Disaster medicine and public health preparedness · 2024
COVID-19 Prevention Practices and Vaccine Acceptability Among Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Households in an Agricultural Community-Washington, 2020.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ortiz Nancy, Hoffman Adela, Schnall Amy Helene, Clara Alexey, Lilo Emily A, Lofgren Hannah, Guerrero Lisa, Miller James S, Houck Peter, Weed Nathan, Monterroso Edgar
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate COVID-19 disparities between Hispanic/Latino persons (H/L) and non-H/L persons in an agricultural community by examining behavioral and demographic differences.
METHODS: In September 2020, we conducted Community Assessments for Public Health Emergency Response in Wenatchee and East Wenatchee, Washington, to evaluate differences between H/L and non-H/L populations in COVID-19 risk beliefs, prevention practices, household needs, and vaccine acceptability. We produced weighted sample frequencies.
RESULTS: More households from predominately H/L census blocks (H/L-CBHs) versus households from predominately non-H/L census blocks (non-H/L-CBHs) worked in essential services (79% versus 57%), could not telework (70% versus 46%), and reported more COVID-19 cases (19% versus 4%). More H/L-CBHs versus non-H/L-CBHs practiced prevention strategies: avoiding gatherings (81% versus 61%), avoiding visiting friends/family (73% versus 36%), and less restaurant dining (indoor 24% versus 39%). More H/L-CBHs versus non-H/L-CBHs needed housing (16% versus 4%) and food assistance (19% versus 6%). COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in H/L-CBHs and non-H/L-CBHs was 42% versus 46%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite practicing prevention measures with greater frequency, H/L-CBHs had more COVID-19 cases. H/L-CBHs worked in conditions with a higher likelihood of exposure. H/L-CBHs had increased housing and food assistance needs due to the pandemic. COVID-19 vaccine acceptability was similarly low (<50%) between groups.
METHODS: In September 2020, we conducted Community Assessments for Public Health Emergency Response in Wenatchee and East Wenatchee, Washington, to evaluate differences between H/L and non-H/L populations in COVID-19 risk beliefs, prevention practices, household needs, and vaccine acceptability. We produced weighted sample frequencies.
RESULTS: More households from predominately H/L census blocks (H/L-CBHs) versus households from predominately non-H/L census blocks (non-H/L-CBHs) worked in essential services (79% versus 57%), could not telework (70% versus 46%), and reported more COVID-19 cases (19% versus 4%). More H/L-CBHs versus non-H/L-CBHs practiced prevention strategies: avoiding gatherings (81% versus 61%), avoiding visiting friends/family (73% versus 36%), and less restaurant dining (indoor 24% versus 39%). More H/L-CBHs versus non-H/L-CBHs needed housing (16% versus 4%) and food assistance (19% versus 6%). COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in H/L-CBHs and non-H/L-CBHs was 42% versus 46%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite practicing prevention measures with greater frequency, H/L-CBHs had more COVID-19 cases. H/L-CBHs worked in conditions with a higher likelihood of exposure. H/L-CBHs had increased housing and food assistance needs due to the pandemic. COVID-19 vaccine acceptability was similarly low (<50%) between groups.