Latinx Immigrants' Legal Concerns About SARS-CoV-2 Testing and COVID-19 Diagnosis and Treatment

Mobile Distribution of COVID-19 Vaccines to Migrant Farmworkers in Minnesota

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted migrant farmworkers (MFWs). MFWs have experienced higher rates of infection and death than any other occupational group in the United States due to workplace exposure risks, overcrowded housing, and limited access to personal protective equipment. Barriers to accessing COVID-19 vaccines have also contributed to these disparities, especially in rural areas where the pandemic's impact has been devastating. Mobile health clinics, in partnership with community-based organizations, are an effective method for vaccine distribution to rural communities where many MFWs live and work. Between June 2021 and October 2022, the University of Minnesota's Mobile Health Initiative (MHI) organized health fairs in southern Minnesota to distribute vaccines to MFWs and their families. The success of these events can be attributed to partnering with trusted local organizations, bridging geographic barriers, ensuring language-concordant care, and offering multiple health services in one place. MHI's health fairs serve as a model for future mobile vaccination events. As the COVID-19 pandemic has ended as of this time, future pandemics may occur, and equitable vaccine access must be a priority for MFWs. Mobile health clinics are an essential tool to achieving this goal.

Spanish-Language Communication of COVID-19 Information Across US Local Health Department Websites

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought new urgency to a longstanding problem: the US health system is not well-equipped to accommodate the country's large limited English proficient (LEP) population in times of national emergency. We examined the landscape of Spanish-language COVID-19 website information compared to information in English provided by health departments of the top 10 cities by population in the USA. For each city, coders evaluated three score measures (amount of information, presentation quality, and ease of navigation) for six content types (general information, symptoms, testing, prevention, vaccines, and live statistics) across six delivery modes (print resources, website text, videos, external links, data visualization, and media toolkits). We then calculated a grand average, combining all cities' values per score measure for each content type-delivery mode combination, to understand the landscape of Spanish-language information across the country. Overall, we found that, for all cities combined, nearly all content types and delivery modes in Spanish were inferior or non-existent compared to English resources. Our findings also showed much variability and spread concerning content type and delivery mode of information. Finally, our findings uncovered three main clusters of content type and delivery mode combinations for Spanish-language information, ranging from similar to worse, compared to information in English. Our findings suggest that COVID-19 information was not equivalently provided in Spanish, despite federal guidance regarding language access during times of national emergency. These results can inform ongoing and future emergency communication plans for Spanish-preferring LEP and other LEP populations in the USA.

Access to COVID-19 testing by individuals with housing insecurity during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States: a scoping review

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic focused attention on healthcare disparities and inequities faced by individuals within marginalized and structurally disadvantaged groups in the United States. These individuals bore the heaviest burden across this pandemic as they faced increased risk of infection and difficulty in accessing testing and medical care. Individuals experiencing housing insecurity are a particularly vulnerable population given the additional barriers they face. In this scoping review, we identify some of the barriers this high-risk group experienced during the early days of the pandemic and assess novel solutions to overcome these barriers.

Methods

A scoping review was performed following PRISMA-Sc guidelines looking for studies focusing on COVID-19 testing among individuals experiencing housing insecurity. Barriers as well as solutions to barriers were identified as applicable and summarized using qualitative methods, highlighting particular ways that proved effective in facilitating access to testing access and delivery.

Results

Ultimately, 42 studies were included in the scoping review, with 143 barriers grouped into four categories: lack of cultural understanding, systemic racism, and stigma; medical care cost, insurance, and logistics; immigration policies, language, and fear of deportation; and other. Out of these 42 studies, 30 of these studies also suggested solutions to address them.

Conclusion

A paucity of studies have analyzed COVID-19 testing barriers among those experiencing housing insecurity, and this is even more pronounced in terms of solutions to address those barriers. Expanding resources and supporting investigators within this space is necessary to ensure equitable healthcare delivery.

"I Use Sunglasses . . . the Sun Can Ruin the Eyes": Latino Day Laborers' Lay Strategies to Reduce Dangers at Work

Latino day laborers (LDLs) are at a high risk for injury and accidents at work and have limited socioeconomic resources to deal with their consequences. While little is known about LDLs' perceptions of their own vulnerability at the workplace, less is known about the strategies they adopt to confront these risks. The purpose of this qualitative study was to assess LDLs' perceptions of their workplace dangers and to document the strategies they adopt and endorse to confront them. Guided by a participatory research approach, four focus groups stratified by age were conducted with 34 LDLs in Houston, Texas. Main focus group themes were identified using a combination of qualitative analysis methods involving a thematic analysis conducted by the interview team, LDL advisors, and bilingual Latino researchers. All participants were Latino males (mean age = 40), the majority reported having completed sixth grade or less (64.2%) and having lived in the United States for an average of 12.7 years. We described three categories of strategies to reduce risk for workplace injury generated by local LDLs (practical knowledge and job experience, interpersonal, and personal). These strategies should be explored and encouraged to assist in planning risk-reduction programs, presented in the voice and language of Latino "inside experts" with firsthand experience. The findings of the focus group suggest that LDLs already possess a broad repertoire of strategies to cope with risks at work that can be incorporated in safety programs for LDLs and other immigrant Latino workers.

US public charge policy and Latinx immigrants' thoughts about health and healthcare utilization

OBJECTIVES

We examined Latinx immigrants' perceptions of US policy related to restrictions on immigrants' use of public resources and their thoughts about the influence of these on immigrants' healthcare utilization.

DESIGN

A series of 16 focus group discussions with Latinx immigrant men and women (documented and undocumented) (N = 130) were conducted between May and July 2017 across four US cities.

RESULTS

Four central themes emerged: participants attributed the limited resources available for affordable healthcare for many uninsured US immigrants (both documented and undocumented) to the US government's view of immigrants as burdens on public resources and its subsequent unwillingness to dedicate funds for their care; participants expressed concerns, some unfounded, about negative immigration ramifications arising from diagnosis with health conditions perceived to be serious and/or expensive to treat; participants noted that some immigrants avoided using health programs and services to which they were entitled because of immigration concerns; finally, participants described how access to information on immigration laws and healthcare resources, and conversely, misinformation about these, influenced healthcare utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants were acutely aware of the image of immigrants as public charges or potential burdens on government resources that underlies US immigration policy. In some cases, participants came to inaccurate and potentially harmful conclusions about the substance of laws and regulations based on their beliefs about the government's rejection of immigrants who may burden public resources. This underscores the importance of ensuring that immigrants have access to information on immigration-related laws and regulations and on healthcare resources available to them. Participants noted that access to information also fostered resilience to widespread misinformation. Importantly, however, participants' beliefs had some basis in US immigration policy discourse. Law and policy makers should reconsider legislation and political commentary that frame self-reliance, the guiding principle of US immigration policy, in terms of immigrants' use of publicly funded healthcare resources.

Community voices on factors influencing COVID-19 concerns and health decisions among racial and ethnic minorities in the school setting

Racial and ethnic minority communities have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19, but the uptake of COVID-19 mitigation strategies like vaccination and testing have been slower in these populations. With the continued spread of COVID-19 while in-person learning is a priority, school-aged youth and their caregivers must make health-related decisions daily to ensure health at school. It is critical to understand factors associated with COVID-related health decisions such as vaccination, testing, and other health behaviors (e.g., wearing masks, hand washing). Community-engaged campaigns are necessary to overcome barriers to these health behaviors and promote health equity. The aim of this study was to examine COVID-19-related concerns and influences on health decisions in middle and high schools serving primarily racial and ethnic minority, low-income families. Seven focus groups were conducted with school staff, parents, and students (aged 16 years and older). Qualitative data were analyzed using a general inductive approach. Factors related to COVID-19 concerns and health decisions centered on (1) vaccine hesitancy, (2) testing hesitancy, (3) developmental stage (i.e., ability to engage in health behaviors based on developmental factors like age), (4) cultural and family traditions and beliefs, (5) compatibility of policies and places with recommended health behaviors, (6) reliability of information, and (7) perceived risk. We explore sub-themes in further detail. It is important to understand the community's level of concern and identify factors that influence COVID-19 medical decision making to better address disparities in COVID-19 testing and vaccination uptake.

The effects of the global health crisis on U. S. immigration policies: shifting political agenda-setting and the mobility crisis of immigrants

The continuing health crisis (COVID-19) reinforces a historical pattern in which partisan-elected officials engage as legislative policy entrepreneurs (LPE) and use the health crisis time as a policy window to advance specifically restricted agendas by (re)introducing immigration bills on the House and Senate. The current exploratory qualitative study utilizes the theoretical underpinning of Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) to analyze the US House immigration bills from 2013 to 2021. The qualitative method of content relational analysis was applied in this research to capture the shifts and changes in (re)introduced immigration bills (n = 904) in the US House of Representatives for the 113th, 114th, 115th, and 116th sessions. Capturing and examining the underlying tone, word choices, and proposed measures in these immigration bills during health and non-health crisis periods received special attention. The qualitative relational content analysis revealed three major themes: (1) During public health crises (Ebola, Zika, and the first two years of COVID-19), restrictive House immigration bills tend to rise sharply; (2) Elected representatives from the Southern States are more likely to introduce restrictive immigration bills during health crises; and (3) Restrictive immigration bills are more likely to receive partisan support (bill co-sponsors) during health crises. The findings emphasize the need for inclusive agenda-setting during health crises and provide light on adaptive measures for supporting underprivileged immigrant communities with increased access to healthcare and public support.