ABSTRACT
Background: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) poses expectant mothers to a higher risk of serious complications and mortality. Following a risk-benefit review, a number of governmental and professional bodies from across the globe recently approved the COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Aim(s): This study aimed to investigate knowledge, actual acceptance, and concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine among the obstetric population. Material(s) and Method(s): Participants were selected from among the expecting women who came for antenatal checkup during the study period (October 1, 2021-November 30, 2021). About 150 pregnant women who met the inclusion criteria and consented were recruited into the study. Data related to socio-demographic and clinical characteristics as well as knowledge, actual acceptance, and concerns about COVID-19 vaccine were collected through in-person interviews using a prestructured questionnaire. The SPSS version 23 was used to analyze data. The association between the attitude (acceptance and hesitance) of participants toward the COVID-19 vaccine and their sociodemographic and clinical profile was found by Fisher's exact test. Result(s): The actual acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among expecting women was 52.0%. The primary motive for accepting COVID-19 immunization was to protect the fetus, followed by the protection of one's own health. A significant association was found between COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and the level of education, socio-economic status, and presence of comorbidities. The leading causes for vaccine reluctance were concerns about the efficacy and safety of the vaccines and lack of awareness about their usage during pregnancy. Conclusion(s): Multifaceted activities are required to promote the effectiveness and safety profile of the COVID-19 vaccine as well as disseminate knowledge about its usage during pregnancy. Clinical significance: Unlike numerous other studies that have investigated the accepting attitude only, the present one has investigated the actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake among the obstetric population.Copyright © The Author(s).
ABSTRACT
Background: Coronavirus pandemic is an ongoing pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). WHO declared the outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern in January 2020 & a pandemic in March 2020. In India Oxford University-Astra Zeneca's Covishield vaccine, manufactured by serum institute of India and Bharath Biotech's Covaxin are being used for vaccination programme. In this study, we assess adverse reactions following Covid-19 vaccination & incidence of COVID-19 disease among vaccinated people across Kerala. Since it was newer vaccine and general population was afraid of side effects. The present study aimed to study the adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccination among general population aged above 18 years in Kerala. Method(s): A descriptive cross sectional study was conducted among COVID-19 vaccinated individuals above 18 yrs of age residing in Kerala from July 2021 to December 2021. Pattern of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination (AEFI) were assessed using a semi structured questionnaire. An online questionnaire using Kobo Toolbox was developed and shared via online platform to record the self-reported adverse events following vaccination. A respondent driven sampling method was used. The data was downloaded in MS Excel and analysed using Microsoft excel. Result(s): Study was conducted among 526 people across Kerala, among which both males(45.63%) and females (54.18%). Majority of them received COVISHEID (92.97%) and rest of them received COVAXIN (6.24%) and SPUTNIK (0.57%). Out of which 65.97% received 2 doses and 34.03% received only one dose of vaccine. More than half of them (61.5%) faced side effects during post vaccination period. The symptoms were very mild in which fever (65.74%) and tiredness (76.85%) were the commonest symptoms. Conclusion(s): In the present study, majority of the vaccinated people experienced very mild and self limiting adverse effects, those were very mild & self limiting. It is a fact that COVID-19 vaccines doesn't provided 100% efficiency, but our study indicates that it does provides protection against COVID-19 infection to a great extend & breakthrough infections are very less severe and asymptomatic for vaccinated people.Copyright © 2023, Dr. Yashwant Research Labs Pvt. Ltd.. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) in India are facing physical and psychological pressure. The pandemic has significant psychological impacts. Hence, we wanted to assess the mental stress and social stress among HCWs during the second wave of COVID-19. Aim and Objectives: Assessment of the mental distress among HCWs of tertiary care level institution during second wave of COVID-19 with the following objectives: (1) To know the sociodemographic characteristics of the HCWs of tertiary care center and (2) to assess the psychological stress among healthcare workers of a tertiary health center. Material(s) and Method(s): It is a cross-sectional and observational study conducted in hospital setting, in a tertiary care setting. Data were collected from 196 HCWs of the institute. Institutional ethical clearance was taken before the study. Structured questionnaire included sociodemographic variables, work-related variables, and variables to assess social stress. We used hospital anxiety and depression scoring questionnaire to assess anxiety and depression. Data were collected through personal interviews and online through Google forms after taking informed consent. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests are used analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Version 21 for Statistical analysis. Result(s): A total of 196 HCWs, 121 doctors, 74 nursing staff, and one ward staff participated in the study. Nursing staff were at higher risk for anxiety and depression, that is, 29% and 25% than others. Females were slightly more anxious (29%) and depressed (17%) than males. HCWs who are Muslim by religion were at more mental distress. Media exposure of more than 3 h had increased risk of mental distress. HCWs with other frontline COVID warrior as a partner were both anxious (40%) and depressed (20%). Anxiety (35%) was more among those who's family members got COVID positive. About 25% of them faced social stigma, 55% of them faced issue of isolation with in the community, and 14% of them faced acts of violence which is unacceptable. Conclusion(s): Although its second wave HCWs are still having psychological distress which needs to be addressed. Social stress that they are facing is significant and is associated with higher anxiety and depression, which has to be taken seriously.Copyright © 2023, Mr Bhawani Singh. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Social media plays an idealistic part in the present society. It assumes a significant role in expanding public awareness and gathers perspectives. Thus, social media has taken a huge place among people all over the world. And the ideas shared on social media reach people instantly. The Covid-19 virus, which is affecting more and more people around the world, It has infected millions in various countries and caused many thousands of deaths. In India, a country with a large population, the incidence of this virus is really higher. A Pune-based serum company has won a contract to develop the Covishield, a vaccine developed by the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom to control the virus. And Bharat Biotech, based in Hyderabad has developed a vaccine called 'Covaxin' in the national level invention. The two vaccines have been approved by the federal government for use on an emergency basis. Accordingly, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare of India has confirmed that these two vaccines are completely safe. Covid-19 vaccination is currently being implemented across India. This study explains whether the news about the Covid-19 vaccine that is appearing on social media at the moment is raising awareness or causing fear among the people. For this study the researcher selected the most Covid-19 affected areas in Chennai, Namely called Royapuram, Thiru Vi Ka Nagar, Anna Nagar, and Kodambakkam. A total of 320 Respondents participated in the study and responded. This study was conducted from 10 March 2021 to 10 April 2021. © 2023 Author(s).
ABSTRACT
COVID-19, an infectious disease, has become a leading cause of death in many people. The rapid emergence of the pandemic prompted the development of a vaccine to mitigate the disease's harmful consequences. Vaccination is the only effective way to prevent infection from spreading and build immunity to the virus. However, developing adverse effects has become a major problem for vaccine reluctance. Accordingly, the interest has been shifted towards identifying the adverse effects developed following immunization. The current study objective is to assess and compare the intensity of adverse effects following 1st and 2nd dose of COVID-19 vaccination and the medication administered to relieve the symptoms associated with vaccination. A cross-sectional study was performed in a community over six months. A total of 836 participants were involved in the study. All the data regarding the vaccination were collected through a specially designed questionnaire form and analyzed in all the participants within the study group. According to the study, at least 1 AEFI was developed in about 90% of the study population. The most common systemic and local effect developed in the study population was fever (59.42%) and pain at the injection site (69.82%), respectively. With both vaccines (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BBV152), the incidence and severity of AEFIs were lower after the second dose than after the first dose, and most of the symptoms associated with vaccination were alleviated by taking home remedies and symptomatic treatment. The adverse effects reported after receiving the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BBV152 vaccines are typical of most vaccines, and the majority of them were tolerated, and most subsided in less than 24 hours.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with cancer are at a higher risk of severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and mortality. Therefore, widespread COVID-19 vaccination is required to attain herd immunity. Objective(s): We aimed to evaluate the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in Indian patients with cancer and to collect information regarding vaccine hesitancy and factors that contributed to vaccine hesitancy. Material(s) and Method(s): This was a questionnaire-based survey conducted between May 7, 2021 and June 10, 2021 in patients aged 45 years and over, with solid tumors. The primary end points of the study were the proportion of Indian patients with cancer aged 45 years and older who had not received the COVID-19 vaccine, and the reasons why these patients had not received the COVID-19 vaccine. Our secondary end points were the proportion of patients with a history of COVID-19 infection, and the proportion of the patients who had vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, we attempted to assess the factors that could impact vaccine hesitancy. Result(s): A total of 435 patients were included in the study. Of these, 348 (80%) patients had not received even a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine;66 (15.2%) patients had received the first dose, and 21 (4.8%) had received both the doses. Approximately half (47.1%) of the patients reported that they took the COVID-19 vaccine based on the advice from a doctor. The reasons for not taking the COVID-19 vaccine could be considered as vaccine hesitancy in 259 (77%) patients. The two most common reasons were fear in 124 (38%) patients (fear of side-effects and of the impact of the vaccine on the cancer/therapy) and lack of information in 87 (26.7%) patients. On the multivariate analysis, the two factors found to be significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy were a lower educational level (OR, 1.78;95% CI, 1-3.17;P = 0.048) and a lack of prior advice regarding the COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 2.80;95% CI, 1.73-4.53;P < 0.001). Conclusion(s): Vaccine hesitancy is present in over half of our patients, and the most common reasons are a fear of the vaccine impacting the cancer therapy, fear of side-effects, and lack of information. Widespread vaccination can only be attained if systematic programs for education and dissemination of information regarding the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine are given as much importance as fortification of the vaccination supply and distribution system.Copyright © 2021 Cancer Research, Statistics, and Treatment Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.
ABSTRACT
Aims and objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the immediate adverse effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (COVAXIN) in a pregnant woman with that of a nonpregnant woman. Material(s) and Method(s): It is a prospective observational study done at Vanivilas Hospital, Bangalore Medical College & Research Institute (BMCRI) for 2 months. The sample size was 100 pregnant and 100 nonpregnant women. Telephonically, patients were followed-up, and details of the side/adverse effects were collected in a proforma after 2 and 14 days. Data collected from both groups were analyzed using the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Result(s): The majority of women were in the age group of <=25 years (64.0% and 36.0%, respectively) with a mean age of 25.01 +/- 3.71 years among the pregnant and 28.52 +/- 6.00 years among nonpregnant women. About 25.0% of pregnant women and 38.0% of nonpregnant women reported side effects. About 15.0% and 22.0% had taken treatment for side effects among pregnant women and nonpregnant women, respectively. Among the pregnant women, the common side effects reported were injection site pain (17) followed by fever (5), fatigue (4), and myalgia (03). Whereas among the nonpregnant women, the common side effects reported were injection site pain (28) followed by fever (6), myalgia (3), headache (2), and fatigue (1). Conclusion(s): Side effects reported following the administration of Covaxin in pregnant and nonpregnant women are fever, fatigue, injection site pain, myalgia, and headache. The proportion of side effects was not significantly different in the pregnant and nonpregnant women following Covaxin administration. Clinical significance: Covaxin is an inactivated killed vaccine against COVID-19 by Bharat Biotech. The vaccine has been recommended for pregnant women by the Government of India during corona pandemic. Studies are lacking regarding the difference in adverse events in pregnant versus nonpregnant women, after vaccine administration.Copyright © The Author(s).
ABSTRACT
Worldwide, infectious diseases have contributed significantly to morbidity and mortality;among the leading causes of death are pneumonia, respiratory infections and Covid-19. Stem cell therapy will be used to treat virus-infected patients in an effective and safe manner. A cross-sectional questionnaire was used to collect data from doctors. Most doctors are aware of the applications of stem cells, but they do not confirm their usage because clinical trials are ongoing. Instead, they show support for using stem cells to treat patients. Stem cells have been hoping to help repair damaged tissues in the respiratory system to promote faster recovery. Stem Cells are being studied in current clinical trials for their efficacy and safety in virus severe pneumonia and respiratory infections. The doctors suggested that stem cells have been used in infectious diseases to improve their health.Copyright © 2023 Health Biotechnology And Biopharma. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
In India, COVID-19 (Corona Virus Disease-2019) continues to this day, although with subdued intensity, following two major waves of viral infection. Despite ongoing vaccination drives to curb the spread of COVID-19, the relative potential of the administered vaccines to render immune protection to the general population and their advantage over natural infection remain undocumented. In this study, we examined the humoral and cell-mediated immune responses induced by the two vaccines Covishield and Covaxin, in individuals living in and around Kolkata, India. We also compared the immune responses induced separately by vaccination and natural infection. Our results indicate that although Covishield generates a better humoral immune response toward SARS-CoV-2, both vaccines are almost equivalent in terms of cell-mediated immune response to the virus. Both Covishield and Covaxin, however, are more effective toward the wild-type virus than the Delta variant. Additionally, the overall immune response resulting from natural infection in and around Kolkata is not only similar to that generated by vaccination but the cell-mediated immune response to SARS-CoV-2 also lasts for at least ten months in some individuals after the viral infection.
ABSTRACT
Viral vector vaccines (Covishield) and inactivated vaccines (Covaxin) are now being administered worldwide to reduce the impact of life-threatening corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19). Various cutaneous adverse drug reactions (CADRs) have been reported following COVID-19 vaccination. Here, we are reporting series of CADRs following COVID-19 vaccination. Among 18 CADRs, 4 each were of acute urticaria and pityriasis rosea, 2 each of leukocytoclastic vasculitis and herpes zoster, 3 exacerbation of psoriasis, and 1 each of exacerbation of eczema, reactivation of herpes simplex virus 1 infection, and COVID arm. However, in 1 case there was remission of psoriasis. These CADRs occurred between 6 hours and 20 days after vaccination and were mild to moderate in severity. Only 1 needed hospitalization. Of the 18 CADRs, 10 developed after first dose and 8 after second dose. Causality assessment was done using World Health Organization causality assessment classification. Mass COVID-19 vaccination program is in progress worldwide. Many CADRs like COVID arm, urticaria, pityriasis rosea, leukocytoclastic vasculitis, herpes zoster etc., have been reported following vaccination. In our series only 1 developed cutaneous adverse drug reaction (CADR) to Covaxin. It was Covishield that was administered during the vaccination drive; hence, more cases were seen to that vaccine. Most of the CADRs were mild to moderate in intensity. Awareness of these adverse effects enables the healthcare professionals to be better equipped to recognize and manage them correctly.
ABSTRACT
AIM: The study was conducted to know the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on menstrual cycle patterns and pre- and post-menstrual symptoms in women aged 18-45 years. BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccination was introduced to combat the dreadful impacts of human coronavirus infection. The two indigenously developed COVID-19 vaccines approved for use in India are COVISHILED and COVAXIN. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of COVID-19 vaccination on the menstrual cycle, pre- and post-menstrual symptoms and to establish the correlation with the type of vaccine received. METHODS: Multi-centric observational study conducted in six institutes of national importance in different states of India over one year. A total of 5709 female participants fulfilling inclusion criteria were enrolled. Data about the impact of vaccines (COVISHIELD and COVAXIN) and prior COVID-19 infection on the menstrual cycle and its associated symptoms were obtained using all participants' online and offline interviews. RESULTS: Of 5709 participants, 78.2% received COVISHIELD and 21.8% COVAXIN. Of the total 5709 participants, 333(5.8%) developed post-vaccination menstrual disturbances, with 32.7% having frequent cycles, 63.7% prolonged cycles, and 3.6% inter-menstrual bleeding. A total of 301 participants noticed changes in the amount of bleeding, with 50.2% excessive, 48.8% scanty, and 0.99% amenorrhea followed by heavy bleeding. Furthermore, the irregularities of the menstrual cycle (p=0.011) and length (0.001) were significantly higher in the COVAXIN group (7.2%) as compared to the COVISHIELD (5.3%) group. A total of 721 participants complained of newly developed/worsening pre- and post-menstrual symptoms. These symptoms were significantly higher in the COVISHIELD group (p=0.031), with generalized weakness and body pains as the main complaints (p=0.001). No significant difference was observed in the incidence of COVID-19 infection with these vaccines. No significant associations were observed when comparing menstrual abnormalities among those with COVID-19 infection (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: COVISHILED and COVAXIN vaccines were associated with menstrual cycle disturbances and pre-and post-menstrual symptoms in a small proportion of participants, with 94.7% having no change in the amount of bleeding during menstruation post-vaccination. The menstrual irregularities observed were significantly higher with the COVAXIN vaccine. Others: Further, long-term studies are required to confirm that the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the menstrual cycle may be short-lasting, with no severe effects on women's menstrual health.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of adverse effects (AE) of vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with SLE who visit medical centers in Asuncion, Paraguay. Method(s): The study performed was observational, transverse, descriptive. 152 patients with SLE were included, who received at least one dose of anti-COVID vaccine. A survey was carried out, which allowed the data collection through phone calls or instant messaging. Each investigator had a spreadsheet that related the generated code with the surveyed patient's name. Once the call ended and if the patient agreed to participate in the study, a code was generated. Result(s): 88.5% of the individuals were female, the average age was 33.93 +/- 11,102 years. Of these, 94.3% received their first dose, 86.3% the second dose, 39.7% the third dose, and 2.3% the fourth dose. Of the total vaccinated patients, 39.38% were administered Sputnik-V, 26.02% Pfizer, 16.43% AstraZeneca, 13.35% Moderna, 4.1% Covaxin, and 0.68% Hayat Vax. Of 292 doses administered, 103 AEs were recorded, 79.6% within the first 5 days and the rest within the next 5 days. 44.03% presented the AE after the first dose, 32.11% after the second dose and 23.85% after the third dose. Themean duration of symptoms was 7.49 +/- 9.877 days. The most important side effect was pain at the injection site, followed by fever and fatigue. The worsening of Lupus due to the administration of the anticovid vaccine was demonstrated in 9.93% of the cases. Conclusion(s): Mild effects were registered. It is concluded that vaccination against COVID-19 is safe for individuals with SLE.
ABSTRACT
The SARS-COV-2 infection-related severe illness is prevented by vaccinations. Therefore, it is relevant to report a case of post vaccine meningoencephalitis in a 30 year old male Indian patient, who presented with weakness in all the extremities, episodes of loose stool, fever, vomiting, tachypnea and loss of consciousness immediately following the 2nd dose of the COVID vaccination (COVAXIN).
ABSTRACT
Intro: Different vaccines against COVID-19 have been approved by the World Health Organization (WHO) at different stages, however, limited data is available on long-term kinetics of antibodies induced by vaccines. This study was performed to investigate the persistence and dynamicity of BBV-152 (Covaxin)- and AZD1222 (Covishield)-induced immunoglobulin-G (IgG) antibodies over the year and neutralizing antibodies' status after the one-month post booster dose. Method(s): This 52-week longitudinal cohort study documented antibody persistence and neutralizing antibody status among 278 health-care workers (HCWs) from four different healthcare and research facilities in Odisha, enrolled in January 2021 and continued until March 2022. An automated chemiluminescence immune assay (CLIA) platform from Abbott Diagnostics was used to quantify IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2's spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) and a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) was performed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). If any participants developed any symptoms of COVID-19, nasopharyngeal swabs were collected and sent to ICMR- RMRC, Bhubaneswar for RT-PCR confirmation. Finding(s): Among the 243 participants, 119 HCWs (48.97%) were Covaxin recipients and the remaining 124 (51.02%) were Covishield recipients. During the seven follow- ups, 104 participants (42.79%) were identified as vaccine breakthrough cases. In 139 non-infected HCWs, the median antibody titer significantly waned after ten months of double dose, both for Covaxin (342.7 AU/mL at DD1 vs 43.9 AU/mL at DD10) and Covishield (2325.8 AU/mL at DD3 vs 595.2 AU/mL at DD10). No statistically significant differences in antibody titers were observed based on age, gender, comorbidities, and blood groups. The median inhibition activity of sVNT was increased significantly for Covaxin and Covishield booster recipients. Among the booster dose recipients, 24 had breakthrough cases by the Omicron variant. Conclusion(s): Results of this longitudinal cohort study can be used to implement vaccination strategies and could also aid in tracking and designing vaccine mandates to minimize vaccine escape.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Objectives: The objective of this study is to assess and correlate adverse drug events following coronavirus disease (COVID) vaccination with blood group and dietary style. Methodology: This is a cross-sectional study carried out from May 2021 to July 2021. A prevalidated Google questionnaire containing demographic details, dietary style, blood group, preexisting diseases, and adverse events of the COVID vaccine was circulated to all health-care professionals of our institution through mail/WhatsApp. Informed consent was obtained (in Google Forms) from all the participants after describing the purpose of the study and the assurance to maintain anonymity and confidentiality. A total of 102 responses were collected, out of which 100 (n = 100) responses were analyzed and interpreted (two responses were excluded since participants are not vaccinated). The descriptive statistical method is applied for the assessment of adverse events. The Chi-square test is applied to assess the correlation between adverse events with blood group and dietary style. P < 0.05 is considered statistically significant. Results: The majority of the participants had comorbidities (80%) and were not infected with COVID (90%) before vaccination. Pain at the injection site is very frequently experienced followed by body aches, fatigue, fever, and weakness of the arm. The Chi-square correlation test showed that nonvegetarians had a significantly higher incidence of pain at the injection site compared to vegetarians [?(2) = 7.799, P < 0.004]. However, the study did not find a significant association between other adverse events with blood group and dietary style of the participants (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The present study concludes that study participants experienced minor adverse events following Covishield and Covaxin;pain at the injection site, myalgia, and fever are more frequent. Moreover, there is a higher incidence of injection site pain in nonvegetarians compared to vegetarians. However, there is no significant association between other adverse events with blood group and dietary style of the participants.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Vaccine safety is a major barrier to the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine by pregnant women. To bring confidence among pregnant women towards vaccine intake, there is a need to synthesize evidence on safety profile of vaccination. Objective: To assess adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women. Materials and methods: A vaccine safety surveillance was conducted at 2 rural primary health centers (PHC) located in Anantapur District, India. A total of 420 pregnant women were monitored for AEs following COVID-19 vaccination for a period of 30â¯min and followed for 1 month for late reactions through telephonic interviews. All AEs were subjected to causality and severity assessment. Descriptive statistics were used to represent adverse events. Results: The COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women was 64.4%. A total of 420 pregnant women received 670 vaccine doses (Covishieldâ¯=â¯372, Covaxinâ¯=â¯298) against COVID-19. Majority of vaccine intake was observed during the second trimester. The incidence rate of AEs following the COVID-19 vaccine among pregnant women was 93.8%, and the majority include injection site pain (28.4%, 29.6%), fever (25.5%, 19.0%), myalgia (8.21%, 12.3%), and malaise (13.6%, 8.4%). Most AEs notified are probable and mild in nature. Conclusion: The COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women was 64.4%. A 30â¯days incidence rate of AEs following COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women was 93.8%, with the most common mild events like injection site pain, and fever. A further follow-up cohort study by taking an adequate sample size was recommended to capture fetal-maternal outcomes.
Introducción: La seguridad de la vacuna es una barrera importante para la adopción de la vacuna COVID-19 por parte de las mujeres embarazadas. Para llevar confianza entre las mujeres embarazadas hacia la ingesta de vacunas, es necesario sintetizar la evidencia sobre el perfil de seguridad de la vacunación. Objetivo: Evaluar los eventos adversos (EA) después de la vacunación contra la COVID-19 en mujeres embarazadas. Materiales y métodos: Se llevó a cabo una vigilancia de la seguridad de las vacunas en dos centros rurales de atención primaria de salud (PHC) ubicados en el distrito de Anantapur, India. Un total de 420 mujeres embarazadas fueron monitoreadas para detectar EA después de la vacunación COVID-19 durante un período de 30 minutos y seguidas durante un mes para detectar reacciones tardías a través de entrevistas telefónicas. Todos los EA se sometieron a una evaluación de causalidad y gravedad. Se utilizaron estadísticas descriptivas para representar los eventos adversos. Resultados: La tasa de aceptación de la vacuna COVID-19 entre las mujeres embarazadas fue del 64,4%. Un total de 420 mujeres embarazadas recibieron 670 dosis de vacunas (Covishieldâ¯=â¯372, Covaxinâ¯=â¯298) contra COVID-19. La mayoría de la ingesta de vacunas se observó durante el segundo trimestre. La tasa de incidencia de EA después de la vacuna COVID-19 entre las mujeres embarazadas fue del 93,8%, y la mayoría incluye dolor en el lugar de la inyección (28,4%, 29,6%), fiebre (25,5%, 19,0%), mialgia (8,21%, 12,3%) y malestar general (13,6%, 8,4%). La mayoría de los EA notificados son de naturaleza probable y leve. Conclusión: La tasa de aceptación de la vacuna COVID-19 entre las mujeres embarazadas fue del 64,4%. Una tasa de incidencia de EA a 30 días después de la vacunación contra COVID-19 entre las mujeres embarazadas fue del 93,8%, con los eventos leves más comunes como dolor en el lugar de la inyección y fiebre. Se recomendó un estudio de cohorte de seguimiento adicional mediante la toma de un tamaño de muestra adecuado para capturar los resultados maternos fetales.
ABSTRACT
Background: SARS-CoV-2 evokes vigorous humoral immune responses which includes production of virus-specific antibodies of the immunoglobulin IgM, IgG & IgA isotypes. Seroconversion & production of detectable antibodies usually occurs within 20 days of symptom onset, while the kinetics of their production is variable. IgA is the major antibody class in mucosal membranes which plays an important role in SARS-CoV-2 infections. It's response in the early stage of the disease seems to be more pronounced than IgM. Objective(s): To detect the presence of serum IgA antibody response against Spike Receptor Binding Domain & Nucleoprotein of SARSCoV- 2 in naturally infected individuals as well as vaccinated individuals. Material(s) and Method(s): Confirmed RT-PCR Covid positive serum samples were tested by in-house developed SRBD IgA ELISA & N protein IgA ELISA of SARS-CoV-2. The subjects were classified according to the post onset of disease date. Serum samples of vaccinated individuals (Covishield & Covaxin) were assessed to compare IgA response. Result(s): Our results suggest a linear trend in the level of IgA antibody response POD 8 onwards in natural infection. In vaccinated individuals Covaxin groups exhibits a prominent increase in the IgA response in comparison to Covisheld. Conclusion(s): IgA might play an important role in assessing the immune status of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. This study suggests that IgA antibody act as a promising immunological marker for vaccine study.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Since the beginning of COVID 19 pandemic, more than 641 million cases and 6.63 million confirmed deaths were reported worldwide. A rapid development of COVID 19 Vaccine was the breakthrough in the prevention and control of COVID 19. India has commenced its vaccination drive from January 16, 2021 and has administered more than 219 crores vaccination to date it its people. On war foot, Reliance Industries Limited also launched its free vaccination coverage program - Mission Vaccine Suraksha for employees, family members, and community by collaborating with local authorities and governments. The organization also provided free vaccination to Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Maharashtra besides various other national and regional organisations to speed up the vaccination drive. Methodology: A taskforce including stakeholders form the Medical Services, HR, Procurement, Logistics, transportation, digital systems was formed to oversee, implement, monitor, and evaluate a successful vaccine roll-out drive. The drive included Covishield and Covaxin COVID 19 vaccines. As a single point of contact, Reliance Foundation HN Hospital procured, stored, and transported vaccines to all locations. At par with Govt. protocols, Reliance developed its own workplace COVID vaccination centres (CVCs) at its corporate headquarters and 11 other manufacturing sites in Maharashtra and Gujrat. For Cold chain management, Reliance procured Ice Lined Refrigerators (ILRs), refrigerators, vaccine carriers, icepacks, etc. for each CVC. Dedicated medical and paramedical staffs were recruited and trained to carry out vaccination drive with all the COVID 19 protocols in place. Reliance tied up with multiple hospitals to carry out pan-India vaccination drive. The entire operation was digitally enabled by involving mediums such as Reliance's in-house app JioHealthHub (JHH) that included end-to-end vaccination journey, i.e., from slot booking, CoWIN registration, post-vaccination care, uploading of the certificates, etc. Vaccine inventory was monitored by Reliance's digital system named KiviHealth. A vaccination dashboard was created to track real time vaccination update. Result(s): 40 lakh vaccine doses were provided free of cost to support the nationwide vaccination programme. Till date, 31,63,870 beneficiaries were covered under R-Suraksha under which, 15,94,357 people received their 1st dosage, 13,36,613 received the 2nd dose, and 2,32,900 people have received the precautionary dose. Reliance also commenced vaccination for children aged 12 to 17 years covering 7369 children for 1st dose, 5802 children for 2nd dose. Reliance has achieved 100% compliance for 2 doses of COVID 19 vaccination for its employees and contract workers across manufacturing units. Precautionary dose was administered to 75% of employees and contract workers to date. 25 mild and 3 moderate Adverse Event Following Immunization (AEFI) cases were recorded during vaccination at workplace CVCs, which were managed and sent home. Conclusion(s): Reliance's Mission Vaccine Suraksha has reached to all corners of the country, including people with disabilities, the elderly, homeless, and those in far-flung locations. Reliance faced hurdles in procuring and storing of the vaccines at the beginning of the operation. However, this was tackled effectively with strategic approach. The initiative is still ongoing ensuring maximum precautionary dosage coverage for everyone.