Cultivating community-based participatory research (CBPR) to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic: an illustrative example of partnership and topic prioritization in the food services industry.

BACKGROUND: As an illustrative example of COVID-19 pandemic community-based participatory research (CBPR), we describe a community-academic partnership to prioritize future research most important to people experiencing high occupational exposure to COVID-19 - food service workers. Food service workers face key challenges surrounding (1) health and safety precautions, (2) stress and mental health, and (3) the long-term pandemic impact. METHOD: Using CBPR methodologies, academic scientists partnered with community stakeholders to develop the research aims, methods, and measures, and interpret and disseminate results. We conducted a survey, three focus groups, and a rapid qualitative assessment to understand the three areas of concern and prioritize future research. RESULTS: The survey showed that food service employers mainly supported basic droplet protections (soap, hand sanitizer, gloves), rather than comprehensive airborne protections (high-quality masks, air quality monitoring, air cleaning). Food service workers faced challenging decisions surrounding isolation, quarantine, testing, masking, vaccines, and in-home transmission, described anxiety, depression, and substance use as top mental health concerns, and described long-term physical and financial concerns. Focus groups provided qualitative examples of concerns experienced by food service workers and narrowed topic prioritization. The rapid qualitative assessment identified key needs and opportunities, with help reducing in-home COVID-19 transmission identified as a top priority. COVID-19 mitigation scientists offered recommendations for reducing in-home transmission. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced food service workers to experience complex decisions about health and safety, stress and mental health concerns, and longer-term concerns. Challenging health decisions included attempting to avoid an airborne infectious illness when employers were mainly only concerned with droplet precautions and trying to decide protocols for testing and isolation without clear guidance, free tests, or paid sick leave. Key mental health concerns were anxiety, depression, and substance use. Longer-term challenges included Long COVID, lack of mental healthcare access, and financial instability. Food service workers suggest the need for more research aimed at reducing in-home COVID-19 transmission and supporting long-term mental health, physical health, and financial concerns. This research provides an illustrative example of how to cultivate community-based partnerships to respond to immediate and critical issues affecting populations most burdened by public health crises.

Community-based N95 distribution during the COVID-19 Omicron BA.1 surge: feasibility, 1-month utilization, and price implications.

Masks and other non-pharmaceutical interventions can complement vaccines and treatments as a part of multilayered mitigation to reduce the burden of COVID-19 in high-risk settings like surges. Although N95s provide greater protection than cloth and procedure masks against airborne infectious illnesses, few people used N95s historically, potentially due to lack of familiarity and cost. The study was designed to examine the feasibility of distributing N95s during a COVID-19 surge. A follow-up survey summarized mask behavior. The investigators aimed to distribute 2,500 N95s to 500 adults in 5-packs with informational handouts at community locations during the COVID-19 Omicron BA.1 surge in New Orleans, Louisiana. A 1-month follow-up survey assessed utilization, safety perceptions, social diffusion of awareness of N95s, and purchase intentions. The investigators successfully distributed all 2,500 N95s during the peak of the BA.1 surge (December 13, 2021 to January 17, 2022). At 1-month follow-up, 96.7% of participants had tried an N95. They utilized an average of 3.42 (68.4%) of the five N95s, felt safer wearing N95s (Ps < 0.0001), discussed N95s with others (80.4%), and would wear N95s again if free (87.9%). Future utilization intentions were price sensitive. Communities will readily use public health tools like N95s when at risk and offered for free with useful information. Cost was identified as a key barrier to sustained utilization. Findings have immediate public policy implications for reducing national, regional, and organizational surges. The research provides an illustrative example of the importance of behavioral science in responding to public health crises.

Masks are a part of a comprehensive approach to reducing the burden of COVID-19 surges. High-quality masks, called N95 masks in the USA, provide better protection than cloth or blue procedure masks. Most people have not used N95s due to a lack of familiarity or cost. We tested a program to distribute N95s to the community during a COVID-19 surge. Specifically, we gave 2,500 N95s to 500 adults in 5-packs with informational handouts during the COVID-19 Omicron BA.1 surge in New Orleans, Louisiana. We requested recipients complete a 1-month follow-up survey. Overall, we were successful in distributing all 2,500 N95s during the peak of the winter 2021­2022 surge. By 1-month follow-up, nearly all recipients had tried an N95 and had used nearly 70% of the total given. They felt safer, discussed the masks with others, and would wear them again if free. Cost was a key barrier to using N95s in the future. After our study, the USA federal government implemented a program to distribute free N95s, but there are no policy plans to distribute free N95s during future winter surges or in response to vaccine-evading variants. Free N95 distribution programs would be popular and reduce the burden of COVID-19.