Search

Club drug use is often associated with unsafe sexual practices, and use remains prevalent among gay and bisexual men. Although epidemiological studies commonly report the risk of engaging in unsafe sex due to the effects of particular club drugs, there remain gaps in the literature regarding the specific sexual effects of such substances and the context of their use in this population. We examined secondary data derived from interviews with 198 club drug-using gay and bisexual males in New York City and qualitatively describe subjective sexual effects of five drugs: ecstasy, gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB), ketamine, powder cocaine and methamphetamine. Differences and commonalities across the five drugs were examined. Results suggest that each drug tends to provide (1) unique sexual effects, (2) its own form of disinhibition and (3) atypical sexual choices, often described as ‘lower sexual standards’. Differences across drugs emerged with regard to social, sensual and sexual enhancement, sexual interest and impotence. Although some common perceived sexual effects exist across drugs, the wide variation in these effects suggests different levels of risk and may further suggest varying motivations for using each substance. This study seeks to educate public health officials regarding the sexual effects of club drug use in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Valid measures of the integration of patient care could provide rapid and accurate feedback on the successfulness of current efforts to improve health care delivery systems. This article describes the development and pilot testing of a new survey, based on a novel conceptual model, which measures the integration of patient care as experienced by patients. We administered the survey to 1,289 patients with multiple chronic conditions from one health system and received responses from 527 patients (43%). Psychometric analysis of responses supported a six-dimension model of integration with satisfactory internal consistency, discriminant validity, and goodness of fit. The Patient Perceptions of Integrated Care survey can be used to measure the integration of care received by chronically ill patients for two main purposes: as a research tool to compare interventions intended to improve the integration of care and as a quality improvement tool intended to guide the refinement of delivery system innovations. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Social media can provide real-time insight into trends in substance use, addiction, and recovery. Prior studies have used platforms such as Reddit and X (formerly Twitter), but evolving policies around data access have threatened these platforms' usability in research. We evaluate the potential of a broad set of platforms to detect emerging trends in the opioid epidemic. From these, we created a shortlist of 11 platforms, for which we documented official policies regulating drug-related discussion, data accessibility, geolocatability, and prior use in opioid-related studies. We quantified their volumes of opioid discussion, capturing informal language by including slang generated using a large language model. Beyond the most commonly used Reddit and X, the platforms with high potential for use in opioid-related surveillance are TikTok, YouTube, and Facebook. Leveraging many different social platforms, instead of a single platform, safeguards against sudden changes to data access and may better capture all populations that use opioids than any single platform.

There are large differences in premature mortality in the USA by racial/ethnic, education, rurality, and social vulnerability index groups. Using existing concentration-response functions, particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) air pollution, population estimates at the tract level, and county-level mortality data, we estimated the degree to which these mortality discrepancies can be attributed to differences in exposure and susceptibility to PM 2.5 . We show that differences in mortality attributable to PM 2.5 were consistently more pronounced between racial/ethnic groups than by education, rurality, or social vulnerability index, with the Black American population having by far the highest proportion of deaths attributable to PM 2.5 in all years from 1990 to 2016. Over half of the difference in age-adjusted all-cause mortality between the Black American and non-Hispanic White population was attributable to PM 2.5 in the years 2000 to 2011., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is co-occurring with a drug addiction and overdose crisis., Methods: We fit overdispersed Poisson models, accounting for seasonality and secular trends, to estimate the excess fatal drug overdoses (i.e., deaths greater than expected), using data on all deaths in California from 2016 to 2020., Findings: Between January 5, 2020 and December 26, 2020, there were 8605 fatal drug overdoses-a 44% increase over the same period one year prior. We estimated 2084 (95% CI: 1925 to 2243) fatal drug overdoses were excess deaths, representing 5·28 (4·88 to 5·68) excess fatal drug overdoses per 100,000 population. Excess fatal drug overdoses were driven by opioids (4·48 [95% CI: 4·18 to 4·77] per 100,000), especially synthetic opioids (2·85 [95% CI: 2·56 to 3·13] per 100,000). The non-Hispanic Black and Other non-Hispanic populations were disproportionately affected with 10·1 (95% CI: 7·6 to 12·5) and 13·26 (95% CI: 11·0 to 15·5) excess fatal drug overdoses per 100,000 population, respectively, compared to 5·99 (95% CI: 5.2 to 6.8) per 100,000 population in the non-Hispanic white population. There was a steep, nonlinear educational gradient with the highest rate among those with only a high school degree. There was a strong spatial patterning with the highest levels of excess mortality in the southernmost region and consistently lower levels at progressively more northern latitudes (7·73 vs 1·96 per 100,000)., Interpretation: Fatal drug overdoses disproportionately increased in 2020 among structurally marginalized populations and showed a strong geographic gradient. Local, tailored public health interventions are urgently needed to reduce growing inequities in overdose deaths., Funding: US National Institutes of Health and Department of Veterans Affairs., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

Excess mortality has exceeded reported deaths from Covid-19 during the pandemic. This gap may be attributable to deaths that occurred among individuals with undiagnosed Covid-19 infections or indirect consequences of the pandemic response such as interruptions in medical care; distinguishing these possibilities has implications for public health responses. In the present study, we examined patterns of excess mortality over time and by setting (in-hospital or out-of-hospital) and cause of death using death certificate data from California. The estimated number of excess natural-cause deaths from 2020 March 1 to 2021 February 28 (69,182) exceeded the number of Covid-19 diagnosed deaths (53,667) by 29%. Nearly half, 47.4% (32,775), of excess natural-cause deaths occurred out of the hospital, where only 28.6% (9,366) of excess mortality was attributed to Covid-19. Over time, increases or decreases in excess natural non-Covid-19 mortality closely mirrored increases or decreases in Covid-19 mortality. The time series were positively correlated in out-of-hospital settings, particularly at time lags when excess natural-cause deaths preceded reported Covid-19 deaths; for example, when comparing Covid-19 deaths to excess natural-cause deaths in the week prior, the correlation was 0.73. The strong temporal association of reported Covid-19 deaths with excess out-of-hospital deaths from other reported natural-cause causes suggests Covid-19 deaths were undercounted during the first year of the pandemic., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the National Academy of Sciences.)

The possibility of a massive oil spill in the Red Sea is increasingly likely. The Safer , a deteriorating oil tanker containing 1.1 million barrels of oil, has been deserted near the coast of Yemen since 2015 and threatens environmental catastrophe to a country presently in a humanitarian crisis. Here, we model the immediate public health impacts of a simulated spill. We estimate that all of Yemen's imported fuel through its key Red Sea ports would be disrupted and that the anticipated spill could disrupt clean-water supply equivalent to the daily use of 9.0-9.9 million people, food supply for 5.7-8.4 million people and 93-100% of Yemen's Red Sea fisheries. We also estimate an increased risk of cardiovascular hospitalization from pollution ranging from 5.8 to 42.0% over the duration of the spill. The spill and its potentially disastrous impacts remain entirely preventable through offloading the oil. Our results stress the need for urgent action to avert this looming disaster., Competing Interests: Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.

COVID-19 mortality increases markedly with age and is also substantially higher among Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) populations in the United States. These two facts can have conflicting implications because BIPOC populations are younger than white populations. In analyses of California and Minnesota—demographically divergent states—we show that COVID vaccination schedules based solely on age benefit the older white populations at the expense of younger BIPOC populations with higher risk of death from COVID-19. We find that strategies that prioritize high-risk geographic areas for vaccination at all ages better target mortality risk than age-based strategies alone, although they do not always perform as well as direct prioritization of high-risk racial/ethnic groups. Vaccination schemas directly implicate equitability of access, both domestically and globally.

COVID-19 mortality increases dramatically with age and is also substantially higher among Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) populations in the United States. These two facts introduce tradeoffs because BIPOC populations are younger than white populations. In analyses of California and Minnesota--demographically divergent states--we show that COVID vaccination schedules based solely on age benefit the older white populations at the expense of younger BIPOC populations with higher risk of death from COVID-19. We find that strategies that prioritize high-risk geographic areas for vaccination at all ages better target mortality risk than age-based strategies alone, although they do not always perform as well as direct prioritization of high-risk racial/ethnic groups., Competing Interests: Competing interests All authors have no conflicts to declare.

Background: Routine viral testing strategies for SARS-CoV-2 infection might facilitate safe airline travel during the COVID-19 pandemic and mitigate global spread of the virus. However, the effectiveness of these test-and-travel strategies to reduce passenger risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and population-level transmission remains unknown., Methods: In this simulation study, we developed a microsimulation of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a cohort of 100 000 US domestic airline travellers using publicly available data on COVID-19 clinical cases and published natural history parameters to assign individuals one of five health states of susceptible to infection, latent period, early infection, late infection, or recovered. We estimated a per-day risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 corresponding to a daily incidence of 150 infections per 100 000 people. We assessed five testing strategies: (1) anterior nasal PCR test within 3 days of departure, (2) PCR within 3 days of departure and 5 days after arrival, (3) rapid antigen test on the day of travel (assuming 90% of the sensitivity of PCR during active infection), (4) rapid antigen test on the day of travel and PCR test 5 days after arrival, and (5) PCR test 5 days after arrival. Strategies 2 and 4 included a 5-day quarantine after arrival. The travel period was defined as 3 days before travel to 2 weeks after travel. Under each scenario, individuals who tested positive before travel were not permitted to travel. The primary study outcome was cumulative number of infectious days in the cohort over the travel period without isolation or quarantine (population-level transmission risk), and the key secondary outcome was the number of infectious people detected on the day of travel (passenger risk of infection)., Findings: We estimated that in a cohort of 100 000 airline travellers, in a scenario with no testing or screening, there would be 8357 (95% uncertainty interval 6144-12831) infectious days with 649 (505-950) actively infectious passengers on the day of travel. The pre-travel PCR test reduced the number of infectious days from 8357 to 5401 (3917-8677), a reduction of 36% (29-41) compared with the base case, and identified 569 (88% [76-92]) of 649 actively infectious travellers on the day of flight; the addition of post-travel quarantine and PCR reduced the number of infectious days to 2520 days (1849-4158), a reduction of 70% (64-75) compared with the base case. The rapid antigen test on the day of travel reduced the number of infectious days to 5674 (4126-9081), a reduction of 32% (26-38) compared with the base case, and identified 560 (86% [83-89]) actively infectious travellers; the addition of post-travel quarantine and PCR reduced the number of infectious days to 3124 (2356-495), a reduction of 63% (58-66) compared with the base case. The post-travel PCR alone reduced the number of infectious days to 4851 (3714-7679), a reduction of 42% (35-49) compared with the base case., Interpretation: Routine asymptomatic testing for SARS-CoV-2 before travel can be an effective strategy to reduce passenger risk of infection during travel, although abbreviated quarantine with post-travel testing is probably needed to reduce population-level transmission due to importation of infection when travelling from a high to low incidence setting., Funding: University of California, San Francisco., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: COVID-19 disproportionately affects racial/ethnic minority groups in the United States. We evaluated characteristics associated with obtaining a COVID-19 test from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and receiving a positive test result for COVID-19., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 6 292 800 veterans in VHA care at 130 VHA medical facilities. We assessed the number of tests for SARS-CoV-2 administered by the VHA (n = 822 934) and the number of positive test results (n = 82 094) from February 8 through December 28, 2020. We evaluated associations of COVID-19 testing and test positivity with demographic characteristics of veterans, adjusting for facility characteristics, comorbidities, and county-level area-based socioeconomic measures using nested generalized linear models., Results: In fully adjusted models, veterans who were female, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, urban, and low income and had a disability had an increased likelihood of obtaining a COVID-19 test, and veterans who were Asian had a decreased likelihood of obtaining a COVID-19 test. Compared with veterans who were White, veterans who were Black/African American (risk ratio [RR] = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.19-1.27) and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (RR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.05-1.21) had an increased likelihood of receiving a positive test result. Hispanic/Latino veterans had a 43% higher likelihood of receiving a positive test result than non-Hispanic/Latino veterans did., Conclusions: Although veterans have access to subsidized health care at the VHA, the increased risk of receiving a positive test result for COVID-19 among Black and Hispanic/Latino veterans, despite receiving more tests than White and non-Hispanic/Latino veterans, suggests that other factors (eg, social inequities) are driving disparities in COVID-19 prevalence.

Background: Airline travel has been significantly reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic due to concern for individual risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and population-level transmission risk from importation. Routine viral testing strategies for COVID-19 may facilitate safe airline travel through reduction of individual and/or population-level risk, although the effectiveness and optimal design of these "test-and-travel" strategies remain unclear., Methods: We developed a microsimulation of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a cohort of airline travelers to evaluate the effectiveness of various testing strategies to reduce individual risk of infection and population-level risk of transmission. We evaluated five testing strategies in asymptomatic passengers: i) anterior nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) within 3 days of departure; ii) PCR within 3 days of departure and PCR 5 days after arrival; iii) rapid antigen test on the day of travel (assuming 90% of the sensitivity of PCR during active infection); iv) rapid antigen test on the day of travel and PCR 5 days after arrival; and v) PCR within 3 days of arrival alone. The travel period was defined as three days prior to the day of travel and two weeks following the day of travel, and we assumed passengers followed guidance on mask wearing during this period. The primary study outcome was cumulative number of infectious days in the cohort over the travel period (population-level transmission risk); the secondary outcome was the proportion of infectious persons detected on the day of travel (individual-level risk of infection). Sensitivity analyses were conducted., Findings: Assuming a community SARS-CoV-2 incidence of 50 daily infections, we estimated that in a cohort of 100,000 airline travelers followed over the travel period, there would be a total of 2,796 (95% UI: 2,031, 4,336) infectious days with 229 (95% UI: 170, 336) actively infectious passengers on the day of travel. The pre-travel PCR test (within 3 days prior to departure) reduced the number of infectious days by 35% (95% UI: 27, 42) and identified 88% (95% UI: 76, 94) of the actively infectious travelers on the day of flight; the addition of PCR 5 days after arrival reduced the number of infectious days by 79% (95% UI: 71, 84). The rapid antigen test on the day of travel reduced the number of infectious days by 32% (95% UI: 25, 39) and identified 87% (95% UI: 81, 92) of the actively infectious travelers; the addition of PCR 5 days after arrival reduced the number of infectious days by 70% (95% UI: 65, 75). The post-travel PCR test alone (within 3 days of landing) reduced the number of infectious days by 42% (95% UI: 31, 51). The ratio of true positives to false positives varied with the incidence of infection. The overall study conclusions were robust in sensitivity analysis., Interpretation: Routine asymptomatic testing for COVID-19 prior to travel can be an effective strategy to reduce individual risk of COVID-19 infection during travel, although post-travel testing with abbreviated quarantine is likely needed to reduce population-level transmission due to importation of infection when traveling from a high to low incidence setting.

Background: The U.S. has experienced an unprecedented number of shelter-in-place orders throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. There is limited empirical research that examines the impact of these orders. We aimed to rapidly ascertain whether social distancing; difficulty with daily activities (obtaining food, essential medications and childcare); and levels of concern regarding COVID-19 changed after the March 16, 2020 announcement of shelter-in-place orders for seven counties in the San Francisco Bay Area., Methods: We conducted an online, cross-sectional social media survey from March 14 - April 1, 2020. We measured changes in social distancing behavior; experienced difficulties with daily activities (i.e., access to healthcare, childcare, obtaining essential food and medications); and level of concern regarding COVID-19 after the March 16 shelter-in-place announcement in the San Francisco Bay Area and elsewhere in the U.S., Results: The percentage of respondents social distancing all of the time increased following the shelter-in-place announcement in the Bay Area (9.2%, 95% CI: 6.6, 11.9) and elsewhere in the U.S. (3.4%, 95% CI: 2.0, 5.0). Respondents also reported increased difficulty with obtaining food, hand sanitizer, and medications, particularly with obtaining food for both respondents from the Bay Area (13.3%, 95% CI: 10.4, 16.3) and elsewhere (8.2%, 95% CI: 6.6, 9.7). We found limited evidence that level of concern regarding the COVID-19 crisis changed following the shelter-in-place announcement., Conclusion: These results capture early changes in attitudes, behaviors, and difficulties. Further research that specifically examines social, economic, and health impacts of COVID-19, especially among vulnerable populations, is urgently needed. =.

Background: The spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) across the United States confirms that not all Americans are equally at risk of infection, severe disease, or mortality. A range of intersecting biological, demographic, and socioeconomic factors are likely to determine an individual's susceptibility to COVID-19. These factors vary significantly across counties in the United States, and often reflect the structural inequities in our society. Recognizing this vast inter-county variation in risks will be critical to mounting an adequate response strategy., Methods and Findings: Using publicly available county-specific data we identified key biological, demographic, and socioeconomic factors influencing susceptibility to COVID-19, guided by international experiences and consideration of epidemiological parameters of importance. We created bivariate county-level maps to summarize examples of key relationships across these categories, grouping age and poverty; comorbidities and lack of health insurance; proximity, density and bed capacity; and race and ethnicity, and premature death. We have also made available an interactive online tool that allows public health officials to query risk factors most relevant to their local context.Our data demonstrate significant inter-county variation in key epidemiological risk factors, with a clustering of counties in certain states, which will result in an increased demand on their public health system. While the East and West coast cities are particularly vulnerable owing to their densities (and travel routes), a large number of counties in the Southeastern states have a high proportion of at-risk populations, with high levels of poverty, comorbidities, and premature death at baseline, and low levels of health insurance coverage.The list of variables we have examined is by no means comprehensive, and several of them are interrelated and magnify underlying vulnerabilities. The online tool allows readers to explore additional combinations of risk factors, set categorical thresholds for each covariate, and filter counties above different population thresholds., Conclusion: COVID-19 responses and decision making in the United States remain decentralized. Both the federal and state governments will benefit from recognizing high intra-state, inter-county variation in population risks and response capacity. Many of the factors that are likely to exacerbate the burden of COVID-19 and the demand on healthcare systems are the compounded result of long-standing structural inequalities in US society. Strategies to protect those in the most vulnerable counties will require urgent measures to better support communities' attempts at social distancing and to accelerate cooperation across jurisdictions to supply personnel and equipment to counties that will experience high demand., Competing Interests: Competing Interests None to declare

Alexander Tsai and co-authors discuss the role of stigma in responses to the US opioid crisis., Competing Interests: The authors of this manuscript have read the journal's policy and have the following competing interests: ACT receives a stipend as a Specialty Consulting Editor for PLOS Medicine and serves on the journal’s Editorial Board. ACT and SS are Guest Editors for the PLOS Medicine Special Issue on Substance Use, Misuse and Dependence. MLB has been retained as an expert witness in litigation against opioid manufacturers. SEW has received research funding from Optum Labs for a study using Optum claims data to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different treatment pathways for opioid use disorder.