A population-based matched cohort study of major congenital anomalies following COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Evidence on associations between COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection and the risk of congenital anomalies is limited. Here we report a national, population-based, matched cohort study using linked electronic health records from Scotland (May 2020-April 2022) to estimate the association between COVID-19 vaccination and, separately, SARS-CoV-2 infection between six weeks pre-conception and 19 weeks and six days gestation and the risk of [1] any major congenital anomaly and [2] any non-genetic major congenital anomaly. Mothers vaccinated in this pregnancy exposure period mostly received an mRNA vaccine (73.7% Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 and 7.9% Moderna mRNA-1273). Of the 6731 babies whose mothers were vaccinated in the pregnancy exposure period, 153 had any anomaly and 120 had a non-genetic anomaly. Primary analyses find no association between any vaccination and any anomaly (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] = 1.01, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.83-1.24) or non-genetic anomalies (aOR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.81-1.22). Primary analyses also find no association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and any anomaly (aOR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.66-1.60) or non-genetic anomalies (aOR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.57-1.54). Findings are robust to sensitivity analyses. These data provide reassurance on the safety of vaccination, in particular mRNA vaccines, just before or in early pregnancy.

A population-based matched cohort study of early pregnancy outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Data on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in early pregnancy are limited. We conducted a national, population-based, matched cohort study assessing associations between COVID-19 vaccination and miscarriage prior to 20 weeks gestation and, separately, ectopic pregnancy. We identified women in Scotland vaccinated between 6 weeks preconception and 19 weeks 6 days gestation (for miscarriage; n = 18,780) or 2 weeks 6 days gestation (for ectopic; n = 10,570). Matched, unvaccinated women from the pre-pandemic and, separately, pandemic periods were used as controls. Here we show no association between vaccination and miscarriage (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR], pre-pandemic controls = 1.02, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.96-1.09) or ectopic pregnancy (aOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.92-1.38). We undertook additional analyses examining confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection as the exposure and similarly found no association with miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy. Our findings support current recommendations that vaccination remains the safest way for pregnant women to protect themselves and their babies from COVID-19.

Uptake of infant and preschool immunisations in Scotland and England during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study of routinely collected data.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic and lockdown control measures threatened to disrupt routine childhood immunisation programmes with early reports suggesting uptake would fall. In response, public health bodies in Scotland and England collected national data for childhood immunisations on a weekly or monthly basis to allow for rapid analysis of trends. The aim of this study was to use these data to assess the impact of different phases of the pandemic on infant and preschool immunisation uptake rates. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted an observational study using routinely collected data for the year prior to the pandemic (2019) and immediately before (22 January to March 2020), during (23 March to 26 July), and after (27 July to 4 October) the first UK "lockdown". Data were obtained for Scotland from the Public Health Scotland "COVID19 wider impacts on the health care system" dashboard and for England from ImmForm. Five vaccinations delivered at different ages were evaluated; 3 doses of "6-in-1" diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b, and hepatitis B vaccine (DTaP/IPV/Hib/HepB) and 2 doses of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. This represented 439,754 invitations to be vaccinated in Scotland and 4.1 million for England. Uptake during the 2020 periods was compared to the previous year (2019) using binary logistic regression analysis. For Scotland, uptake within 4 weeks of a child becoming eligible by age was analysed along with geographical region and indices of deprivation. For Scotland and England, we assessed whether immunisations were up-to-date at approximately 6 months (all doses 6-in-1) and 16 to 18 months (first MMR) of age. We found that uptake within 4 weeks of eligibility in Scotland for all the 5 vaccines was higher during lockdown than in 2019. Differences ranged from 1.3% for first dose 6-in-1 vaccine (95.3 versus 94%, odds ratio [OR] compared to 2019 1.28, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] 1.18 to 1.39) to 14.3% for second MMR dose (66.1 versus 51.8%, OR compared to 2019 1.8, 95% CI 1.74 to 1.87). Significant increases in uptake were seen across all deprivation levels. In England, fewer children due to receive their immunisations during the lockdown period were up to date at 6 months (6-in-1) or 18 months (first dose MMR). The fall in percentage uptake ranged from 0.5% for first 6-in-1 (95.8 versus 96.3%, OR compared to 2019 0.89, 95% CI 0.86- to 0.91) to 2.1% for third 6-in-1 (86.6 versus 88.7%, OR compared to 2019 0.82, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.83). The use of routinely collected data used in this study was a limiting factor as detailed information on potential confounding factors were not available and we were unable to eliminate the possibility of seasonal trends in immunisation uptake. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that the national lockdown in Scotland was associated with an increase in timely childhood immunisation uptake; however, in England, uptake fell slightly. Reasons for the improved uptake in Scotland may include active measures taken to promote immunisation at local and national levels during this period and should be explored further. Promoting immunisation uptake and addressing potential vaccine hesitancy is particularly important given the ongoing pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.

Antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infection in patients with suspected and proven COVID-19: results from an antibiotic point prevalence survey in Scottish hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial co-infection is infrequently observed with SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 infection outside of critical care, however, antibiotics are commonly prescribed. OBJECTIVES: To examine factors associated with antibiotic prescribing for suspected respiratory tract infection (RTI) and evaluate the nature and dynamics of prescribing in hospitalized patients with suspected and proven COVID-19 infection. METHODS: An antibiotic point prevalence survey in hospitalized adult patients was conducted in designated COVID-19 clinical areas (including critical care) in 15 Scottish hospitals. Antibiotics prescribed for RTI and factors associated with prescribing were investigated. RESULTS: Of 820 surveyed patients, 272 (prevalence 33.3%) received antibiotics for suspected RTI on the survey day and 58.8% were SARS-CoV-2 positive. Antibiotics were empirical in 91.9% and amoxicillin (24.6%), doxycycline (20.5%) and co-amoxiclav (15%) were most frequently prescribed. Oral antibiotics were prescribed in 54.5% and duration was recorded in 76.7% on wards for a median of 5 days. IV to oral switch occurred after a median of 2 days. Prescribing for RTI was independently and positively associated with COPD/chronic lung disease, purulent/bloody sputum, abnormal chest X-ray, and CRP ≥ 100 mg/L. Probable and definite hospital-acquired COVID-19 and diabetes were associated with a lower odds of receiving an antibiotic for RTI. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prescribing for suspected RTI was commonly observed and predominantly empirical in suspected or proven COVID-19. Initiatives to reinforce stewardship principles including clinical review, effective use of microbiological diagnostics and better understanding of the role of biomarkers are central to further limit unnecessary antibiotic therapy in COVID-19.

Survey of antibiotic and antifungal prescribing in patients with suspected and confirmed COVID-19 in Scottish hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Concern regarding bacterial co-infection complicating SARS-CoV-2 has created a challenge for antimicrobial stewardship. Following introduction of national antibiotic recommendations for suspected bacterial respiratory tract infection complicating COVID-19, a point prevalence survey of prescribing was conducted across acute hospitals in Scotland. METHODS: Patients in designated COVID-19 units were included and demographic, clinical and antimicrobial data were collected from 15 hospitals on a single day between 20th and 30th April 2020. Comparisons were made between SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative patients and patients on non-critical care and critical care units. Factors associated with antibiotic prescribing in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were examined using Univariable and multivariable regression analyses. FINDINGS: There were 820 patients were included, 64.8% were SARS-CoV-2 positive and 14.9% were managed in critical care, and 22.1% of SARS-CoV-2 infections were considered probable or definite nosocomial infections. On the survey day, antibiotic prevalence was 45.0% and 73.9% were prescribed for suspected respiratory tract infection. Amoxicillin, doxycycline and co-amoxiclav accounted for over half of all antibiotics in non-critical care wards and meropenem, piperacillin-tazobactam and co-amoxiclav accounted for approximately half prescribed in critical care. Of all SARS-CoV-2 patients, 38.3% were prescribed antibiotics. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, COPD/chronic lung disease and CRP ≥ 100 mg/l were associated with higher odds and probable or confirmed nosocomial COVID-19, diabetes and management on an elderly care ward had lower odds of an antibiotic prescription. Systemic antifungals were prescribed in 9.8% of critical care patients and commenced a median of 18 days after critical care admission. INTERPRETATION: A relatively low prevalence of antibiotic prescribing in SARS-CoV-2 hospitalised patients and low proportion of broad spectrum antibiotics in non-critical care settings was observed potentially reflecting national antimicrobial stewardship initiatives. Broad spectrum antibiotic and antifungal prescribing in critical care units was observed indicating the importance of infection prevention and control and stewardship initiatives in this setting. FUNDING: The Scottish Antibiotic Prescribing Group is funded by Scottish Government.