Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Formative Research
Date Submitted: Aug 3, 2021
Date Accepted: Oct 4, 2021
Date Submitted to PubMed: Oct 5, 2021
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Exploring Online Health Reviews to Monitor COVID-19 Public Health Responses in Alabama State Department of Corrections: A Case Example
ABSTRACT
Background:
SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has devastated incarcerated people nationwide. There are 2.3 million incarcerated people in the US that are imprisoned in various correctional institutions across the criminal justice system.
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 PPE; (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 ranged from 45 minutes to one hour.
Results:
Of the twenty-one participants who completed the COVID-19 Health Review for Correctional Facilities survey, 48% identified as male, 43% identified as female, and 10% percent identified as transgender. For race, 30% self-identified as Black or African American, 24% as Asian, 24% as White, 5% as Pacific Islander or Native Hawaiian, and 19% as Other. In addition, five 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 rates/infection rates between inmates and staff was ‘good’ and ‘very good,’ information on vaccinations was ‘good’ and ‘very good.’ There was a significant difference observed (p=0.0256) between non-returning citizens and returning citizens regarding COVID-19 infection rates.
Conclusions:
COVID-19 Health reviews provide an opportunity for the public to review the COVID-19 responses in prison settings.
Citation
