ABSTRACT
IntroductionThere is widespread concern that disruption to health services during the COVID-19 pandemic has led to declines in immunization coverage among young children, but there is limited information on the magnitude of such impact. MethodsWe used data from two nationwide sources covering the whole of Brazil. Data from the Information System of the National Immunization Program (SIPNI) on the monthly number of vaccine doses administered to young children were analyzed. The second source was a survey in 133 large cities in the 27 states in the country, carried out from August 24-27. Respondents answered a question on whether children under the age of three years had missed any scheduled vaccinations during the pandemic, and available vaccination cards were photographed for later examination. ResultsSIPNI data showed that, relative to January and February 2020, there was a decline of about 20% in vaccines administered to children aged two months or older during March and April, when social distancing was at the highest level in the country. After May, vaccination levels returned to pre-pandemic values. Survey data, based on the interviews and on examination of the vaccine cards, showed that 19.0% (95% CI 17.0;21.1%) and 20.6% (95% CI 19.0;23.1%) of children, respectively, had missed immunizations. Missed doses were most common in the North (Amazon) region and least common in the South and Southeast, and also more common among children from poor than from wealthy families. InterpretationOur results show that the pandemic was associated with a reduction of about 20% in child vaccinations, but this was reverted in recent months. Children from poor families and from the least developed regions of the country were most affected. There is an urgent need to booster immunization activities in the country to compensate for missed doses, and to reduce geographic and socioeconomic inequalities.
ABSTRACT
Since the beginning of the pandemic of COVID-19, there has been a widespread assumption that most infected persons are asymptomatic. A frequently-cited early study from China suggested that 86% of all infections were undocumented, which was used as indirect evidence that patients were asymptomatic. Using data from the most recent wave of the EPICOVID19 study, a nationwide household-based survey including 133 cities from all states of Brazil, we estimated the proportion of people with and without antibodies for SARS-CoV-2 who were asymptomatic, which symptoms were most frequently reported, the number of symptoms reported and the association between symptomatology and socio-demographic characteristics. We were able to test 33,205 subjects using a rapid antibody test that was previously validated. Information on symptoms was collected before participants received the test result. Out of 849 (2.7%) participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, only 12.1% (95%CI 10.1-14.5) reported no symptoms since the start of the pandemic, compared to 42.2% (95%CI 41.7-42.8) among those who tested negative. The largest difference between the two groups was observed for changes in smell or taste (56.5% versus 9.1%, a 6.2-fold difference). Symptoms change in smell or taste, fever and myalgia were most likely to predict positive test results as suggested by recursive partitioning tree analysis. Among individuals without any of these three symptoms (74.2% of the sample), only 0.8% tested positive, compared to 18.3% of those with both fever and changes in smell or taste. Most subjects with antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in Brazil are symptomatic, even though most present only mild symptoms.
