Search

Objective: Case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) are fundamental public health efforts widely used during the COVID-19 pandemic to mitigate transmission. This study investigated how state, local, and tribal public health departments used CI/CT during the COVID-19 pandemic, including CI/CT methodology, staffing models, training and support, and efforts to identify or prioritize populations disproportionately affected by COVID-19., Methods: During March and April 2022, we conducted key informant interviews with up to 3 public health officials from 43 state, local, and tribal public health departments. From audio-recorded and transcribed interviews, we used the framework method to analyze key themes., Results: Major adjustments to CI/CT protocols during the pandemic included (1) prioritizing populations for outreach; (2) implementing automated outreach for nonprioritized groups, particularly during COVID-19 surges; (3) discontinuing contact tracing and focusing exclusively on case investigation; and (4) adding innovations to provide additional support. Key informants also discussed the utility of having backup staffing to support overwhelmed public health departments and spoke to the difficulty in "right-sizing" the public health workforce, with COVID-19 surges leaving public health departments understaffed as case rates rose and overstaffed as case rates fell., Conclusions: When addressing future epidemics or outbreaks, public health officials should consider strategies that improve the effectiveness of CI/CT efforts over time, such as prioritizing populations based on disproportionate risk, implementing automated outreach, developing models that provide flexible additional staffing resources as cases rise and fall among local public health departments, incorporating demographic data in laboratory reporting, providing community connections and support, and having a system of self-notification of contacts., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Purpose: To estimate the societal costs of untreated perinatal mood and anxiety disorders (PMADs) in Vermont for the 2018-2020 average annual birth cohort from conception through five years postpartum., Methods: We developed a cost analysis model to calculate the excess cases of outcomes attributed to PMADs in the state of Vermont. Then, we modeled the associated costs of each outcome incurred by birthing parents and their children, projected five years for birthing parents who do not achieve remission by the end of the first year postpartum., Results: We estimated that the total societal cost of untreated PMADs in Vermont could reach $48 million for an annual birth cohort from conception to five years postpartum, amounting to $35,910 in excess societal costs per birthing parent with an untreated PMAD and their child., Conclusion: Our model provides evidence of the high costs of untreated PMADs for birthing parents and their children in Vermont. Our estimates for Vermont are slightly higher but comparable to national estimates, which are $35,500 per birthing parent-child pair, adjusted to 2021 US dollars. Investing in perinatal mental health prevention and treatment could improve health outcomes and reduce economic burden of PMADs on individuals, families, employers, and the state., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature.)

Objectives: We sought to (1) document how health departments (HDs) developed COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) interview scripts and the topics covered, and (2) understand how and why HDs modified those scripts., Design: Qualitative analysis of CI/CT interview scripts and in-depth key informant interviews with public health officials in 14 HDs. Collected scripts represent 3 distinct points (initial, the majority of which were time stamped May 2020; interim, spanning from September 2020 to August 2021; and current, as of April 2022)., Setting: Fourteen state, local, and tribal health jurisdictions and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)., Participants: Thirty-six public health officials involved in leading CI/CT from 14 state, local, and tribal health jurisdictions (6 states, 3 cities, 4 counties, and 1 tribal area)., Main Outcome Measure: Interview script elements included in CI/CT interview scripts over time., Results: Many COVID-19 CI/CT scripts were developed by modifying questions from scripts used for other communicable diseases. Early in the pandemic, scripts included guidance on isolation/quarantine and discussed symptoms of COVID-19. As the pandemic evolved, the length of scripts increased substantially, with significant additions on contact elicitation, vaccinations, isolation/quarantine recommendations, and testing. Drivers of script changes included changes in our understanding of how the virus spreads, risk factors and symptoms, new treatments, new variants, vaccine development, and adjustments to CDC's official isolation and quarantine guidance., Conclusions: Our findings offer suggestions about components to include in future CI/CT efforts, including educating members of the public about the disease and its symptoms, offering mitigation guidance, and providing sufficient support and resources to help people act on that guidance. Assessing the correlation between script length and number of completed interviews or other quality and performance measures could be an area for future study., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) received surveillance data on how many people tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, but there was little information about what individuals did to mitigate transmission. To fill the information gap, we conducted an online, probability-based survey among a nationally representative panel of adults living in the United States to better understand the behaviors of individuals following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. Given the low response rates commonly associated with panel surveys, we assessed how well the survey data aligned with CDC surveillance data from March, 2020 to March, 2022. We used CDC surveillance data to calculate monthly aggregated COVID-19 case counts and compared these to monthly COVID-19 case counts captured by our survey during the same period. We found high correlation between our overall survey data estimates and monthly case counts reported to the CDC during the analytic period ( r : +0.94; p  < 0.05). When stratified according to demographic characteristics, correlations remained high. These correlations strengthened our confidence that the panel survey participants were reflective of the cases reported to CDC and demonstrated the potential value of panel surveys to inform decision making., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (© 2024 Matulewicz, Vohra, Crawford-Crudell, Oeltmann, Moonan, Taylor, Couzens and Weiss.)

Using a nationally representative panel survey, we examined isolation behaviors among persons in the United States who had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results during January 2021-March 2022. Compared with persons who received provider-administered results, persons with home-based results had 29% (95% CI 5%-47%) lower odds of following isolation recommendations.

Background: Public health programs varied in ability to reach people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and their contacts to encourage separation from others. For both adult case patients with COVID-19 and their contacts, we estimated the impact of contact tracing activities on separation behaviors from January 2020 until March 2022., Methods: We used a probability-based panel survey of a nationally representative sample to gather data for estimates and comparisons., Results: An estimated 64 255 351 adults reported a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test result; 79.6% isolated for ≥5 days, 60.2% isolated for ≥10 days, and 79.2% self-notified contacts. A total of, 24 057 139 (37.7%) completed a case investigation, and 46.2% of them reported contacts to health officials. More adults who completed a case investigation isolated than those who did not complete a case investigation (≥5 days, 82.6% vs 78.2%, respectively; ≥10 days, 69.8% vs 54.8%; both P < .05). A total of 84 946 636 adults were contacts of a COVID-19 case patient. Of these, 73.1% learned of their exposure directly from a case patient; 49.4% quarantined for ≥5 days, 18.7% quarantined for ≥14 days, and 13.5% completed a contact tracing call. More quarantined among those who completed a contact tracing call than among those who did not complete a tracing call (≥5 days, 61.2% vs 48.5%, respectively; ≥14 days, 25.2% vs 18.0%; both P < .05)., Conclusions: Engagement in contact tracing was positively correlated with isolation and quarantine. However, most adults with COVID-19 isolated and self-notified contacts regardless of whether the public health workforce was able to reach them. Identifying and reaching contacts was challenging and limited the ability to promote quarantining, and testing., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. The authors: No reported conflicts of interest. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2023.)

Case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) is a critical part of the public health response to COVID-19. Individuals' experiences with CI/CT for COVID-19 varied based on geographic location, changes in knowledge and guidelines, access to testing and vaccination, as well as demographic characteristics including age, race, ethnicity, income, and political ideology. In this paper, we explore the experiences and behaviors of adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results, or who were exposed to a person with COVID-19, to understand their knowledge, motivations, and facilitators and barriers to their actions. We conducted focus groups and one-on-one interviews with 94 cases and 90 contacts from across the United States. We found that participants were concerned about infecting or exposing others, which motivated them to isolate or quarantine, notify contacts, and get tested. Although most cases and contacts were not contacted by CI/CT professionals, those who were reported a positive experience and received helpful information. Many cases and contacts reported seeking information from family, friends, health care providers, as well as television news and Internet sources. Although participants reported similar perspectives and experiences across demographic characteristics, some highlighted inequities in receiving COVID-19 information and resources., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Objective: To estimate the cost of maternal morbidity for all 2019 pregnancies and births in the United States., Methods: Using data from 2010 to 2020, we developed a cost analysis model that calculated the excess cases of outcomes attributed to nine maternal morbidity conditions with evidence of outcomes in the literature. We then modeled the associated medical and nonmedical costs of each outcome incurred by birthing people and their children in 2019, projected through five years postpartum., Results: We estimated that the total cost of nine maternal morbidity conditions for all pregnancies and births in 2019 was $32.3 billion from conception to five years postpartum, amounting to $8,624 in societal costs per birthing person., Conclusion: We found only nine maternal morbidity conditions with sufficient supporting evidence of linkages to outcomes and costs. The lack of comprehensive data for other conditions suggests that maternal morbidity exacts a higher toll on society than we found., Policy Implications: Although this study likely provides lower bound cost estimates, it establishes the substantial adverse societal impact of maternal morbidity and suggests further opportunities to invest in maternal health., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Maternal mental health conditions (MMHCs), which include depression and anxiety disorders during pregnancy and through five years postpartum, are among the most common obstetric complications in the United States overall and in Texas in particular. In the context of potential expansion of postpartum Medicaid coverage from 60 days to one year, we sought to capture the societal, financial burden of untreated MMHCs., Methods: We estimated the economic impact of untreated maternal mental health conditions (MMHCs) among births in Texas in 2019 using a cost-of-illness model., Results: We found that MMHCs affected 13.2% of mothers and, when left untreated, cost $2.2 billion among mothers and children born in Texas in 2019 when following the birth cohort from conception through five years postpartum. We found that MMHCs affected 17.2% of mothers enrolled in Texas' Medicaid for Pregnant Women and cost $962 million. In addition, the prevalence of MMHCs and resulting costs varied considerably among women of different races and ethnicities. Employers and health care payers, including Medicaid, bore most of these costs., Conclusions: The Texas Health and Human Services Commission's (HHSC) efforts to increase awareness about MMHCs and increase access to care represent an important step toward improving maternal and child health and maximizing benefits to Texas HHSC, employers, and insurers., (© 2022. The Author(s).)