Third dose mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 reduces medical complaints seen in primary care: a matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination has been associated with both side effects and a reduction in COVID-related complaints due to the decrease in COVID-19 incidence. We aimed to investigate if individuals who received three doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines had a lower incidence of (a) medical complaints and (b) COVID-19-related medical complaints, both as seen in primary care, when compared to individuals who received two doses. METHODS: We conducted a daily longitudinal exact one-to-one matching study based on a set of covariates. We obtained a matched sample of 315,650 individuals aged 18-70 years who received the 3rd dose at 20-30 weeks after the 2nd dose and an equally large control group who did not. Outcome variables were diagnostic codes as reported by general practitioners or emergency wards, both alone and in combination with diagnostic codes of confirmed COVID-19. For each outcome, we estimated cumulative incidence functions with hospitalization and death as competing events. RESULTS: We found that the number of medical complaints was lower in individuals aged 18-44 years who received three doses compared to those who received two doses. The differences in estimates per 100,000 vaccinated were as follows: fatigue 458 less (95% confidence interval: 355-539), musculoskeletal pain 171 less (48-292), cough 118 less (65-173), heart palpitations 57 less (22-98), shortness of breath 118 less (81-149), and brain fog 31 less (8-55). We also found a lower number of COVID-19-related medical complaints: per 100,000 individuals aged 18-44 years vaccinated with three doses, there were 102 (76-125) fewer individuals with fatigue, 32 (18-45) fewer with musculoskeletal pain, 30 (14-45) fewer with cough, and 36 (22-48) fewer with shortness of breath. There were no or fewer differences in heart palpitations (8 (1-16)) or brain fog (0 (- 1-8)). We observed similar results, though more uncertain, for individuals aged 45-70 years, both for medical complaints and for medical complaints that were COVID-19 related. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a 3rd dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine administered 20-30 weeks after the 2nd dose may reduce the incidence of medical complaints. It may also reduce the COVID-19-related burden on primary healthcare services.

Transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between hospital workers and members of their household: Nationwide, registry-based, cohort study from Norway.

BACKGROUND: Understanding and limiting infection in healthcare workers (HCWs) and subsequent transmission to their families is always important and has been underscored during the COVID-19 pandemic. Except in specific and local settings, little is known about the extent of such transmissions at the national level. OBJECTIVE: To describe SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs and to estimate the risk of HCWs transmitting COVID-19 to their household members, including calculating the secondary attack rate to household members and estimating the risk for hospital workers to contract COVID-19 at home. METHODS: Using individual-level data on all HCWs employed in Norwegian hospitals and their household members, we identified (1) the number of HCWs who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between August 2020 and September 2021 and the proportion of those who were index cases in their own household and (2) the number of HCWs who were secondary cases in their own households. RESULTS: During this period, ∼3,005 (2,6%) hospital workers acquired COVID-19. Almost half of all hospital workers with confirmed COVID-19 were likely index cases in their own households. When the index case in a family was an HCW, the secondary attack rate was 24.8%. At least 17.8% of all confirmed COVID-19 cases among hospital workers were acquired in the household. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest not only that many HCWs are infected with SARS-CoV-2 in their households but also that infected HCWs constitute a serious infection risk to members of the HCW's household.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Norwegian schools during academic year 2020-21: population wide, register based cohort study

Objective To assess the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools in Norway mainly kept open during the covid-19 pandemic in the academic year 2020-21. Design Population wide, register based cohort study. Setting Primary and lower secondary schools in Norway open during the academic year 2020-21, with strict infection prevention and control measures in place, such as organisation of students into smaller cohorts. Contact tracing, quarantine, and isolation were also implemented, and testing of students and staff identified as close contacts. Participants All students and educational staff in primary and lower secondary schools in Norway, from August 2020 to June 2021. Main outcome measures Overall attack rate of SARS-CoV-2 transmission (AR14) was defined as the number of individuals (among students, staff, or both) in the school with covid-19, detected within 14 days of the index case, divided by the number of students and staff members in the school. AR14 to students (attack rates from all index cases to students only) and AR14 to school staff (attack rates from all index cases to staff members only) were also calculated. These measures for student and school staff index cases were also calculated separately to explore variation in AR14 based on the characteristics of the index case. Results From August 2020 to June 2021, 4078 index cases were identified;3220 (79%) students and 858 (21%) school staff. In most (2230 (55%)) schools with an index case, no subsequent individuals with covid-19 were found within 14 days;in 631 (16%) schools, only one more individual with covid-19 within 14 days was found. Overall, AR14 was 0.33% (95% confidence interval 0.32% to 0.33%). When restricting index cases and subsequent individuals with covid-19 to students born in the same year, AR14 to students (0.56-0.78%) was slightly higher. Conclusions Regarding the number of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 among students and staff, these results suggest that schools were not an important setting for transmission of the virus in Norway during the covid-19 pandemic in the academic year 2020-21.

Impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy-related healthcare utilisation: a prospective nationwide registry study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy-related healthcare utilisation and differences across social groups. DESIGN: Nationwide longitudinal prospective registry-based study. SETTING: Norway. PARTICIPANTS: Female residents aged 15-50 years (n=1 244 560). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pregnancy-related inpatient, outpatient and primary care healthcare utilisation before the COVID-19 pandemic (prepandemic: 1 January to 11 March 2020), during the initial lockdown (first wave: 12 March to 3 April 2020), during the summer months of low restrictions (summer period: 4 April to 31 August 2020) and during the second wave to the end of the year (second wave: 1 September to 31 December 2020). Rates were compared with the same time periods in 2019. RESULTS: There were 130 924 inpatient specialist care admissions, 266 015 outpatient specialist care consultations and 2 309 047 primary care consultations with pregnancy-related diagnostic codes during 2019 and 2020. After adjusting for time trends and cofactors, inpatient admissions were reduced by 9% (adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR)=0.91, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.95), outpatient consultations by 17% (aIRR=0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.86) and primary care consultations by 10% (aIRR=0.90, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.91) during the first wave. Inpatient care remained 3%-4% below prepandemic levels throughout 2020. Reductions according to education, income and immigrant background were also observed. Notably, women born in Asia, Africa or Latin America had a greater reduction in inpatient (aIRR=0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.97) and outpatient (aIRR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.95) care during the first wave, compared with Norwegian-born women. We also observed that women with low education had a greater reduction in inpatient care during summer period (aIRR=0.88, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.92), compared with women with high educational attainment. CONCLUSION: Following the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures in Norway in March 2020, there were substantial reductions in pregnancy-related healthcare utilisation, especially during the initial lockdown and among women with an immigrant background.

COVID-19 vaccination rates among healthcare workers by immigrant background: A nation-wide registry study from Norway.

AIMS: Studies have suggested that some minority groups tend to have lower vaccination rates than the overall population. This study aims to examine COVID-19 vaccination rates among healthcare workers in Norway, according to immigrant background. METHODS: We used individual-level, nation-wide registry data from Norway to identify all healthcare workers employed full time at 1 December 2020. We examined the relationship between country of birth and COVID-19 vaccination from December 2020 to August 2021, both crude and adjusted for, for example, age, sex, municipality of residence and detailed occupation codes in logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among all healthcare workers in Norway, immigrants had a 9 percentage point lower vaccination rate (85%) than healthcare workers without an immigrant background (94%) at 31 August 2021. The overall vaccination rate varied by country of birth, with immigrants born in Russia (71%), Serbia (72%), Lithuania (72%), Romania (75%), Poland (76%), Eritrea (77%) and Somalia (78%) having the lowest crude vaccination rates. When we adjusted for demographics and detailed occupational codes, immigrant groups that more often worked as healthcare assistants, such as immigrants from Eritrea and Somalia, increased their vaccination rates. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences in vaccination rates among immigrant groups employed in the healthcare sector in Norway indicate that measures to improve vaccine uptake should focus on specific immigrant groups rather than all immigrants together. Lower vaccination rates in some immigrant groups appear to be largely driven by the occupational composition, suggesting that some of the differences in vaccine rates can be attributed to variation in vaccine access.

Has vaccination alleviated the strain on hospitals due to COVID-19? A combined difference-in-difference and simulation approach.

BACKGROUND: Serious measures, including mass vaccination, have been taken to ensure sufficient hospital capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to high hospitalization risk in the oldest age groups, most countries prioritized elderly for vaccines. The aim of this study is to broaden the understanding of how vaccination in younger age groups relieved the strain on hospitals during the pandemic. METHODS: To determine the impact of vaccination on hospitalization, we relied on individual level data on health care use and vaccination from the Norwegian Emergency Preparedness Register Beredt C19. Using a pre-post design, we estimated the increase in hospitalization days from before to after confirmed COVID-19 for individuals aged 18-64 who were fully vaccinated (N=2 419) or unvaccinated (N=55 168) with comparison groups of vaccinated (N=4 818) and unvaccinated (N= 97 126) individuals without COVID-19. To evaluate whether vaccination itself contributed to a strain in hospitals, we use a similar design to study hospitalization rates before and after vaccination by comparing individuals vaccinated with the first dose (N=67 687) to unvaccinated individuals (N=130 769). These estimates were incorporated into a simulation of hospitalization days with different vaccine scenarios to show how the estimated results might have mattered for the hospitals and their capacity. RESULTS: Hospitalization days increased by 0.96 percentage point each day during the first week and 1.57 percentage points during the second week after testing positive for COVID-19 for unvaccinated individuals. The corresponding increase was 0.46 and 0.32 for vaccinated individuals, i.e., a substantial difference. The increase was significantly higher for those aged 45-64 than for those aged 18-25. We find no increase in hospitalization days due to vaccination. Simulation results show that vaccination reduced hospitalization days by 25 percent, mainly driven by age 45-64. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that vaccination of individuals aged 18-64 did alleviate pressure on hospitals. Whereas there was a substantial relieve from vaccinating the 45-64 age group, there was no such contribution from vaccinating the 18-25 age group. Our study highlights how simulation models can be useful when evaluating alternative vaccine strategies.

General practitioner visits after SARS-CoV-2 omicron compared with the delta variant in children in Norway: a prospective nationwide registry study.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection in children is followed by an immediate increase in primary care utilisation. The difference in utilisation following infection with the delta and omicron virus variants is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To study whether general practitioner (GP) contacts were different in children infected with the omicron versus delta variant for up to 4 weeks after the week testing positive. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: All residents in Norway aged 0-10. After excluding 47 683 children with a positive test where the virus variant was not identified as delta or omicron and 474 children who were vaccinated, the primary study population consisted of 613 448 children. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: GP visits. METHODS: We estimated the difference in the weekly share visiting the GP after being infected with the delta or omicron variant to those in the study population who were either not tested or who tested negative using an event study design, controlling for calendar week of consultation, municipality fixed effects and sociodemographic factors in multivariate logistic regressions. RESULTS: Compared with preinfection, increased GP utilisation was found for children 1 and 2 weeks after testing positive for the omicron variant, with an OR of 6.7 (SE: 0.69) in the first week and 5.5 (0.72) in the second week. This increase was more pronounced for children with the delta variant, with an OR of 8.2 (0.52) in the first week and 7.1 (0.93) in the second week. After 2 weeks, the GP utilisation returned to preinfection levels. CONCLUSION: The omicron variant appears to have resulted in less primary healthcare interactions per infected child compared with the delta variant.

SARS-CoV-2 infections and hospitalisations among immigrants in Norway-significance of occupation, household crowding, education, household income and medical risk: a nationwide register study.

BACKGROUND: As in other countries, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected Norway's immigrant population disproportionately, with significantly higher infection rates and hospitalisations. The reasons for this are uncertain. METHODS: Through the national emergency preparedness register, BeredtC19, we have studied laboratory-confirmed infections with SARS-CoV-2 and related hospitalisations in the entire Norwegian population, by birth-country background for the period 15 June 2020 to 31 March 2021, excluding the first wave due to limited test capacity and restrictive test criteria. Straightforward linkage of individual-level data allowed adjustment for demographics, socioeconomic factors (occupation, household crowding, education and household income), and underlying medical risk for severe COVID-19 in regression models. RESULTS: The sample comprised 5.49 million persons, of which 0.91 million were born outside of Norway, there were 82,532 confirmed cases and 3088 hospitalisations. Confirmed infections in this period (per 100,000): foreign-born 3140, Norwegian-born with foreign-born parents 4799 and Norwegian-born with Norwegian-born parent(s) 1011. Hospitalisations (per 100,000): foreign-born 147, Norwegian-born with foreign-born parents 47 and Norwegian-born with Norwegian-born parent(s) 37. The addition of socioeconomic and medical factors to the base model (age, sex, municipality of residence) attenuated excess infection rates by 12.0% and hospitalisations by 3.8% among foreign-born, and 10.9% and 46.2%, respectively, among Norwegian-born with foreign parents, compared to Norwegian-born with Norwegian-born parent(s). CONCLUSIONS: There were large differences in infection rates and hospitalisations by country background, and these do not appear to be fully explained by socioeconomic and medical factors. Our results may have implications for health policy, including the targeting of mitigation strategies.

Hospital Admissions for Respiratory Tract Infections in Children Aged 0-5 Years for 2017/2023.

Aim: To compare hospital admissions across common respiratory tract infections (RTI) in 2017-21, and project possible hospital admissions for the RTIs among children aged 0-12 months and 1-5 years in 2022 and 2023. Methods: In 644 885 children aged 0-12 months and 1-5 years, we plotted the observed monthly number of RTI admissions [upper- and lower RTI, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and COVID-19] from January 1st, 2017 until October 31st, 2021. We also plotted the number of RTI admissions with a need for respiratory support. We used the observed data to project four different scenarios of RTI admissions for the rest of 2021 until 2023, with different impacts on hospital wards: (1) "Business as usual," (2) "Continuous lockdown," (3) "Children's immunity debt," and (4) "Maternal and child immunity debt." Results: By October 31st, 2021, the number of simultaneous RTI admissions had exceeded the numbers usually observed at the typical season peak in January, i.e., ~900. Based on our observed data and assuming that children and their mothers (who transfer antibodies to the very youngest) have not been exposed to RTI over the last one and a half years, our scenarios suggest that hospitals should be prepared to handle two to three times as many RTI admissions, and two to three times as many RTI admissions requiring respiratory support among 0-5-year-olds as normal, from November 2021 to April 2022. Conclusion: Scenarios with immunity debt suggest that pediatric hospital wards and policy makers should plan for extended capacity.

Admissions to Norwegian Hospitals during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In mid-March 2020, the Norwegian government implemented measures to contain the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and hospitals prepared to handle an unpredictable inflow of patients with COVID-19. AIM: The study was performed to describe the changes in hospital admissions during the first phase of the pandemic. METHODS: The Norwegian Institute of Public Health established a national preparedness register with daily updates on COVID-19 cases and the use of health services. We used individual-level information on inpatients from the electronic journal systems for all hospitals in Norway to estimate daily hospital admissions. RESULTS: Before the onset of the pandemic in March, there was an average of 2400 inpatient admissions per day in Norway, which decreased to approximately 1500 in the first few days after lockdown measures were implemented. The relative magnitudes of the decreases were similar in men and women and across all age groups. The decreases were substantial for both elective (54%) and emergency (29%) inpatient care. The admission rate gradually increased and reached pre-pandemic levels in June. However, the reductions in admissions for pneumonia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease seemed to persist. CONCLUSIONS: The elective and emergency inpatient admission rates were substantially reduced a few days after the pandemic response measures were implemented. The ways in which the lack or postponement of care may have affected the health and well-being of patients is an important issue to be addressed in future research.

Healthcare use in 700 000 children and adolescents for six months after covid-19: before and after register based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore whether and for how long use of healthcare services is increased among children and adolescents after covid-19. DESIGN: Before and after register based study. SETTING: General population of Norway. PARTICIPANTS: Norwegians aged 1-19 years (n=706 885) who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 from 1 August 2020 to 1 February 2021 (n=10 279 positive, n=275 859 negative) or not tested (n=420 747) and were not admitted to hospital, by age groups 1-5, 6-15, and 16-19 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Monthly percentages of all cause and cause specific healthcare use in primary care (general practitioner, emergency ward) and specialist care (outpatient, inpatient) from six months before to about six months after the week of being tested for SARS-CoV-2, using a difference-in-differences approach. RESULTS: A substantial short term relative increase in primary care use was observed for participants during the first month after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result compared with those who tested negative (age 1-5 years: 339%, 95% confidence interval 308% to 369%; 6-15 years: 471%, 450% to 491%; 16-19 years: 401%, 380% to 422%). Use of primary care for the younger age groups was still increased at two months (1-5 years: 22%, 4% to 40%; 6-15 years: 14%, 2% to 26%) and three months (1-5 years: 26%, 7% to 46%, 6-15 years: 15%, 3% to 28%), but not for the oldest group (16-19 years: 11%, -2% to 24% and 6%, -7% to 19%, respectively). Children aged 1-5 years who tested positive also showed a minor long term (≤6 months) relative increase in primary care use (13%, -0% to 26%) that was not observed for the older age groups, compared with same aged children who tested negative. Results were similar yet the age differences less pronounced compared with untested controls. For all age groups, the increase in primary care visits was due to respiratory and general or unspecified conditions. No increased use of specialist care was observed. CONCLUSION: Covid-19 among children and adolescents was found to have limited impact on healthcare services in Norway. Preschool aged children might take longer to recover (3-6 months) than primary or secondary school students (1-3 months), usually because of respiratory conditions.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 into and within immigrant households: nationwide registry study from Norway.

BACKGROUND: Minority groups and immigrants have been hit disproportionally hard by COVID-19 in many developed countries, including Norway. METHODS: Using individual-level registry data of all Norwegian residents, we compared infections across all multiperson households. A household with at least one member born abroad was defined as an immigrant household. In households where at least one person tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from 1 August 2020 to 1 May 2021, we calculated secondary attack rates (SARs) as the per cent of other household members testing positive within 14 days. Logistic regression was used to adjust for sex, age, household composition and geography. RESULTS: Among all multiperson households in Norway (n=1 422 411), at least one member had been infected in 3.7% of the 343 017 immigrant households and 1.4% in the 1 079 394 households with only Norwegian-born members. SARs were higher in immigrant (32%) than Norwegian-born households (20%). SARs differed considerably by region, and were particularly high in households from West Asia, Eastern Europe, Africa and East Asia, also after adjustment for sex and age of the secondary case, household composition and geography. CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2 is more frequently introduced into multiperson immigrant households than into households with only Norwegian-born members, and transmission within the household occurs more frequently in immigrant households. The results are likely related to living conditions, family composition or differences in social interaction, emphasising the need to prevent introduction of SARS-CoV-2 into these vulnerable households.

Utilization of health care services before and after media attention about fatal side effects of the AstraZeneca vaccine: a nation-wide register-based event study.

BACKGROUND: Survey studies have found that vaccinated persons tend to report more side effects after being given information about side effects rather than benefits. However, the impact of high media attention about vaccine-related side effects on the utilization of health care is unknown. We aimed to assess whether utilization of health care services for newly vaccinated health care workers changed after media attention about fatal side effects of the AstraZeneca vaccine on March 11th, 2021, and whether changes differed by age, sex, or occupation. METHODS: We utilized individual-level data on health care use, vaccination, employment, and demographics available in the Norwegian emergency preparedness register Beredt C19. In all 99,899 health care workers in Norway who were vaccinated with AstraZeneca between February 11th and March 11th, we used an event-study design with a matched comparison group to compare the change in primary and inpatient specialist care use from 14 days before to 14 days after the information shock on March 11th, 2021. RESULTS: Primary health care use increased with 8.2 daily consultations per 1000 health care workers (95% CI 7.51 to 8.89) the week following March 11th for those vaccinated with AstraZeneca (n = 99,899), compared with no increase for the unvaccinated comparison group (n = 186,885). Utilization of inpatient care also increased with 0.8 daily hospitalizations per 1000 health care workers (95% CI 0.37 to 1.23) in week two after March 11th. The sharpest increase in daily primary health care use in the first week after March 11th was found for women aged 18-44 (10.6 consultations per 1000, 95% CI 9.52 to 11.68) and for cleaners working in the health care sector (9.8 consultations per 1000, 95% CI 3.41 to 16.19). CONCLUSIONS: Health care use was higher after the media reports of a few cases of fatal or severe side effects of the AstraZeneca vaccine. Our results suggest that the reports did not only lead vaccinated individuals to contact primary health care more, but also that physicians referred and treated more cases to specialist care after the new information.

Occupational risk of COVID-19 in the first versus second epidemic wave in Norway, 2020.

BackgroundThe occupational risk of COVID-19 may be different in the first versus second epidemic wave.AimTo study whether employees in occupations that typically entail close contact with others were at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation during the first and second epidemic wave before and after 18 July 2020, in Norway.MethodsWe included individuals in occupations working with patients, children, students, or customers using Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO-08) codes. We compared residents (3,559,694 on 1 January 2020) in such occupations aged 20-70 years (mean: 44.1; standard deviation: 14.3 years; 51% men) to age-matched individuals in other professions using logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, birth country and marital status.ResultsNurses, physicians, dentists and physiotherapists had 2-3.5 times the odds of COVID-19 during the first wave when compared with others of working age. In the second wave, bartenders, waiters, food counter attendants, transport conductors, travel stewards, childcare workers, preschool and primary school teachers had ca 1.25-2 times the odds of infection. Bus, tram and taxi drivers had an increased odds of infection in both waves (odds ratio: 1.2-2.1). Occupation was of limited relevance for the odds of severe infection, here studied as hospitalisation with the disease.ConclusionOur findings from the entire Norwegian population may be of relevance to national and regional authorities in handling the epidemic. Also, we provide a knowledge foundation for more targeted future studies of lockdowns and disease control measures.

Preterm birth after the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark: a registry-based difference-in-differences study.

BACKGROUND: Although some studies have reported a decrease in preterm birth following the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the findings are inconsistent. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the incidences of preterm birth before and after the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures in Scandinavian countries using robust population-based registry data. STUDY DESIGN: This was a registry-based difference-in-differences study using births from January 2014 through December 2020 in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. The changes in the preterm birth (<37 weeks) rates before and after the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures (set to March 12, 2020) were compared with the changes in preterm birth before and after March 12 from 2014 to 2019. The differences per 1000 births were calculated for 2-, 4-, 8-, 12-, and 16-week intervals before and after March 12. The secondary analyses included medically indicated preterm birth, spontaneous preterm birth, and very preterm (<32 weeks) birth. RESULTS: A total of 1,519,521 births were included in this study. During the study period, 5.6% of the births were preterm in Norway and Sweden, and 5.7% were preterm in Denmark. There was a seasonal variation in the incidence of preterm birth, with the highest incidence during winter. In all the 3 countries, there was a slight overall decline in preterm births from 2014 to 2020. There was no consistent evidence of a change in the preterm birth rates following the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures, with difference-in-differences estimates ranging from 3.7 per 1000 births (95% confidence interval, -3.8 to 11.1) for the first 2 weeks after March 12, 2020, to -1.8 per 1000 births (95% confidence interval, -4.6 to 1.1) in the 16 weeks after March 12, 2020. Similarly, there was no evidence of an impact on medically indicated preterm birth, spontaneous preterm birth, or very preterm birth. CONCLUSION: Using high-quality national data on births in 3 Scandinavian countries, each of which implemented different approaches to address the pandemic, there was no evidence of a decline in preterm births following the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures.

Impacts of mild COVID-19 on elevated use of primary and specialist health care services: A nationwide register study from Norway.

AIM: To explore the temporal impact of mild COVID-19 on need for primary and specialist health care services. METHODS: In all adults (≥20 years) tested for SARS-CoV-2 in Norway March 1st 2020 to February 1st 2021 (N = 1 401 922), we contrasted the monthly all-cause health care use before and up to 6 months after the test (% relative difference), for patients with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 (non-hospitalization, i.e. mild COVID-19) and patients with a negative test (no COVID-19). RESULTS: We found a substantial short-term elevation in primary care use in all age groups, with men generally having a higher relative increase (men 20-44 years: 522%, 95%CI = 509-535, 45-69 years: 439%, 95%CI = 426-452, ≥70 years: 199%, 95%CI = 180-218) than women (20-44 years: 342, 95%CI = 334-350, 45-69 years = 375, 95%CI = 365-385, ≥70 years: 156%, 95%CI = 141-171) at 1 month following positive test. At 2 months, this sex difference was less pronounced, with a (20-44 years: 21%, 95%CI = 13-29, 45-69 years = 38%, 95%CI = 30-46, ≥70 years: 15%, 95%CI = 3-28) increase in primary care use for men, and a (20-44 years: 30%, 95%CI = 24-36, 45-69 years = 57%, 95%CI = 50-64, ≥70 years: 14%, 95%CI = 4-24) increase for women. At 3 months after test, only women aged 45-70 years still had an increased primary care use (14%, 95%CI = 7-20). The increase was due to respiratory- and general/unspecified conditions. We observed no long-term (4-6 months) elevation in primary care use, and no elevation in specialist care use. CONCLUSION: Mild COVID-19 gives an elevated need for primary care that vanishes 2-3 months after positive test. Middle-aged women had the most prolonged increased primary care use.

COVID-19 infection among bartenders and waiters before and after pub lockdown.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how different bans on serving alcohol in Norwegian bars and restaurants were related to the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in bartenders and waiters and in persons in any occupation. METHODS: In 25 392 bartenders and waiters and 1 496 328 persons with other occupations (mean (SD) age 42.0 (12.9) years and 51.8% men), we examined the weekly rates of workers tested and detected with SARS-CoV-2, 1-10 weeks before and 1-5 weeks after implementation of different degrees of bans on serving alcohol in pubs and restaurants, across 102 Norwegian municipalities with: (1) full blanket ban, (2) partial ban with hourly restrictions (eg, from 22:00 hours) or (3) no ban, adjusted for age, sex, testing behaviour and population size. RESULTS: By 4 weeks after the implementation of ban, COVID-19 infection among bartenders and waiters had been reduced by 60% (from 2.8 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.6) to 1.1 (95% CI 0.5 to 1.6) per 1000) in municipalities introducing full ban, and by almost 50% (from 2.5 (95% CI 1.5 to 3.5) to 1.3 (95% CI 0.4 to 2.2) per 1000) in municipalities introducing partial ban. A similar reduction within 4 weeks was also observed for workers in all occupations, both in municipalities with full (from 1.3 (95% CI 1.3 to 1.4) to 0.9 (95% CI 0.9 to 1.0)) and partial bans (from 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3) to 0.5 (95% CI 0.5 to 0.6)). CONCLUSION: Partial bans on serving alcohol in bars and restaurants may be similarly associated with declines in confirmed COVID-19 infection as full bans.