Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of COVID-19 Inactivated Vaccines in Reducing the Economic Burden of Ischaemic Stroke after SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Due to significant economic burden and disability from ischaemic stroke and the relationship between ischaemic stroke and SARS-CoV-2 infection, we aimed to explore the cost-effectiveness of the two-dose inactivated COVID-19 vaccination program in reducing the economic burden of ischaemic stroke after SARS-CoV-2 infection. We constructed a decision-analytic Markov model to compare the two-dose inactivated COVID-19 vaccination strategy to the no vaccination strategy using cohort simulation. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and used number of the ischaemic stroke cases after SARS-CoV-2 infection and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) to assess effects. Both one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the robustness of the results. We found that the two-dose inactivated vaccination strategy reduced ischaemic stroke cases after SARS-CoV-2 infection by 80.89% (127/157) with a USD 1.09 million as vaccination program cost, saved USD 3675.69 million as direct health care costs and gained 26.56 million QALYs compared with no vaccination strategy among 100,000 COVID-19 patients (ICER < 0 per QALY gained). ICERs remained robust in sensitivity analysis. The proportion of older patients and the proportion of two-dose inactivated vaccination among older people were the critical factors that affected ICER. This study suggests the importance of COVID-19 vaccination is not only in preventing the spread of infectious diseases, but also in considering its long-term value in reducing the economic burden of non-communicable diseases such as ischaemic stroke after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Association between inequalities in human resources for health and all cause and cause specific mortality in 172 countries and territories, 1990-2019: observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore inequalities in human resources for health (HRH) in relation to all cause and cause specific mortality globally in 1990-2019. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: 172 countries and territories. DATA SOURCES: Databases of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019, United Nations Statistics, and Our World in Data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was age standardized all cause mortality per 100 000 population in relation to HRH density per 10 000 population, and secondary outcome was age standardized cause specific mortality. The Lorenz curve and the concentration index (CCI) were used to assess trends and inequalities in HRH. RESULTS: Globally, the total HRH density per 10 000 population increased, from 56.0 in 1990 to 142.5 in 2019, whereas age standardized all cause mortality per 100 000 population decreased, from 995.5 in 1990 to 743.8 in 2019. The Lorenz curve lay below the equality line and CCI was 0.43 (P<0.05), indicating that the health workforce was more concentrated among countries and territories ranked high on the human development index. The CCI for HRH was stable, at about 0.42-0.43 between 1990 and 2001 and continued to decline (narrowed inequality), from 0.43 in 2001 to 0.38 in 2019 (P<0.001). In the multivariable generalized estimating equation model, a negative association was found between total HRH level and all cause mortality, with the highest levels of HRH as reference (low: incidence risk ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.32; middle: 1.14, 1.01 to 1.29; high: 1.18, 1.08 to 1.28). A negative association between total HRH density and mortality rate was more pronounced for some types of cause specific mortality, including neglected tropical diseases and malaria, enteric infections, maternal and neonatal disorders, and diabetes and kidney diseases. The risk of death was more likely to be higher in people from countries and territories with a lower density of doctors, dentistry staff, pharmaceutical staff, aides and emergency medical workers, optometrists, psychologists, personal care workers, physiotherapists, and radiographers. CONCLUSIONS: Inequalities in HRH have been decreasing over the past 30 years globally but persist. All cause mortality and most types of cause specific mortality were relatively higher in countries and territories with a limited health workforce, especially for several specific HRH types among priority diseases. The findings highlight the importance of strengthening political commitment to develop equity oriented health workforce policies, expanding health financing, and implementing targeted measures to reduce deaths related to inadequate HRH to achieve universal health coverage by 2030.

COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage among 42,565 Adults Amid the Spread of Omicron Variant in Beijing, China.

Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been in use for over two years, but studies that reflect real-world vaccination coverage and demographic determinants are lacking. Using a multistage stratified random cluster sampling method, we planned to directly explore vaccination coverage and the demographic determinants of different doses of COVID-19 vaccines in Beijing, especially in older populations. All 348 community health service centers in 16 districts were involved. We performed multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify demographic determinants of different coverage rates via adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs. Of the 42,565 eligible participants, the total vaccination coverage rates for ≥1 dose, ≥2 doses, ≥3 doses, and 4 doses were 93.3%, 91.6%, 84.9%, and 13.0%, respectively, but decreased to 88.1%, 85.1%, 76.2%, and 3.8% in the older population. Among all participants, younger (aOR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.60-1.95), male (aOR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06-1.23), and better-educated residents (high school and technical secondary school aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.43-1.74; bachelor's degree aOR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.37-1.70) were more likely to be fully vaccinated. People who lived in rural areas (aOR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.31-1.60) and held the new rural cooperative health insurance (aOR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.20-1.57) established a higher rate of full vaccination coverage. No history of chronic disease was positively associated with a higher coverage rate (aOR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.66-1.97). Occupation also affected vaccination coverage. Demographic factors influencing the rate of vaccination with at least one or three doses were consistent with the results above. Results remained robust in a sensitivity analysis. Given the highly transmissible variants and declining antibody titers, accelerating the promotion of booster vaccination coverage, especially in high-risk groups such as the elderly, is a top priority. For all vaccine-preventable diseases, rapidly clarifying vaccine-hesitant populations, clearing barriers, and establishing a better immune barrier can effectively safeguard people's lives and property and coordinate economic development with epidemic prevention and control.

Assessing acceptability of the fourth dose against COVID-19 among Chinese adults: A population-based survey.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has wreaked havoc across the globe for approximately three years. Vaccination is a key factor to ending this pandemic, but its protective effect diminishes over time. A second booster dose at the right time is needed. To explore the willingness to receive the fourth dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and its influencing factors, we commenced a national, cross-sectional and anonymous survey in mainland China among people aged 18 and above from October 24 to November 7, 2022. A total of 3,224 respondents were eventually included. The acceptance rate of the fourth dose was 81.1% (95% CI: 79.8-82.5%), while it was 72.6% (95% CI: 71.1-74.2%) for a heterologous booster. Confidence in current domestic situation and the effectiveness of previous vaccinations, and uncertainty about extra protection were the main reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Perceived benefit (aOR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.159-1.40) and cues to action (aOR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.60-1.88) were positively associated with the vaccine acceptance, whereas perceived barriers (aOR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.72-0.84) and self-efficacy (aOR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.71-0.89) were both negatively associated with it. Additionally, sex, age, COVID-19 vaccination history, time for social media, and satisfaction with the government's response to COVID-19 were also factors affecting vaccination intention. Factors influencing the intention of heterologous booster were similar to the above results. It is of profound theoretical and practical significance to clarify the population's willingness to vaccinate in advance and explore the relevant influencing factors for the subsequent development and promotion of the fourth-dose vaccination strategies.

COVID-19 vaccination in people living with HIV and AIDS (PLWHA) in China: A cross-sectional study.

COVID-19 appears to put people living with HIV and AIDS (PLWHA) at a higher risk of catastrophic consequences and mortality. However, investigations on the hesitancy and vaccination behavior of PLWHA in China were lacking compared to the general population. From January 2022 to March 2022, we conducted a multi-center cross-sectional survey of PLWHA in China. Logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated to vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Among 1424 participants, 108 participants (7.6%) were hesitant to be vaccinated while 1258 (88.3%) had already received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Higher COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was associated with older age, a lower academic level, chronic disease, lower CD4+ T cell counts, severe anxiety and despair, and high perception of illness. Lower education level, lower CD4+ T cell counts, and significant anxiety and depression were all associated with a lower vaccination rate. When compared to vaccinated participants, those who were not hesitant but nevertheless unvaccinated had a higher presence of chronic disease and lower CD4+ T cell count. Tailored interventions (e.g. targeted education programs) based on these linked characteristics were required to alleviate concerns for PLWHA in promoting COVID-19 vaccination rates, particularly for PLWHA with lower education levels, lower CD4+ T cell counts, and severe anxiety and depression.

Severity and Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection Compared with Primary Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection has brought new challenges to the global prevention and control of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, current studies suggest that there is still great uncertainty about the risk of severe COVID-19 and poor outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Random-effects inverse-variance models were used to evaluate the pooled prevalence (PP) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of severity, outcomes and symptoms of reinfection. Random-effects were used to estimate the pooled odds ratios (OR) and its 95%CI of severity and outcomes between reinfections and primary infections. Nineteen studies involving a total of 34,375 cases of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and 5,264,720 cases of SARS-CoV-2 primary infection were included in this meta-analysis. Among those SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases, 41.77% (95%CI, 19.23-64.31%) were asymptomatic, and 51.83% (95%CI, 23.90-79.76%) were symptomatic, only 0.58% (95%CI, 0.031-1.14%) manifested as severe illness, and 0.04% (95%CI, 0.009-0.078%) manifested as critical illness. The PPs for SARS-CoV-2 reinfection-related hospitalization, admission to ICU, and death were, respectively, 15.48% (95%CI, 11.98-18.97%), 3.58% (95%CI, 0.39-6.77%), 2.96% (95%CI, 1.25-4.67%). Compared with SARS-CoV-2 primary infection cases, reinfection cases were more likely to present with mild illness (OR = 7.01, 95%CI, 5.83-8.44), and the risk of severe illness was reduced by 86% (OR = 0.14, 95%CI, 0.11-0.16). Primary infection provided some protection against reinfection and reduces the risk of symptomatic infection and severe illness. Reinfection did not contribute to extra risk of hospitalization, ICU, or death. It is suggested to scientifically understand the risk of reinfection of SARS-CoV-2, strengthen public health education, maintain healthy habits, and reduce the risk of reinfection.

Long-Term Consequences of Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Little is known about the long-term consequences of asymptomatic infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to review the data available to explore the long-term consequences of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the real world. We searched observational cohort studies that described the long-term health effects of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Random-effects inverse-variance models were used to evaluate the pooled prevalence (PP) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of long-term symptoms. Random effects were used to estimate the pooled odds ratios (OR) and its 95%CI of different long-term symptoms between symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. Five studies involving a total of 1643 cases, including 597 cases of asymptomatic and 1043 cases of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in this meta-analysis. The PPs of long-term consequences after asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections were 17.13% (95%CI, 7.55−26.71%) for at least one symptom, 15.09% (95%CI, 5.46−24.73%) for loss of taste, 14.14% (95%CI, −1.32−29.61%) for loss of smell, and 9.33% (95%CI, 3.07−15.60) for fatigue. Compared with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, asymptomatic infection was associated with a significantly lower risk of developing COVID-19-related sequelae (p < 0.05), with 80% lower risk of developing at least one symptom (OR = 0.20, 95%CI, 0.09−0.45), 81% lower risk of fatigue (OR = 0.19, 95%CI, 0.08−0.49), 90% lower risk of loss of taste/smell (OR = 0.10, 95%CI, 0.02−0.58). Our results suggested that there were long-term effects of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, such as loss of taste or smell, fatigue, cough and so on. However, the risk of developing long-term symptoms in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected persons was significantly lower than those in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection cases.

Trends and disparities in 44 national notifiable infectious diseases in China: an analysis of national surveillance data from 2010 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Research assessing the changing epidemiology of infectious diseases in China after the implementation of new health-care reform in 2009 was scarce. We aimed to get the latest trends and disparities of national notifiable infectious diseases by age, sex, province and seasons in China from 2010 to 2019. METHODS: The number of incident cases and deaths, incidence rate and mortality of 44 national notifiable infectious diseases by sex, age groups, and provincial regions from 2010 to 2019 was extracted from the China Information System for Disease Control and Prevention and official reports, and divided into six kinds of infectious diseases by transmission routes and three classes (A, B and C) in this descriptive study. Estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) were calculated to quantify the temporal trends of incidence and mortality rate. We calculated concentration index to measure economic-related inequality. Segmented interrupted time-series analysis was used to estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the epidemic of notifiable infectious disease. RESULTS: The trend of incidence rate on six kinds of infectious diseases by transmission routes was stable, while only mortality of sexual, blood-borne, and mother-to-child-borne infectious diseases increased from 0.6466 per 100 000 population in 2010 to 1.5499 per 100 000 population in 2019 by 8.76% per year (95%CI: 6.88-10.68). There was a decreasing trend of incidence rate on Class-A infectious diseases (EAPC=-16.30%; 95%CI: -27.93 - -2.79) and Class-B infectious diseases (EAPC=-1.05%; 95%CI: -1.56 - -0.54), while an increasing trend on Class-C infectious diseases (EAPC=6.22%; 95%CI: 2.13~10.48). For mortality, there was a decreasing trend on Class-C infectious diseases (EAPC=-14.76%; 95%CI: -23.46 - -5.07), and an increasing trend on Class-B infectious diseases (EAPC=4.56%; 95%CI: 2.44-6.72). In 2019, the infectious diseases with highest incidence rate and mortality were respiratory diseases (340.95 per 100 000 population), and sexual, blood-borne, and mother-to-child-borne infectious diseases (1.5459 per 100 000 population), respectively. The greatest increasing trend of incidence rate was observed in seasonal influenza, from 4.83 per 100 000 population in 2010 to 253.36 per 100 000 population in 2019 by 45.16% per year (95%CI: 29.81-62.33), especially among female and children aged 0 - 4 years old. The top disease with highest mortality was still AIDs which had the highest average yearly mortality in 24 provinces from 2010 to 2019, and its incidence rate (EAPC=14.99%; 95%CI: 8.75-21.59) and mortality (EAPC=9.65; 95%CI: 7.71-11.63) both increased from 2010 to 2019, especially among people aged 44 - 59 years old and 60 or older. Male incidence rate and mortality were higher than females each year from 2010 to 2018 on 29 and 10 infectious diseases, respectively. Additionally, sex differences of incidence and mortality of AIDS were becoming larger. The curve lay above the equality line, with the negative value of the concentration index, which indicated that economic-related health disparities exist in the distribution of incidence rate and mortality of respiratory diseases (incidence rate: the concentration index = -0.063, P<0.0001; mortality: the concentration index = -0.131, P<0.001), sexual, blood-borne, and mother-to-child-borne infectious diseases (incidence rate: the concentration index = -0.039, P=0.0192; mortality: the concentration index = -0.207, P<0.0001), and the inequality disadvantageous to the poor (pro-rich). Respiratory diseases (Dec, Jan), intestinal diseases (May, Jun, July), zoonotic infectious diseases (Mar-Jul) and vector-borne infectious diseases (Sep-Oct) had distinct seasonal epidemic patterns. In addition, segmented interrupted time-series analyses showed that, after adjusted for potential seasonality, autocorrelation, GDP per capita, number of primary medical institutions and other factors, there was no significant impact of COVID-19 epidemic on the monthly incidence rate of six kinds of infectious diseases by transmission routes from 2018 to 2020 (all P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence rates of six kinds of infectious diseases were stable in the past decade, and incidence rates of Class-A and Class-B infectious diseases were deceasing, because of comprehensive prevention and control measures and strengthened health system after the implementation of the new health-care reform in China since 2009. However, age, gender, regional and economic disparities were still observed. Concerted efforts are needed to reduce the impact of seasonal influenza (especially among children aged 0 - 4 years old) and the mortality of AIDs (especially among people aged 44 - 59 years old and 60 or older). More attention should be paid to the disparities on the burden of infectious diseases. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Millions of excess cases and thousands of excess deaths of malaria occurred globally in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted malaria-related health care services, leading to an excess burden of malaria. However, there is a lack of research on the indirect global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on malaria. We aimed to assess the excess burden of malaria due to the COVID-19 pandemic in malaria-endemic countries in 2020. Methods: Based on data from the World Health Organization Global Observatory, we used estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) from 2000 to 2019 (model A) and from 2015 to 2019 (model B) to predict the malaria burden in 2020. We calculated the ratios between reported and predicted malaria incidence (incidence rate ratio (IRR)) and mortality rates (mortality rate ratio (MRR)). Results: In 2020, African countries suffered the most from malaria, with the largest number of malaria cases (64.7 million) and deaths (151 thousand) observed in Nigeria. Most countries showed a decrease in malaria incidence and mortality rates from 2000 to 2019, with the strongest decline in incidence rates in Bhutan (EAPC = -35.7%, 95% CI = -38.7 to -32.5%) and mortality rates Ecuador (EAPC = -40.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -46.6 to -33.8%). During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, there was a total of 18 million excess malaria cases and 83 291 excess deaths per model A, and 7.4 million excess cases and 33 528 excess deaths per model B globally. Malaria incidence rates increased excessively in over 50% of the malaria-endemic countries, with the greatest increase in Costa Rica (IRR = 35.6) per model A and Bhutan (IRR = 15.6) per model B. Mortality rates had increased excessively in around 70% of the malaria-endemic countries, with the greatest increase in Ecuador in both model A (MRR = 580) and model B (MRR = 58). Conclusions: The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic indirectly caused an increase in the prevalence of malaria and thwarted progress in malaria control. Global efforts to control the pandemic's impact should be balanced with malaria control to ensure that the goal for global malaria elimination is achieved on time.

Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose and associated factors among the elderly in China based on the health belief model (HBM): A national cross-sectional study.

Background: The reluctance of individuals to obtain solid vaccine-induced immunity represents a fundamental challenge to containing the spread of SARS-CoV-2, including its highly mutated variants. We aimed to assess vaccination acceptance and associated factors for the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose among elderly people (≥60 years old) in China, providing a theoretical and practical reference for universal vaccination policy. Methods: A national anonymous survey was conducted in mainland China from May 25 to June 8, 2022, using a stratified random sampling method. Individuals 60 years of age and above were the target population. A chi-squared test and Cochran-Armitage test for trend were used to compare and examine vaccine acceptance rates by characteristics. Via a backward stepwise method, multivariable logistic regression models were established to assess factors associated with booster dose acceptance. Two-sided P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of 3,321 eligible participants, 82.8% (95% CI: 81.5-84.1%) were willing to receive COVID-19 vaccine booster shots. Concerns about contraindications (38.3%), vaccine safety (32.0%), and limited movement (28.0%) were the main reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Nearly one-third still believed that the booster dose was unnecessary after receiving the initial vaccination. Older adults with a low level of perceived barriers (aOR = 1.86, 95% CI, 1.03-3.38), a high level of perceived benefit (aOR = 2.31, 95% CI, 1.38-3.87), and higher cues to action (moderate, aOR = 2.22, 95% CI, 1.39-3.56; high, aOR = 5.46, 95% CI: 3.44-8.67) were more likely to accept the booster dose. Other major factors affecting the booster dose acceptance rate were occupation, time spent on social media, vaccination history, and a high knowledge score for COVID-19 and vaccines. In addition, for those over 70 years of age, rising awareness of susceptibility could be a better gateway for improving their willingness to get vaccinated. Conclusions: A total of 82.8% of recruited older adults were willing to receive the booster dose. Acceptance behaviors were closely related to occupation, time spent on social media, vaccination history, knowledge factors, perception of barriers, and benefit, as well as action cues. Targeted public health measures are a priority for improving the vaccination coverage of valid immunity among the elderly population, not only to prevent infection and poor prognosis caused by emerging variants but also to reduce the huge disease and economic burden caused by the long-term sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Association of Infection with Different SARS-CoV-2 Variants during Pregnancy with Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The aim of this study is to review the currently available data, and to explore the association of infection with different severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants during pregnancy with maternal and perinatal outcomes in the real world. Observational cohort studies were analyzed that described the maternal and perinatal outcomes of infection with different SARS-CoV-2 variants during pregnancy. Random-effects inverse-variance models were used to evaluate the pooled prevalence (PP) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for maternal and perinatal outcomes. Random effects were used to estimate the pooled odds ratios (OR) and their 95% CI for different outcomes between Delta and pre-Delta periods, and between Omicron and Delta periods. Eighteen studies, involving a total of 133,058 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy (99,567 cases of SARS-CoV-2 wild type or pre-variant infection and 33,494 cases of SARS-CoV-2 variant infections), were included in this meta-analysis. Among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infections, the PPs for required respiratory support, severe or critical illness, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, maternal death, and preterm birth <37 weeks were, respectively, 27.24% (95%CI, 20.51−33.97%), 24.96% (95%CI, 15.96−33.96%), 11.31% (95%CI, 4.00−18.61%), 4.20% (95%CI, 1.43−6.97%), and 33.85% (95%CI, 21.54−46.17%) in the Delta period, which were higher than those in the pre-Delta period, while the corresponding PPs were, respectively, 10.74% (95%CI, 6.05−15.46%), 11.99% (95%CI, 6.23−17.74%), 4.17% (95%CI, 1.53−6.80%), 0.63% (95%CI, 0.05−1.20%), and 18.58% (95%CI, 9.52−27.65%). The PPs for required respiratory support, severe or critical illness, and ICU admission were, respectively, 2.63% (95%CI, 0.98−4.28%), 1.11% (95%CI, 0.29−1.94%), and 1.83% (95%CI, 0.85−2.81%) in the Omicron period, which were lower than those in the pre-Delta and Delta periods. These results suggest that Omicron infections are associated with less severe maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes, though maternal ICU admission, the need for respiratory support, and preterm birth did also occur with Omicron infections. Since Omicron is currently the predominant strain globally, and has the highest rates of transmission, it is still important to remain vigilant in protecting the vulnerable populations of mothers and infants. In particular, obstetricians and gynecologists should not ignore the adverse risks of maternal ICU admission, respiratory support, and preterm births in pregnant patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections, in order to protect the health of mothers and infants.

Comparison of Long COVID-19 Caused by Different SARS-CoV-2 Strains: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Although many studies of long COVID-19 were reported, there was a lack of systematic research which assessed the differences of long COVID-19 in regard to what unique SARS-CoV-2 strains caused it. As such, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the characteristics of long COVID-19 that is caused by different SARS-CoV-2 strains. We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and ScienceDirect databases in order to find cohort studies of long COVID-19 as defined by the WHO (Geneva, Switzerland). The main outcomes were in determining the percentages of long COVID-19 among patients who were infected with different SARS-CoV-2 strains. Further, this study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022339964). A total of 51 studies with 33,573 patients was included, of which three studies possessed the Alpha and Delta variants, and five studies possessed the Omicron variant. The highest pooled estimate of long COVID-19 was found in the CT abnormalities (60.5%; 95% CI: 40.4%, 80.6%) for the wild-type strain; fatigue (66.1%; 95% CI: 42.2%, 89.9%) for the Alpha variant; and ≥1 general symptoms (28.4%; 95% CI: 7.9%, 49.0%) for the Omicron variant. The pooled estimates of ≥1 general symptoms (65.8%; 95% CI: 47.7%, 83.9%) and fatigue were the highest symptoms found among patients infected with the Alpha variant, followed by the wild-type strain, and then the Omicron variant. The pooled estimate of myalgia was highest among patients infected with the Omicron variant (11.7%; 95%: 8.3%, 15.1%), compared with those infected with the wild-type strain (9.4%; 95%: 6.3%, 12.5%). The pooled estimate of sleep difficulty was lowest among the patients infected with the Delta variant (2.5%; 95%: 0.2%, 4.9%) when compared with those infected with the wild-type strain (24.5%; 95%: 17.5%, 31.5%) and the Omicron variant (18.7%; 95%: 1.0%, 36.5%). The findings of this study suggest that there is no significant difference between long COVID-19 that has been caused by different strains, except in certain general symptoms (i.e., in the Alpha or Omicron variant) and in sleep difficulty (i.e., the wild-type strain). In the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its emerging variants, directing more attention to long COVID-19 that is caused by unique strains, as well as implementing targeted intervention measures to address it are vital.

Neighborhood social cohesion is associated with the willingness toward the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccines among the Chinese older population.

Neighborhood social cohesion is a prominent psychosocial factor during the pandemic, and trust in neighbors is critical for implementing health prevention-related behaviors with public health messages. We planned to specifically explore the association between neighborhood social cohesion and vaccine acceptability among older adults (≥60 years) in China. Using a random stratified sampling method, an anonymous cross-sectional online survey was conducted in mainland China via a professional scientific data platform from May 25 to June 8, 2022. A revised Social Cohesion Scale was applied to evaluate the level of neighborhood social cohesion. Of the 3,321 recruited respondents aged 60 and above, 82.8% (95% CI: 81.5-84.1) reported their willingness to be vaccinated. With all significant covariates adjusted, older adults with moderate (aOR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.04-3.04) and high level of social cohesion (aOR = 2.21, 95% CI: 1.29-3.77) were more likely to receive the booster dose. Our findings remained robust in a series of models after controlling for different covariates. Uncertainty about contraindications (38.3%), underestimation of their vulnerability (33.1%), and concerns about vaccine safety (32.0%) were the three main reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Therefore, building a harmonious community environment, strengthening neighborhood communication and exchange, and making good use of peer education among neighbors may become a breakthrough to promote herd immunity, especially for vulnerable older adults with limited social networks.

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Heterologous Booster Doses with Homologous Booster Doses for SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

As vaccine resources were distributed unevenly worldwide, sometimes there might have been shortages or delays in vaccine supply; therefore, considering the use of heterogeneous booster doses for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) might be an alternative strategy. Therefore, we aimed to review the data available to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of heterologous booster doses with homologous booster doses for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines. We searched relevant studies up to 27 April 2022. Random-effects inverse variance models were used to evaluate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of COVID-19 outcomes and odds ratio (OR) and its CI of safety events. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale and Cochrane Collaboration's tool were used to assess the quality of the included cohort studies. A total of 23 studies involving 1,726,506 inoculation cases of homologous booster dose and 5,343,580 inoculation cases of heterologous booster dose was included. The VE of heterologous booster for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection (VEheterologous = 96.10%, VEhomologous = 84.00%), symptomatic COVID-19 (VEheterologous = 56.80%, VEhomologous = 17.30%), and COVID-19-related hospital admissions (VEheterologous = 97.40%, VEhomologous = 93.20%) was higher than homologous booster. Compared with homologous booster group, there was a higher risk of fever (OR = 1.930, 95% CI, 1.199-3.107), myalgia (OR = 1.825, 95% CI, 1.079-3.089), and malaise or fatigue (OR = 1.745, 95% CI, 1.047-2.906) within 7 days after boosting, and a higher risk of malaise or fatigue (OR = 4.140, 95% CI, 1.729-9.916) within 28 days after boosting in heterologous booster group. Compared with homologous booster group, geometric mean neutralizing titers (GMTs) of neutralizing antibody for different SARS-CoV-2 variants and response rate of antibody and gama interferon were higher in heterologous booster group. Our findings suggested that both homologous and heterologous COVID-19 booster doses had great effectiveness, immunogenicity, and acceptable safety, and a heterologous booster dose was more effective, which would help make appropriate public health decisions and reduce public hesitancy in vaccination.

Long-Term Consequences of COVID-19 at 6 Months and Above: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

We aimed to review the data available to evaluate the long-term consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at 6 months and above. We searched relevant observational cohort studies up to 9 February 2022 in Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science. Random-effects inverse-variance models were used to evaluate the Pooled Prevalence (PP) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of long-term consequences. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was used to assess the quality of the included cohort studies. A total of 40 studies involving 10,945 cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were included. Of the patients, 63.87% had at least one consequence at the 6 month follow-up, which decreased to 58.89% at 12 months. The most common symptoms were fatigue or muscle weakness (PP 6-12 m = 54.21%, PP ≥ 12 m = 34.22%) and mild dyspnea (Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale, mMRC = 0, PP 6-12 m = 74.60%, PP ≥ 12 m = 80.64%). Abnormal computerized tomography (CT; PP 6-12 m = 55.68%, PP ≥ 12 m = 43.76%) and lung diffuse function impairment, i.e., a carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DLCO) of < 80% were common (PP 6-12 m = 49.10%, PP ≥ 12 m = 31.80%). Anxiety and depression (PP 6-12 m = 33.49%, PP ≥ 12 m = 35.40%) and pain or discomfort (PP 6-12 m = 33.26%, PP ≥ 12 m = 35.31%) were the most common problems that affected patients' quality of life. Our findings suggest a significant long-term impact on health and quality of life due to COVID-19, and as waves of ASRS-CoV-2 infections emerge, the long-term effects of COVID-19 will not only increase the difficulty of care for COVID-19 survivors and the setting of public health policy but also might lead to another public health crisis following the current pandemic, which would also increase the global long-term burden of disease.

The association between social media use and hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccine booster shots in China: A web-based cross-sectional survey.

COVID-19 vaccine booster shots are necessary to provide durable immunity and stronger protection against the emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. As a major platform for access to information, social media plays an important role in disseminating health information. This study aimed to evaluate hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccine booster shots in China, assess its association with social media use, and provide information to manage social media. We conducted a cross-sectional study across all 31 provinces in mainland China from November 12, 2021, to November 17, 2021. In total, 3,119 of 3,242 participants completed the questionnaire (response rate = 96.2%). COVID-19 vaccine booster shot hesitancy rate in China was 6.5% (95% CI: 5.6-7.3). Unemployment (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.428, 95% CI: 1.590-3.670), low monthly income (aOR 2.854,95% CI: 1.561-5.281), low scores of knowledge (aOR 0.917, 95% CI: 0.869-0.968) and low level of cues to action (aOR 0.773, 95% CI: 0.689-0.869) were associated with vaccine hesitancy. Compared with public social media, lower vaccine hesitancy was associated with high perceived importance of social media (aOR 0.252, 95% CI: 0.146-0.445) and official social media use (aOR 0.671, 95% CI: 0.467-0.954), while higher vaccine hesitancy was associated with traditional media use (aOR 3.718, 95% CI: 1.282-10.273). More efforts are needed to regulate the content of social media and filtering out misinformation. The role of official social media in disseminating health information should be enhanced.

Effectiveness and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines among Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The proportion of children and adolescents with COVID-19 had gradually increased according to data reported by WHO. However, there was no meta-analysis of effectiveness and safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in children and adolescents. We aimed to provide investigation-based medical evidence and reference recommendations for children and adolescents in regard to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to 5 January 2022. RCTs and observational studies that examined the effectiveness and safety were included. RESULTS: A total of 13 eligible studies were included for analysis. For the first dose, the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 was 88.5% (95% CI:15.7-98.4%, p = 0.033) and 84.3% (95% CI: 66.6-92.6%, p < 0.001) separately. For the second dose, the effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 was 91.6% (95% CI: 37.8-99.5%, p = 0.083) and 92.7 (95% CI: 82.2-97.0, p < 0.001) separately. Injection-site pain, fatigue, headache, anorexia, and axillary swelling were the top five adverse events after the first dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Fatigue, injection-site pain, headache, chills, and myalgia/muscle pain were the top five adverse events after the second dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines had good effectiveness and safety in children and adolescents. We suggest that children and adolescents should get vaccinated as soon as possible to protect themselves and slow the spread of the pandemic.

Association between risk perception and influenza vaccine hesitancy for children among reproductive women in China during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national online survey.

BACKGROUND: In China, the national prevalence of parental influenza vaccine hesitancy (IVH) during the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and the association between risk perception and parental IVH are still unclear. We aimed to explore the association between risk perception and IVH for children among reproductive women in China, a poorly studied area. METHODS: From December 14, 2020, to January 31, 2021, we conducted a national anonymous online survey on IVH for children among reproductive women in China. We assessed risk perception including perceived susceptibility, severity, barriers, and benefits using the Health Belief Model and then classified each variable into three groups based on tertiles. Logistic regression models were used to calculate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of risk perception related to vaccine hesitancy after controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, health status, and knowledge of influenza, among other factors. Additionally, subgroup analysis was performed. RESULTS: Among 3,011 reproductive women, 9.13% reported IVH. In multivariable models, vaccine hesitancy was associated with low perceived susceptibility (aOR = 2.55, 95% CI: 1.79-3.65), higher perceived barriers (moderate: aOR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.04-2.08; high: aOR = 2.20, 95% CI: 1.47-3.30), and low perceived benefit (moderate: aOR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.03-1.92; low: aOR = 2.10, 95% CI: 1.43-3.07). Subgroup analysis showed that vaccine hesitancy was more likely to occur among women with high perceived barriers aged < 30 years compared with those older than 30 years (P for difference = 0.041) and among women with moderate perceived benefit who had never conceived compared with those had a history of pregnancy (P for difference = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one in 10 reproductive women was hesitant about influenza vaccination for their children during the COVID-19 pandemic. To mitigate vaccine hesitancy, our findings highlight a need for tailored public health measures to increase perceived disease susceptibility and vaccine benefit and decrease perceived barriers. Furthermore, the effect of high perceived barriers and moderate perceived benefit on vaccine hesitancy was higher among younger women and women who had never conceived.

Effectiveness and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccine among Pregnant Women in Real-World Studies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

We aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines for pregnant women in real-world studies. We searched for observational studies about the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines among vaccinated pregnant women from inception to 6 November 2021. A total of 6 studies were included. We found that vaccination prevented pregnant women from SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR = 0.50, 95% CI, 0.35-0.79) and COVID-19-related hospitalization (OR = 0.50, 95% CI, 0.31-0.82). Messenger-RNA vaccines could reduce the risk of infection in pregnant women (OR = 0.13, 95% CI, 0.03-0.57). No adverse events of COVID-19 vaccination were found on pregnant, fetal, or neonatal outcomes. Our analysis confirmed the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women. Policy makers should formulate targeted strategies to improve vaccine coverage in pregnant women.

The Association Between Risk Perception and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy for Children Among Reproductive Women in China: An Online Survey.

Background: This study aimed to explore the association between risk perception and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among reproductive women in China to supplement limited studies in this area. Methods: From December 14, 2020, to January 31, 2021, an anonymous cross-sectional online survey was conducted on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy for children among reproductive women in China. We assessed risk perception, including perceived susceptibility, severity, barriers, and benefits using the health belief model, and then classified each variable into three groups (low, moderate, and high) based on tertiles. Information on sociodemographic characteristics, health status, and knowledge of COVID-19 was also collected. The Pearson χ2-test was used to compare vaccine hesitancy among the above mentioned factors. Logistic regression models were used to calculate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of risk perception related to vaccine hesitancy after controlling for the above covariates. Results: Among 3,011 reproductive women, 8.44% (95%CI: 7.44. 9.43) had COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy was observed more in women who lived in eastern China (11.63%), aged >45 years (12.00%), had a lower than high school education level (12.77%), and a low score on knowledge of COVID-19 (12.22%). Vaccine hesitancy was associated with lower perceived susceptibility (moderate: aOR = 1.72, 95%CI: 1.17-2.54, P = 0.0061; low: aOR = 2.44, 95%CI: 1.60-3.70, P < 0.0001), high perceived barriers (aOR = 2.86, 95%CI: 1.57-5.22, P < 0.0001), and lower perceived benefit (moderate: aOR = 3.29, 95%CI: 2.30-4.70, P < 0.0001; low: aOR = 4.59, 95%CI: 2.98-7.07, P < 0.0001), but not with perceived severity. Conclusions: Although the proportion of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy for children among Chinese reproductive women was <1 out of 10, to improve COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, our findings suggest that tailored public health measures are needed to increase perceived susceptibility and benefit, and decrease perceived barriers among reproductive women.