ABSTRACT
Background: The emergence of the COVID-19 vaccination has been critical in changing the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, with estimates suggesting vaccinations have prevented millions of deaths worldwide. To ensure protection remains high in groups at high-risk, booster vaccinations in the UK have been targeted based on age and clinical vulnerabilities. We sought to identify adults at increased risk of COVID-19 death, and compared to non-COVID-19 risk, despite having received a booster dose as part of the 2022 autumn vaccination campaign in England. Methods: We undertook a national retrospective cohort study using data from the 2021 Census linked to electronic health records. We fitted cause-specific Cox regression to examine the association between a range of health conditions and the risk of COVID-19 death and all-other-cause death for adults aged 50-100-years in England vaccinated with a booster in autumn 2022. Findings: Our total population was 14,644,570 people; there were 6,800 COVID-19 deaths (52. and 150,075 non-COVID-19 deaths. Having learning disabilities or Down Syndrome (hazard ratio=5.07;conficence interval=3.69-6.98), pulmonary hypertension or fibrosis(2.88;2.43-3.40), motor neuron disease, multiple sclerosis, myasthenia or Huntington's disease (2.94, 1.82-4.74), cancer of blood and bone marrow (3.11;2.72-3.56), Parkinson's disease (2.74;2.34-3.20), lung or oral cancer (2.57;2.04 to 3.24), dementia (2.64;2.46 to 2.83) or liver cirrhosis (2.65;1.95 to 3.59) was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 death. Individuals with cancer of the blood or bone marrow, chronic kidney disease, cystic fibrosis, pulmonary hypotension or fibrosis, or rheumatoid arthritis or systemic lupus erythematosus had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 death relative to other causes of death compared with individuals who did not have diagnoses of these comorbidities. Interpretation: We identify groups who are at increased risk of COVID-19 death relative to non-COVID-19 deaths. Vulnerable groups should continue to be prioritised for COVID-19 booster doses to minimise the risk of COVID-19 deaths.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , DeathABSTRACT
Objective: To estimate the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against hospitalisation for COVID-19 and death involving COVID-19 in England using linked population level data sources including the 2021 Census. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: England, 21 March 2021 to 20 March 2022. Participants: Individuals alive and aged 16+ on 21 March 2021, resident in England, enumerated in the 2021 Census as a usual resident, and able to link to an NHS number. A sample of 583,840 individuals was used for the analysis. Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination: first dose, second dose and third dose/first booster dose, with categories for time since each dose. Main outcome measures: Hospitalisation for COVID-19 or death involving COVID-19. An adjusted Cox proportional hazard model was used to estimate the hazard ratio for the outcomes for vaccinated participants for different doses and time since dose compared to unvaccinated individuals. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as (1 minus hazard ratio)x 100%. A control outcome of non-COVID-19 death was also assessed. Results: Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation for COVID-19 was 52.1% (95% confidence interval 51.3% to 52.8%) for a first dose, 55.6% (55.2% to 56.1%) for a second dose and 77.6% (77.3% to 78.0%) for a third dose, with a decrease in vaccine effectiveness 3+ months after the third dose. Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 mortality was 58.7% (52.7% to 63.9%) for a first dose, 88.5% (87.5% to 89.5%) for a second dose and 93.2% (92.9% to 93.5%) for a third dose, with evidence of waning 3+ months after the second and third doses. For the second dose, which is the most comparable across the different time-periods, vaccine effectiveness was higher against COVID-19 hospitalisation but slightly lower against COVID-19 mortality in the Omicron dominant period than the period before the Omicron variant became dominant. Vaccine effectiveness against both COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality was higher in general for mRNA vaccines than non mRNA vaccines, however this could be influenced by the different populations given each vaccine vector. Non-zero VE against non-COVID-19 mortality indicates that residual confounding may impact the results, despite the inclusion of up-to-date socio-demographic adjustments and various sources of health data, with possible frailty bias, confounding by indication and a healthy vaccinee effect observed. Conclusions: The vaccine effectiveness estimates show increased protection with number of doses and a high level of protection against both COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality for the third/booster dose, as would be expected from previous research. However, despite the various sources of health data used to adjust the models, the estimates for different breakdowns and for non-COVID-19 mortality expose residual confounding by health status, which should be considered when interpreting estimates of vaccine effectiveness.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Kallmann Syndrome , DeathABSTRACT
BackgroundLittle is known about the risk of Long Covid following reinfection with SARS-CoV-2. We estimated the likelihood of new-onset, self-reported Long Covid after a second SARS-CoV-2 infection, and compared to a first infection. MethodsWe included UK COVID-19 Infection Survey participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 1 November 2021 and 8 October 2022. The primary outcome was self-reported Long Covid 12 to 20 weeks after each infection. Separate analyses were performed for those <16 years and [≥]16 years. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for new-onset Long Covid using logistic regression, comparing second to first infections, controlling for socio-demographic characteristics and calendar date of infection, plus vaccination status in those [≥]16 years. ResultsOverall, Long Covid was reported by those [≥]16 years after 4.0% and 2.4% of first and second infections, respectively; the corresponding estimates among those <16 years were 1.0% and 0.6%. The aOR for Long Covid after second compared to first infections was 0.72 (95% confidence interval: 0.63-0.81) for those [≥]16 years and 0.93 (0.57-1.53) for those <16 years. ConclusionsThe risk of new-onset Long Covid after a second SARS-CoV-2 infection is lower than that after a first infection for those [≥]16 years, though there is no evidence of a difference in risk for those <16 years. However, there remains some risk of new-onset Long Covid after a second infection, with around 1 in 40 of those [≥]16 years and 1 in 165 of those <16 years reporting Long Covid after a second infection.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: Evidence on the long-term employment consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection is lacking. We used data from a large, community-based sample in the UK to estimate associations between Long Covid and subsequent employment outcomes. Methods: This was an observational, longitudinal study using a pre-post design. We included UK COVID-19 Infection Survey participants who completed questionnaires on Long Covid from 3 February 2021 to 30 September 2022 when they were aged 16 to 64 years and not in full-time education. We used conditional logit modelling to explore the time-varying relationship between Long Covid status [≥]12 weeks after a first test-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (reference: pre-infection) and labour market inactivity (neither working nor looking for work) or workplace absence lasting [≥]4 weeks. Results: Of 206,299 included participants (mean age 45 years, 54% female, 92% white), 15% were ever inactive in the labour market and 10% were ever long-term absent during follow-up. Compared with pre-infection, inactivity was higher in participants reporting Long Covid 30 to <40 weeks (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.45; 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.81) or 40 to <52 weeks (1.34; 1.05 to 1.72) post-infection. Compared with pre-infection, reporting Long Covid was also associated with increased odds of long-term absence 18 to <24 weeks (1.40; 1.04 to 1.90) and 24 to <30 weeks (1.45; 1.03 to 2.04) post-infection, but not beyond 30 weeks. Combining with official statistics on Long Covid prevalence, our estimates translate to 27,000 (95% CI: 6,000 to 47,000) working-age adults in the UK being inactive because of their Long Covid symptoms in July 2022. Conclusions: Long Covid is likely to have contributed to reduced levels of participation in the UK labour market, though it is unlikely to be the sole driver. Further research is required to quantify the contribution of other factors, such as indirect health effects of the pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: The risk of COVID-19 severity and mortality differs markedly by age, socio-demographic characteristics and pre-existing health status. Various studies have suggested that higher air pollution exposures also increase the likelihood of dying from COVID-19. Objectives: To assess the association between long-term outdoor air pollution (NO2, NOx, PM10 and PM2.5) concentrations and the risk of death involving COVID-19, using a large individual-level dataset. Methods: We used comprehensive individual-level data from the Office for National Statistics' Public Health Data Asset for September 2020 to January 2022 and London Air Quality Network modelled air pollution concentrations available for 2016. Using Cox proportional hazard regression models, we adjusted for potential confounders including age, sex, vaccination status, dominant virus variants, geographical factors (such as population density), ethnicity, area and household-level deprivation, and health comorbidities. Results: There were 737,356 confirmed COVID-19 cases including 9,315 COVID-related deaths. When only adjusting for age, sex, and vaccination status, there was an increased risk of dying from COVID-19 with increased exposure to all air pollutants studied (NO2: HR 1.07 [95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.12] per 10 g /m3; NOx: 1.05[1.02-1.09] per 20 g /m3; PM10: 1.32[1.15-1.51] per 10 g /m3; PM2.5: 1.29[1.12-1.49] per 5 g /m3). However, after adjustment including ethnicity and socio-economic factors the HRs were close to unity (NO2: 0.98[0.90-1.06]; NOx: 0.99[0.94-1.04]; PM10: 0.95[0.74-1.22]; PM2.5: 0.90[0.67-1.20]). Additional adjustment for dominant variant or pre-existing health comorbidities did not alter the results. Conclusions: Observed associations between long-term outdoor air pollution exposure and COVID-19 mortality in London are strongly confounded by geography, ethnicity and deprivation.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Objective: To estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) for preventing COVID-19 hospital admission in women first infected with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy, and assess how this compares to VE among women of reproductive age who were not pregnant when first infected. Design: Population-based cohort study using national, linked Census and administrative data. Setting: England, United Kingdom, from 8th December 2020 to 31st August 2021. Participants: 815,4777 women aged 18 to 45 years (mean age, 30.4 years) who had documented evidence of a first SARS-CoV-2 infection in NHS Test and Trace data or Hospital Episode Statistics. Main outcome measures: A hospital inpatient episode where COVID-19 was recorded as the primary diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for calendar time of infection and sociodemographic factors related to vaccine uptake and risk of severe COVID-19, were used to estimate VE as the complement of the hazard ratio for COVID-19 hospital admission. Results: Compared with unvaccinated pregnant women, the adjusted rate of COVID-19 hospital admission was 76% (95% confidence interval 69% to 82%) lower for single-vaccinated pregnant women and 83% (75% to 88%) lower for double-vaccinated pregnant women. These estimates were similar to those found for non-pregnant women: 79% (76% to 81%) for single-vaccinated and 82% (80% to 83%) for double-vaccinated. Among those vaccinated more than 90 days before infection, being double-vaccinated was associated with a greater reduction in risk than being single-vaccinated. Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccination is associated with reduced rates of severe illness in pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2, and the reduction in risk is similar to that for non-pregnant women. Waning of vaccine effectiveness occurs more quickly after one dose of a vaccine than two doses.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background Ethnic differences in the risk of severe COVID-19 may be linked to household composition. We quantified the association between household composition and risk of severe COVID-19 by ethnicity for older individuals. Methods With the approval of NHS England, we analysed ethnic differences in the association between household composition and severe COVID-19 in people aged 67 or over in England. We defined households by number of generations living together, and used multivariable Cox regression stratified by location and wave of the pandemic and accounted for age, sex, comorbidities, smoking, obesity, housing density and deprivation. We included 2 692 223 people over 67 years in wave 1 (01/02/2020-31/08/2020) and 2 731 427 in wave 2 (01/09/2020-31/01/2021). Findings Multigenerational living was associated with increased risk of severe COVID-19 for White and South Asian older people in both waves (e.g. wave 2, 67+ living with 3 other generations vs 67+ year olds only: White HR 1.61 95% CI 1.38-1.87, South Asian HR 1.76 95% CI 1.48-2.10), with a trend for increased risks of severe COVID-19 with increasing generations in wave 2. Interpretation Multigenerational living was associated with severe COVID-19 in older adults. Older South Asian people are over-represented within multigenerational households in England, especially in the most deprived settings. The number of generations in a household, number of occupants, ethnicity and deprivation status are important considerations in the continued roll-out of COVID-19 vaccination and targeting of interventions for future pandemics. Funding This research was funded in part, by the Wellcome Trust. For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC-BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , ObesityABSTRACT
Objectives: To assess whether there is a change in the incidence of cardiac and all-cause death in young people following COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated individuals. Design: Self-controlled case series. Setting: National, linked electronic health record data in England. Study population: Individuals aged 12-29 who had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccination and died between 8 December 2020 and 2 February 2022 and registered by 16 February 2022 within 12 weeks of COVID-19 vaccination; Individuals aged 12-29 who died within 12 weeks of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Main outcome measures: Cardiac and all-cause deaths occurring within 12 weeks of vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: Compared to the baseline period, there was no evidence of a change in the incidence of cardiac death in the six weeks after vaccination, whether for each of weeks 1 to 6 or the whole six-week period. There was a decrease in the risk of all-cause death in the first week after vaccination and no change in each of weeks 2 to 6 after vaccination or whole six-week period after vaccination. Subgroup analyses by sex, age, vaccine type, and last dose also showed no change in the risk of death in the first six weeks after vaccination. There was a large increase in the incidence of cardiac and all-cause death in the overall risk period after SARS-CoV-2 infection among the unvaccinated. Conclusion: There is no evidence of an association between COVID-19 vaccination and an increased risk of death in young people. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with substantially higher risk of cardiac related death and all-cause death.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , DeathABSTRACT
Objective To examine socio-demographic disparities in SARS-CoV-2 case rates during the second (Alpha) and third (Delta) waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design Retrospective, population-based cohort study. Setting Resident population of England. Participants 39,006,194 people aged 10 years and over who were enumerated at the 2011 Census, registered with the National Health Service (NHS) and alive on 1 September 2020. Main outcome measures Testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the second wave (1 September 2020 to 22 May 2021) or third wave (23 May to 10 December 2021) of the pandemic. We calculated age-standardised case rates by socio-demographic characteristics and used logistic regression models to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs). Results During the study period, 5,767,584 individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. In the second wave, the fully-adjusted odds of having a positive test, relative to the White British group, were highest for the Bangladeshi (OR: 1.88, 95% CI 1.86 to 1.90) and Pakistani (1.81, 1.79 to 1.82) ethnic groups. Relative to the Christian group, Muslim and Sikh religious groups had fully-adjusted ORs of 1.58 (1.57 to 1.59) and 1.74 (1.72 to 1.76), respectively. Greater area deprivation, disadvantaged socio-economic position, living in a care home and low English language proficiency were also associated with higher odds of having a positive test. However, the disparities between groups varied over time. Being Christian, White British, non-disabled, and from a more advantaged socio-economic position were all associated with increased odds of testing positive during the third wave. Conclusion There are large socio-demographic disparities on SARS-CoV-2 cases which have varied between different waves of the pandemic. Research is now urgently needed to understand why these disparities exist to inform policy interventions in future waves or pandemics. What is already known on this topic People with pre-existing health conditions or disability, ethnic minority groups, the elderly, some religious groups, people with low socio-economic status, and those living in deprived areas have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of risk of infection and adverse outcomes. What this study adds Using linked data on 39 million people in England, we found that during the second wave, COVID-19 case rates were highest among the Bangladeshi and Pakistani ethnic groups, the Muslim religious group, individuals from deprived areas and of low socio-economic position; during the third wave, being Christian, White British, non-disabled, and from a more advantaged socio-economic position were all associated with increased odds of receiving a positive test Adjusting for geographical factors, socio-demographic characteristics, and pre-pandemic health status explained some, but not all, of the excess risk When stratifying the dataset by broad age groups, the odds of receiving a positive test remained higher among the Bangladeshi and Pakistani ethnic groups aged 65 years and over during the third wave, which may partly explain the continued elevated mortality rates in these groups
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Objective To assess the risk of death involving COVID-19 following infection from Omicron (B.1.1.539/BA.1) relative to Delta (B.1.617.2). Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting England, UK, 1 December 2021 to 25 January 2022. Participants 1,035,163 people aged 18-100 years who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the national surveillance programme, and had an infection identified as either Omicron- or Delta compatible. Main outcome measures Death involving COVID-19 as identified from death certification records. The exposure of interest was the SARS-CoV-2 variant identified from NHS Test and Trace PCR positive tests taken in the community (pillar 2) and analysed by Lighthouse laboratories. Cause-specific Cox proportional hazard regression models were adjusted for sex, age, vaccination status, previous infection, calendar time, ethnicity, Index of Multiple Deprivation rank, household deprivation, university degree, keyworker status, country of birth, main language, region, disability, and comorbidities. Additionally, we tested for interactions between variant and sex, age, vaccination status and comorbidities. Results The risk of death involving COVID-19 was 67% lower for Omicron compared to Delta and the reduction in the risk of death involving COVID-19 for Omicron compared to Delta was more pronounced in males than in females and in people under 70 years old than in people aged 70 years or over. Regardless of age, reduction of the risk of death from Omicron relative to Delta more was more pronounced in people who had received a booster than in those having received only two doses. Conclusions Our results support early work showing the relative reduction in severity of Omicron compared to Delta in terms of hospitalisation and extends this research to assess COVID-19 mortality. Our work also highlights the importance of the vaccination booster campaign, where the reduction in risk of death involving COVID-19 is most pronounced in individuals who had received a booster. What is already known on this topic The Omicron variant, which refers to the whole lineage (BA.1, BA.2, BA.3) had already been shown to be more transmissible than the Delta variant, but there is emerging evidence suggests that the risk of hospitalisation and risk of death within 28 days after a SARS-COV-2 test is lower. However, with a highly transmissible infection and high levels of population testing, definition of death within 28 days is more likely to be susceptible to misclassification bias due to asymptomatic or co-incidental infection. There is no study so far comparing the risk of COVID-19 death as identified from death certification records, with the cause of death assessed by the physician who attended the patient in the last illness. What this study adds Using data from a large cohort of COVID-19 infections that occurred in December 2021, we examined the difference in the risk COVID-19 death, as identified from death certification records, between the Delta and Omicron BA.1 variant. Our study shows that risk of death involving COVID-19 was reduced by 67% following infection with the Omicron BA.1 variant relative to the Delta variant after adjusting for a wide range of potential confounders, including vaccination status and comorbidities. Importantly, we found that the relative risk of COVID-19 mortality following Omicron versus Delta infection varied by age and sex, with lower relative risk in younger individuals and for males than females. The reduction in risk of death involving COVID-19 was also most pronounced in individuals who had received a booster.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: It is unclear whether receiving two COVID-19 vaccinations before SARS-CoV-2 infection reduces the risk of developing Long Covid symptoms. We examined whether the likelihood of symptoms 12 weeks after infection differed by vaccination status. Methods: We included COVID-19 Infection Survey participants aged 18-69 years who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 26 April 2020 and 30 November 2021; we excluded participants who, before their first test-confirmed infection, had suspected COVID-19 or Long Covid symptoms, or were single-vaccinated. Participants who were double-vaccinated [≥]14 days before infection were 1:1 propensity-score matched, based on socio-demographic characteristics and time from infection to follow-up for Long Covid, to those unvaccinated at time of infection. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of Long Covid symptoms [≥]12 weeks post-infection, comparing double-vaccinated with unvaccinated (reference group) participants. Results: The study sample comprised 3,090 double-vaccinated participants (mean age 49 years, 54% female, 92% white, median follow-up from infection 96 days) and matched control participants. Long Covid symptoms were reported by 294 double-vaccinated participants (prevalence 9.5%) compared with 452 unvaccinated participants (14.6%), corresponding to an aOR for Long Covid symptoms of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.50 to 0.69). There was no evidence of heterogeneity by adenovirus vector versus messenger ribonucleic acid vaccines (p=0.25). Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccination is associated with reduced risk of Long Covid, emphasising the need for public health initiatives to increase population-level vaccine uptake. Longer follow-up is needed, as is the assessment of further vaccine doses and the Omicron variant.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Objectives To assess whether ethnic differences in COVID-19 mortality in England have continued into the third wave and to what extent differences in vaccination rates contributed to excess COVID-19 mortality after accounting for other risk factors. Design Cohort study of 28.8 million adults using data from the Office for National Statistics Public Health Data Asset. Setting People living in private households or communal establishments in England. Participants 28,816,020 adults (47% male) aged 30-100 years in 2020 (mean age = 56), who were present at the 2011 Census and alive on 8 December 2020. Main outcome measures Death involving COVID-19 during the second (8 December 2020 to 12 June 2021) and third wave (13 June 2021 to 1 December 2021) of the pandemic. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) separately for males to females to summarise the association between ethnic group and death involving COVID-19 in each wave, sequentially adjusting for age, residence type, geographical factors, sociodemographic characteristics, pre-pandemic health, and vaccination status. Results Age-adjusted HRs of death involving COVID-19 were higher for most ethnic minority groups than the White British group during both waves, particularly for groups with lowest vaccination rates (Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Black African and Black Caribbean). In both waves, HRs were attenuated after adjusting for geographical factors, sociodemographic characteristics, and pre-pandemic health. Further adjusting for vaccination status substantially reduced residual HRs for Black African, Black Caribbean, and Pakistani groups in the third wave. The only groups where fully-adjusted HRs remained elevated were the Bangladeshi group (men: 2.19, 95% CI 1.72 to 2.78; women: 2.12, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.86) and men from the Pakistani group (1.24, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.46). Conclusion Public health strategies to increase vaccination uptake in ethnic minority groups could reduce disparities in COVID-19 mortality that cannot be accounted for by pre-existing risk factors. What is already known on this topic Ethnic minority groups in England have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic during the first and second waves. COVID-19 vaccination uptake is also lower among many ethnic minority groups, particularly Bangladeshi, Black African, Black Caribbean, and Pakistani groups. There is a paucity of research into whether ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality have continued into the third wave and the extent to which differences in vaccination uptake contribute to differences in COVID-19 mortality. What this study adds Using linked data on 28.8 million adults in England, we find that rates of COVID-19 mortality have remained higher than the White British group for most ethnic minority groups during the vaccine roll-out, notably for the Bangladeshi, Black African, Black Caribbean, and Pakistani groups. After adjustment for geographical factors, sociodemographic characteristics, pre-pandemic health status, and vaccination status, the only groups with elevated rates of COVID-19 mortality during the third wave were the Bangladeshi group and men from the Pakistani group, suggesting that increasing vaccination uptake in ethnic minority groups could reduce ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
ObjectiveTo estimate associations between COVID-19 vaccination and Long Covid symptoms in adults who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 prior to vaccination. DesignObservational cohort study using individual-level interrupted time series analysis. SettingRandom sample from the community population of the UK. Participants28,356 COVID-19 Infection Survey participants (mean age 46 years, 56% female, 89% white) aged 18 to 69 years who received at least their first vaccination after test-confirmed infection. Main outcome measuresPresence of long Covid symptoms at least 12 weeks after infection over the follow-up period 3 February to 5 September 2021. ResultsMedian follow-up was 141 days from first vaccination (among all participants) and 67 days from second vaccination (84% of participants). First vaccination was associated with an initial 12.8% decrease (95% confidence interval: -18.6% to -6.6%) in the odds of Long Covid, but increasing by 0.3% (-0.6% to +1.2%) per week after the first dose. Second vaccination was associated with an 8.8% decrease (-14.1% to -3.1%) in the odds of Long Covid, with the odds subsequently decreasing by 0.8% (-1.2% to -0.4%) per week. There was no statistical evidence of heterogeneity in associations between vaccination and Long Covid by socio-demographic characteristics, health status, whether hospitalised with acute COVID-19, vaccine type (adenovirus vector or mRNA), or duration from infection to vaccination. ConclusionsThe likelihood of Long Covid symptoms reduced after COVID-19 vaccination, and the improvement was sustained over the follow-up period after the second dose. Vaccination may contribute to a reduction in the population health burden of Long Covid, though longer follow-up time is needed. Summary boxWhat is already known on this topic O_LICOVID-19 vaccines are effective at reducing rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection, transmission, hospitalisation, and death C_LIO_LIThe incidence of Long Covid may be reduced if infected after vaccination, but the relationship between vaccination and pre-existing long COVID symptoms is unclear, as published studies are generally small and with self-selected participants C_LI What this study adds O_LIThe likelihood of Long Covid symptoms reduced after COVID-19 vaccination, and the improvement was sustained over the follow-up period after the second dose C_LIO_LIThere was no evidence of differences in this relationship by socio-demographic characteristics, health-related factors, vaccine type, or duration from infection to vaccination C_LIO_LIAlthough causality cannot be inferred from this observational evidence, vaccination may contribute to a reduction in the population health burden of Long Covid; further research is needed to understand the biological mechanisms that may ultimately contribute to the development of therapeutics for Long Covid C_LI
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: Monitoring differences in COVID-19 vaccination uptake in different groups is crucial to help inform the policy response to the pandemic. A key gap is the absence of data on uptake by occupation. Methods: Using nationwide population-level data, we calculated the proportion of people who had received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine (assessed on 31 August 2021) by detailed occupational categories in adults aged 40-64 and estimated adjusted odds ratios to examine whether these differences were driven by occupation or other factors, such as education. We also examined whether vaccination rates differed by ability to work from home. Results: Our study population included 14,298,147 adults 40-64. Vaccination rates differed markedly by occupation, being higher in administrative and secretarial occupations (90.8%); professional occupations (90.7%); and managers, directors and senior officials (90.6%); and lowest (83.1%) in people working in elementary occupations. We found substantial differences in vaccination rates looking at finer occupational groups even after adjusting for confounding factors, such as education. Vaccination rates were higher in occupations which can be done from home and lower in those which cannot. Many occupations with low vaccination rates also involved contact with the public or with vulnerable people. Conclusions: Increasing vaccination coverage in occupations with low vaccination rates is crucial to help protecting the public and control infection, especially in occupations that cannot be done from home and involve contacts with the public. Policies such as 'work from home if you can' may only have limited future impact on hospitalisations and deaths
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Occupational Diseases , DeathABSTRACT
Background: The UK began an ambitious COVID-19 vaccination programme on 8th December 2020. This study describes variation in vaccination coverage by sociodemographic characteristics between December 2020 and August 2021. Methods: Using population-level administrative records linked to the 2011 Census, we estimated monthly first dose vaccination rates by age group and sociodemographic characteristics amongst adults aged 18 years or over in England. We also present a tool to display the results interactively. Findings: Our study population included 35,223,466 adults. A lower percentage of males than females were vaccinated in the young and middle age groups (18-59 years) but not in the older age groups. Vaccination rates were highest among individuals of White British and Indian ethnic backgrounds and lowest among Black Africans (aged [≥]80 years) and Black Caribbeans (18-79 years). Differences by ethnic group emerged as soon as vaccination roll-out commenced and widened over time. Vaccination rates were also lower among individuals who identified as Muslim, lived in more deprived areas, reported having a disability, did not speak English as their main language, lived in rented housing, belonged to a lower socio-economic group, and had fewer qualifications. Interpretation: We found inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination rates by sex, ethnicity, religion, area deprivation, disability status, English language proficiency, socio-economic position, and educational attainment, but some of these differences varied by age group. Research is urgently needed to understand why these inequalities exist and how they can be addressed.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Abstract Importance: Obesity and ethnicity are well characterised risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes, but the differential effects of obesity on COVID-19 outcomes by race/ethnicity has not been examined robustly in the general population. Objective: To investigate the association between body mass index (BMI) and COVID-19 mortality across different ethnic groups. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a retrospective cohort study using linked national Census, electronic health records and mortality data for English adults aged 40 years or older who were alive at the start of pandemic (24th January 2020). Exposures: BMI obtained from electronic health records. Self-reported ethnicity (white, black, South Asian, other) was the effect-modifying variable. Main Outcomes and Measures: COVID-19 related death identified by ICD-10 codes U07.1 or U07.2 mentioned on the death certificate from 24th January 2020 until December 28th 2020. Results: The analysis included white (n = 11,074,708; mean age 61.9 [13.4] years; 54% women), black (n = 416,542; 56.4 [11.7] years; 57% women), South Asian (621,691; 55.7 [12.4] years; 51% women) and other (n = 478,196; 55.3 [11.6] years; 55% women) ethnicities with linked BMI data. The association between BMI and COVID-19 mortality was stronger in ethnic minority groups. Compared to a BMI of 22.5 kg/m2 in white ethnicities, the adjusted HR for COVID-19 mortality at a BMI of 30 kg/m2 in white, black, South Asian and other ethnicities was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87-1.03), 1.72 (1.52-1.94), 2.00 (1.78-2.25) and 1.39 (1.21-1.61), respectively. The estimated risk of COVID-19 mortality at a BMI of 40 kg/m2 in white ethnicities (HR = 1.73) was equivalent to the risk observed at a BMI of 30.1 kg/m2, 27.0 kg/m2, and 32.2 kg/m2 in black, South Asian and other ethnic groups, respectively. 5 Conclusions: This population-based study using linked Census and electronic health care records demonstrates that the risk of COVID-19 mortality associated with obesity is greater in ethnic minority groups compared to white populations.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , ObesityABSTRACT
BackgroundEstimating real-world vaccine effectiveness is vital to assess the impact of the vaccination programme on the pandemic and inform the ongoing policy response. However, estimating vaccine effectiveness using observational data is inherently challenging because of the non-randomised design and the potential for unmeasured confounding. MethodsWe used a Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD) to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 mortality in England, exploiting the discontinuity in vaccination rates resulting from the UKs age-based vaccination priority groups. We used the fact that people aged 80 or over were prioritised for the vaccine roll-out in the UK to compare the risk of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 death in people aged 75-79 and 80-84. FindingsThe prioritisation of vaccination of people aged 80 or above led to a large discrepancy in vaccination rates in people 80-84 compared to those 75-79 at the beginning of the vaccination campaign. We found a corresponding difference in COVID-19 mortality, but not in non-COVID-19 mortality, suggesting that our approach appropriately addresses the issue of unmeasured confounding factors. Our results suggest that the first vaccine dose reduced the risk of COVID-19 death by 52.6% (95% Cl 26.6-84.2) in those aged 80. InterpretationsOur results support existing evidence that a first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine has a strong protective effect against COVID-19 mortality in older adults. The RDD estimate of vaccine effectiveness is comparable to previously published studies using different methods, suggesting that unmeasured confounding factors are unlikely to substantially bias these studies. FundingOffice for National Statistics. Research in ContextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed for studies reporting on the real-world effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccination on risk of death using terms such as "COVID-19", "vaccine effectiveness", "mortality" and "death". The relevant published studies on this topic report vaccine effectiveness estimates against risk of death ranging from 64.2% to 98.7%, for varying times post-vaccination. All of these are observational studies and therefore potentially subject to bias from unmeasured confounding. We found no studies that used a quasi-experimental method such as regression discontinuity design, which is not subject to bias from unmeasured confounding, to calculate the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccination on risk of COVID-19 death, or on other outcomes such as hospitalisation or infection. Added value of this studyThe estimates of vaccine effectiveness based on observational data may be biased by unmeasured confounding. This study uses a regression discontinuity design to estimate vaccine effectiveness, exploiting the fact that the vaccination campaign in the UK was rolled out following age-based priority groups. This enables the calculation of an unbiased estimate of the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine against risk of death. The vaccine effectiveness estimate of 52.6% (95% Cl 26.6-84.2) is slightly lower but similar to previously published estimates, therefore suggesting that these estimates are not substantially affected by unmeasured confounding factors and confirming the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine against risk of COVID-19 death. Implications of all the available evidenceObtaining an unbiased estimate of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is of vital importance in informing policy for lifting COVID-19 related measures. The regression discontinuity design provides confidence that the existing estimates from observational studies are unlikely to be substantially biased by unmeasured confounding.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Objectives To assess the association between self-reported disability and deaths involving COVID-19 among adults in England. Design Cohort study of >29 million adults using data from the Office for National Statistics Public Health Data Asset. Setting People living in private households or communal establishments (including care homes) in England. Participants 29,293,845 adults (47% male) aged 30-100 years (mean age = 56) present at the 2011 Census who were alive on 24 January 2020. The main exposure was self-reported disability from the 2011 Census. Main outcome measures Death involving COVID-19, occurring between 24 January 2020 and 28 February 2021. We estimated the age-standardised mortality rate per 100,000 person-years at-risk, stratified by sex, disability status, and wave of the pandemic. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) for disabled people compared with non-disabled people, adjusted for geographical factors, socio-demographic characteristics, and pre-pandemic health conditions. Results Disabled people made up 17% of the study population, including 7% who were ‘more-disabled’ and 10% ‘less-disabled’. From 24 January 2020 to 28 February 2021, 105,213 people died from causes involving COVID-19 in England, 58% of whom were disabled. Age-adjusted analyses showed that, compared to non-disabled people, mortality involving COVID-19 was higher among both more-disabled people (HR=3.05, 95% CI: 2.98 to 3.11 in males; 3.48, 3.41 to 3.56 in females) and less-disabled people (HR=1.88, 95% CI: 1.84 to 1.92 in males; 2.03, 1.98 to 2.08 in females). Among people aged 30-69, HRs reached 8.47 (8.01 to 8.95) among more-disabled females and 5.42 (5.18 to 5.68) for more-disabled males. Sequential adjustment for residence type, geography, socio-demographics, and health conditions partly explained the associations, indicating that a combination of these factors contributed towards the increased risk. Conclusion Disabled people in England had markedly increased risk of mortality involving COVID-19 compared to non-disabled people and should be prioritised within the pandemic response.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coronavirus InfectionsABSTRACT
Objective: To examine inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination rates amongst elderly adults in England Design: Cohort study Setting: People living in private households and communal establishments in England Participants: 6,829,643 adults aged 70 years or above (mean 78.7 years, 55.2% female) who were alive on 15 March 2021. Main outcome measures: Having received the first dose of a vaccine against COVID-19 by 15 March 2021. We calculated vaccination rates and estimated unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios using logistic regression models. Results: By 15 March 2021, 93.2% of people living in England aged 70 years and over had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. While vaccination rates differed across all factors considered apart from sex, the greatest disparities were seen between ethnic and religious groups. The lowest rates were in people of Black African and Black Caribbean ethnic backgrounds, where only 67.2% and 73.9% had received a vaccine, with adjusted odds of not being vaccinated at 5.01 (95% CI 4.86 - 5.16) and 4.85 (4.75 - 4.96) times greater than the White British group. The proportion of individuals self-identifying as Muslim and Buddhist who had received a vaccine was 79.1% and 84.1%, respectively. Older age, greater area deprivation, less advantaged socio-economic position (proxied by living in a rented home), being disabled and living either alone or in a multi-generational household were also associated with higher odds of not having received the vaccine. Conclusion: People disproportionately affected seem most hesitant to COVID-19 vaccinations. Policy Interventions to improve these disparities are urgently needed.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
ObjectiveTo estimate occupational differences in COVID-19 mortality, and test whether these are confounded by factors, such as regional differences, ethnicity and education or due to non-workplace factors, such as deprivation or pre-pandemic health. DesignRetrospective cohort study SettingPeople living in private households England Participants14,295,900 people aged 40-64 years (mean age 52 years, 51% female) who were alive on 24 January 2020, living in private households in England in 2019, were employed in 2011, and completed the 2011 census. Main outcome measuresCOVID-19 related death, assessed between 24 January 2020 and 28 December 2020. We estimated age-standardised mortality rates per 100,000 person-years at risk (ASMR) stratified by sex and occupations. To estimate the effect of occupation due to work-related exposures, we used Cox proportional hazard models to adjust for confounding (region, ethnicity, education), as well as non-workplace factors that are related to occupation. ResultsThere is wide variation between occupations in COVID-19 mortality. Several occupations, particularly those involving contact with patients or the public, show three-fold or four-fold risks. These elevated risks were greatly attenuated after adjustment for confounding and mediating non-workplace factors. For example, the hazard ratio (HR) for men working as taxi and cab drivers or chauffeurs changed from 4.60 [95%CI 3.62-5.84] to 1.47 [1.14-1.89] after adjustment. More generally, the overall HR for men working in essential occupations compared with men in non-essential occupations changed from 1.45 [1.34 - 1.56] to 1.22 [1.13 - 1.32] after adjustment. For most occupations, confounding and other mediating factors explained about 70% to 80% of the age-adjusted hazard ratios. ConclusionsWorking conditions are likely to play a role in COVID-19 mortality, particularly in occupations involving contact with COVID-19 patients or the public. However, there is also a substantial contribution from non-workplace factors, including regional factors, socio-demographic factors, and pre-pandemic health.