Type 2 Diabetes Status, Diabetes Complication Severity Index Scores, and Their Relationship With COVID-19 Severity: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Hospitalized Patients in a Southwest Virginia Health System.

Background Studies have shown that patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) tend to have poorer outcomes associated with COVID-19, including increased rates of hospitalization, ICU admission, need for ventilatory support, and mortality. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study that included all non-pregnant adult patients who were hospitalized as a result of COVID-19 in a Southwest Virginia health system between March 18, 2020, and August 31, 2022. T2DM status was treated as a binary variable. T2DM severity was assessed using the Diabetes Complications Severity Index (DCSI). Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between T2DM status and COVID-19 severity outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression was also used to assess the relationship between DCSI score and COVID-19 severity outcomes among patients with an established diagnosis of T2DM at the time of COVID-19 hospital admission. Results Patients with T2DM had 1.27 times the odds of experiencing a poor COVID-19 clinical outcome (95% CI: 1.13, 1.43) and 1.35 times the odds of in-hospital mortality (95% CI: 1.14, 1.59) compared to patients without diabetes. Among patients with T2DM, increasing DCSI score was significantly associated with increased odds of experiencing a poor COVID-19 clinical outcome and in-hospital mortality. Conclusions Diabetic patients in our sample were at increased odds of experiencing poor COVID-19 clinical outcomes and in-hospital mortality compared to individuals without diabetes. Amongst patients with T2DM, increasing DCSI score was associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. Clinical decision support tools may be able to utilize DCSI scores as an indicator of COVID-19 severity risk to facilitate decisions regarding treatment aggressiveness and resource allocation.

Deepening Our Understanding of COVID-19 Vaccine Decision-Making amongst Healthcare Workers in Southwest Virginia, USA Using Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Vaccine hesitancy amongst healthcare workers (HCWs) has been a major challenge throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. While many studies have identified HCW characteristics and specific attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, researchers are still working towards developing a holistic understanding of the psychological constructs that influence COVID-19 vaccine decision-making in this population. Between 15 March and 29 March 2021, we distributed an online survey assessing individual characteristics and vaccine-related perceptions to employees of a not-for-profit healthcare system in Southwest Virginia (N = 2459). We then performed exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to describe patterns of vaccine-related thought amongst HCWs and identify latent psychometric constructs involved in vaccine decision-making. The goodness of model fit was assessed using the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA). Internal consistency and reliability of each factor were assessed using Cronbach's alpha. EFA identified four latent psychometric constructs: Lack of trust in the COVID-19 vaccine; Anti-science sentiment; Adverse side-effects; and Situational risk assessment. The goodness of EFA model fit was adequate (TLI > 0.90, RMSEA ≤ 0.08) with acceptable internal consistency and reliability for three of four factors (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70). The CFA model also had adequate goodness of fit (CFI > 0.90, RMSEA ≤ 0.08). We believe the psychometric constructs identified in this study can provide a useful framework for interventions to improve vaccine uptake amongst this critical population.

Examining drivers of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVE: To assess characteristics and perceptions associated with vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers to increase coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine uptake in this population. DESIGN: Cross-sectional quantitative survey. SETTING: A not-for-profit healthcare system in southwestern Virginia. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 2,720 employees of a not-for-profit healthcare system. METHODS: Between March 15 and 29, 2021, we conducted an Internet-based survey. Our questionnaire assessed sociodemographic and work-related characteristics, vaccine experience and intentions, agreement with vaccine-related perceptions, the most important reasons for getting or not getting vaccinated, and trusted sources of information about COVID-19. We used χ2 analyses to assess the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and both HCW characteristics and vaccine-related perceptions. RESULTS: Overall, 18% of respondents were classified as vaccine hesitant. Characteristics significantly associated with hesitancy included Black race, younger age, not having a high-risk household member, and prior personal experience with COVID-19 illness. Vaccine hesitancy was also significantly associated with many vaccine-related perceptions, including concerns about short-term and long-term side effects and a belief that the vaccines are not effective. Among vaccine-acceptant participants, wanting to protect others and wanting to help end the pandemic were the most common reasons for getting vaccinated. Personal physicians were cited most frequently as trusted sources of information about COVID-19 among both vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-acceptant respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Educational interventions to decrease vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers should focus on alleviating safety concerns, emphasizing vaccine efficacy, and appealing to a sense of duty. Such interventions should target younger adult audiences. Personal physicians may also be an effective avenue for reducing hesitancy among their patients through patient-centered discussions.

Evaluation of a Client-Centered Linkage Intervention for Patients Newly Diagnosed with HIV at an Urban United States LGBT Center: The Linkage to Care Specialist Project.

Linkage to care (LTC) is a key element of the HIV care continuum, and a crucial bridge from testing and diagnosis to receipt of antiretroviral therapies and viral suppression. In 2012, the Los Angeles LGBT Center hired a full-time LTC specialist (LTC-S), who developed a unique client-centered approach to LTC. This single-arm demonstration project was designed to systematically evaluate the LTC-S intervention. Individuals who were newly diagnosed with HIV between March 2014 and September 2015 were eligible for enrollment. The LTC-S draws heavily from principles of motivational interviewing and strengths-based case management, helping to normalize fears while guiding clients at a pace that reflects individual needs and resources. These tailored, targeted methods facilitate the rapid development of rapport, enabling the LTC-S to help clients address particular reactions and barriers to care more effectively. Of the 118 newly HIV-diagnosed individuals who enrolled, 111 (94.1%) saw an HIV primary care provider within 3 months of diagnosis; the LTC-S spent an average of 2.1 h working with each participant. Enrolled clients were a racially diverse, urban group composed primarily of young men who have sex with men. The LTC-S intervention was effective in promoting LTC among this sample. Our results demonstrate that client-centered, resiliency-based LTC services can be seamlessly integrated into an existing HIV testing program, thereby increasing the chances that newly diagnosed individuals will link to care.

Project Engage: Snowball Sampling and Direct Recruitment to Identify and Link Hard-to-Reach HIV-Infected Persons Who Are Out of Care.

INTRODUCTION: Innovative strategies are needed to identify and link hard-to-find persons living with HIV (PLWH) who are out of care (OOC). Project Engage, a health department-based project in Los Angeles County, used a mixed-methods approach to locate and provide linkage for PLWH who have limited contact with HIV medical and nonmedical services. METHODS: Incentivized social network recruitment (SNR) and direct recruitment (DR) was used to identify eligible OOC alters for a linkage intervention that included HIV clinic selection, appointment and transportation support, reminder calls/texts, and clinic navigation. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2015, 112 alters were identified using SNR (n = 74) and DR (n = 38). Most alters were male (80%), African American (38%), and gay (60%). Sizable percentages were homeless (78%), had engaged in sex work (32%) in the previous 6 months, had injected drugs (47%), were incarcerated in the previous 12 months (50%), and had only received HIV care during the previous 5 years while incarcerated (24%). SNR alters were more likely than DR alters to be African American, uninsured, unemployed, homeless, sex workers, injection drug users, recently incarcerated, and have unmet service needs. Alters linked to care within 3 (69%), 4-6 (5%), and 7-12 months (8%), and 72% were retained at 6-12 months. The percent virally suppressed increased (27% vs. 41%) and the median viral load decreased (P = 0.003) between linkage and follow-up at 6-12 months. DISCUSSION: The alternative approaches presented were effective at locating marginalized HIV-positive persons who are OOC for linkage and retention. The SNR approach was most successful at identifying alters with serious social challenges and gaps in needed medical/ancillary services.

Implementation and Operational Research: The Navigation Program: An Intervention to Reengage Lost Patients at 7 HIV Clinics in Los Angeles County, 2012-2014.

The Navigation Program is a health department-community agency collaboration to reengage lost HIV clinic patients in Los Angeles County using best practices from disease investigator services locator activities and the Antiretroviral Treatment Access Study (ARTAS), a CDC-recommended intervention. Clinic databases were reviewed to identify HIV patients who: (1) had no HIV care visits in 6-12 months and last viral load was greater than 200 copies per milliliter; (2) had no HIV care visits in >12 months; (3) were newly diagnosed and never in care; or (4) were recently released from jail/prison/other institution with no regular HIV medical provider. Patients were contacted by trained Navigators using locator information from clinic medical records, HIV/sexually transmitted disease surveillance, and people-finder databases and offered enrollment in a modified ARTAS intervention. Among the 1139 lost clinic patients identified, 36% were in care elsewhere, 29% could not be located, 8% returned to the clinic independently, 4% declined enrollment, and 7% (n = 78) were located and enrolled in the intervention. Participants received an average of 4.5 Navigator sessions over 11.6 hours. Among reengaged patients, 68% linked within 3 months, 85% linked within 6 months, and 94% linked within 12 months, and 82% of linked patients were retained in care 12 months after study enrollment. The percentage of linked patients virally suppressed was compared at time of linkage by the Navigators (52%) with a second viral load measure after linkage to care (63%) (χ(2) = 11.8; P = 0.01). The combined disease investigator services/ARTAS model of reengagement was effective for locating and reengaging lost HIV clinic patients. Access to HIV surveillance data is critical for the efficient identification of persons truly in need of reengagement.