Pandemic preparedness improves national-level SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality data completeness: a cross-country ecologic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity in national SARS-CoV-2 infection surveillance capabilities may compromise global enumeration and tracking of COVID-19 cases and deaths and bias analyses of the pandemic's tolls. Taking account of heterogeneity in data completeness may thus help clarify analyses of the relationship between COVID-19 outcomes and standard preparedness measures. METHODS: We examined country-level associations of pandemic preparedness capacities inventories, from the Global Health Security (GHS) Index and Joint External Evaluation (JEE), on SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 death data completion rates adjusted for income. Analyses were stratified by 100, 100-300, 300-500, and 500-700 days after the first reported case in each country. We subsequently reevaluated the relationship of pandemic preparedness on SARS-CoV-2 infection and age-standardized COVID-19 death rates adjusted for cross-country differentials in data completeness during the pre-vaccine era. RESULTS: Every 10% increase in the GHS Index was associated with a 14.9% (95% confidence interval 8.34-21.8%) increase in SARS-CoV-2 infection completion rate and a 10.6% (5.91-15.4%) increase in the death completion rate during the entire observation period. Disease prevention (infections: ß = 1.08 [1.05-1.10], deaths: ß = 1.05 [1.04-1.07]), detection (infections: ß = 1.04 [1.01-1.06], deaths: ß = 1.03 [1.01-1.05]), response (infections: ß = 1.06 [1.00-1.13], deaths: ß = 1.05 [1.00-1.10]), health system (infections: ß = 1.06 [1.03-1.10], deaths: ß = 1.05 [1.03-1.07]), and risk environment (infections: ß = 1.27 [1.15-1.41], deaths: ß = 1.15 [1.08-1.23]) were associated with both data completeness outcomes. Effect sizes of GHS Index on infection completion (Low income: ß = 1.18 [1.04-1.34], Lower Middle income: ß = 1.41 [1.16-1.71]) and death completion rates (Low income: ß = 1.19 [1.09-1.31], Lower Middle income: ß = 1.25 [1.10-1.43]) were largest in LMICs. After adjustment for cross-country differences in data completeness, each 10% increase in the GHS Index was associated with a 13.5% (4.80-21.4%) decrease in SARS-CoV-2 infection rate at 100 days and a 9.10 (1.07-16.5%) decrease at 300 days. For age-standardized COVID-19 death rates, each 10% increase in the GHS Index was with a 15.7% (5.19-25.0%) decrease at 100 days and a 10.3% (- 0.00-19.5%) decrease at 300 days. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the pre-pandemic hypothesis that countries with greater pandemic preparedness capacities have larger SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality data completeness rates and lower COVID-19 disease burdens. More high-quality data of COVID-19 impact based on direct measurement are needed.

Does it matter that standard preparedness indices did not predict COVID-19 outcomes?

A number of scientific publications and commentaries have suggested that standard preparedness indices such as the Global Health Security Index (GHSI) and Joint External Evaluation (JEE) scores did not predict COVID-19 outcomes. To some, the failure of these metrics to be predictive demonstrates the need for a fundamental reassessment which better aligns preparedness measurement with operational capacities in real-world stress situations, including the points at which coordination structures and decision-making may fail. There are, however, several reasons why these instruments should not be so easily rejected as preparedness measures.From a methodological point of view, these studies use relatively simple outcome measures, mostly based on cumulative numbers of cases and deaths at a fixed point of time. A country's "success" in dealing with the pandemic is highly multidimensional - both in the health outcomes and type and timing of interventions and policies - is too complex to represent with a single number. In addition, the comparability of mortality data over time and among jurisdictions is questionable due to highly variable completeness and representativeness. Furthermore, the analyses use a cross-sectional design, which is poorly suited for evaluating the impact of interventions, especially for COVID-19.Conceptually, a major reason that current preparedness measures fail to predict pandemic outcomes is that they do not adequately capture variations in the presence of effective political leadership needed to activate and implement existing system, instill confidence in the government's response; or background levels of interpersonal trust and trust in government institutions and country ability needed to mount fast and adaptable responses. These factors are crucial; capacity alone is insufficient if that capacity is not effectively leveraged. However, preparedness metrics are intended to identify gaps that countries must fill. As important as effective political leadership and trust in institutions, countries cannot be held accountable to one another for having good political leadership or trust in institutions. Therefore, JEE scores, the GHSI, and similar metrics can be useful tools for identifying critical gaps in capacities and capabilities that are necessary but not sufficient for an effective pandemic response.

The European experience with testing and surveillance during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to learn the challenges encountered by public health emergency preparedness systems, both in terms of problems encountered and adaptations during and after the first wave, as well as successful responses to them. RESULTS: This work draws on published literature, interviews with countries and institutional documents as part of a European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control project that aims to identify the implications for preparedness measurement derived from COVID-19 pandemic experience in order to advance future preparedness efforts in European Union member states. The analysis focused on testing and surveillance themes and five countries were considered, namely Italy, Germany, Finland, Spain and Croatia. Our analysis shown that a country's ability to conduct testing at scale was critical, especially early in the pandemic, and the inability to scale up testing operations created critical issues for public health operations such as contact tracing. Countries were required to develop new strategies, approaches, and policies under pressure and to review and revise them as the pandemic evolved, also considering that public health systems operate at the national, regional, and local level with respect to testing, contact tracing, and surveillance, and involve both government agencies as well as private organizations. Therefore, communication among multiple public and private entities at all levels and coordination of the testing and surveillance activities was critical. CONCLUSION: With regard to testing and surveillance, three capabilities that were essential to the COVID-19 response in the first phase, and presumably in other public health emergencies: the ability to scale-up testing, contact tracing, surveillance efforts; flexibility to develop new strategies, approaches, and policies under pressure and to review and revise them as the pandemic evolved; and the ability to coordinate and communicate in complex public health systems that operate at the national, regional, and local level with respect and involve multiple government agencies as well as private organizations.

Adjusting COVID-19 Seroprevalence Survey Results to Account for Test Sensitivity and Specificity.

Population-based seroprevalence surveys can provide useful estimates of the number of individuals previously infected with serious acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and still susceptible, as well as contribute to better estimates of the case-fatality rate and other measures of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity. No serological test is 100% accurate, however, and the standard correction that epidemiologists use to adjust estimates relies on estimates of the test sensitivity and specificity often based on small validation studies. We have developed a fully Bayesian approach to adjust observed prevalence estimates for sensitivity and specificity. Application to a seroprevalence survey conducted in New York State in 2020 demonstrates that this approach results in more realistic-and narrower-credible intervals than the standard sensitivity analysis using confidence interval endpoints. In addition, the model permits incorporating data on the geographical distribution of reported case counts to create informative priors on the cumulative incidence to produce estimates and credible intervals for smaller geographic areas than often can be precisely estimated with seroprevalence surveys.

An Estimate of the US Rate of Overuse of Screening Colonoscopy: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to assess the rate at which screening colonoscopy is performed on patients younger or older than the age range specified in national guidelines, or at shorter intervals than recommended. Such non-indicated use of the procedure is considered low-value care, or overuse. This study is the first systematic review of the rate of non-indicated completed screening colonoscopy in the USA. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were queried for relevant studies on overuse of screening colonoscopy published from January 1, 2002, until January 23, 2019. English-language studies that were conducted for screening colonoscopy after 2001 for average-risk patients were included. Studies must have followed national guidelines for detecting rates of overuse. We followed methods outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the reporting recommendations of the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology group (MOOSE). RESULTS: A total of 772 papers were reviewed for inclusion; 42 were reviewed in full text. Of those reviewed, six studies met eligibility criteria, including a total of 459,503 colonoscopies of which 242,756 were screening colonoscopies. The rate of overuse ranged credibly from 17 to 25.7%. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that screening colonoscopy is regularly performed in the USA more often, and in populations older or younger, than recommended by national guidelines. Such overuse wastes resources and places patients at unnecessary risk of harm. Efforts to reduce non-indicated screening colonoscopy are needed.

COVID-19 data are messy: analytic methods for rigorous impact analyses with imperfect data.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an avalanche of scientific studies, drawing on many different types of data. However, studies addressing the effectiveness of government actions against COVID-19, especially non-pharmaceutical interventions, often exhibit data problems that threaten the validity of their results. This review is thus intended to help epidemiologists and other researchers identify a set of data issues that, in our view, must be addressed in order for their work to be credible. We further intend to help journal editors and peer reviewers when evaluating studies, to apprise policy-makers, journalists, and other research consumers about the strengths and weaknesses of published studies, and to inform the wider debate about the scientific quality of COVID-19 research. RESULTS: To this end, we describe common challenges in the collection, reporting, and use of epidemiologic, policy, and other data, including completeness and representativeness of outcomes data; their comparability over time and among jurisdictions; the adequacy of policy variables and data on intermediate outcomes such as mobility and mask use; and a mismatch between level of intervention and outcome variables. We urge researchers to think critically about potential problems with the COVID-19 data sources over the specific time periods and particular locations they have chosen to analyze, and to choose not only appropriate study designs but also to conduct appropriate checks and sensitivity analyses to investigate the impact(s) of potential threats on study findings. CONCLUSIONS: In an effort to encourage high quality research, we provide recommendations on how to address the issues we identify. Our first recommendation is for researchers to choose an appropriate design (and the data it requires). This review describes considerations and issues in order to identify the strongest analytical designs and demonstrates how interrupted time-series and comparative longitudinal studies can be particularly useful. Furthermore, we recommend that researchers conduct checks or sensitivity analyses of the results to data source and design choices, which we illustrate. Regardless of the approaches taken, researchers should be explicit about the kind of data problems or other biases that the design choice and sensitivity analyses are addressing.

A National Framework to Improve Mortality, Morbidity, and Disparities Data for COVID-19 and Other Large-Scale Disasters.

Timely and accurate data on COVID-19 cases and COVID-19‒related deaths are essential for making decisions with significant health, economic, and policy implications. A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine proposes a uniform national framework for data collection to more accurately quantify disaster-related deaths, injuries, and illnesses. This article describes how following the report's recommendations could help improve the quality and timeliness of public health surveillance data during pandemics, with special attention to addressing gaps in the data necessary to understand pandemic-related health disparities.

Getting the most from after action reviews to improve global health security.

BACKGROUND: After Action Reviews (AARs) provide a means to observe how well preparedness systems perform in real world conditions and can help to identify - and address - gaps in national and global public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) systems. WHO has recently published guidance for voluntary AARs. This analysis builds on this guidance by reviewing evidence on the effectiveness of AARs as tools for system improvement and by summarizing some key lessons about ensuring that AARs result in meaningful learning from experience. RESULTS: Empirical evidence from a variety of fields suggests that AARs hold considerable promise as tools of system improvement for PHEP. Our review of the literature and practical experience demonstrates that AARs are most likely to result in meaningful learning if they focus on incidents that are selected for their learning value, involve an appropriately broad range of perspectives, are conducted with appropriate time for reflection, employ systems frameworks and rigorous tools such as facilitated lookbacks and root cause analysis, and strike a balance between attention to incident specifics vs. generalizable capacities and capabilities. CONCLUSIONS: Employing these practices requires a PHEP system that facilitates the preparation of insightful AARs, and more generally rewards learning. The barriers to AARs fall into two categories: concerns about the cultural sensitivity and context, liability, the political response, and national security; and constraints on staff time and the lack of experience and the requisite analytical skills. Ensuring that AARs fulfill their promise as tools of system improvement will require ongoing investment and a change in mindset. The first step should be to clarify that the goal of AARs is organizational learning, not placing blame or punishing poor performance. Based on experience in other fields, the buy-in of agency and political leadership is critical in this regard. National public health systems also need support in the form of toolkits, guides, and training, as well as research on AAR methods. An AAR registry could support organizational improvement through careful post-event analysis of systems' own events, facilitate identification and sharing of best practices across jurisdictions, and enable cross-case analyses.

Public Health Surveillance for Zika Virus: Data Interpretation and Report Validity.

Zika virus provides an example for which public health surveillance is based primarily on health care provider notifications to health departments of potential cases. This case-based surveillance is commonly used to understand the spread of disease in a population. However, case-based surveillance is often biased-whether testing is done and which tests are used and the accuracy of the results depend on a variety of factors including test availability, patient demand, perceptions of transmission, and patient and provider awareness, leading to surveillance artifacts that can provide misleading information on the spread of a disease in a population and have significant public health practice implications. To better understand this challenge, we first summarize the process that health departments use to generate surveillance reports, then describe factors influencing testing and reporting patterns at the patient, provider, and contextual level. We then describe public health activities, including active surveillance, that influence both patient and provider behavior as well as surveillance reports, and conclude with a discussion about the interpretation of surveillance data and approaches that could improve the validity of surveillance reports.

Development of a public health emergency preparedness competency model for European Union countries.

In 2017, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) developed a competency model for individuals who work in public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) in European Union (EU) countries. The model serves as the basis for developing competency-based training programmes to support professionals in PHEP efforts at the country level. The competency model describes the knowledge and skills professionals need when working in national-level PHEP, such as preparedness committee members or their equivalents. In order to develop the model, existing competency statements were reviewed, as well as case studies and reports. Fifty-three professionals from the EU and other countries provided feedback to the model by participating in a three-stage consultation process. The model includes 102 competency, 100 knowledge and 158 skill statements. In addition to specifying the appropriate content for training programmes, the proposed common competency model can help to standardise terminology and approaches to PHEP training.

Facilitated Look-Back Analysis of Public Health Emergencies to Enhance Preparedness: A Brief Report of a Chemical Spill in Charleston, West Virginia.

To demonstrate how public health emergency systems can use health systems tools to analyze and learn from critical incidents, we employed a facilitated look-back approach to review the public response to a chemical spill in Charleston, West Virginia. We reviewed official reports, news articles, and other documents; conducted in-person interviews with key public health and emergency response officials and local community stakeholders; and organized a facilitated look-back meeting to identify root causes of the problems that were encountered. The primary response challenges were (1) public distrust stemming from scientific uncertainty about potential harms of chemicals involved in the spill and how this uncertainty was communicated and (2) communication within the public health system, broadly defined. We found that to address inherent uncertainty, health officials should acknowledge uncertainty and tell the public what is known and unknown, and what they are doing to get more information.

Root-Cause Analysis for Enhancing Public Health Emergency Preparedness: A Brief Report of a Salmonella Outbreak in the Alamosa, Colorado, Water Supply.

To demonstrate how public health systems can use root-cause analysis (RCA) to improve learning from critical incidents, the research team utilized a facilitated look-back meeting to examine the public health systems' response to a Salmonella outbreak in the water supply in Alamosa, Colorado. We worked with public health, emergency management agencies, and other stakeholders to identify response challenges related to public health emergency preparedness capabilities, root causes, and lessons learned. The results demonstrate that RCA can help identify systems issues that, if addressed, can improve future responses. Furthermore, RCA can identify more basic issues that go beyond a specific incident or setting, such as the need for effective communication and coordination throughout the public health system, and the social capital needed to support it.

Public response to the 2014 chemical spill in West Virginia: knowledge, opinions and behaviours.

BACKGROUND: On January 9(th) 2014, a faulty storage tank leaked 10,000 gal of an industrial coal processing liquid into the Elk River in West Virginia (WV), contaminating the drinking water of the nine counties collectively known as the Kanawha Valley. The aim of this study was to 1) explore how and when people obtained information about the water contamination and 2) understand how individual and social factors such as socio-demographic characteristics, timing of information, trust in government, and risk perception influenced compliance with recommended behaviours and the public's views on the need for environmental regulations. METHODS: Between February 7-26, 2014, a survey was conducted of adult residents of West Virginia including geographic areas affected and non-affected by the chemical spill. The total population-based sample size was 690 and the survey was administered online. Descriptive statistics and multivariate statistical models were created to determine what factors influenced compliance and public opinions. RESULTS: Findings from this study show that, during the 2014 West Virginia water crisis, information about water contamination spread quickly, as 73 % of survey respondents across the state and 89 % within the affected counties reported they heard about the incident the same day it occurred. Most people received the information promptly, understood what happened, and understood what to do to prevent exposure to the contaminant. The majority of respondents living in affected counties (70 %) followed the recommended behaviours. Among participants who voiced an opinion on the role of government in environmental regulations, the majority of respondents (54 %) reported there is "too little regulation." CONCLUSION: Data from this study show that a higher perception of risk and timely receipt of information are associated with compliance with recommended behaviours, underlying the importance of releasing information to the public as quickly as possible during a crisis. This study also highlights the importance of coordinating risk communication activities beyond the area of the incident to assure public understanding of what measures are recommended, which are not and where.

Characterizing Influenza surveillance systems performance: application of a Bayesian hierarchical statistical model to Hong Kong surveillance data.

BACKGROUND: Infectious disease surveillance is a process the product of which reflects both actual disease trends and public awareness of the disease. Decisions made by patients, health care providers, and public health professionals about seeking and providing health care and about reporting cases to health authorities are all influenced by the information environment, which changes constantly. Biases are therefore imbedded in surveillance systems; these biases need to be characterized to provide better situational awareness for decision-making purposes. Our goal is to develop a statistical framework to characterize influenza surveillance systems, particularly their correlation with the information environment. METHODS: We identified Hong Kong influenza surveillance data systems covering healthcare providers, laboratories, daycare centers and residential care homes for the elderly. A Bayesian hierarchical statistical model was developed to examine the statistical relationships between the influenza surveillance data and the information environment represented by alerts from HealthMap and web queries from Google. Different models were fitted for non-pandemic and pandemic periods and model goodness-of-fit was assessed using common model selection procedures. RESULTS: Some surveillance systems - especially ad hoc systems developed in response to the pandemic flu outbreak - are more correlated with the information environment than others. General practitioner (percentage of influenza-like-illness related patient visits among all patient visits) and laboratory (percentage of specimen tested positive) seem to proportionally reflect the actual disease trends and are less representative of the information environment. Surveillance systems using influenza-specific code for reporting tend to reflect biases of both healthcare seekers and providers. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows certain influenza surveillance systems are less correlated with the information environment than others, and therefore, might represent more reliable indicators of disease activity in future outbreaks. Although the patterns identified in this study might change in future outbreaks, the potential susceptibility of surveillance data is likely to persist in the future, and should be considered when interpreting surveillance data.

Lessons about the state and local public health system response to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic: a workshop summary.

OBJECTIVE: Identify lessons about the public health emergency preparedness system from after action report/improvement plans (AAR/IPs) authored by state and local health departments following the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. DESIGN: Potentially generalizable findings were collected during a workshop attended by representatives from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), state and local public health departments, and other organizations that prepared 2009 H1N1AAR/IPs. PARTICIPANTS: Workshop participants included state and local health department personnel who had submitted AAR/IPs to the CDC for review. MEASURES: Workshop participants were asked to consider the question: What did you hear from other jurisdictions that resonated with your own experience and could be a generalized finding? RESULTS: Workshop discussions revealed potential lessons concerning: (1) situational awareness during the initial response; (2) resource mobilization and legal authority; (3) the complexity of vaccine distribution and administration; (4) balancing emergency response and routine operations; (5) communication and coordination among the many independent actors in the public health system; and (6) incident management in a long-duration incident. CONCLUSIONS: The response to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic provides an opportunity to learn about the public health system's emergency response capabilities and to identify ways to improve preparedness for future events. Perhaps the most important lessons from the 2009 H1N1 response reveal the complexity of coordinating actions among the many different actors, institutions, sectors, and disciplines involved in the public health system. While the response to the pandemic engendered creative "on the spot" solutions, continued effort is needed to better understand and manage the identified challenges.

Learning about after action reporting from the 2009 H1N1 pandemic: a workshop summary.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze key variations in the after action report/improvement plan (AAR/IP) process used by state and local health departments following the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and identify ideas for improving that process. DESIGN: Workshop participants discussed their AAR findings and the methods used to prepare their reports and implications for improving the AAR/IP process in future events. PARTICIPANTS: Workshop participants included state and local health department personnel who had submitted AAR/IPs to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for review. MEASURES: Workshop participants were asked to consider the question: On the basis of what you heard in this workshop, what would you do differently if you could redo your 2009 H1N1 AAR/IP? RESULTS: Workshop discussions revealed wide differences in the participants' understanding of the intended uses and users of the AAR/IPs, their scope, timing, and format, and the use of external consultants in their preparation, and on the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches. The AAR/IPs also varied in the extent to which they sought to identify root causes and the methods they used to do so. CONCLUSIONS: The AAR/IPs can be useful for both accountability and quality improvement, but these objectives require different foci and methodological approaches. Notably, the AAR/IPs can also be used as an opportunity to hold health departments accountable for conducting root cause analyses and making the improvements that follow from them. Federal agencies requiring the AAR/IPs should clarify the purpose and issues of scope and timing; develop training materials and exemplary cases of effective AAR/IPs, particularly of root cause analysis applied to public health emergency preparedness, professional guidelines, and standards for consultants; and consider developing a peer model for preparing AAR/IPs.

An Estimate of Severe Harms Due to Screening Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to comprehensively assess the direct, severe harms of screening colonoscopy in the United States. Whereas other investigators have completed systematic reviews estimating the harms of all types of colonoscopy, this analysis focuses on screening colonoscopies that had adequate follow up to avoid undercounting delayed harms. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Embase were queried for relevant studies on screening colonoscopy harms published between January 1, 2002, and April 1, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: English-language studies of screening colonoscopy for average risk patients were included. Studies must have followed patients for adequate time post procedure, defined as 30 days after colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the number of severe bleeding events and gastrointestinal (GI) perforations within 30 days of screening colonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 1951 studies were reviewed for inclusion; 94 were reviewed in full text. Of those reviewed in full, 6 studies, including a total of 467,139 colonoscopies, met our inclusion criteria and were included in our analysis of harms related to screening colonoscopies. The rate of severe bleeding ranged credibly from 16.4 to 36.18 per 10,000 colonoscopies; the rate of perforation ranged credibly from 7.62 to 8.50 per 10,000 colonoscopies. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to estimate direct harms from screening colonoscopy, including harms that occur up to 30 days after the procedure. The risk of harm subsequent to screening colonoscopy is higher than previously reported and should be discussed with patients when engaging in shared decision making.

COVID-19 mortality in the United States: It's been two Americas from the start.

During the summer of 2021, a narrative of "two Americas" emerged: one with high demand for the COVID-19 vaccine and the second with widespread vaccine hesitancy and opposition to masks and vaccines. We analyzed "excess mortality" rates (the difference between total deaths and what would have been expected based on earlier time periods) prepared by the CDC for the United States from January 3, 2020 to September 26, 2021. Between Jan. 3, 2020 and Sept. 26, 2021, there were 895,693 excess deaths associated with COVID-19, 26% more than reported as such. The proportion of deaths estimated by the excess mortality method that was reported as COVID-19 was highest in the Northeast (92%) and lowest in the West (72%) and South (76%). Of the estimated deaths, 43% occurred between Oct. 4, 2020 and Feb. 27, 2021. Before May 31, 2020, approximately 56% of deaths were in the Northeast, where 17% of the population resides. Subsequently, 48% of deaths were in the South, which makes up 38% of the population. Since May 31, 2020, the South experienced COVID-19 mortality 26% higher than the national rate, whereas the Northeast's rate was 42% lower. If each region had the same mortality rate as the Northeast, more than 316,234 COVID-19 deaths between May 31, 2020 and Sept. 26, 2021 were "avoidable." More than half (63%) of the avoidable deaths occurred between May 31, 2020 and February, 2021, and more than half (60%) were in the South. Regional differences in COVID-19 mortality have been strong throughout the pandemic. The South has had higher mortality rates than the rest of the U.S. since May 31, 2020, and experienced 62% of the avoidable deaths. A comprehensive COVID-19 policy, including population-based restrictions as well as vaccines, is needed to control the pandemic.

The impact of health policies and vaccine rollout on the COVID-19 pandemic waves in Italy.

Background: Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy, different response measures were taken to contain the spread of the virus. These include a variety of non-pharmaceutical interventions and a mass vaccination campaign. While not definitive, epidemiological measures provide some indication of the impact of such measures on the dynamics of the pandemic and lessons to better prepare for future emergencies. Objective: To describe the impact of vaccine rollout and health policies on the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy from March 2020 to October 2021 using a set of epidemiological indicators. Methods: We performed a time-trend analysis of new confirmed COVID-19 cases, patients in hospital, and deaths. Using line charts, we informally assessed the relationship of these indicators with the immunization campaign and other health policies. Daily aggregate data were gathered from GitHub repositories of certified data from Italy's Government and Civil Protection. Results: The immunization coverage increased starting in March 2021, with a parallel decrease in COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. Despite different implementation approaches, the vaccine coverage growth rate had a similar pattern across regions. A comprehensive approach including measures such as requiring face masks and a "Green Pass" to enter indoor places also helped contain the pandemic. Conclusions: The vaccine rollout had a major effect on COVID-19 in Italy, especially on hospitalizations and deaths. Before the vaccine was available, however, other non-pharmaceutical interventions also helped to contain the spread of the virus and mitigate its effect on the population.

Prevalence of symptoms of bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis among adult females in the United States.

PURPOSE: Bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis is a poorly understood condition that can cause serious disability. We provide the first population based symptom prevalence estimate to our knowledge among United States adult females. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed and validated 2 case definitions to identify bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis symptoms. Beginning in August 2007 we telephoned United States households, seeking adult women with bladder symptoms or a bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis diagnosis. Second stage screening identified those subjects who met case definition criteria. Each completed a 60-minute interview on the severity and impact of bladder symptoms, health care seeking and demographics. Data collection ended in April 2009. Using population and nonresponse weights we calculated prevalence estimates based on definitions spanning a range of sensitivity and specificity. We used United States Census counts to estimate the number of affected women in 2006. The random sample included 146,231 households, of which 131,691 included an adult female. Of these households 32,474 reported an adult female with bladder symptoms or diagnosis, of which 12,752 completed the questionnaire. RESULTS: Based on the high sensitivity definition 6.53% (95% CI 6.28, 6.79) of women met symptom criteria. Based on the high specificity definition 2.70% (95% CI 2.53, 2.86) of women met the criteria. These percentages translated into 3.3 to 7.9 million United States women 18 years old or older with bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis symptoms. Symptom severity and impact were comparable to those of adult women with established diagnoses. However, only 9.7% of the women reported being assigned a bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis symptoms are widespread among United States women and associated with considerable disability. These results suggest bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis may be underdiagnosed.