COVID-19 infection, and reinfection, and vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection among health care workers in the setting of omicron variant transmission in New Delhi, India.

Background: Surge of SARS CoV-2 infections ascribed to omicron variant began in December 2021 in New Delhi. We determined the infection and reinfection density in a cohort of health care workers (HCWs) along with vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic infection within omicron transmission period (considered from December 01, 2021 to February 25, 2022. Methods: This is an observational study from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. Data were collected telephonically. Person-time at risk was counted from November 30, 2021 till date of infection/ reinfection, or date of interview. Comparison of clinical features and severity was done with previous pandemic periods. VE was estimated using test-negative case-control design [matched pairs (for age and sex)]. Vaccination status was compared and adjusted odds ratios (OR) were computed by conditional logistic regression. VE was estimated as (1-adjusted OR)X100-. Findings: 11474 HCWs participated in this study. The mean age was 36⋅2 (±10⋅7) years. Complete vaccination with two doses were reported by 9522 (83%) HCWs [8394 (88%) Covaxin and 1072 Covishield (11%)]. The incidence density of all infections and reinfection during the omicron transmission period was 34⋅8 [95% Confidence Interval (CI): 33⋅5-36⋅2] and 45⋅6 [95% CI: 42⋅9-48⋅5] per 10000 person days respectively. The infection was milder as compared to previous periods. VE was 52⋅5% (95% CI: 3⋅9-76⋅5, p = 0⋅036) for those who were tested within 14-60 days of receiving second dose and beyond this period (61-180 days), modest effect was observed. Interpretation: Almost one-fifth of HCWs were infected with SARS CoV-2 during omicron transmission period, with predominant mild spectrum of COVID-19 disease. Waning effects of vaccine protection were noted with increase in time intervals since vaccination. Funding: None.

Changes in Oral Health Policies and Guidelines During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The aim of this study was to describe the changes in oral health policies and guidelines in response to the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in different countries and regions around the world. Information on oral health policies and guidelines from 9 countries (Canada, China including Hong Kong, Egypt, India, Japan, New Zealand, Nigeria, Switzerland, and Thailand) were summarized, and sources of the information were mostly the national or regional health authorities and/or dental council/associations. The changes made to the oral health guidelines depended on the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic. This included suspension of non-emergency dental care services at the peak of the COVID-19 outbreak, and easing the restrictions on non-essential and elective dental care when the pandemic became under control. The COVID-19 risk mitigation strategies include strict adherence to infection control practices (use of hand sanitizers, facemask and maintaining social distancing), reducing the amount of aerosol production in the dental setting, and managing the quality of air in the dental treatment rooms by reducing the use of air conditioners and improving air exchange. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown a major impact on dental practice. Dental professionals are trying to adapt to the new norms, while the medium to long-term impact of COVID-19 on dentistry needs further investigation.

Global Oral Health Policies and Guidelines: Using Silver Diamine Fluoride for Caries Control.

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) was developed in Japan in the 1960s. It is a clear solution containing silver and fluoride ions. Because of its anti-bacterial and remineralizing effect, silver diamine fluoride has been used in managing dental caries for decades worldwide. This paper aims to summarize and discuss the global policies, guidelines, and relevant information on utilizing SDF for caries management. SDF can be used for treating dental caries in most countries. However, it is not permitted to be used in mainland China. Several manufacturers, mainly in Australia, Brazil, India, Japan, and the United States, produce SDF at different concentrations that are commercially available around the world. The prices differ between contents and brands. Different government organizations and dental associations have developed guidelines for clinical use of SDF. Dental professionals can refer to the specific guidelines in their own countries or territories. Training for using SDF is part of undergraduate and/or postgraduate curriculums in almost all countries. However, real utilization of SDF of dentists, especially in the private sector, remains unclear in most places because little research has been conducted. There are at least two ongoing regional-wide large-scale oral health programs, using SDF as one of the components to manage dental caries in young children (one in Hong Kong and one in Mongolia). Because SDF treatment does not require caries removal, and it is simple, non-invasive, and inexpensive, SDF is a valuable strategy for caries management in young children, elderly people, and patients with special needs. In addition, to reduce the risk of bacteria or virus transmission in dental settings, using SDF as a non-aerosol producing procedure should be emphasized under the COVID-19 outbreak.

SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection Rate and Estimated Effectiveness of the Inactivated Whole Virion Vaccine BBV152 Against Reinfection Among Health Care Workers in New Delhi, India.

Importance: A surge of COVID-19 occurred from March to June 2021, in New Delhi, India, linked to the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2. COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out for health care workers (HCWs) starting in January 2021. Objective: To assess the incidence density of reinfection among a cohort of HCWs and estimate the effectiveness of the inactivated whole virion vaccine BBV152 against reinfection. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study among HCWs working at a tertiary care center in New Delhi, India. Exposures: Vaccination with 0, 1, or 2 doses of BBV152. Main Outcomes and Measures: The HCWs were categorized as fully vaccinated (with 2 doses and ≥15 days after the second dose), partially vaccinated (with 1 dose or 2 doses with <15 days after the second dose), or unvaccinated. The incidence density of COVID-19 reinfection per 100 person-years was computed, and events from March 3, 2020, to June 18, 2021, were included for analysis. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model. Estimated vaccine effectiveness (1 - adjusted HR) was reported. Results: Among 15 244 HCWs who participated in the study, 4978 (32.7%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. The mean (SD) age was 36.6 (10.3) years, and 55.0% were male. The reinfection incidence density was 7.26 (95% CI: 6.09-8.66) per 100 person-years (124 HCWs [2.5%], total person follow-up period of 1696 person-years as time at risk). Fully vaccinated HCWs had lower risk of reinfection (HR, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.08-0.23]), symptomatic reinfection (HR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.07-0.24]), and asymptomatic reinfection (HR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.05-0.53]) compared with unvaccinated HCWs. Accordingly, among the 3 vaccine categories, reinfection was observed in 60 of 472 (12.7%) of unvaccinated (incidence density, 18.05 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 14.02-23.25), 39 of 356 (11.0%) of partially vaccinated (incidence density 15.62 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 11.42-21.38), and 17 of 1089 (1.6%) fully vaccinated (incidence density 2.18 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 1.35-3.51) HCWs. The estimated effectiveness of BBV152 against reinfection was 86% (95% CI, 77%-92%); symptomatic reinfection, 87% (95% CI, 76%-93%); and asymptomatic reinfection, 84% (95% CI, 47%-95%) among fully vaccinated HCWs. Partial vaccination was not associated with reduced risk of reinfection. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that BBV152 was associated with protection against both symptomatic and asymptomatic reinfection in HCWs after a complete vaccination schedule, when the predominant circulating variant was B.1.617.2.