CDC's COVID-19 International Vaccine Implementation and Evaluation Program and Lessons from Earlier Vaccine Introductions.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) supports international partners in introducing vaccines, including those against SARS-CoV-2 virus. CDC contributes to the development of global technical tools, guidance, and policy for COVID-19 vaccination and has established its COVID-19 International Vaccine Implementation and Evaluation (CIVIE) program. CIVIE supports ministries of health and their partner organizations in developing or strengthening their national capacities for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination programs. CIVIE's 7 priority areas for country-specific technical assistance are vaccine policy development, program planning, vaccine confidence and demand, data management and use, workforce development, vaccine safety, and evaluation. We discuss CDC's work on global COVID-19 vaccine implementation, including priorities, challenges, opportunities, and applicable lessons learned from prior experiences with Ebola, influenza, and meningococcal serogroup A conjugate vaccine introductions.

Perception of online and face to face microbiology laboratory sessions among medical students and faculty at Arabian Gulf University: a mixed method study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all spheres of society including medical education and healthcare systems. In response to the pandemic, there has been a transition in medical education practice from traditional forms of teaching to online instruction delivery and virtual learning. Effective clinical microbiology education involves a combination of 'hands-on' practical learning and instructional delivery of scientific knowledge. Microbiology practical laboratories are critical learning environments offering 'hands-on' learning experiences that cannot be replicated through online learning. We conducted a mixed-methods study to understand the perception of online and face-to-face microbiology laboratory sessions among the medical students and microbiology faculty at Arabian Gulf University (AGU). METHODS: The study participants were third and fourth-year undergraduate medical students and faculty involved in delivering microbiology labs at AGU. The questionnaire consisted of questions ranging from perceived learning style to attitude towards online delivery of microbiology curriculum. After the questionnaire administration (google form), focus group discussion (FGD) was conducted for students and microbiology faculty separately. RESULTS: Among 168 students, 50.6% preferred face-to-face lab sessions as compared to 30.4% who preferred online labs, and 51.8% considered online labs to be an essential addition to face-to-face labs. Among the faculty, 85.7% preferred the face-to-face mode of teaching. All the faculty (100%) disagreed that all the microbiology labs teaching should be online. 57.2% considered online labs to be an essential addition to traditional face-to-face labs. Both faculty and students hold that a blended mode of instructional delivery is vital and indispensable for the transfer of skills and knowledge for microbiology students. CONCLUSION: The blended mode of delivering microbiology laboratory sessions in medical school is successful and well-received by both students and faculty. Students take the responsibility for furthering their own learning and understanding of concepts. Instructors have also noticed that blending learning strategies also successfully enhances the development of cognitive skills and problem-solving abilities in students. A review of the microbiology lab curriculum is necessary to identify content areas that can be delivered effectively through online, face-to-face lab sessions, or both, supported with appropriate tools and infrastructure.

Evaluation of the Utility of Online Objective Structured Clinical Examination Conducted During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to profound restrictions on the face-to-face learning and assessment in all educational institutions, particularly the medical schools. The College of Medicine and Medical Sciences of the Arabian Gulf University (CMMS-AGU) conducted the final exams, both theoretical and clinical components, for its MD students online. This study was conducted to evaluate the utility of online clinical exams held at CMMS-AGU. Methods: This is a cross-sectional, mixed method study that included samples from final year medical students, examiners, and heads of clinical departments. Data were collected through surveys, structured interviews, documents' review, and calculation of online examination's psychometrics. Descriptive statistics were used. Quantitative data were presented in the form of means and standard deviations. Responses of heads of clinical departments in the structured interview were transcribed and analyzed thematically based on three pre-established themes. Results: Quantitative and qualitative data on the utility (validity, reliability, acceptability, educational impact, and cost and feasibility) of online objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) were collected. Content validity of the online clinical examination was established through high mean scores of content representativeness, which was confirmed by the heads of clinical departments regarding the proper coverage of clinical skills. Criterion validity was established through a high correlation between clinical and theoretical exam results (r = 0.75). Reliability of the exam was established through an acceptable Cronbach's alpha value (0.70 to 0.78) over the four days of the examinations. The examinations were perceived as highly acceptable by both students and examiners. High educational impact was inferred from students' responses and review of documents. The examination was found to be feasible and of reasonable cost. Conclusion: Online OSCE might be a good alternative of conventional clinical assessments in times of crises and impossibility of having in-person contact between students, examiners, and patients. An important major drawback is still present in such initiatives, which is the inability to assess students' physical examination skills.

Online, Face-to-Face, or Blended Learning? Faculty and Medical Students' Perceptions During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Method Study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic forced educational institutions to adopt online methods which were inevitable to keep continuity of education across all academia after suspension of traditional educational systems. The aim of this study was to explore the experience of faculty and students of online and face-to-face learning, and their preference of the mode of learning after the pandemic. METHODS: This is a mixed-method study. Quantitative data was collected through a survey from 194 medical students and 33 faculty members, while qualitative data was collected through two focus group discussions with 9 students and another two with 13 faculty members. Quantitative variables were presented as means and standard deviations. Paired samples t-test and Chi-square test were used. Thematic analysis of qualitative data was used to code, interpret, and make sense of data. RESULTS: Mean scores of responses of faculty members and students were higher for face-to-face and blended learning compared to online learning in all survey statements with statistically significant differences. More than half of the students (53.1%) preferred the face-to-face mode of learning, while most of the faculty members (60.6%) preferred the blended mode of learning. Qualitative analysis identified five themes, namely: "Transforming the way theoretical teaching sessions are given," "Face-to-face teaching at campus cannot be replaced for some types of education," "Interaction in online sessions is limited," "Problems and challenges of online examinations," and "Technical issues and challenges of online education." It revealed suggestions that at least 30% of the curriculum could be taught online post-COVID-19. Some aspects of clinically oriented teaching including history taking and case discussions can also be delivered online in the future. Faculty members and students reported that dealing with online education was not difficult, although the transition was not smooth. CONCLUSION: Medical students and faculty members were in favor of face-to-face and blended modes of learning. However, they perceived online mode of learning as an acceptable adaptation in theoretical teaching and in some clinically oriented teaching including history taking and clinical case discussions. Although face-to-face education in medicine is irreplaceable, the blended mode of learning remains an acceptable and practical solution for the post-COVID era.

Polarity Based Model for Guiding Medical School Strategy During Crisis - A Cross Sectional Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Crises in academia can best be dealt with as a polarity that needs to be leveraged rather than a problem that needs to be solved. This work aimed at utilizing the Polarity Approach for Continuity and Transformation (PACT)™ to establish a guide for medical schools during times of crisis to minimize the effect of crisis-driven decisions on strategic growth. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A qualitative study following the 5-Steps of the PACT process was conducted. A virtual mapping session was held with 108 medical educators from 22 countries to determine the upsides and downsides of strategic orientation and crisis management subsequently. RESULTS: Four polarity maps were generated identifying four tension areas; University reputation, mission, teams, and individuals followed by a 72-item assessment and another mapping session to map the warning signs and action steps. A comparison between private school scores and the whole cohort of respondents showed that private schools had the least problems in team-oriented work. CONCLUSION: This study highlighted the importance of taking measures to communicate the mission and supporting team functions inside universities either by enhancing resources or utilizing time and effort-saving strategies.

Research on the Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Essential Response Personnel (RECOVER): Protocol for a Multisite Longitudinal Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Workers critical to emergency response and continuity of essential services during the COVID-19 pandemic are at a disproportionally high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Prospective cohort studies are needed for enhancing the understanding of the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, identifying risk factors, assessing clinical outcomes, and determining the effectiveness of vaccination. OBJECTIVE: The Research on the Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Essential Response Personnel (RECOVER) prospective cohort study was designed to estimate the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, examine the risk factors for infection and clinical spectrum of illness, and assess the effectiveness of vaccination among essential workers. METHODS: The RECOVER multisite network was initiated in August 2020 and aims to enroll 3000 health care personnel (HCP), first responders, and other essential and frontline workers (EFWs) at 6 US locations. Data on participant demographics, medical history, and vaccination history are collected at baseline and throughout the study. Active surveillance for the symptoms of COVID-19-like illness (CLI), access of medical care, and symptom duration is performed by text messages, emails, and direct participant or medical record reports. Participants self-collect a mid-turbinate nasal swab weekly, regardless of symptoms, and 2 additional respiratory specimens at the onset of CLI. Blood is collected upon enrollment, every 3 months, approximately 28 days after a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 14 to 28 days after a dose of any COVID-19 vaccine. From February 2021, household members of RT-PCR-confirmed participants are self-collecting mid-turbinate nasal swabs daily for 10 days. RESULTS: The study observation period began in August 2020 and is expected to continue through spring 2022. There are 2623 actively enrolled RECOVER participants, including 280 participants who have been found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Enrollment is ongoing at 3 of the 6 study sites. CONCLUSIONS: Data collected through the cohort are expected to provide important public health information for essential workers at high risk for occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and allow early evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/31574.

COVID-19 Infection, Reinfection, and Vaccine Effectiveness in a Prospective Cohort of Arizona Frontline/Essential Workers: The AZ HEROES Research Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Arizona Healthcare, Emergency Response, and Other Essential workers Study (AZ HEROES) aims to examine the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 illness among adults with high occupational exposure risk. OBJECTIVE: Study objectives include estimating incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in essential workers by symptom presentation and demographic factors, determining independent effects of occupational and community exposures on incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, establishing molecular and immunologic characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in essential workers, describing the duration and patterns of rRT-PCR-positivity, and examining post-vaccine immunologic response. METHODS: Eligible participants include Arizona residents aged 18-85 years who work at least 20 hours per week in an occupation involving regular direct contact (within three feet) with others. Recruitment goals are stratified by demographic characteristics (50% aged 40 or older, 50% women, and 50% Hispanic or American Indian), by occupation (40% healthcare personnel, 30% first responders, and 30% other essential workers), and by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (with up to 50% seropositive at baseline). Information on sociodemographics, health and medical history, vaccination status, exposures to individuals with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, use of personal protective equipment, and perceived risks are collected at enrollment and updated through quarterly surveys. Every week, participants complete active surveillance for COVID-19-like illness (CLI) and self-collect nasal swabs. Additional self-collected nasal swab and saliva specimens are collected in the event of CLI onset. Respiratory specimens are sent to Marshfield Laboratories and tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assay. CLI symptoms and impact on work and productivity are followed through illness resolution. Serum specimens are collected every 3 months and additional sera are collected following incident rRT-PCR positivity and after each COVID-19 vaccine dose. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections will be calculated by person-weeks at risk and compared by occupation and demographic characteristics and by seropositivity status and infection and vaccination history. RESULTS: The AZ HEROES study was funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Enrollment began July 27, 2020 and as of May 1, 2021 a total of 3,165 participants have been enrolled in the study. CONCLUSIONS: AZ HEROES is unique in aiming to recruit a diverse sample of essential workers and prospectively following strata of SARS-CoV-2 seronegative and seropositive adults. Survey results combined with active surveillance data on exposure, CLI, weekly molecular diagnostic testing, and periodic serology will be used to estimate the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, assess the intensity and durability of immune responses to natural infection and COVID-19 vaccination, and contribute to the evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT: DERR1-10.2196/28925.

Evaluation of Curricular Adaptations Using Digital Transformation in a Medical School in Arabian Gulf during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Several institutions adopted innovative approaches to ensure continued learning for their students during the COVID-19 pandemic. All curricular innovations should undergo curriculum evaluation; hence, the objective of this paper was to share the salient features of evaluation using faculty and student's feedback on curricular adaptations implemented through digital transformation in a Medical School in Arabian Gulf during the COVID-19 pandemic, using a structured questionnaire. METHODOLOGY: After getting informed consent, feedback about acceptability and limitations regarding various aspects of curricular adaptations was obtained from students and faculty, using a structured and validated questionnaire. The response rate from faculty and students was 90% and 60%, respectively. The qualitative responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: About 97% agreed that Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment, ZOOM, and Examsoft platforms were effective for curriculum delivery and assessment. 85% agreed that they were able to maintain online interactivity and 92% conveyed their willingness to continue to use these digital innovations even after the end of pandemic. "Lack of interactivity," "missed clinical training," "live sessions were more engaging than recorded ones" were the prominent themes emerged out of thematic analysis. All faculty and students expressed concern over the lack of clinical training involving real patients. All of them expressed appreciation to the university and faculty for their enormous efforts. CONCLUSION: Innovative ways should be considered to start clinical teaching with real patients, during pandemic. The learning outcomes of digital learning should be validated across all institutions. New indicators related to "digital learning" should be considered for accreditation of medical schools.