Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(13): 495-502, 2022 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1771891

ABSTRACT

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥18 years receive a single COVID-19 vaccine booster dose ≥2 months after receipt of an Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) adenovirus vector-based primary series vaccine; a heterologous COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is preferred over a homologous (matching) Janssen vaccine for booster vaccination. This recommendation was made in light of the risks for rare but serious adverse events following receipt of a Janssen vaccine, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome† (1), and clinical trial data indicating similar or higher neutralizing antibody response following heterologous boosting compared with homologous boosting (2). Data on real-world vaccine effectiveness (VE) of different booster strategies following a primary Janssen vaccine dose are limited, particularly during the period of Omicron variant predominance. The VISION Network§ determined real-world VE of 1 Janssen vaccine dose and 2 alternative booster dose strategies: 1) a homologous booster (i.e., 2 Janssen doses) and 2) a heterologous mRNA booster (i.e., 1 Janssen dose/1 mRNA dose). In addition, VE of these booster strategies was compared with VE of a homologous booster following mRNA primary series vaccination (i.e., 3 mRNA doses). The study examined 80,287 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits¶ and 25,244 hospitalizations across 10 states during December 16, 2021-March 7, 2022, when Omicron was the predominant circulating variant.** VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 24% after 1 Janssen dose, 54% after 2 Janssen doses, 79% after 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose, and 83% after 3 mRNA doses. VE for the same vaccination strategies against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were 31%, 67%, 78%, and 90%, respectively. All booster strategies provided higher protection than a single Janssen dose against ED/UC visits and hospitalizations during Omicron variant predominance. Vaccination with 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose provided higher protection than did 2 Janssen doses against COVID-19-associated ED/UC visits and was comparable to protection provided by 3 mRNA doses during the first 120 days after a booster dose. However, 3 mRNA doses provided higher protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations than did other booster strategies during the same time interval since booster dose. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines for their COVID-19 primary series vaccination should receive an mRNA booster dose when eligible. Adults who received a primary Janssen vaccine dose should preferentially receive a heterologous mRNA vaccine booster dose ≥2 months later, or a homologous Janssen vaccine booster dose if mRNA vaccine is contraindicated or unavailable. Further investigation of the durability of protection afforded by different booster strategies is warranted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Adolescent , Adult , Ambulatory Care , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Emergency Service, Hospital , Hospitalization , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccines, Synthetic
2.
BMJ Open ; 12(3): e053864, 2022 03 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1765122

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The Intermountain Risk Score (IMRS), composed using published sex-specific weightings of parameters in the complete blood count (CBC) and basic metabolic profile (BMP), is a validated predictor of mortality. We hypothesised that IMRS calculated from prepandemic CBC and BMP predicts COVID-19 outcomes and that IMRS using laboratory results tested at COVID-19 diagnosis is also predictive. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Primary, secondary, urgent and emergent care, and drive-through testing locations across Utah and in sections of adjacent US states. Viral RNA testing for SARS-CoV-2 was conducted from 3 March to 2 November 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥18 years were evaluated if they had CBC and BMP measured in 2019 and tested positive for COVID-19 in 2020. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalisation or mortality, with secondary outcomes being hospitalisation and mortality separately. RESULTS: Among 3883 patients, 8.2% were hospitalised and 1.6% died. Subjects with low, mild, moderate and high-risk IMRS had the composite endpoint in 3.5% (52/1502), 8.6% (108/1256), 15.5% (152/979) and 28.1% (41/146) of patients, respectively. Compared with low-risk, subjects in mild-risk, moderate-risk and high-risk groups had HR=2.33 (95% CI 1.67 to 3.24), HR=4.01 (95% CI 2.93 to 5.50) and HR=8.34 (95% CI 5.54 to 12.57), respectively. Subjects aged <60 years had HR=3.06 (95% CI 2.01 to 4.65) and HR=7.38 (95% CI 3.14 to 17.34) for moderate and high risks versus low risk, respectively; those ≥60 years had HR=1.95 (95% CI 0.99 to 3.86) and HR=3.40 (95% CI 1.63 to 7.07). In multivariable analyses, IMRS was independently predictive and was shown to capture substantial risk variation of comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: IMRS, a simple risk score using very basic laboratory results, predicted COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality. This included important abilities to identify risk in younger adults with few diagnosed comorbidities and to predict risk prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
3.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(9): 352-358, 2022 Mar 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1727017

ABSTRACT

The efficacy of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 exceeded 90% in clinical trials that included children and adolescents aged 5-11, 12-15, and 16-17 years (1-3). Limited real-world data on 2-dose mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in persons aged 12-17 years (referred to as adolescents in this report) have also indicated high levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection and COVID-19-associated hospitalization (4-6); however, data on VE against the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and duration of protection are limited. Pfizer-BioNTech VE data are not available for children aged 5-11 years. In partnership with CDC, the VISION Network* examined 39,217 emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) encounters and 1,699 hospitalizations† among persons aged 5-17 years with COVID-19-like illness across 10 states during April 9, 2021-January 29, 2022,§ to estimate VE using a case-control test-negative design. Among children aged 5-11 years, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters 14-67 days after dose 2 (the longest interval after dose 2 in this age group) was 46%. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 83% and 76%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 38% and 46%, respectively. Among adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE increased to 86% ≥7 days after dose 3 (booster dose). VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was substantially lower during the Omicron predominant period than the B.1.617.2 (Delta) predominant period among adolescents aged 12-17 years, with no significant protection ≥150 days after dose 2 during Omicron predominance. However, in adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE during the Omicron predominant period increased to 81% ≥7 days after a third booster dose. During the full study period, including pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron predominant periods, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalization among children aged 5-11 years was 74% 14-67 days after dose 2, with wide CIs that included zero. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 92% and 94%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 73% and 88%, respectively. All eligible children and adolescents should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, including a booster dose for those aged 12-17 years.


Subject(s)
/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , /statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , Child , Child, Preschool , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , Male , United States
4.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(7): 255-263, 2022 Feb 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1689713

ABSTRACT

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after completion of a primary mRNA vaccination series and that immunocompromised persons receive a third primary dose.* Waning of vaccine protection after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine has been observed during the period of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance† (1-5), but little is known about durability of protection after 3 doses during periods of Delta or SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant predominance. A test-negative case-control study design using data from eight VISION Network sites§ examined vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years at various time points after receipt of a second or third vaccine dose during two periods: Delta variant predominance and Omicron variant predominance (i.e., periods when each variant accounted for ≥50% of sequenced isolates).¶ Persons categorized as having received 3 doses included those who received a third dose in a primary series or a booster dose after a 2 dose primary series (including the reduced-dosage Moderna booster). The VISION Network analyzed 241,204 ED/UC encounters** and 93,408 hospitalizations across 10 states during August 26, 2021-January 22, 2022. VE after receipt of both 2 and 3 doses was lower during the Omicron-predominant than during the Delta-predominant period at all time points evaluated. During both periods, VE after receipt of a third dose was higher than that after a second dose; however, VE waned with increasing time since vaccination. During the Omicron period, VE against ED/UC visits was 87% during the first 2 months after a third dose and decreased to 66% among those vaccinated 4-5 months earlier; VE against hospitalizations was 91% during the first 2 months following a third dose and decreased to 78% ≥4 months after a third dose. For both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, VE was generally higher for protection against hospitalizations than against ED/UC visits. All eligible persons should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations to best protect against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and ED/UC visits.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , /administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Case-Control Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Time Factors , United States , Young Adult
5.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-312526

ABSTRACT

Background: As the COVID-19 pandemic evolves, stratifying risk is increasingly important. The Intermountain Risk Score (IMRS) uses the complete blood count (CBC) and basic metabolic profile (BMP) as a first-line predictor of mortality and is widely validated. We hypothesized that IMRS predicts COVID-19 outcomes.Methods: Intermountain Healthcare patients aged ≥18 years were evaluated if they had CBC and BMP measured in 2019 and tested positive for COVID-19 in 2020. Viral RNA testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) was conducted March 3 through November 2, 2020. IMRS used published sex-specific weightings and associations were evaluated for the composite of COVID-19 hospitalization or mortality.Findings: Among 3,883 patients, 8.2% were hospitalized, 1.6% died. Subjects with low, mild, moderate, and high-risk IMRS had the composite endpoint in 3.5% (52/1,502), 8.6% (108/1,256), 15.5% (152/979), and 28.1% (41/146), respectively. Versus low-risk, subjects in mild, moderate, and high-risk groups had HR=2.33 (95% CI: 1.67, 3.24), HR=4.01 (CI: 2.93, 5.50), and HR=8.34 (CI: 5.54, 12.57), respectively. Subjects aged <60 years had HR=3.06 (CI: 2.01, 4.65) and HR=7.38 (CI: 3.14, 17.34) for moderate and high versus low-risk, respectively;those ≥60 years had HR=1.95 (CI: 0.99, 3.86) and HR=3.40 (CI: 1.63, 7.07). In multivariable analyses, IMRS was independently predictive but was shown to capture substantial risk variation of comorbidities.Interpretation: IMRS, a simple risk score using very basic laboratory results, predicted COVID-19 hospitalization and mortality. This included important abilities to identify risk in younger adults with few diagnosed comorbidities and to predict risk prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection.Funding Statement: This study was funded by internal Intermountain departmental funds.Declaration of Interests: BDH, HTM, BSR, and JLA are inventors of clinical decision tools that are licensed to CareCentra and Alluceo. BDH is the PI of grants related to clinical decision tools that were funded by Intermountain Healthcare’s Foundry innovation program, the Intermountain Research and Medical Foundation, CareCentra, GlaxoSmithKline, and AstraZeneca. BDH is a member of the scientific advisory board of Labme.ai. KUK is PI of and BDH a co-investigator of a grant funded by the Patient- Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). IDP was supported by a grant from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (K23GM129661). Outside the current work, IDP has received grant support from the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Immunexpress Inc and funding to his institution from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. The authors have no other potential conflicts of interest to report.Ethics Approval Statement: This study was approved as a data-only historical records review study with a waiver of consent by the Intermountain Healthcare Institutional Review Board.

6.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 9(3): ofab663, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684766

ABSTRACT

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are being administered on an unprecedented scale. Assessing the risks of side effects is needed to aid clinicians in early detection and treatment. This study examined the risk of inflammatory heart disease, including pericarditis and myocarditis, after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Methods: Intermountain Healthcare patients with inflammatory heart disease from December 15, 2020 to June 15, 2021, and with or without preceding SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, were studied. Relative rates of inflammatory heart disease were examined for vaccinated patients compared to unvaccinated patients. Results: Of 67 patients identified with inflammatory heart disease, 21 (31.3%) had a SARS-Cov-2 vaccination within the previous 60 days. Overall, 914 611 Intermountain Healthcare patients received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, resulting in an inflammatory heart disease rate of 2.30 per 100 000 vaccinated patients. The relative risk of inflammatory heart disease for the vaccinated patients compared to the unvaccinated patients was 2.05 times higher rate within the 30-day window (P = .01) and had a trend toward increase in the 60-day window (relative rate = 1.63; P = .07). All vaccinated patients with inflammatory heart disease were treated successfully with 1 death related to a pre-existing condition. Conclusions: Although rare, the rate of inflammatory heart disease was greater in a SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated population than the unvaccinated population. This risk is eclipsed by the risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 and its associated, commonly severe outcomes. Nevertheless, clinicians and patients should be informed of this risk to facilitate earlier recognition and treatment.

7.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 9(2): ofab662, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1672246

ABSTRACT

We compared antibiotic prescribing before and during the -coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at 2 academic urgent care clinics and found a sustained decrease in prescribing driven by respiratory encounters and despite transitioning to telemedicine. Antibiotics were rarely prescribed during encounters for COVID-19 or COVID-19 symptoms. COVID-19 revealed opportunities for outpatient stewardship programs.

10.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 8(Suppl 1):84-84, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1564955

ABSTRACT

Background Early bacterial co-infection is rare in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, yet antibiotics are commonly prescribed. Antibiotic stewardship (AS) intervention is needed, especially in small community hospitals (SCHs), which often lack access to AS expertise. Methods We implemented daily remote multidisciplinary tele-COVID rounds (synchronous case review between SCH providers and ID clinicians) and tele-stewardship surveillance (ID pharmacist review of COVID patients on antibiotics) on 6/24/2020 in 17 SCHs. We retrospectively included adult symptomatic COVID-19 admissions between 3/2020 and 4/2021. The primary outcome was early use of antibiotics for pneumonia (started within 48 hours of admission);mean monthly days of therapy per 1,000 patient days (DOT) were compared pre- (3/2020-6/2020) and post-intervention (7/2020-4/2021). Secondary outcomes were early use of antibiotics for any indication, estimated days of antibiotics avoided (comparing pre- and post-intervention DOT), and in-hospital mortality. Analyses were conducted using a two-tailed unpaired t-test (antibiotic use) or Fisher’s exact test (mortality). Results Of the 1,976 patients included (124 pre- vs. 1852 post-intervention), 55.4% were male and 85.5% were white. Patients in the pre-intervention group were more likely to require hospital transfer [21.8% vs 8.8% (p< 0.001)] and ICU admission [18.5% vs. 9.7% (p=0.003)]. We observed a significant decrease in mean use of early antibiotics for pneumonia [656.9 vs. 240.1 DOT (p< 0.001)], including among non-ICU patients only [603.6 vs 240.2 DOT (p< 0.001)]. Early antibiotic use for any indication also decreased [686.2 vs. 359.3 DOT (p< 0.001)]. An estimated 3,697 days of unnecessary antibiotics for pneumonia were avoided in the 10-months post-intervention [370 days per month (95% CI 304 – 435)]. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was not different pre- vs post-intervention (0.8% vs. 2.0%, p=0.511), but was higher among those prescribed early antibiotics (4.4% vs 0.5%, p< 0.001). Conclusion A significant, sustained reduction in antibiotic use among COVID-19 patients at 17 SCHs was observed after implementation of tele-COVID rounds and tele-stewardship surveillance without an observed difference in mortality. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

11.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(44): 1553-1559, 2021 Nov 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502903

ABSTRACT

Immunocompromised persons, defined as those with suppressed humoral or cellular immunity resulting from health conditions or medications, account for approximately 3% of the U.S. adult population (1). Immunocompromised adults are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes (2) and might not acquire the same level of protection from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as do immunocompetent adults (3,4). To evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) among immunocompromised adults, data from the VISION Network* on hospitalizations among persons aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness from 187 hospitals in nine states during January 17-September 5, 2021 were analyzed. Using selected discharge diagnoses,† VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization conferred by completing a 2-dose series of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine ≥14 days before the index hospitalization date§ (i.e., being fully vaccinated) was evaluated using a test-negative design comparing 20,101 immunocompromised adults (10,564 [53%] of whom were fully vaccinated) and 69,116 immunocompetent adults (29,456 [43%] of whom were fully vaccinated). VE of 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was lower among immunocompromised patients (77%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 74%-80%) than among immunocompetent patients (90%; 95% CI = 89%-91%). This difference persisted irrespective of mRNA vaccine product, age group, and timing of hospitalization relative to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance in the state of hospitalization. VE varied across immunocompromising condition subgroups, ranging from 59% (organ or stem cell transplant recipients) to 81% (persons with a rheumatologic or inflammatory disorder). Immunocompromised persons benefit from mRNA COVID-19 vaccination but are less protected from severe COVID-19 outcomes than are immunocompetent persons, and VE varies among immunocompromised subgroups. Immunocompromised persons receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines should receive 3 doses and a booster, consistent with CDC recommendations (5), practice nonpharmaceutical interventions, and, if infected, be monitored closely and considered early for proven therapies that can prevent severe outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Immunocompromised Host/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Female , Humans , Immunization Schedule , Laboratories , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , United States/epidemiology , Vaccines, Synthetic/administration & dosage , Young Adult
12.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(37): 1291-1293, 2021 09 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1441399

ABSTRACT

Data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) since the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, became the predominant circulating strain in the United States are limited (1-3). CDC used the VISION Network* to examine medical encounters (32,867) from 187 hospitals and 221 emergency departments (EDs) and urgent care (UC) clinics across nine states during June-August 2021, beginning on the date the Delta variant accounted for >50% of sequenced isolates in each medical facility's state. VISION Network methods have been published (4).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Ambulatory Care Facilities/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Middle Aged , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
13.
N Engl J Med ; 385(15): 1355-1371, 2021 10 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1397961

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the effectiveness of the vaccines against symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) currently authorized in the United States with respect to hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or ambulatory care in an emergency department or urgent care clinic. METHODS: We conducted a study involving adults (≥50 years of age) with Covid-19-like illness who underwent molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed 41,552 admissions to 187 hospitals and 21,522 visits to 221 emergency departments or urgent care clinics during the period from January 1 through June 22, 2021, in multiple states. The patients' vaccination status was documented in electronic health records and immunization registries. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness by comparing the odds of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated patients with those among unvaccinated patients. Vaccine effectiveness was adjusted with weights based on propensity-for-vaccination scores and according to age, geographic region, calendar time (days from January 1, 2021, to the index date for each medical visit), and local virus circulation. RESULTS: The effectiveness of full messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination (≥14 days after the second dose) was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87 to 91) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization, 90% (95% CI, 86 to 93) against infection leading to an ICU admission, and 91% (95% CI, 89 to 93) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. The effectiveness of full vaccination with respect to a Covid-19-associated hospitalization or emergency department or urgent care clinic visit was similar with the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines and ranged from 81% to 95% among adults 85 years of age or older, persons with chronic medical conditions, and Black or Hispanic adults. The effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was 68% (95% CI, 50 to 79) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization and 73% (95% CI, 59 to 82) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. CONCLUSIONS: Covid-19 vaccines in the United States were highly effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization, ICU admission, or an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. This vaccine effectiveness extended to populations that are disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL