Dataset Information

Eviction Moratoria Expiration and COVID-19 Infection Risk Across Strata of Health and Socioeconomic Status in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Housing insecurity induced by evictions may increase the risk of contracting COVID-19.

Objective

To estimate the association of lifting state-level eviction moratoria, which increased housing insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19.

Design, setting, and participants

This retrospective cohort study included individuals with commercial insurance or Medicare Advantage who lived in a state that issued an eviction moratorium and were diagnosed with COVID-19 as well as a control group comprising an equal number of randomly selected individuals in these states who were not diagnosed with COVID-19. Data were collected from OptumLabs Data Warehouse, a database of deidentified administrative claims. The study used a difference-in-differences analysis among states that implemented an eviction moratorium between March 13, 2020, and September 4, 2020.

Exposures

Time since state-level eviction moratoria were lifted.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome measure was a binary variable indicating whether an individual was diagnosed with COVID-19 for the first time in a given week with International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision code U07.1. The study analyzed changes in COVID-19 diagnosis before vs after a state lifted its moratorium compared with changes in states that did not lift it. For sensitivity analyses, models were reestimated on a 2% random sample of all individuals in the claims database during this period in these states.

Results

The cohort consisted of 509 694 individuals (254 847 [50.0%] diagnosed with COVID-19; mean [SD] age, 47.0 [23.6] years; 239 056 [53.3%] men). During the study period, 43 states and the District of Columbia implemented an eviction moratorium and 7 did not. Among the states that implemented a moratorium, 26 (59.1%) lifted their moratorium before the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued their national moratorium, while 18 (40.1%) maintained theirs. In a Cox difference-in-differences regression model, individuals living in a state that lifted its eviction moratorium experienced higher hazards of a COVID-19 diagnosis beginning 5 weeks after the moratorium was lifted (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-1.76; P = .004), reaching an HR of 1.83 (95% CI, 1.36-2.46; P < .001) 12 weeks after. Hazards increased in magnitude among individuals with preexisting comorbidities and those living in nonaffluent and rent-burdened areas. Individuals with a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 3 or greater had an HR of 2.37 (95% CI, 1.67-3.36; P < .001) at the end of the study period. Those living in nonaffluent areas had an HR of 2.14 (95% CI, 1.51-3.05; P < .001), while those living in areas with a high rent burden had an HR of 2.31 (95% CI, 1.64-3.26; P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance

The findings of this difference-in-differences analysis suggest that eviction-led housing insecurity may have exacerbated the COVID-19 pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Sandoval-Olascoaga S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8406080 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe spread of COVID-19 has highlighted the long-standing health inequalities across the U.S. as neighborhoods with fewer resources were associated with higher rates of COVID-19 transmission. Although the stay-at-home order was one of the most effective methods to contain its spread, residents in lower-income neighborhoods faced barriers to practicing social distancing. We aimed to quantify the differential impact of stay-at-home policy on COVID-19 transmission and residents' mobility across neighborhoods of different levels of socioeconomic disadvantage.MethodsThis was a comparative interrupted time-series analysis at the county level. We included 2087 counties from 38 states which both implemented and lifted the state-wide stay-at-home order. Every county was assigned to one of four equally-sized groups based on its levels of disadvantage, represented by the Area Deprivation Index. Prevalence of COVID-19 was calculated by dividing the daily number of cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases by the number of residents from the 2010 Census. We used the Social Distancing Index (SDI), derived from the COVID-19 Impact Analysis Platform, to measure the mobility. For the evaluation of implementation, the observation started from Mar 1st 2020 to 1 day before lifting; and, for lifting, it ranged from 1 day after implementation to Jul 5th 2020. We calculated a comparative change of daily trends in COVID-19 prevalence and Social Distancing Index between counties with three highest disadvantage levels and those with the least level before and after the implementation and lifting of the stay-at-home order, separately.ResultsOn both stay-at-home implementation and lifting dates, COVID-19 prevalence was much higher among counties with the highest or lowest disadvantage level, while mobility decreased as the disadvantage level increased. Mobility of the most disadvantaged counties was least impacted by stay-at-home implementation and relaxation compared to counties with the most resources; however, disadvantaged counties experienced the largest relative increase in COVID-19 infection after both stay-at-home implementation and relaxation.ConclusionsNeighborhoods with varying levels of socioeconomic disadvantage reacted differently to the implementation and relaxation of COVID-19 mitigation policies. Policymakers should consider investing more resources in disadvantaged counties as the pandemic may not stop until most neighborhoods have it under control.

Project description:ImportanceRecommendations for additional doses of COVID vaccine are restricted to people with HIV who have advanced disease or unsuppressed HIV viral load. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 infection risk post-vaccination among PWH is essential for informing vaccination guidelines.ObjectiveEstimate the risk of breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated people with (PWH) and without (PWoH) HIV in the US.Design setting and participantsThe Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET)-II cohort collaboration consists of 4 longitudinal cohorts from integrated health systems and academic health centers. Each cohort identified individuals â‰¥18 years old, in-care, and fully vaccinated for COVID-19 through 30 June 2021. PWH were matched to PWoH on date fully vaccinated, age group, race/ethnicity, and sex at birth. Incidence rates per 1,000 person-years and cumulative incidence of breakthrough infections with 95% confidence intervals ([,]) were estimated by HIV status. Cox proportional hazards models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) of breakthrough infections by HIV status adjusting for demographic factors, prior COVID-19 illness, vaccine type (BNT162b2, [Pfizer], mRNA-1273 [Moderna], Jansen Ad26.COV2.S [J&J]), calendar time, and cohort. Risk factors for breakthroughs among PWH, were also investigated.ExposureHIV infection.OutcomeCOVID-19 breakthrough infections, defined as laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 diagnosis after an individual was fully vaccinated.ResultsAmong 109,599 individuals (31,840 PWH and 77,759 PWoH), the rate of breakthrough infections was higher in PWH versus PWoH: 44 [41, 48] vs. 31 [29, 33] per 1,000 person-years. Cumulative incidence at 210 days after date fully vaccinated was low, albeit higher in PWH versus PWoH overall (2.8% versus 2.1%, log-rank p<0.001, risk difference=0.7% [0.4%, 1.0%]) and within each vaccine type. Breakthrough infection risk was 41% higher in PWH versus PWoH (aHR=1.41 [1.28, 1.56]). Among PWH, younger age (18-24 versus 45-54), history of COVID-19 prior to fully vaccinated date, and J&J vaccination (versus Pfizer) were associated with increased risk of breakthroughs. There was no association of breakthrough with HIV viral load suppression or CD4 count among PWH.Conclusions and relevanceCOVID-19 vaccination is effective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 strains circulating through 30 Sept 2021. PWH have an increased risk of breakthrough infections compared to PWoH. Recommendations for additional vaccine doses should be expanded to all PWH.