Browsing by Subject "non-pharmaceutical interventions"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Predicting spatial and temporal responses to non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 growth rates across 58 counties in New York State: A prospective event-based modeling study on county-level sociological predictors
    (JMIR, 2020) Xiao, Yunyu; School of Social Work
    Background: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been implemented in the New York State since the COVID-19 outbreak on March 1, 2020 to control the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Projecting the growth rate of incidence as a response to key NPIs is crucial to guide future policy making. Few studies, however, considered spatial variations of incidence growth rate across different time points of NPIs. Objective: This study quantifies county-level predictors of the time evolution of COVID-19 incidence growth rate following key NPIs in New York State. Methods: County-level COVID-19 incidence data were retrieved from the Coronavirus Case Data from Social Explorer Website between March and June 2020. 5-day moving average growth rates of COVID-19 were calculated for 16 selected time points on the dates of eight NPIs and their respective 14-day-lag-behind time points. A total of 36 county-level predictors were extracted from multiple public datasets. Geospatial mapping was used to display the spatial heterogeneity of county-level COVID-19 outbreak. Generalized mixed effect least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was employed to identify significant county-level predictors related to the change of county-level COVID-19 growth rate over time. Results: Since March 1, the growth rate of COVID-19 infection increased and peaked by the end of March, followed by a decrease. Over time, the region with the highest growth rates shifted from New York metropolitan area towards Western and Northern areas. Proportions of population aged 45 years and above (β=3.25 [0.17–6.32]), living alone at residential houses (β=3.31 [0.39–-6.22]), and proportion of crowd residential houses (β=6.15 [2.15–10.14]) were positively associated with the growth rate of COVID-19 infection. In contrast, living alone at rental houses (β=-2.47 [-4.83–-0.12]) and rate of mental health providers (β=-1.11 [-1.95–-0.28]) were negatively associated with COVID-19 growth rate across all 16 time points. Conclusions: Tailored interventions and policies are required to effectively control the epidemic for different counties. Attention towards economic, racial/ethnic, and healthcare resource disparities are needed to narrow the unequal health impact on vulnerable populations.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Public perceptions of the effectiveness of recommended non-pharmaceutical intervention behaviors to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2
    (PloS, 2020) Kasting, Monica L.; Head, Katharine J.; Hartsock, Jane A.; Sturm, Lynne; Zimet, Gregory D.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health threat, both in scope and response. With no vaccine available, the public is advised to practice non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) including social distancing, mask-wearing, and washing hands. However, little is known about public perceptions of the effectiveness of these measures, and high perceived effectiveness is likely to be critical in order to achieve widespread adoption of NPI. Methods In May 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among U.S. adults (N = 3,474). The primary outcome was a six-item measure assessing perceived effectiveness of recommended behaviors to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection from 1 (not at all effective) to 5 (extremely effective). The sample was divided into “higher” and “lower” perceived effectiveness groups. Covariates included demographics, healthcare characteristics, and health beliefs. Variables that were significant at p<0.01 in bivariate analyses were entered into a multivariable logistic regression and a best-fit model was created using a cutoff of p<0.01 to stay in the model. Results Mean age was 45.5 years and most participants were non-Hispanic White (63%) and female (52.4%). The high perceived effectiveness group was slightly larger than the low perceived effectiveness group (52.7% vs. 47.3%). Almost all health belief variables were significant in the best-fit regression model. COVID-19-related worry (aOR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.64–2.02), and perceived threat to physical health (aOR = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.20–1.45) were positively associated with perceived effectiveness while perceived severity of COVID-19 (0.84; 95% CI = 0.73–0.96) and perceived likelihood of infection (0.85; 95% CI = 0.77–0.94) switched directions in the adjusted model and were negatively associated with perceived effectiveness. Conclusions This research indicates people generally believe NPI are effective, but there was variability based on health beliefs and there are mixed rates of engagement in these behaviors. Public health efforts should focus on increasing perceived severity and threat of SARS-CoV-2-related disease, while promoting NPI as effective in reducing threat.