Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 291, 2022 Mar 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1765436

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to assess the impact the impact of gender and age on reactogenicity to three COVID-19 vaccine products: Biontech/Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) and AstraZeneca (ChAdOx). Additional analyses focused on the reduction in working capacity after vaccination and the influence of the time of day when vaccines were administered. METHODS: We conducted a survey on COVID-19 vaccinations and eventual reactions among 73,000 employees of 89 hospitals of the Helios Group. On May 19th, 2021 all employees received an email, inviting all employees who received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 to participate using an attached link. Additionally, the invitation was posted in the group's intranet page. Participation was voluntary and non-traceable. The survey was closed on June 21st, 2021. RESULTS: 8375 participants reported on 16,727 vaccinations. Reactogenicity was reported after 74.6% of COVID-19 vaccinations. After 23.0% vaccinations the capacity to work was affected. ChAdOx induced impairing reactogenicity mainly after the prime vaccination (70.5%), while mRNA-1273 led to more pronounced reactions after the second dose (71.6%). Heterologous prime-booster vaccinations with ChAdOx followed by either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 were associated with the highest risk for impairment (81.4%). Multivariable analyses identified the factors older age, male gender and vaccine BNT162b as independently associated with lower odds ratio for both, impairing reactogenicity and incapacity to work. In the comparison of vaccine schedules, the heterologous combination ChAdOx + BNT162b or mRNA-1273 was associated with the highest and the homologue prime-booster vaccination with BNT162b with the lowest odds ratios. The time of vaccination had no significant influence. CONCLUSIONS: Around 75% of the COVID-19 vaccinations led to reactogenicity and nearly 25% of them led to one or more days of work loss. Major risk factors were female gender, younger age and the administration of a vaccine other than BNT162b2. When vaccinating a large part of a workforce against COVID-19, especially in professions with a higher proportion of young and women such as health care, employers and employees must be prepared for a noticeable amount of absenteeism. Assuming vaccine effectiveness to be equivalent across the vaccine combinations, to minimize reactogenicity, employees at risk should receive a homologous prime-booster immunisation with BNT162b2. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the Ethic Committee of the Aerztekammer Berlin on May 27th, 2021 (Eth-37/21) and registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS 00025745). The study was supported by the Helios research grant HCRI-ID 2021-0272.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis Vaccine , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Vaccination
2.
Teoriya i Praktika Fizicheskoy Kultury ; - (12):80-81, 2021.
Article in Russian | Scopus | ID: covidwho-1628155

ABSTRACT

Objective of the study was to analyze the students’ physical fitness variation in the distant educational period. Methods and structure of the study. We run the physical fitness variation tests in the distant educational period of the Covid-19 pandemic related restrictions in 2020 on a sample of the 3-year Irkutsk State Transport University and Nizhnevartovsk State University students (n=50). Results and conclusion. The distant education model was introduced in 2020 in response to the pandemic, with the faculty taking efforts to reform the standard classroom learning system and find effective distant education methods and tools. To maintain the optimal physical working capacity, the students were recommended a set of self-reliant physical education practices facilitated by the extracurricular physical education instruction packages and progress tests. It should be mentioned that some students have failed to maintain the recommended physical activity for different reasons. The pandemic-necessitated physical education service transformation into the distant education format has resulted in regresses in the physical fitness standards of the sample in fact. © 2021, Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoy kul'tury i sporta. All rights reserved.

3.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(3)2022 Jan 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1625795

ABSTRACT

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic requires wearing face masks in many areas of our daily life; hence, the potential side effects of mask use are discussed. Therefore, the present study explores whether wearing a medical face mask (MedMask) affects physical working capacity (PWC). Secondary, the influence of a filtering facepiece mask with exhalation valve class 2 (FFP2exhal) and a cotton fabric mask (community mask) on PWC was also investigated. Furthermore, corresponding physiological and subjective responses when wearing face masks as well as a potential moderating role of subjects' individual cardiorespiratory fitness and sex on face mask effects were analyzed. Thirty-nine subjects (20 males, 19 females) with different cardiorespiratory fitness levels participated in a standardized submaximal bicycle ergometer protocol using either a MedMask, FFP2exhal, community mask, or no mask (control) on four days, in randomized order. PWC130 and PWC150 as the mechanical load at the heart rates of 130 and 150 beats per minute were measured as well as transcutaneous carbon dioxide partial pressure, saturation of peripheral capillary oxygen, breathing frequency, blood pressure, perceived respiratory effort, and physical exhaustion. Using the MedMask did not lead to changes in PWC or physiological response compared to control. Neither appeared changes exceeding normal ranges when the FFP2exhal or community mask was worn. Perceived respiratory effort was up to one point higher (zero-to-ten Likert scale) when using face masks (p < 0.05) compared to control. Sex and cardiorespiratory fitness were not factors influencing the effects of the masks. The results of the present study provide reason to believe that wearing face masks for infection prevention during the COVID-19 pandemic does not pose relevant additional physical demands on the user although some more respiratory effort is required.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Bicycling , Female , Humans , Male , Masks , Physical Functional Performance , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL