Dataset Information

Variations in state-level SARS-COV-2 testing recommendations in the United States, March-July 2020.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Testing recommendations for COVID-19 in the United States varied by state and over time in the spring and summer of 2020.

Methods

We compiled data about COVID-19 testing, cases, and deaths, and excess pneumonia + influenza + COVID-19 deaths to assess relationships between testing recommendations, per capita tests performed, epidemic intensity, and excess mortality during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

Results

As of July 2020, 16 states recommended testing asymptomatic members of the general public. The rate of COVID-19 tests reported in each state correlates with more inclusive testing recommendations and with higher epidemic intensity. Higher per capita testing was associated with more complete reporting of COVID-19 deaths, which is a fundamental requirement for analyzing the pandemic.

Conclusions

Reported deaths due to COVID-19 likely represent an undercount of the true burden of the pandemic. Coordinated, consistent guidelines for COVID-19 testing should be a high priority for state and national health systems.

SUBMITTER: Perniciaro SR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7668755 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

50 policies, 1 pandemic, 500,000 deaths: Associations between state-level COVID-19 testing recommendations, tests <i>per capita</i>, undercounted deaths, vaccination policies, and doses <i>per capita</i> in the United States.

Perniciaro Stephanie R SR Weinberger Daniel M DM

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences 20210226

<h4>Background</h4>State health departments have been responsible for prioritizing and allocating SARS-CoV-2 tests and vaccines. Testing and vaccination recommendations in the United States varied by state and over time, as did vaccine rollouts, COVID-19 cases, and estimates of excess mortality.<h4>Methods</h4>We compiled data about COVID-19 testing, cases, and deaths, and excess pneumonia + influenza + COVID-19 deaths to assess relationships between testing recommendations, <i>per capita</i> te ...[more]

PMID: 33200142

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesFollowing well-established practices in demography, this article discusses several measures based on the number of COVID-19 deaths to facilitate comparisons over time and across populations.SettingsNational populations in 186 United Nations countries and territories and populations in first-level subnational administrative entities in Brazil, China, Italy, Mexico, Peru, Spain and the USA.ParticipantsNone (death statistics only).Primary and secondary outcome measuresAn unstandardised occurrence/exposure rate comparable to the Crude Death Rate; an indirectly age-and-sex standardised rate that can be derived even when the breakdown of COVID-19 deaths by age and sex required for direct standardisation is unavailable; the reduction in life expectancy at birth corresponding to the 2020 number of COVID-19 deaths.ResultsTo date, the highest unstandardised rate has been in New York, at its peak exceeding the state 2017 crude death rate. Populations compare differently after standardisation: while parts of Italy, Spain and the USA have the highest unstandardised rates, parts of Mexico and Peru have the highest standardised rates. For several populations with the necessary data by age and sex for direct standardisation, we show that direct and indirect standardisation yield similar results. US life expectancy is estimated to have declined this year by more than a year (-1.26 years), far more than during the worst year of the HIV epidemic, or the worst 3?years of the opioid crisis, and to reach its lowest level since 2008. Substantially larger reductions, exceeding 2?years, are estimated for Panama, Peru, and parts of Italy, Spain, the USA and especially, Mexico.ConclusionsWith lesser demand on data than direct standardisation, indirect standardisation is a valid alternative to adjust international comparisons for differences in population distribution by sex and age-groups. A number of populations have experienced reductions in 2020 life expectancies that are substantial by recent historical standards.

Project description:ImportanceExpanding the use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder is a critical component of the US response to the opioid crisis, but few studies have examined how state policies are associated with buprenorphine dispensing.ObjectiveTo examine the association of 6 selected state policies with the rate of individuals receiving buprenorphine per 1000 county residents.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used 2006 to 2018 US retail pharmacy claims data for individuals dispensed buprenorphine formulations indicated for treating opioid use disorder.ExposuresState implementation of policies requiring additional education for buprenorphine prescribers beyond waiver training, continuing medical education related to substance misuse and addiction, Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, Medicaid expansion, mandatory prescriber use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and pain management clinic laws were examined.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was buprenorphine treatment months per 1000 county residents as measured using multivariable longitudinal models. Statistical analyses were conducted from September 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022, with revised analyses conducted through February 28, 2023.ResultsThe mean (SD) number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 persons nationally increased steadily from 1.47 (0.04) in 2006 to 22.80 (0.55) in 2018. Requiring that buprenorphine prescribers receive additional education beyond that required to obtain the federal X-waiver was associated with significant increases in the number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in the 5 years following implementation of the requirement (from 8.51 [95% CI, 2.36-14.64] months in year 1 to 14.43 [95% CI, 2.61-26.26] months in year 5). Requiring continuing medical education for physician licensure related to substance misuse or addiction was associated with significant increases in buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in each of the 5 years following policy implementation (from 7.01 [95% CI, 3.17-10.86] months in the first year to 11.43 [95% CI, 0.61-22.25] months in the fifth year). None of the other policies examined was associated with a significant change in buprenorphine months of treatment per 1000 county residents.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of US pharmacy claims, state-mandated educational requirements beyond the initial training required to prescribe buprenorphine were associated with increased buprenorphine use over time. The findings suggest requiring education for buprenorphine prescribers and training in substance use disorder treatment for all controlled substance prescribers as an actionable proposal for increasing buprenorphine use, ultimately serving more patients. No single policy lever can ensure adequate buprenorphine supply; however, policy maker attention to the benefits of enhancing clinician education and knowledge may help to expand buprenorphine access.

Project description:BackgroundNew data on COVID-19 may influence the stringency of containment policies, but these potential effect are not understood. We aimed to understand the associations of new COVID-19 cases and deaths with policy stringency globally and regionally.MethodsWe modelled the marginal effects of new COVID-19 cases and deaths on policy stringency (scored 0-100) in 175 countries and territories, adjusting for gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and health expenditure (% of GDP), and public expenditure on health. The time periods examined were March to August 2020, September 2020 to February 2021, and March to August 2021.ResultsPolicy response to new cases and deaths was faster and more stringent early in the COVID-19 pandemic (March to August 2020) compared to subsequent periods. New deaths were more strongly associated with stringent policies than new cases. In an average week, one new death per 100 000 people was associated with a stringency increase of 2.1 units in the March to August 2020 period, 1.3 units in the September 2020 to February 2021 period, and 0.7 units in the March to August 2021 period. New deaths in Africa and the Western Pacific were associated with more stringency than in other regions. Higher health expenditure as a percentage of GDP was associated with less stringent policies. Similarly, higher public expenditure on health by governments was mostly associated with less stringency across all three periods. GDP per capita did not have consistent patterns of associations with stringency.ConclusionsThe stringency of COVID-19 policies was more strongly associated with new deaths than new cases. Our findings demonstrate the need for enhanced mortality surveillance to ensure policy alignment during health emergencies. Countries that invest less in health or have a lower public expenditure on health may be inclined to enact more stringent policies. This new empirical understanding of COVID-19 policy drivers can help public health officials anticipate and shape policy responses in future health emergencies.