Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 15249, 2022 09 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2016843

ABSTRACT

There has been no validated tool to assess workplace infection control towards SARS-Cov-2 in non-healthcare industries. In this first year survey during 07/2020-04/2021, 6684 workers were recruited from varied non-healthcare settings of Hong Kong, Nanjing and Wuhan of China and responded standard questionnaires containing information of prevention measures and policies implemented by companies and personal preventive behaviour towards infection control. All participants were randomly stratified into two sub-samples as training and validation sample. Workplace safety index towards SARS-Cov-2 (WSI-SC2) was developed and validated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). We identified 14 manifest variables in WSI-SC2, with three sub-indices named "Workplace infection control measures and prevention", "Company occupational safety and health management and commitment" and "Worker's personal preventive behavior and awareness towards infectious control". WSI-SC2 obtained a good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranged: 0.76-0.91), good composite reliability (composite reliability ranged: 0.70-0.95) and satisfactory fit of the model (GFI = 0.95; SRMR = 0.05; RMSEA = 0.07). We further performed stratified analysis according to cities, and the index remained stable. Workers with higher scores of WSI-SC2 were more likely to uptake COVID-19 test. This multi-city large study developed a novel and validated tool that could horizontally measure the workplace safety towards SARS-Cov-2 in non-healthcare workers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , China/epidemiology , Cities , Hong Kong/epidemiology , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Workplace
2.
J Ment Health ; 31(4): 585-596, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1915385

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many workers experienced income reduction during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which may link to adverse mental health. AIMS: This study aimed to examine the association of current income and reduction in income during COVID-19 with anxiety and depression levels among non-healthcare workers. METHODS: This is a multi-city cross-sectional study. We used standardized questionnaires to collect information. We regrouped the current income and income reduction during COVID-19 according to the tertile and median value of each specific city. Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales-21 item short version (DASS-21) was used to assess anxiety and depression levels. We performed multinomial logistic regression to examine the association of current and reduced income with anxiety and depression. Path models were developed to outline the potential modification/indirect effect of subsidies from government. RESULTS: Large income reduction and low current income were significantly associated with more anxiety/depression symptoms. Path analysis showed that government subsidies could not significantly alleviate the impact of reduced income on anxiety/depression. CONCLUSION: Our findings showed that large income reduction and low current income were independently associated with anxiety/depression, while these symptoms may not be ameliorated by one-off government funds. This study suggests the need for long-term policies (e.g. developing sustained economic growth policies) to mitigate negative impacts of the COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Lancet Microbe ; 3(3): e193-e202, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1721237

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Safe and effective vaccines are urgently needed to end the COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to assess the preliminary safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an mRNA vaccine ARCoV, which encodes the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor-binding domain (RBD). METHODS: This single centre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation, phase 1 trial of ARCoV was conducted at Shulan (Hangzhou) hospital in Hangzhou, Zhejiang province, China. Healthy adults aged 18-59 years negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled and randomly assigned using block randomisation to receive an intramuscular injection of vaccine or placebo. Vaccine doses were 5 µg, 10 µg, 15 µg, 20 µg, and 25 µg. The first six participants in each block were sentinels and along with the remaining 18 participants, were randomly assigned to groups (5:1). In block 1 sentinels were given the lowest vaccine dose and after a 4-day observation with confirmed safety analyses, the remaining 18 participants in the same dose group proceeded and sentinels in block 2 were given their first administration on a two-dose schedule, 28 days apart. All participants, investigators, and staff doing laboratory analyses were masked to treatment allocation. Humoral responses were assessed by measuring anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG using a standardised ELISA and neutralising antibodies using pseudovirus-based and live SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation assays. SARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific T-cell responses, including IFN-γ and IL-2 production, were assessed using an enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assay. The primary outcome for safety was incidence of adverse events or adverse reactions within 60 min, and at days 7, 14, and 28 after each vaccine dose. The secondary safety outcome was abnormal changes detected by laboratory tests at days 1, 4, 7, and 28 after each vaccine dose. For immunogenicity, the secondary outcome was humoral immune responses: titres of neutralising antibodies to live SARS-CoV-2, neutralising antibodies to pseudovirus, and RBD-specific IgG at baseline and 28 days after first vaccination and at days 7, 15, and 28 after second vaccination. The exploratory outcome was SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses at 7 days after the first vaccination and at days 7 and 15 after the second vaccination. This trial is registered with www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2000039212). FINDINGS: Between Oct 30 and Dec 2, 2020, 230 individuals were screened and 120 eligible participants were randomly assigned to receive five-dose levels of ARCoV or a placebo (20 per group). All participants received the first vaccination and 118 received the second dose. No serious adverse events were reported within 56 days after vaccination and the majority of adverse events were mild or moderate. Fever was the most common systemic adverse reaction (one [5%] of 20 in the 5 µg group, 13 [65%] of 20 in the 10 µg group, 17 [85%] of 20 in the 15 µg group, 19 [95%] of 20 in the 20 µg group, 16 [100%] of 16 in the 25 µg group; p<0·0001). The incidence of grade 3 systemic adverse events were none (0%) of 20 in the 5 µg group, three (15%) of 20 in the 10 µg group, six (30%) of 20 in the 15 µg group, seven (35%) of 20 in the 20 µg group, five (31%) of 16 in the 25 µg group, and none (0%) of 20 in the placebo group (p=0·0013). As expected, the majority of fever resolved in the first 2 days after vaccination for all groups. The incidence of solicited systemic adverse events was similar after administration of ARCoV as a first or second vaccination. Humoral immune responses including anti-RBD IgG and neutralising antibodies increased significantly 7 days after the second dose and peaked between 14 and 28 days thereafter. Specific T-cell response peaked between 7 and 14 days after full vaccination. 15 µg induced the highest titre of neutralising antibodies, which was about twofold more than the antibody titre of convalescent patients with COVID-19. INTERPRETATION: ARCoV was safe and well tolerated at all five doses. The acceptable safety profile, together with the induction of strong humoral and cellular immune responses, support further clinical testing of ARCoV at a large scale. FUNDING: National Key Research and Development Project of China, Academy of Medical Sciences China, National Natural Science Foundation China, and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , China , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Immunoglobulin G , Pandemics/prevention & control , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA Vaccines
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL