Last data update: May 06, 2024. (Total: 46732 publications since 2009)
Records 1-3 (of 3 Records) |
Query Trace: Segovia G[original query] |
---|
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination rates and staffing shortages among healthcare personnel in nursing homes before, during, and after implementation of mandates for COVID-19 vaccination among 15 US jurisdictions, National Healthcare Safety Network, June 2021-January 2022
Reses HE , Soe M , Dubendris H , Segovia G , Wong E , Shafi S , Kalayil EJ , Lu M , Bagchi S , Edwards JR , Benin AL , Bell JM . Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2023 44 (11) 1-10 OBJECTIVE: To examine temporal changes in coverage with a complete primary series of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and staffing shortages among healthcare personnel (HCP) working in nursing homes in the United States before, during, and after the implementation of jurisdiction-based COVID-19 vaccination mandates for HCP. SAMPLE AND SETTING: HCP in nursing homes from 15 US jurisdictions. DESIGN: We analyzed weekly COVID-19 vaccination data reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network from June 7, 2021, through January 2, 2022. We assessed 3 periods (preintervention, intervention, and postintervention) based on the announcement of vaccination mandates for HCP in 15 jurisdictions. We used interrupted time-series models to estimate the weekly percentage change in vaccination with complete primary series and the odds of reporting a staffing shortage for each period. RESULTS: Complete primary series vaccination among HCP increased from 66.7% at baseline to 94.3% at the end of the study period and increased at the fastest rate during the intervention period for 12 of 15 jurisdictions. The odds of reporting a staffing shortage were lowest after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that COVID-19 vaccination mandates may be an effective strategy for improving HCP vaccination coverage in nursing homes without exacerbating staffing shortages. These data suggest that mandates can be considered to improve COVID-19 coverage among HCP in nursing homes to protect both HCP and vulnerable nursing home residents. |
Population-based prevalence and incidence estimates of mixed connective tissue disease from the Manhattan Lupus Surveillance Program
Hasan G , Ferucci ED , Buyon JP , Belmont HM , Salmon JE , Askanase A , Bathon JM , Geraldino-Pardilla L , Ali Y , Ginzler EM , Putterman C , Gordon C , Helmick CG , Parton H , Izmirly PM . Rheumatology (Oxford) 2022 62 (8) 2845-2849 OBJECTIVE: Epidemiologic data for mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD) are limited. Leveraging data from the Manhattan Lupus Surveillance Program (MLSP), a racially/ethnically diverse population-based registry of cases with SLE and related diseases including MCTD, we provide estimates of the prevalence and incidence of MCTD. METHODS: MLSP cases were identified from rheumatologists, hospitals, and population databases using a variety of ICD-9 codes. MCTD was defined as one of the following: 1) fulfillment of our modified Alarcon-Segovia and Kahn criteria which required a positive RNP antibody and the presence of synovitis, myositis, and Raynaud's phenomenon, 2) a diagnosis of MCTD and no other diagnosis of another connective tissue disease (CTD), and 3) a diagnosis of MCTD regardless of another CTD diagnosis. RESULTS: Overall, 258 (7.7%) of cases met a definition of MCTD. Using our modified Alarcon-Segovia and Kahn criteria for MCTD, the age-adjusted prevalence was 1.28 (95%CI 0.72-2.09) per 100 000. Using our definition of a diagnosis of MCTD and no other diagnosis of another CTD yielded an age-adjusted prevalence and incidence of MCTD of 2.98 (95%CI 2.10-4.11) per 100 000 and 0.39 (95%CI 0.22-0.64) per 100 000, respectively. The age-adjusted prevalence and incidence were highest using a diagnosis of MCTD regardless of other CTD diagnoses and were 16.22 (95%CI 14.00-18.43) per 100 000 and 1.90 (95%CI 1.49-2.39) per 100 000 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The MLSP provided estimates for prevalence and incidence of MCTD in a diverse population. The variation in estimates using different case definitions is reflective of the challenge of defining MCTD in epidemiologic studies. |
Prevalence of mixed connective tissue disease in a population-based registry of American Indian/Alaska Native people in 2007
Ferucci ED , Johnston JM , Gordon C , Helmick CG , Lim SS . Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2016 69 (8) 1271-1275 OBJECTIVE: The objective of this surveillance project was to determine the prevalence of mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD) in 2007 in the Indian Health Service (IHS) active clinical population from 3 regions of the United States. METHODS: The IHS Lupus Registry was designed to identify possible MCTD cases in addition to lupus. The population denominator for this report includes American Indian or Alaska Native adults within the IHS active clinical population in 2007, residing in select communities in 3 regions of the US. Potential MCTD cases were identified using a broad range of diagnostic codes and were confirmed by detailed medical record abstraction. Classification as MCTD for this analysis required both rheumatologist diagnosis of MCTD without diagnosis of other connective tissue disease and documentation of the Alarcon-Segovia criteria in the medical record. Prevalence was also calculated using two alternate definitions of MCTD. RESULTS: The age-adjusted prevalence of MCTD using our primary definition was 6.4 per 100,000 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8-12.8). The prevalence was higher in women than men using all three definitions of MCTD, and no men met the primary definition of MCTD. CONCLUSION: The first population-based estimates of the prevalence of MCTD in the US American Indian/Alaska Native population show that the prevalence appears to be higher than in other populations. Additional population-based estimates are needed to better understand the epidemiology of MCTD. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:May 06, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure