,000-52,000 deaths annually (1). As the United States enters the 2021-22 influenza season, the potential impact of influenza illnesses is of concern given that influenza season will again coincide with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which could further strain overburdened health care systems. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends routine annual influenza vaccination for the 2021-22 influenza season for all persons aged ≥6 months who have no contraindications (2). To assess the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on influenza vaccination coverage, the percentage change between administration of at least 1 dose of influenza vaccine during September-December 2020 was compared with the average administered in the corresponding periods in 2018 and 2019. The data analyzed were reported from 11 U.S. jurisdictions with high-performing state immunization information systems.* Overall, influenza vaccine administration was 9.0% higher in 2020 compared with the average in 2018 and 2019, combined. However, in 2020, the number of influenza vaccine doses administered to children aged 6-23 months and children aged 2-4 years, was 13.9% and 11.9% lower, respectively than the average for each age group in 2018 and 2019. Strategic efforts are needed to ensure high influenza vaccination coverage among all age groups, especially children aged 6 months-4 years who are not yet eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Administration of influenza vaccine and a COVID-19 vaccine among eligible populations is especially important to reduce the potential strain that influenza and COVID-19 cases could place on health care systems already overburdened by COVID-19.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Administration of Selected Routine Childhood and Adolescent Vaccinations - 10 U.S. Jurisdictions, March-September 2020.

After the March 2020 declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, an analysis of provider ordering data from the federally funded Vaccines for Children program found a substantial decrease in routine pediatric vaccine ordering (1), and data from New York City and Michigan indicated sharp declines in routine childhood vaccine administration in these areas (2,3). In November 2020, CDC interim guidance stated that routine vaccination of children and adolescents should remain an essential preventive service during the COVID-19 pandemic (4,5). To further understand the impact of the pandemic on routine childhood and adolescent vaccination, vaccine administration data during March-September 2020 from 10 U.S. jurisdictions with high-performing* immunization information systems were assessed. Fewer administered doses of routine childhood and adolescent vaccines were recorded in all 10 jurisdictions during March-September 2020 compared with those recorded during the same period in 2018 and 2019. The number of vaccine doses administered substantially declined during March-May 2020, when many jurisdictions enacted stay-at-home orders. After many jurisdictions lifted these orders, the number of vaccine doses administered during June-September 2020 approached prepandemic baseline levels, but did not increase to the level that would have been necessary to catch up children who did not receive routine vaccinations on time. This lag in catch-up vaccination might pose a serious public health threat that would result in vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks, especially in schools that have reopened for in-person learning. During the past few decades, the United States has achieved a substantial reduction in the prevalence of vaccine-preventable diseases driven in large part to the ongoing administration of routinely recommended pediatric vaccines. These efforts need to continue even during the COVID-19 pandemic to reduce the morbidity and mortality from vaccine-preventable diseases. Health care providers should assess the vaccination status of all pediatric patients, including adolescents, and contact those who are behind schedule to ensure that all children are fully vaccinated.

Science Educational Outreach Programs That Benefit Students and Scientists.

Both scientists and the public would benefit from improved communication of basic scientific research and from integrating scientists into education outreach, but opportunities to support these efforts are limited. We have developed two low-cost programs--"Present Your PhD Thesis to a 12-Year-Old" and "Shadow a Scientist"--that combine training in science communication with outreach to area middle schools. We assessed the outcomes of these programs and found a 2-fold benefit: scientists improve their communication skills by explaining basic science research to a general audience, and students' enthusiasm for science and their scientific knowledge are increased. Here we present details about both programs, along with our assessment of them, and discuss the feasibility of exporting these programs to other universities.

Building Capacity for Workplace Health Promotion: Findings From the Work@Health® Train-the-Trainer Program.

Small- and mid-sized employers are less likely to have expertise, capacity, or resources to implement workplace health promotion programs, compared with large employers. In response, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed the Work@Health® employer training program to determine the best way to deliver skill-based training to employers of all sizes. The core curriculum was designed to increase employers' knowledge of the design, implementation, and evaluation of workplace health strategies. The first arm of the program was direct employer training. In this article, we describe the results of the second arm-the program's train-the-trainer (T3) component, which was designed to prepare new certified trainers to provide core workplace health training to other employers. Of the 103 participants who began the T3 program, 87 fully completed it and delivered the Work@Health core training to 233 other employers. Key indicators of T3 participants' knowledge and attitudes significantly improved after training. The curriculum delivered through the T3 model has the potential to increase the health promotion capacity of employers across the nation, as well as organizations that work with employers, such as health departments and business coalitions.

Comparing 2 National Organization-Level Workplace Health Promotion and Improvement Tools, 2013-2015.

Creating healthy workplaces is becoming more common. Half of employers that have more than 50 employees offer some type of workplace health promotion program. Few employers implement comprehensive evidence-based interventions that reach all employees and achieve desired health and cost outcomes. A few organization-level assessment and benchmarking tools have emerged to help employers evaluate the comprehensiveness and rigor of their health promotion offerings. Even fewer tools exist that combine assessment with technical assistance and guidance to implement evidence-based practices. Our descriptive analysis compares 2 such tools, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Worksite Health ScoreCard and Prevention Partners' WorkHealthy America, and presents data from both to describe workplace health promotion practices across the United States. These tools are reaching employers of all types (N = 1,797), and many employers are using a comprehensive approach (85% of those using WorkHealthy America and 45% of those using the ScoreCard), increasing program effectiveness and impact.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine childhood vaccination in 9 U.S. jurisdictions.

IMPORTANCE: Routine vaccinations are key to prevent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. However, there have been documented declines in routine childhood vaccinations in the U.S. and worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: Assess how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted routine childhood vaccinations by evaluating vaccination coverage for routine childhood vaccinations for children born in 2016-2021. METHODS: Data on routine childhood vaccinations reported to CDC by nine U.S. jurisdictions via the immunization information systems (IISs) by December 31, 2022, were available for analyses. Population size for each age group was obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' Bridging Population Estimates. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Vaccination coverage for routine childhood vaccinations at age three months, five months, seven months, one year, and two years was calculated by vaccine type and overall, for 4:3:1:3:3:1:4 series (≥4 doses DTaP, ≥3 doses Polio, ≥1 dose MMR, ≥3 doses Hib, ≥3 doses Hepatitis B, ≥1 dose Varicella, and ≥ 4 doses pneumococcal conjugate), for each birth cohort year and by jurisdiction. RESULTS: Overall, there was a 10.4 percentage point decrease in the 4:3:1:3:3:1:4 series in those children born in 2020 compared to those children born in 2016. As of December 31, 2022, 71.0% and 71.3% of children born in 2016 and 2017, respectively, were up to date on their routine childhood vaccinations by two years of age compared to 69.1%, 64.7% and 60.6% for children born in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The decline in vaccination coverage for routine childhood vaccines is concerning. In order to protect population health, strategic efforts are needed by health care providers, schools, parents, as well as state, local, and federal governments to work together to address these declines in vaccination coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic to prevent outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases by maintaining high levels of population immunity.

Advancing public health informatics during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned from a public-private partnership with pharmacies.

To support efforts to vaccinate millions of Americans across the United States (US) against COVID-19, the US federal government (USG) launched the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program (PPP) in December 2020 and the Federal Retail Pharmacy Program (FRPP) in February 2021. These programs consisted of a collaborative partnership with the USG and 21 pharmacy organizations, including large retail chains, coordinating pharmacy services administrative organizations (PSAOs) representing independent retail and long-term care pharmacies, and pharmacy network administrators. These pharmacy organizations represented over 46,000 providers and created a robust channel for far-reaching COVID-19 vaccination across 56 state and local jurisdictions. PPP reported more than 8 million COVID-19 doses administered to residents and staff in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) as of June 2021. In addition, FRPP was responsible for administering more than 304 million doses, accounting for approximately 49% of all COVID-19 doses administered as of June 2023. This unprecedented public-private partnership allowed USG to rapidly adapt, expand, and aim to provide equitable access to vaccines for adults and eligible-aged children during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the largest federal COVID-19 vaccination program, the FRPP exemplifies how public-private partnerships can expand access to immunizations during a public health emergency. End-to-end informatics support helped pharmacies meet critical national public health goals and served as convenient access points for sustained health services. This manuscript describes lessons learned regarding informatics coordination with participating pharmacy partners to support the rapid and safe administration of COVID-19 vaccines across the US. The processes of onboarding to CDC's complex data network, establishing connections to state and local immunization information systems (IIS), and monitoring the quality of data pharmacy partners submitted to the CDC Data Clearinghouse (DCH) in alignment with the COVID-19 Vaccine Reporting Specifications (CVRS) are highlighted.

The US Federal Retail Pharmacy Program: Optimizing COVID-19 Vaccine Delivery Through a Strategic Public-Private Partnership.

To help achieve the initial goal of providing universal COVID-19 vaccine access to approximately 258 million adults in 62 US jurisdictions, the federal government launched the Federal Retail Pharmacy Program (FRPP) on February 11, 2021. We describe FRPP's collaboration among the federal government, US jurisdictions, federal entity partners, and 21 national chain and independent pharmacy networks to provide large-scale access to COVID-19 vaccines, particularly in communities disproportionately affected by COVID-19 (eg, people aged ≥65 years, people from racial and ethnic minority groups). FRPP initially provided 10 000 vaccination sites for people to access COVID-19 vaccines, which was increased to >35 000 vaccination sites by May 2021 and sustained through January 31, 2022. From February 11, 2021, through January 31, 2022, FRPP vaccination sites received 293 million doses and administered 219 million doses, representing 45% of all COVID-19 immunizations provided nationwide (38% of all first doses, 72% of all booster doses). This unprecedented public-private partnership allowed the federal government to rapidly adapt and scale up an equitable vaccination program to reach adults, later expanding access to vaccine-eligible children, during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the largest federal COVID-19 vaccination program, FRPP exemplifies how public-private partnerships can expand access to immunizations during a public health emergency. Pharmacies can help meet critical national public health goals by serving as convenient access points for sustained health services. Lessons learned from this effort-including the importance of strong coordination and communication, efficient reporting systems and data quality, and increasing access to and demand for vaccine, among others-may help improve future immunization programs and support health system resiliency, emphasizing community-level access and health equity during public health emergencies.

Patient flow time data of COVID-19 vaccination clinics in 23 sites, United States, April and May 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Public health department (PHD) led COVID-19 vaccination clinics can be a critical component of pandemic response as they facilitate high volume of vaccination. However, few patient-time analyses examining patient throughput at mass vaccination clinics with unique COVID-19 vaccination challenges have been published. METHODS: During April and May of 2021, 521 patients in 23 COVID-19 vaccination sites counties of 6 states were followed to measure the time spent from entry to vaccination. The total time was summarized and tabulated by clinic characteristics. A multivariate linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the association between vaccination clinic settings and patient waiting times in the clinic. RESULTS: The average time a patient spent in the clinic from entry to vaccination was 9 min 5 s (range: 02:00-23:39). Longer patient flow times were observed in clinics with higher numbers of doses administered, 6 or fewer vaccinators, walk-in patients accepted, dedicated services for people with disabilities, and drive-through clinics. The multivariate linear regression showed that longer patient waiting times were significantly associated with the number of vaccine doses administered, dedicated services for people with disabilities, the availability of more than one brand of vaccine, and rurality. CONCLUSIONS: Given the standardized procedures outlined by immunization guidelines, reducing the wait time is critical in lowering the patient flow time by relieving the bottleneck effect in the clinic. Our study suggests enhancing the efficiency of PHD-led vaccination clinics by preparing vaccinators to provide vaccines with proper and timely support such as training or delivering necessary supplies and paperwork to the vaccinators. In addition, patient wait time can be spent answering questions about vaccination or reviewing educational materials on other public health services.

Monitoring and reporting the US COVID-19 vaccination effort.

Immunizations are an important tool to reduce the burden of vaccine preventable diseases and improve population health.1 High-quality immunization data is essential to inform clinical and public health interventions and respond to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. To track COVID-19 vaccines and vaccinations, CDC established an integrated network that included vaccination provider systems, health information exchange systems, immunization information systems, pharmacy and dialysis systems, vaccine ordering systems, electronic health records, and tools to support mass vaccination clinics. All these systems reported data to CDC's COVID-19 response system (either directly or indirectly) where it was processed, analyzed, and disseminated. This unprecedented vaccine tracking effort provided essential information for public health officials that was used to monitor the COVID-19 response and guide decisions. This paper will describe systems, processes, and policies that enabled monitoring and reporting of COVID-19 vaccination efforts and share challenges and lessons learned for future public health emergency responses.

Resident full-time specialists in the ICU: a survivable model?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Intensivists have a professional and personal interest in trying to answer whether immediate review of patients by a consultant intensivist improves outcomes. Although some advocate in-hospital around-the-clock consultant intensivist presence, does the available evidence suggest all ICUs should be staffed in such a manner and is such a service sustainable given the shortage of intensivists, potential loss of staff from burnout and cost? RECENT FINDINGS: We present in narrative form the background and recent literature for a consultant resident service in terms of the ethical tenets of nonmaleficence, beneficence, autonomy and justice. Nonmaleficence - what is the evidence it is bad for patients not to provide a resident service? Beneficence - what is the evidence a resident intensivist service is good for patients? Autonomy - is it in intensivists' own interests to provide a 24-h service? And justice - is it a justifiable use of healthcare resources? SUMMARY: A unified staffing solution within a country's different ICUs, let alone between countries, is unlikely. The current evidence does not universally support or justify 24  h/7 days consultant intensivist presence. International differences in staffing models and ICU structures make direct comparisons difficult and in some circumstances the balance may favour 24  h/7 days consultant intensivists.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Adult Vaccination: A Review of the State of Evidence.

Background: Adult vaccination coverage remains low in the United States, particularly among racial and ethnic minority populations. Objective: To conduct a comprehensive literature review of research studies assessing racial and ethnic disparities in adult vaccination. Search Methods: We conducted a search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant articles. Selection Criteria: Research studies were eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (1) study based in the United States, (2) evaluated receipt of routine immunizations in adult populations, (3) used within-study comparison of race/ethnic groups, and (4) eligible for at least one author-defined PICO (patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome) question. Data Collection and Analysis: Preliminary abstract review was conducted by two authors. Following complete abstraction of articles using a standardized template, abstraction notes and determinations were reviewed by all authors; disagreements regarding article inclusion/exclusion were resolved by majority rule. The Social Ecological Model framework was used to complete a narrative review of observational studies to summarize factors associated with disparities; a systematic review was used to evaluate eligible intervention studies. Results: Ninety-five studies were included in the final analysis and summarized qualitatively within two main topic areas: (1) factors associated with documented racial-ethnic disparities in adult vaccination and (2) interventions aimed to reduce disparities or to improve vaccination coverage among racial-ethnic minority groups. Of the 12 included intervention studies, only 3 studies provided direct evidence and were of Level II, fair quality; the remaining 9 studies met the criteria for indirect evidence (Level I or II, fair or poor quality). Conclusions: A considerable amount of observational research evaluating factors associated with racial and ethnic disparities in adult vaccination is available. However, intervention studies aimed at reducing these disparities are limited, are of poor quality, and insufficiently address known reasons for low vaccination uptake among racial and ethnic minority adults.

Fluid-repellent surgical mask (FRSM) fit - one size does not fit all.

BACKGROUND: Fluid-repellent surgical masks (FRSMs) are recommended by the UK government for healthcare workers as personal protective equipment (PPE) against SARS-COV-2. UK Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) national guidelines states that 'masks must be well-fitting and fit for purpose, fully covering the mouth and nose'. AIM: To review the fit of the FRSM supplied to the NHS front line workers against the national IPC guidelines and, through re-audit, assess for improvements in fit with FRSM worn with a plastic strap (intervention A) and FFP3 mask (intervention B). METHOD: A three-part closed-loop audit was carried out comprising controlled observation, observation in the clinical area and questionnaire. Re-audit was carried out following interventions A and B. RESULTS: FRSMs slipped below the nose in 43% and below the mouth of 10% of participants during the controlled observation and below the nose (above or below the mouth) in 30% of staff in the clinical area. No masks slipped below the nose or mouth with intervention A or B. 86% of participants reported touching the FRSM to keep it in the correct position and 66% reported touching the FFP3. CONCLUSION: The current supply of FRSMs are poorly fitting for many users and do not meet the UK IPC guideline standard. These issues were not evident when worn with a plastic strap or with FFP3 masks.