The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has affected employment and food security globally and in the United States. To understand the impacts of COVID-19 on food security in Arizona, a representative survey of Arizona households was launched online from July 1 to August 10, 2020. This brief provides an overview of changes in food security rate, perceived worries and challenges about food security, as well as behavioral changes and strategies adopted since the pandemic. Additional briefs from the Arizona survey covering topics on economic consequences, food access, and participations in food assistance programs during the pandemic are also available.
The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic led to disruptions in the food supply and high rates of unemployment and under-employment, both in Arizona and nationally. These emergencies required food assistance programs to adapt quickly and in unprecedented ways by relaxing eligibility criteria, improvising on delivery modalities, and increasing benefits. To examine food assistance program participation during the pandemic, we collected data from a representative sample of 620 Arizona households. The sample was drawn from across Arizona in July-August 2020 using an online survey. This brief provides the summary for participation in key food assistance programs, namely, the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Special Supplemental Program for Women Infants and Children (WIC), School Food Programs, and the emergency food assistance provided through food pantries.
With more than 19 million confirmed COVID-19 cases across the United States1 and over 500,000 in Arizona as of December 2020, the ongoing pandemic has had devastating impacts on local, national, and global economies. Prior to the pandemic (February 2020), based on U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data, the unemployment rate in Arizona was 6.5%, compared to 4.9% at the national level.3 Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020), the United States has experienced striking increases in the unemployment rate, reaching 13.2% in April. Similarly, in Arizona, the unemployment rate jumped to over 13.5% in April. The unemployment rates have since declined both nationally and in Arizona but remain higher compared to February 2020. In November 2020 (the most recent data available), the national unemployment rate was 6.7%, while in Arizona the rate was 7.8%—the 10th highest unemployment rate among all U.S. states.
As of May 2022, there have been more than 80 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 across the United States, and over two million cases in Arizona. The pandemic has had a devastating impact on local, national, and global economies. This brief features the findings from data collected from a survey administered to Arizona residents in April of 2021, as well as national statistics, to understand some of the economic consequences of COVID-19 and its impacts on Arizona households.
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 and the resulting closures of schools, businesses, and restaurants led to a massive economic disruption in Arizona. The unemployment rate at its peak reached 14.2% (April 2020) - a level even higher than during the great recession of 2008. High unemployment rates, coupled with a breakdown of local and national food supply chains, led to a remarkable increase in food insecurity rates among Arizona households. More than a year later, as vaccines became widely available and restrictions were lifted, schools and business began to reopen, and most activities slowly returned to pre-pandemic standards. The effects of the pandemic on food insecurity and food-related behaviors, however, might have long-lasting effects. This brief describes levels of food insecurity, food assistance program participation, job disruption, and food related behaviors among 814 households in Arizona, in the 12 months preceding the pandemic (March 2019 – March 2020) and approximately one year after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic ( January 2021 –April 2021). Data collection took place between April and May 2021.
Aims: to evaluate 1) the PA variation explained by work walkability, 2) the moderating effects of person-level characteristics to the relationship between PA and work walkability, and 3) the differences in the rate of change in PA over time by worksite walkability.
Methods: self-report and accelerometer measured PA at baseline (aim 1, 2); longitudinal accelerometer PA during the initial 56 days of a behavioral intervention (aim 3). Adults were generally healthy and reported part- or full-time employment with a geocodeable address outside the home. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) measured walkability followed established techniques (i.e., residential, intersection, and transit densities, and land-use-mix).
Results: On average, worksite walkability did not show direct relationships with PA (aim 1); yet certain person-level characteristics moderated the relationships: sex, race, and not having young children in the household (aim 2). During 56 days of intervention, the PA rate of change over time showed no evidence of a moderating effect by worksite walkability.
Discussion: Worksite walkability was generally not shown to relate to the overall PA. However, specific subgroups (women, those without young children) appeared more responsive to their worksite neighborhood walkability. Prior literature shows certain demographics respond differently with various BE exposures, and this study adds a potentially novel moderator of interest regarding young children at home. Understanding who benefits from access to walkable BE may inform targeted interventions and policy to improve PA levels and foster health equity.
Investigation one revealed a moderate-to-large effect size for school-based interventions (n=10) increasing CVF (g=0.75; 95%CI [0.40-1.11]). Multi-level interventions (g=.79 [0.34-1.25]) were more effective than interventions focused on the individual (g=0.67 [0.12-1.22]). In investigations two and three children (78.3% Hispanic; mean ± SD age 53.2±4.5 months) completed a mean ± SD 3.7±2.3 PACER laps and 19.0±5.5 CSMP criteria. Individual and family factors associated with PACER laps included child sex (B=-0.96, p=0.03) and age (B=0.17, p<0.01), parents’ promotion of inactivity (B=0.66, p=0.08) and screen time (B=0.65, p=0.05), and parents’ concern for child’s safety during physical activity (B=-0.36, p=0.09). Child age (B=0.47, p<0.01) and parent employment (B=2.29, p=0.07) were associated with CMSP criteria. At the ECEC level, policy environment quality (B=-0.17; p=0.01) was significantly associated with number of PACER laps completed. Outdoor play environment quality (B=0.18; p=0.03), outdoor play equipment total (B=0.32; p<0.01) and screen time environment quality (B=0.60; p=0.02) were significantly associated with CMSP criteria. Researchers, ECEC teachers and policy makers should promote positive environmental changes to preschool-aged children’s family and ECEC environments, as these environments have the potential to improve CVF and GLS more than programs focused on the child alone.
Methods: Participants were recruited from the parent REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study. ActicalTM accelerometers provided estimates of PA variables, including moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA), high light PA (HLPA), low light PA (LLPA) and sedentary time, for 4-7 consecutive days. Prevalence and incidence of cognitive impairment were defined by the Six-Item Screener. Letter fluency, animal fluency, word list learning and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (orientation and recall) were conducted to assess executive function and memory.
Results: Of the 7,339 participants who provided accelerometer wear data > 4 days (70.1 ± 8.6 yr, 54.2% women, 31.7% African American), 320 participants exhibited impaired cognition. In cross-sectional analysis, participants in the highest MVPA% quartile had 39% lower odds of cognitive impairment than those in the lowest quartile (OR: 0.61, 95% C.I.: 0.39-0.95) after full adjustment. Further analysis shows most quartiles of MVPA% and HLPA% were significantly associated with executive function and memory (P<0.01). During 2.7 ± 0.5 years of follow-up, 3,385 participants were included in the longitudinal analysis, with 157 incident cases of cognitive impairment. After adjustments, participants in the highest MVPA% quartile had 51% lower hazards of cognitive impairment (HR: 0.49, 95% C.I.: 0.28-0.86). Additionally, MVPA% was inversely associated with change in memory z-scores (P<0.01), while the highest quartile of HLPA% was inversely associated with change in executive function and memory z-scores (P<0.01).
Conclusion: Higher levels of objectively measured MVPA% were independently associated with lower prevalence and incidence of cognitive impairment, and better memory and executive function in older adults. Higher levels of HLPA% were also independently associated with better memory and executive function. The amount of MVPA associated with lower risk of cognitive impairment (259 min/week) is >70% higher than the minimal amount of MVPA recommended by PA guidelines.
Purpose: To compare the acute effects of ACT, voluntary cycling (VC), and no cycling (NC) on upper and lower extremity motor function and executive function in adults with chronic stroke (age: 60 ± 16 years; months since stroke: 96 ± 85).
Methods: Twenty-two participants (gender: female = 6, male = 16; types: ischemic = 12, hemorrhagic = 10; sides: left lesion = 15, right lesion = 7) completed one session of ACT, one session of VC and one session of NC on separate days using a 3 x 3 crossover design.
Results: ACT lead to greater improvements in lower and upper extremity function on the paretic and non-paretic side than VC or NC (all p < 0.05), except in the non-paretic lower extremity where ACT and VC produced similar improvement (both p < 0.05). ACT and VC, but not NC, were associated with improvements in inhibition (p < 0.05). A positive relationship between cadence and motor function (P < 0.05) was found. Ratings of perceived exertion shared an inverted-U shaped relationship with measures of processing speed (p < 0.05) and a negative linear relationship with measures of executive function (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: ACT appears to benefit paretic and non-paretic motor function globally whereas the benefits of VC are more task specific. Faster cycling cadence was associated with greater improvements in global motor function. ACT and VC seem to carry similar acute benefits in inhibition.