More than a third of American adults worry that they or someone in their family will get the seasonal flu, COVID-19, or RSV (respiratory syncytial virus) in the next three months, according to a new health survey from the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC).
Those three viral illnesses made up the tripledemic of respiratory illnesses that overwhelmed some health care facilities last winter. Although RSV typically peaks later in the year, this month hospitals in parts of Texas are already seeing emergency roomsfilled with children with RSV.
RSV is a common respiratory virus that often causes mild, cold-like symptoms but can be serious and require hospitalization among infants and older adults, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Theres no consensus among U.S. adults on which virus is more likely to cause severe illness: 22% say COVID-19, 13% say RSV, 7% say seasonal flu, and 41% say they are equally likely to cause severe illness. Sixteen percent are not sure.
The Annenberg Science and Public Health Knowledge (ASAPH) survey, which was conducted Oct. 5-12, 2023, with a panel of more than 1,500 U.S. adults, finds that Americans generally are more knowledgeable about RSV today than earlier this year. Over the spring and summer, health authorities approved new vaccines against RSV specifically for adults age 60 and older and for pregnant people as a way to protect their newborns.
The highlights of the survey show that 35% of people surveyed worry that they or someone in their family will get RSV in the next three months, up from 32% in January 2023. About two-thirds are not worried. Additionally, 35% are worried that they or someone in their family will get COVID-19 in the next three months, up from 21% in August 2023 but similar to last winter. Regarding influenza, 39% are worried that they or someone in their family will contract the seasonal flu in the next three months, statistically unchanged from January 2023.
Nearly one in three people say they personally know someone who believes they are suffering long-term health complications as a result of getting infected with COVID-19.
At the time the survey was fielded (Oct. 5-12, 2023), 21% said they had received the flu shot this season, compared with 26% in mid-October 2022 and 38% in the second week of November 2021.
Because getting a flu shot yearly not only helps to protect us from serious infection but also predicts our acceptance of other CDC-recommended vaccines, the drop in reported flu vaccination we see reflected in our panel is worrisome, says Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and director of the survey.
Read more at Annenberg Public Policy Center.
Legal Challenges Threaten Programs Addressing Racial Disparities in Health Care
Legal actions challenging programs designed to address racial disparities in health care, such as the Abundant Birth Project in San Francisco, raise concerns about the potential impact on efforts to reduce racial inequities, according to Kaiser Health News. The project, which provides a $1000 monthly stipend to pregnant Black and Pacific Islander women, is facing a lawsuit alleging discrimination. Similar legal challenges targeting racial preferences in various institutions reflect a broader effort to eliminate affirmative action. Advocates argue that the initiatives are essential to address health disparities, particularly in maternal and infant health, where racial differences persist.
A research letter published in JAMA Health Forum reveals that less than 10% of interventional COVID-19 trials conducted in the United States during the first 3 years of the pandemic included children, despite this age group accounting for 18% of infections, according to CIDRAP. The researchers from Harvard and Boston Children's Hospital identified all trials of a COVID-19 intervention registered on ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2020 to December 2022. The study highlights the need for greater inclusion of children in clinical research to understand transmission patterns and identify treatments for pediatric patients with severe disease.
The recent surge in respiratory illnesses across China, which prompted the World Health Organization (WHO) to seek more information, is caused by known pathogens such as the flu and common viruses, according to China's health ministry, reports ABC News. The respiratory infections are attributed to common viruses like influenza, rhinoviruses, respiratory syncytial virus, or adenovirus, and bacteria like mycoplasma pneumoniae. The WHO had formally requested information on the spike in respiratory illnesses and pneumonia clusters in children. The Chinese health ministry advises local authorities to open more fever clinics, promote vaccinations, and focus on preventing the spread in crowded places.
The rate of COVID-19 infection in Ontario as measured by wastewater data is now at its highest point in more than a year.
Data released last week by Public Health Ontario (PHO) shows that the provinces COVID-19 wastewater signal has approximately doubled over the last month from one to 1.9 - and is now at its highest point since at least mid-November, 2022. The GTAs wastewater signal is at its highest point since January 6, 2022.
Meanwhile, other indicators are also pointing to rapidly rising levels of viral activity as the temperatures cool and residents head indoors.
In the last week, 21,000 (PCR) COVID-19 tests were completed, resulting in a positivity rate of just over 20 per cent in Ontario a near doubling over rates recorded in the summer.
While scarcity of testing has rendered it near-impossible to provide an accurate estimate on the number of Ontarians currently infected with COVID-19, both provincial public health and national hospitalization data show cases are on the rise.
In Canada, the total number COVID-19 hospitalizations increased from 3,894 to 4,369 in the last seven days, with 248 of those admissions taking place in Ontario.
According to Unity Health Network Infectious Disease Specialist Dr. Isaac Bogoch, a peak is expected as we enter the winter months.
It's the fall and winter, of course we are going to see more cases, Bogoch told CTV News Toronto Monday. The rise is expected.
As most individuals have either become infected with COVID-19, received a vaccination or both Bogoch said that a majority of individuals are not experiencing severe symptoms, or hospitalization, when infected.
According to the doctor, to paint an accurate picture of the respiratory health in the province, data on all such illnesses must be considered together, not just that detailing COVID-19 levels.
Were at the stage now that, while all these viruses are certainly unique, we should be looking at a more holistic approach, Bogoch said. [Public health] campaigns should not be solely related to one vaccine or pathogen, he said.
According to the PHO, over the last week, COVID-19 cases made up the majority of respiratory illness reported in the province (20.4 per cent), followed by respiratory syncytial virus (7.9 per cent), and entero/rhinovirus (6.8 per cent).
According to Bogoch, while most infected with COVID-19 are not likely to experience severe symptoms, Ontarios senior population remains the most disproportionately affected.
If you look at the data, you can see a very, very clear risk for hospitalization and death in those over 70-years-old and, especially, those over 80-years-old, he said.
His concern, he explained, is a lack of uptake in updated vaccinations amongst those age groups only around 25 per cent have received a booster designed to protect against the XBB.1.5 Omicron subvariant that has become dominant across the country.
Thats a big problem because those are the age groups that are getting sick and disproportionately ending up in hospital, he continued.
Medical experts have urged all residents to stay up to date on their vaccinations both for COVID-19 and influenza.
The two latest COVID-19 vaccines, reformulated by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, are specifically designed to fight XBB.1.5.
We really need to lower barriers to vaccinations, Bogoch said. You have to think of it from a multidimensional standpoint there needs to be age, language, and culturally appropriate communication.
Bogoch called Torontos vaccination for homebound seniors a fantastic example.
That's a really smart initiative but how many people know it exists or how to access it?
An improvement in communication could help see more seniors opt to get vaccinated, he said.
It would go a long way in terms of protecting the vulnerable, he said.
Currently, rapid antigen tests are still available for free at select pharmacies and retailers, but only while supplies last. For a list of PCR-testing locations in the province, click here.
Masking, while now only mandated in certain healthcare settings, will help prevent infections, Bogoch underlined.
Unfortunately, the conversation around masking has become so polarized, but putting a mask on will of course help, he said.
While there are no mandated requirements for isolation in place, the Ministry of Health recommends staying home when you are feeling unwell, up until 24-hours after symptoms have resolved. For ten days after the onset of symptoms, it advises wearing a mask and avoiding non-essential tasks.
If infected with COVID-19 and experiencing severe symptoms, certain individuals will be eligible for free anti-viral treatments, if prescribed by a physician, nurse practitioner, or pharmacist.
To be eligible for antiviral treatment, individuals must either:
Ontario offers a free self-screening tool for eligibility of antiviral treatments.
With files from CTV News Heather Butts
Health departments in the Coastal Health District will hold several COVID-19 vaccination incentive events in December to encourage residents to get the updated COVID vaccine. Everyone age 6 months and older who has not already received the updated COVID vaccine is eligible.
All incentive events are by appointment only. Anyone with an appointment who is vaccinated at one of the events will receive a $100 retail gift card. The cost of COVID vaccination is covered by many insurance plans at no cost to the patient. For individuals without health insurance coverage, a federal program will cover the cost of vaccination.
The updated COVID vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna were released in September of this year. The vaccines provide protection against COVID variants that are currently circulating. Even if you have received a previous COVID vaccine or been infected with COVID, existing immunity wanes over time. Receiving an updated COVID vaccination significantly reduces your risk of severe complications and hospitalization from COVID infection.
The study population consisted of 13,779 ICs who provided care over the previous 30 days and completed the BRFSS survey in 2019 or 2020. Out of those 13,779 ICs, 3,638 were excluded from the analysis because they provided care both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic or because it was unclear whether their care provision status overlapped between the period before and during COVID-19 pandemic. The final sample consisted of a total of 9,240 ICs, who provided complete data on their sociodemographic characteristics (age, sex, race-ethnicity, educational attainment, and relationship to the care recipient). A weighted 90.03% (N=8,379) of the ICs in the sample provided care before the COVID-19 NED, and 9.97% (N=861) provided care after the COVID-19 NED went into effect.
Table1 presents the weighted demographic characteristics of the sample, both total and by the COVID-19 NED status. The 861 ICs who provided care during the COVID-19 pandemic were successfully matched with 1,722 controls (selected among those who provided care before the COVID-19 NED). An adequate covariate balance (i.e., all SMD<0.20) was achieved using 2:1 propensity score matching (Supplementary Figs.12), with a caliper of 0.11.
Table2 presents a summary of weighted descriptive statistics across baseline characteristics for each outcome of interest in the matched data. Descriptively, the average number of days of poor physical health was observed to be higher among those who provided care before the COVID-19 NED (4.62 days) compared to those who provided care after the COVID-19 NED (3.41 days). However, the mean number of days of poor mental health observed was only slightly higher among those who provided care after the COVID-19 NED (5.68 days) compared to those who provided care before the COVID-19 NED (5.35 days).
The reported mean number of days of poor physical and mental health differed across age groups: younger age ICs (i.e., < 25 years) reported a higher average number of days of poor mental health (8.66 days in this age group) compared to older ICs (3.19 days among those 65+). However, the average number of days of poor physical health was observed to be lower among those<25 years (1.51 days) compared to those 65+ (5.04 days).
Male ICs were observed to have a slightly higher average number of days of poor physical health compared to female ICs (e.g., 4.52 versus 3.82 days); whereas female ICs reported a higher mean number of days of poor mental health compared to male ICs (e.g., 5.90 versus 4.89 days). Across all age groups, male ICs reported higher averages of poor physical health days compared to female ICs within the same age groups, except for female ICs aged 4554 years, who reported a higher observed average number of days of poor physical health compared to male ICs of the same age group. However, female ICs consistently reported a higher observed average number of days of poor mental health compared to male ICs of similar age groups, and this trend held across all age groups, except for 2534 years old group (Fig.1). Compared to the period before the COVID-19 NED, the observed average number of days of poor physical health after the COVID-19 NED decreased in both sexes across most age groups; except for the youngest female ICs (1824 years old); female ICs aged 5564; and older male ICs (55+years old). The observed average number of days of poor mental health decreased from its levels prior to the COVID-19 NED among younger female ICs (<45 years old); whereas older female ICs (45+years old) reported on average higher numbers of days of poor mental health, compared to before the COVID-19 NED. Among young male ICs (<35 years old), the period following the COVID-19 NED saw a lower observed average number of days of poor mental health compared to its levels prior to the COVID-19 NED. However, among male ICs aged 3544 and 65 years and older, the period following the COVID-19 NED recorded a higher observed average number of days of poor mental health compared to its levels prior to the COVID-19 NED (Fig.1).
Weighted average number of days of poor physical and mental, health by sex and age
On average, non-Hispanic White ICs reported the highest number of days of poor physical health (4.58 days) and ICs who identified as non-Hispanic other races had the lowest observed average number of days of poor physical health (1.99 days) in the combined period. By contrast, non-Hispanic Black and White ICs had the lowest observed average number of days of poor mental health (5.29 and 5.31, respectively) compared to individuals with another racial/ethnic group identity. People who identified as non-Hispanic multiracial reported the highest number of days of poor mental health (8.16 days on average) (Fig.2). Across race-ethnicity stratification, middle-age [35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44] ICs self-identified as non-Hispanic other races and older (55+years of age), non-Hispanic multiracial ICs had the lowest observed average numbers of days of poor physical and physical health. Older non-Hispanic other races ICs (65+) had the highest observed average number of days of poor physical health (on average 9.7 days of poor physical health), compared to other race-ethnicity groups. The highest average number of days of poor mental health was reported among younger ICs (1824 years old group) self-identifying as non-Hispanic other races, as well as Hispanic ICs aged 2534; whereas the lowest average number of days of poor mental health was recorded among older Hispanic (65+years) and non-Hispanic multiracial ICs (55+years of age).
Weighted average number of days of poor physical and mental health by race-ethnicity, and by race-ethnicity across age groups
Prior to the COVID-19 NED, older ICs (65+years of age) of Hispanic origins and non-Hispanic other races had the highest observed average number of days of poor physical health (on average more than 13 days of poor physical health), however after the COVID-19 NED older (55+years) Hispanic ICs and middle age [25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44] ICs of non-Hispanic other race origins had the lowest average number of days of poor physical health (Fig.3, panels A and B), though the numbers of respondents are smaller for some of these subpopulations. Hispanic ICs aged 2534 experienced the biggest increase in the average number of days of poor physical health (from 1.71 days to 10.00 days); also, non-Hispanic Black ICs aged 3544 and 65+years and older non-Hispanic White (55+years of age) reported higher numbers of days of poor physical health after the COVID-19 NED compared to the period before the COVID-19 NED.
Weighted average number of days of poor physical and mental health, before and after the COVID-19 NED
In terms of mental health (Fig.3, panels C and D), Hispanic and multiracial non-Hispanic ICs aged 2534 reported the highest average number of days of poor mental health before the COVID-19 NED. After the COVID-19 NED, young (<25 years) non-Hispanic multiracial and non-Hispanic ICs of other races experienced the highest average number of days of poor mental health. Across the other racial-ethnic groups, the average number of days of poor mental health increased among non-Hispanic Black (e.g., 2554; and 65+years of age) and older non-Hispanic White (55+years of age).
Table3 includes adjusted incidence rate ratios and corresponding p-values from the weighted negative binomial regressions using the 2:1 matched sample. The adjusted incidence rate of poor physical health days was 26% lower (p=0.001) among ICs who provided care after versus before the COVID-19 NED. The incidence rate of reporting days of poor physical health was 69% lower (p<0.001) among ICs aged 1824 compared to those aged 65+. The incidence rate for reporting days of poor physical health was 44% lower (p=0.001) among ICs aged 2534 compared to those aged 65+. The incidence rates of reporting days of poor physical health were higher for ICs with lower educational attainment (e.g., 2.03; and 1.68 times higher, respectively, for those with no high school diploma, those with high school diploma only, and those who attended college or technical school without obtaining a degree, respectively) compared to those who graduated from college or technical school). The incidence rate of reporting days of poor physical health was 30% lower (p=0.005) among non-Hispanic Black ICs compared to non-Hispanic White ICs. The incidence rate of reporting days of poor physical health was 46% (p=0.042) among those identifying as non-Hispanic of other races compared to non-Hispanic White. The relationship with the care recipient was non-significant (p0.844).
The adjusted incidence rate of reported days of poor mental health was not statistically different (p=0.730) between informal caregiving before versus after the COVID-19 NED, nor across racial/ethnic identities (p>0.591) when compared to non-Hispanic White individuals. The incidence rate of reported days of poor mental health stood higher at younger ages compared to older ages. For example, ICs aged 1824 had 3.32 times higher incidence rates than those aged 65 years and older (p<0.001). Similar results were found across age groups, with smaller differences as age gaps narrowed.
The incidence rate of reported days of poor mental health was 29% lower (p<0.001) among male ICs compared to female ICs. Those with generally lower education had higher incidence rates of reporting days of poor mental health compared to graduates from college or technical school (p0.012), although the comparison with those who did not graduate from high school was non-significant (p=0.095). Furthermore, the incidence rate of poor mental health days was 37% higher for IC for a sibling, spouse, or brothers- and sisters-in-law (p=0.004) compared to that of intergenerational relatives (including father, mother, child, grandparents, parents-in-law, and grandchild); whereas no significant difference was found for IC to other relatives or friends.
Supplementary Figs.34 portray the residual plots for both models.
Results from the hot-deck imputed data were comparable to those in the complete case analysis. There were 448 missing observations imputed from the original sample of ICs, who provided care before or during the COVID-19 pandemic but had missing sociodemographic characteristics. Overall, a weighted 10.72% of the ICs provided care after the COVID-19 NED upon imputation, compared to 9.97% in the main analysis (Supplementary Table1). Covariate balance was achieved using propensity score matching, with all standardized mean differences below 0.20 (Supplementary Fig.5).
In the imputed, 2:1 matched sample, 1,003 ICs who provided care after the COVID-19 NED were successfully matched to 2,006 controls (ICs who provided care before the COVID-19 NED). Like in the primary analysis, the average number of days of poor physical health was observed to be higher (5.16 days) among ICs who provided care before the COVID-19 NED compared to those who provided care after the COVID-19 NED (3.72 days) (Supplementary Table2). Days of poor mental health were higher (6.28 days) among those who provided care after the COVID-19 NED compared to those who provided care before the COVID-19 NED (5.40 days). At younger age ranges, ICs reported fewer days of poor physical health, but more days of poor mental health, whereas at older ages this was reversed. Likewise, ICs with low educational attainment reported on average a higher number of days of poor physical and mental health.
Results from the negative binomial regression models (Supplementary Table3) showed similar results to that of the primary analysis i.e., that although informal caregiving during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with decreased incidence rates of days of poor physical health (p<0.001), there was no significant difference in the incidence of poor mental health days (p=0.075) among ICs before versus after the COVID-19 NED. In comparison, at younger ages (all age groups less than 65 years old; all p<0.001), the incidence rate of reported poor mental health days was higher than for those aged 65+. Lower educational attainment was similarly associated with a higher incidence rate of reported poor mental and physical health days (all p-values<0.001 across all education levels compared to those with a college or technical school degree).
HARTLETON The reconstruction of Catherine Street in Hartleton was funded by COVID-19 relief money from Union County.
The borough of Hartleton was awarded $25,000 from Union County in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds last year. Borough Secretary/Treasurer Gwendolyn Perrin said the borough requested the funds to redo several small roads in the borough.
Catherine Street leads into the sewage plant, the Historical Church, which is used for meetings and elections, the borough park and the playground, said Perrin.
The 182-year-old brick Hartleton Historical Union Church, built in the 1841, is located at 115 Catherine St., Hartleton. It served four congregations until the 1940s, but left mostly unoccupied and neglected until it was renovated in 1977 with funds from Donald Hayes. The borough council, which now holds its public meetings at the church, started the second renovation process in 1998.
Since October 2022, the county has awarded 26 local municipalities, organizations and projects a portion of $8,008,236 in ARPA funds from Union County. Union County received $9 million of the $6.15 billion federal funds allocated to Pennsylvania. The county has approximately $905,000 that has not been allocated.
The total price was $24,700 and the borough paid 10 percent of their share of the project. The borough returned the leftover funds to the county, said Perrin.
The Hartleton Borough Council would like to thank (Commissioner) Stacy Richards for recognizing the need, said Perrin.
Richards said Hartleton did not qualify for Community Development Block Grant funds.
They obviously had a need, said Richards. We had some ARPA funds that we could provide so they had better access to the municipal building.
Richards said its wonderful that the borough is able to use the historic church.
One of Act deputy leader Brooke van Veldens early ministerial tasks will be to fill a vacancy at the Royal Commission into the Covid-19 response after one of its three commissioners quit.
And who she appoints might inform how she broadens the commissions terms of reference, which Act has previously criticised as too narrow.
Commissioner and former National Party minister Hekia Parata finished up earlier this month for personal reasons, and it falls on van Velden, as the new Internal Affairs Minister, to replace her.
Van Velden can also widen the terms of reference; the Inquiries Act says that the appointing minister may amend the terms of reference by notice in the Gazette.
She told the Herald in a statement: Im aware of Hekia Paratas departure from the Covid-19 Inquiry. I will be seeking advice from officials and taking papers regarding the inquiry to Cabinet in due course. It is a matter that is being taken seriously.
Act has previously said it was wrong for the Government to set the terms of reference, calling for six weeks of public submissions followed by a new set of terms based on those submissions.
Two months ago Act leader David Seymour said the Royal Commission should cover, among other things, how the response affected education, business and mental health, whether other policies would have been more cost-effective in improving the lives of New Zealanders, and whether it was sensible to restructure the health system in the middle of a pandemic.
The Act-National coalition agreement committed to broaden the terms of reference of the Royal Commission into the Covid-19 response, subject to public consultation.
Its unclear whether this could be done in a way that also fulfills the specific commitment for an inquiry in the NZ First-National coalition agreement, or whether that would require a separate inquiry.
The NZ First-National coalition agreement commits to an independent inquiry conducted publicly with local and international experts, into how the Covid pandemic was handled in New Zealand, including covering use of multiple lockdowns; vaccine procurement and efficacy; the social and economic impacts on both regional and national levels; whether the decisions made, and steps taken, where justified [sic].
Several issues are currently outside the scope of the inquiry including vaccine efficacy, the health system reforms, the effect of the Reserve Banks decisions on economic inequality, and particular clinical decisions made by clinicians or by public health authorities.
Currently the aim of the Royal Commission is to learn the lessons from New Zealands response that could be applied in preparation for a future pandemic. Public consultation was meant to start this month, with a report delivered in September 2024.
A commission spokesperson said the commission was aware of the Covid inquiry references in the coalition agreements.
We recognise the Government can seek to widen our Terms of Reference, and we welcome the opportunity to work with the new Government on this as required.
All Covid restrictions have been lifted but the virus continues to impact the country, with the current surge in infections being the biggest this year.
Parata told the Herald the election and political debate around the terms of reference for the Covid-19 inquiry had nothing to do with her resignation; she had advised the Government back in July that she intended to step down after about a year on the inquiry, once it was set up.
Commission chair and epidemiologist Professor Tony Blakely thanked Parata for her outstanding contribution, having completed all duties of the role.
Parata said she wanted to focus her time and attention on issues close to home, having worked on the Ministerial Inquiry into Land Use into the impacts of slash and sediment from Cyclones Hale and Gabrielle in Tairwhiti and Wairoa.
She was now preparing a briefing on Tairwhiti for the new government.
I have been quietly advocating that Tairwhiti is the climate change canary for our country. The Landcare scientists said we have about 10 years to take action or we could see the wholesale collapse of our hills, mountains and water catchments.
Ngati Porou would be rendered landless. So I have been making it my business to advocate for our region.
She said the region would be the first to fail because of climate change, and if action was taken it could become a template for other regions in climate adaptation measures, and how to keep industries such as forestry going at the same time.
Derek Cheng is a senior journalist who started at the Herald in 2004. He has worked several stints in the press gallery and is a former deputy political editor.
NEW YORK -- Justin Ryan Horton has two jobs. When he's not putting in 24-hour shifts as a firefighter, the 22-year-old is working as an administrative assistant for a local community college from his home in Colorado Springs.
Firefighting is, of course, not a work-from-home kind of job. So when the community college position gave Horton the choice to clock in remotely, he took it.
I'm gone a lot being a firefighter, Horton said. Instead of coming home and then seeing my family for a few minutes before leaving to go to my other job... I feel like I have just more time with (them) when I work from home."
The COVID-19 pandemic upended what working looks like for millions of people all around the world. While many jobs can only be done in person, swaths of employers shuttered their physical doors and moved their workplaces increasingly online.
Workers have since begun to return to the office in waves, at least for part of the week, and navigating that transition is an ongoing and significant hurdle for employers and workers alike. And many simply cannot fathom a return to the pre-COVID status quo, changing how companies approach their staffing needs.
Retaining employees who don't want to work in person is an issue for companies, but relatively few employers (13%) have introduced new incentives that would make employees more satisfied with it, according to a newly released poll conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago.
About 3 in 4 human resources representatives say that retaining employees who dont want to work in the office is a problem including 19% who call it a major problem. Another 54% of HR representatives call it a minor problem. And only about one-third of HR professionals say employees at their workplace are extremely or very happy about returning to the workplace.
Once workers discovered that (remote work could be) less expensive and... make their life a little easier, they just wanted to keep doing it, even once the pandemic began fading away, Marjorie Connelly, senior fellow with NORCs Public Affairs & Media Research department, told The Associated Press.
In both the HR survey and a separate poll of U.S. adults, researchers found that the top factors behind employees desire to work from home include their prioritization of flexibility and work-life balance. Other HR representatives and employees who work from home cite the length and costs of commuting as key.
Those are some of the main reasons that Megan Homis, 33, prefers remote work. As a senior account executive for an advertising and marketing firm in Southern California, Homis goes into the office once a month.
With traffic, its about an hour and 45 minute drive each way into the office," she said. And on top of that, I have two little kids so just wrangling childcare for them with drop off and pick up is a lot.
Homis said that the ability to work remotely will continue to be a priority for her down the road. She would consider potentially going into the office more if an employer offered sufficient incentives and support for in-person work, but hasn't seen opportunities that would sway her in that direction yet.
Bill Castellano, a professor in the Rutgers School of Management and Labor Relations, notes that flexibility is key particularly in giving employees agency for scheduling their work.
Employees really value more of when to do work vs. where to do work, Castellano, who was not involved in the NORC surveys, said. He added that this is a key benefit for many remote workers today and could be duplicated in physical offices with the right policy, such as having flexible start times.
There are some initiatives that could incentivize more employees to work in-person or at least increase their satisfaction about already going into the office the poll shows. Most hybrid workers (55%) say paying employees more for their in-office work would provide a lot of encouragement for them to work in-person more often.
Additional pay topped the list across respondents whether they were working in-person, remotely (44%) or in hybrid (50%) roles. However, just 4% of HR representatives whose companies have introduced new policies to get employees back to the workplace say that higher compensation is among them.
Employees who are already going into the office either entirely or part-time indicated that other incentives such as commuter benefits, in-office childcare, free food and social gatherings could also add at least some more satisfaction with returning to the office.
Those in-office perks had less sway among solely remote workers, Connelly noted particularly social gatherings. For example, I work hundreds of miles away from the main office, so they can have a pizza party (and) all the pizza parties they want, but Im not going to be affected by it, she said.
Regardless, many U.S. employees have returned to in-person work, or had never left. Most paid employees report that they work in person per NORC's survey, and three-quarters of those in-person employees say they are required by their employer to do so. About 1 in 10 indicate that they could work remotely but prefer working from the office.
Meanwhile, about one-third of paid employees surveyed work remotely or in hybrid positions. The majority cited convenience and work-life balance, as well as a lack of in-office requirements, as reasons to do so.
The number of people working remotely has fallen significantly since the peak of COVID-19 but is still far higher than pre-pandemic levels.
Estimates are mixed, but according to a Pew Research Center survey published in March, 35% of workers with jobs that can be completed remotely were working from home all of the time. That's down from 43% in January 2022 and 55% in October 2020. Still, that's much higher than the mere 7% recorded before the pandemic.
This coincides with dwindling work-from-home options from employers. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 72.5% of private-sector establishments, for example, had little to no telework in mid-2022 up from 60.1% a year earlier.
I would think that this trend downward will continue, but I dont think its going to go down to zero... (or) where we were pre-pandemic, Castellano said, adding that he believes the hybrid model will grow in popularity. The question is, what kind of schedule will that be?
FOR many of us, the covid-19 pandemic is fading into memory. But for millions of people, that isnt possible as they are still unwell. An illness that is often brief and mild is, for some, the start of a rollercoaster of symptoms that can last years. Today, around 65 million people may have long covid.
That is the bad news. But around four years since the first cases emerged, evidence of the causes of long covid is rapidly accumulating, paving the way for treatments. Multiple trials of therapies are under way and several have already shown promising results. It is now also clear that people experience wide differences in their long covid symptoms, so treating this condition is an exercise in personalised medicine: no single approach will work for everyone.
Many questions remain, however. Can the plummeting levels of certain hormones explain the fatigue and brain fog, and is the persistence of the virus really key to understanding what is going on? And what should we do and not do to avoid developing long covid in the first place?
The SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus started spreading around the world in early 2020. Within months, reports began emerging that some people were experiencing lingering symptoms. The term long covid was coined in May 2020 and widely adopted. The most common symptoms include headaches, brain fog and fatigue, or post-exertional malaise, in which even small amounts of activity cause exhaustion. Altogether, more than 200 symptoms have been reported, ranging from depression to gastrointestinal problems.
Since that time
jsonline.com wants to ensure the best experience for all of our readers, so we built our site to take advantage of the latest technology, making it faster and easier to use.
Unfortunately, your browser is not supported. Please download one of these browsers for the best experience on jsonline.com
