"The perfect storm": community worker perspectives on the impact of COVID-19 on New York City immigrants and migrant-serving organizations.

Background: Immigrants in New York City (NYC) have higher COVID-19 mortality than the general population. While migrant-serving organizations (MSOs) provide access to a breadth of services, they are disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic due to staffing limitations, funding cuts, and resource limitations of communities served. Methods: Six focus-group discussions were conducted to explore the experiences of MSOs in NYC during the COVID-19 pandemic from November 2021 to March 2022. Study participants csomprised a subsample of survey respondents from a larger study identified via lists of MSOs. Results: Twenty-seven organizational representatives from 11 MSOs across NYC participated in the discussions. In addition to providing information on communities served, services offered, and organizational characteristics, the following themes emerged from the convenings: mental health challenges and resources needed for immigrants; immigration-related challenges; factors exacerbating hardships for immigrants during COVID-19; interorganizational collaborations and partnerships; policy change; and needs/requests of MSOs. MSOs provide a wide range of services as non-profit organizations and use interorganizational collaboration to improve service delivery. The proximity of MSOs to immigrant communities helps providers understand the needs of immigrants relating to the COVID-19 pandemic and factors that shape telehealth services. Conclusion: MSOs are important providers and advocates for immigration policy in the US given their relationship with the populations they serve. These findings have implications for how to support MSOs that serve immigrants in NYC. Strategies to achieve this include timelier availability and exchange of information, policies, and research as well as strengthening the experience-based advocacy of these groups.

Vaccine Trust Gauge: Mixed methods research to measure and understand vaccine trust.

INTRODUCTION: While trust in vaccination is one factor in the ecosystem that surrounds vaccine decision-making and acceptance, understanding its role may provide insights into effective and tailored approaches to help build individual-level vaccine confidence. The authors developed the Vaccine Trust Gauge (VTG), a scale used to measure trust in vaccines, and conducted mixed methods research to provide an in-depth understanding of the various factors shaping vaccine trust in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The VTG instrument was developed from previous and scoping research of questionnaires (Larson et al., 2018; Palmedo et al., 2021) and fielded in the US to n = 3026 adults ages ≥18. Based on survey responses, participants were segmented by vaccine trust level (low, medium, or high) through an aggregated scoring system constructed from the VTG. 65 respondents were recruited to participate in in-depth interviews or focus groups conducted by phone or video conference. A conceptual definition of vaccine trust was developed using components of the VTG scale. RESULTS: Multivariate regressions found that higher levels of vaccine trust measured by the VTG are closely associated with trust in healthcare providers and trust in government. College or higher degree, Democrats, and those aged 55+ were more likely to have higher trust in vaccines compared to Black/African Americans, and those experiencing discrimination in the healthcare system. The qualitative analysis allowed the authors to add diverse, contextual elements to the vaccine trust levels summarized here. DISCUSSION: These mixed methods findings suggest future implications for research and practice. Ideas for potential communication, policy, and public health strategies are offered to build vaccine confidence and advance uptake for COVID-19 and other vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: There are diverse underlying factors that influence an individual's trust in vaccines, which means trust categories and demographic characteristics cannot be used as monolithic identifiers. Assessing vaccine trust provides insights into a foundation for engagement to promote individual-level vaccine acceptance. The authors present recommendations for the use of the VTG, future implications for research and practice, and potential strategies to build vaccine confidence.

The vulnerability to COVID-19 of migrants in large urban areas: structural exacerbators and community-level mitigators.

BACKGROUND: Despite research on large urban areas in the context of COVID-19, evidence on how these settings impact migrants is still limited. OBJECTIVE: To explore exacerbating and mitigating factors of large urban areas on migrants' vulnerabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2022, focused on migrants (foreign-born individuals who have not been naturalized in the host country, regardless of legal immigration status) in urban areas with a population >500 000. After screening 880 studies, 29 studies were included and categorized within the following thematic framework: (i) pre-existing inequities, (ii) governance strategies, (iii) urban design and (iv) engagement of civil society organizations (CSOs). RESULTS: Exacerbating factors include pre-existing inequities (e.g. unemployment, financial instability and barriers to healthcare access), exclusionary government responses (e.g. ineligibility for relief funds or unemployment benefits) and residential segregation. Mitigating community-level factors include the engagement of CSOs to fill institutional and governmental gaps through service provision and use of technology. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend increased attention to pre-existing structural inequities faced by migrants, more inclusive governance strategies and partnerships between government and CSOs to improve the design and delivery of services to migrants in large urban areas. More research is needed on how urban design can be utilized to mitigate COVID-19 impacts on migrant communities. The factors identified in this systematic review should be considered as part of migrant-inclusive emergency preparedness strategies to address the disproportionate impact of health crises on migrant communities.

Supporting US healthcare providers for successful vaccine communication.

BACKGROUND: While many healthcare providers (HCPs) have navigated patients' vaccine concerns and questions prior to the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines, sentiments surrounding the COVID-19 vaccines have presented new and distinct challenges. OBJECTIVE: To understand the provider experience of counseling patients about COVID-19 vaccinations, aspects of the pandemic environment that impacted vaccine trust, and communication strategies providers found supportive of patient vaccine education. METHODS: 7 focus groups of healthcare providers were conducted and recorded during December 2021 and January 2022, at the height of the Omicron wave in the United States. Recordings were transcribed, and iterative coding and analysis was applied. RESULTS: 44 focus group participants representing 24 US states with the majority (80%) fully vaccinated at the time of data collection. Most participants were doctors (34%) or physician's assistants and nurse practitioners (34%). The negative impact of COVID-19 misinformation on patient-provider communication at both intrapersonal and interpersonal levels as well as barriers and facilitators to patient vaccine uptake are reported. People or sources that play a role in health communication ("messengers") and persuasive messages that impact behavior or attitudes towards vaccination ("messages") are described. Providers expressed frustration in the need to continuously address vaccine misinformation in clinical appointments among patients who remained unvaccinated. Many providers found value in resources that provided up-to-date and evidence-based information as COVID-19 guidelines continued to change. Additionally, providers indicated that patient-facing materials designed to support vaccination education were not frequently available, but they were the most valuable to providers in a changing information environment. CONCLUSIONS: While vaccine decision-making is complex and hinges on diverse factors such as health care access (i.e., convenience, expense) and individual knowledge, providers can play a major role in navigating these factors with their patients. But to strengthen provider vaccine communication and promote vaccine uptake, a comprehensive communication infrastructure must be sustained to support the patient-provider dyad. The findings provide recommendations to maintain an environment that facilitates effective provider-patient communication at the community, organizational and policy levels. There is a need for a unified multisectoral response to reinforce the recommendations in patient settings.