ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The study underwent to evaluate the adverse events, the incidence of COVID-19 and the participant's attitude and perception towards the vaccine following Sputnik V administration through an active surveillance program. METHODS: The prospective observational study was conducted four months in the Sputnik V vaccination center that enrolled 700 participants. Sociodemographic details, medical histories, COVID-19 incidences and adverse events following immunization (AEFI) of each sample were collected through face-to-face interviews and a telephonic feedback system. A self-prepared and validated questionnaire addressed their acceptances and perceptions towards the vaccination drive. RESULTS: Our study reported 42.1% of AEFIs after the first dose and 9.1% after the second. Fever, pain at the injection site, body pain, headache and fatigue were predominant, while dizziness and diarrhoea were rare. However, AEFIs were not influenced by the presence of comorbidities (p > 0.05). On the other hand, there were limited post immunization (1.8%) COVID-19 patients and that too with minor severity (p < 0.01). Our participants were overall satisfied with the Sputnik V immunization. However, those presented with AEFIs on the consecutive three days depicted slightly declined gratification (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our pharmacist-directed surveillance program on Sputnik V showed fewer events of AEFIs and negligible occurrence of COVID19 following immunization. Moreover, the population had appreciable attitude and positive perceptions towards Sputnik V vaccination.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pharmacists , Diarrhea , India/epidemiology , PainABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies have gained attention in developing countries owing to its benefits portrayed by few clinical trials. However, no studies until now have been undergone in India. METHODS: A retro-prospective comparative observational study was conducted in symptomatic COVID19 patients to evaluate the impact of Casirivimab and Imdevimab antibody cocktail in the high-risk population. Through an extensive data retrieval for 6 months, 152 samples were documented and sorted into test (Casirivimab and Imdevimab treated patients, n = 79) and control (Non- Casirivimab and Imdevimab treated individuals, n = 73) subsets. The research had two phases; first, estimation of mechanical ventilation and high flow oxygen requirement and mortality in samples amidst the treatment, and second was the post COVID19 patients' feedback through validated (Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.7) questionnaire that evaluated their health and vaccination status, and treatment satisfaction. RESULTS: We noticed lesser requisite for mechanical ventilation (6.3%; p < 0.001), high flow oxygen (5.1%; p < 0.001) and no death during Casirivimab and Imdevimab therapy. Meanwhile, non-vaccinated test groups were not on mechanical ventilation and those fully immunized seldom entailed high flow oxygen (test, 6.3%; control, 41.9%, p < 0.01). On evaluating the post COVID19 status of each patient in the study, 90.1% of the test samples were healthy and 97.2% were satisfied with the treatment than those in control group. CONCLUSIONS: Casirivimab and Imdevimab regimen was clinically beneficial for high risk COVID19 patients than those treated without the antibody cocktail.
