Importance of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy in older age groups

ImportanceAn effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 will reduce morbidity and mortality and allow substantial relaxation of physical distancing policies. However, the ability of a vaccine to prevent infection or disease depends critically on protecting older individuals, who are at highest risk of severe disease.ObjectiveWe quantitatively estimated the relative benefits of COVID-19 vaccines, in terms of preventing infection and death, with a particular focus on effectiveness in elderly people.DesignWe applied compartmental mathematical modelling to determine the relative effects of vaccines that block infection and onward transmission, and those that prevent severe disease. We assumed that vaccines showing high efficacy in adults would be deployed, and examined the effects of lower vaccine efficacy among the elderly population.Setting and participantsOur mathematical model was calibrated to simulate the course of an epidemic among the entire population of British Columbia, Canada. Within our model, the population was structured by age and levels of contact.Main outcome(s) and measure(s)We assessed the effectiveness of possible vaccines in terms of the predicted number of infections within the entire population, and deaths among people aged 65 years and over.Results In order to reduce the overall rate of infections in the population, high rates of deployment to all age groups will be critical. However, to substantially reduce mortality among people aged 65 years and over, a vaccine must directly protect a high proportion of people in that group.Conclusions and relevanceEffective vaccines deployed to a large fraction of the population are projected to substantially reduce infection in an otherwise susceptible population. However, even if transmission were blocked highly effectively by vaccination of children and younger adults, overall mortality would not be substantially reduced unless the vaccine is also directly protective in elderly people. We strongly recommend: (i) the inclusion of people aged 65 years and over in future trials of COVID-19 vaccine candidates; (ii) careful monitoring of vaccine efficacy in older age groups following vaccination.     

Effectiveness of the recombinant zoster vaccine among Kaiser Permanente Hawaii enrollees aged 50 and older: A retrospective cohort study

BackgroundThe incidence of herpes zoster (HZ) has been on the rise for decades in the United States. Clinical trials for the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) demonstrated vaccine efficacy of over 90% in preventing herpes zoster. However, there is limited information on its effectiveness outside of a clinical trial setting, as well as its effectiveness against herpes zoster ophthalmicus (HZO).MethodsA de-identified electronic health records database from Kaiser Permanente Hawaii (KPH) was used to conduct this retrospective cohort study to assess the effectiveness of the recombinant zoster vaccine against HZ and HZO in immunocompetent, vaccine age-eligible individuals without a prior history of HZ, who were continuously enrolled in KPH for ≥365 days prior to becoming age-eligible for RZV between January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2019.ResultsA total of 78 356 adults were included in this study, with 11 864 (15.1%) adults receiving two valid doses of the recombinant zoster vaccine. The incidence rate of HZ was 325.6 (95% CI: 217.7 to 464.4) cases per 100 000 person-years in vaccinated persons compared to 1063.3 cases per 100 000 person-years (95% CI: 1006.0 to 1122.8) in the unvaccinated group. The incidence rate of HZO was 11.9 (95% CI: 0.7 to 52.3) cases per 100 000 person-years in the vaccinated group compared to 72.1 (95% CI: 58.0 to 88.3) in the unvaccinated group. RZV was 83.5% (95% CI: 74.9% to 89.2%) effective against HZ and 93.3% (95% CI: 48.7% to 99.1%) effective against HZO.ConclusionsRZV has demonstrated high effectiveness against both HZ and HZO outside of a clinical trial setting in the United States. Vaccine coverage is low, emphasizing the need for public health efforts to increase vaccination to reduce morbidity from HZ and HZO.     

Influenza vaccine effectiveness against influenza-associated hospitalization in children in Hong Kong, 2010–2020

BackgroundInfluenza virus infections can cause hospitalizations in children, and annual vaccination of children can provide protection against influenza.MethodsWe analyzed a test-negative design study with data spanning from 2010/11 through 2019/20 to evaluate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza hospitalization in children by age group, influenza type/subtype and time period within each season. We enrolled children admitted to hospital with acute febrile respiratory illnesses. Nasopharyngeal aspirates were tested by culture and/or RT-PCR to determine influenza status, and vaccination status was obtained by interviewing parents or legal guardians and was verified where possible. VE was estimated by conditional logistic regression model adjusting for sex, age and age-squared, matching on week.ResultsInfluenza seasons in Hong Kong are prolonged with influenza-associated hospitalizations occurring in almost every month of the year during the study period. Influenza vaccination was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations in children of all ages. Influenza VE was higher in younger children than in older children, and higher against hospitalization due to influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 than A(H3N2) and B.ConclusionsThe childhood influenza vaccination program in Hong Kong has prevented influenza-associated hospitalizations particularly in younger children. Our findings support the use of influenza vaccines in children as an effective approach to influenza control and prevention.     

How frequent are acute reactions to COVID-19 vaccination and who is at risk?

IntroductionOur objective was to describe and compare self-reported side effects of COVID-19 vaccines in the USA.MethodsA web-based registry enrolled volunteers who received a COVID-19 vaccine between March 19–July 15, 2021. We collected self-reported short-term side effects, medical consultation, hospitalization, and quality of life impact following completed vaccination regimens (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J).ResultsWe recruited 6,966 volunteers who completed their full course of vaccination (median age 48 years, IQR 35.0–62.0; 83.6% female): Pfizer 3,486; Moderna 2,857; J&J 623. Few (3.1%) sought medical care for post-vaccination side effects. Hospitalization (n = 17; 0.3%) and severe allergic reactions (n = 39; 0.6%) also were rare. Those with autoimmune disease or lung disease were approximately twice as likely to seek medical care (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.01, 95% CI:1.39; 2.92 and aOR 1.70, 95% CI: 1.12; .58 respectively). 92.4% of participants reported ≥ 1 side effect (median 3), with injection site reactions (78.9%), fatigue (70.3%), headache (49.0%) reported most frequently. More side effects were reported after the second dose of two-dose vaccines (medians: 1 vs. 2 for Pfizer and 1 vs. 3 for Moderna for first and second doses respectively) versus 3 for J&J's single-dose vaccine. For the employed, the median number of workdays missed was one. Diabetics and those vaccinated against influenza were substantially less likely to report 3 or more symptoms (aOR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.56;0.82] and aOR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.73;0.93, respectively).DiscussionThe total side effect burden was, not unexpectedly, greater with two-dose regimens but all three vaccines appear relatively safe. Very few subjects reported side effects serious enough to warrant medical care or reported post-vaccination hospitalization. While these findings do not address possible long-term effects, they do inform on their short-term safety and tolerability and will hopefully provide some reassurance and positively inform the benefit-risk and pharmacoeconomic assessment for all three vaccines.See Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04368065.     

Differences in clinical outcomes of COVID-19 among vaccinated and unvaccinated kidney transplant recipients

IntroductionThe remarkable efficacy and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines have been described in healthy individuals, but kidney transplant recipients have been excluded from these studies. Therefore, real-world evidence of these vaccines can guide clinicians in predicting complications in kidney transplant recipients and how many doses of vaccines are protective. In this study, we aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 vaccines on kidney transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.Material and methodThis matched case-control study included vaccinated kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19 from two centers between 1 May and 1 October 2021. All patients in the vaccinated group received a minimum of two doses of the vaccine and were diagnosed with COVID-19 at least one month after the last dose. Each vaccinated patient was matched with an unvaccinated kidney transplant recipient diagnosed with COVID. The endpoints were all-cause mortality, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, acute kidney injury, cytokine storm, and acute respiratory distress syndrome.ResultsThe median age of vaccinated seventy-two participants was 45 years, and 41 of the participants were men in the vaccinated group. Four patients in the vaccinated group and nine patients in the control group died during follow-up (p = 0.247). Seventeen patients in the vaccinated group, thirty-four participants in the control group were hospitalized (p = 0.004); five vaccinated patients and ten unvaccinated patients were followed-up in the ICU during follow-up (p = 0.168). Thirteen of the vaccinated and twelve unvaccinated patients developed acute kidney injury (p = 0.16). The occurrence of cytokine storm (n = 4 vs. n = 11; p = 0.061) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (n = 5 vs. n = 10; p = 0.168) was higher in the patient group compared to the control group.ConclusionCOVID-19 remains a fatal disease despite advancing treatment modalities and preventive strategies. COVID-19 vaccines can't prevent death in all kidney transplant recipients, but they decrease hospitalization rate and duration in most patients.     

公费医疗门诊项目实行“按人头付费”的效果评价

1998年,上海市普陀区医疗保险办公室改革公费医疗支付方式,对门诊项目实行按人头付费。本文就改革实施一年来公费医疗费用发生情况作一分析,对按人头付费方式实施效果进行评估,得出以下结论:该支付方式较为有效地降低了医疗费用的增长幅度,减少了浪费;对促进医院加强内部管理,转变经营策略,重视医疗成本控制,提高卫生资源的利用效率起到了积极的作用。同时提出,要注意纠正个别医疗机构控制费用方法简单化的偏差,要考虑人群年龄结构因素对医疗费用的影响,适当调整付费标准,以避免医疗机构在承担费用支出方面出现畸轻畸重的问题。     

陕西省眉县健康教育干预5岁以下儿童腹泻效果评价

为了探讨适合我国农村社区的健康教育方法,陕西省眉县被确定为西北地区的试点。本文运用格林模式,采取健康教育、改水、改厕三位一体方法,通过２年的健康教育综合性干预,实验乡５岁以下儿童腹泻发病率较对照乡及干预前均有明显下降,儿童母亲防治儿童腹泻的知、信、行水平也显著提高（Ｐ＜００１）,进一步证实综合干预在农村社区健康教育中运用的可行性。同时,初步探索出了一些适合我国农村社区的健康教育实施经验。     

儿童接种肾综合征出血热Ⅰ型灭活疫苗的成本效益和效果分析

采用建德市肾综合征出血热Ⅰ型灭活疫苗效果考核现场资料,计算５～９岁和１０～１４岁各年龄组的效益费用比（ＢＣＲ）和效果费用比（ＣＥＲ）。结果各年龄组ＢＣＲ和ＣＥＲ均小于１或大于０;５～９岁年龄组儿童接种疫苗后的ＣＥＲ和预防一个病人的费用是１０～１４岁年龄组的一倍左右。结论：可在高发区１０～１４岁儿童中开展ＨＦＲＳ疫苗预防接种。