Olivia Veira’s research while affiliated with Brown University and other places

Few studies have examined the pandemic’s impact on both parents-to-be. Our study examined parents’-to-be pandemic-related stress, correlates of pandemic-related stress, and dyadic agreement on pandemic-related stress and its impact. Participants consisted of 74 parent-to-be dyads recruited from a larger text-messaging intervention of fathers-to-be with lower education from February 2020 to February 2022 before their partner was 25 weeks gestation from one mid-Atlantic U.S. city. Our baseline cross-sectional data assessed parents’ pandemic-related stress, perceived pandemic-related impact on infant interactions, help with infant care by caregivers, access to health care, concerns about finances, and participants’ background characteristics. We compared perceived pandemic-related stress and impact within dyads. Separate multivariate linear regressions explored factors associated with pandemic-related stress without and with adjustment for participants’ characteristics stratified by fathers- and mothers-to be. Our findings showed overall low levels of pandemic-related stress, with fathers-to-be within dyads reporting lower levels of pandemic-related stress than reported by mothers-to-be. We found differential factors were associated with greater pandemic-related stress for fathers- than mothers-to-be, except that for both parents greater pandemic-related stress was associated with greater concerns about being able to interact with their own infant and getting infant care help from the mothers’ parents. Whereas greater pandemic-related stress for mothers-to-be was associated with only concerns about getting infant care help, greater stress for fathers-to-be was associated with concerns about getting infant care help and accessing health care. Findings have implications for better understanding expectant parents’ differential response to stressful events that may be informed by gender role expectations during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Clinical Trial Registry and Registration number. Not applicable for the current data presented.

The aim of this study is to describe the collaborative development and pilot implementation of a peer-support program for survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV). The program paired six IPV survivors who were actively in crisis with four survivors who identified as equipped to support other survivors. The program was piloted for 6 months and pre- and post-intervention in-depth interviews were conducted with mentors and mentees. In in-depth interviews, survivors and mentors discussed the value they saw in the peer-support model and described strong motivations for participation. However, program engagement was limited and drop-out was high among mentors ( n = 3; 75%). Mentors cited difficulty establishing boundaries with mentees and engaging with mentees’ experiences of IPV given their own histories. This study highlights the value of the peer-support mentorship model while also revealing significant challenges associated with the implementation of such a model in a community-based IPV crisis organization. Adaptations in structure, recruitment, training, and monitoring are necessary for future peer-support programs to effectively meet the needs of survivors.

This quality improvement initiative aimed to increase first dose of COVID-19 vaccinations during pediatric/adolescent clinic visits. Four plan-do-study-act cycles were performed with creation of eligibility lists and increasing health educator (HE) engagement. Statistical process control analysis assessed vaccine receipt over time. Logistic regression modeling evaluated odds of receipt. Among 6,740 visits, 52.2% of patients were eligible for first COVID-19 vaccine; 17.9% of eligible patients accepted it. First-vaccine improvements from 13.1% to 21.7% were not sustained. Odds of receipt increased in each cycle compared with baseline (1: Odds Ratio=1.99 [95% Confidence Interval 1.49–2.67], 2: OR=2.22 [1.58–3.14]), 3: OR=2.15 [1.51–3.05]), 4: OR=1.48 [1.11–1.96]), and with HE discussion versus no HE discussion (OR=1.64 [1.16–1.90]). First COVID-19 vaccine receipt increased with vaccine-eligible patient lists and HE-initiated discussions, although improvements diminished over time. Health educator versus no HE discussion led to improved vaccinations, supporting further quality improvement research on HE role to improve vaccine uptake.

Introduction: Educational campaigns have the potential to inform at risk populations about key issues relevant to lung health and to facilitate active engagement promoting healthy behaviors and risk prevention. We developed a community-based educational campaign called the Lung Health Ambassador Program (LHAP) with a goal of engaging youth and empowering them to be advocates for pulmonary health in their community. Objective: To evaluate the process outcomes and feasibility of the inaugural LHAP (2018–2019 academic year), with a specific aim to impact tobacco policy in the state of Maryland. Methods: Outcomes regarding feasibility included assessment of number of schools reached, number of students and healthcare professionals participating, and types of projects developed by participating students to impact modifiable risk factors for lung health. The courses for the LHAP were five 1 h sessions implemented at days and times identified by the community. The topics of the LHAP focused on lung anatomy, pulmonary diseases affecting school aged youth, tobacco use and prevalence, and air pollution (both indoor and outdoor). The fifth class discussed ways in which the students could impact lung health (e.g., policy and advocacy) and mitigate pulmonary disparities. Main Results: The LHAP was implemented at two elementary/middle schools, one high school, and two recreation centers within an urban metropolitan region. A total of 268 youths participated in the LHAP (age ranging from 11 to 18), whereby 72 (26.9%) were Hispanic/Latino and 110 (41.0%) were African American. Of the participating students, 240 wrote letters to local politicians to advocate for policies that would raise the legal age of acquiring tobacco products to 21. As for healthcare professionals, 18 academic faculty members participated in implementing the LHAP: 8 physicians and faculty staff and 10 nurses. Conclusions: The LHAP is a community-based program that provides education and training in advocacy with a goal of teaching about and, ultimately, reducing respiratory health disparities. The results from the first year demonstrate that the program is feasible, with success demonstrated in completing educational modules and engaging students. Next steps will include strategies to ensure sustainability and scalability to increase the reach of this program.