SHEA position statement on pandemic preparedness for policymakers: building a strong and resilient healthcare workforce.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, many areas in the United States experienced healthcare personnel (HCP) shortages tied to a variety of factors. Infection prevention programs, in particular, faced increasing workload demands with little opportunity to delegate tasks to others without specific infectious diseases or infection control expertise. Shortages of clinicians providing inpatient care to critically ill patients during the early phase of the pandemic were multifactorial, largely attributed to increasing demands on hospitals to provide care to patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and furloughs.1 HCP shortages and challenges during later surges, including the Omicron variant-associated surges, were largely attributed to HCP infections and associated work restrictions during isolation periods and the need to care for family members, particularly children, with COVID-19. Additionally, the detrimental physical and mental health impact of COVID-19 on HCP has led to attrition, which further exacerbates shortages.2 Demands increased in post-acute and long-term care (PALTC) settings, which already faced critical staffing challenges difficulty with recruitment, and high rates of turnover. Although individual healthcare organizations and state and federal governments have taken actions to mitigate recurring shortages, additional work and innovation are needed to develop longer-term solutions to improve healthcare workforce resiliency. The critical role of those with specialized training in infection prevention, including healthcare epidemiologists, was well-demonstrated in pandemic preparedness and response. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need to support growth in these fields.3 This commentary outlines the need to develop the US healthcare workforce in preparation for future pandemics.

SHEA position statement on pandemic preparedness for policymakers: introduction and overview.

Throughout history, pandemics and their aftereffects have spurred society to make substantial improvements in healthcare. After the Black Death in 14th century Europe, changes were made to elevate standards of care and nutrition that resulted in improved life expectancy.1 The 1918 influenza pandemic spurred a movement that emphasized public health surveillance and detection of future outbreaks and eventually led to the creation of the World Health Organization Global Influenza Surveillance Network.2 In the present, the COVID-19 pandemic exposed many of the pre-existing problems within the US healthcare system, which included (1) a lack of capacity to manage a large influx of contagious patients while simultaneously maintaining routine and emergency care to non-COVID patients; (2) a "just in time" supply network that led to shortages and competition among hospitals, nursing homes, and other care sites for essential supplies; and (3) longstanding inequities in the distribution of healthcare and the healthcare workforce. The decades-long shift from domestic manufacturing to a reliance on global supply chains has compounded ongoing gaps in preparedness for supplies such as personal protective equipment and ventilators. Inequities in racial and socioeconomic outcomes highlighted during the pandemic have accelerated the call to focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within our communities. The pandemic accelerated cooperation between government entities and the healthcare system, resulting in swift implementation of mitigation measures, new therapies and vaccinations at unprecedented speeds, despite our fragmented healthcare delivery system and political divisions. Still, widespread misinformation or disinformation and political divisions contributed to eroded trust in the public health system and prevented an even uptake of mitigation measures, vaccines and therapeutics, impeding our ability to contain the spread of the virus in this country.3 Ultimately, the lessons of COVID-19 illustrate the need to better prepare for the next pandemic. Rising microbial resistance, emerging and re-emerging pathogens, increased globalization, an aging population, and climate change are all factors that increase the likelihood of another pandemic.4.

Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America position statement on pandemic preparedness for policymakers: mitigating supply shortages.

The COVID-19 has had major direct (e.g., deaths) and indirect (e.g., social inequities) effects in the United States. While the public health response to the epidemic featured some important successes (e.g., universal masking ,and rapid development and approval of vaccines and therapeutics), there were systemic failures (e.g., inadequate public health infrastructure) that overshadowed these successes. Key deficiency in the U.S. response were shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) and supply chain deficiencies. Recommendations are provided for mitigating supply shortages and supply chain failures in healthcare settings in future pandemics. Some key recommendations for preventing shortages of essential components of infection control and prevention include increasing the stockpile of PPE in the U.S. National Strategic Stockpile, increased transparency of the Stockpile, invoking the Defense Production Act at an early stage, and rapid review and authorization by FDA/EPA/OSHA of non-U.S. approved products. Recommendations are also provided for mitigating shortages of diagnostic testing, medications and medical equipment.

SHEA position statement on pandemic preparedness for policymakers: pandemic data collection, maintenance, and release.

The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology in America (SHEA) strongly supports modernization of data collection processes and the creation of publicly available data repositories that include a wide variety of data elements and mechanisms for securely storing both cleaned and uncleaned data sets that can be curated as clinical and research needs arise. These elements can be used for clinical research and quality monitoring and to evaluate the impacts of different policies on different outcomes. Achieving these goals will require dedicated, sustained and long-term funding to support data science teams and the creation of central data repositories that include data sets that can be "linked" via a variety of different mechanisms and also data sets that include institutional and state and local policies and procedures. A team-based approach to data science is strongly encouraged and supported to achieve the goal of a sustainable, adaptable national shared data resource.

COVID-19 Vaccination Concerns and Reasons for Acceptance Among US Health Care Personnel.

OBJECTIVES: Because health care personnel (HCP) are potentially at increased risk of contracting COVID-19, high vaccination rates in this population are essential. The objective of this study was to assess vaccination status, barriers to vaccination, reasons for vaccine acceptance, and concerns about COVID-19 vaccination among HCP. METHODS: We conducted an anonymous online survey at a large US health care system from April 9 through May 4, 2021, to assess COVID-19 vaccination status and endorsement of reasons for acceptance and concerns related to vaccination (based on selections from a provided list). RESULTS: A total of 4603 HCP (12.2% response rate) completed the survey, 3947 (85.7%) had received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine at the time of the survey, and 550 (11.9%) reported no plans to receive the vaccine. Unvaccinated HCP were 30 times more likely than vaccinated HCP to endorse religious or personal beliefs as a vaccine concern (odds ratio = 30.95; 95% CI, 21.06-45.48) and 15 times more likely to believe that personal vaccination is not needed if enough others are vaccinated (odds ratio = 14.99; 95% CI, 10.84-20.72). The more reasons endorsed for vaccination (ß = 0.60; P < .001), the higher the likelihood of having received the vaccine. However, the number of concerns about COVID-19 vaccine was not related to vaccination status (ß = 1.01; P = .64). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that reasons for vaccination acceptance and concerns about vaccination need to be considered to better understand behavioral choices related to COVID-19 vaccination among HCP, because these beliefs may affect vaccination advocacy, responses to vaccine mandates, and promotion of COVID-19 vaccine boosters.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Healthcare Personnel Who Generally Accept Vaccines.

To identify psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare personnel (HCP). We surveyed 4603 HCP to assess psychological antecedents of their vaccination decisions (the '5 Cs') for vaccines in general and for COVID-19 vaccines. Most HCP accept vaccines, but many expressed hesitancy about COVID-19 vaccines for the psychological antecedents of vaccination: confidence (vaccines are effective), complacency (vaccines are unnecessary), constraints (difficult to access), calculation (risks/benefits), collective responsibility (need for vaccination when others vaccinate). HCP who were hesitant only about COVID-19 vaccines differed from HCP who were consistently hesitant: those with lower confidence were more likely to be younger and women, higher constraints were more likely to have clinical positions, higher complacency were more likely to have recently cared for COVID-19 patients, and lesser collective responsibility were more likely to be non-white. These results can inform interventions to encourage uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in HCP.

Multisociety statement on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination as a condition of employment for healthcare personnel.

This consensus statement by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine (AMDA), the Association for Professionals in Epidemiology and Infection Control (APIC), the HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS), and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists (SIDP) recommends that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination should be a condition of employment for all healthcare personnel in facilities in the United States. Exemptions from this policy apply to those with medical contraindications to all COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States and other exemptions as specified by federal or state law. The consensus statement also supports COVID-19 vaccination of nonemployees functioning at a healthcare facility (eg, students, contract workers, volunteers, etc).

Location Matters: Geographic Disparities and Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the United States has revealed major disparities in the access to testing and messaging about the pandemic based on the geographic location of individuals, particularly in communities of color, rural areas, and areas of low income. This geographic disparity, in addition to deeply rooted structural inequities, have posed additional challenges to adequately diagnose and provide care for individuals of all ages living in these settings. We describe the impact that COVID-19 has had on geographically disparate populations in the United States and share our recommendations on what might be done to ameliorate the current situation.

Racial Disparity of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in African American Communities.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has unveiled unsettling disparities in the outcome of the disease among African Americans. These disparities are not new but are rooted in structural inequities that must be addressed to adequately care for communities of color. We describe the historical context of these structural inequities, their impact on the progression of COVID-19 in the African American (black) community, and suggest a multifaceted approach to addressing these healthcare disparities. (Of note, terminology from survey data cited for this article varied from blacks, African Americans, or both; for consistency, we use African Americans throughout.).

Tuberculosis Screening, Testing, and Treatment of U.S. Health Care Personnel: Recommendations from the National Tuberculosis Controllers Association and CDC, 2019.

The 2005 CDC guidelines for preventing Mycobacterium tuberculosis transmission in health care settings include recommendations for baseline tuberculosis (TB) screening of all U.S. health care personnel and annual testing for health care personnel working in medium-risk settings or settings with potential for ongoing transmission (1). Using evidence from a systematic review conducted by a National Tuberculosis Controllers Association (NTCA)-CDC work group, and following methods adapted from the Guide to Community Preventive Services (2,3), the 2005 CDC recommendations for testing U.S. health care personnel have been updated and now include 1) TB screening with an individual risk assessment and symptom evaluation at baseline (preplacement); 2) TB testing with an interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) or a tuberculin skin test (TST) for persons without documented prior TB disease or latent TB infection (LTBI); 3) no routine serial TB testing at any interval after baseline in the absence of a known exposure or ongoing transmission; 4) encouragement of treatment for all health care personnel with untreated LTBI, unless treatment is contraindicated; 5) annual symptom screening for health care personnel with untreated LTBI; and 6) annual TB education of all health care personnel.

Alcohol use disorders (AUD) among tuberculosis patients: a study from Chennai, South India.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol Use Disorders (AUDs) among tuberculosis (TB) patients are associated with nonadherence and poor treatment outcomes. Studies from Tuberculosis Research Centre (TRC), Chennai have reported that alcoholism has been one of the major reasons for default and mortality in under the DOTS programme in South India. Hence, it is planned to conduct a study to estimate prevalence of alcohol use and AUDs among TB patients attending the corporation health centres in Chennai, India. METHODOLOGY: This is a cross-sectional cohort study covering 10 corporation zones at Chennai and it included situational assessment followed by screening of TB patients by a WHO developed Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test AUDIT scale. Four zones were randomly selected and all TB patients treated during July to September 2009 were screened with AUDIT scale for alcohol consumption. RESULTS: Out of 490 patients, 66% were males, 66% were 35 years and above, 57% were married, 58% were from the low monthly income group of 8. Age (>35 years), education (less educated), income (

Alcohol consumption among men and women with tuberculosis in Tomsk, Russia.

Drinking behavior among Russian women remains poorly described. We analyzed gender differences in alcohol use among 374 tuberculosis patients in Tomsk, Siberia. Twenty-six (28.3%) women had lifetime alcohol abuse or dependence, compared with 70.6% of men. Women with alcohol use disorders drank 12.7 +/- 14.0 standard drinks per day and > or = 34.6% drank 2 three days per week. Among individuals with a lifetime alcohol use disorder, age of onset and typical consumption did not differ significantly by gender. We conclude that Russian women with alcohol use disorders consume almost as much alcohol as men and may be at greater risk for negative social and medical consequences.

Integrated Management of Physician-delivered Alcohol Care for Tuberculosis Patients: Design and Implementation.

BACKGROUND: While the integration of alcohol screening, treatment, and referral in primary care and other medical settings in the U.S. and worldwide has been recognized as a key health care priority, it is not routinely done. In spite of the high co-occurrence and excess mortality associated with alcohol use disorders (AUDs) among individuals with tuberculosis (TB), there are no studies evaluating effectiveness of integrating alcohol care into routine treatment for this disorder. METHODS: We designed and implemented a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to determine the effectiveness of integrating pharmacotherapy and behavioral treatments for AUDs into routine medical care for TB in the Tomsk Oblast Tuberculosis Service (TOTBS) in Tomsk, Russia. Eligible patients are diagnosed with alcohol abuse or dependence, are newly diagnosed with TB, and initiating treatment in the TOTBS with Directly Observed Therapy-Short Course (DOTS) for TB. Utilizing a factorial design, the Integrated Management of Physician-delivered Alcohol Care for Tuberculosis Patients (IMPACT) study randomizes eligible patients who sign informed consent into 1 of 4 study arms: (1) Oral Naltrexone + Brief Behavioral Compliance Enhancement Therapy (BBCET) + treatment as usual (TAU), (2) Brief Counseling Intervention (BCI) + TAU, (3) Naltrexone + BBCET + BCI + TAU, or (4) TAU alone. RESULTS: Utilizing an iterative, collaborative approach, a multi-disciplinary U.S. and Russian team has implemented a model of alcohol management that is culturally appropriate to the patient and TB physician community in Russia. Implementation to date has achieved the integration of routine alcohol screening into TB care in Tomsk; an ethnographic assessment of knowledge, attitudes, and practices of AUD management among TB physicians in Tomsk; translation and cultural adaptation of the BCI to Russia and the TB setting; and training and certification of TB physicians to deliver oral naltrexone and brief counseling interventions for alcohol abuse and dependence as part of routine TB care. The study is successfully enrolling eligible subjects in the RCT to evaluate the relationship of integrating effective pharmacotherapy and brief behavioral intervention on TB and alcohol outcomes, as well as reduction in HIV risk behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: The IMPACT study utilizes an innovative approach to adapt 2 effective therapies for treatment of alcohol use disorders to the TB clinical services setting in the Tomsk Oblast, Siberia, Russia, and to train TB physicians to deliver state of the art alcohol pharmacotherapy and behavioral treatments as an integrated part of routine TB care. The proposed treatment strategy could be applied elsewhere in Russia and in other settings where TB control is jeopardized by AUDs. If demonstrated to be effective, this model of integrating alcohol interventions into routine TB care has the potential for expanded applicability to other chronic co-occurring infectious and other medical conditions seen in medical care settings.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of physicians in Tomsk Oblast tuberculosis services regarding alcohol use among tuberculosis patients in Tomsk, Russia.

In recent years, the Russian Federation has seen a dramatic rise in morbidity and mortality from tuberculosis (TB), attributed in part to an increase in alcohol use disorders (AUDs), which are associated with worse TB treatment outcomes. This study describes the knowledge, attitudes and practices of physicians who treat TB patients in Tomsk, Russia. We conducted semistructured interviews with 16 TB physicians and 1 addiction specialist. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed, translated and systematically analyzed. We identified four key domains: definitions of alcohol use and abuse and physicians' knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding these problems. Physicians described patients as largely precontemplative and reluctant to seek treatment. Physicians recognized their limited knowledge in diagnosing and treating AUDs but expressed interest in acquiring these skills. Few options are currently available for treatment of AUDs in TB patients in Tomsk. These findings suggest that Tomsk physicians are aware of the need to engage AUDs in TB patients but identify a knowledge gap that restricts their ability to do so. Training TB physicians to use simple screening instruments and deliver evidence-based alcohol interventions improves TB outcomes among patients with co-occurring AUDs.

Integration of alcohol use disorders identification and management in the tuberculosis programme in Tomsk Oblast, Russia.

Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) among tuberculosis (TB) patients are associated with nonadherence and poor treatment outcomes. We developed a multidisciplinary model to manage AUDs among TB patients in Tomsk, Russia. First, we assessed current standards of care through stakeholder meetings and ethnographic work. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) was incorporated into routine assessment of all patients starting TB treatment. We established treatment algorithms based on AUDIT scores. We then hired specialists and addressed licensing requirements to provide on-site addictions care. Our experience offers a successful model in the management of co-occurring AUDs among patients with chronic medical problems.