Understanding reported COVID-19 cases in England following changes to testing, between November 2021 and April 2022 (preprint)

Background Over the course of the pandemic, testing policies for SARS-CoV-2 have varied considerably in England, particularly in the five months up to 1 April 2022 when free community testing ended. We described the trends and demographics of COVID-19 cases during this period. Methods COVID-19 cases reported between 15 November 2021 and 30 April 2022 were extracted and aggregated by testing pillar: Pillar 1 for those tested within the NHS, private or public health laboratories, and Pillar 2 for community testing. COVID-19 cases were described by epi-week, and stratified by test type, age, sex, index of multiple deprivation (IMD), region, and population density. Incidence rates were also calculated and stratified by IMD and region. Results Of 10,196,425 COVID-19 cases, 7.3% were reported under Pillar 1 and 92.7% under Pillar 2. From 15 November 2021 to 31 March 2022, most Pillar 2 cases were tested either by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) only or PCR with lateral flow device (LFD) (70.8%) and three in ten cases tested using LFD only. However, between 1 April and 30 April 2022 this rose to nine out of ten cases testing using LFD only. Over the whole period studied and under both pillars, the majority of cases were female (55.2%), resided in the South East (17.0%) and in the age group 30-39 years (18.6%). Trends in IMD and population density varied over the period. When stratifying by IMD the highest case numbers and incidence rates reported under Pillar 1 and NHS were in those in the most deprived quintile. This was also seen for cases reported under Pillar 2 by LFD until 11 January 2022, where a reverse in the trend occurred with the highest cases and rates in the least deprived quintile. This same pattern was observed when describing the cases by population density, with Pillar 2 LFD reported cases being highest in the most densely populated regions until 11 January, from when there was a switch to the highest cases being in the least densely populated regions. Conclusion Differences and trends were observed in reported COVID-19 cases in England, particularly those tested under Pillar 2 following the introduction of testing policy changes. To better understand the impact of these changes over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as to predict the impact of future testing policies, it would be beneficial to investigate the accessibility of testing amongst different populations. Currently, Pillar 1 COVID-19 cases are likely to be more representative of symptomatic cases requiring testing for a clinical need, as these are less impacted by variations in testing patterns compared to Pillar 2. However, a limitation of that approach is that use of Pillar 1 alone would be biased towards those more likely to be clinically unwell.

Comparative transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) and Delta (B.1.617.2) variants and the impact of vaccination: national cohort study, England (preprint)

Background The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has rapidly replaced the Delta variant (B.1.617.2) to become dominant in England. This epidemiological study assessed differences in transmissibility between the Omicron and Delta using two methods and data sources. Methods Omicron and Delta cases were identified through genomic sequencing, genotyping and S-gene target failure in England from 5-11 December 2021. Secondary attack rates for Omicron and Delta using named contacts and household clustering were calculated using national surveillance and contact tracing data. Logistic regression was used to control for factors associated with transmission. Findings Analysis of contact tracing data identified elevated secondary attack rates for Omicron vs Delta in household (15.0% vs 10.8%) and non-household (8.2% vs 3.7%) settings. The proportion of index cases resulting in residential clustering was twice as high for Omicron (16.1%) compared to Delta (7.3%). Transmission was significantly less likely from cases, or in named contacts, in receipt of three compared to two vaccine doses in household settings, but less pronounced for Omicron (aRR 0.78 and 0.88) compared to Delta (aRR 0.62 and 0.68). In non-household settings, a similar reduction was observed for Delta cases and contacts (aRR 0.84 and 0.51) but only for Omicron contacts (aRR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.58-0.93) and not cases in receipt of three vs two doses (aRR 0.95, 0.77-1.16). Interpretation Our study identified increased risk of onward transmission of Omicron, consistent with its successful global displacement of Delta. We identified a reduced effectiveness of vaccination in lowering risk of transmission, a likely contributor for the rapid propagation of Omicron.

Long-term health-related quality of life in non-hospitalised COVID-19 cases with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in England: Longitudinal analysis and cross-sectional comparison with controls (preprint)

Background This study measured the long-term health-related quality of life of non-hospitalised COVID-19 cases with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2(+) infection using the recommended instrument in England (the EQ-5D). Methods Prospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2(+) cases aged 12-85 years and followed up for six months from 01 December 2020, with cross-sectional comparison to SARS-CoV-2(-) controls. Main outcomes were loss of quality-adjusted life days (QALDs); physical symptoms; and COVID-19-related private expenditures. We analysed results using multivariable regressions with post-hoc weighting by age and sex, and conditional logistic regressions for the association of each symptom and EQ-5D limitation on cases and controls. Results Of 548 cases (mean age 41.1 years; 61.5% female), 16.8% reported physical symptoms at month 6 (most frequently extreme tiredness, headache, loss of taste and/or smell, and shortness of breath). Cases reported more limitations with doing usual activities than controls. Almost half of cases spent a mean of £18.1 on non-prescription drugs (median: £10.0), and 52.7% missed work or school for a mean of 12 days (median: 10). On average, all cases lost 15.9 (95%-CI: 12.1, 19.7) QALDs, while those reporting symptoms at month 6 lost 34.1 (29.0, 39.2) QALDs. Losses also increased with older age. Cumulatively, the health loss from morbidity contributes at least 21% of the total COVID-19-related disease burden in England. Conclusions One in 6 cases report ongoing symptoms at 6 months, and 10% report prolonged loss of function compared to pre-COVID-19 baselines. A marked health burden was observed among older COVID-19 cases and those with persistent physical symptoms. summary Losses of health-related quality of life in non-hospitalised COVID-19 cases increase by age and for cases with symptoms after 6 months. At a population level, at least 21% of the total COVID-19-related disease burden in England is attributable to morbidity.

Monitoring the COVID-19 immunisation programme through a National Immunisation Management System- Englands experience (preprint)

In England, the National Immunisation Management System (NIMS) has been used to deliver COVID-19 vaccinations across England, monitor vaccine coverage, and assess vaccine effectiveness and safety. The NIMS was developed by a joint collaboration between a range of health and digital government agencies. Vaccinations delivered at large vaccination sites, pharmacies, hospitals and in primary care are entered on a point of care application which is verified using the unique NHS number in a centralised system containing information for everyone resident and registered with a GP in England. Vaccination details and additional data from hospital and GP records (such as priority groups) are sent to NHS Digital for data linkage. The NIMS constantly receives updated details from NHS Digital for all individuals and these data are provided to Public Health England (PHE) in a secure environment. PHE primarily use the NIMS for vaccine coverage, vaccine effectiveness and safety. Daily access to individual-level vaccine data has allowed PHE to rapidly and accurately estimate vaccine coverage and provide some of the worlds first vaccine effectiveness estimates. Other countries evaluating the roll-out and effect of COVID-19 vaccine programmes should consider a vaccine register or immunisation information system similar to the NIMS.

Vaccine effectiveness and duration of protection of Comirnaty, Vaxzevria and Spikevax against mild and severe COVID-19 in the UK (preprint)

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccines have been used for 9 months in the UK. Real world data have demonstrated the vaccines to be highly effective against COVID-19, severe disease and death. Here, we estimate vaccine effectiveness over time since the second dose of Comirnaty, Vaxzevria and Spikevax in England. MethodsWe used a test-negative case-control design to estimate vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease, hospitalisation and mortality by age, comorbidity status and over time after the second dose to investigate waning separately for Alpha and Delta variants. ResultsVaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease peaked in the early weeks after the second dose and then fell to 47.3 (95% CI 45 to 49.6) and 69.7 (95% CI 68.7 to 70.5) by 20+ weeks against the Delta variant for Vaxzevria and Comirnaty, respectively. Waning of vaccine effectiveness was greater for 65+ year-olds compared to 40-64 year-olds. Vaccine effectiveness fell less against hospitalisations to 77.0 (70.3 to 82.3) and 92.7 (90.3 to 94.6) beyond 20 weeks post-vaccination and 78.7 (95% CI 52.7 to 90.4) and 90.4 (95% CI 85.1 to 93.8) against death for Vaxzevria and Comirnaty, respectively. Greater waning was observed among 65+ year-olds in a clinically extremely vulnerable group and 40-64-year olds with underlying medical conditions compared to healthy adults. ConclusionsWe observed limited waning in vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation and death more than 20 weeks post-vaccination with Vaxzevria or Comirnaty. Waning was greater in older adults and those in a clinical risk group, suggesting that these individuals should be prioritised for booster doses.

Characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake among adults in England (08 December to 17 May 2021) (preprint)

ObjectiveTo determine characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine coverage among individuals aged 50 years and above in England since the beginning of the programme. DesignObservational cross-sectional study assessed by logistic regression and mean prevalence margins. SettingCOVID-19 vaccinations delivered in England from 08 December 2020 - 17 May 2021. Participants30,624,257/ 61,967,781 (49.4%) and 17,360,045/ 61,967,781 (28.1%) individuals in England were recorded as vaccinated in the National Immunisation Management System with a first dose and a second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, respectively. InterventionsVaccination status with COVID-19 vaccinations. Main Outcome MeasuresProportion, adjusted odds ratios and mean prevalence margins for individuals not vaccinated with dose 1 among those aged 50-69 years old and dose 1 and 2 among those aged 70 years old and above. ResultsAmong individuals aged 50 years and above, Black/African/Caribbean ethnic group was the least likely of all ethnic groups to be vaccinated with dose 1 of the COVID-19 vaccine. However, among those aged 70 years and above, the odds of not having dose 2 was 5.53 (95% CI 5.42 to 5.63) and 5.36 (90% CI 5.29 to 5.43) greater among Pakistani and Black/African/Caribbean compared to White British ethnicity, respectively. The odds of not receiving dose 2 was 1.18 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.20) higher among individuals who lived in a care home compared to those who did not. This was the opposite to that observed for dose 1, where the odds of not being vaccinated was significantly higher among those not living in a care home (0.89 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.91)). ConclusionsWe found that there are characteristics associated with low COVID-19 vaccine coverage. Inequalities, such as ethnicity are a major contributor to suboptimal coverage and tailored interventions are required to improve coverage and protect the population from SARS-CoV-2. Article summaryO_ST_ABSStrengths and Limitations of this studyC_ST_ABSO_LIThis is the is the first study assessing characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine coverage for all individuals aged 50 years and above in England. C_LIO_LIThis study uses data from the National Immunisation Management System (NIMS) which is based on all individuals in England with a registered NHS number. C_LIO_LIThis centralised national system captures individual level data for both vaccination status and demographic characteristics and allows for linkage to other datasets such as health care worker and care home resident status. C_LIO_LIThis study does not include those without an NHS number and, therefore, it is possible we have underestimated the number of vaccines delivered and odds of not being vaccinated for characteristics such as ethnic groups where we have seen the greatest impact. C_LIO_LIResidual errors in data entry on the point of care apps at the vaccination sites may have also occurred, though these errors are not likely to be widespread. C_LI

Higher serological responses and increased vaccine effectiveness demonstrate the value of extended vaccine schedules in combatting COVID-19 in England (preprint)

IntroductionIn January 2021, the UK decided to prioritise the delivery of the first dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) and AZD1222 (AstraZeneca) vaccines by extending the interval until the second dose up to 12 weeks. MethodsSerological responses were compared after BNT162b2 and AZD1222 vaccination with varying intervals in uninfected and previously-infected adults aged 50-89 years. These findings are evaluated against real-world national vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates against COVID-19 in England. ResultsWe recruited 750 participants aged 50-89 years, including 126 (16.8%) with evidence of previous infection; 421 received BNT162b2 and 329 and AZD1222. For both vaccines, over 95% had seroconverted 35-55 days after dose one, and 100% seroconverted 7+ days after dose 2. Following a 65-84 day interval between two doses, geometric mean titres (GMTs) at 14-34 days were 6-fold higher for BNT162b2 (6703; 95%CI, 5887-7633) than AZD1222 (1093; 806-1483), which in turn were higher than those receiving BNT162b2 19-29 days apart (694; 540 - 893). For both vaccines, VE was higher across all age-groups from 14 days after dose two compared to one dose, but the magnitude varied with interval between doses. Higher two-dose VE was observed with >6 week intervals between BNT162b2 doses compared to the authorised 3-week schedule, including [≥]80 year-olds. ConclusionOur findings support the UK approach of prioritising the first dose of COVID-19 vaccines, with evidence of higher protection following extended schedules. Given global vaccine constraints, these results are relevant to policymakers, especially with highly transmissible variants and rising incidence in many countries. FundingPublic Health England

Uptake of infant and pre-school immunisations in Scotland and England during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study of routinely collected data (preprint)

BackgroundIn 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic and control measures such as national lockdowns threatened to disrupt routine childhood immunisation programmes. Initial reports from the early weeks of lockdown in the UK and worldwide suggested that uptake could fall putting children at risk from multiple other infectious diseases. In Scotland and England, enhanced surveillance of national data for childhood immunisations was established to inform and rapidly assess the impact of the pandemic on infant and preschool immunisation uptake rates. Methods and findingsWe undertook an observational study using routinely collected data for the year prior to the pandemic (2019), and immediately before, during and after the first period of the UK lockdown in 2020. Data were obtained for Scotland from the Public Health Scotland "COVID19 wider impacts on the health care system" dashboard (https://scotland.shinyapps.io/phs-covid-wider-impact/) and for England from ImmForm. Five vaccinations delivered at different ages were evaluated; three doses of the 6-in-1 DTaP/IPV/Hib/HepB vaccine and two doses of MMR. Uptake in the periods in 2020 compared to that in the baseline year of 2019 using binary logistic regression analysis. For Scotland, we analysed timely uptake of immunisations, defined as uptake within four weeks of the child becoming eligible by age for each immunisation and data were also analysed by geographical region and indices of deprivation. For both Scotland and England, we assessed whether immunisations were up to date at approximately 6 months (all doses 6-in-1) and 16-18 months (first MMR) of age. We found that uptake rates within four weeks of eligibility in Scotland for all the five vaccine visits were higher during the 2020 lockdown period than in 2019. The difference ranged from 1.3% for the first dose of the 6-in-1 vaccine (95.3 vs 94%, OR 1.28, CI 1.18-1.39) to 14.3% for the second MMR dose (66.1 vs 51.8 %, OR 1.8, CI 1.74-1.87). Significant increases in uptake were seen across all deprivation levels, though, for MMR, there was evidence of greater improvement for children living in the least deprived areas. In England, fewer children who had been due to receive their immunisations during the lockdown period were up to date at 6 months (6-in-1) or 18 months (first dose MMR). The fall in percentage uptake ranged from 0.5% for first 6-in1 (95.8 vs 96.3%, OR 0.89, CI 0.86-0.91) to 2.1% for third 6-in-1 (86.6 vs 88.7%, OR 0.82, CI 0.81-0.83). ConclusionsThis study suggests that the national lockdown in Scotland was associated with a positive effect on timely childhood immunisation uptake, however in England a lower percentage of children were up to date at 6 and 18 months. Reason for the improve uptake in Scotland may include active measures taken to promote immunisation at local and national level during this period. Promoting immunisation uptake and addressing potential vaccine hesitancy is particularly important given the ongoing pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against the B.1.617.2 variant (preprint)

Background: The B.1.617.2 COVID-19 variant has contributed to the surge in cases in India and has now been detected across the globe, including a notable increase in cases in the UK. We estimate the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines against this variant. Methods: A test negative case control design was used to estimate the effectiveness of vaccination against symptomatic disease with both variants over the period that B.1.617.2 began circulating with cases identified based on sequencing and S-gene target status. Data on all symptomatic sequenced cases of COVID-19 in England was used to estimate the proportion of cases with B.1.617.2 compared to the predominant strain (B.1.1.7) by vaccination status. Results: Effectiveness was notably lower after 1 dose of vaccine with B.1.617.2 cases 33.5% (95%CI: 20.6 to 44.3) compared to B.1.1.7 cases 51.1% (95%CI: 47.3 to 54.7) with similar results for both vaccines. With BNT162b2 2 dose effectiveness reduced from 93.4% (95%CI: 90.4 to 95.5) with B.1.1.7 to 87.9% (95%CI: 78.2 to 93.2) with B.1.617.2. With ChAdOx1 2 dose effectiveness reduced from 66.1% (95% CI: 54.0 to 75.0) with B.1.1.7 to 59.8% (95%CI: 28.9 to 77.3) with B.1.617.2. Sequenced cases detected after 1 or 2 doses of vaccination had a higher odds of infection with B.1.617.2 compared to unvaccinated cases (OR 1.40; 95%CI: 1.13-1.75). Conclusions: After 2 doses of either vaccine there were only modest differences in vaccine effectiveness with the B.1.617.2 variant. Absolute differences in vaccine effectiveness were more marked with dose 1. This would support maximising vaccine uptake with two doses among vulnerable groups.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector vaccine on mortality following COVID-19 (preprint)

We estimated risk of death in vaccinated compared to unvaccinated COVID-19 cases. Cases vaccinated with 1 dose of BNT162b2 had 44% reduced risk of death, 55% with 1 dose of ChAdOx1, and 69% with 2 doses of BNT162b2. This is on top of the protection provided against becoming a case.

Early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination with BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector vaccine on symptomatic disease, hospitalisations and mortality in older adults in England (preprint)

Objectives To estimate the real-world effectiveness of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine and Astrazeneca ChAdOx1 vaccine against Confirmed COVID-19, hospitalisations and deaths. To estimate effectiveness on the UK variant of concern. Design Test negative case control design Setting Community COVID-19 PCR testing in England Participants All adults in England aged 70 years and older (over 7.5 million). All COVID-19 testing in the community among eligible individuals who reported symptoms between 8 th December 2020 and 19 th February 2021 was included in the analysis. Interventions One and two doses of BNT162b2 vaccine. One dose of ChAdOx1 vaccine. Main outcome measures Symptomatic PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalisations and deaths with COVID-19. Results Individuals aged >=80 years vaccinated with BNT162b2 prior to 4 th January, had a higher odds of testing positive in the first 9 days after vaccination (odds ratio up to 1.48, 95%CI 1.23-1.77), indicating that those initially targeted had a higher underlying risk of infection. Vaccine effectiveness was therefore estimated relative to the baseline post-vaccination period. Vaccine effects were noted from 10-13 days after vaccination, reaching an effectiveness of 70% (95% CI 59-78%) from 28-34 days, then plateauing. From 14 days after the second dose a vaccine effectiveness of 89% (95%CI: 85-93%) was seen. Individuals aged >=70 years vaccinated from 4 th January had a similar underlying risk of COVID-19 to unvaccinated individuals. With BNT162b2, vaccine effectiveness reached 61% (95%CI 51-69%) from 28-34 days after vaccination then plateaued. With the ChAdOx1 vaccine, vaccine effects were seen from 14-20 days after vaccination reaching an effectiveness of 60% (95%CI 41-73%) from 28-34 days and further increasing to 73% (95%CI 27-90%) from day 35 onwards. On top of the protection against symptomatic disease, cases who had been vaccinated with one dose of BNT162b2 had an additional 43% (95%CI 33-52%) lower risk of emergency hospitalisation and an additional 51% (95%CI 37-62%) lower risk of death. Cases who had been vaccinated with one dose of ChAdOx1 had an additional 37% (95% CI 3-59%) lower risk of emergency hospitalisation. There was insufficient follow-up to assess the effect of ChAdOx1 on mortality due to the later rollout of this vaccine. Combined with the effect against symptomatic disease, this indicates that a single dose of either vaccine is approximately 80% effective at preventing hospitalisation and a single dose of BNT162b2 is 85% effective at preventing death with COVID-19. Conclusion Vaccination with either a single dose of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a significant reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV2 positive cases in older adults with even greater protection against severe disease. Both vaccines show similar effects. Protection was maintained for the duration of follow-up (>6 weeks). A second dose of BNT162b2 provides further protection against symptomatic disease but second doses of ChAdOx1 have not yet been rolled out in England. There is a clear effect of the vaccines against the UK variant of concern.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in University Students: Cross-sectional Study, December 2020, England (preprint)

Background: In England, the reopening of universities in September 2020 coincided with a rapid increase in SARS-CoV-2 infection rates in university aged young adults. This study aimed to estimate SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence in students attending universities that had experienced a COVID-19 outbreak after reopening for the autumn term in September 2020.Methods: A cross-sectional serosurvey was conducted during 02-11 December 2020 in students aged ≤ 25 years across five universities in England. Blood samples for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing were obtained using a self-sampling kit and analysed using the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 N antibody and/or an in-house receptor binding domain (RBD) assay. Findings: SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in 2,905 university students was 17.8% (95%CI, 16.5-19.3), ranging between 7.6%-29.7% across the five universities. Seropositivity was associated with being younger likely to represent first year undergraduates (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 2.0-4.9), living in halls of residence (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.7-2.7) and sharing a kitchen with an increasing number of students (shared with 4-7 individuals, aOR 1.43, 95%CI 1.12-1.82; shared with 8 or more individuals, aOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.04-2.24). Seropositivity was 49% in students living in halls of residence that reported high SARS-CoV-2 infection rates (>8%) during the autumn term.Interpretation: Despite large numbers of cases and outbreaks in universities, less than one in five students (17.8%) overall had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at the end of the autumn term in England. In university halls of residence affected by a COVID-19 outbreak, however, nearly half the resident students became infected and developed SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Interactions between SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza and the impact of coinfection on disease severity: A test negative design (preprint)

Background: The potential impact of COVID-19 alongside influenza on morbidity, mortality and health service capacity is a major concern as the Northern Hemisphere winter approaches. This study investigates the interaction between influenza and COVID-19 during the latter part of the 2019-20 influenza season in England. Methods: Individuals tested for influenza and SARS-CoV-2 were extracted from national surveillance systems between 20/01/2020 and 25/04/2020. To estimate influenza infection on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, univariable and multivariable analyses on the odds of SARS-CoV-2 in those who tested positive for influenza compared to those who tested negative for influenza. To assess whether a coinfection was associated with severe SARS-CoV-2 outcome, univariable and multivariable analyses on the odds of death adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidity and coinfection status. Findings: The risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 68% lower among influenza positive cases, suggesting possible pathogenic competition between the two viruses. Patients with a coinfection had a risk of death of 5.92 (95% CI, 3.21-10.91) times greater than among those with neither influenza nor SARS-CoV-2 suggesting possible synergistic effects in coinfected individuals. The odds of ventilator use or death and ICU admission or death was greatest among coinfection patients showing strong evidence of an interaction effect compared to SARS-CoV-2/influenza acting independently. Interpretation: Cocirculation of these viruses could have a significant impact on morbidity, mortality and health service demand. Testing for influenza alongside SARS-CoV-2 and maximising influenza vaccine uptake should be prioritised to mitigate these risks.

Early impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing measures on routine childhood vaccinations in England, January to April 2020 (preprint)

Electronic health records were used to assess the early impact of COVID-19 on routine childhood vaccination in England to 26 April 2020. MMR vaccination counts fell from February 2020, and in the three weeks after introduction of social distancing measures were 19.8% lower (95% CI -20.7 to -18.9%) than the same period in 2019, before improving in mid-April. A gradual decline in hexavalent vaccination counts throughout 2020 was not accentuated on introduction of social distancing.