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.

Predictors of hospitalization and severe disease due to breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection in fully vaccinated individuals.

Objective: We aimed to identify risk factors for hospital admission and severe disease among fully vaccinated (FV) individuals with COVID-19. Further, we investigated if risk factors for hospitalization and severe disease are similar between unvaccinated (UV) and vaccinated individuals. Methods: This was a multicenter, observational cohort analysis from a large regional healthcare system in metro Detroit using electronic health record data to evaluate risk factors for hospitalization and severe COVID-19 disease. Vaccination data were retrieved using electronic medical records linked to our statewide immunization database. Consecutive adult FV and UV patients with a primary admission diagnosis of COVID-19 were included in the comparative analysis. Partially vaccinated patients and patients who had received a booster dose were excluded. The primary outcome of this study was hospital admission and severe disease inclusive of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, or death. Results: Between December 15, 2020 and December 19, 2021, 20,584 emergency department visits met our inclusion criteria. Among these, 2005 (9.7%) visits consisted of FV individuals, 18,579 (90.3%) were UV, and 40.3% of UV and 52.7% of FV required hospitalization with similar (12.7% and 12.6%, respectively) rates of severe disease. Hospitalized UV patients with severe disease were younger than their FV counterparts (49.5% <65 years vs. 13.5% p < 0.001). Risk factors for severe disease on UV and FV included age ≥65 years (UV: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-1.73, p < 0.001 and FV: aOR 2.50, 95% CI 1.44-4.36 p = 0.001) and weighted Elixhauser score >10 (UV: aOR 9.11, 95% CI 6.92-12.00, p < 0.001 and FV: aOR 6.04, 95% CI 2.68-13.26, p < 0.001). However, only on UV status, body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 was associated with increased odds of severe disease (aOR 2.59, 95% CI 2.09-3.22, p < 0.001). Conclusions: FV patients with breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection who require hospitalization and have severe disease are older and have more medical comorbidities compared to UV patients. When comparing risk factors for severe disease between UV and FV individuals, FV status is particularly associated with reduced risk among patients with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 and a moderate number of medical comorbidities, regardless of age, highlighting the importance of vaccination in these particularly vulnerable groups.

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).

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ+) Communities and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Call to Break the Cycle of Structural Barriers.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately impacted lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) communities. Many disparities mirror those of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/AIDS epidemic. These health inequities have repeated throughout history due to the structural oppression of LGBTQ+ people. We aim to demonstrate that the familiar patterns of LGBTQ+ health disparities reflect a perpetuating, deeply rooted cycle of injustice imposed on LGBTQ+ people. Here, we contextualize COVID-19 inequities through the history of the HIV/AIDS crisis, describe manifestations of LGBTQ+ structural oppression exacerbated by the pandemic, and provide recommendations for medical professionals and institutions seeking to reduce health inequities.

Policy statement from the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA): Only medical contraindications should be accepted as a reason for not receiving all routine immunizations as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

SHEA endorses adhering to the recommendations by the CDC and ACIP for immunizations of all children and adults. All persons providing clinical care should be familiar with these recommendations and should routinely assess immunization compliance of their patients and strongly recommend all routine immunizations to patients. All healthcare personnel (HCP) should be immunized against vaccine-preventable diseases as recommended by the CDC/ACIP (unless immunity is demonstrated by another recommended method). SHEA endorses the policy that immunization should be a condition of employment or functioning (students, contract workers, volunteers, etc) at a healthcare facility. Only recognized medical contraindications should be accepted for not receiving recommended immunizations.

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.

COVID-19 Pandemic: Disparate Health Impact on the Hispanic/Latinx Population in the United States.

In December 2019, a novel coronavirus known as SARS-CoV-2, emerged in Wuhan, China, causing the coronavirus disease 2019 we now refer to as COVID-19. The World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 12 March 2020. In the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed preexisting social and health disparities among several historically vulnerable populations, with stark differences in the proportion of minority individuals diagnosed with and dying from COVID-19. In this article we will describe the emerging disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on the Hispanic/Latinx (henceforth: Hispanic or Latinx) community in the United States, discuss potential antecedents, and consider strategies to address the disparate impact of COVID-19 on this population.

Tuberculosis Screening, Testing, and Treatment of US Health Care Personnel: ACOEM and NTCA Joint Task Force on Implementation of the 2019 MMWR Recommendations.

: On May 17, 2019, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Tuberculosis Controllers Association issued new Recommendations for Tuberculosis Screening, Testing, and Treatment of Health Care Personnel, United States, 2019, updating the health care personnel-related sections of the Guidelines for Preventing the Transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Health-Care Settings, 2005. This companion document offers the collective effort and experience of occupational health, infectious disease, and public health experts from major academic and public health institutions across the United States and expands on each section of the 2019 recommendations to provide clarifications, explanations, and considerations that go beyond the 2019 recommendations to answer questions that may arise and to offer strategies for implementation.

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 (