首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
《Vaccine》2022,40(46):6664-6669
BackgroundElderly people in long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at higher risk for (severe) COVID-19, yet evidence of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population is scarce. In November 2021 (Delta period), a COVID-19 outbreak occurred at a LTCF in the Netherlands, continuing despite measures and booster vaccination campaign. We investigated the outbreak to assess VE of primary COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and to describe the impact of the booster vaccination.MethodsWe calculated attack rate (AR) and case fatality (CF) per vaccination status (unvaccinated, primarily vaccinated and boostered). We calculated VE – at on average 6 months after vaccination – as 1- risk ratio (RR) using the crude risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between vaccination status (primary vaccination versus unvaccinated) and outcomes (SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality < 30 days after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2).ResultsThe overall AR was 67% (70/105). CF was 33% (2/6) among unvaccinated cases, 12% among primarily vaccinated (7/58) and 0% (0/5) among boostered. The VE of primary vaccination was 17% (95% CI ?28%; 46%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 70% (95% CI ?44%; 96%) against mortality. Among boostered residents (N = 55), there were 25 cases in the first week after receiving the booster dose, declining to 5 in the second and none in the third week.ConclusionVE of primary vaccination in residents of LTCF was very low against SARS-CoV-2 infection and moderate against mortality. There were few cases at 2 weeks after the booster dose and no deaths, despite the presence of susceptible residents. These data are consistent with the positive impact of the booster vaccination in curbing transmission. Timely booster vaccination in residents of LTCF is therefore important.  相似文献   

2.
Background:The present study was aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of BNT162b2 among HCWs of a university hospital while a recrudescence of pandemics was hitting the province, with a high rate of the B.1.1.7 variant.Methods:The study was performed in the context of health surveillance at the workplaces. We monitored the SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms among HCWs classified by having received the entire vaccine schedule or not; the latter further classified in not vaccinated workers and workers who had received the first shot more than 14 days earlier. The SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed by conventional RT-PCR on rhino-pharyngeal swabs, followed by gene sequencing in positive vaccinated HCWs. The cumulative incidence of infections in the period was normalised to 100,000 people.Results:At the end of the observation period, HCWs that had completed the full schedule were at lower infection risk than both unvaccinated HCWs and the workforce who had not yet gained the complete theoretical protection from the vaccine (by 2.4-folds). Overall, ninety-two SARS-CoV-2 infections were observed among HCWs, mostly among not protected workers (52 cases) but none of them showed symptoms requiring hospitalisation.Conclusions:The vaccination campaign effectively reduced the appearance of symptoms and the incidence of infections among vaccinated HCWs. Among vaccinated HCWs, gene sequencing was possible in five cases only, 4 B.1.1.7 and 1 B1.525 variants. The high rate of unsuccessful gene sequencing observed among infected vaccinated workers could be explained by a low viral burden. Vaccination for COVID-19 should be mandatory in occupational settings with a high infective risk.  相似文献   

3.
《Vaccine》2022,40(5):691-694
In South Korea, all 12th grade students (highs school seniors) were offered BNT162b2 vaccine starting July 19, 2021; while 10th–11th grade students were not eligible. We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study by to determine the safety and effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine in adolescents against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among 444,313 persons who received the first dose of vaccine, reporting rate for myocarditis and/or pericarditis was 1.8 per 100,000 (95% C.I. 0.8–3.5) among first-dose recipients and 4.3 per 100,000 (95% C.I. 2.6–6.7) in second-dose recipients. Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic/asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection 14 days post-first dose vaccination was 91.1% (95% C.I. 89.6–92.5), and 14 days post-second dose was 99.1% (95% C.I. 98.5–99.5). In this retrospective cohort study, BNT162b2 vaccination was safe and was associated with a significantly lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, suggesting that vaccination in adolescent may reduce the burden of Covid-19.  相似文献   

4.
《Vaccine》2022,40(33):4845-4855
BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccination reduces SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission. However, evidence is emerging on the degree of protection across variants and in high-transmission settings. To better understand the protection afforded by vaccination specifically in a high-transmission setting, we examined household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 during a period of high community incidence with predominant SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 (Alpha) variant, among vaccinated and unvaccinated contacts.MethodsWe conducted a household transmission investigation in San Diego County, California, and Denver, Colorado, during January-April 2021. Households were enrolled if they had at least one person with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. We collected nasopharyngeal swabs, blood, demographic information, and vaccination history from all consenting household members. We compared infection risks (IRs), RT-PCR cycle threshold values, SARS-CoV-2 culture results, and antibody statuses among vaccinated and unvaccinated household contacts.ResultsWe enrolled 493 individuals from 138 households. The SARS-CoV-2 variant was identified from 121/138 households (88%). The most common variants were Alpha (75/121, 62%) and Epsilon (19/121, 16%). There were no households with discordant lineages among household members. One fully vaccinated secondary case was symptomatic (13%); the other 5 were asymptomatic (87%). Among unvaccinated secondary cases, 105/108 (97%) were symptomatic. Among 127 households with a single primary case, the IR for household contacts was 45% (146/322; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 40–51%). The observed IR was higher in unvaccinated (130/257, 49%, 95% CI 45–57%) than fully vaccinated contacts (6/26, 23%, 95% CI 11–42%). A lower proportion of households with a fully vaccinated primary case had secondary cases (1/5, 20%) than households with an unvaccinated primary case (66/108, 62%).ConclusionsAlthough SARS-CoV-2 infections in vaccinated household contacts were reported in this high transmission setting, full vaccination protected against SARS-CoV-2 infection. These findings further support the protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination and highlight the need for ongoing vaccination among eligible persons.  相似文献   

5.
《Vaccine》2022,40(3):512-520
BackgroundMethodologically rigorous studies on Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection are critically needed to inform national and global policy on Covid-19 vaccine use. In Israel, healthcare personnel (HCP) were initially prioritized for Covid-19 vaccination, creating an ideal setting to evaluate early real-world VE in a closely monitored population.MethodsWe conducted a prospective study among HCP in 6 hospitals to estimate the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants filled out weekly symptom questionnaires, provided weekly nasal specimens, and three serology samples – at enrollment, 30 days and 90 days. We estimated VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection using the Cox Proportional Hazards model and against a combined PCR/serology endpoint using Fisher’s exact test.ResultsOf the 1567 HCP enrolled between December 27, 2020 and February 15, 2021, 1250 previously uninfected participants were included in the primary analysis; 998 (79.8%) were vaccinated with their first dose prior to or at enrollment, all with Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. There were four PCR-positive events among vaccinated participants, and nine among unvaccinated participants. Adjusted two-dose VE against any PCR-confirmed infection was 94.5% (95% CI: 82.6%-98.2%); adjusted two-dose VE against a combined endpoint of PCR and seroconversion for a 60-day follow-up period was 94.5% (95% CI: 63.0%-99.0%). Five PCR-positive samples from study participants were sequenced; all were alpha variant.ConclusionsOur prospective VE study of HCP in Israel with rigorous weekly surveillance found very high VE for two doses of Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection in recently vaccinated HCP during a period of predominant alpha variant circulation.FundingClalit Health Services.  相似文献   

6.
7.
目的 分析新型冠状病毒(新冠病毒)疫苗接种对成都市境外输入病例流行病学及临床特征的影响,为新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情防控提供参考依据。方法 截至2021年4月15日,经成都市入境的新冠病毒感染病例,根据新冠病毒疫苗接种史被分为疫苗接种组和疫苗未接种组。回顾性收集和分析病例的流行病学及临床特征资料。实验室检测项目包括新冠病毒核酸检测、临床指标、血清抗体和淋巴细胞检测。采用WPS 2019软件整理数据,采用R 4.0.3软件进行统计学分析。结果 75例新冠病毒感染病例包括疫苗接种组20例(出现临床症状4例)和疫苗未接种组55例(出现临床症状16例)。疫苗接种组的首针接种时间分布为2020年7-11月,其中接种2剂次疫苗采用一次性接种方式有10例,采取2次间隔接种方式有10例,2次接种间隔14~57 d,完成疫苗接种与发病时间间隔87~224 d。两组病例的分类和临床分型的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),其中,疫苗接种组病例分类为无症状感染者的比例较高(40.00%,8/20),而疫苗未接种组的临床分型以普通型的比例较高(76.36%,42/55)。两组病例的新冠病毒核酸检测2个靶标(ORF1ab和N基因)Ct值、淋巴细胞亚型、降钙素原及C反应蛋白的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),疫苗接种组的血清淀粉样蛋白A水平低于疫苗未接种组(P<0.05),但新冠病毒血清抗体IgM、IgG及总抗体水平均明显高于疫苗未接种组(P<0.05)。结论 新冠病毒疫苗接种后,仍存在感染的风险,但新冠病毒侵入人体后,体内可迅速产生特异性IgM和IgG抗体,对感染者产生一定保护作用,已接种新冠病毒疫苗的病例分类以无症状感染者为主。  相似文献   

8.
《Vaccine》2022,40(18):2574-2579
BackgroundReal-world studies showed varying levels of effectiveness of CoronaVac vaccine against COVID-19 disease. This study aimed to assess the association between the vaccination with CoronaVac and the COVID-19 infections among the health care workers in a university hospital and to determine the vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 in a period when alpha variant was dominant.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in a university hospital in Istanbul, Turkey employs 4067 health care workers. The follow-up period was defined as starting 14 days after receiving the second dose for fully vaccinated group. Health care workers were censored when have a positive PCR test result or at the end of the study. Unvaccinated health care workers were censored if they receive any COVID-19 vaccine doses. The incidence rate ratio and Cox regression were used to estimate the unadjusted and adjusted effectiveness of the vaccine.Findings: Seventy-one percent of the health care workers were fully vaccinated whereas 29% percent did not receive any doses. The incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 133.7 vs 70.7 per 100.000 person-days in the unvaccinated and fully vaccinated groups, respectively. The unadjusted effectiveness against COVID-19 infection was 47% (95% CI 31–59%) whereas adjusted effectiveness was 39% (95% CI 20–64%).Interpretation: This real life study conducted in health care workers demonstrated that the effectiveness of two doses of the CoronaVac vaccine (39%) was lower than that determined in clinical trials. Due to reduce in protection over time or against variants, booster doses may be needed.  相似文献   

9.
《Vaccine》2022,40(20):2869-2874
BackgroundIn partial response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, countries around the world are conducting large-scale vaccination campaigns. Real-world estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant are still limited. An outbreak in Ruili city of China provided an opportunity to evaluate VE against the Delta variant of two types of COVID-19 vaccines in use in China and globally – inactivated (CoronaVac and BBIBP-CorV) and adenovirus type 5 vectored (Convidecia) vaccines.MethodsWe estimated VE using a retrospective cohort study two months after the Ruili vaccination campaign (median: 63 days). Close contacts of infected people (Chinese nationality, 18 years and above) were included to assess VE against symptomatic Covid-19, COVID-19 pneumonia, and severe COVID-19. We calculated the relative risks (RR) of the outcomes for unvaccinated compared with fully vaccinated individuals. We used logistic regression analyses to estimate adjusted VEs, controlling for gender and age group (18–59 years and 60 years and over).We compared unvaccinated and fully vaccinated individuals on duration of RT-PCR positivity and Ct value.FindingsThere were 686 close contacts eligible for VE estimates. Adjusted VE of ad5-vectored vaccine was 61.5% (95% CI, 9.5–83.6) against symptomatic COVID-19, 67.9% (95%CI: 1.7–89.9) against pneumonia, and 100% (95%CI: 36.6–100) against severe/critical illness. For the two inactivated vaccines, combined VE was 74.6% (95% CI, 36.0–90.0) against symptomatic COVID-19, 76.7% (95% CI: 19.3–93.3) against pneumonia, and 100% (95% CI: 47.6–100) against severe/critical COVID-19. There were no statistically significant differences in VE between two inactivated vaccines for symptomatic COVID-19 and for pneumonia, nor were there statistically significant differences between inactivated and ad5-vectored VE in any of the three outcomes. The median durations of RT-PCR positivity were 17 days for fifteen people vaccinated with an inactivated vaccine, 18 days for forty-four people vaccinated with the Ad5 vectored vaccine, and 26 days for eleven unvaccinated individuals. InterpretationThese results provide reassuring evidence that the three vaccines are effective at preventing Delta-variant COVID-19 in short term following vaccination campaign, and are most effective at preventing more serious illness. The findings of reduced duration of RT-PCR positivity and length of hospital stay associated with full vaccination suggests potential saving of health-care system resources.  相似文献   

10.
BackgroundOn March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared SARS-CoV-2, causing COVID-19, as a pandemic. The UK mass vaccination program commenced on December 8, 2020, vaccinating groups of the population deemed to be most vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the early vaccine administration coverage and outcome data across an integrated care system in North West London, leveraging a unique population-level care data set. Vaccine effectiveness of a single dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines were compared.MethodsA retrospective cohort study identified 2,183,939 individuals eligible for COVID-19 vaccination between December 8, 2020, and February 24, 2021, within a primary, secondary, and community care integrated care data set. These data were used to assess vaccination hesitancy across ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic deprivation measures (Pearson product-moment correlations); investigate COVID-19 transmission related to vaccination hubs; and assess the early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination (after a single dose) using time-to-event analyses with multivariable Cox regression analysis to investigate if vaccination independently predicted positive SARS-CoV-2 in those vaccinated compared to those unvaccinated.ResultsIn this study, 5.88% (24,332/413,919) of individuals declined and did not receive a vaccination. Black or Black British individuals had the highest rate of declining a vaccine at 16.14% (4337/26,870). There was a strong negative association between socioeconomic deprivation and rate of declining vaccination (r=–0.94; P=.002) with 13.5% (1980/14,571) of individuals declining vaccination in the most deprived areas compared to 0.98% (869/9609) in the least. In the first 6 days after vaccination, 344 of 389,587 (0.09%) individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rate increased to 0.13% (525/389,243) between days 7 and 13, before then gradually falling week on week. At 28 days post vaccination, there was a 74% (hazard ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.19-0.35) and 78% (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.18-0.27) reduction in risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 for individuals that received the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines, respectively, when compared with unvaccinated individuals. A very low proportion of hospital admissions were seen in vaccinated individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (288/389,587, 0.07% of all patients vaccinated) providing evidence for vaccination effectiveness after a single dose.ConclusionsThere was no definitive evidence to suggest COVID-19 was transmitted as a result of vaccination hubs during the vaccine administration rollout in North West London, and the risk of contracting COVID-19 or becoming hospitalized after vaccination has been demonstrated to be low in the vaccinated population. This study provides further evidence that a single dose of either the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine or the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is effective at reducing the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 up to 60 days across all age groups, ethnic groups, and risk categories in an urban UK population.  相似文献   

11.
12.
《Vaccine》2021,39(48):7021-7027
AimHealthcare personnel (HCP) are prioritized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination to protect them and non-disruptive provision of healthcare services. We assessed the impact of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on morbidity and absenteeism among HCP.MethodsWe studied 7445 HCP in five tertiary-care hospitals in Greece from November 15, 2020 through April 18, 2021.ResultsA total of 910 episodes of absenteeism and 9695 days of absence were recorded during the entire study period. Starting from January 4, 2021, 4823/7445 HCP (64.8%) were fully or partially vaccinated. Overall, 535 episodes of absenteeism occurred from January 4, 2021 through April 18, 2021, including 309 (57.76%) episodes among 2622 unvaccinated HCP and 226 (42.24%) episodes among 4823 vaccinated HCP (11.8 versus 4.7 episodes of absenteeism per 100 HCP, respectively; p-value < 0.001). The mean duration of absenteeism was 11.9 days among unvaccinated HCP compared with 6.9 days among vaccinated HCP (p-value < 0.001). Unvaccinated HCP more frequently developed acute respiratory infection, influenza-like illness, and COVID-19 (p-values < 0.001 for all comparisons). Vaccine effectiveness for fully vaccinated HCP was estimated at 94.16% [confidence interval (CI): 88.50%-98.05%) against COVID-19, 83.62% (CI: 73.36%-90.38%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection (asymptomatic or COVID-19), and 66.42% (CI: 56.86%-74.15%) against absenteeism.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic had a considerable impact on healthcare workforce. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine significantly reduced morbidity, COVID-19, absenteeism and duration of absenteeism among HCP during a period of high SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the community. It is expected that HCP vaccination will protect them and healthcare services and contain healthcare costs.  相似文献   

13.
《Vaccine》2023,41(4):883-891
BackgroundPolarized debates about Covid-19 vaccination and vaccine mandates for healthcare workers (HCWs) challenge Belgian HCWs ability to discuss Covid-19 vaccine sentiments with peers and patients. Although studies have identified drivers of HCWs vaccine hesitancy, they do not include effects of workplace interactions and have not addressed consequences beyond vaccine coverage.MethodsInterviews and focus group discussions with 74 HCWs practicing in Belgium addressed Covid-19 vaccine sentiments and experiences of discussing vaccination with peers and patients.ResultsMost participating HCWs reported difficulties discussing Covid-19 vaccination with peers and patients. Unvaccinated HCWs often feared that expressing their vaccine sentiments might upset patients or peers and that they would be suspended. Consequently, they used social cues to evaluate others’ openness to vaccine-skeptical discourses and avoided discussing vaccines. Surprisingly, some vaccine-confident HCWs hid their vaccine sentiments to avoid peer and patient conflicts. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs observed that unvaccinated patients occasionally received suboptimal care. Suboptimal care was central in unvaccinated HCW unwillingness to express their vaccine sentiments to peers. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs described loss of trust and ruptured social relations with peers and patients holding divergent vaccine sentiments.DiscussionBelgian HCW perceived Covid-19 vaccines as a risky discussion topic and engaged in “strategic silences” around vaccination to maintain functional work relationships and employment in health institutions. Loss of trust between HCW and peers or patients, along with suboptimal patient care based on vaccination status, threaten to weaken Belgium’s, and by implication, other health systems, and to catalyze preventable disease outbreaks.  相似文献   

14.
《Vaccine》2021,39(48):7074-7081
IntroductionWe surveyed a cohort of patients who recovered from severe SARS-CoV-2 infection to determine the COVID-19 vaccination rate. We also compared the willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine before and after its availability to assess changes in perception and attitude towards vaccination.Materials and MethodsRecovered patients with severe hypoxemic respiratory failure from SARS-CoV-2 infection treated in the ICU at Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia between April 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020 were followed up over a 1-year period to assess vaccine acceptability and acceptance rates, and changes in perception towards COVID-19 vaccination before and after vaccine availability.ResultsA total of 98 and 93 patients completed the initial and follow up surveys respectively. During the initial survey, 41% of the patients intended to receive vaccination, 46% responded they would not accept a vaccine against COVID-19 even if it were proven to be ‘safe and effective ‘and 13% undecided. During the follow up survey, 44% of the study cohort had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Major reasons provided by respondents for not accepting COVID-19 vaccine were lack of trust in the effectiveness of the vaccine, pharmaceutical companies, government, vaccine technology, fear of side effects and perceived immunity against COVID-19. Respondents were more likely to be vaccinated if recommended by their physicians (OR 6.4, 95% CI 2.8–8.3), employers (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.9–5.8), and family and friends (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–4.5).ConclusionWe found a suboptimal COVID-19 vaccination rate in a cohort of patients who recovered from severe infection. COVID-19 vaccine information and recommendation by healthcare providers, employers, and family and friends may improve vaccination uptake.  相似文献   

15.
《Vaccine》2022,40(41):5856-5859
BackgroundThe majority of healthcare workers (HCW) in the US report being fully vaccinated against COVID-19, yet little is known about vaccine decision-making for their household members, including children.MethodsCross-sectional survey July–August 2021 of HCW and their household members in Minnesota.Results94 % of eligible participants were vaccinated with the most common reasons being wanting to protect oneself, family and loved ones. Safety concerns were the most commonly reported reasons for not being vaccinated; a significantly higher proportion of unvaccinated compared to vaccinated HCW (58 % vs 12 %, p = 0.0035) and household adults (25 % vs 5 %, p = 0.03) reported prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nearly half of unvaccinated adults and two-thirds of unvaccinated children would be vaccinated if a vaccine mandate were in place.ConclusionsDespite high COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among HCWs, more research is required to identify and address the needs and concerns of healthcare workers who decline COVID-19 vaccination despite availability.  相似文献   

16.
ObjectiveTo offer a quantitative risk–benefit analysis of two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among adolescents in England.SettingEngland.DesignFollowing the risk–benefit analysis methodology carried out by the US Centers for Disease Control, we calculated historical rates of hospital admission, Intensive Care Unit admission and death for ascertained SARS-CoV-2 cases in children aged 12–17 in England. We then used these rates alongside a range of estimates for incidence of long COVID, vaccine efficacy and vaccine-induced myocarditis, to estimate hospital and Intensive Care Unit admissions, deaths and cases of long COVID over a period of 16 weeks under assumptions of high and low case incidence.ParticipantsAll 12–17 year olds with a record of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in England between 1 July 2020 and 31 March 2021 using national linked electronic health records, accessed through the British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre.Main outcome measuresHospitalisations, Intensive Care Unit admissions, deaths and cases of long COVID averted by vaccinating all 12–17 year olds in England over a 16-week period under different estimates of future case incidence.ResultsAt high future case incidence of 1000/100,000 population/week over 16 weeks, vaccination could avert 4430 hospital admissions and 36 deaths over 16 weeks. At the low incidence of 50/100,000/week, vaccination could avert 70 hospital admissions and two deaths over 16 weeks. The benefit of vaccination in terms of hospitalisations in adolescents outweighs risks unless case rates are sustainably very low (below 30/100,000 teenagers/week). Benefit of vaccination exists at any case rate for the outcomes of death and long COVID, since neither have been associated with vaccination to date.ConclusionsGiven the current (as at 15 September 2021) high case rates (680/100,000 population/week in 10–19 year olds) in England, our findings support vaccination of adolescents against SARS-CoV2.  相似文献   

17.
《Vaccine》2022,40(23):3159-3164
ObjectivesHealthcare workers (HCWs), at increased risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were among the primary targets for vaccination, which became mandatory for them on September 15th, 2021 in France. In November they were confronted to the fifth COVID-19 wave despite excellent vaccine coverage. We aimed to estimate the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection after complete vaccination among HCWs with different vaccination schemes, and its determinants.MethodsWe enrolled all HCWs in the university hospital of Rennes, France who had received complete vaccination (two doses of COVID-19 vaccine). The delay from last vaccination dose to SARS-CoV-2 infection was computed. Fitted mixed Cox survival model with a random effect applied to exposure risk periods to account for epidemic variation was used to estimate the determinants of SARS-CoV-2 infection after complete vaccination.ResultsOf the 6674 (82%) HCWs who received complete vaccination (36% BNT162b2, 29% mRNA-1273, and 34% mixed with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and were prospectively followed-up for a median of 7.0 [6.3–8.0] months, 160 (2.4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Incidence density of SARS-CoV-2 infection after complete vaccination was 3.39 [2.89–3.96] infections per 1000 person-month. Median time from vaccine completion to SARS-CoV-2 infection was 5.5 [3.2–6.6] months. Using fitted mixed Cox regression with the delay as a time-dependent variable and random effect applied to exposure risk periods, age (P < 0.001) was independently associated with the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccine schemes were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection (P = 0.068). A period effect was significantly associated with the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (P < 0.001).ConclusionsIn this real-world study, incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection increases with time in fully vaccinated HCWs with no differences according to the vaccination scheme. The short delay between complete vaccination and incident SARS-CoV-2 infection highlights the need for sustained barrier measures even in fully vaccinated HCWs.  相似文献   

18.
《Vaccine》2023,41(1):193-200
IntroductionCoronavirus infection is a particular risk for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), because they are much more likely to become severely ill due to oxygen supply problems. Primary prevention, including COVID-19 vaccination is of paramount importance in this disease group. The aim of our study was to assess COVID-19 vaccination coverage in COPD patients during the first vaccination campaign of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA cross-sectional observational study (CHANCE) has been conducted in COPD patients in the eastern, western and central regions of Hungary from 15th November 2021. The anthropometric, respiratory function test results and vaccination status of 1,511 randomly selected patients were recorded who were aged 35 years and older.ResultsThe median age was 67 (61–72) years, for men: 67 (62–73) and for women: 66 (60–72) years, with 47.98 % men and 52.02 % women in our sample. The prevalence of vaccination coverage for the first COVID-19 vaccine dose was 88.62 %, whereas 86.57 % of the patients received the second vaccine dose. When unvaccinated (n = 172) and double vaccinated (n = 1308) patients were compared, the difference was significant both in quality of life (CAT: 17 (12–23) vs 14 (10–19); p < 0.001) and severity of dyspnea (mMRC: 2 (2–2) vs 2 (1–2); p = 0.048). The COVID-19 infection rate between double vaccinated and unvaccinated patients was 1.61 % vs 22.67 %; p < 0.001 six months after vaccination. The difference between unvaccinated and vaccinated patients was significant (8.14 % vs 0.08 %; p < 0.001) among those with acute COVID-19 infection hospitalized. In terms of post-COVID symptoms, single or double vaccinated patients had significantly fewer outpatient hospital admissions than unvaccinated patients (7.56 vs 0 %; p < 0.001).ConclusionThe COVID-19 vaccination coverage was satisfactory in our sample. The uptake of COVID-19 vaccines by patients with COPD is of utmost importance because they are much more likely to develop severe complications.  相似文献   

19.
《Vaccine》2022,40(3):494-502
IntroductionIn a multi-center prospective cohort of essential workers, we assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) by vaccine intention, prior SARS-CoV-2 positivity, and occupation, and their impact on vaccine uptake over time.MethodsInitiated in July 2020, the HEROES-RECOVER cohort provided socio-demographics and COVID-19 vaccination data. Using two follow-up surveys approximately three months apart, COVID-19 vaccine KAP, intention, and receipt was collected; the first survey categorized participants as reluctant, reachable, or endorser.ResultsA total of 4,803 participants were included in the analysis. Most (70%) were vaccine endorsers, 16% were reachable, and 14% were reluctant. By May 2021, 77% had received at least one vaccine dose. KAP responses strongly predicted vaccine uptake, particularly positive attitudes about safety (aOR = 5.46, 95% CI: 1.4–20.8) and effectiveness (aOR = 5.0, 95% CI: 1.3–19.1). Participants’ with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were 22% less likely to believe the COVID-19 vaccine was effective compared with uninfected participants (aOR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64–0.96). This was even more pronounced in first responders compared with other occupations, with first responders 42% less likely to believe in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (aOR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.40–0.84). Between administrations of the two surveys, 25% of reluctant, 56% reachable, and 83% of endorser groups received the COVID-19 vaccine. The reachable group had large increases in positive responses for questions about vaccine safety (10% of vaccinated, 34% of unvaccinated), and vaccine effectiveness (12% of vaccinated, 27% of unvaccinated).DiscussionOur study demonstrates attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and a positive shift in attitudes over time. First responders, despite potential high exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were more vaccine reluctant.ConclusionsPerceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine can shift over time. Targeting messages about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and illness severity may increase vaccine uptake for reluctant and reachable participants.  相似文献   

20.
《Vaccine》2023,41(11):1783-1790
BackgroundThe relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and long COVID has not been firmly established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between COVID-19 vaccination and long COVID.MethodsPubMed and EMBASE databases were searched on September 2022 without language restrictions (CRD42022360399) to identify prospective trials and observational studies comparing patients with and without vaccination before severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We also included studies reporting symptomatic changes of ongoing long COVID following vaccination among those with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Odds ratios (ORs) for each outcome were synthesized using a random-effects model. Symptomatic changes after vaccination were synthesized by a one-group meta-analysis.ResultsSix observational studies involving 536,291 unvaccinated and 84,603 vaccinated (before SARS-CoV-2 infection) patients (mean age, 41.2–66.6; female, 9.0–67.3%) and six observational studies involving 8,199 long COVID patients (mean age, 40.0 to 53.5; female, 22.2–85.9%) who received vaccination after SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Two-dose vaccination was associated with a lower risk of long COVID compared to no vaccination (OR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45–0.92) and one-dose vaccination (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43–0.83). Two-dose vaccination compared to no vaccination was associated with a lower risk of persistent fatigue (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41–0.93) and pulmonary disorder (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.47–0.52). Among those with ongoing long COVID symptoms, 54.4% (95% CI, 34.3–73.1%) did not report symptomatic changes following vaccination, while 20.3% (95% CI, 8.1–42.4%) experienced symptomatic improvement after two weeks to six months of COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination before SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a lower risk of long COVID, while most of those with ongoing long COVID did not experience symptomatic changes following vaccination.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号