The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed, and intensified, health inequities faced by Latinx in the United States. Washington was one of the first U.S. states to report cases of COVID-19. Public health surveillance shows that 31% of Washington cases are Latinx, despite being only 13% of the state population. Unjust policies related to immigration, labor, housing, transportation, and education have contributed to both past and existing inequities. Approximately 20% of Latinx are uninsured, leading to delays in testing and medical care for COVID-19, and early reports indicated critical shortages in professional interpreters and multilingual telehealth options. Washington State is taking action to address some of these inequities. Applying a health equity framework, we describe key factors contributing to COVID-19–related health inequities among Latinx populations, and how Washington State has aimed to address these inequities. We draw on these experiences to make recommendations for other Latinx communities experiencing COVID-19 disparities.

Background The burden of adverse health effects from heat exposure is substantial, and outdoor workers who perform heavy physical work are at high risk. Though heat prevention interventions have been developed, studies have not yet systematically evaluated the effectiveness of approaches that address risk factors at multiple levels. Objective We sought to test the effectiveness of a multi-level heat prevention approach (heat education and awareness tools [HEAT]), which includes participatory training for outdoor agricultural workers that addresses individual and community factors and a heat awareness mobile application for agricultural supervisors that supports decisions about workplace heat prevention, in the Northwest United States. Design We designed the HEAT study as a parallel, comparison, randomized group intervention study that recruited workers and supervisors from agricultural workplaces. In intervention arm crews, workers received HEAT training, and supervisors received the HEAT awareness application. In comparison arm crews, workers were offered non-HEAT training. Primary outcomes were worker physiological heat strain and heat-related illness (HRI) symptoms. In both worker groups, we assessed HRI symptoms approximately weekly, and heat strain physiological monitoring was conducted at worksites approximately monthly, from June through August. Discussion To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-level heat prevention intervention on physiological heat strain and HRI symptoms for outdoor agricultural workers. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Registration Number: NCT04234802;

Introduction. Evidence-based health promotion programs (EBPs) support older adults where they live, work, pray, play, and age. COVID-19 placed a disproportionate burden on this population, especially those with chronic conditions. In-person EBPs shifted to remote delivery via video-conferencing, phone, and mail during the pandemic, creating opportunities and challenges for older adult health equity. Method. In 2021–2022, we conducted a process evaluation of remote EBPs by purposively sampling diverse U.S. organizations and older adults (people of color, rural, and/or with disabilities). The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) + Equity framework was used to understand program reach and implementation, including FRAME to describe adaptations for remote delivery. Analyses include descriptive statistics and thematic analysis of participant and provider surveys and interviews, and joint display tables to compare learnings. Results. Findings from 31 EBPs through 198 managers/leaders and 107 organizations suggest remote delivery increases EBP reach by improving access for older adults who are underserved. For programs requiring new software or hardware, challenges remain reaching those with limited access to—or comfort using—technology. Adaptations were to context (e.g., shorter, smaller classes with longer duration) and for equity (e.g., phone formats, autogenerated captioning); content was unchanged except where safety was concerned. Implementation is facilitated by remote delivery guidelines, distance training, and technology support; and hindered by additional time, staffing, and resources for engagement and delivery. Conclusions. Remote EBP delivery is promising for improving equitable access to quality health promotion. Future policies and practices must support technology access and usability for all older adults.

No abstract

Background Farmworkers are at risk of heat-related illness (HRI). We sought to: 1) evaluate the effectiveness of farmworker Spanish/English participatory heat education and a supervisor decision-support mobile application (HEAT intervention) on physiological heat strain; and 2) describe factors associated with HRI symptoms reporting. Methods We conducted a parallel, comparison group intervention study from May–September of 2019 in Central/Eastern Washington State, USA. We used convenience sampling to recruit adult outdoor farmworkers and allocated participating crews to intervention (n = 37 participants) and alternative-training comparison (n = 38 participants) groups. We measured heat strain monthly using heart rate and estimated core body temperature to compute the maximum work-shift physiological strain index (PSImax) and assessed self-reported HRI symptoms using a weekly survey. Multivariable linear mixed effects models were used to assess associations of the HEAT intervention with PSImax, and bivariate mixed models were used to describe factors associated with HRI symptoms reported (0, 1, 2+ symptoms), with random effects for workers. Results We observed larger decreases in PSImax in the intervention versus comparison group for higher work exertion levels (categorized as low, low/medium-low, and high effort), after adjustment for maximum work-shift ambient Heat Index (HImax), but this was not statistically significant (interaction − 0.91 for high versus low/medium-low effort, t = − 1.60, p = 0.11). We observed a higher PSImax with high versus low/medium-low effort (main effect 1.96, t = 3.81, p < 0.001) and a lower PSImax with older age (− 0.03, t = − 2.95, p = 0.004), after covariate adjustment. There was no clear relationship between PSImax and the number of HRI symptoms reported. Reporting more symptoms was associated with older age, higher HImax, 10+ years agricultural work, not being an H-2A guest worker, and walking > 3 min to get to the toilet at work. Conclusions Effort level should be addressed in heat management plans, for example through work/rest cycles, rotation, and pacing, in addition to education and other factors that influence heat stress. Both symptoms and indicators of physiological heat strain should be monitored, if possible, during periods of high heat stress to increase the sensitivity of early HRI detection and prevention. Structural barriers to HRI prevention must also be addressed. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Registration Number: NCT04234802, date first posted 21/01/2020.