Oral side effects of COVID-19 vaccines in 32 European countries: Analysis of EudraVigilance reports.

The recent reports of oral side effects (SEs) following COVID-19 vaccination warrant further investigation into their prevalence, severity, and aetiology. This study was conducted to synthesize the first-ever population-level evidence about oral SEs of COVID-19 vaccines in Europe. The European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Pharmacovigilance (EudraVigilance) database was accessed in August 2022 to extract summary data of all potential oral SEs reported after COVID-19 vaccination. The data were reported descriptively and cross-tabulated to facilitate sub-group analysis per vaccine type, sex, and age group. Dysgeusia was the most commonly reported oral SE (0.381 case per each 100 received reports), followed by oral paraesthesia (0.315%), ageusia (0.296%), lip swelling (0.243%), dry mouth (0.215%), oral hypoaesthesia (0.210%), swollen tongue (0.207%), and taste disorder (0.173%). Females had significantly (Sig. < 0.001) a higher prevalence of all most common (top 20) oral SEs, except for salivary hypersecretion, which was equally prevalent among females and males. The present study revealed a low prevalence of oral SEs, with taste-related, other sensory and anaphylactic SEs being the most common SEs in Europe, similar to what was found earlier among the US population. Future studies should explore the potential risk factors of oral sensory and anaphylactic SEs to verify whether they are causally linked to COVID-19 vaccines.

Monkeypox (MPOX)-Related Knowledge and Vaccination Hesitancy in Non-Endemic Countries: Concise Literature Review.

In May 2022, the world witnessed the emergence of human monkeypox (MPOX), a new zoonotic viral disease in multiple non-endemic countries. This health threat has been associated with increased anxiety, especially after the COVID-19 catastrophe. In addition, people are exposed to an unprecedented amount of information, making them vulnerable to misinformation that may lead to embracing conspiracy theories. This literature review was conducted to evaluate the levels of MPOX-related knowledge and attitudes toward its vaccination by reviewing studies indexed in MEDLINE® until 15 November 2022. A total of 16 studies conducted in non-endemic countries were included in this review, predominantly in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Nine studies investigated exclusively MPOX-related knowledge and awareness, and two studies were exclusively related to MPOX vaccines, while five studies dealt with both topics. The target populations were mainly healthcare professionals and the general adult population. The results revealed an unsatisfactory level of knowledge and awareness among certain groups. Regarding vaccination, the results showed that vaccine hesitancy is still common for healthcare professionals except among Chinese healthcare professionals, where the rate of vaccine acceptance was estimated at 90.1%. This review could help understand the MPOX-related knowledge and awareness and vaccine hesitancy in the first months of the emergence of the MPOX by comparing their evolution in recent studies.

Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines Primer Doses: Experience of Saudi Healthcare Workers Participating in CoVaST-SA.

BACKGROUND: Side effects emerging after COVID-19 vaccines may adversely impact public confidence in vaccines. Therefore, this study was designed to explore the short-term side effects of COVID-19 vaccines as a part of the COVID-19 Vaccines Safety Tracking (CoVaST) study. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out to collect data from healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia. The study was initiated between June and December 2021. A validated questionnaire was used in this study consisting of four categories, including demographic characteristics and medical anamnesis of the participants, COVID-19-associated anamnesis, and side effects of vaccine uptake. RESULTS: The study included 1039 participants, of which 70.2% were females, and their median age was 34. About 82.9% and 52.3% of the participants reported a minimum of both one local and systemic side effect, respectively. Females, young participants (≤34 years old), and non-obese participants had more potential to disclose post-vaccination side effects than their counterparts. Heterologous schedules and viral vector-based vaccines were linked with a greater rate of systemic side effects, whereas homologous vaccination schedules and mRNA-based vaccines were linked with a greater rate of local side effects. CONCLUSION: Future studies on COVID-19 vaccines should focus on the role of BMI, previous infection, and vaccination schedule in terms of vaccine safety and reactogenicity.

Monkeypox Knowledge and Vaccine Hesitancy of Czech Healthcare Workers: A Health Belief Model (HBM)-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: The recent human monkeypox virus (HMPXV) outbreak in non-endemic countries that started in May 2022 has raised concerns among public health authorities worldwide. Healthcare workers (HCWs) play a decisive role during epidemics in transmitting accurate information to the public and motivating them to pursue protective behaviours, including immunisation. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted in the Czech Republic in September 2022 to evaluate HMPXV-related knowledge and vaccination perceptions among HCWs. The study utilised a digital self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) to collect data from the target population. The proposed SAQ inquired about participants' sociodemographic and anamnestic characteristics, perceived knowledge of HMPXV, factual knowledge, and vaccination perceptions according to the health belief model (HBM). RESULTS: A total of 341 participants were included in this study; most of them were females (88.9%), allied HCWs (89.4%), heterosexuals (87.1%), married (61.9%), and vaccinated against COVID-19 (91.2%). Only 8.8% of the participants agreed to receive vaccination against HMPXV; 44.9% rejected it, while 46.3% were hesitant. While digital news portals (47.5%) and social media (25.8%) were among the most utilised sources of information about HMPXV, the scientific journals (5.6%), ECDC (5%), and the U.S. CDC (1.5%) were the least common sources. The participants demonstrated suboptimal levels of factual knowledge, especially regarding HMPXV vaccines (1.5 ± 1.2 (0-4)) and treatments (0.9 ± 0.9 (0-4)). Additionally, several misconceptions were detectable among the participants, regarding topics such as the availability of effective vaccines and antivirals against HMPXV, the risk of vertical transmission, and homosexual stigmatisation. The HBM indicated that the cues to action and perceived susceptibility were the most important constructs to predict HMPXV vaccine acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: the findings of this study call upon public health practitioners and health policymakers in the Czech Republic to act accordingly in order to determine the drivers of vaccine hesitancy among Czech HCWs. Dedicated educational campaigns should aim to counter the HCWs' misconceptions around HMPXV, and future studies should aim to explore the prevalence and drivers of HMPXV vaccine hesitancy among the general population.

COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy (VBH) of healthcare professionals and students in Poland: Cross-sectional survey-based study.

Since healthcare professionals (HCPs) play a critical role in shaping their local communities' attitudes toward vaccines, HCPs' beliefs and attitudes toward vaccination are of vital importance for primary prevention strategies. The present study was designed as a cross-sectional survey-based study utilizing a self-administered questionnaire to collect data about COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy (VBH) among Polish HCPs and students of medical universities (MUSs). Out of the 443 included participants, 76.3% were females, 52.6% were HCPs, 31.8% were previously infected by SARS-CoV-2, and 69.3% had already received COVID-19 vaccine booster doses (VBD). Overall, 74.5% of the participants were willing to receive COVID-19 VBD, while 7.9 and 17.6% exhibited their hesitance and rejection, respectively. The most commonly found promoter for acceptance was protection of one's health (95.2%), followed by protection of family's health (81.8%) and protection of community's health (63.3%). Inferential statistics did not show a significant association between COVID-19 VBH and demographic variables, e.g., age and gender; however, the participants who had been previously infected by SARS-CoV-2 were significantly more inclined to reject the VBD. Protection from severe infection, community transmission, good safety profile, and favorable risk-benefit ratio were the significant determinants of the COVID-19 VBD acceptance and uptake. Fear of post-vaccination side effects was one of the key barriers for accepting COVID-19 VBD, which is consistent with the pre-existing literature. Public health campaigns need to highlight the postulated benefits of vaccines and the expected harms of skipping VBD.

Self-reported side effects of the Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers in Ethiopia, Africa: A cross-sectional study

Introduction Ethiopia is the second most populous country in Africa. Ethiopia received most of its COVID-19 vaccines through donations. The Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine is the first to be donated to Ethiopia by the COVAX facility. Healthcare workers were the priority population that received the Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. However, there was no nationwide study on the safety of the vaccine in Ethiopia. This study aimed to measure the prevalence and predictors of self-reported side effects of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine. Materials and methods The study employed a cross-sectional design. A sample of healthcare workers who took Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was drawn from four regions of Ethiopia;namely, Amhara, Oromia, Somali, and Southwest. Data were collected on sociodemographic characteristics, medical anamnesis, COVID-19 related anamnesis, and COVID-19 vaccine anamnesis via telephone interview. Descriptive and inferential analyses were done. The software, IBM SPSS Statistics v21.0, was used for analyses of data. Results Out of 384 people, 346 responded (response rate: 90.1%). Female accounted for 34.1% of the respondents. The mean age of the respondents was 31.0 years (Standard Deviation (SD) = 7.4). Nurses accounted for 43.7% of the respondents. The prevalence of at least one local- and systemic-side effect was 50.6 and 44.5%, respectively. The most frequent local- and systemic- side effect were injection site pain and headache, respectively. Both types of side effects mostly subsided in the first 3 days. A third of healthcare workers with side effects took at least one medication. Paracetamol followed by diclofenac sodium were taken by healthcare workers to overcome side effects. There was no independent predictor of local side effect. After controlling for age and chronic diseases, the odds of healthcare workers with COVID-19 like symptoms to experience systemic side effects was 1.38 (Confidence Interval (CI): 1.04–1.82) times more than that of healthcare workers without COVID-19 like symptoms. Conclusions The prevalence of local- and systemic-side effects of the Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was modest. As the symptoms were mostly common in the first 3 days, it is preferable to monitor healthcare workers at least in the first 3 days following the administration of the vaccine.

Oral Adverse Events Following COVID-19 Vaccination: Analysis of VAERS Reports.

Background: Oral adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 vaccination have been sporadically reported during the previous months, warranting further investigation for their prevalence and suspected relationship with vaccine-elicited immune response. Methods: A retrospective analysis using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data was conducted to evaluate AEs within the oral cavity (mucosa, tongue, lips, palate, dentition, salivary glands) and AEs involving taste and other sensations. Oral AEs reported after receiving COVID-19 vaccination (test group) and seasonal influenza vaccination (control group) were extracted and cross-tabulated to assess their relative prevalence. Results: Among the 128 solicited (suspected) oral AEs, oral paresthesia (0.872%) was most reported after receiving COVID-19 vaccines, followed by the swelling of lips (0.844%), ageusia (0.722%), oral hypoesthesia (0.648%), swollen tongue (0.628%), and dysgeusia (0.617%). The reported prevalence of oral AEs was higher in the COVID-19 vaccine group than in the seasonal influenza group. The distribution pattern of the most reported oral AEs was similar for both COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. Female sex, older age (>39 years old), primer doses, and mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines exhibited a higher reported prevalence of oral AEs. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, COVID-19 vaccines were found to be associated with rare oral AEs that are predominantly similar to those emerging following seasonal influenza vaccines. The most commonly reported oral AEs were oral paraesthesia (mouth-tingling), lip swelling, and ageusia, representing various pathophysiologic pathways that remain unclear. Taste-related AEs should be acknowledged in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the public should be adequately informed about a potential taste dysfunction after receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. Dentists and dental teams need to be aware of the prevalence, severity, and prognosis of oral AEs to inform their patients and increase public confidence in vaccines.

Side Effects of COVID-19 Inactivated Virus vs. Adenoviral Vector Vaccines: Experience of Algerian Healthcare Workers.

Healthcare workers were prioritized in vaccination campaigns globally because they are exposed to the highest risk of contamination by SARS-CoV-2. This study evaluated the self-reported post-vaccination side effects of inactivated (BBIBP-CorV and CoronaVac) and adenoviral vector-based (AZD1222, Gam-COVID-Vac and Ad26.COV2.S) vaccines among Algerian healthcare workers using a validated questionnaire. The final analysis included 721 healthcare workers, with a predominance of females (59.1%) and younger individuals 20-30 years old (39.4%). Less than half (49.1%) of the respondents reported at least one local side effect, while 53.8% reported at least one systemic side effect. These side effects were more prevalent among viral vector vaccinees than inactivated virus vaccinees. The most common local side effects were injection site pain (39%) and arm pain (25.4%), while fatigue (34.4%), fever (28.4%), headache (24.8%) and myalgia (22.7%) were the most prevalent systemic side effects. The side effects appeared earlier among inactivated virus vaccines recipients and generally lasted for 2 to 3 days for the two vaccinated groups. The risk factors associated with a higher prevalence of side effects included female gender, allergic individuals, individuals with regular medication, those who contracted the COVID-19 disease and those who received two doses for both inactivated and viral-based vaccines groups. Despite the higher prevalence of post-vaccination side effects among adenoviral vector vaccines recipients, both vaccines groups were equally effective in preventing symptomatic infections, and no life-threatening side effects were reported in either vaccine group.

Prevalence and Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Hesitancy Among German University Students and Employees.

COVID-19 booster hesitancy (VBH) is a serious public health challenge which acts simultaneously with the waning vaccine-elicited immunity and the emerging viral variants to prolong the pandemic interval. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of COVID-19 VBH among a highly educated subset of the German population and to explore the potential demographic, anamnestic, and psychosocial determinants of this problem. A cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted in December 2021 among German university students and employees to evaluate their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine booster (VB) doses. The study used a self-administered questionnaire that was developed and disseminated digitally, and the questionnaire inquired about participants' demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related anamnesis, COVID-19 vaccine-related anamnesis, and psychosocial predictors of COVID-19 VBH. A total of 930 participants were recruited, of which 608 (65.4%) were students, 682 (73.3%) were females, and their mean age was 29.08 ± 10.93 years. Fifty-five participants (5.9%) had been previously infected by COVID-19 and the vast majority of infections happened before the first vaccine dose. Over 95% of the participants had received at least one vaccine dose, and the most commonly administered vaccine was BNT162b2. The overall COVID-19 VB acceptance was satisfactory (87.8%) and induced by various altruistic promoters, e.g., family health protection, community health protection, and patients' health protection. The students (86.3%), the previously infected participants (76.4%), the participants who did not receive primer doses of COVID-19 vaccines (2.5 %), and those who were hospitalized (40%) and sought medical care/treatment after receiving primer doses (86.8%) were less likely to accept COVID-19 VB compared to the employees (90.7%), the participants who were not previously infected (88.6%) and those who received primer dose (91.7%), and the participants who were not hospitalized (92%) nor sought medical care/treatment after primer doses (92.9%), respectively. The perceived effectiveness of COVID-19 VB against severe illness (adjusted odds ratio "AOR": 47.65-95% confidence interval "CI": 23.65-96.49), symptomatic infection (AOR: 9.87-95% CI: 5.20-18.71), community transmission (AOR: 5.34-95% CI: 3.00-9.49) and emerging variants (AOR: 19.12-95% CI: 10.57-34.55) were key predictors for COVID-19 VB acceptance; therefore, it needs to be highlighted in vaccine messaging. In addition, the perceived safety of COVID-19 VB and ethical dilemmas of vaccine justice need to be addressed publicly.

COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Hesitancy (VBH) and Its Drivers in Algeria: National Cross-Sectional Survey-Based Study.

Due to the emergence of various highly contagious variants of SARS-CoV-2, vaccine boosters were adopted as a complementary strategy in different countries. This strategy has, however, posed another challenge for the national authorities to convince their population to receive the booster after the first challenge of COVID-19 primer dose vaccines. This study was conducted to determine COVID-19 vaccine booster acceptance and its associated factors in the general population in Algeria. Using social media platforms, an online self-administered questionnaire was distributed between 28 January and 5 March 2022 for all Algerian citizens who received COVID-19 vaccines. Overall, 787 respondents were included in this study. Among them, 51.6%, 25%, and 23.8% accepted, rejected, or were hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine booster, respectively. However, only 13.2% declared receiving the booster dose. Additionally, while 58.2% of the respondents declared being relieved after primer vaccination, 11.4% among them declared that they regretted being vaccinated. The most common reasons for acceptance were experts' recommendations (24.6%) and the belief that COVID-19 vaccine boosters were necessary and efficient, while rejection was mainly due to the belief that primer doses are sufficient (15.5%), or that vaccination in general is inefficient (8%). Males, older individuals, those with chronic comorbidities or a history of COVID-19 infection, non-healthcare workers, and those with low educational levels were associated with significantly higher odds for booster acceptance. Moreover, belief that booster doses were necessary and efficient, disagreeing with the notion that primer doses were not sufficient, experts' recommendations, and the desire to travel abroad were significantly associated with higher odds of COVID-19 vaccine booster acceptance.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance of Pregnant and Lactating Women (PLW) in Czechia: An Analytical Cross-Sectional Study.

Pregnant and lactating women (PLW) represent a particular population subset with increased susceptibility for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, even though the evidence about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines was delayed due to their initial exclusion from development trials. This unclear situation could have led to increased COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy levels among PLW; therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of Czech PLW towards COVID-19 vaccines and the determinants of their attitudes. An analytical cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out in the University Hospital Brno (South Moravia, Czechia) between August and October 2021. The study utilised a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) adapted from previous instruments used for the same purpose. The SAQ included closed-ended items covering demographic characteristics, clinical and obstetric characteristics, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, and potential psychosocial predictors of vaccine acceptance. Out of the 362 included participants, 278 were pregnant (PW) and 84 were lactating women (LW). The overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (immediate and delayed) level was substantially high (70.2%), with a significant difference between PW (76.6%) and LW (48.8%). Out of the 70.2% who agreed to receive the vaccine, 3.6% indicated immediate acceptance, and 66.6% indicated delayed acceptance. Only 13.3% of the participants indicated their acceptance of their physician's vaccination recommendation during pregnancy or while lactating, and 62.2% were against it. Our results agreed with the recent studies that revealed that PW tended to have a high level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, and they were also inclined to resist professional recommendations because they predominantly preferred to delay their vaccination. The pregnancy trimester, education level, employment status, and previous live births were significant determinants for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. The most commonly preferred vaccine type was mRNA-based vaccines, followed by viral vector-based and inactivated virus vaccines. The first top priority of PLW was vaccine safety for their children, followed by vaccine safety for the PLW and vaccine effectiveness. Regarding psychosocial predictors, media/social media, trust in the government, the pharmaceutical industry, and healthcare professionals, partners, and a positive risk-benefit ratio were significant promoters for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Findings from this study suggest that promotional interventions targeting PLW should use web platforms and focus on vaccine safety evidence, the expected benefits of vaccines and potential harms of the infection.

The Associations of COVID-19 Induced Anxiety, Related Knowledge and Protective Behavior.

On the last day of 2019, 44 pneumonia cases with unknown etiology were reported to the World Health Organization (WHO) Country Office of China. This was the first cluster of what would be defined later as coronavirus disease (COVID-19). A self-administered questionnaire with multiple-choice items was created in Microsoft Forms (Microsoft Corp. Redmond, WA. 2020). A 5-point Likert scale with ten items, where "1" refers to "Totally disagree" and "5" refers to "Totally agree," was developed to evaluate the anxiety induced by the COVID-19 outbreak highlighting the suggested sources of stress and anxious emotions, e.g., "When I or any family member go outside home during this COVID-19 outbreak I feel anxious". A 5-point Likert scale with 14 items, where "1" refers to "Not at all like me" and "5" refers to "Just like me," was developed to evaluate people's protective behaviors against coronavirus infection from 3 dimensions: Routine Protective Behaviors (RPB), Post-exposure Protective Behaviors (PPB), and Post-exposure Risky Behaviors (PRB). Items in RPB are aimed to measure individuals' protective behaviors in daily life when facing the epidemic. A multiple-choice scale of 12 items was developed to assess public awareness of COVID-19 as an emerging infectious disease. The primary objective of this work was to develop psychometrically sound scales to assess COVID-19 induced anxiety (CIAS), protective behaviors towards COVID-19 (PBCS), and COVID-19 related knowledge. The results indicated that COVID-19 induced the 6-item version of the CIAS can adequately measure anxiety level. Infectious disease outbreaks represent specific health-related crises that may impact people's emotions in different patterns according to their emerging nature. Therefore, the CIAS was designed to cover the potential anxiety sources for the general population during the COVID-19 outbreak.

COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Hesitancy (VBH) of Healthcare Workers in Czechia: National Cross-Sectional Study.

The emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants and waning vaccine-elicited immunity are two public health challenges that occurred simultaneously and synergistically during the summer of 2021 and led to a surging demand for COVID-19 vaccine booster dose (BD) rollout. This study aimed to evaluate the COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy (VBH) among Czech healthcare workers to explore the potential determinants of VBH. A national cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out between 3 and 11 November 2021, using an online self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) that explored the participants' demographic characteristics, COVID-19 infection and vaccine anamneses, willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine BD, and the psychosocial drivers of VBH. A total of 3454 HCW properly responded to the online SAQ, of which 80.9% were females, 30.3% were medical professionals, and 50.5% were ≤47 years old. Most of the participants were already inoculated against SARS-CoV-2 (95.2%), and BTN162b2 was the most commonly administered vaccine (90.7%). As the study sample was planned to represent the target population, it revealed a high level of BD acceptance (71.3%) among Czech HCW, while 12.2% were still hesitant and 16.6% were against the currently available BD. These results are consistent with other recent results from central Europe. Medical professional, male, and older participants were more likely to accept BD rather than allied health professional, female, and younger participants. The BDs' perceived effectiveness against severe illness, symptomatic infection, and community transmission was a significant and strong predictor for BD acceptance, while the effectiveness against the circulating variants was not that important for our target population. The BDs' perceived safety and ethical dilemmas of vaccine justice should be addressed sufficiently while communicating with HCW and other population groups. The altruistic reasons for BD acceptance, i.e., family protection, patient protection, and community health protection, underpin the recommendation of postponing the COVID-19 vaccine mandating in favour of stressing these altruistic concerns amid public health messaging.

The Impact of Information Sources on COVID-19-Related Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) among University Students: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.

COVID-19 is an emerging respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus accompanied by a tsunami of misinformation and fake news. This can weaken the public health responses by affecting the COVID-19-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of the public. Therefore, this cross-sectional study was designed during the early stage of the pandemic to evaluate the KAP of Palestinian university students and their commonly used information sources. We found that the most trusted information source among students was the World Health Organization (WHO), followed by the Palestinian Ministry of Health (MoH) briefings and healthcare workers, whereas social media was the most frequently used source of information. The participants exhibited a high level of COVID-19-related knowledge, having an average score of 8.65 (range: 0-10). In total, 76% avoided going to crowded places, and only 33% wore a mask while being outdoors. The vast majority (93%) checked the accuracy of COVID-19-related information before publishing it, 56% used the WHO and MoH briefings for fact-checking, and only 8% relied on healthcare workers. This was particularly the case for those who lived in refugee camps. This study provides an insight into the information sources used by Palestinian university students, the sources they trust, and the information formats they prefer. These results may help public health authorities to locate the information sources through which university students should be targeted. Efforts should be made to recommend healthcare workers as credible information sources. In this way, they will be able to prevent the spread of misleading information and provide high-quality information, especially within unconventional settings such as refugee camps.

Global Prevalence of COVID-19-Associated Mucormycosis (CAM): Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mucormycosis, a secondary fungal infection, gained much attention in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. This deadly infection has a high all-cause mortality rate and imposes a significant economic, epidemiological, and humanistic burden on the patients and healthcare system. Evidence from the published epidemiological studies showed the varying prevalence of COVID-19-associated mucormycosis (CAM). This study aims to compute the pooled prevalence of CAM and other associated clinical outcomes. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and WHO COVID-19 databases were scanned to retrieve the relevant articles until August 2021. All studies reporting the prevalence of mucormycosis among COVID-19 patients were eligible for inclusion. Two investigators independently screened the articles against the selection criteria, extracted the data, and performed the quality assessment using the JBI tool. The pooled prevalence of CAM was the primary outcome, and the pooled prevalence of diabetes, steroid exposure, and the mortality rate were the secondary outcomes of interest. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 2 was used for performing the meta-analysis. This meta-analysis comprised six studies with a pooled sample size of 52,916 COVID-19 patients with a mean age of 62.12 ± 9.69 years. The mean duration of mucormycosis onset was 14.59 ± 6.88 days after the COVID-19 diagnosis. The pooled prevalence of CAM (seven cases per 1000 patients) was 50 times higher than the highest recorded background of mucormycosis (0.14 cases per 1000 patients). A high mortality rate was found among CAM patients with a pooled prevalence rate of 29.6% (95% CI: 17.2-45.9%). Optimal glycemic control and the judicious use of steroids should be the approach for tackling rising CAM cases.

Self-Reported Adverse Events of COVID-19 Vaccines in Polish Healthcare Workers and Medical Students. Cross-Sectional Study and Pooled Analysis of CoVaST Project Results in Central Europe.

BACKGROUND: Optimization of COVID-19 vaccination rate among healthcare personnel is of utmost priority to secure provision of uninterrupted care and to protect the most vulnerable patients. This study, as part of the global CoVaST project, aimed to assess the occurrence of short-term adverse events (SRAEs) of two most administered COVID-19 vaccines, mRNA-based (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) and viral vector-based (AstraZeneca) in healthcare sector workers (HWs). METHODS: A cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out for the first time among 317 Polish healthcare sector personnel and medical students using a validated and pre-tested questionnaire. The online questionnaire included 25 pre-tested, validated questions concerning demographic data, medical parameters, COVID-19-related anamneses, and local or systemic reactions (reactogenicity) associated with COVID-19 vaccination. Descriptive statistics, inferential tests and binary logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: Out of the 247 participating HWs, 79.8% were females, and 77.5% received mRNA-based vaccines, while 24.5% received a viral vector-based vaccine. Cumulatively, 78.9% and 60.7% of the participants reported at least one local and one systemic SRAE respectively, following their COVID-19 first or second dose of vaccine. A wide array of SRAEs was observed, while pain at injection site (76.9%) was the most common local SRAE, and fatigue (46.2%), headache (37.7%), muscle pain (31.6%) were the most common systemic SRAEs. The vast proportion of local (35.2%) and systemic (44.8%) SRAEs subsided up to 1 day after inoculation with both types of vaccines. The mRNA-based vaccine versions seem to cause higher prevalence of local SRAEs, mainly pain within injection site (81.3% vs. 71.7%; p = 0.435), while the viral vector-based vaccine was linked with increased incidents of mild systemic side effects (76.7% vs. 55.3%; p = 0.004) after both doses. Pooled analysis revealed uniform results while comparing the prevalence of SRAEs in HWs as recipients in four central European countries (OR = 2.38; 95% CI = 2.03-2.79). CONCLUSIONS: The study confirmed the safety of commonly administered vaccines against COVID-19, which were associated with mild, self-resolving adverse events. No major vaccine-related incidents were reported which would affect every day functioning, significantly. The younger age group (below 29 y.o.) were associated with an increased risk of adverse events generally. The results enhanced current data regarding COVID-19 vaccination active surveillance in selected occupational groups.

The Associations of COVID-19 Induced Anxiety, Related Knowledge and Protective Behavior

On the last day of 2019, 44 pneumonia cases with unknown etiology were reported to the World Health Organization (WHO) Country Office of China. This was the first cluster of what would be defined later as coronavirus disease (COVID-19). A self-administered questionnaire with multiple-choice items was created in Microsoft Forms (Microsoft Corp. Redmond, WA. 2020). A 5-point Likert scale with ten items, where “1” refers to “Totally disagree” and “5” refers to “Totally agree,” was developed to evaluate the anxiety induced by the COVID-19 outbreak highlighting the suggested sources of stress and anxious emotions, e.g., “When I or any family member go outside home during this COVID-19 outbreak I feel anxious”. A 5-point Likert scale with 14 items, where “1” refers to “Not at all like me” and “5” refers to “Just like me,” was developed to evaluate people’s protective behaviors against coronavirus infection from 3 dimensions: Routine Protective Behaviors (RPB), Post-exposure Protective Behaviors (PPB), and Post-exposure Risky Behaviors (PRB). Items in RPB are aimed to measure individuals’ protective behaviors in daily life when facing the epidemic. A multiple-choice scale of 12 items was developed to assess public awareness of COVID-19 as an emerging infectious disease. The primary objective of this work was to develop psychometrically sound scales to assess COVID-19 induced anxiety (CIAS), protective behaviors towards COVID-19 (PBCS), and COVID-19 related knowledge. The results indicated that COVID-19 induced the 6-item version of the CIAS can adequately measure anxiety level. Infectious disease outbreaks represent specific health-related crises that may impact people’s emotions in different patterns according to their emerging nature. Therefore, the CIAS was designed to cover the potential anxiety sources for the general population during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Side Effects of mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccines among Young Adults (18-30 Years Old): An Independent Post-Marketing Study.

Young adults had been widely perceived as a low-risk group for COVID-19 severity; therefore, they were deprioritised within the mass vaccination strategies as their prognosis of COVID-19 infection is relatively more favourable than older age groups. On the other hand, vaccination of this demographic group is indispensable to achieve herd immunity. A cross-sectional survey-based study was used to evaluate the side effects of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines among university students in the Czech Republic. The validated questionnaire was delivered in a digital form, and it consisted of demographic data; COVID-19 vaccine-related anamnesis; and local, systemic, orofacial, and skin-related side effects' prevalence, onset, and duration. Out of the 539 included participants, 70.1% were females and 45.8% were <23 years old. The vast majority (95.2%) reported at least one side effect. The most common side effect was injection site pain (91.8%), followed by fatigue (62.5%), headache (36.4%), and muscle pain (34.9%). The majority of local side effects occurred after both doses (74.4%), while most systemic side effects occurred after the second dose only (56.2%). Most local (94.2%) and systemic (93.3%) side effects resolved within three days after vaccination. Females participants' adjusted odds ratio (AOR) showed they were 2.566 (CI 95%: 1.103-5.970) times more likely to experience post-vaccination side effects, and the participants who received two doses reported an increased AOR of 1.896 (0.708-5.077) for experiencing side effects. The results of this study imply that mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are highly probably safe for young adults, and further studies are required to investigate the role of medical anamnesis, prior COVID-19 infection, and gender in side effects incidence.