Displaying 1-20 of 358 results for

ASTHO letter to the White House Requesting Funding For a National Monkeypox Response

On April 4, 2022, the U.S. Senate indicated that they have reached an agreement on a $10 billion bipartisan emergency supplemental funding bill for the federal COVID-19 response.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, public health authority has been used to require the use of face masks and encourage social distancing, and other measures. In several states these legal authorities have been challenged and, in many jurisdictions, limited or eliminated by the legislature. Maintaining the legal authority to prevent and control the spread of infectious disease is crucial to preparing for and addressing disease outbreaks.

In-depth analysis on state health policy surrounding immunization. This is part of ASTHO's annual legislative prospectus series.

The State Health Policy portfolio includes an annual legislative prospectus series. This document is from 2021 and addresses the COVID-19 pandemic.

Insight and Inspiration: Conversations for Public Health Leaders ASTHO is honored to present Insight and Inspiration, the premier webinar series designed to motivate public health leaders as they respond to new and ongoing public health challenges. The nation’s preeminent thought leaders, authors, and strategic thinkers offer attendees strategies to further develop their leadership skills as well as ground themselves and their teams even amid crisis. This series is open to governmental public health professionals at all stages of their careers. Check out upcoming opportunities and previous session recordings below to take your leadership to the next level. website

Read about deference to ACIP vaccine recommendations in state and territorial vaccine policy, following recent changes to the committee.

Downstream Effects of CDC Adopting ACIP Recommendations for COVID-19 and MMRV Vaccines Downstream Effects of CDC Adopting ACIP Recommendations Susan Kansagra, Andy Baker-White, Meredith Allen, Kimberly Martin, Ericka McGowan Learn about the downstream effects of CDC adopting ACIP recommendations for COVID-19 and MMRV vaccines, as states examine how their policies and laws intersect. On Oct. 6, CDC adopted the recommendations that the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) made in September — specifically, individual-based decision-making for COVID-19 vaccine and separate measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, and the varicella vaccine in toddlers. The adoption of these recommendations now sets in motion a cascade of other processes that influence access to vaccines. In addition, several states have begun to examine how their state level policy and laws intersect with ACIP recommendations given the delay in adoption and the uncertainty of the process going forward. COVID-19 Vaccine Recommendation CDC adopted the recommendation for shared clinical decision-making for the COVID-19 vaccine for those six months and older. The adoption of this ACIP recommendation has a ripple effect on coverage and access: It enables states to begin ordering COVID-19 vaccine under the Vaccines for Children program. It allows state Medicaid programs that link coverage to ACIP recommendations to cover the cost of the vaccine. It enables pharmacists to provide the COVID-19 vaccine under the federal PREP act declaration — as opposed to or in addition to state law, which varies by state. Many state health departments issued standing orders and executive orders to enable pharmacists to administer in the meantime. It requires health insurers to cover the cost of the vaccine, as the Affordable Care Act ties insurance coverage requirements to ACIP recommendations. Though, prior to the meeting, health insurers indicated they would do so anyway this year. MMRV Recommendation The CDC also adopted the recommendation for separate varicella (V) and measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccines rather than the MMRV vaccine (combined measles, mumps, rubella, varicella) for children under four years. As background, current guidance allows either MMRV or MMR + V to be administered to children 12-47 months. However, because of a small but higher risk of febrile seizures for dose one, they are recommended to be administered separately (MMR + V), unless families express a preference for MMRV. Only about 15% of children currently receive MMRV for the first dose, and the general consensus is that this decision will result in some changes but not significantly impact access to vaccines: The adoption of this recommendation means that VFC will no longer cover MMRV for children under four, but it continues to cover separate MMR and V vaccines. Since many state Medicaid plans tie vaccine coverage to ACIP recommendations, coverage of MMRV by state Medicaid will vary depending on this language, though separate MMR and V vaccines would continue to be covered. Private insurers can choose to cover MMRV and will likely continue to in the short term but are not required to. They are required to cover separate MMR and V vaccines. How States Are Preparing for the Future As it stands now, ACIP recommendations, particularly for respiratory viral season, are not that different than prior years – with influenza, RSV, and the COVID-19 vaccine recommended (the latter with shared clinical decision making). However, the delayed and unpredictable process has led many states to examine how closely they are tied to ACIP in law, regulation, or practice. Over 600 statutes across U.S. states and territories reference ACIP — whether for pharmacist vaccine authority, school entry, health care worker or other requirements. States have considered a variety of actions to ensure they maintain access to vaccinations for their jurisdictions including: Passing or introducing legislation that allows the state health department to use ACIP guidance from previous years or recommendations from other bodies (e.g., medical provider organizations) in state law, as it relates to school entry, pharmacist authority, and others. Issuing standing orders and executive orders to enable pharmacists to administer vaccines in the absence of ACIP recommendations. Examining Medicaid state plan language to determine how to interpret requirements when ACIP is referenced and considering updates to that language (e.g., North Carolina). Issuing state requirements for insurers on vaccine coverage (e.g., Oregon, California, Hawaii). Examining use of state funds to purchase vaccines. Supplemental Resources Tracking State Actions on Vaccine Policy and Access by KFF Vaccine Resources by the Common Health Coalition States Take Action to “Immunize” Vaccine Access by Mandy Cohen, Julian Polaris, and Liz Dervan Vaccine Integrity Project — Fall Immunization Information by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy Special Thanks - Blog - Downstream Effects of CDC Adopting ACIP Recommendations Padding Block - Large Related Content - Blog - Downstream Effects of CDC Adopting ACIP Recommendations article yes

For many individuals living with disabilities, inaccessible vaccination websites have been a significant barrier to receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Recent studies have found that many vaccination websites do not reliably meet accessibility standards. This brief discusses how several disability rights laws apply to COVID-19 vaccine registration websites and offers considerations for state and territorial health agencies as they work to improve website accessibility for people living with disabilities.

Case investigators and contact tracers must understand and adapt to the culture of people with COVID-19 to conduct effective interviews and follow up. It is important that case investigators acknowledge existing fears and concerns, and work with residents to build trust. This brief explores four elements of cross-cultural communication.

An issue brief by ASTHO and the Duke University Margolis Center for Health Policy that highlights considerations for state health officials as they look to maximize the benefits of COVID-19 therapeutics.

As schools work to stay open for in-person learning, it is essential to understand key recommendations related to COVID-19 prevention in K-12 schools. CDC recommends that health department staff work closely with K-12 schools to effectively prevent and respond to COVID-19 infections. Health department staff may look to school officials to understand the unique context of each school setting, while school officials may look to health department staff to better understand federal, state, and local guidance. This document compiles CDC guidance for COVID-19 prevention strategies in K-12 schools and should supplement state or territorial and local policies. Schools and health departments should layer the COVID-19 prevention strategies listed in this ASTHOBrief.

This infographic highlights 10 high-level strategies to advance work in school behavioral health.

Defining Disease Forecasting and Modeling Disease forecasting, generated by disease models, helps the public health workforce understand potential future outbreaks. Learn more about disease forecasts and models. Disease forecasting is important in describing potential future outbreaks that will affect the population and demand for health services in a given geographic area. Forecasts pull input from various sources (e.g., disease models, demographic, mobility, and intervention impact data). Individual forecasts can also be part of an ensemble forecast to improve accuracy. Forecasts can cover any length of time, but most target a window of several weeks to a few months. A subset of forecasts, known as nowcasts, seek to estimate present conditions, or those expected to occur imminently. Disease models are mathematical tools that are foundational components of disease forecasts. They estimate quantifiable factors that are impossible or impractical to directly measure, (e.g., future hospitalizations from a given disease, or its infection count in a population). Although models can be useful for specific questions, they do not give as complete a picture as a forecast. There are four major disease model types: Mechanistic. Attempts to simulate biological and/or social processes of transmission based on assumptions from prior or experimental data. Statistical. Relies on past data (such as infections or death) to predict future trends and can incorporate some assumptions about intervention application and uptake. Quality and quantity of past data can be a major limitation, and some models may suggest biological improbabilities. Agent. Simulates individual risks and behaviors in a population. These are highly complex, computationally very expensive to develop and run and require vast amounts of data and strong assumptions. Ensemble. Like their forecasting counterparts, they compile models and outputs, mitigating the risk of relying on one data point. While raising the overall confidence in output, they require coordination of many models to be built and simulated, which can be complex and costly unless the models already exist (such as for COVID-19 case counts). Forecasts and Models Work Together While disease forecasts and models are often conflated, they are discrete concepts. Forecasts offer a general prediction, whereas models are the mathematical pieces forecasters use to create them. Weather forecasts are commonplace, and their weekly predictions are often reasonably accurate. In contrast, predicting a big storm’s individual factors (e.g., rainfall, wind speed, lightning strikes) fall to the job of models. Together, those models help meteorologists better understand the weather and generate a forecast. In a public health context, disease forecasting informs public health officials, health care providers, and policymakers about potential risks and guide decision-making regarding preventive measures, resource allocation, and response strategies. Meanwhile, disease models aim to simulate the behavior of infectious diseases under different scenarios, allowing researchers to explore and evaluate various factors that influence disease transmission. Considerations for Decision-Making Decision-makers should consider scope and limitations of forecasts and models. They may consider adding inputs—such as projections for economic and long-term impacts. Examples include economic impacts of school closures, costs of more staffing ahead of an outbreak, and supply chain shortage forecasts for personal protective equipment (PPE). Decision-makers at all levels should consider using modeling to answer more specific, practical questions rather than predicting overall trends. Forecasts can cover different geographic scales. Public health leaders will need granular, local data to most effectively inform decision-making and communications. Novel conditions and pathogens may not have readily available data to inform models or forecasts, which will affect their predictive ability. Health officials must effectively communicate these limitations to decision-makers and the public. Examples of Forecasts and Models CDC’s COVID-19 Forecast for Hospitalizations (ensemble forecast) shows the number of daily COVID-19 hospitalizations reported in the United States from the prior two months and projected daily COVID-19 hospitalizations over the coming four weeks. Information sources are independent teams meeting submission and data quality requirements. CDC’s FluSight (ensemble forecast) has many contributing teams and models that predicts the upcoming weekly laboratory confirmed influenza hospital admissions both nationally and by state. Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Systems Science and Engineering county-level risk model for COVID-19 in the United States. This model leverages epidemiological data, mobile phone data, demographic and socioeconomic information, and behavioral metrics. The Global Epidemic and Mobility Framework simulates the global spread of infectious diseases by mathematically representing infection dynamics, population geographies, and population mobility patterns. Additional Resources Disease modeling for public health: added value, challenges, and institutional constraints Predictive Models for Forecasting Public Health Scenarios: Practical Experiences Applied during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic Applying infectious disease forecasting to public health: a path forward using influenza forecasting examples Technology to advance infectious disease forecasting for outbreak management CDC-RFA-OT18-1802 2018-2024 article yes

Disease Forecasting and Modeling Data for Public Health Action Disease Forecasting Benefits Public Health Planning Disease forecasting and modeling help prepare public health departments for future infectious disease outbreaks and epidemics. Disease forecasting and modeling data can be powerful tools for state and local health agencies (S/THAs) that respond to outbreaks, develop appropriate policies, and ensure interventions have maximum impact. Actions for which decision-makers can leverage such data include: Surveillance. Forecasts and modeling help public health agencies anticipate the spread of disease or outbreaks. This advance warning allows public health officials to inform public health recommendations, preparation, and response. Communication. Disease forecasts help relate the risk of disease outbreaks to various audiences accurately and quickly, which, in turn, can inform messages on important preventive measures and encourages compliance with recommended interventions. Resource allocation. Modeling data can help decision-makers better allocate resources by predicting where and when disease outbreaks are likely to intensify and create the greatest need. Evaluation. Forecasts and modeling can help make evaluating the effectiveness of public health policies and interventions more efficient by comparing predicted outcomes with observed data and adjusting as needed. Considerations Informed by S/THA Forecasting Jurisdictions with forecasting experience identified key indicators to monitor as part of outbreak forecasting, which fall into three main categories: Epidemic spread indicators (e.g., symptom monitoring, morbidity and mortality data, percent positivity, regional pictures of transmission). Health care system capacity (e.g., essential and/or surge personnel, available beds, ventilator usage, and supply of personal protective equipment. Public health capacity for testing capacity and contact tracing. Further considerations for S/THAs: Know your strengths. Identify the unique skillsets among partners in public health, academia, and the private sector and consider how they foster reciprocal relationships. Recognize capacity/expertise gaps. Consider leveraging partnerships for specific types of analytics expertise while exploring internal capacity building opportunities (e.g., job shadowing and resource-sharing programs on workflows and methodologies). Engage legal and compliance teams. Ensure policy and practice are aligned among partners. Explore data access/sharing pipelines. Connect public, private, academic partners, and their audiences. Start small. Identify discrete forecasting and modeling projects to demonstrate success. Identify decision-makers’ needs. Provide quick access to analyses, metrics, dashboards. Michigan Used Models and Forecasting for Hep C Cases In response to Hepatitis C virus (HCV) in young adults from 2010-2018, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) simulated how HCV treatment could significantly reduce HCV prevalence among young people who inject drugs, especially for those both previously or currently injecting drugs. MDHHS used several novel predictors to paint a local picture of probable HCV diagnoses among residents up to age 40. These predictors included measures related to a variety of population characteristics (e.g., access to transportation, college education, presence of non-family households) and public health indicators (e.g., heroin treatment admissions, newborns with neonatal abstinence syndrome, and sexually-transmitted infections). MDHHS also leveraged county-level assessments of HCV vulnerability to identify locations for new syringe services programs in the state. MDHHS has recognized several modeling and analytics use cases that benefitted their work during responses to HCV and COVID-19: Short-term forecasts (i.e., weeks) helped predict likely transmission patterns and potential ranges of projections. Longer-term forecasts (i.e., months) explored scenarios based on new recommendations and policy changes. Retrospective counterfactuals evaluated the impact of policies or other changes by examining “what-if” situations. MDHHS is considering using forecasts and models for COVID-19, influenza epidemics, tuberculosis vulnerability, and C. auris spread. Resource constraints require decision-makers and public health practitioners to consider how they are using available resources for the highest return on investment. Models generated momentum to respond to threats and evaluate whether interventions were successful. CDC-RFA-OT18-1802 2018-2024 article yes

This brief dives into the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the ability of people with disabilities to access vital health care services during the public health emergency.

This brief from ASTHO discusses the results of standing up virtual and hybrid emergency operations centers during the covid-19 pandemic.

How Mississippi Prioritizes Environmental Justice During Disaster Response Association of state and territorial health officials, astho, environmental health, environmental justice, public health, cross sector partnerships, emergency preparedness, natural disaster response, emergency response, health equity, social determinants of health, missisippi state department of health, office of environmental health, office of health equity, covid 19 pandemic, emergency planning and response Ali Aslam, Yaryna Onufrey, Beth Giambrone This case study dives into the Mississippi State Department of Health’s environmental justice initiatives, conducted using cross-sector partnerships. Environmental justice is defined as all people enjoying the same degree of access and protection from environmental and health hazards. This happens by intentionally involving all people—regardless of race, color, national origin, or income—while developing, implementing, and enforcing environmental laws and policies. The Mississippi State Department of Health incorporates environmental justice principles into their disaster response and emergency preparedness efforts. Mississippi's environmental justice work has been community-based and equity-driven. This case study dives into Mississippi’s cross-sector partnerships, community health initiatives, and health equity work as the state has worked to address environmental health concerns. Get the Report (PDF) website yes

Medicaid analysis project assesses COVID-19's impact on adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

ASTHO convened focus groups of state environmental health directors and designated representatives from 11 states to talk about their agencies’ ventilation guidance for school districts. The discussions focused on recommendations for filtration and air cleaning technologies in schools, layered mitigation techniques, partner engagement, and challenges moving forward.