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
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
Objective: Government of India (GOI) has allowed vaccination for age group of 15-18 y. It is a positive step toward boosting immunization rates across the nation. As per guidelines, BBV152 vaccine, Bharat Biotech's "Covaxin" is approved for adolescents. The study was designed to evaluate adverse events following immunization (AEFI) among adolescents. Method(s): A prospective, observational survey was carried out among the first 315 beneficiaries (adolescents of age 15-18 y) for a period of 5 mo at Osmania medical college and hospitals. Within 24 h, 48-72 h, and two weeks following the first and second doses of Covaxin, active and passive surveillance using telephonic inquiry and documentation relating to adverse events was conducted. The prevalence of AEFI and its association with demographic factors have been identified. Collected data were analyzed using SPSS 25. Result(s): The first 315 beneficiaries (Adolescents between the ages of 15 and 18) who received Covaxin were identified. All AEFIs reported were within the first 24-72 h of vaccination. AEFI incidence was higher in 1st dose (16.6%) when compared to 2nd dose (3.5%). No AEFIs were noted after 2 w. We found no association of AEFI with sex, age group, and past history of Covid as this finding is not significant (p>0.05). Conclusion(s): Overall, Covaxin has a good safety profile in adolescents. Symptoms were transient and of low intensity. There were no documented severe and serious AEFI. It is obligatory for documentation as the AEFI profile will encourage vaccine adoption and lessen reluctance.Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Innovare Academic Sciences Pvt Ltd.
ABSTRACT
Background: The use of mydriatic and cycloplegic eye drops is a common practice in ophthalmology for various diagnostic and therapeutic procedures like for estimation of refractive error and for thorough fundus examination. The combination of Tropicamide and Phenylephrine has been a subject of debate among ophthalmologists regarding its efficacy and side effects. Aims and Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 1% Tropicamide alone versus a combination of 0.8% Tropicamide and 5% Phenylephrine for mydriasis and cycloplegia. The objectives were to compare the rate of mydriasis and maximal mydriasis after instilling a single drop of each solution and to measure the degree of cycloplegia and amount of residual accommodation at 25 minutes after instillation of the drops. Method(s): This was a hospital-based, analytic cross-sectional study conducted on 100 patients between 15 and 35 years of age presenting to the Department of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College and Associated Group of Hospitals, Kota for refraction or fundus examination. Patients were randomly assigned to either the Tropicamide group or the Tropicamide-Phenylephrine group. The study measured the rate of mydriasis, maximal mydriasis after eye drop instillation. Study also measured the degree of cycloplegia and amount of residual accommodation at 25 minutes after instillation of the drop. Result(s): The combination of Tropicamide and Phenylephrine resulted in a higher rate of mydriasis and maximal mydriasis than Tropicamide alone. Tropicamide alone uncovered significantly higher mean latent error of refraction and had higher cycloplegic effect as compared to combination group. The study also found that increasing age lead to increased cycloplegia and decreased residual accommodation in both groups. It was also found that both groups had a similar safety profile, with no significant adverse effects observed except significant increase in pulse rate after instillation of combination eye drop. Conclusion(s): The combination of Tropicamide and Phenylephrine is more effective than Tropicamide alone for inducing mydriasis with a similar safety profile except significant change in pulse rate. While Tropicamide alone had better cycloplegic effect.Copyright © 2023, Dr. Yashwant Research Labs Pvt. Ltd.. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) is a term given to describe shoulder pain and dysfunction arising within 48 hours after vaccine administration and lasting for more than one week. While SIRVA is most commonly seen after influenza and tetanus vaccines, there have been a few recent case reports describing SIRVA-like symptoms after COVID-19 vaccine administration. Two patients presented to the shoulder surgeon's practice center with complaints of shoulder stiffness and pain following the COVID-19 vaccine. The first patient was a 33-year-old man;he presented within 2 days of onset of the pain and 14 days from the vaccine date. He had a complete restriction of shoulder motion (0degree flexion, and no external or internal rotation) at presentation. This patient was treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) and rested in a sling for a week. The second patient was a 53-year-old woman;she presented with a 6-week duration of mild restriction of active shoulder motion and shoulder pain. Her magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed the presence of subacromial-subdeltoid bursitis. She was treated with subacromial steroid injection and range of motion shoulder exercises. Both patients recovered a near-normal range of motion recovery within a month, and their pain improved significantly. The main lessons from this case report were: (1) patients presenting with a recent increase in pain and acute loss of shoulder movements after vaccination may be managed conservatively with rest and NSAID medications and (2) in case of a subacromial-subdeltoid bursitis in the MRI, subacromial injection of steroid may provide good pain relief. Copyright © 2022, Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine Inc. All rights reserved.