Pediatric Research Observing Trends and Exposures in COVID-19 Timelines (PROTECT): Protocol for a Multisite Longitudinal Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Assessing the real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines and understanding the incidence and severity of SARS-CoV-2 illness in children are essential to inform policy and guide health care professionals in advising parents and caregivers of children who test positive for SARS-CoV-2. OBJECTIVE: This report describes the objectives and methods for conducting the Pediatric Research Observing Trends and Exposures in COVID-19 Timelines (PROTECT) study. PROTECT is a longitudinal prospective pediatric cohort study designed to estimate SARS-CoV-2 incidence and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against infection among children aged 6 months to 17 years, as well as differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccine response between children and adolescents. METHODS: The PROTECT multisite network was initiated in July 2021, which aims to enroll approximately 2305 children across four US locations and collect data over a 2-year surveillance period. The enrollment target was based on prospective power calculations and accounts for expected attrition and nonresponse. Study sites recruit parents and legal guardians of age-eligible children participating in the existing Arizona Healthcare, Emergency Response, and Other Essential Workers Surveillance (HEROES)-Research on the Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Essential Response Personnel (RECOVER) network as well as from surrounding communities. Child demographics, medical history, COVID-19 exposure, vaccination history, and parents/legal guardians' knowledge and attitudes about COVID-19 are collected at baseline and throughout the study. Mid-turbinate nasal specimens are self-collected or collected by parents/legal guardians weekly, regardless of symptoms, for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza testing via reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay, and the presence of COVID-like illness (CLI) is reported. Children who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 or influenza, or report CLI are monitored weekly by online surveys to report exposure and medical utilization until no longer ill. Children, with permission of their parents/legal guardians, may elect to contribute blood at enrollment, following SARS-CoV-2 infection, following COVID-19 vaccination, and at the end of the study period. PROTECT uses electronic medical record (EMR) linkages where available, and verifies COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations through EMR or state vaccine registries. RESULTS: Data collection began in July 2021 and is expected to continue through the spring of 2023. As of April 13, 2022, 2371 children are enrolled in PROTECT. Enrollment is ongoing at all study sites. CONCLUSIONS: As COVID-19 vaccine products are authorized for use in pediatric populations, PROTECT study data will provide real-world estimates of VE in preventing infection. In addition, this prospective cohort provides a unique opportunity to further understand SARS-CoV-2 incidence, clinical course, and key knowledge gaps that may inform public health. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/37929.

Financial incentives increase fruit and vegetable intake among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants: a randomized controlled trial of the USDA Healthy Incentives Pilot.

BACKGROUND: US fruit and vegetable (FV) intake remains below recommendations, particularly for low-income populations. Evidence on effectiveness of rebates in addressing this shortfall is limited. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the USDA Healthy Incentives Pilot (HIP), which offered rebates to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants for purchasing targeted FVs (TFVs). DESIGN: As part of a randomized controlled trial in Hampden County, Massachusetts, 7500 randomly selected SNAP households received a 30% rebate on TFVs purchased with SNAP benefits. The remaining 47,595 SNAP households in the county received usual benefits. Adults in 5076 HIP and non-HIP households were randomly sampled for telephone surveys, including 24-h dietary recall interviews. Surveys were conducted at baseline (1-3 mo before implementation) and in 2 follow-up rounds (4-6 mo and 9-11 mo after implementation). 2784 adults (1388 HIP, 1396 non-HIP) completed baseline interviews; data were analyzed for 2009 adults (72%) who also completed ≥1 follow-up interview. RESULTS: Regression-adjusted mean TFV intake at follow-up was 0.24 cup-equivalents/d (95% CI: 0.13, 0.34 cup-equivalents/d) higher among HIP participants. Across all fruit and vegetables (AFVs), regression-adjusted mean intake was 0.32 cup-equivalents/d (95% CI: 0.17, 0.48 cup-equivalents/d) higher among HIP participants. The AFV-TFV difference was explained by greater intake of 100% fruit juice (0.10 cup-equivalents/d; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.17 cup-equivalents/d); juice purchases did not earn the HIP rebate. Refined grain intake was 0.43 ounce-equivalents/d lower (95% CI: -0.69, -0.16 ounce-equivalents/d) among HIP participants, possibly indicating substitution effects. Increased AFV intake and decreased refined grain intake contributed to higher Healthy Eating Index-2010 scores among HIP participants (4.7 points; 95% CI: 2.4, 7.1 points). CONCLUSIONS: The HIP significantly increased FV intake among SNAP participants, closing ∼20% of the gap relative to recommendations and increasing dietary quality. More research on mechanisms of action is warranted. The HIP trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02651064.

Impacts of a farmers' market incentive programme on fruit and vegetable access, purchase and consumption.

OBJECTIVE: The present study examines the impact of Health Bucks, a farmers' market incentive programme, on awareness of and access to farmers' markets, and fruit and vegetable purchase and consumption in low-income New York City neighbourhoods. DESIGN: The evaluation used two primary data collection methods: (i) an on-site point-of-purchase survey of farmers' market shoppers; and (ii) a random-digit-dial telephone survey of residents in neighbourhoods where the programme operates. Additionally, we conducted a quasi-experimental analysis examining differential time trends in consumption before and after programme introduction using secondary Community Health Survey (CHS) data. SETTING: New York City farmers' markets and communities. SUBJECTS: Farmers' market shoppers (n 2287) completing point-of-purchase surveys in a representative sample of New York City farmers' markets in 2010; residents (n 1025) completing random-digit-dial telephone survey interviews in 2010; and respondents (n 35 606) completing CHS interviews in 2002, 2004, 2008 and 2009. RESULTS: Greater Health Bucks exposure was associated with: (i) greater awareness of farmers' markets; (ii) increased frequency and amount of farmers' market purchases; and (iii) greater likelihood of a self-reported year-over-year increase in fruit and vegetable consumption. However, our CHS analysis did not detect impacts on consumption. CONCLUSIONS: While our study provides promising evidence that use of farmers' market incentives is associated with increased awareness and use of farmers' markets, additional research is needed to better understand impacts on fruit and vegetable consumption.

Reduction in medication errors in hospitals due to adoption of computerized provider order entry systems.

OBJECTIVE: Medication errors in hospitals are common, expensive, and sometimes harmful to patients. This study's objective was to derive a nationally representative estimate of medication error reduction in hospitals attributable to electronic prescribing through computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review and applied random-effects meta-analytic techniques to derive a summary estimate of the effect of CPOE on medication errors. This pooled estimate was combined with data from the 2006 American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Annual Survey, the 2007 American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and the latter's 2008 Electronic Health Record Adoption Database supplement to estimate the percentage and absolute reduction in medication errors attributable to CPOE. RESULTS: Processing a prescription drug order through a CPOE system decreases the likelihood of error on that order by 48% (95% CI 41% to 55%). Given this effect size, and the degree of CPOE adoption and use in hospitals in 2008, we estimate a 12.5% reduction in medication errors, or ∼17.4 million medication errors averted in the USA in 1 year. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that CPOE can substantially reduce the frequency of medication errors in inpatient acute-care settings; however, it is unclear whether this translates into reduced harm for patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite CPOE systems' effectiveness at preventing medication errors, adoption and use in US hospitals remain modest. Current policies to increase CPOE adoption and use will likely prevent millions of additional medication errors each year. Further research is needed to better characterize links to patient harm.