Safety of simultaneous vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines in the Vaccine Safety Datalink

IntroductionSafety data on simultaneous vaccination (SV) with primary series monovalent COVID-19 vaccines and other vaccines are limited. We describe SV with primary series COVID-19 vaccines and assess 23 pre-specified health outcomes following SV among persons aged ≥5 years in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD).MethodsWe utilized VSD’s COVID-19 vaccine surveillance data from December 11, 2020-May 21, 2022. Analyses assessed frequency of SV. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by Poisson regression when the number of outcomes was ≥5 across both doses, comparing outcome rates between COVID-19 vaccinees receiving SV and COVID-19 vaccinees receiving no SV in the 1–21 days following COVID-19 vaccine dose 1 and 1–42 days following dose 2 by SV type received (“All SV”, “Influenza SV”, “Non-influenza SV”).ResultsSV with COVID-19 vaccines was not common practice (dose 1: 0.7 % of 8,455,037 persons, dose 2: 0.3 % of 7,787,013 persons). The most frequent simultaneous vaccines were influenza, HPV, Tdap, and meningococcal. Outcomes following SV with COVID-19 vaccines were rare (total of 56 outcomes observed after dose 1 and dose 2). Overall rate of outcomes among COVID-19 vaccinees who received SV was not statistically significantly different than the rate among those who did not receive SV (6.5 vs. 6.8 per 10,000 persons). Statistically significant elevated RRs were observed for appendicitis (2.09; 95 % CI, 1.06–4.13) and convulsions/seizures (2.78; 95 % CI, 1.10–7.06) in the “All SV” group following dose 1, and for Bell’s palsy (2.82; 95 % CI, 1.14–6.97) in the “Influenza SV” group following dose 2.ConclusionCombined pre-specified health outcomes observed among persons who received SV with COVID-19 vaccine were rare and not statistically significantly different compared to persons who did not receive SV with COVID-19 vaccine. Statistically significant adjusted rate ratios were observed for some individual outcomes, but the number of outcomes was small and there was no adjustment for multiple testing.     

Acceptability of a COVID-19 vaccine among adults in the United States: How many people would get vaccinated?

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic in March 2020. Several prophylactic vaccines against COVID-19 are currently in development, yet little is known about people’s acceptability of a COVID-19 vaccine.MethodsWe conducted an online survey of adults ages 18 and older in the United States (n = 2,006) in May 2020. Multivariable relative risk regression identified correlates of participants’ willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine (i.e., vaccine acceptability).ResultsOverall, 69% of participants were willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Participants were more likely to be willing to get vaccinated if they thought their healthcare provider would recommend vaccination (RR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.49–2.02) or if they were moderate (RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.02–1.16) or liberal (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.07–1.22) in their political leaning. Participants were also more likely to be willing to get vaccinated if they reported higher levels of perceived likelihood getting a COVID-19 infection in the future (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.01–1.09), perceived severity of COVID-19 infection (RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04–1.11), or perceived effectiveness of a COVID-19 vaccine (RR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.40–1.52). Participants were less likely to be willing to get vaccinated if they were non-Latinx black (RR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74–0.90) or reported a higher level of perceived potential vaccine harms (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.92–0.98).ConclusionsMany adults are willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine, though acceptability should be monitored as vaccine development continues. Our findings can help guide future efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccine acceptability (and uptake if a vaccine becomes available).     

Association between COVID-19 vaccination status,time elapsed since the last vaccine dose,morbidity, and absenteeism among healthcare personnel: A prospective,multicenter study

AimWe assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination status and time elapsed since the last vaccine dose on morbidity and absenteeism among healthcare personnel (HCP) in the context of a mandatory vaccination policy.MethodsWe followed 7592 HCP from November 15, 2021 through April 17, 2022. Full COVID-19 vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination series plus a booster dose at least six months later.ResultsThere were 6496 (85.6 %) fully vaccinated, 953 (12.5 %) not fully vaccinated, and 143 (1.9 %) unvaccinated HCP. A total of 2182 absenteeism episodes occurred. Of 2088 absenteeism episodes among vaccinated HCP with known vaccination status, 1971 (94.4 %) concerned fully vaccinated and 117 (5.6 %) not fully vaccinated. Fully vaccinated HCP had 1.6 fewer days of absence compared to those not fully vaccinated (8.1 versus 9.7; p-value < 0.001). Multivariable regression analyses showed that full vaccination was associated with shorter absenteeism compared to not full vaccination (OR: 0.56; 95 % CI: 0.36–0.87; p-value = 0.01). Compared to a history of ≤ 17.1 weeks since the last dose, a history of > 17.1 weeks since the last dose was associated with longer absenteeism (OR: 1.22, 95 % CI:1.02–1.46; p-value = 0.026) and increased risk for febrile episode (OR: 1.33; 95 % CI: 1.09–1.63; p-value = 0.004), influenza-like illness (OR: 1.53, 95 % CI: 1.02–2.30; p-value = 0.038), and COVID-19 (OR: 1.72; 95 % CI: 1.24–2.39; p-value = 0.001).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic continues to impose a considerable impact on HCP. The administration of a vaccine dose in less than four months before significantly protected against COVID-19 and absenteeism duration, irrespective of COVID-19 vaccination status. Defining the optimal timing of boosters is imperative.     

Effectiveness of adenovirus type 5 vectored and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic COVID-19, COVID-19 pneumonia,and severe COVID-19 caused by the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant: Evidence from an outbreak in Yunnan,China, 2021

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.     

Social inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake for children and adolescents in Montreal,Canada

BackgroundThe success of current and prospective COVID-19 vaccine campaigns for children and adolescents will in part depend on the willingness of parents to accept vaccination. This study examined social determinants of parental COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake for children and adolescents.MethodsWe used cross-sectional data from an ongoing COVID-19 cohort study in Montreal, Canada and included all parents of 2 to 18-year-olds who completed an online questionnaire between May 18 and June 26, 2021 (n = 809). We calculated child age-adjusted prevalence estimates of vaccine acceptance by parental education, race/ethnicity, birthplace, household income, and neighbourhood, and used multinomial logistic regression to estimate adjusted prevalence differences (aPD) and ratios (aPR). Social determinants of vaccine uptake were examined for the vaccine-eligible sample of 12 to 18 year-olds (n = 306).ResultsIntention to vaccinate children against COVID-19 was high, with only 12.4% of parents unlikely to have their child vaccinated. Parents with younger children were less likely to accept vaccination, as were those from lower-income households, racialized groups, and those born outside Canada. Children from households with annual incomes <$100,000 had 18.4 percent lower prevalence of being vaccinated/very likely vaccinated compared to household incomes ≥$150,000 (95% CI: 10.1 to 26.7). Racialized parents reported greater unwillingness to vaccinate vs. White parents (aPD = 10.3; 95% CI: 1.5, 19.1). Vaccine-eligible adolescents from the most deprived neighbourhood were half as likely to be vaccinated compared to those from the least deprived neighbourhood (aPR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.77).Interpretation.This study identified marked social inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake for children and adolescents. Efforts are needed to reach disadvantaged and marginalized populations with tailored strategies that promote informed decision making and facilitate access to vaccination.     

Short-term safety of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines with respect to all-cause mortality in the older population in Norway

BackgroundThere have been concerns about COVID-19 vaccination safety among frail older individuals. We investigated the relationship between COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and mortality among individuals aged ≥ 70 years and whether mortality varies across four groups of health services used.MethodsIn this nationwide cohort study, we included 688,152 individuals aged ≥ 70 years at the start of the Norwegian vaccination campaign (December 27, 2020). We collected individual-level data from the Norwegian Emergency Preparedness Register for COVID-19. Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals were matched (1:1 ratio) on the date of vaccination based on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. The main outcome was all-cause mortality during 21 days after first dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Kaplan-Meier survival functions were estimated for the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. We used Cox proportional-hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of death between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs), overall and by use of health services (none, home-based, short- and long-term nursing homes) and age group.ResultsBetween December 27, 2020, and March 31, 2021, 420,771 older individuals (61.1%) were vaccinated against COVID-19. The Kaplan-Meier estimates based on the matched study sample showed a small absolute risk difference in all-cause mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, with a lower mortality in the vaccinated group (overall HR 0.28 [95% CI: 0.24–0.31]). Similar results were obtained in analyses stratified by use of health services and age group.ConclusionWe found no evidence of increased short-term mortality among vaccinated individuals in the older population after matching on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics affecting vaccination and mortality.     

Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults

IntroductionIn 2020, prior to COVID-19 vaccine rollout, the Brighton Collaboration created a priority list, endorsed by the World Health Organization, of potential adverse events relevant to COVID-19 vaccines. We adapted the Brighton Collaboration list to evaluate serious adverse events of special interest observed in mRNA COVID-19 vaccine trials.MethodsSecondary analysis of serious adverse events reported in the placebo-controlled, phase III randomized clinical trials of Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in adults (NCT04368728 and NCT04470427), focusing analysis on Brighton Collaboration adverse events of special interest.ResultsPfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI ?0.4 to 20.6 and ?3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 2.1 to 22.9); risk ratio 1.43 (95 % CI 1.07 to 1.92). The Pfizer trial exhibited a 36 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group; risk difference 18.0 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 1.2 to 34.9); risk ratio 1.36 (95 % CI 1.02 to 1.83). The Moderna trial exhibited a 6 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group: risk difference 7.1 per 10,000 (95 % CI –23.2 to 37.4); risk ratio 1.06 (95 % CI 0.84 to 1.33). Combined, there was a 16 % higher risk of serious adverse events in mRNA vaccine recipients: risk difference 13.2 (95 % CI ?3.2 to 29.6); risk ratio 1.16 (95 % CI 0.97 to 1.39).DiscussionThe excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes. These analyses will require public release of participant level datasets.     

Waning effectiveness of CoronaVac in real life: A retrospective cohort study in health care workers

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.     

Estimated COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against seroconversion from SARS-CoV-2 Infection,March–October, 2021

BackgroundMonitoring the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infections remains important to inform public health responses. Estimation of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against serological evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection might provide an alternative measure of the benefit of vaccination against infection.MethodsWe estimated mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against development of SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid antibodies in March–October 2021, during which the Delta variant became predominant. Participants were enrolled from four participating healthcare systems in the United States, and completed electronic surveys that included vaccination history. Dried blood spot specimens collected on a monthly basis were analyzed for anti-spike antibodies, and, if positive, anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. We used detection of new anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to indicate SARS-CoV-2 infection, and estimated VE by comparing 154 case-participants with new detection of anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to 1,540 seronegative control-participants matched by calendar period. Using conditional logistic regression, we estimated VE ≥ 14 days after the 2nd dose of an mRNA vaccine compared with no receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine dose, adjusting for age group, healthcare worker occupation, urban/suburban/rural residence, healthcare system region, and reported contact with a person testing positive for SARS-CoV-2.ResultsAmong individuals who completed a primary series, estimated VE against seroconversion from SARS-CoV-2 infection was 88.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79.6%–93.9%) after any mRNA vaccine, 87.8% (95% CI, 75.9%–93.8%) after BioNTech vaccine and 91.7% (95% CI, 75.7%–97.2%) after Moderna vaccine. VE was estimated to be lower ≥ 3 months after dose 2 compared with < 3 months after dose 2, and among participants who were older or had underlying health conditions, although confidence intervals overlapped between subgroups.ConclusionsVE estimates generated using infection-induced antibodies were consistent with published estimates from clinical trials and observational studies that used virologic tests to confirm infection during the same period. Our findings support recommendations for eligible adults to remain up to date with COVID-19 vaccination.     

Predictors of vaccine hesitancy among disability support workers in Australia: A cross-sectional survey

BackgroundAchieving high levels of vaccination among disability support workers (DSWs) is critical to protecting people with disability from COVID-19 and other vaccine-preventable diseases.ObjectiveTo identify how demographic factors, risk perceptions of COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccine, and views about COVID-19 vaccination are associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among DSWs.MethodsSurvey of 252 Australian DSWs conducted in March and early April 2021. Participants were classified as vaccine hesitant if they had not been vaccinated and would not have the vaccine when offered it. Logistic regression analysis was used to control for confounders.Results52.4% of DSWs were hesitant with females being more likely to be hesitant than males (58.2% female, 38.1% male). Hesitancy was more frequent among DSWs who were not worried about COVID-19 for themselves or their family (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.86, 95% CI 1.0–3.45); did not agree they were at more risk than the rest of the community (AOR 2.29, 95% 1.25–4.20); were concerned about vaccine safety (AOR 22.86, 95% CI 10.59–49.13) and were not confident the vaccine would protect them (AOR 6.06, 95% CI 3.21–11.41) or the clients from COVID-19 (AOR 6.03, 95% CI 3.19–11.41). DSWs who thought vaccination was a personal choice were more likely to be hesitant (82.1%) than those who thought it was a community responsibility (27.6%).ConclusionsThe study shows that increasing vaccination rates among DSWs requires targeted strategies that emphasise the seriousness of the infection; the potential for vaccines to reduce transmission; and vaccine safety and efficacy.     

Risk of serious adverse events after the BNT162b2, CoronaVac,and ChAdOx1 vaccines in Malaysia: A self-controlled case series study

BackgroundRapid deployment of COVID-19 vaccines is challenging for safety surveillance, especially on adverse events of special interest (AESIs) that were not identified during the pre-licensure studies. This study evaluated the risk of hospitalisations for predefined diagnoses among the vaccinated population in Malaysia.MethodsHospital admissions for selected diagnoses between 1 February 2021 and 30 September 2021 were linked to the national COVID-19 immunisation register. We conducted self-controlled case-series study by identifying individuals who received COVID-19 vaccine and diagnosis of thrombocytopenia, venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, myocarditis/pericarditis, arrhythmia, stroke, Bell’s Palsy, and convulsion/seizure. The incidence of events was assessed in risk period of 21 days postvaccination relative to the control period. We used conditional Poisson regression to calculate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) with adjustment for calendar period.ResultsThere was no increase in the risk for myocarditis/pericarditis, Bell’s Palsy, stroke, and myocardial infarction in the 21 days following either dose of BNT162b2, CoronaVac, and ChAdOx1 vaccines. A small increased risk of venous thromboembolism (IRR 1.24; 95% CI 1.02, 1.49), arrhythmia (IRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07, 1.26), and convulsion/seizure (IRR 1.26; 95% CI 1.07, 1.48) was observed among BNT162b2 recipients. No association between CoronaVac vaccine was found with all events except arrhythmia (IRR 1.15; 95% CI 1.01, 1.30). ChAdOx1 vaccine was associated with an increased risk of thrombocytopenia (IRR 2.67; 95% CI 1.21, 5.89) and venous thromboembolism (IRR 2.22; 95% CI 1.17, 4.21).ConclusionThis study shows acceptable safety profiles of COVID-19 vaccines among recipients of BNT162b2, CoronaVac, and ChAdOx1 vaccines. This information can be used together with effectiveness data for risk-benefit analysis of the vaccination program. Further surveillance with more data is required to assess AESIs following COVID-19 vaccination in short- and long-term.     

广州市居民对新型冠状病毒疫苗的认知与接种意愿调查

目的 调查广州市居民对新冠疫苗的认知、接种意愿及影响因素，为新冠疫苗在居民中的推广提供理论依据和建议。方法 采用简单随机抽样方法对广州市居民进行电话调查，对数据进行χ2检验和多因素logistic回归分析。结果 回收有效问卷1 000份，居民新冠疫苗知晓率为83.60%（836/1 000），79.16%（547/691）愿意接种新冠疫苗；年龄≥40岁（OR = 0.524，95% CI: 0.291～0.943，P = 0.031）、未曾自费接种（OR = 1.456，95% CI: 1.030～2.059，P = 0.033）是影响居民疫苗知晓率的因素；女性（OR = 0.657，95% CI: 0.422～0.978，P = 0.038）、未曾自费接种（OR = 1.850，95% CI: 1.249～2.740，P = 0.002）是影响居民接种意愿的因素，疫苗无副作用（OR = 0.504，95% CI: 0.298～0.853，P = 0.011）和不清楚疫苗有效期（OR = 10.074，95% CI: 4.105～24.724，P = 0.031）是居民不接种新冠疫苗的重要影响因素。结论 广州市居民对新冠疫苗知晓度高、接种意愿强，但疫苗上市后立即接种的积极性低、认知尚匮乏，建议加强新冠疫苗相关知识的宣传教育。     

Inactive SARS-CoV-2 vaccine generates high antibody responses in healthcare workers with and without prior infection

Background and ObjectivesHealthcare workers (HCWs) were among the first groups to be vaccinated in Turkey. The data to be obtained by the vaccination of HCWs would guide wide spread vaccination programs.Materials and MethodsThe study included 330 HCWs working at Istanbul University-Cerrahpa?a, Cerrahpa?a Medical Faculty Hospital and vaccinated with inactive CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences, China) SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in two doses (28 days apart). Anti-Spike /RBD IgG levels were measured 14 days after the first dose and 28 days after the second dose. Chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) (ARCHITECT IgG II Quant test, Abbott, USA), which is 100% compatible with plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT), was used.ResultsOf the participants, 211 (63.9%) were female, 119 (36.1%) were male, and mean age was 39.6 ± 7.7 years. In those without prior COVID-19 history; (n = 255) antibody positivity was detected as 48.2% (95% CI: 42.1–54.3) 14 days after the first dose of vaccine, and 99.2% (95% CI: 98.1–100) at day 28 after the second dose. Antibody titers were significantly lower in patients with hypertension (p = 0.011). In those with prior history of COVID-19 (n = 75); both the antibody positivity rates after the first vaccine (48.2% vs 100%, p = 0.000) and the anti-spike/RBD antibody levels after the second vaccine (with a ≥ 1050 AU/mL titer equivalent to PRNT 1/80 dilution) was significant than infection-naive group (25.9% vs. 54.7%, p = 0.000). Antibody positivity after two doses of vaccination for all study group was 99.4% (95% CI: 98.6–100).ConclusionsTwo doses CoronaVac produce effective humoral immunity in HCWs. Antibody response is significantly higher in those with prior history of COVID-19 than infection-naive group. Given no significant benefit of the second dose, a single shot of vaccination may be sufficient for those with prior history of COVID-19. Monitoring humoral and cellular immune responses, considering new variants, is required to validate this approach.     

Exploring the attitudes,concerns, and knowledge regarding COVID-19 vaccine by the parents of children with rheumatic disease: Cross-sectional online survey

BackgroundVaccination programs are effective strategies in preventing infectious diseases and controlling epidemics. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in children has not yet been approved globally, and it is unclear what attitude families will take when it is approved in children. We aimed to investigate the underlying causes of vaccine acceptance, hesitation, and refusal, as well as concerns about the acceptability of the COVID-19 vaccine by parents of children with rheumatic diseases.MethodsParents of children followed up with a diagnosis of rheumatic disease in the pediatric rheumatology outpatient clinic of a university hospital were included in the study. We applied a closed web-based online survey conducted cross-sectionally and sent to the participants via mobile smartphones.ResultsFor fathers, mothers, and their children, acceptance rates for a COVID-19 vaccine were 64.2%, 57.7%, and 41.8%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, factors affecting parents' acceptance of vaccines for their children were as follows: “Receiving antirheumatic medications regularly (AOR 5.40, 95% CI 1.10–26.33, p = 0.03), the previous history of getting special recommended vaccines (AOR 4.12, 95% CI 1.12–27.85, p = 0.03), relying on vaccines for ending pandemic (AOR 8.84, 95% CI 2.80–27.85, p = 0.001), complying with the pandemic measures entirely (AOR 5.24, 95% CI 1.46–18.74, p = 0.01)“. The two most common reasons for vaccine rejection were fear of the side effects of the vaccine and its possible interaction with rheumatic drugs used by children.ConclusionAccording to our survey, parents were more likely to accept a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves than their children. The success of COVID-19 vaccination programs sources highly on people's willingness to accept the vaccine. It is crucial to vaccinate children for achieving herd immunity and in terms of avoiding vaccine hesitancy. Larger data examining the causes of concerns in parents of both healthy children and children with chronic diseases should be delineated.     

International estimates of intended uptake and refusal of COVID-19 vaccines: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of large nationally representative samples

BackgroundWidespread uptake of COVID-19 vaccines will be essential to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccines have been developed in unprecedented time and quantifying levels of hesitancy towards vaccination among the general population is of importance.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis of studies using large nationally representative samples (n ≥ 1000) to examine the percentage of the population intending to vaccinate, unsure, or intending to refuse a COVID-19 vaccine when available. Generic inverse meta-analysis and meta-regression were used to pool estimates and examine time trends. PubMed, Scopus and pre-printer servers were searched from January-November 2020. Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020223132).FindingsTwenty-eight nationally representative samples (n = 58,656) from 13 countries indicate that as the pandemic has progressed, the percentage of people intending to vaccinate decreased and the percentage of people intending to refuse vaccination increased. Pooled data from surveys conducted during June-October suggest that 60% (95% CI: 49% to 69%) intend to vaccinate and 20% (95% CI: 13% to 29%) intend to refuse vaccination, although intentions vary substantially between samples and countries (I² > 90%). Being female, younger, of lower income or education level and belonging to an ethnic minority group were consistently associated with being less likely to intend to vaccinate. Findings were consistent across higher vs. lower quality studies.InterpretationIntentions to be vaccinated when a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available have been declining across countries and there is an urgent need to address social inequalities in vaccine hesitancy and promote widespread uptake of vaccines as they become available.FundingN/A.     

Vaccine-induced seroconversion in participants in the North Carolina COVID-19 community Research Partnership

Well-regulated clinical trials have shown FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines to be immunogenic and highly efficacious. We evaluated seroconversion rates in adults reporting ≥ 1 dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a cohort study of nearly 8000 adults residing in North Carolina to validate immunogenicity using a novel approach: at-home, participant administered point-of-care testing. Overall, 91.4% had documented seroconversion within 75 days of first vaccination (median: 31 days). Participants who were older and male participants were less likely to seroconvert (adults aged 41–65: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64, 0.73], adults aged 66–95: aHR 0.55 [95% CI: 0.50, 0.60], compared to those 18–40; males: aHR 0.92 [95% CI: 0.87, 0.98], compared to females). Participants with evidence of prior infection were more likely to seroconvert than those without (aHR 1.50 [95% CI: 1.19, 1.88]) and those receiving BNT162b2 were less likely to seroconvert compared to those receiving mRNA-1273 (aHR 0.84 [95% CI: 0.79, 0.90]). Reporting at least one new symptom after first vaccination did not affect time to seroconversion, but participants reporting at least one new symptom after second vaccination were more likely to seroconvert (aHR 1.11 [95% CI: 1.05, 1.17]). This data demonstrates the high community-level immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines, albeit with notable differences in older adults, and feasibility of using at-home, participant administered point-of-care testing for community cohort monitoring.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04342884.     

Lack of association between vaccination rates and excess mortality in Cyprus during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundIt has been claimed that COVID-19 vaccination is associated with excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic, a claim that contributes to vaccine hesitancy. We examined whether all-cause mortality has actually increased in Cyprus during the first two pandemic years, and whether any increases are associated with vaccination rates.MethodsWe calculated weekly excess mortality for Cyprus between January 2020 and June 2022, overall and by age group, using both a Distributed Lag Nonlinear Model (DLNM) adjusted for mean daily temperature, and the EuroMOMO algorithm. Excess deaths were regressed on the weekly number of confirmed COVID-19 deaths and on weekly first-dose vaccinations, also using a DLNM to explore the lag-response dimension.Results552 excess deaths were observed in Cyprus during the study period (95% CI: 508–597) as opposed to 1306 confirmed COVID-19 deaths. No association between excess deaths and vaccination rates was found overall and for any age group except 18–49 years, among whom 1.09 excess deaths (95% CI: 0.27–1.91) per 10,000 vaccinations were estimated during the first 8 weeks post-vaccination. However, detailed cause-of-death examination identified just two such deaths potentially linked to vaccination, therefore this association is spurious and attributable to random error.ConclusionsExcess mortality was moderately increased in Cyprus during the COVID-19 pandemic, primarily as a result of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 deaths. No relationship was found between vaccination rates and all-cause mortality, demonstrating the excellent safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines.     

The Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccines to Prevent Severe COVID-19 in Costa Rica: Nationwide,Ecological Study of Hospitalization Prevalence

BackgroundThe Costa Rican COVID-19 vaccination program has used Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines. Real-world estimates of the effectiveness of these vaccines to prevent hospitalizations range from 90%-98% for two doses and from 70%-91% for a single dose. Almost all of these estimates predate the Delta variant.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to estimate the dose-dependent effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines to prevent severe illness in real-world conditions in Costa Rica, after the Delta variant became dominant.MethodsThis observational study is a secondary analysis of hospitalization prevalence. The sample is all 3.67 million adult residents living in Costa Rica by mid-2021. The study is based on public aggregated data of 5978 COVID-19–related hospital records from September 14, 2021, to October 20, 2021, and 6.1 million vaccination doses administered to determine hospitalization prevalence by dose-specific vaccination status. The intervention retrospectively evaluated is vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech (78%) and Oxford-AstraZeneca (22%). The main outcome studied is being hospitalized.ResultsVaccine effectiveness against hospitalization (VEH) was estimated as 93.4% (95% CI 93.0-93.9) for complete vaccination and 76.7% (95% CI 75.0-78.3) for single-dose vaccination among adults of all ages. VEH was lower and more uncertain among older adults aged ≥58 years: 92% (95% CI 91%-93%) for those who had received full vaccination and 64% (95% CI 58%-69%) for those who had received partial vaccination. Single-dose VEH declined over time during the study period, especially in the older age group. Estimates were sensitive to possible errors in the population count used to determine the residual number of unvaccinated people when vaccine coverage is high.ConclusionsThe Costa Rican COVID-19 vaccination program that administered Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines seems to be highly effective at preventing COVID-19–related hospitalization after the Delta variant became dominant. Even a single dose seems to provide some degree of protection, which is good news for people whose second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was postponed several weeks to more rapidly increase the number of people vaccinated with a first dose. Timely monitoring of vaccine effectiveness is important to detect eventual failures and motivate the public to get vaccinated by providing information regarding the effectiveness of the vaccines.     

Immediate adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination among 16–65-year-old Danish citizens

IntroductionThere is sparse knowledge of immediate adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination.ObjectiveThis study aimed to estimate the frequency and number of immediate adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination in a Danish population.MethodsThe study used data from the Danish population-based cohort study BiCoVac. The frequencies of 20 self-reported adverse reactions were estimated for each vaccine dose stratified by sex, age, and vaccine type. Also, the distributions of number of adverse reactions following each dose were estimated stratified by sex, age, vaccine type, and prior COVID-19 infection.ResultsA total of 889,503 citizens were invited and 171,008 (19 %) vaccinated individuals were included in the analysis. The most frequently reported adverse reaction following the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine was redness and/or pain at the injection site (20 %) while following the second and third dose, tiredness was the most frequently reported adverse reaction (22 % and 14 %, respectively). Individuals aged 26–35 years, females, and those with a prior COVID-19 infection were more likely to report adverse reactions compared with older individuals, males, and those with no prior COVID-19 infection, respectively. Following the first dose, individuals vaccinated with ChAdOx1-2 (AstraZeneca) reported more adverse reactions compared with individuals vaccinated with other vaccine types. Individuals vaccinated with mRNA-1273 (Moderna) reported more adverse reactions following the second and third dose compared with individuals vaccinated with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech).ConclusionThe frequency of immediate adverse reactions was highest among females and younger persons, however, most of the Danish citizens did not experience immediate adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination.