OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to measure sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing among Medicaid enrollees initiating preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent human immunodeficiency virus. Secondary data are in the form of Medicaid enrollment and claims data in six states in the US South. METHODS: Research partnerships in six states in the US South developed a distributed research network to accomplish study aims. Each state identified all first-time PrEP users in fiscal year 2017-2018 (combined N = 990) and measured the presence of STI testing for chlamydia, syphilis, and gonorrhea through 2019. Each state calculated the percentage of individuals with at least one STI test during 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up periods. RESULTS: The proportion of first-time PrEP users that received an STI test varied by state: 37% to 67% of all of the individuals in each state who initiated PrEP received a test within the first 6 months of PrEP treatment and 50% to 77% received a test within the first 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends STI testing at least every 6 months for PrEP users, our analysis of Medicaid data suggests that STI testing occurs less frequently than recommended in populations at elevated risk of syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia.

In the original publication of this article, the title | was incorrect, and the key words were left out. The | article has since been corrected. | The publisher apologizes for the error.

BACKGROUND: Congenital syphilis can cause severe morbidity, including miscarriage and stillbirth, and rates are increasing rapidly within the United States. However, congenital syphilis can be prevented with early detection and treatment of syphilis during pregnancy. Current screening recommendations propose that all women should be screened early in pregnancy, whereas women with elevated risks for congenital syphilis should be screened again later in pregnancy. The rapid increase in congenital syphilis rates suggests that there are still gaps in prenatal syphilis screening. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine associations between the odds of prenatal syphilis screening and sexually transmitted infection history or other patient characteristics across 3 states with elevated rates of congenital syphilis. STUDY DESIGN: We used the Medicaid claims data from Kentucky, Louisiana, and South Carolina for women with deliveries between 2017 and 2021. Within each state, we examined the log-odds of prenatal syphilis screening as a function of the mother's health history, demographic factors, and Medicaid enrollment history. Patient history was established using a 4-year lookback period of the Medicaid claims data; in state A, sexually transmitted infection surveillance data were used to improve the sexually transmitted infection history. RESULTS: The prenatal syphilis screening rates varied by state, ranging from 62.8% to 85.1% of deliveries to women without a recent history of sexually transmitted infections and from 78.1% to 91.1% of deliveries to women with a previous sexually transmitted infection. For the main outcome of syphilis screening at any time during pregnancy, deliveries associated with previous sexually transmitted infections had 1.09 to 1.37 times higher adjusted odds ratios of undergoing screening. Deliveries to women with continuous Medicaid coverage throughout the first trimester also had higher odds of syphilis screening at any time (adjusted odds ratio, 2.45-3.15). Among deliveries to women with a previous sexually transmitted infection, only 53.6% to 63.6% underwent first-trimester screening and this rate was still just 55.0% to 69.5% when considering only deliveries to women with a previous sexually transmitted infection and full first-trimester Medicaid coverage. Fewer delivering women underwent third-trimester screening (20.3%-55.8% of women with previous sexually transmitted infection). Compared with deliveries to White women, deliveries to Black women had lower odds of first-trimester screening (adjusted odds ratio, 0.85 in all states) but higher odds of third-trimester screening (adjusted odds ratio, 1.23-2.03), potentially impacting maternal and birth outcomes. For state A, linkage to surveillance data doubled the rate of detection of a previous sexually transmitted infection because 53.0% of deliveries by women with a previous sexually transmitted infection would not have had sexually transmitted infection history detected using Medicaid claims alone. CONCLUSION: A previous sexually transmitted infection and continuous preconception Medicaid enrollment were associated with higher rates of syphilis screening, but Medicaid claims alone do not fully capture the sexually transmitted infection history of patients. The overall screening rates were lower than would be expected given that all women should undergo prenatal screening, but the rates in the third trimester were particularly low. Of note, there are gaps in early screening for non-Hispanic Black women who had lower odds of first-trimester screening when compared with non-Hispanic White women despite being at elevated risk for syphilis.

INTRODUCTION: The rates of syphilis among pregnant women and infants have increased in recent years, particularly in the U.S. South. Although state policies require prenatal syphilis testing, recent screening rates comparable across Southern states are not known. The purpose of this study is to measure syphilis screening among Medicaid enrollees with delivery in states in the U.S. South. METHODS: A total of 6 state-university research partnerships in the U.S. South developed a distributed research network to analyze Medicaid claims data using a common analytic approach for enrollees with delivery in fiscal years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 (combined N=504,943). In 2020-2021, each state calculated the percentage of enrollees with delivery with a syphilis screen test during the first trimester, third trimester, and at any point during pregnancy. Percentages for those with first-trimester enrollment were compared with the percentages of those who enrolled in Medicaid later in pregnancy. RESULTS: Prenatal syphilis screening during pregnancy ranged from 56% to 91%. Screening was higher among those enrolled in Medicaid during the first trimester than in those enrolled later in pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite state laws requiring syphilis screening during pregnancy, screening was much lower than 100%, and states varied in syphilis screening rates among Medicaid enrollees. Findings indicate that access to Medicaid in the first trimester is associated with higher rates of syphilis screening and that efforts to improve access to screening in practice settings are needed.

BACKGROUND: Simulation exercises can functionally validate World Health Organization (WHO) International Health Regulations (IHR 2005) core capacities. In 2018, the Vietnam Ministry of Health (MOH) conducted a full-scale exercise (FSX) in response to cases of severe viral pneumonia with subsequent laboratory confirmation for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) to evaluate the country's early warning and response capabilities for high-risk events. METHODS: An exercise planning team designed a complex fictitious scenario beginning with one case of severe viral pneumonia presenting at the hospital level and developed all the materials required for the exercise. Actors, controllers and evaluators were trained. In August 2018, a 3-day exercise was conducted in Quang Ninh province and Hanoi city, with participation of public health partners at the community, district, province, regional and national levels. Immediate debriefings and an after-action review were conducted after all exercise activities. Participants assessed overall exercise design, conduction and usefulness. RESULTS: FSX findings demonstrated that the event-based surveillance component of the MOH surveillance system worked optimally at different administrative levels. Detection and reporting of signals at the community and health facility levels were appropriate. Triage, verification and risk assessment were successfully implemented to identify a high-risk event and trigger timely response. The FSX identified infection control, coordination with internal and external response partners and process documentation as response challenges. Participants positively evaluated the exercise training and design. CONCLUSIONS: This exercise documents the value of exercising surveillance capabilities as part of a real-time operational scenario before facing a true emergency. The timing of this exercise and choice of disease scenario was particularly fortuitous given the subsequent appearance of COVID-19. As a result of this exercise and subsequent improvements made by the MOH, the country may have been better able to deal with the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and contain it.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of State and Local Readiness (DSLR), Public Health Emergency Preparedness(PHEP) program funds 62 recipients to strengthen capability standards to prepare for and respond to public health emergencies. Recipients use these PHEP resources in addition to CDC's administrative and scientific guidance to support preparedness and response program planning and requirements. It is expected that public health agencies develop and maintain comprehensive emergency preparedness and response plans in preparation for disasters such as hurricanes. The 2017 historic hurricane season highlighted how emergency planning and collaborative operational execution is important for public health agencies to effectively prepare for and respond to both the immediate and long-term population health consequences of these disasters. In 2017, the southeastern United States (US) and US Caribbean territories experienced 3 Category 4 or higher Atlantic hurricanes (Harvey, Irma, and Maria) within a 5-week period. This paper highlights selected case studies that illustrate the contributions and impact of jurisdictional emergency management planning and operational capacity supported by capability standards during the 2017 hurricane season. Although the magnitude of the 2017 hurricanes required public health officials to seek additional assistance, the following case studies describe the use of public health preparedness systems and recovery resources supported by the PHEP program.

In spring 2011, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released Public Health Preparedness Capabilities: National Standards for State and Local Planning. The capability standards provide a framework that supports state, local, tribal, and territorial public health agency preparedness planning and response to public health threats and emergencies. In 2017, a project team at the CDC Division of State and Local Readiness incorporated input from subject matter experts, national partners, and stakeholders to update the 2011 capability standards. As a result, CDC released the updated capability standards in October 2018, which were amended in January 2019. The original structure of the 15 capability standards remained unchanged, but updates were made to capability functions, tasks, and resource elements to reflect advances in public health emergency preparedness and response practices since 2011. When the number of functions and tasks in the 2018 capability standards were compared to those in the 2011 capabilities, only 20% (3/15) of the capabilities had a decrease in function number. The majority of changes were at the task level (task numbers changed in 80%, or 12/15, capabilities) in the 2018 version. The capability standards provide public health agencies with a practical framework, informed by updated science and tools, which can guide prioritization of limited resources to strengthen public health agency emergency preparedness and response capacities.

OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate how inclusion of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) as a tool in Public Health Preparedness Capabilities: National Standards for State and Local Planning can increase public health capacity for emergency response. METHODS: We reviewed all domestic CASPER activities (i.e., trainings and assessments) between fiscal years 2012 and 2016. Data from these CASPER activities were compared with respect to differences in geographic distribution, type, actions, efficacy, and usefulness of training. RESULTS: During the study period, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted 24 domestic in-person CASPER trainings for 1057 staff in 38 states. On average, there was a marked increase in knowledge of CASPER. Ninety-nine CASPERs were conducted in the United States, approximately half of which (53.5%) assessed preparedness; the others were categorized as response or recovery (27.2%) or were unrelated to a disaster (19.2%). CONCLUSIONS: CASPER trainings are successful in increasing disaster epidemiology skills. CASPER can be used by Public Health Emergency Preparedness program awardees to help build and sustain preparedness and response capabilities.

BACKGROUND: During an influenza pandemic, to achieve early and rapid vaccination coverage and maximize the benefit of an immunization campaign, partnerships between public health agencies and vaccine providers are essential. Immunizing pharmacists represent an important group for expanding access to pandemic vaccination. However, little is known about nationwide coordination between public health programs and pharmacies for pandemic vaccine response planning. METHODS: To assess relationships and planning activities between public health programs and pharmacies, we analyzed data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention assessments of jurisdictions that received immunization and emergency preparedness funding from 2012 to 2015. RESULTS: Forty-seven (88.7%) of 53 jurisdictions reported including pharmacies in pandemic vaccine distribution plans, 24 (45.3%) had processes to recruit pharmacists to vaccinate, and 16 (30.8%) of 52 established formal relationships with pharmacies. Most jurisdictions plan to allocate less than 10% of pandemic vaccine supply to pharmacies. DISCUSSION: While most jurisdictions plan to include pharmacies as pandemic vaccine providers, work is needed to establish formalized agreements between public health departments and pharmacies to improve pandemic preparedness coordination and ensure that vaccinating pharmacists are fully utilized during a pandemic.