Abstract

Social Capital, Vulnerability, and the Status of Women: Striking Connections with COVID-19, Obesity, and Diabetes

John C. Pollock, PhD, MPA¹, Carolina Borges, PhD, DDS², Miranda Crowley, BA³, Radhika Purandare, BA⁴, James N. Sparano, BA⁵, Breeda Bennett-Jones, BA⁵, Alexis Marta, BA⁶, Allison Uhl, BA⁵, Courtney Sacco, MPH⁷ (1)Departments of Public Health and Communication Studies, The College of New Jersey, Ewing, NJ USA, (2)Department of Public Health, School of Nursing, Health, and Exercise Science, The College of New Jersey, Ewing NJ USA; Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston MA USA, (3)Department of Public Administration and International Affairs, The Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, Syracuse NY USA , (4)Department of Public Health, School of Nursing, Health, and Exercise Science, The College of New Jersey, Ewing NJ USA; Department of Communication Studies, School of the Arts and Communication, The College of New Jersey, Ewing NJ USA, (5)Department of Communication Studies, School of the Arts and Communication, The College of New Jersey, Ewing NJ USA, (6)Department of International Health, The Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore MD USA, (7)Department of Public Health, School of Nursing, Health, and Exercise Science, The College of New Jersey, Ewing NJ USA

APHA 2022 Annual Meeting and Expo

Objective: To test associations among measures of social capital, vulnerability, political partisanship, and income and three health outcomes in 64 counties selected from the highest and lowest obesity, adult diabetes, and COVID-19 prevalence counties in each of four major regions in the United States. Methods: This ecological, cross-sectional study utilized secondary data from sevensix open access databases. The dependent variables were adult obesity, adult diabetes, and COVID-19. Results: Regression analysis revealed economic privilege (per capita income) strongly associated with lower obesity and diabetes prevalence, along with household income and social capital indicators percent women currently married (obesity and COVID-19 prevalence) and non-religious, nonprofit organizations/1,000 (diabetes). Economic vulnerability measures connected to higher prevalence levels included unemployment rate (obesity, diabetes) and poverty level (COVID-19), along with more births to unmarried women (obesity and COVID-19).
Number of memberships in non-religious, nonprofit organizations in a county were inversely associated with obesity and diabetes, and married women were linked with lower COVID-19 levels. The higher the poverty rate, the higher the prevalence of obesity (p = <0.001), diabetes ( p = 0.016), and COVID-19 ( p = 0.025). The higher the percentage of births to unmarried women, the higher the prevalence of obesity ( p = 0.003), diabetes ( p = 0.028), and COVID-19 ( p = 0.024). The greater the emotional isolation, the higher the levels of obesity (r = 0.390, p = 0.001), diabetes ( p = 0.001), and COVID-19 ( p = 0.039). Conclusion: Measures of vulnerability were associated with health outcomes more than measures of social capital, but the status of women played a significant role: The higher the percent of married women in a county, the lower the COVID-19 prevalence, while the higher the percentage of births to unmarried women, the higher the COVID-19 prevalence. It was unsurprising that measures of income privilege or vulnerability were linked to prevalence variations in obesity, diabetes, and COVID-19, but the status of women played a striking role, meriting attention. Political partisanship (voting Republican in the last two presidential elections of 2016 and 2020) was linked significantly to obesity and diabetes, but voting Republican or Democratic was not associated significantly with COVID-19 health outcomes.
Keywords: Social Capital; Vulnerability; Political Partisanship; Income; COVID-19; Obesity; Diabetes; Status of Women

Abstract

Residential social vulnerability among U.S. healthcare personnel with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2020

Maria Zlotorzynska, PhD, MPH¹, Nora Chea, MD¹, Taniece Eure, MPH¹, Rebecca Alkis Ramirez, MPH¹, Gregory T. Blazek, MPH^1,2, Joelle Nadle, MPH³, Jane Lee, MPH³, Christopher A Czaja, MD, DrPH⁴, Helen Johnston, MPH⁴, Devra Barter, MSc⁴, Betsy Feighner Miller, DVM⁴, Kathleen Angell, MPH⁴, James Meek, MPH⁵, Monica Brackney, MPH⁵, Stacy Carswell, MPH⁶, Scott K. Fridkin, MD⁷, Lucy E. Wilson, MD⁸, Rebecca Perlmutter, MPH⁸, Kaytlynn Marceaux-Galli, MPH⁸, Sara Lovett, MPH⁹, Ruth Lynfield, MD⁹, Melissa Christian, MPH¹⁰, Erin C. Phipps, DVM, MPH¹⁰, Marla Sievers, MPH¹¹, Ghinwa Dumyati, MD¹², Cathleen Concannon, MPH¹², Christopher Myers, MS¹², Rebecca Pierce, PhD¹³, Valerie L. S. Ocampo, MIPH¹³, Judith A. Guzman-Cottrill, DO¹³, Monika Samper, RN¹³, Christopher Wilson, MD, MPH¹⁴, Cullen Adre, PharmD¹⁴, Tiffanie M. Markus, PhD¹⁵, Kathryn Billings, MPH¹⁵, Shelley S. Magill, MD, PhD¹, Cheri T. Grigg, DVM, MPH^{1 1}Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA; ²Chenega Enterprise Systems & Solutions, LLC, Chesapeake, VA, USA; ³California Emerging Infections Program, Oakland, CA, USA; ⁴Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Denver, CO, USA; ⁵Connecticut Emerging Infections Program, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA; ⁶Georgia Emerging Infections Program, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Foundation for Atlanta Veterans Education and Research, Atlanta, GA, USA; ⁷Georgia Emerging Infections Program, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA; ⁸Maryland Department of Health, Baltimore, MD, USA; ⁹Minnesota Department of Health, St. Paul, MN, USA; ¹⁰New Mexico Emerging Infections Program, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA; ¹¹New Mexico Department of Health, Santa Fe, NM, USA; ¹²New York Emerging Infections Program, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA; ¹³Public Health Division, Oregon Health Authority, Portland, OR, USA; ¹⁴Tennessee Department of Health, Nashville, TN, USA; ¹⁵Vanderbilt University Medical Center

APHA 2022 Annual Meeting and Expo

Background:
Recent research has shown that exposures outside the workplace contribute significantly to healthcare personnel's (HCP) risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. To reduce risk among US HCP and further health equity goals, a better understanding of social determinants of community SARS-CoV-2 infection risk among HCP is needed.
Objectives:
To characterize social vulnerability among HCP in their residential census tract using the CDC/ATSDR social vulnerability index (SVI).
Methods:
In 2020, CDC collaborated with Emerging Infections Program sites to survey HCP with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (cases) and with negative test results (non-cases) from within the same facilities. Residential addresses of HCP were geocoded and merged with census tract SVI, which represents a ranking of community vulnerability to emergencies based on 15 Census variables. Significant differences in the proportions of HCP residing in highest SVI quartile census tracts were assessed by case status and HCP role using Fisher’s exact test (α=0.05).
Results:
Among 2,023 HCP (1,417 cases and 606 non-cases), a higher proportion of cases than non-cases resided in highest SVI quartile tracts (28.6% versus 16.5%, p<0.05). Overall, a higher proportion of certified nursing assistants (59/130; 45.4%) resided in the highest SVI quartile compared to registered nurses (100/675; 14.8%, p<0.05) and physicians (11/128; 8.6%, p<0.05).
Conclusions:
Our results suggest that residing in more socially vulnerable census tracts may contribute to risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCP, and this vulnerability appears to differ by HCP role. Targeting HCP role- and community-based interventions to the most vulnerable neighborhoods may help prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections among HCP.

Abstract

Can social capital protect your mental health against the COVID-19 pandemic? Findings from a household survey in Wisconsin

Eunice Park, MS, MIS University of Wisconsin-Madison

APHA 2022 Annual Meeting and Expo

Background: In the U.S., 51.5 million (one in five) adults live with a mental illness. Research has shown significant associations between social capital and health. One pathway applicable to this study is buffering factors for distress. The COVID-19 pandemic is a unique opportunity to explore whether social capital protects one’s health against pandemic distress.

Objective: This study aims to examine whether two types of social capital (sense of community and social support) are a protective factor for mental health (anxiety and depression) at three different time points during the pandemic.

Methods: This study uses the COVID-19 Community Impact Survey data collected by the Survey of the Health of Wisconsin. Wave 1 had 1,403 participants in the summer of 2020, Wave 2 had 1,889 participants in the winter of 2021, and Wave 3 had 1,615 participants in the summer of 2021. A total of 986 participants were in all three waves. Multivariate logistic regression models are used to examine the associations. Covariates include age, gender, race/ethnicity, income, and education.

Results: Compared to those with a positive sense of community, those with a neutral or negative sense of community have higher odds of reporting anxiety and depression. Compared to those who report adequate social support, those with inadequate social support have higher odds of reporting anxiety and depression.

Conclusion: This study extends the current understanding of social capital and mental health, especially applied during a pandemic. Findings indicate that better and more social capital protects one’s mental health from distress.