Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(8): e2225657, 2022 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1990377

ABSTRACT

Importance: After SARS-CoV-2 infection, many patients present with persistent symptoms for at least 6 months, collectively termed post-COVID conditions (PCC). However, the impact of PCC on health care utilization has not been well described. Objectives: To estimate COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization following acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and describe utilization for select PCCs among patients who had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (including reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and antigen tests) compared with control patients whose results were negative. Design, Setting, and Participants: This matched retrospective cohort study included patients of all ages from 8 large integrated health care systems across the United States who completed a SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test during March 1 to November 1, 2020. Patients were matched on age, sex, race and ethnicity, site, and date of SARS-CoV-2 test and were followed-up for 6 months. Data were analyzed from March 18, 2021, to June 8, 2022. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ratios of rate ratios (RRRs) for COVID-19-associated health care utilization were calculated with a difference-in-difference analysis using Poisson regression models. RRRs were estimated overall, by health care setting, by select population characteristics, and by 44 PCCs. COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization was estimated by health care setting. Results: The final matched cohort included 127 859 patients with test results positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 127 859 patients with test results negative for SARS-CoV-2. The mean (SD) age of the study population was 41.2 (18.6) years, 68 696 patients in each group (53.7%) were female, and each group included 66 211 Hispanic patients (51.8%), 9122 non-Hispanic Asian patients (7.1%), 7983 non-Hispanic Black patients (6.2%), and 34 326 non-Hispanic White patients (26.9%). Overall, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a 4% increase in health care utilization over 6 months (RRR, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.03-1.05]), predominantly for virtual encounters (RRR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.12-1.16]), followed by emergency department visits (RRR, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.04-1.12]). COVID-19-associated utilization for 18 PCCs remained elevated 6 months from the acute stage of infection, with the largest increase in COVID-19-associated utilization observed for infectious disease sequelae (RRR, 86.00 [95% CI, 5.07-1458.33]), COVID-19 (RRR, 19.47 [95% CI, 10.47-36.22]), alopecia (RRR, 2.52 [95% CI, 2.17-2.92]), bronchitis (RRR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.62-2.12]), pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis (RRR, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.36-2.23]), and dyspnea (RRR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.61-1.86]). In total, COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization amounted to an estimated 27 217 additional medical encounters over 6 months (212.9 [95% CI, 146.5-278.4] visits per 1000 patients). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study documented an excess health care burden of PCC in the 6 months after the acute stage of infection. As health care systems evolve during a highly dynamic and ongoing global pandemic, these data provide valuable evidence to inform long-term strategic resource allocation for patients previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
2.
Pediatrics ; 150(2)2022 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1974395

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Limited postauthorization safety data for the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination among children ages 5 to 11 years are available, particularly for the adverse event myocarditis, which has been detected in adolescents and young adults. We describe adverse events observed during the first 4 months of the United States coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination program in this age group. METHODS: We analyzed data from 3 United States safety monitoring systems: v-safe, a voluntary smartphone-based system that monitors reactions and health effects; the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), the national spontaneous reporting system comanaged by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Food and Drug Administration; and the Vaccine Safety Datalink, an active surveillance system that monitors electronic health records for prespecified events, including myocarditis. RESULTS: Among 48 795 children ages 5 to 11 years enrolled in v-safe, most reported reactions were mild-to-moderate, most frequently reported the day after vaccination, and were more common after dose 2. VAERS received 7578 adverse event reports; 97% were nonserious. On review of 194 serious VAERS reports, 15 myocarditis cases were verified; 8 occurred in boys after dose 2 (reporting rate 2.2 per million doses). In the Vaccine Safety Datalink, no safety signals were detected in weekly sequential monitoring after administration of 726 820 doses. CONCLUSIONS: Safety findings for Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine from 3 United States monitoring systems in children ages 5 to 11 years show that most reported adverse events were mild and no safety signals were observed in active surveillance. VAERS reporting rates of myocarditis after dose 2 in this age group were substantially lower than those observed among adolescents ages 12 to 15 years.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Myocarditis , Adolescent , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Male , Myocarditis/etiology , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
3.
Vaccine ; 2022 Jul 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1926970

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Evidence indicates that mRNA COVID-19 vaccination is associated with risk of myocarditis and possibly pericarditis, especially in young males. It is not clear if risk differs between mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2. We assessed if risk differs using comprehensive health records on a diverse population. METHODS: Members 18-39 years of age at eight integrated healthcare-delivery systems were monitored using data updated weekly and supplemented with medical record review of myocarditis and pericarditis cases. Incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis events that occurred among vaccine recipients 0 to 7 days after either dose 1 or 2 of a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was compared with that of vaccinated concurrent comparators who, on the same calendar day, had received their most recent dose 22 to 42 days earlier. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by conditional Poisson regression, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, health plan, and calendar day. Head-to-head comparison directly assessed risk following mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 during 0-7 days post-vaccination. RESULTS: From December 14, 2020 - January 15, 2022 there were 41 cases after 2,891,498 doses of BNT162b2 and 38 cases after 1,803,267 doses of mRNA-1273. Cases had similar demographic and clinical characteristics. Most were hospitalized for ≤1 day; none required intensive care. During days 0-7 after dose 2 of BNT162b2, the incidence was 14.3 (CI: 6.5-34.9) times higher than the comparison interval, amounting to 22.4 excess cases per million doses; after mRNA-1273 the incidence was 18.8 (CI: 6.7-64.9) times higher than the comparison interval, amounting to 31.2 excess cases per million doses. In head-to-head comparisons 0-7 days after either dose, risk was moderately higher after mRNA-1273 than after BNT162b2 (RR: 1.61, CI 1.02-2.54). CONCLUSIONS: Both vaccines were associated with increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in 18-39-year-olds. Risk estimates were modestly higher after mRNA-1273 than after BNT162b2.

4.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(25): 830-833, 2022 Jun 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1903989

ABSTRACT

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) is a combination protease inhibitor that blocks replication of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) and has been shown to reduce the risk for hospitalization and death among patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who are at risk for progression to severe disease* (1). In December 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for early treatment with Paxlovid among persons with mild to moderate cases of COVID-19 who are at high risk for progression to severe disease (2). FDA and a small number of published case reports have documented recurrence of COVID-19 symptoms or a positive viral test result (COVID-19 rebound) 2-8 days after recovery or a negative SARS-CoV-2 test result among patients treated with Paxlovid (3-7); however, large-scale studies investigating severe illness after Paxlovid treatment are limited. This study used electronic health record (EHR) data from a large integrated health care system in California (Kaiser Permanente Southern California [KPSC]) to describe hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) encounters related to SARS-CoV-2 infections during the 5-15 days after pharmacy dispensation of a 5-day treatment course of Paxlovid. Among 5,287 persons aged ≥12 years who received Paxlovid during December 31, 2021-May 26, 2022, 73% had received ≥3 doses of COVID-19 vaccine†, and 8% were unvaccinated. During the 5-15 days after Paxlovid treatment was dispensed, six hospitalizations and 39 ED encounters considered to be related to SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified, representing <1% of all patients to whom Paxlovid treatment was dispensed during the study period. Among these 45 persons, 21 (47%) were aged ≥65 years, and 35 (78%) had at least one underlying medical condition§ (8). This study found that hospitalization or ED encounters for COVID-19 during the 5-15 days after Paxlovid treatment was dispensed for mild to moderate COVID-19 illness were rarely identified. When administered as an early-stage treatment, Paxlovid might prevent COVID-19-related hospitalization among persons with mild to moderate cases of COVID-19 who are at risk for progression to severe disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19 Vaccines , Drug Combinations , Emergency Service, Hospital , Hospitalization , Humans , Lactams , Leucine , Nitriles , Proline , Ritonavir , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Pediatr Res ; 2022 Jun 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1900478

ABSTRACT

A web-based survey was widely distributed between November 1st-December 27th, 2021, to health care providers and ancillary staff to assess reported COVID-19 vaccination of their children as well as their vaccine concerns. Fewer nurses and laboratory / radiology technicians reported COVID-19 vaccination of their adolescent children and intent to vaccinate their younger children compared to physicians and pharmacists, along with more frequently reported concern about anaphylaxis and infertility. Focused efforts to update ancillary staff as well as all health care providers on emerging COVID-19 vaccine safety information for children is crucial to promote strong COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. IMPACT: Nurses, laboratory technicians and radiology technicians frequently reported concern about anaphylaxis and infertility after COVID-19 vaccination despite reassuring safety data. Education of ancillary staff with emerging safety data is important to strengthen health care provider vaccine recommendations.

6.
Workplace Health Saf ; 70(6): 285-297, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1753085

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is evidence of disparities in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among health care providers. The purpose of this study was to examine confidence receiving and recommending COVID-19 vaccines by health care provider type and race/ethnicity. METHODS: This mixed methods study involved a cross-sectional survey and qualitative, semi-structured interviews from March to May 2021 among a sample of physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, and pharmacists. These workers were recruited through voluntary response sampling from an integrated health system in Southern California. The primary dependent variables were (a) confidence in vaccine safety, (b) confidence in vaccine effectiveness, and (c) intent to recommend the vaccine to others. The primary independent variables were health care provider type and race/ethnicity. FINDINGS: A total of 2,948 providers completed the survey. Nurses relative to physicians were 15% less likely to perceive the COVID-19 vaccine to be safe (risk ratio [RR] = 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83-0.87); 27% less likely to perceive the vaccine to prevent COVID-19 (RR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.69-0.76); and 11% less likely to recommend the vaccine to others (RR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.87-0.91). Hispanic/Latinx providers were 10% less likely to perceive the vaccine to prevent COVID-19 (RR = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.83-0.98) relative to White providers. Qualitative themes included: No need for vaccine; distrusting vaccine research and roll-out; caretaking barriers; uncertainty and potential to change one's mind; framing vaccine decisions around personal beliefs. CONCLUSIONS & APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: Health care workplaces should consider interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination among their workers, including education and mandatory vaccination policies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Personnel , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
7.
J Transcult Nurs ; 33(2): 134-140, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1604286

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is evidence for relatively lower COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people of color in the United States. The purpose of this study was to investigate associations between race/ethnicity and COVID-19 vaccine uptake among nurses. METHODS: Nurses in Southern California (N = 1183) completed a one-time, web-based survey to assess COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and uptake. RESULTS: In all, 82.8% of respondents (N = 979) received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Identifying as East Asian was associated with 14% higher odds of COVID-19 vaccine uptake relative to identifying as White (odds ratio [OR] = 1.14/95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.06, 1.24]); identifying as Filipino was associated with 14% higher odds of uptake (OR = 1.14/95% CI = [1.08, 1.20]); and identifying as Hispanic/Latinx was associated with 6% higher odds of uptake (OR = 1.06/95% CI = [1.00, 1.12]). DISCUSSION: Although nurses and people of color have been identified as groups with low levels of COVID-19 vaccine uptake, this study found that nurses of color received the vaccine at higher levels than their White counterparts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , Ethnicity , Hispanic or Latino , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
8.
JMIR Infodemiology ; 1(1): e33330, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591914

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Information and opinions shared by health care providers can affect patient vaccination decisions, but little is known about who health care providers themselves trust for information in the context of new COVID-19 vaccines. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to investigate which sources of information about COVID-19 vaccines are trusted by health care providers and how they communicate this information to patients. METHODS: This mixed methods study involved a one-time, web-based survey of health care providers and qualitative interviews with a subset of survey respondents. Health care providers (physicians, advanced practice providers, pharmacists, nurses) were recruited from an integrated health system in Southern California using voluntary response sampling, with follow-up interviews with providers who either accepted or declined a COVID-19 vaccine. The outcome was the type of information sources that respondents reported trusting for information about COVID-19 vaccines. Bivariate tests were used to compare trusted information sources by provider type; thematic analysis was used to explore perspectives about vaccine information and communicating with patients about vaccines. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 2948 providers, of whom 91% (n=2683) responded that they had received ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The most frequently trusted source of COVID-19 vaccine information was government agencies (n=2513, 84.2%); the least frequently trusted source was social media (n=691, 9.5%). More physicians trusted government agencies (n=1226, 93%) than nurses (n=927, 78%) or pharmacists (n=203, 78%; P<.001), and more physicians trusted their employer (n=1115, 84%) than advanced practice providers (n=95, 67%) and nurses (n=759, 64%; P=.002). Qualitative themes (n=32 participants) about trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information were identified: processing new COVID-19 information in a health care work context likened to a "war zone" during the pandemic and communicating information to patients. Some providers were hesitant to recommend vaccines to pregnant people and groups they perceived to be at low risk for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians have stronger trust in government sources and their employers for information about COVID-19 vaccines compared with nurses, pharmacists, and advanced practice providers. Strategies such as role modeling, tailored messaging, or talking points with standard language may help providers to communicate accurate COVID-19 vaccine information to patients, and these strategies may also be used with providers with lower levels of trust in reputable information sources.

9.
JAMA ; 326(14): 1390-1399, 2021 10 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1490611

ABSTRACT

Importance: Safety surveillance of vaccines against COVID-19 is critical to ensure safety, maintain trust, and inform policy. Objectives: To monitor 23 serious outcomes weekly, using comprehensive health records on a diverse population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study represents an interim analysis of safety surveillance data from Vaccine Safety Datalink. The 10 162 227 vaccine-eligible members of 8 participating US health plans were monitored with administrative data updated weekly and supplemented with medical record review for selected outcomes from December 14, 2020, through June 26, 2021. Exposures: Receipt of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccination, with a risk interval of 21 days for individuals after vaccine dose 1 or 2 compared with an interval of 22 to 42 days for similar individuals after vaccine dose 1 or 2. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence of serious outcomes, including acute myocardial infarction, Bell palsy, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, myocarditis/pericarditis, pulmonary embolism, stroke, and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. Incidence of events that occurred among vaccine recipients 1 to 21 days after either dose 1 or 2 of a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was compared with that of vaccinated concurrent comparators who, on the same calendar day, had received their most recent dose 22 to 42 days earlier. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by Poisson regression, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, health plan, and calendar day. For a signal, a 1-sided P < .0048 was required to keep type I error below .05 during 2 years of weekly analyses. For 4 additional outcomes, including anaphylaxis, only descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: A total of 11 845 128 doses of mRNA vaccines (57% BNT162b2; 6 175 813 first doses and 5 669 315 second doses) were administered to 6.2 million individuals (mean age, 49 years; 54% female individuals). The incidence of events per 1 000 000 person-years during the risk vs comparison intervals for ischemic stroke was 1612 vs 1781 (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.87-1.08); for appendicitis, 1179 vs 1345 (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93); and for acute myocardial infarction, 935 vs 1030 (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.18). No vaccine-outcome association met the prespecified requirement for a signal. Incidence of confirmed anaphylaxis was 4.8 (95% CI, 3.2-6.9) per million doses of BNT162b2 and 5.1 (95% CI, 3.3-7.6) per million doses of mRNA-1273. Conclusions and Relevance: In interim analyses of surveillance of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, incidence of selected serious outcomes was not significantly higher 1 to 21 days postvaccination compared with 22 to 42 days postvaccination. While CIs were wide for many outcomes, surveillance is ongoing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Anaphylaxis/epidemiology , Anaphylaxis/etiology , Child , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Myocarditis/etiology , Public Health Surveillance , Time Factors , Vaccines, Synthetic/adverse effects , Young Adult
11.
JAMA ; 326(14): 1390-1399, 2021 10 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1391514

ABSTRACT

Importance: Safety surveillance of vaccines against COVID-19 is critical to ensure safety, maintain trust, and inform policy. Objectives: To monitor 23 serious outcomes weekly, using comprehensive health records on a diverse population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study represents an interim analysis of safety surveillance data from Vaccine Safety Datalink. The 10 162 227 vaccine-eligible members of 8 participating US health plans were monitored with administrative data updated weekly and supplemented with medical record review for selected outcomes from December 14, 2020, through June 26, 2021. Exposures: Receipt of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccination, with a risk interval of 21 days for individuals after vaccine dose 1 or 2 compared with an interval of 22 to 42 days for similar individuals after vaccine dose 1 or 2. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence of serious outcomes, including acute myocardial infarction, Bell palsy, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, myocarditis/pericarditis, pulmonary embolism, stroke, and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. Incidence of events that occurred among vaccine recipients 1 to 21 days after either dose 1 or 2 of a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was compared with that of vaccinated concurrent comparators who, on the same calendar day, had received their most recent dose 22 to 42 days earlier. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by Poisson regression, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, health plan, and calendar day. For a signal, a 1-sided P < .0048 was required to keep type I error below .05 during 2 years of weekly analyses. For 4 additional outcomes, including anaphylaxis, only descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: A total of 11 845 128 doses of mRNA vaccines (57% BNT162b2; 6 175 813 first doses and 5 669 315 second doses) were administered to 6.2 million individuals (mean age, 49 years; 54% female individuals). The incidence of events per 1 000 000 person-years during the risk vs comparison intervals for ischemic stroke was 1612 vs 1781 (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.87-1.08); for appendicitis, 1179 vs 1345 (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93); and for acute myocardial infarction, 935 vs 1030 (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.18). No vaccine-outcome association met the prespecified requirement for a signal. Incidence of confirmed anaphylaxis was 4.8 (95% CI, 3.2-6.9) per million doses of BNT162b2 and 5.1 (95% CI, 3.3-7.6) per million doses of mRNA-1273. Conclusions and Relevance: In interim analyses of surveillance of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, incidence of selected serious outcomes was not significantly higher 1 to 21 days postvaccination compared with 22 to 42 days postvaccination. While CIs were wide for many outcomes, surveillance is ongoing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Anaphylaxis/epidemiology , Anaphylaxis/etiology , Child , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Myocarditis/etiology , Public Health Surveillance , Time Factors , Vaccines, Synthetic/adverse effects , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL