Alternative workflows for identifying transnational missing persons.

Mass migration and migrant death at the U.S. southern border highlight the disconnectedness of the systems for transnational decedent identifications. Death investigation cases in Texas face delays and barriers at all stages of an investigation. Additionally, fragmentation of DNA databases exacerbate challenges in comparing genetic samples from unidentified human remains (UHR) and families of the missing. We sought to pilot alternative workflows for processing UHR and family reference samples (FRS) for the identification of probable migrant decedents. Primarily using Rapid DNA, but also accredited non-CODIS DNA laboratories, the piloted approaches were conducted in parallel to existing medicolegal workflows under the relevant case jurisdictional guidance. Our data show that Rapid DNA is a valid path for anthropology laboratories to support identification hypotheses and that accredited non-CODIS forensic and genetic laboratories also can support families to identify remains, especially when families reside outside of the United States.

Risk and Protective Factors for Vaping and Smoking Among High School Students in Maine.

INTRODUCTION: Vaping rates are rising among adolescents across the country, and smoking rates remain high. Understanding risk and protective factors associated with vaping and smoking can guide public health interventions. This study examined risk and protective factors associated with vaping and smoking among high school students in Maine. METHODS: We used 2019 Maine Integrated Youth Health Survey (MIYHS) data to examine risk and protective factors for vaping and smoking among Maine high school students. Our analytic sample consisted of 17,651 Maine high school students. In addition to bivariate analyses, we used unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models to assess risk and protective factors. RESULTS: Factors with the greatest effect on students' likelihood to vape, smoke, or do both were parental attitude toward adolescent smoking and depressive symptoms. Students who reported their parents feel it is a little wrong or not wrong at all if they smoked had 4.9 times higher adjusted odds of smoking and 4.6 times higher adjusted odds of vaping and smoking compared with students who said their parents feel it would be wrong or very wrong if they smoked. Students who reported depressive symptoms had 2.1 times higher adjusted odds of vaping, 2.7 times higher adjusted odds of smoking, and 3.0 times higher adjusted odds of vaping and smoking compared with students who did not report depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION: Understanding risk and protective factors for smoking and vaping among high school students can help tailor adolescent-focused vaping and smoking public health interventions to increase effectiveness.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection Hospitalization Rate and Infection Fatality Rate Among the Non-Congregate Population in Connecticut.

BACKGROUND: Infection fatality rate and infection hospitalization rate, defined as the proportion of deaths and hospitalizations, respectively, of the total infected individuals, can estimate the actual toll of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on a community, as the denominator is ideally based on a representative sample of a population, which captures the full spectrum of illness, including asymptomatic and untested individuals. OBJECTIVE: To determine the COVID-19 infection hospitalization rate and infection fatality rate among the non-congregate population in Connecticut between March 1 and June 1, 2020. METHODS: The infection hospitalization rate and infection fatality rate were calculated for adults residing in non-congregate settings in Connecticut prior to June 2020. Individuals with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies were estimated using the seroprevalence estimates from the recently conducted Post-Infection Prevalence study. Information on total hospitalizations and deaths was obtained from the Connecticut Hospital Association and the Connecticut Department of Public Health, respectively. RESULTS: Prior to June 1, 2020, nearly 113,515 (90% confidence interval [CI] 56,758-170,273) individuals were estimated to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and there were 7792 hospitalizations and 1079 deaths among the non-congregate population. The overall COVID-19 infection hospitalization rate and infection fatality rate were estimated to be 6.86% (90% CI, 4.58%-13.72%) and 0.95% (90% CI, 0.63%-1.90%), respectively, and there was variation in these rate estimates across subgroups; older people, men, non-Hispanic Black people, and those belonging to 2 of the counties had a higher burden of adverse outcomes, although the differences between most subgroups were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Using representative seroprevalence estimates, the overall COVID-19 infection hospitalization rate and infection fatality rate were estimated to be 6.86% and 0.95%, respectively, among community residents in Connecticut.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-Specific IgG Antibodies Among Adults Living in Connecticut: Post-Infection Prevalence (PIP) Study.

BACKGROUND: A seroprevalence study can estimate the percentage of people with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies in the general population; however, most existing reports have used a convenience sample, which may bias their estimates. METHODS: We sought a representative sample of Connecticut residents, ages ≥18 years and residing in noncongregate settings, who completed a survey between June 4 and June 23, 2020, and underwent serology testing for SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies between June 10 and July 29, 2020. We also oversampled non-Hispanic black and Hispanic subpopulations. We estimated the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies and the prevalence of symptomatic illness and self-reported adherence to risk-mitigation behaviors among this population. RESULTS: Of the 567 respondents (mean age 50 [± 17] years; 53% women; 75% non-Hispanic white individuals) included at the state level, 23 respondents tested positive for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, resulting in weighted seroprevalence of 4.0 (90% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-6.0). The weighted seroprevalence for the oversampled non-Hispanic black and Hispanic populations was 6.4% (90% CI 0.9-11.9) and 19.9% (90% CI 13.2-26.6), respectively. The majority of respondents at the state level reported following risk-mitigation behaviors: 73% avoided public places, 75% avoided gatherings of families or friends, and 97% wore a facemask, at least part of the time. CONCLUSIONS: These estimates indicate that the vast majority of people in Connecticut lack antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, and there is variation by race and ethnicity. There is a need for continued adherence to risk-mitigation behaviors among Connecticut residents to prevent resurgence of COVID-19 in this region.

Multiple COVID-19 Outbreaks Linked to a Wedding Reception in Rural Maine - August 7-September 14, 2020.

Large indoor gatherings pose a high risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and have the potential to be super-spreading events (1,2). Such events are associated with explosive growth, followed by sustained transmission (3). During August 7-September 14, 2020, the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention (MeCDC) investigated a COVID-19 outbreak linked to a wedding reception attended by 55 persons in a rural Maine town. In addition to the community outbreak, secondary and tertiary transmission led to outbreaks at a long-term care facility 100 miles away and at a correctional facility approximately 200 miles away. Overall, 177 COVID-19 cases were epidemiologically linked to the event, including seven hospitalizations and seven deaths (four in hospitalized persons). Investigation revealed noncompliance with CDC's recommended mitigation measures. To reduce transmission, persons should avoid large gatherings, practice physical distancing, wear masks, stay home when ill, and self-quarantine after exposure to a person with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Persons can work with local health officials to increase COVID-19 awareness and determine the best policies for organizing social events to prevent outbreaks in their communities.

Stall in Heart Disease Death Rates, Evidence From Maine, 1999-2017.

INTRODUCTION: Since the 1950s, heart disease deaths have declined in the United States, but recent reports indicate a plateau in this decline. Heart disease death rates increased in Maine from 2011-2015. We examined reasons for the trend change in Maine's heart disease death rates, including the contributing types of heart disease. METHODS: We obtained Maine's annual heart disease death data for 1999-2017 from CDC's Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER). We used joinpoint regression to determine changes in trend and annual percentage change (APC) in death rates for heart disease overall and by demographic groups, types of heart disease, and geographic area. RESULTS: Joinpoint modeling showed that Maine's age-adjusted heart disease death rates decreased during 1999-2010 (-4.2% APC), then plateaued during 2010-2017 (-0.1% APC). Death rates flattened for both sexes and age groups ≥45 years. Although death rates for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) decreased through 2017, hypertensive heart disease (HHD) and heart failure death rates increased. Death rates attributable to diabetes-related heart disease and non-AMI ischemic heart disease (IHD) plateaued. CONCLUSION: Declines in Maine's heart disease death rates have plateaued, similar to national trends. Flattening rates appear to be driven by adverse trends in HHD, heart failure, diabetes-related heart disease, and non-AMI IHD. Increased efforts to address cardiovascular disease risk factors, chronic heart disease, and access to care are necessary to continue the decrease in heart disease deaths in Maine.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Contacts of COVID-19 Patients Monitored Using an Automated Symptom Monitoring Tool - Maine, May-June 2020.

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is spread from person to person (1-3). Quarantine of exposed persons (contacts) for 14 days following their exposure reduces transmission (4-7). Contact tracing provides an opportunity to identify contacts, inform them of quarantine recommendations, and monitor their symptoms to promptly identify secondary COVID-19 cases (7,8). On March 12, 2020, Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Maine CDC) identified the first case of COVID-19 in the state. Because of resource constraints, including staffing, Maine CDC could not consistently monitor contacts, and automated technological solutions for monitoring contacts were explored. On May 14, 2020, Maine CDC began enrolling contacts of patients with reported COVID-19 into Sara Alert (MITRE Corporation, 2020),* an automated, web-based, symptom monitoring tool. After initial communication with Maine CDC staff members, enrolled contacts automatically received daily symptom questionnaires via their choice of e-mailed weblink, text message, texted weblink, or telephone call until completion of their quarantine. Epidemiologic investigations were conducted for enrollees who reported symptoms or received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. During May 14-June 26, Maine CDC enrolled 1,622 contacts of 614 COVID-19 patients; 190 (11.7%) eventually developed COVID-19, highlighting the importance of identifying, quarantining, and monitoring contacts of COVID-19 patients to limit spread. In Maine, symptom monitoring was not feasible without the use of an automated symptom monitoring tool. Using a tool that permitted enrollees to specify a method of symptom monitoring was well received, because the majority of persons monitored (96.4%) agreed to report using this system.

Indicators for chronic disease surveillance - United States, 2013.

Chronic diseases are an important public health problem, which can result in morbidity, mortality, disability, and decreased quality of life. Chronic diseases represented seven of the top 10 causes of death in the United States in 2010 (Murphy SL, Xu J, Kochanek KD. Deaths: final data for 2010. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2013;6. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf Adobe PDF file). Chronic diseases and risk factors vary by geographic area such as state and county, where essential public health interventions are implemented. The chronic disease indicators (CDIs) were established in the late 1990s through collaboration among CDC, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, and the Association of State and Territorial Chronic Disease Program Directors (now the National Association of Chronic Disease Directors) to enable public health professionals and policymakers to retrieve data for chronic diseases and risk factors that have a substantial impact on public health. This report describes the latest revisions to the CDIs, which were developed on the basis of a comprehensive review during 2011-2013. The number of indicators is increasing from 97 to 124, with major additions in systems and environmental indicators and additional emphasis on high-impact diseases and conditions as well as emerging topics.

Awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia among insured residents of New York City, 2004.

INTRODUCTION: Health care access and sociodemographic characteristics may influence chronic disease management even among adults who have health insurance. The objective of this study was to examine awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia, by health care access and sociodemographic characteristics, among insured adults in New York City. METHODS: Using data from the 2004 New York City Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, we investigated inequalities in the diagnosis and management of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia among insured adults aged 20 to 64 years (n = 1,334). We assessed differences in insurance type (public, private) and routine place of care (yes, no), by sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: One in 10 participants with hypertension and 3 in 10 with hypercholesterolemia were unaware and untreated. Having a routine place of care was associated with treatment and control of hypertension and with awareness, treatment, and control of hypercholesterolemia, after adjusting for insurance type, age, sex, race/ethnicity, foreign birth, income, and education. Differences in systolic blood pressure and total cholesterol between people with versus without a routine place of care were 2 to 3 times the difference found between people with public versus private insurance. Few differences were associated with sociodemographic characteristics after adjusting for routine place of care and insurance type; however, male sex, younger age, Asian race, and foreign birth with short-term US residence reduced the odds of having a routine place of care. Neither income nor education predicted having a routine place of care. CONCLUSION: Sociodemographic characteristics may influence chronic disease management among the insured through health care access factors such as having a routine place of care.

Management of cardiovascular risk in the usual care of Medicaid recipients.

Uncontrolled risk factors contribute substantially to cardiovascular disease burden. With retrospective chart review, we examined rates of cardiovascular risk factor assessment and intervention during the course of usual care for a representative sample of 3,742 adult North Carolina Medicaid recipients with diagnosed hypertension managed by a primary care provider. Most patients had been established with their provider for at least three years. Ninety-six percent had multiple modifiable risk factors. Blood pressure and cholesterol were above goal for 52.9% and 37.2% of patients, respectively. Among those with uncontrolled blood pressure, only 44.3% had intensification of therapy within the prior year. Half of patients with cholesterol above goal were treated with medication; and half of current smokers had documented advice to quit. Documentation of aspirin use or counseling was rare. Despite Medicaid coverage and access to care, many effective strategies to prevent cardiovascular events were underutilized, even among patients at highest risk.

Geographic and sociodemographic disparities in drive times to Joint Commission-certified primary stroke centers in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia.

INTRODUCTION: Timely access to facilities that provide acute stroke care is necessary to reduce disabilities and death from stroke. We examined geographic and sociodemographic disparities in drive times to Joint Commission-certified primary stroke centers (JCPSCs) and other hospitals with stroke care quality improvement initiatives in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. METHODS: We defined boundaries for 30- and 60-minute drive-time areas to JCPSCs and other hospitals  by  using geographic information systems (GIS) mapping technology and calculated the proportions of the population living in these drive-time areas by sociodemographic characteristics. Age-adjusted county-level stroke death rates were overlaid onto the drive-time areas. RESULTS: Approximately 55% of the population lived within a 30-minute drive time to a JCPSC; 77% lived within a 60-minute drive time. Disparities in percentage of the population within 30-minute drive times were found by race/ethnicity, education, income, and urban/rural status; the disparity was largest between urban areas (70% lived within 30-minute drive time) and rural areas (26%). The rural coastal plains had the largest concentration of counties with high stroke death rates and the fewest JCPSCs. CONCLUSION: Many areas in this tri-state region lack timely access to JCPSCs. Alternative strategies are needed to expand provision of quality acute stroke care in this region. GIS modeling is valuable for examining and strategically planning the distribution of hospitals providing acute stroke care.

Racial disparities in blood pressure control and treatment differences in a Medicaid population, North Carolina, 2005-2006.

INTRODUCTION: Racial disparities in prevalence and control of high blood pressure are well-documented. We studied blood pressure control and interventions received during the course of a year in a sample of black and white Medicaid recipients with high blood pressure and examined patient, provider, and treatment characteristics as potential explanatory factors for racial disparities in blood pressure control. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 2,078 black and 1,436 white North Carolina Medicaid recipients who had high blood pressure managed in primary care practices from July 2005 through June 2006. Documented provider responses to high blood pressure during office visits during the prior year were reviewed. RESULTS: Blacks were less likely than whites to have blood pressure at goal (43.6% compared with 50.9%, P = .001). Blacks above goal were more likely than whites above goal to have been prescribed 4 or more antihypertensive drug classes (24.7% compared with 13.4%, P < .001); to have had medication adjusted during the prior year (46.7% compared with 40.4%, P = .02); and to have a documented provider response to high blood pressure during office visits (35.7% compared with 30.0% of visits, P = .02). Many blacks (28.0%) and whites (34.3%) with blood pressure above goal had fewer than 2 antihypertensive drug classes prescribed. CONCLUSION: In this population with Medicaid coverage and access to primary care, blacks were less likely than whites to have their blood pressure controlled. Blacks received more frequent intervention and had greater use of combination antihypertensive therapy. Care patterns observed in the usual management of high blood pressure were not sufficient to achieve treatment goals or eliminate disparities.

Drive-time proximity to Joint Commission Primary Stroke Centers among North Carolina residents who died of stroke.

OBJECTIVE: In developing a statewide system of stroke care, understanding the relative availability of acute stroke care at designated centers for stroke care is essential. In this article, we compare the change in availability of acute stroke care in North Carolina at Joint Commission Primary Stroke Centers (JCPSCs) between 2006 and 2008 by examining the drive-time proximity of the residential address to the nearest JCPSC among people who died of stroke. METHODS: We assigned geographic coordinates to residential addresses of North Carolinians who died of stroke and to addresses of North Carolina JCPSCs. We calculated the distance within a 40-minute drive from each JCPSC and determined whether the residential addresses of patients who died of stroke were in the areas demarcated by the drive time. In a secondary analysis, we included non-ICPSCs that participate in recognized quality-improvement programs for stroke care. RESULTS: In 2006, 37% of geocodable residences of patients who died of stroke (3,834 of 10,469) were within a 40-minute drive from a JCPSC. By the end of 2008, this percentage increased to 56% (3,482 of 6,204). Inclusion of other hospitals that participate in recognized quality-improvement programs for acute stroke care increased the 40-minute drive-time coverage to 82% (5,095 of 6,204). LIMITATIONS: As an index of the geographic distribution of the stroke burden, we used deaths due to stroke, rather incident strokes. We included several assumptions in our drive-time calculation. CONCLUSIONS: For many regions of North Carolina in which the stroke burden is high, timely care at JCPSCs for acute stroke is unavailable. To develop a statewide system for acute stroke care in North Carolina, criteria beyond JCPSC certification should be considered for designating hospitals as centers for stroke care.

Predictors of time from hospital arrival to initial brain-imaging among suspected stroke patients: the North Carolina Collaborative Stroke Registry.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We examined patient demographic and hospital characteristics and clinical predictors of delay time from hospital arrival until CT among 20 374 patients enrolled in the North Carolina Collaborative Stroke Registry (January 2005 to April 2008). METHODS: Delay time was log-transformed in linear regression analyses and dichotomized (25 minutes) in logistic regression analyses to correspond to a 1999 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke guideline. RESULTS: In multiple linear regression analyses, prehospital delay time, mode of transport, race, gender, presumptive diagnosis, time of day of arrival, weekday versus weekend arrival, and hospital type (defined by Joint Commission Primary Stroke Center certification and teaching status) were significantly associated with CT delay. In analyses of 3549 patients arriving within 2 hours of symptom onset, time of day of arrival and weekday versus weekend arrival were no longer significant. Among patients arriving within 2 hours of symptom onset, the strongest independent predictors of meeting the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) guideline were arrival by emergency medical services versus other modes of transportation (odds ratio, 95% CI=2.3 [1.9, 2.8]) and a presumptive diagnosis of transient ischemic attack versus unspecified stroke type (odds ratio, 95% CI=0.4 [0.3, 0.5]). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients do not arrive to the hospital in a timely manner and cannot be considered for time-dependent therapies. Among those that do, disparities exist in time to receipt of CT scan, suggesting room for improvement in hospital-level stroke systems of care.