Objective: Schools’ ability to implement recommended hygiene-related activities is critical in preventing the spread of gastrointestinal and respiratory illness. We conducted this study to improve understanding of perceived barriers to, and responsibility for implementing recommended activities related to hand hygiene, cleaning, and disinfection. Methods: We recruited a convenience sample of adults affiliated with the National Parent Teacher Association during July-August 2020. Questions focused on barriers to implementing recommended hygiene-related, cleaning, and disinfection activities. Results: Overall, 1173 participants completed the survey. Among caregivers, the main barriers to conducting hand hygiene were educators’ ability to monitor students (72%), lack of time (66%), and limited funding for hygiene supplies (65%). Among educators, the main barriers to conducting hand hygiene were access to needed supplies (75%), ability to monitor students (75%), and lack of time (72%). The top barriers reported by both groups relating to cleaning and disinfection activities were similar, with both groups reporting limited staff capacity (61% vs 75%), lack of time/scheduling difficulties (64% vs 75%), and lack of funds to purchase supplies (64% vs 70%). Conclusions: Our results clarify stakeholder concerns around implementation and main barriers. To implement recommended activities, schools need support (funding, staff, and supplies) and guidance for hygiene-related activities. © 2024, Paris Scholar Publishing. All rights reserved.

In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, CDC established the National Wastewater Surveillance System and later expanded it to include mpox and influenza A data dashboards.(†) Wastewater utility partners have cited community health benefits as a motivating factor for participating in wastewater surveillance; a lack of public support for wastewater surveillance activities might lead utility partners to cease participation (1,2). However, little is known about public support for wastewater monitoring and its influence on protective health behaviors. As innovative surveillance strategies such as wastewater surveillance evolve, ethical considerations, including understanding public perceptions regarding support for these activities and potential risks to communities, are essential (3).

As part of the response to the highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) virus outbreak in U.S. cattle and poultry and the associated human cases, CDC and partners are monitoring influenza A virus levels and detection of the H5 subtype in wastewater. Among 48 states and the District of Columbia that performed influenza A testing of wastewater during May 12-July 13, 2024, a weekly average of 309 sites in 38 states had sufficient data for analysis, and 11 sites in four states reported high levels of influenza A virus. H5 subtype testing was conducted at 203 sites in 41 states, with H5 detections at 24 sites in nine states. For each detection or high level, CDC and state and local health departments evaluated data from other influenza surveillance systems and partnered with wastewater utilities and agriculture departments to investigate potential sources. Among the four states with high influenza A virus levels detected in wastewater, three states had corresponding evidence of human influenza activity from other influenza surveillance systems. Among the 24 sites with H5 detections, 15 identified animal sources within the sewershed or adjacent county, including eight milk-processing inputs. Data from these early investigations can help health officials optimize the use of wastewater surveillance during the upcoming respiratory illness season.

BACKGROUND: While previous studies have identified a range of factors associated with mask wearing in the US, little is known about drivers of mask-wearing among racial and ethnic minority groups. This analysis assessed whether factors positively associated with wearing a mask early in the pandemic differed between participants grouped by race/ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Asian, and non-Hispanic White). METHOD: Data were obtained from a US internet panel survey of 3217 respondents during May-November 2020 (weighted by race/ethnicity, age, gender, and education to the US national population). Within each of the four available racial/ethnic groups, crude and adjusted odds ratios (COR and AOR) were calculated using logistic regression to assess factors positively associated with wearing a mask. Adjusted models were controlled for age, gender, education, county COVID-19 case count, presence of a state-issued mask mandate, and interview month. RESULTS: The following variables were most strongly positively associated with mask wearing (p<0.05) in each racial/ethnic group: Hispanic-seeing others wearing masks (AOR: 6.7), importance of wearing a mask combined with social distancing (AOR: 3.0); non-Hispanic Black-belief that wearing a mask would protect others from coronavirus (AOR: 5.1), reporting hearing that one should wear a mask (AOR: 3.6); non-Hispanic Asian-belief that people important to them believe they should wear a mask (COR: 5.1, not statistically significant); and non-Hispanic White-seeing others wearing masks (AOR: 3.1), importance of wearing a mask (AOR: 2.3). CONCLUSION: Public health efforts to encourage mask wearing should consider the diversity of behavioral influences within different population groups.

IMPORTANCE: Some US states have issued COVID-19 vaccine mandates; however, the association of these mandates with vaccination rates remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between announcing state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandates that did not provide a test-out option for workers and the vaccine administration rates in terms of state-level first-dose vaccine administration and series completion coverage. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study used publicly available, state-level aggregated panel data to fit linear regression models with 2-way fixed effects (state and time) estimating vaccine coverage changes 8 weeks before and 8 weeks after a state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandate was announced. Mandates were announced on or after July 26, 2021, and were included only if they went into effect before December 31, 2021. Data were included from 13 state-level jurisdictions with a vaccine mandate in effect as of December 31, 2021, that did not allow recurring testing in lieu of vaccination (mandate group), and 14 state-level jurisdictions that allowed a test-out option and/or did not restrict vaccine requirements (comparison group). INTERVENTIONS/EXPOSURES: The event of interest was the announcement of a state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandate applicable to specific groups of workers. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The outcome measures were state-level daily COVID-19 vaccine first-dose administration and series completion coverage, reported as mean percentage point changes. RESULTS: Of 5508539 first-dose administrations in the 8-week postannouncement period, an estimated 634831 (11.5%) were associated with the mandate announcement. First-dose administration coverage among 13 jurisdictions increased starting at 3 weeks after the mandate announcement, with statistically significant differences of 0.20, 0.33, 0.39, 0.45, 0.49, and 0.59 percentage points higher than the referent category coverage of 62.9%. Increases in vaccine series completion coverage were observed from 5 to 8 weeks after the announcement, but statistically significant differences from the referent category coverage of 56.3% were observed only during weeks 7 and 8 after the announcement (both differed by 0.2 percentage points; P=.05 and P=.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this cross-sectional event study suggest that the announcement of state-issued vaccine mandates may be associated with short-term increases in vaccine uptake. This observed association may be a product of both a direct outcome experienced by groups governed by the mandate as well as the spillover outcome due to a government signaling the importance of vaccination to the general population of the state.

Since May 2022, 27,558 monkeypox cases have been identified in the United States (1). Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent the most affected demographic group in the current multinational outbreak (2). As of October 18, 2022, Louisiana had reported 273 monkeypox cases with 187 (68.5%) among residents of the Louisiana Department of Health (LDH) Southeast Region, which includes the city of New Orleans (3).

PURPOSE: Information on incentives for COVID-19 testing is needed to understand effective practices that encourage testing uptake. We describe characteristics of those who received an incentive after performing a rapid antigen test. DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of survey data. SETTING: During April 29-May 9, 2021, COVID-19 rapid antigen testing was offered in 2 Maryland cities. SAMPLE: Convenience sample of 553 adults (≥18 years) who tested and received an incentive; 93% consented to survey. MEASURES: Survey questions assessed reasons for testing, testing history, barriers, and demographics. ANALYSIS: Robust Poisson regressions were used to determine characteristic differences based on testing history and between participants who would re-test in the future without an incentive vs participants who would not. RESULTS: The most common reasons for testing were the desire to be tested (n = 280; 54%) and convenience of location (n = 146; 28%). Those motivated by an incentive to test (n = 110; 21%) were 5.83 times as likely to state they would not test again without an incentive, compared to those with other reasons for testing (95% CI: 2.67-12.72, P < .001). CRITICAL LIMITATIONS: No comparative study group. CONCLUSION: Results indicate internal motivation and convenience were prominent factors supporting testing uptake. Incentives may increase community testing participation, particularly among people who have never tested. Keywords COVID-19, pandemic, incentives, health behavior, community testing.

During December 2021, the United States experienced a surge in COVID-19 cases, coinciding with predominance of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant (1). During this surge, the National Football League (NFL) and NFL Players Association (NFLPA) adjusted their protocols for test-to-release from COVID-19 isolation on December 16, 2021, based on analytic assessments of their 2021 test-to-release data. Fully vaccinated* persons with COVID-19 were permitted to return to work once they were asymptomatic or fever-free and experiencing improving symptoms for ≥24 hours, and after two negative or high cycle-threshold (Ct) results (Ct≥35) from either of two reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests(†) (2). This report describes data from NFL's SARS-CoV-2 testing program (3) and time to first negative or Ct≥35 result based on serial COVID-19 patient testing during isolation. Among this occupational cohort of 173 fully vaccinated adults with confirmed COVID-19 during December 14-19, 2021, a period of Omicron variant predominance, 46% received negative test results or had a subsequent RT-PCR test result with a Ct≥35 by day 6 postdiagnosis (i.e., concluding 5 days of isolation) and 84% before day 10. The proportion of persons with positive test results decreased with time, with approximately one half receiving positive RT-PCR test results after postdiagnosis day 5. Although this test result does not necessarily mean these persons are infectious (RT-PCR tests might continue to return positive results long after an initial positive result) (4), these findings indicate that persons with COVID-19 should continue taking precautions, including correct and consistent mask use, for a full 10 days after symptom onset or initial positive test result if they are asymptomatic.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies (DBMD) are X-linked neuromuscular disorders characterized by progressive muscle weakness, leading to decreased mobility and multisystem complications. We estimate productivity costs attributable to time spent by a parent caring for a male child under the age of 18 years with DBMD, with particular focus on female caregivers of boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) who have already lost ambulation. METHODS: Primary caregivers of males with DBMD in the Muscular Dystrophy Surveillance and Research Tracking Network (MD STARnet) were surveyed during 2011-2012 on family quality of life measures, including labor market outcomes. Of 211 respondents, 96 female caregivers of boys with DBMD were matched on state, year of survey, respondent's age, child's age, and number of minor children with controls constructed from Current Population Survey extracts. Regression analysis was used to estimate labor market outcomes and productivity costs. RESULTS: Caregivers of boys with DBMD worked 296 hours less per year on average than caregivers of unaffected children, translating to a $8816 earnings loss in 2020 U.S. dollars. Caregivers of boys with DMD with ≥4 years of ambulation loss had a predicted loss in annualized earnings of $23 995, whereas caregivers of boys with DBMD of the same ages who remained ambulatory had no loss of earnings. DISCUSSION: Female caregivers of non-ambulatory boys with DMD face additional household budget constraints through income loss. Failure to include informal care costs in economic studies could understate the societal cost-effectiveness of strategies for managing DMD that might prolong ambulation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Spillover effects on the welfare of family members may refer to caregiver health effects, informal care time costs, or both. This review focuses on methods that have been used to measure and value informal care time and makes suggestions for their appropriate use in cost-of-illness and cost-effectiveness analyses. It highlights the importance of methods to value informal care time that are independent of caregiver health effects in order to minimize double counting of spillover effects. Although the concept of including caregiver time costs in economic evaluations is not new, relatively few societal perspective cost-effectiveness analyses have included informal care, with the exception of dementia. This is due in part to challenges in measuring and valuing time costs. Analysts can collect information on time spent in informal care or can assess its impact in displacing other time use, notably time in paid employment. A key challenge is to ensure appropriate comparison groups that do not require informal care to be able to correctly estimate attributable informal care time or foregone market work. To value informal care time, analysts can use estimates of hourly earnings in either opportunity cost or replacement cost approaches. Researchers have used widely varying estimates of hourly earnings. Alternatively, stated-preference methods (i.e. contingent valuation, conjoint analysis) can be used to value the effect of informal care on utility, but this can entail double counting with health effects. Lack of consensus and standardization of methods makes it difficult to compare estimates of informal care costs.

Care Considerations for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy were published in 2010. However, little is known about the extent to which these considerations were implemented after publication. With this article, we provide direction on evaluating the uptake of the 2018 Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Care Considerations. We identify key elements of care and present suggestions for their use in evaluation and research.