Search

Background: The urgency of the COVID-19 global pandemic called upon the joint efforts from the scientific and private sectors to work together to track vaccine acceptance, prevention behaviors, and symptoms. Methods: Our study utilized individual responses to the Facebook’s COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey from January 2021 to February 2022 (n=13,426,245) to examine contextual and individual-level predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, vaccination, and mask wearing. Adjusted logistic regression models were developed to examine individual and zip code predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccination status. Given the COVID vaccine was rolled out in phases in the U.S. we conducted analyses stratified by time, January 2021-May 2021 (Time 1) and June 2021-February 2022 (Time 2). Results: On January 2021 only 9% of Facebook respondents reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, and 45% were vaccine hesitant. By February 2022, 80% of respondents were vaccinated and only 18% were vaccine hesitant. Individuals who were older, held higher educational degrees, worked in white collar jobs, wore a mask most of the time or some of the time, and identified as white and Asian had higher COVID-19 vaccination rates and lower vaccine hesitancy across Time 1 and Time 2. COVID vaccinations were lower among essential workers and blue-collar occupations (OR=0.31-0.40) including those in food preparation and serving, construction, installation and repair, transportation, and production in Time 1. In Time 2, these disparities attenuated but were still present (OR-0.36-0.64). For these same occupation groups, vaccine hesitancy was higher (OR=1.88-2.30 in Time 1) and (OR=2.05-2.80 in Time 2). By Time 2, all adults were eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine, but blacks (OR=0.71; 95% CI: 0.70-0.72) and multiracial (OR=0.47; 95% CI: 0.47-0.48) individuals had lower vaccination and higher vaccine hesitancy compared to whites. Conclusions: Associations found in earlier phases of the pandemic were generally found to also be present later in the pandemic, indicating stability in inequities. Additionally, inequities in these important outcomes suggests more work is needed to bridge gaps to ensure that the burden of COVID-19 risk does not disproportionately fall upon subgroups of the population.

Background Timely intervention is essential for the successful removal of ingested foreign bodies. Emergent endoscopy (EGD) is usually performed in the emergency department (ED), operating room (OR), intensive care unit (ICU), or endoscopy suite. However, because the endoscopy suite is not always available, this study investigated the impact of location outside of the endoscopy suite on the successful removal of ingested foreign bodies and other patient outcomes. Methodology We reviewed charts of patients who underwent EGD for foreign body removal at an academic quaternary center between January 01, 2012, and December 31, 2020. We defined successful EGD as retrieval of the foreign body at the first attempt and not requiring subsequent endoscopy or surgical intervention. We performed descriptive and inferential statistical analyses and conducted classification and regression trees to compare endoscopy procedure length (EPL) and hospital length of stay (HLOS) between different locations. Results We analyzed 77 patients, of whom 13 (17%) underwent endoscopy in the ICU, 46 (60%) in the OR, and 18 (23%) in the ED. Endoscopic removal failed in four (5%) patients. Endoscopy length was significantly shorter in the OR (67 (48-122) minutes) versus the ICU (158 (95-166) minutes

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has increased healthcare worker (HCW) susceptibility to mental illness. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the prevalence and possible factors associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms among HCW during the COVID-19 pandemic. We searched PubMed, SCOPUS and EMBASE databases up to May 4th, 2022. We performed random effects meta-analysis and moderator analyses for the prevalence of PTSD-relevant symptoms and severe PTSD symptoms. We identified 1276 studies, reviewed 209 full-text articles, and included 119 studies (117,143 participants) with a total of 121 data points in our final analysis. 34 studies (24,541 participants) reported prevalence of severe PTSD symptoms. Approximately 25.2% of participants were physicians, 42.8% nurses, 12.4% allied health professionals, 8.9% auxiliary health professionals, and 10.8% "other". The pooled prevalence of PTSD symptoms among HCWs was 34% (95% CI, 0.30-0.39, I

Ultrasound-guided venous cannulation is an increasingly popular tool for peripheral intravenous catheter placement among nursing providers as opposed to standard of care landmark-based placement methods. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the use of ultrasound-guided versus landmark-based catheter cannulation among nursing providers across existing literature.PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched for eligible studies from their beginning to June 11, 2021. Outcomes were the rate of first successful placement, procedure length, and number of total attempts. Bias and study quality were assessed using the Cochrane's Risk of Bias and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tools, respectively. Random-effects meta-analysis and assessed heterogeneity via Q-statistics and IThe meta-analysis included 7 randomized clinical studies and 527 patients; 276 (52%) underwent ultrasound-guided cannulation and were associated with 2 times higher likelihood (odds ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-3.0; P.001; IThis study demonstrated the advantage of nurses' ultrasound-guided venous cannulation over landmark-based cannulation methods for first successful placement, although other outcomes were not significantly different between methods. Additional multisite studies with adequately powered sample sizes are necessary to confirm these findings.