Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Arch Public Health ; 81(1): 66, 2023 Apr 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2298403

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To design efficient mitigation measures against COVID-19, understanding the transmission dynamics between different age groups was crucial. The role of children in the pandemic has been intensely debated and involves both scientific and ethical questions. To design efficient age-targeted non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI), a good view of the incidence of the different age groups was needed. However, using Belgian testing data to infer real incidence (RI) from observed incidence (OI) or positivity ratio (PR) was not trivial. METHODS: Based on Belgian testing data collected during the Delta wave of Autumn 2021, we compared the use of different estimators of RI and analyzed their effect on comparisons between age groups. RESULTS: We found that the RI estimator's choice strongly influences the comparison between age groups. CONCLUSION: The widespread implementation of testing campaigns using representative population samples could help to avoid pitfalls related to the current testing strategy in Belgium and worldwide. This approach would also allow a better comparison of the data from different countries while reducing biases arising from the specificities of each surveillance system.

2.
Vaccine ; 41(20): 3292-3300, 2023 05 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2292542

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Vaccine effectiveness against transmission (VET) of SARS-CoV-2-infection can be estimated from secondary attack rates observed during contact tracing. We estimated VET, the vaccine-effect on infectiousness of the index case and susceptibility of the high-risk exposure contact (HREC). METHODS: We fitted RT-PCR-test results from HREC to immunity status (vaccine schedule, prior infection, time since last immunity-conferring event), age, sex, calendar week of sampling, household, background positivity rate and dominant VOC using a multilevel Bayesian regression-model. We included Belgian data collected between January 2021 and January 2022. RESULTS: For primary BNT162b2-vaccination we estimated initial VET at 96% (95%CI 95-97) against Alpha, 87% (95%CI 84-88) against Delta and 31% (95%CI 25-37) against Omicron. Initial VET of booster-vaccination (mRNA primary and booster-vaccination) was 87% (95%CI 86-89) against Delta and 68% (95%CI 65-70) against Omicron. The VET-estimate against Delta and Omicron decreased to 71% (95%CI 64-78) and 55% (95%CI 46-62) respectively, 150-200 days after booster-vaccination. Hybrid immunity, defined as vaccination and documented prior infection, was associated with durable and higher or comparable (by number of antigen exposures) protection against transmission. CONCLUSIONS: While we observed VOC-specific immune-escape, especially by Omicron, and waning over time since immunization, vaccination remained associated with a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2-transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , BNT162 Vaccine , Bayes Theorem , Belgium/epidemiology , Contact Tracing , Vaccine Efficacy , Immunization, Secondary
3.
BMC Public Health ; 23(1): 342, 2023 02 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2268022

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fathers are important in establishing healthy behaviors in their children, but are rarely engaged in lifestyle programs. Focusing on physical activity (PA) of both fathers and their children by engaging them together in PA (i.e. "co-PA") is therefore a promising novel strategy for interventions. The study aim was to investigate the effect of the 'Run Daddy Run' on co-PA and PA of fathers and their children, and secondary outcomes such as weight status and sedentary behaviour (SB). METHODS: This study is a non-randomized controlled trial (nRCT), including 98 fathers and one of their 6 to 8 years old children (intervention = 35, control = 63). The intervention was implemented over a 14-week period, and consisted of six (inter)active father-child sessions and an online component. Due to COVID-19, only 2/6 sessions could be implemented as planned, the remaining sessions were delivered online. In November 2019-January 2020 pre-test measurements took place, and post-test measurements in June 2020. Additional follow-up test was conducted in November 2020. PA (i.e. LPA, MPA, VPA and volume) of fathers and children were objectively measured using accelerometry, co-PA and the secondary outcomes were questioned using an online questionnaire. RESULTS: Significant intervention effects were found for co-PA (+ 24 min./day in the intervention compared to the control group, p = 0.002), and MPA of the father (+ 17 min./day, p = 0.035). For children, a significant increase in LPA (+ 35 min./day, p < 0.001) was found. However, an inverse intervention effect was found for their MPA and VPA (-15 min./day, p = 0.005 and - 4 min./day, p = 0.002, respectively). Also decreases in fathers' and children's SB were found (-39 min./day, p = 0.022 and - 40 min./day, p = 0.003, respectively), but no changes in weight status, the father-child relationship, and the PA-family health climate (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The Run Daddy Run intervention was able to improve co-PA, MPA of fathers and LPA of children, and decreasing their SB. Inverse intervention effects were however found for MPA and VPA of children. These results are unique given their magnitude and clinical relevance. Targeting fathers together with their children might be a novel and potential intervention strategy to improve overall physical activity levels, however, further efforts should however be made to target children's MPA and VPA. Last, replicating these findings in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is recommended for future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study is registered as a clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov, ID number: NCT04590755, date: 19/10/2020).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Child , Male , COVID-19/prevention & control , Exercise , Life Style , Health Behavior , Accelerometry , Fathers
4.
Viruses ; 14(6)2022 06 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1911633

ABSTRACT

This retrospective multi-center matched cohort study assessed the risk for severe COVID-19 (combination of severity indicators), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality in hospitalized patients when infected with the Omicron variant compared to when infected with the Delta variant. The study is based on a causal framework using individually-linked data from national COVID-19 registries. The study population consisted of 954 COVID-19 patients (of which, 445 were infected with Omicron) above 18 years old admitted to a Belgian hospital during the autumn and winter season 2021-2022, and with available viral genomic data. Patients were matched based on the hospital, whereas other possible confounders (demographics, comorbidities, vaccination status, socio-economic status, and ICU occupancy) were adjusted for by using a multivariable logistic regression analysis. The estimated standardized risk for severe COVID-19 and ICU admission in hospitalized patients was significantly lower (RR = 0.63; 95% CI (0.30; 0.97) and RR = 0.56; 95% CI (0.14; 0.99), respectively) when infected with the Omicron variant, whereas in-hospital mortality was not significantly different according to the SARS-CoV-2 variant (RR = 0.78, 95% CI (0.28-1.29)). This study demonstrates the added value of integrated genomic and clinical surveillance to recognize the multifactorial nature of COVID-19 pathogenesis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Seasons
5.
PLoS One ; 17(6): e0269138, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1879315

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The pathogenesis of COVID-19 depends on the interplay between host characteristics, viral characteristics and contextual factors. Here, we compare COVID-19 disease severity between hospitalized patients in Belgium infected with the SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 and those infected with previously circulating strains. METHODS: The study is conducted within a causal framework to study the severity of SARS-CoV-2 variants by merging surveillance registries in Belgium. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 ('exposed') was compared to infection with previously circulating strains ('unexposed') in terms of the manifestation of severe COVID-19, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or in-hospital mortality. The exposed and unexposed group were matched based on the hospital and the mean ICU occupancy rate during the patient's hospital stay. Other variables identified as confounders in a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) were adjusted for using regression analysis. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the influence of selection bias, vaccination rollout, and unmeasured confounding. RESULTS: We observed no difference between the exposed and unexposed group in severe COVID-19 disease or in-hospital mortality (RR = 1.15, 95% CI [0.93-1.38] and RR = 0.92, 95% CI [0.62-1.23], respectively). The estimated standardized risk to be admitted in ICU was significantly higher (RR = 1.36, 95% CI [1.03-1.68]) when infected with the B.1.1.7 variant. An age-stratified analysis showed that among the younger age group (≤65 years), the SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 was significantly associated with both severe COVID-19 progression and ICU admission. CONCLUSION: This matched observational cohort study did not find an overall increased risk of severe COVID-19 or death associated with B.1.1.7 infection among patients already hospitalized. There was a significant increased risk to be transferred to ICU when infected with the B.1.1.7 variant, especially among the younger age group. However, potential selection biases advocate for more systematic sequencing of samples from hospitalized COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans
7.
Vaccine ; 40(22): 3027-3037, 2022 05 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1783823

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the first half of 2021, we observed high vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV2-infection. The replacement of the alpha-'variant of concern' (VOC) by the delta-VOC and uncertainty about the time course of immunity called for a re-assessment. METHODS: We estimated VE against transmission of infection (VET) from Belgian contact tracing data for high-risk exposure contacts between 26/01/2021 and 14/12/2021 by susceptibility (VEs) and infectiousness of breakthrough cases (VEi) for a complete schedule of Ad26.COV2.S, ChAdOx1, BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 as well as infection-acquired and hybrid immunity. We used a multilevel Bayesian model and adjusted for personal characteristics (age, sex, household), background exposure, calendar week, VOC and time since immunity conferring-event. FINDINGS: VET-estimates were higher for mRNA-vaccines, over 90%, compared to viral vector vaccines: 66% and 80% for Ad26COV2.S and ChAdOx1 respectively (Alpha, 0-50 days after vaccination). Delta was associated with a 40% increase in odds of transmission and a decrease of VEs (72-64%) and especially of VEi (71-46% for BNT162b2). Infection-acquired and hybrid immunity were less affected by Delta. Waning further reduced VET-estimates: from 81% to 63% for BNT162b2 (Delta, 150-200 days after vaccination). We observed lower initial VEi in the age group 65-84 years (32% vs 46% in the age group 45-64 years for BNT162b2) and faster waning. Hybrid immunity waned slower than vaccine-induced immunity. INTERPRETATION: VEi and VEs-estimates, while remaining significant, were reduced by Delta and waned over time. We observed faster waning in the oldest age group. We should seek to improve vaccine-induced protection in older persons and those vaccinated with viral-vector vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Ad26COVS1 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , BNT162 Vaccine , Bayes Theorem , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Contact Tracing , Humans , Middle Aged , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Vaccine Efficacy
8.
Viruses ; 14(4)2022 04 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1786084

ABSTRACT

The objective of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections. We included all persons ≥18 years that had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 for ≥14 days, between 1 February 2021 and 5 December 2021, in Belgium. The incidence of breakthrough infections (laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infections) was determined. Factors associated with breakthrough infections were analyzed using COX proportional hazard models. Among 8,062,600 fully vaccinated adults, we identified 373,070 breakthrough infections with an incidence of 11.2 (95%CI 11.2-11.3)/100 person years. Vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S (HR1.54, 95%CI 1.52-1.56) or ChAdOx1 (HR1.68, 95%CI 1.66-1.69) was associated with a higher risk of a breakthrough infection compared to BNT162b2, while mRNA-1273 was associated with a lower risk (HR0.68, 95%CI 0.67-0.69). A prior COVID-19-infection was protective against a breakthrough infection (HR0.23, 95%CI 0.23-0.24), as was an mRNA booster (HR0.44, 95%CI 0.43-0.45). During a breakthrough infection, those who had a prior COVID-19 infection were less likely to have COVID-19 symptoms of almost all types than naïve persons. We identified risk factors associated with breakthrough infections, such as vaccination with adenoviral-vector vaccines, which could help inform future decisions on booster vaccination strategies. A prior COVID-19 infection lowered the risk of breakthrough infections and of having symptoms, highlighting the protective effect of hybrid immunity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Ad26COVS1 , Adult , BNT162 Vaccine , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Incidence , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
9.
Arch Public Health ; 79(1): 185, 2021 Oct 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1484321

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 strains evolve continuously and accumulate mutations in their genomes over the course of the pandemic. The severity of a SARS-CoV-2 infection could partly depend on these viral genetic characteristics. Here, we present a general conceptual framework that allows to study the effect of SARS-CoV-2 variants on COVID-19 disease severity among hospitalized patients. METHODS: A causal model is defined and visualized using a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG), in which assumptions on the relationship between (confounding) variables are made explicit. Various DAGs are presented to explore specific study design options and the risk for selection bias. Next, the data infrastructure specific to the COVID-19 surveillance in Belgium is described, along with its strengths and weaknesses for the study of clinical impact of variants. DISCUSSION: A well-established framework that provides a complete view on COVID-19 disease severity among hospitalized patients by combining information from different sources on host factors, viral factors, and healthcare-related factors, will enable to assess the clinical impact of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants and answer questions that will be raised in the future. The framework shows the complexity related to causal research, the corresponding data requirements, and it underlines important limitations, such as unmeasured confounders or selection bias, inherent to repurposing existing routine COVID-19 data registries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Each individual research project within the current conceptual framework will be prospectively registered in Open Science Framework (OSF identifier: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UEF29 ). OSF project created on 18 May 2021.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL