Synergistic Disparities and Public Health Mitigation of COVID-19 in the Rural United States

Using wastewater to overcome health disparities among rural residents

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic highlighted the need for novel tools to promote health equity. There has been a historical legacy around the location and allocation of public facilities (such as health care) focused on efficiency, which is not attainable in rural, low-density, United States areas. Differences in the spread of the disease and outcomes of infections have been observed between urban and rural populations throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this article was to review rural health disparities related to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic while using evidence to support wastewater surveillance as a potentially innovative tool to address these disparities more widely. The successful implementation of wastewater surveillance in resource-limited settings in South Africa demonstrates the ability to monitor disease in underserved areas. A better surveillance model of disease detection among rural residents will overcome issues around the interactions of a disease and social determinants of health. Wastewater surveillance can be used to promote health equity, particularly in rural and resource-limited areas, and has the potential to identify future global outbreaks of endemic and pandemic viruses.

Qualitative Analysis of a Roundtable Exercise "Reflecting on the COVID-19 Experience of Public Health Professionals"

CONTEXT

Public health professionals around the country faced significant challenges responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Reflecting on their experience is an essential element in making sense of their experience and learning from it.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this qualitative study was to (1) describe the lived experiences of public health professionals working during the COVID-19 pandemic, (2) discuss the effectiveness of a guided reflection exercise to help public health professionals process these experiences, and (3) provide lessons learned and best practices to inform preparation for a future infectious disease pandemic.

DESIGN

Qualitative focus group study design.

SETTING

This activity was conducted at a Midwestern state public health professional meeting.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty-eight public health professionals self-selected to participate in this study.

RESULTS

Five themes were elicited in this analysis, including Communication, Leadership and Collaboration, Data Management, Community Relationships, and Resources and Planning. In addition, public health professionals reported numerous lessons learned, including the need for more leadership from the state government, the conflicted response of their communities, and the benefits of community solidarity where it was present.

CONCLUSIONS

This article provides a detailed account of public health workers' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also provides lessons learned that will help public health workers lead more effectively in the future. Guided reflection on a traumatic professional experience can assist participating individuals in making sense of their experience and learning important lessons from it.

Treating Workers as Essential Too: An Ethical Framework for Public Health Interventions to Prevent and Control COVID-19 Infections among Meat-processing Facility Workers and Their Communities in the United States

Meat is a multi-billion-dollar industry that relies on people performing risky physical work inside meat-processing facilities over long shifts in close proximity. These workers are socially disempowered, and many are members of groups beset by historic and ongoing structural discrimination. The combination of working conditions and worker characteristics facilitate the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Workers have been expected to put their health and lives at risk during the pandemic because of government and industry pressures to keep this "essential industry" producing. Numerous interventions can significantly reduce the risks to workers and their communities; however, the industry's implementation has been sporadic and inconsistent. With a focus on the U.S. context, this paper offers an ethical framework for infection prevention and control recommendations grounded in public health values of health and safety, interdependence and solidarity, and health equity and justice, with particular attention to considerations of reciprocity, equitable burden sharing, harm reduction, and health promotion. Meat-processing workers are owed an approach that protects their health relative to the risks of harms to them, their families, and their communities. Sacrifices from businesses benefitting financially from essential industry status are ethically warranted and should acknowledge the risks assumed by workers in the context of existing structural inequities.

Implementation of a Rural Community Diagnostic Testing Strategy for SARS-CoV-2 in Upstate South Carolina

By developing a partnership amongst a public university lab, local city government officials and community healthcare providers, we established a drive-through COVID-19 testing site aiming to improve access to SARS-CoV-2 testing in rural Upstate South Carolina. We collected information on symptoms and known exposures of individuals seeking testing to determine the number of pre- or asymptomatic individuals. We completed 71,102 SARS-CoV-2 tests in the community between December 2020-December 2021 and reported 91.49% of results within 24 h. We successfully identified 5,244 positive tests; 73.36% of these tests originated from individuals who did not report symptoms. Finally, we identified high transmission levels during two major surges and compared test positivity rates of the local and regional communities. Importantly, the local community had significantly lower test positivity rates than the regional community throughout 2021 (p < 0.001). While both communities reached peak case load and test positivity near the same time, the local community returned to moderate transmission as indicated by positivity 4 weeks before the regional community. Our university lab facilitated easy testing with fast turnaround times, which encouraged voluntary testing and helped identify a large number of non-symptomatic cases. Finding the balance of simplicity, accessibility, and community trust was vital to the success of our widespread community testing program for SARS-CoV-2.

The Role of a Federally Qualified Health Center in Identification and Management of an Occupational COVID-19 Outbreak: Lessons for Future Infection Surveillance and Response

Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) have been essential in response to COVID-19 outbreaks among vulnerable populations. Our rural FQHC had a primary role in early detection of and response to a poultry plant-related outbreak at the outset of the pandemic that disproportionately and gravely affected the local Hispanic community. The health center activated a rapid local response that included the community's first mass testing event and first acute respiratory treatment clinic, both of which were central to abatement. Lessons learned from this experience provide important guidance for the potential role of FQHCs in infection outbreak preparedness in marginalized communities.

The CTSA University of Texas Health Science Center (UTHSC) Northeast-Tyler and Rio Grande Valley Success Story: How Rural, Underserved Academic Communities Rapidly Built a Robust Engine for Collaborative COVID-19 Clinical Research

In 2018, The University of Texas Health Science Center-Tyler and University of Texas Rio Grande Valley were invited to develop clinical research units for an existing Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) consortium with the objective to equip medically underserved, economically disadvantaged communities and subsequently to deploy COVID-19 clinical trials in response to a public health emergency.

Non-invasive ventilation versus mechanical ventilation in hypoxemic patients with COVID-19

Purpose

Limited mechanical ventilators (MV) during the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic have led to the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in hypoxemic patients, which has not been studied well. We aimed to assess the association of NIV versus MV with mortality and morbidity during respiratory intervention among hypoxemic patients admitted with COVID-19.

Methods

We performed a retrospective multi-center cohort study across 5 hospitals during March–April 2020. Outcomes included mortality, severe COVID-19-related symptoms, time to discharge, and final oxygen saturation (SpO2) at the conclusion of the respiratory intervention. Multivariable regression of outcomes was conducted in all hypoxemic participants, 4 subgroups, and propensity-matched analysis.

Results

Of 2381 participants with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, 688 were included in the study who were hypoxemic upon initiation of respiratory intervention. During the study period, 299 participants died (43%), 163 were admitted to the ICU (24%), and 121 experienced severe COVID-19-related symptoms (18%). Participants on MV had increased mortality than those on NIV (128/154 [83%] versus 171/534 [32%], OR = 30, 95% CI 16–60) with a mean survival of 6 versus 15 days, respectively. The MV group experienced more severe COVID-19-related symptoms [55/154 (36%) versus 66/534 (12%), OR = 4.3, 95% CI 2.7–6.8], longer time to discharge (mean 17 versus 7.1 days), and lower final SpO2 (92 versus 94%). Across all subgroups and propensity-matched analysis, MV was associated with a greater OR of death than NIV.

Conclusions

NIV was associated with lower respiratory intervention mortality and morbidity than MV. However, findings may be liable to unmeasured confounding and further study from randomized controlled trials is needed to definitively determine the role of NIV in hypoxemic patients with COVID-19.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s15010-021-01633-6.