Search

Background: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been particularly high among immigrant populations, whose experience is shaped by a history of racism and discriminations, and distrust of the healthcare system. In this study we draw from the Theory of Planned Behavior to examine COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among immigrants in Chicago., Methods: A mixed-methods approach comprising of both focus groups and a health survey was conducted from February to August 2022. Five focus groups were held (N = 35) among Black, Asian and Arab/Palestine participants to understand attitudes and beliefs around the COVID-19 vaccine. Focus groups were analyzed using a modified template approach to text analysis. Based on these findings and themes, we developed a survey that was conducted among 413 immigrants from the mentioned communities. We used hierarchical ordinal regression analyses to examine the relationship between COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccination status., Results: Qualitative analysis suggest that the major factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy included fear of adverse reactions, misinformation around COVID-19 and the vaccine, negative social norms around vaccination, and external pressure to get vaccinated. From our quantitative analysis we found that 24% of participants were unvaccinated, 5% were partially vaccinated, 32.3% were vaccinated but not boosted, and 39% were vaccinated and boosted for COVID-19. Hierarchical regression models suggest that immigrants who hold negative attitudes and social norms around the COVID-19 vaccine are less likely to vaccinate., Conclusions: Understanding vaccine hesitancy among immigrants allows for the creation of culturally and linguistically tailored education that can be utilized to increase vaccine confidence and uptake., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest 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., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Asian Americans have experienced compounding stressors during the pandemic as a result of racial discrimination. We aim of to investigate the prevalence of depression symptoms among Asian Americans before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and examine differences based on socio-demographic factors. Data are from a cross-sectional study (N = 636) among Chinese and South Asian adults in Chicago collected between February and May 2020. One cohort of participants were surveyed from each ethnic group before the pandemic and a second cohort of participants were surveyed during the pandemic. Depression symptoms increased more than two-fold, from 9% pre-pandemic to 21% during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found an increase in depression symptoms during the pandemic for South Asians, men and adults older than 30 years. These findings call for public health education that effectively addresses anti-Asian harassment and violence and ensure that culturally competent mental health services are provided to Asian Americans from diverse ethnic backgrounds., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) populations are growing rapidly in the United States, yet AANHPIs remain understudied, overlooked, and misunderstood. During the COVID-19 pandemic, themes from the tragic history of anti-Asian bias and marginalization have resurfaced in a surge of renewed bigotry and xenophobic violence against AANHPIs. In this commentary, the authors discuss the role of medical schools in combating anti-Asian sentiment as an important step toward achieving health equity. Based on their collective expertise in health disparities research, medical education, and policy, they offer suggestions about how to disrupt the pattern of invisibility and exclusion faced by AANHPI populations. They consider ways that representative data, leadership in medical education, research funding, national policies, and broad partnerships can help address AANHPI health disparities., (Copyright © 2022 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.)

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has substantially disrupted many processes of care related to emergency cardiac conditions, while there has been no clinical guidance regarding the management of type A aortic dissection. A retrospective multicenter study involving 52 consecutive patients (mean age 52.3, 28.9% women) with type A aortic dissection during COVID-19 pandemic was conducted at tertiary aortic centers in Michigan, Wuhan and Changsha (China). Twenty-four (46.2%) were considered clinically suspicious for COVID-19 based on radiographic lung lesions (70.8%) followed by dyspnea (25.0%), cough (12.5%), and fever (12.5%). Overall, 47 (90.4%) underwent an operation and 5 (9.6%) managed nonoperatively. All suspected patients underwent a reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction at arrival, whereas 82.1% in the nonsuspected (P = 0.054). Among the 24 patients either nonoperatively managed or whose operation was delayed for >24 hours, only 1 (4.2%) died. A total of 3 (6.4%) operated patients had a positive reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction at various timings, including 1 nonsuspected patient preoperatively and 2 with very recent COVID-19 infection. The first patient died of respiratory failure despite uneventful surgical repair and maximal medical management. The postoperative course of both patients with recent COVID-19 was characterized by severe coagulopathy requiring massive transfusions and prolonged ICU stay. However, both survived to hospital discharge. In light of the possible dismal outcomes associated with dual diagnoses of type A aortic dissection/COVID-19 and the higher-than-expected number of asymptomatic carriers, all type A dissection patients should be immediately tested for COVID-19. Surgical interventions in patients recovered from recent COVID-19 may be safe., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This qualitative research explored the lived experiences of patients who experienced postponement of elective cardiac and vascular surgery due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We know very little about patients during the novel coronavirus pandemic. Understanding the patient voice may play an important role in prioritization of postponed cases and triage moving forward., Methods: Utilizing a hermeneutical phenomenological qualitative design, we interviewed 47 individuals who experienced a postponement of cardiac or vascular surgery due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were analyzed and informed by phenomenological research methods., Results: Patients in our study described 3 key issues around their postponement of elective surgery. Patients described robust narratives about the meanings of their elective surgeries as the chance to "return to normal" and alleviate symptoms that impacted everyday life. Second, because of the meanings most of our patients ascribed to their surgeries, postponement often took a toll on how patients managed physical health and emotional well-being. Finally, paradoxically, many patients in our study were demonstrative that they would "rather die from a heart attack" than be exposed to the coronavirus., Conclusions: We identified several components of the patient experience, encompassing quality of life and other desired benefits of surgery, the risks of COVID, and difficulty reconciling the 2. Our study provides significant qualitative evidence to inform providers of important considerations when rescheduling the backlog of patients. The emotional and psychological distress that patients experienced due to postponement may also require additional considerations in postoperative recovery., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

ObjectivesTo evaluate rapid COVID-19 vaccine clinic implementation from January-April 2021 in the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LACDHS), the second-largest US safety net health system. During initial vaccine clinic implementation, LACDHS vaccinated 59,898 outpatients, 69% of whom were Latinx (exceeding the LA County Latinx population of 46%). LACDHS is a unique safety net setting to evaluate rapid vaccine implementation due to system size, geographic breadth, language/racial/ethnic diversity, limited health staffing resources, and socioeconomic complexity of patients.MethodsImplementation factors were assessed through semi-structured interviews of staff from all twelve LACDHS vaccine clinics from August-November 2021 using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and themes analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis.ResultsOf 40 potential participants, 25 health professionals completed an interview (27% clinical providers/medical directors, 23% pharmacist, 15% nursing staff, and 35% other). Qualitative analysis of participant interviews yielded ten narrative themes. Implementation facilitators included bidirectional communication between system leadership and clinics, multidisciplinary leadership and operations teams, expanded use of standing orders, teamwork culture, use of active and passive communication structures, and development of patient-centered engagement strategies. Barriers to implementation included vaccine scarcity, underestimation of resources needed for patient outreach, and numerous process challenges encountered.ConclusionPrevious studies focused on robust advance planning as a facilitator and understaffing and high staff turnover as barriers to implementation in safety net health systems. This study found facilitators that can mitigate lack of advance planning and staffing challenges present during public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The ten identified themes may inform future implementations in safety net health systems.