Surveillance Methods Used to Detect, Characterize, and Monitor the COVID-19 Pandemic in Rocky Mountain Tribal Communities

OBJECTIVE

Data were essential to public health decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet no single data source was adequate for Tribes in Montana and Wyoming. We outlined data access, availability, and limitations for COVID-19 pandemic surveillance response to improve future data exchange.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Rocky Mountain Tribal Epidemiology Center (RMTEC) used various data sources to deliver data on the number of COVID-19 cases, deaths, and vaccinations at local, state, and regional levels to inform Tribes in Montana and Wyoming. RMTEC reviewed state, federal, and public datasets and then attached a score to each dataset for completeness of demographic information, including race, geographic level, and refresh rate.

RESULTS

The RMTEC COVID-19 response team shared data weekly on the number of COVID-19 cases, deaths, and vaccinations distributed and the percentage of the population vaccinated with Tribal health departments in Montana and Wyoming. The Indian Health Service Epidemiology Data Mart dataset scored the highest (24 of 30), followed by datasets from Montana (18 of 30) and Wyoming (22 of 30). Publicly available datasets scored low largely due to data aggregation across larger geographic areas and lack of demographic variables.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The absence of data on race and ethnicity from publicly available data and lack of access to real-time data limited RMTEC's ability to provide Tribal-specific updates on COVID-19 cases, deaths, and vaccinations to Tribal health departments. RMTEC should be fully funded to provide the necessary resources for data management and the capacity to respond to data requests from Tribal health departments and their programs to address current and future pandemics. Federal and state agencies should also be educated on Tribal Epidemiology Centers' public health authority status to improve access to infectious disease data among those agencies.

Experience of Hurricane Katrina and reported intimate partner violence

Intimate partner violence (IPV) has been associated with stress, but few studies have examined the effect of natural disaster on IPV. In this study, the authors examine the relationship between experience of Hurricane Katrina and reported relationship aggression and violence in a cohort of 123 postpartum women. Hurricane experience is measured using a series of questions about damage, injury, and danger during the storm; IPV was measured using the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS-2). Multiple log-poisson regression was used to calculate relative risks (RRs), adjusted for potential confounders. Most participants report that they and their partners had explained themselves to each other, showed each other respect, and also insulted, swore, or shouted during conflicts with each other. A few participants report physical violence, sexual force, or destroying property, though in each case at least 5% endorse that it had happened at least once in the last 6 months. Another few report that they and their partners had carried out these actions. Experiencing damage due to the storm is associated with increased likelihood of most conflict tactics. Strong RRs are seen for the relationship between damage due to the storm and aggression or violence, especially being insulted, sworn, shouted, or yelled at (adjusted relative risk [aRR] = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.02-1.48); pushed, shoved, or slapped (aRR = 5.28, 95% CI = 1.93-14.45); or being punched, kicked, or beat up (aRR = 8.25, 95% CI = 1.68-40.47). Results suggest that certain experiences of the hurricane are associated with an increased likelihood of violent methods of conflict resolution. Relief and medical workers may need to be aware of the possibility of increased IPV after disaster.