Beyond its physical health impact, the COVID-19 pandemic also resulted in grief from loss of loved ones, isolation due to social distancing, stress, fear, and economic distress-all of which impacted mental health. How Right Now/Qué Hacer Ahora (HRN) is an award-winning, national campaign that provides emotional support to people disproportionately affected by COVID-19. We conducted a theory-based, culturally responsive evaluation to assess the campaign's effect on coping behaviors and resiliency between summer 2020 and spring 2021. We surveyed HRN's priority audiences (older adults/caregivers and those with preexisting health conditions, experiencing violence, or economic distress) in English and Spanish using NORC's national probability panel, AmeriSpeak, over three waves. We also analyzed social media data and monitored HRN website traffic and triangulated these data to understand the campaign's full impact. Campaign exposure was associated with people who were experiencing higher levels of stress and were more likely to seek information to support their emotional well-being. Campaign exposure was also positively associated with increased feelings of resilience and confidence in using coping strategies, especially for people experiencing violence or economic distress and people from racial and ethnic groups. Findings demonstrate the campaign's success in reaching its intended audiences with the mental health support they needed. Additionally, the HRN evaluation's design illustrates how the use of multiple data sources can elucidate a deeper understanding of campaign impact. Findings underscore that culturally responsive health communication interventions-like HRN-can provide needed mental health support and resources to disproportionately affected communities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Loneliness and lack of social connection are widespread and negatively affect physical and mental health and well-being. Data are limited for persons disproportionately affected by social disconnection, especially those who do not identify as heterosexual and cisgender. Using data from the 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 26 U.S. states, CDC examined associations of loneliness and lack of social and emotional support to mental health variables. Prevalence estimates for the mental health variables were significantly higher among adults who reported loneliness and lack of social and emotional support than among those adults who did not. The prevalence of loneliness was highest among respondents who identified as bisexual (56.7%) and transgender (range = 56.4%-63.9%). Prevalence of lack of social and emotional support was highest among those who identified as transgender female (44.8%), transgender gender nonconforming (41.4%), and those with household income below $25,000 (39.8%). Prevalences of stress, frequent mental distress, and history of depression were highest among bisexual (34.3%-54.4%) and transgender adults (36.1%-67.2%). Addressing the threat to mental health among sexual and gender minority groups should include consideration of loneliness and lack of social and emotional support. Providing access to health services that are affirming for sexual and gender minority groups and collecting data to address health inequities might help improve the delivery of culturally competent care.

BACKGROUND: To inform development, targeting, and penetration of materials from a national injection safety campaign, an evaluation was conducted to assess provider knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to unsafe injection practices. METHODS: A panel of physicians (n = 370) and nurses (n = 320) were recruited from 8 states to complete an online survey. Questions, using 5-point Likert and Spector scales, addressed acceptability and frequency of unsafe practices (eg, reuse of a syringe on >1 patient). Results were stratified to identify differences among physician specialties and nurse practice locations. RESULTS: Unsafe injection practices were reported by both physicians and nurses across all surveyed physician specialties and nurse practice locations. Twelve percent (12.4%) of physicians and 3% of nurses indicated reuse of syringes for >1 patient occurs in their workplace; nearly 5% of physicians indicated this practice usually or always occurs. A higher proportion of oncologists reported unsafe practices occurring in their workplace. CONCLUSIONS: There is a dangerous minority of providers violating basic standards of care; practice patterns may vary by provider group and specialty. More research is needed to understand how best to identify providers placing patients at risk of infection and modify their behaviors.