z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Exploring Online Health Reviews to Monitor COVID-19 Public Health Responses in Alabama State Department of Corrections: Case Example
Author(s) -
Pamela Valera,
David Carmona,
Sarah Malarkey,
Noah Sinangil,
Madelyn Owens,
Asia Lefebre
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
jmir formative research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2561-326X
DOI - 10.2196/32591
Subject(s) - covid-19 , prison , personal protective equipment , medicine , public health , health department , pacific islanders , family medicine , gerontology , environmental health , psychology , nursing , criminology , population , pathology , disease , infectious disease (medical specialty)
Background COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has devastated incarcerated people throughout the United States. Objective The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of a COVID-19 Health Review for Correctional Facilities. Methods The COVID-19 Health Review survey for the Department of Corrections was developed in Qualtrics to assess the following: (1) COVID-19 testing, (2) providing personal protective equipment, (3) vaccination procedures, (4) quarantine procedures, (5) COVID-19 mortality rates for inmates, (6) COVID-19 mortality rates for correctional officers and prison staff, (7) COVID-19 infection rates for inmates, (8) COVID-19 infection rates for correctional officers and prison staff, and (9) uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. The estimated time to review the Alabama State Department of Corrections COVID-19 responses on their website and complete the survey items was 45 minutes to 1 hour. Results Of the 21 participants who completed the COVID-19 Health Review for Correctional Facilities survey, 48% (n=10) identified as female, 43% (n=9) identified as male, and 10% (n=2) identified as transgender. For race, 29% (n=6) self-identified as Black or African American, 24% (n=5) Asian, 24% (n=5) White, 5% (n=1) Pacific Islander or Native Hawaiian, and 19% (n=4) Other. In addition, 5 respondents self-identified as returning citizens. For COVID-19 review questions, the majority concluded that information on personal protective equipment was “poor” and “very poor,” information on COVID-19 testing was “fair” and above, information on COVID-19 death/infection rates between inmates and staff was “good” and “very good,” and information on vaccinations was “good” and “very good.” There was a significant difference observed ( P =.03) between nonreturning citizens and returning citizens regarding the health grade review with respect to available information on COVID-19 infection rates. Conclusions COVID-19 health reviews may provide an opportunity for the public to review the COVID-19 responses in correctional settings.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom