Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 1.980
Filter
Add filters

Year range
1.
JMIR Form Res ; 6(11): e41914, 2022 Nov 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2109577

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite continuing efforts to improve the inclusion of underserved groups in clinical research, gaps in diversity remain. Participation of special populations is especially important when facing problems of unprecedented complexity such as the COVID-19 pandemic. A better understanding of factors associated with the immune response in diverse populations would advance future preventive and curative approaches. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the factors potentially responsible for adverse events following COVID-19 immunization. The study population included adults from rural areas, transitional countries, and those with medically understudied conditions, across a broad age range. METHODS: The study evolved from peer support networks developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were recruited digitally through online neighborhood and health communities. Some of the participants volunteered as study investigators assisting with offline recruitment and safety monitoring. Individuals who consented to participate were asked to share their vaccination experiences either using constantly evolving web-based surveys or via one-on-one communication. Inferential statistical analysis to estimate differences between study groups was performed using parametric and nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Of 1430 participants who shared their vaccination experiences, 648 had outcome measures at their 1.5-year follow-up. Significant differences were found between age groups, types of vaccine adverse events (VAEs), incidences of breakthrough infections, and health conditions linked to the microbiome. Pairwise comparisons showed that VAEs interfering with daily activities were significantly higher in both younger (18-59 years) and older age groups (80-100 years, P<.001) than in the 60-79-year age group. Short-term VAEs were associated with lower incidence of breakthrough COVID-19 infections relative to those who reported either minimal or long-term adverse events (P<.001). A genetic origin was suggested for some adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study demonstrate that vaccine adverse reactions in older individuals are being overlooked, and the incidence of VAEs impairing immunity may be higher than previously perceived. Better preventive measures are needed for all those at risk for life-threatening and long-term adverse events due to vaccination. Supportive community-based studies focusing on these populations could add important data to the current body of knowledge. Further and more comprehensive studies should follow. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04832932; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04832932. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1101/2021.06.28.21256779.

2.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 816, 2022 Nov 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2108747

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The elderly are highly vulnerable to severe COVID-19. Waning immunity and emergence of Omicron have caused concerns about reduced effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines. The objective was to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against severe COVID-19 among the elderly. METHODS: This nationwide, register-based cohort analysis included all residents aged 70 years and over in Finland. The follow-up started on December 27, 2020, and ended on March 31, 2022. The outcomes of interest were COVID-19-related hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) admission timely associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. VE was estimated as one minus the hazard ratio comparing the vaccinated and unvaccinated and taking into account time since vaccination. Omicron-specific VE was evaluated as the effectiveness observed since January 1, 2022. RESULTS: The cohort included 896,220 individuals. Comirnaty (BioNTech/Pfizer) VE against COVID-19-related hospitalization was 93% (95% CI 89-95%) and 85% (95% CI 82-87%) 14-90 and 91-180 days after the second dose; VE increased to 95% (95% CI 94-96%) 14-60 days after the third dose. VE of other homologous and heterologous three dose series was similar. Protection against severe COVID-19 requiring ICU treatment was even better. Since January 1, 2022, Comirnaty VE was 98% (95% CI 92-99%) and 92% (95% CI 87-95%) 14-90 and 91-180 days after the second and 98% (95% CI 95-99%) 14-60 days after the third dose. CONCLUSIONS: VE against severe COVID-19 is high among the elderly. It waned slightly after two doses, but a third restored the protection. VE against severe COVID-19 remained high even after the emergence of Omicron.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Humans , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Finland/epidemiology , Vaccine Efficacy , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Dialogues in Health ; : 100074, 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-2104790

ABSTRACT

Treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials are often reported in the media and medical journals as the relative risk reduction. The present article explains why the relative risk reduction is a misinformative measure that promotes disinformation when reporting efficacy in clinical research studies such as randomized controlled trials for COVID-19 vaccines. The relative risk reduction is based on the relative risk, a proportional measure or ratio used in epidemiologic studies to estimate the probability of a disease associated with an exposure. The present article demonstrates how the relative risk reduction and relative risk obscure the magnitude of disease risk reduction in clinical research. The absolute risk reduction is shown to be a more precise and reliable measure of treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical research studies. The absolute risk reduction reciprocal also measures the number needed to treat or vaccinate, and is a more accurate measure than the relative risk reduction for comparing risk reductions of clinical studies. Additionally, the present article reviews consequences of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy misinformation disseminated through media reports. The article concludes that relative risk reduction should not be used to measure treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials. What is new? •Unreliability of relative measures in clinical trials is graphically illustrated, demonstrating constant relative measures as absolute measures change.•Misuse of relative measures in clinical research is historically linked to misinterpretation of Jerome Cornfield’s advice on measuring causative and associative effects.•Consequences of disinformation and misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and modern clinical medicine are described.•The proper use of absolute measures in meta-analyses is explained.

4.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; : 2135918, 2022 Nov 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2107199

ABSTRACT

The association between COVID-19 vaccines and vasovagal malaise (VVM) has recently been reported in the literature. Our study aimed to describe COVID-19 vaccines associated VVM cases and to identify risk factors of COVID-19 vaccines associated VVM. To this end, we performed a descriptive study of VVM reports associated with COVID-19 vaccines from two French mass COVID-19 vaccination centers. We also extracted reports of VVM associated with all-COVID-19 vaccines in VigiBase®, the World Health Organization (WHO) pharmacovigilance database to analyze demographic data. In the two French mass vaccination center database, 408 entries reported VVM after the standard administration of tozinameran - Pfizer® (1.63/1,000 vaccinated persons). Of these cases, 213 (52.2%) occurred in women, and 193 (47.3%) occurred in the 18-29 year-old (yo) age group. In 232 cases (56.8%), patients had a history of anxiety related to needles or medical visits, 213 (52.2%) reported a fear of COVID-19 vaccination in particular, and 233 (57.1%) had a history of VVM. In VigiBase®, 336,291 notifications of COVID-19 vaccines associated with VVM were identified in the adult population during the period of analysis. The most reported age class was 18-44 years (52.4%), and women represented 71.7% of the reports. Reporting widely differed depending on the country. This study, performed in real-life conditions, highlights that VVM is associated with all-COVID-19 vaccines. Young age and history of anxiety related in young adults could be a triggering factor of vaccines-associated VVM. Further studies are needed to confirm our results.

5.
Public Health Pract (Oxf) ; 4: 100338, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2105786

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The Ethiopian government had planned to vaccinate the total population and started to deliver the COVID-19 vaccine but, there is limited evidence about vaccine acceptance among pregnant women. Thus, this study aimed to assess COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and associated factors among pregnant women attending an antenatal care unit clinic in Eastern Ethiopia. Study design: A facility-based cross-sectional study. Methods: A study was conducted from June 01 to 30/2021 among systematically selected pregnant women. Data were collected using a pre-tested structured questionnaire, which was adapted from previous studies, through a face-to-face interview. Predictors were assessed using a multivariable logistic regression model and reported using an adjusted odds ratio with 95% CI. Statistical significance was declared at p-value less than 0.05. Results: In this study, data from 645 pregnant women were used in the analysis. Overall, 62.2% of pregnant women were willing to be vaccinated if the vaccine is approved by the relevant authority. Fear of side effects (62.04%), a lack of information (54.29%), and uncertainty about the vaccine's safety and efficacy (25%) were the most common reasons for refusal to take the COVID-19 vaccine. The odds of unwillingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine among pregnant women were increased significantly among mothers who were able to read and write [AOR = 2.9, 95% CI: (1.16, 7.23)], attain 9-12 grade level [AOR = 4.2, 95% CI: (2.1, 8.5)], lack information [AOR = 2.2, 95% CI: (1.41, 3.57)], and having a history of chronic diseases [AOR = 2.52, 95% CI: (1.34, 4.7)]. Conclusion: Less than two-thirds of pregnant women were willing to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. Extensive public health information dissemination aimed at women with lower educational backgrounds and a history of chronic disease could be critical.

7.
Int J Infect Dis ; 2022 Nov 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2105084

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has evolved quickly, with different variants of concern resulting in the need for countries to offer booster vaccinations. While studies have assessed homologous schedules in detail, the effectiveness of heterologous booster vaccine schedules against severity and mortality with newer variants, remains to be explored fully. METHODS: Utilising a Hospital Information System for COVID-19 established in Chiang Mai, Thailand, we conducted a cohort study by linking patient-level data on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases to the national immunization records, during delta-predominant and omicron predominant periods. RESULTS: Compared to omicron, COVID-19 cases during delta period were ten times more likely to have severe outcomes and in-hospital deaths. During omicron, a third vaccine dose had 89% reduced risk of both severe COVID-19 and deaths. Third dose received 14-90 days prior to the date of positive test showed highest protection (93%). Severe outcomes were not observed with third dose during delta, and fourth dose during omicron period. All the vaccine types used for boosting in Thailand offered similar protection against severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Booster doses provided very high level of protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths. Booster campaigns should focus on improving coverage utilising all available vaccines to ensure optimal protection.

8.
Bioorg Med Chem Lett ; 75: 128987, 2022 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2104449

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a communicable disease triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged as leading cause of death from a single infectious agent globally. Despite of rigorous protective measures, availability of multiple vaccines and with few approved therapeutics, the virus effect on the humankind throughout the world is perennial. COVID-19 has become the most urgent health concern with emergence of new challenging variants which outnumbered all other health issues and ensued in overwhelming number of reported deaths. In this unprecedented period of COVID-19 pandemic, scientists work round the clock for rapid development of efficient vaccines for prevention of infection and effective therapeutics for treatment. Here, we report the status of COVID-19 and highlight the ongoing research and development of vaccines and therapeutic strategies. It is necessary to know the present situation and available options to fight against the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Iran J Med Sci ; 47(6): 517-532, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2100903

ABSTRACT

In December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in China. This virus rapidly spread worldwide and was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March 2020. High incidence, long incubation period, and diverse clinical signs of the disease posed a huge challenge globally. The efforts of health systems have been focused on repurposing existing drugs or developing innovative therapies to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with SARS-CoV-2. In addition, most of the large pharmaceutical companies are intensely working on vaccine development to swiftly deliver safe and effective vaccines to prevent further spread of the virus. In this review, we will discuss the latest data on therapeutic strategies undergoing clinical trials. Additionally, we will provide a summary of vaccines currently under development.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , China
10.
Osong Public Health Res Perspect ; 13(5): 316-327, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2100730

ABSTRACT

The initial case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in India was reported on January 30, 2020, and subsequently, the number of COVID-19-infected patients surged during the first wave of April 2020 and the second wave in the same month of 2021. The government of India imposed a strict nationwide lockdown in April 2020 and extended it until May 2020. The second wave of COVID-19 in India overwhelmed the country's health facilities and exhausted its medical and paramedical workforce. This narrative review was conducted with the aim of summarizing the evidence drawn from policy documents of governmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as capturing India's COVID-19 vaccination efforts. The findings from this review cover the Indian government's vaccination initiatives, which ranged from steps taken to combat vaccine hesitancy to vaccination roadmaps, deployment plans, the use of digital health technology, vaccination monitoring, adverse effects, and innovative strategies such as Har Ghar Dastak and Jan Bhagidari Andolan (people's participation). These efforts collectively culminated in the successful administration of more than 1.8 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines in India. This review also provides insights into other countries' responses to COVID-19 and guidance for future pandemics.

11.
J Korean Med Sci ; 37(42): e306, 2022 Oct 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2099100

ABSTRACT

A 43-year-old man presented with cardiac arrest 2 days after the second coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination with an mRNA vaccine. Electrocardiograms showed ventricular fibrillation and type 1 Brugada pattern ST segment elevation. The patient reported having no symptoms, including febrile sensation. There were no known underlying cardiac diseases to explain such electrocardiographic abnormalities. ST segment elevation completely disappeared in two weeks. Although there were no genetic mutations or personal or family history typical of Brugada syndrome, flecainide administration induced type 1 Brugada pattern ST segment elevation. This case suggests that COVID-19 vaccination may induce cardiac ion channel dysfunction and cause life threatening ventricular arrhythmias in specific patients with Brugada syndrome.


Subject(s)
Brugada Syndrome , COVID-19 , Male , Humans , Adult , Brugada Syndrome/diagnosis , Brugada Syndrome/etiology , Ventricular Fibrillation/diagnosis , Ventricular Fibrillation/etiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Electrocardiography/adverse effects , Vaccination/adverse effects
12.
J Infect Dis ; 2022 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097373

ABSTRACT

Omicron variants are still the dominant SARS-CoV-2 viruses worldwide, therefore determining the level of protection from infection and severe disease is essential. Here, we investigated humoral and cellular immunity of individuals immunized by ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 and our results show that IgG and neutralization titers wane over time. However, strongest neutralization against Omicron BA.1 and T cell responses were detected in ChAdOx1 vaccinees six months after the second dose, while no long lasting neutralization was shown against BA.2 in any cohort. Crucially, our investigation revealed that immunity against variants of concern is heterogenic and dependent on the immunization status.

13.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Oct 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097331

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Adults previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 develop short-term immunity and may have increased reactogenicity to COVID-19 vaccines. This prospective, multi-center active surveillance cohort study examined the short-term safety of COVID-19 vaccines in adults with a prior history of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Canadian adults vaccinated between December 22, 2020 and November 27, 2021 were sent an electronic questionnaire 7 days post dose 1, dose 2 and dose 3 vaccination. The main outcome was health events occurring in the first 7 days after each vaccination that prevented daily activities, resulted in work absenteeism or required a medical consultation, including hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 684,998 vaccinated individuals, 2.6% (18,127/684,998) reported a prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection a median of 4 months (interquartile range 2-6 months) previously. After dose 1, individuals with moderate (bedridden) to severe (hospitalized) COVID-19 who received BNT162b2, mRNA1273 or ChAdox1-S vaccines had higher odds of a health event preventing daily activities, resulting in work absenteeism or requiring medical consultation; adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 3.96 (95% CI 3.67-4.28) for BNT162b2, 5.01 (4.57-5.50) for mRNA1273 and 1.84 (1.54-2.20) for ChAdox1-S compared to no infection. Following dose 2 and 3, the greater risk associated with previous infection was also present but attenuated compared to dose 1. For all doses, the association was lower or absent after mild or asymptomatic infection. CONCLUSION: Adults with moderate or severe previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to have a health event sufficient to impact routine activities or require medical assessment in the week following each vaccine doses.

14.
Arch Med Res ; 53(7): 694-710, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2095059

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The mutations in SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) facilitate the virus' escape from the neutralizing antibodies induced by vaccines. However, the protection from hospitalization and death is not significantly diminished. Both vaccine boosters and infection improve immune responses and provide protection, suggesting that conserved and/or cross-reactive epitopes could be involved. While several important T- and B-cell epitopes have been identified, mainly in the S protein, the M and N proteins and their potential cross-reactive epitopes with other coronaviruses remain largely unexplored. AIMS: To identify and map new potential B- and T-cell epitopes within the SARS-CoV-2 S, M and N proteins, as well as cross-reactive epitopes with human coronaviruses. METHODS: Different bioinformatics tools were used to: i) Identify new and compile previously-reported B-and T-cell epitopes from SARS-CoV-2 S, M and N proteins; ii) Determine the mutations in S protein from VOC that affect B- and T-cell epitopes, and; iii) Identify cross-reactive epitopes with coronaviruses relevant to human health. RESULTS: New, potential B- and T-cell epitopes from S, M and N proteins as well as cross-reactive epitopes with other coronaviruses were found and mapped within the proteins' structures. CONCLUSION: Numerous potential B- and T-cell epitopes were found in S, M and N proteins, some of which are conserved between coronaviruses. VOCs present mutations within important epitopes in the S protein; however, a significant number of other epitopes remain unchanged. The epitopes identified here may contribute to augmenting the protective response to SARS-CoV-2 and its variants induced by infection and/or vaccination, and may also be used for the rational design of novel broad-spectrum coronavirus vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epitopes, T-Lymphocyte , Humans , Epitopes, T-Lymphocyte/genetics , Computational Biology , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Malawi Medical Journal ; 34:71-71, 2022.
Article in English | Africa Wide Information | ID: covidwho-2092953

ABSTRACT

AJOL : We would like to share ideas on “Pharmacists' Readiness to Receive, Recommend and Administer COVID-19 Vaccines in an African Country: An Online Multiple-Practice Settings Survey in Nigeria.” Isah and Ubaka proposed that “most pharmacists are willing to accept to be vaccinated against COVID-19…

16.
Acta Med Port ; 2022 Oct 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2091283

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Following a COVID-19 mass vaccination campaign, it is important to evaluate the population level of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The aim of this study was to estimate the seroprevalence rate of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies acquired due to infection or vaccination in the Portuguese population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The National Serological Survey (third wave - ISN3COVID-19) is a cross-sectional nationwide epidemiological study developed on a sample of 4545 Portuguese residents aged one year or older, between the 28th September 2021 and the 19th November 2021. The SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleoprotein and anti-spike IgG antibody levels were determined in serum samples using Abbott Chemiluminescent Microparticle Immunoassays. Seroprevalence estimates were stratified by age group, sex, administrative region and self-reported chronic conditions. Medians and respective 95% confidence intervals were used to describe the distribution of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies in specific population subgroups. RESULTS: The total seroprevalence rate of SARS-CoV-2 was 86.4% (95% CI: 85.2% to 87.6%). A higher seroprevalence rate was estimated for women (88.3%), 50 to 59 years-old (96.5%) and in those with two or more self-reported chronic conditions (90.8%). A higher IgG (anti-Spike) concentration was observed in individuals vaccinated with the booster dose (median = 1 2601.3 AU/mL; 95% CI: 4127.5 to 19 089.1). CONCLUSION: There was a significant increase in SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence following the mass vaccination campaign in Portugal. It is important to continue to monitor the distribution of specific SARS-COV-2 antibody at the population level to further inform public health policies.

17.
J Educ Health Promot ; 11: 175, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2090565

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In terms of public health, vaccination is considered as the most effective approach against the infectious diseases. Accepting and receiving the first vaccine produced as an innovation may not be easy. Therefore, the present study was conducted to investigate the predictors of intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine by Iranians aged 18-70 years based on the health belief model in 2021. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This descriptive study was performed on 2365 people aged 18-70-year old in Iran by random cluster sampling. Receipt of data was done electronically questionnaire through the Porcelain system. Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 20 using Chi-square, one-way analysis of variance, independent t-test, and multiple regression analysis at a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: The mean score of receiving the Iranian corona vaccine was 3.06 ± 1.30 out of 5 points. About 16.7% reported that they will definitely choose the Iranian vaccine. The highest correlation was between the intention to receive the vaccine with self-efficacy (r = 0.239, P < 0.001) and barriers to receiving the vaccine (r = -0.237, P < 0.001). Self-efficacy (ß = 0.114, P < 0.001), perceived barriers (ß = -0.126, P < 0.001), and benefits of vaccine (ß = 0.061, P = 0.022) were most important predictors the intention to receive the vaccine. CONCLUSION: Approximately 38% reported that they would definitely and probably not choose the Iranian corona vaccine. Therefore, it is suggested that more information should be provided about the features and benefits of domestically produced vaccines compared to foreign products.

18.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(11)2022 Oct 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2090403

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Following the announcement of the development of COVID-19 vaccines, hesitancy about the safety of vaccinations and their side effects have spread, despite having the approval of international drug agencies. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that concern about side effects may have led people to fill out the COVID-19 anamnestic vaccine questionnaire with greater attention compared to the similar instrument used for the influenza vaccination. METHODS: We analyzed vaccination questionnaires of 218 healthcare workers (HCWs) who underwent both COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in 2020/2021. Outcomes included self-reported allergies, chronic pharmacological treatments, and chronic diseases. We tested the difference in prevalence, analyzed differences using the kappa statistics and concordance correlation, and explored factors associated with differences in reporting. RESULTS: HCWs reported more allergies to substances other than drugs and a higher prevalence of chronic drug intake in the COVID-19 questionnaires than in the influenza ones. Technical staff reported more drug allergies than physicians, and other HCWs reported more outcomes than physicians in the COVID-19 questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: We found that this population of HCWs reported higher conditions during the 2020 COVID-19 vaccination campaign compared to that of the influenza vaccine. The identification of socio-demographic characteristics of the less vaccine-confident HCWs could help in planning targeted interventions to enhance vaccine adherence.

19.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(11)2022 Oct 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2090381

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of different COVID-19 booster vaccines by measuring the serum antibody titer. SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid protein antibody (N-Ab), anti-spike protein antibody (S-Ab), and neutralizing antibody (Neut.Ab) were measured before and 4-6 weeks after booster vaccinations in healthcare personnel with a previous vaccination within 3-6 months. Personnel who previously received two doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine or two doses of BNT162b2 vaccine received the BNT162b2 vaccine (AAP and PPP groups, respectively). Personnel who previously received two doses of mRNA-1273 received the same vaccine as a booster dose (MMM group). Of the 917 participants, the AAP, MMM, and PPP groups comprised 837 (91.3%), 27 (2.9%), and 53 (5.8%) participants, respectively. The pre-booster S-Ab and Neut.Ab titer were significantly lower in the AAP group. After the booster vaccination, all participants were positive for S-Ab and Neut.Ab; furthermore, the S-Ab and Neut.Ab titer significantly increased in all three groups, although the post-booster S-Ab was lower in the AAP group than in the other groups. The post-booster Neut.Ab titer showed no significant difference among the groups. Our study's results suggest that booster vaccination, after two prior vaccinations, shows a significant effect regardless of the type of vaccine administered.

20.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(11)2022 Oct 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2090379

ABSTRACT

Healthcare workers (HCWs), particularly physicians, are a relevant and trusted source of information for patients, especially when health-related choices such as vaccination are concerned. Between July and November 2022, we administered a web-based survey to physicians and dentists living in the Latio region of Italy to explore whether their background might affect their willingness to recommend the COVID-19 vaccination to their patients (RCVtoPat) and their relatives (RCVtoRel). We performed a multivariable logistic regression to study the association between the two outcomes (RCVtoPat and RCVtoRel) and their potential determinants in our sample (n = 1464). We found that being a dentist, an increasing fear of COVID-19, and having been previously vaccinated against flu are positively associated with both RCVtoPat and RCVtoRel, while a better self-rated knowledge of COVID-19 vaccines is associated only with RCVtoRel. No role was found for age, sex, civil status, education level, information sources, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and chronic diseases. A sub-group analysis of physicians alone (n = 1305) demonstrated a positive association with RCVtoRel of being specialized in diagnostic/therapeutic services and a negative effect on RCVtoPat of being trained in general practice. We provide useful insights about the factors that should be addressed to ensure HCWs exert a positive influence on their patients and communities.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL