ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: During the last two and a half years, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has spread around the world. Most of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are designed to produce anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) against the viral S-glycoprotein. The aim of this study was to measure the anti-S antibody titres among the medical personnel who had been fully vaccinated with different types of vaccines, and to compare them with those who were COVID-19 convalescents. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study serum was collected from 261 healthcare workers, of whom 227 were vaccinated, while 34 were recovered participants who were not immunised. Serum samples were collected 21 days after the first dose and 60 and 180 days after the second dose of the vaccines and tested with a commercial ELISA kit. RESULTS: The highest antibody level (12 AU/ml) was measured in the Pfizer-BioNTech group, followed by Sinopharm (9.3 AU/ml), Sputnik V (5.9 AU/ml), Sinovac (4.6 AU/ml) and Oxford/Astra- Zeneca vaccine (2.5 AU/ml) 60 days after the second dose of the vaccines (90 days after the first dose). The seropositivity rate for mRNA vaccine was 88.5%, for vector vaccines 86.2% and for inactivated vaccines 71.4%. When comparing these antibody levels with COVID-19 convalescents, higher antibody titres were found in vaccinated participants (5.76 AU/ml vs 7.06 AU/ml), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals vaccinated with mRNA and vector vaccines had a higher seroconversion rate compared to the group vaccinated with inactivated vaccines, or convalescents. Copyright © 2023 Termedia.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The early approaches to prevent the spread of COVID-19 included lockdown and social distancing measures, leading to university closures. These measures forced unparalleled changes to the delivery of healthcare education. Concerns included the preparedness of faculty and students to e-learning as well as the routine availability and funding of equipment and internet bundles. This needed addressing with fully trained healthcare professionals required given rising inappropriate use of antibiotics in India, growing prevalence of non-communicable diseases as well as an increasing number of patients with joint comorbidities. Consequently, there is a need to ascertain the current impact of the pandemic on healthcare student education across India. Materials and Methods: This was a pilot study among 10 purposely selected healthcare educators in both private and public universities. The questionnaire built on published studies. Results: Identified challenges included a lack of familiarity with online education, no bedside teaching, lack of equipment and affordability of internet bundles, poor internet connectivity and postponed examinations. Ways forward included training faculty on e-learning, providing students with loans and other financial support to purchase equipment and internet bundles, establishing COVID-19 prevention protocols and protective equipment, recording lectures and tutorials to make up for lost time and simulated methods to teach clinical aspects. Conclusion: Despite challenges, there was a rapid move to online learning among surveyed universities. Alongside this, courses to address lack of familiarity with e-learning approaches with hybrid teaching approaches here to stay. The next step will be to undertake a wider study and to use the combined findings to provide future guidance.