RESUMO
PURPOSE: Vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) is a theoretical concern with new vaccines, although trials of authorized vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have not identified markers for VAED. The purpose of this study was to detect any signals for VAED among adults vaccinated against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed COVID-19 severity as a proxy for VAED among 400 adults hospitalized for COVID-19 from March through October 2021 at eight US healthcare systems. Primary outcomes were admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and severe illness (score ≥6 on the World Health Organization [WHO] Clinical Progression Scale). We compared the risk of outcomes among those who had completed a COVID-19 vaccine primary series versus those who were unvaccinated. We incorporated inverse propensity weights for vaccination status in a doubly robust regression model to estimate the causal average treatment effect. RESULTS: The causal risk ratio in vaccinated versus unvaccinated was 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.94) for ICU admission and 0.46 (95% CI, 0.25-0.76) for severe illness. CONCLUSION: Among hospitalized patients, reduced disease severity in those vaccinated against COVID-19 supports the absence of VAED.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Hospitalização , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Estudos Transversais , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversosRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility of a medical dental integration program to provide overdue vaccinations to adolescents ages 9-17 and evaluate the facilitators and barriers to the process. METHODS: The program was developed and implemented at one dental clinic co-located within a medical clinic at a federally qualified healthcare center in Denver, Colorado. Utilizing a shared electronic health record, human papillomavirus, meningococcal, and/or tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccines were recommended by dental providers and then administered by the medical team. Plan-do-study-act cycles informed implementation. Descriptive analyses of eligible patients were performed and run charts were used track process implementation outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty eligible adolescents were identified during a 6-month period. Overall, 29 patients (18%) received 41 vaccines. Process facilitators included staff buy-in and individual provider feedback and barriers included staff shortages and family vaccine refusal/preference to receive vaccines in the medical home. CONCLUSIONS: Many adolescents see dental providers more than their primary care providers, creating an opportunity to vaccinate adolescents overdue for immunizations during dental visits. A medical dental integration program to provide adolescent vaccinations was feasible in a federally qualified health center with co-located medical and dental services. Expansion to diverse healthcare settings is necessary to further explore implementation outcomes.
RESUMO
Importance: COVID-19 vaccination is recommended throughout pregnancy to prevent pregnancy complications and adverse birth outcomes associated with COVID-19 disease. To date, data on birth defects after first-trimester vaccination are limited. Objective: To evaluate the associated risks for selected major structural birth defects among live-born infants after first-trimester receipt of a messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of singleton pregnancies with estimated last menstrual period (LMP) between September 13, 2020, and April 3, 2021, and ending in live birth from March 5, 2021, to January 25, 2022. Included were data from 8 health systems in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, and Wisconsin in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Exposures: Receipt of 1 or 2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses in the first trimester, as part of the primary series. Main Outcomes and Measures: Selected major structural birth defects among live-born infants, identified from electronic health data using validated algorithms, with neural tube defects confirmed via medical record review. Results: Among 42â¯156 eligible pregnancies (mean [SD] maternal age, 30.9 [5.0] years) 7632 (18.1%) received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in the first trimester. Of 34â¯524 pregnancies without a first-trimester COVID-19 vaccination, 2045 (5.9%) were vaccinated before pregnancy, 13â¯494 (39.1%) during the second or third trimester, and 18â¯985 (55.0%) were unvaccinated before or during pregnancy. Compared with pregnant people unvaccinated in the first trimester, those vaccinated in the first trimester were older (mean [SD] age, 32.3 [4.5] years vs 30.6 [5.1] years) and differed by LMP date. After applying stabilized inverse probability weighting, differences in baseline characteristics between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant persons in the first trimester were negligible (standardized mean difference <0.20). Selected major structural birth defects occurred in 113 infants (1.48%) after first-trimester mRNA COVID-19 vaccination and in 488 infants (1.41%) without first-trimester vaccine exposure; the adjusted prevalence ratio was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.78-1.33). In secondary analyses, with major structural birth defect outcomes grouped by organ system, no significant differences between infants vaccinated or unvaccinated in the first trimester were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: In this multisite cohort study, among live-born infants, first-trimester mRNA COVID-19 vaccine exposure was not associated with an increased risk for selected major structural birth defects.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Primeiro Trimestre da Gravidez , Humanos , Feminino , Gravidez , Estudos Retrospectivos , Adulto , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Recém-Nascido , Anormalidades Congênitas/epidemiologia , Anormalidades Congênitas/prevenção & controle , Nascido Vivo/epidemiologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is recommended in pregnancy to reduce the risk of severe morbidity from COVID-19. However, vaccine hesitancy persists among pregnant people, with risk of stillbirth being a primary concern. Our objective was to examine the association between COVID-19 vaccination and stillbirth. METHODS: We performed a matched case-control study in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Stillbirths and live births were selected from singleton pregnancies among persons aged 16-49 years with at least one prenatal, delivery, or postpartum visit at eight participating VSD sites. Stillbirths identified through diagnostic codes were adjudicated to confirm the outcome, date, and gestational age at fetal death. Confirmed antepartum stillbirths that occurred between February 14, 2021, and February 27, 2022, then were matched 1:3 to live births by pregnancy start date, VSD site, and maternal age at delivery. Associations among antepartum stillbirth and COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy, vaccine manufacturer, number of vaccine doses received, and vaccination within 6 weeks before stillbirth (or index date in live births) were evaluated using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: In the matched analysis of 276 confirmed antepartum stillbirths and 822 live births, we found no association between COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and stillbirth (38.4% stillbirths vs 39.3% live births in vaccinated individuals, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.02, 95% CI, 0.76-1.37). Furthermore, no association between COVID-19 vaccination and stillbirth was detected by vaccine manufacturer (Moderna: aOR 1.00, 95% CI, 0.62-1.62; Pfizer-BioNTech: aOR 1.00, 95% CI, 0.69-1.43), number of vaccine doses received during pregnancy (1 vs 0: aOR 1.17, 95% CI, 0.75-1.83; 2 vs 0: aOR 0.98, 95% CI, 0.81-1.17), or COVID-19 vaccination within the 6 weeks before stillbirth or index date compared with no vaccination (aOR 1.16, 95% CI, 0.74-1.83). CONCLUSION: No association was found between COVID-19 vaccination and stillbirth. These findings further support recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Natimorto , Humanos , Natimorto/epidemiologia , Feminino , Gravidez , Adulto , Estudos de Casos e Controles , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Importance: People with HIV (PWH) may be at increased risk for severe outcomes with COVID-19 illness compared with people without HIV. Little is known about COVID-19 vaccination coverage and factors associated with primary series completion among PWH. Objectives: To evaluate COVID-19 vaccination coverage among PWH and examine sociodemographic, clinical, and community-level factors associated with completion of the primary series and an additional primary dose. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used electronic health record data to assess COVID-19 vaccination information from December 14, 2020, through April 30, 2022, from 8 health care organizations of the Vaccine Safety Datalink project in the US. Participants were adults diagnosed with HIV on or before December 14, 2020, enrolled in a participating site. Main Outcomes and Measures: The percentage of PWH with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine and PWH who completed the COVID-19 vaccine primary series by December 31, 2021, and an additional primary dose by April 30, 2022. Rate ratios (RR) and 95% CIs were estimated using Poisson regression models for factors associated with completing the COVID-19 vaccine primary series and receiving an additional primary dose. Results: Among 22â¯058 adult PWH (mean [SD] age, 52.1 [13.3] years; 88.8% male), 90.5% completed the primary series by December 31, 2021. Among 18â¯374 eligible PWH who completed the primary series by August 12, 2021, 15â¯982 (87.0%) received an additional primary dose, and 4318 (23.5%) received a booster dose by April 30, 2022. Receipt of influenza vaccines in the last 2 years was associated with completion of the primary series (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.15-1.20) and an additional primary dose (RR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.54-1.69). PWH with uncontrolled viremia (HIV viral load ≥200 copies/mL) (eg, RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.85-0.95] for viral load 200-10â¯000 copies/mL vs undetected or <200 copies/mL for completing the primary series) and Medicaid insurance (eg, RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.87-0.90] for completing the primary series) were less likely to be fully vaccinated. By contrast, greater outpatient utilization (eg, RR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.05-1.09] for ≥7 vs 0 visits for primary series completion) and residence in counties with higher COVID-19 vaccine coverage (eg, RR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.03-1.08] for fourth vs first quartiles for primary series completion) were associated with primary series and additional dose completion (RRs ranging from 1.01 to 1.21). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings from this cohort study suggest that, while COVID-19 vaccination coverage was high among PWH, outreach efforts should focus on those who did not complete vaccine series and those who have uncontrolled viremia.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Infecções por HIV , SARS-CoV-2 , Cobertura Vacinal , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , Cobertura Vacinal/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Estados Unidos , Idoso , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
COVID-19 vaccinations protect against severe illness and death, but associations with post-COVID conditions (PCC) are less clear. We aimed to evaluate the association between prior COVID-19 vaccination and new-onset PCC among individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection across eight large healthcare systems in the United States. This retrospective matched cohort study used electronic health records (EHR) from patients with SARS-CoV-2 positive tests during March 2021-February 2022. Vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 cases were matched on location, test date, severity of acute infection, age, and sex. Vaccination status was ascertained using EHR and integrated data on externally administered vaccines. Adjusted relative risks (RRs) were obtained from Poisson regression. PCC was defined as a new diagnosis in one of 13 PCC categories 30 days to 6 months following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. The study included 161,531 vaccinated COVID-19 cases and 161,531 matched unvaccinated cases. Compared to unvaccinated cases, vaccinated cases had a similar or lower risk of all PCC categories except mental health disorders (RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10). Vaccination was associated with ≥10% lower risk of sensory (RR: 0.90, 0.86-0.95), circulatory (RR: 0.88, 0.83-0.94), blood and hematologic (RR: 0.79, 0.71-0.89), skin and subcutaneous (RR: 0.69, 0.66-0.72), and non-specific COVID-19 related disorders (RR: 0.53, 0.51-0.56). In general, associations were stronger at younger ages but mostly persisted regardless of SARS-CoV-2 variant period, receipt of ≥3 vs. 1-2 vaccine doses, or time since vaccination. Pre-infection vaccination was associated with reduced risk of several PCC outcomes and hence may decrease the long-term consequences of COVID-19.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinação , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Masculino , Feminino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Adulto , Idoso , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem , Síndrome de COVID-19 Pós-Aguda , AdolescenteRESUMO
Importance: Pregnant people and infants are at high risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Understanding changes in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant and recently pregnant people is important for public health messaging. Objective: To assess attitudinal trends regarding COVID-19 vaccines by (1) vaccination status and (2) race, ethnicity, and language among samples of pregnant and recently pregnant Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) members from 2021 to 2023. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional surveye study included pregnant or recently pregnant members of the VSD, a collaboration of 13 health care systems and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Unvaccinated, non-Hispanic Black, and Spanish-speaking members were oversampled. Wave 1 took place from October 2021 to February 2022, and wave 2 took place from November 2022 to February 2023. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to September 2023. Exposures: Self-reported or electronic health record (EHR)-derived race, ethnicity, and preferred language. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported vaccination status and attitudes toward monovalent (wave 1) or bivalent Omicron booster (wave 2) COVID-19 vaccines. Sample- and response-weighted analyses assessed attitudes by vaccination status and 3 race, ethnicity, and language groupings of interest. Results: There were 1227 respondents; all identified as female, the mean (SD) age was 31.7 (5.6) years, 356 (29.0%) identified as Black race, 555 (45.2%) identified as Hispanic ethnicity, and 445 (36.3%) preferred the Spanish language. Response rates were 43.5% for wave 1 (652 of 1500 individuals sampled) and 39.5% for wave 2 (575 of 1456 individuals sampled). Respondents were more likely than nonrespondents to be White, non-Hispanic, and vaccinated per EHR. Overall, 76.8% (95% CI, 71.5%-82.2%) reported 1 or more COVID-19 vaccinations; Spanish-speaking Hispanic respondents had the highest weighted proportion of respondents with 1 or more vaccination. Weighted estimates of somewhat or strongly agreeing that COVID-19 vaccines are safe decreased from wave 1 to 2 for respondents who reported 1 or more vaccinations (76% vs 50%; χ21 = 7.8; P < .001), non-Hispanic White respondents (72% vs 43%; χ21 = 5.4; P = .02), and Spanish-speaking Hispanic respondents (76% vs 53%; χ21 = 22.8; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: Decreasing confidence in COVID-19 vaccine safety in a large, diverse pregnant and recently pregnant insured population is a public health concern.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Gravidez , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Estudos Transversais , Autorrelato , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Hispânico ou Latino , Negro ou Afro-Americano , Brancos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between antenatal messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of individuals with singleton pregnancies with live deliveries between June 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022, with data available from eight integrated health care systems in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Vaccine exposure was defined as receipt of one or two mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses (primary series) during pregnancy. Outcomes were preterm birth (PTB) before 37 weeks of gestation, small-for-gestational age (SGA) neonates, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), gestational hypertension, and preeclampsia-eclampsia-HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count) syndrome. Outcomes in individuals vaccinated were compared with those in propensity-matched individuals with unexposed pregnancies. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs were estimated for PTB and SGA using a time-dependent covariate Cox model, and adjusted relative risks (aRRs) were estimated for GDM, gestational hypertension, and preeclampsia-eclampsia-HELLP syndrome using Poisson regression with robust variance. RESULTS: Among 55,591 individuals eligible for inclusion, 23,517 (42.3%) received one or two mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses during pregnancy. Receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination varied by maternal age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, and history of COVID-19. Compared with no vaccination, mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a decreased risk of PTB (rate: 6.4 [vaccinated] vs 7.7 [unvaccinated] per 100, aHR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94). Messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with SGA (8.3 vs 7.4 per 100; aHR 1.06, 95% CI, 0.99-1.13), GDM (11.9 vs 10.6 per 100; aRR 1.00, 95% CI, 0.90-1.10), gestational hypertension (10.8 vs 9.9 per 100; aRR 1.08, 95% CI, 0.96-1.22), or preeclampsia-eclampsia-HELLP syndrome (8.9 vs 8.4 per 100; aRR 1.10, 95% CI, 0.97-1.24). CONCLUSION: Receipt of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy was not associated with an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes; this information will be helpful for patients and clinicians when considering COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Resultado da Gravidez , Humanos , Feminino , Gravidez , Adulto , Estudos Retrospectivos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Recém-Nascido , Nascimento Prematuro/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/prevenção & controle , Recém-Nascido Pequeno para a Idade Gestacional , Adulto Jovem , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Racial and ethnic disparities in influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women in the United States have been documented. This study assessed the contribution of vaccine-related attitudes to coverage disparities. METHODS: Surveys were conducted following the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 influenza seasons in a US research network. Using electronic health record data to identify pregnant women, random samples were selected for surveying; non-Hispanic Black women and influenza-unvaccinated women were oversampled. Regression-based decomposition analyses were used to assess the contribution of vaccine-related attitudes to racial and ethnic differences in influenza vaccination. Data were combined across survey years, and analyses were weighted and accounted for survey design. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 41.2% (721 of 1748) for 2019-2020 and 39.3% (706 of 1798) for 2020-2021. Self-reported influenza vaccination was higher among non-Hispanic White respondents (79.4% coverage, 95% CI 73.1%-85.7%) than Hispanic (66.2% coverage, 95% CI 52.5%-79.9%) and non-Hispanic Black (55.8% coverage, 95% CI 50.2%-61.4%) respondents. For all racial and ethnic groups, a high proportion (generally >80%) reported being seen for care, recommended for influenza vaccination, and offered vaccination. In decomposition analyses, vaccine-related attitudes (e.g., worry about vaccination causing influenza; concern about vaccine safety and effectiveness) explained a statistically significant portion of the observed racial and ethnic disparities in vaccination. Maternal age, education, and health status were not significant contributors after controlling for vaccine-related attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: In a setting with relatively high influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women, racial and ethnic disparities in coverage were identified. Vaccine-related attitudes were associated with the disparities observed.
Assuntos
Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Cobertura Vacinal , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Gestantes , Estados Unidos , Vacinação , Cobertura Vacinal/estatística & dados numéricos , Grupos Raciais , EtnicidadeRESUMO
Objectives: Morning Report is a prevalent classroom learning activity in residency programs. Yet, its contribution to resident education remains unclear. Our objective was to explore pediatric residents' perceptions of the purpose of Morning Report as well as their experiences at Morning Report both as learners and resident presenters. Methods: We performed a qualitative study with a grounded theory approach using semi-structured focus groups of pediatric residents (November 2016-July 2017) from a large academic health center. We analyzed data with the constant comparative method, generating codes using an iterative approach and collecting data until reaching saturation. We identified major themes and resolved disagreements by consensus. Results: Twenty-six residents participated in five focus groups. Data analysis yielded four themes: Morning Report is Multipurpose, Socialization and Engagement Influence the Learning Environment, Potential for Emotional Discomfort, and Barriers to Prioritizing Morning Report Attendance. Residents felt the primary purpose of Morning Report was acquiring medical knowledge, but also acknowledged Morning Report's added benefits of providing an opportunity for socialization and a mental reprieve before work rounds. Residents felt Morning Report was educational when engaged in interactive discussion; however, it was challenging to meet the differing needs in this mixed learner level format. Some resident learners were hesitant to participate due to fears of being judged, and some resident presenters perceived a need to be topic experts. Clinical responsibilities and exhaustion following busy service rotations often precluded Morning Report attendance. Conclusion: Pediatric residents described numerous purposes of Morning Report, including opportunities for valuable learning. Self-perceived learning was positively influenced by engagement and a sense of connection and challenged by emotional discomfort at times. Future work can explore how to best promote engagement and foster a safe learning environment.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Traditional active vaccine safety monitoring involves pre-specifying health outcomes and biologically plausible outcome-specific time windows of concern, limiting the adverse events that can be evaluated. In this study, we used tree-based scan statistics to look broadly for >60,000 possible adverse events after bivalent COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: Vaccine Safety Datalink enrollees aged ≥5 years receiving Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent COVID-19 vaccine through November 2022 were followed for 56 days post-vaccination. Incident diagnoses in inpatient or emergency department settings were analyzed for clustering within the hierarchical ICD-10-CM diagnosis code "tree" and temporally within post-vaccination follow-up. The conditional self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic was used, conditioning on total number of cases of each diagnosis and total number of cases of any diagnosis occurring during the scanning risk window across the entire tree. P = 0.01 was the pre-specified cut-off for statistical significance. RESULTS: Analysis included 352,509 doses of Moderna and 979,189 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent vaccines. After Moderna vaccination, no statistically significant clusters were found. After Pfizer-BioNTech, there were clusters of unspecified adverse events (Days 1-3, p = 0.0001-0.0007), influenza (Days 35-56, p = 0.0001), cough (Days 44-55, p = 0.0002), and COVID-19 (Days 52-56, p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: For Pfizer-BioNTech only, we detected clusters of: (1) unspecified adverse effects, as have been observed in other vaccine studies using this method, and (2) respiratory disease toward the end of follow-up. The respiratory clusters were likely due to overlap of follow-up with the spread of respiratory syncytial virus, influenza, and COVID-19, i.e., confounding by seasonality. The untargeted nature of the method and its inherent adjustment for the many diagnoses and risk intervals evaluated are unique advantages. Limitations include susceptibility to time-varying confounding, lower statistical power for assessing risks of specific outcomes than in traditional studies targeting fewer outcomes, and the possibility of missing adverse events not strongly clustered in time or within the "tree."
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Influenza Humana , Vírus Sincicial Respiratório Humano , Vacinação/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Historically, partnerships with community leaders (e.g., religious leaders, teachers) have been critical to building vaccination confidence, but leaders may be increasingly vaccine hesitant. In rural Guatemala, the extent of vaccine hesitancy among community leaders is unclear, as are their perceptions of advocacy for childhood vaccines. We sought to: (i) compare Guatemalan religious leaders' and community leaders' attitudes toward childhood vaccines, (ii) describe leaders' experiences and comfort with vaccination advocacy, and (iii) describe community members' trust in them as vaccination advocates. In 2019, we surveyed religious leaders, other community leaders, and parents of children under five in rural Guatemala. We recorded participant demographic information and assessed participant vaccine hesitancy regarding childhood vaccines. We analyzed data descriptively and via adjusted regression modeling. Our sample included 50 religious leaders, 50 community leaders, and 150 community members (response rate: 99%); 14% of religious leaders and community leaders were vaccine hesitant, similar to community members (P = 0.71). In the prior year, 47% of leaders had spoken about vaccines in their formal role; 85% felt responsible to do so. Only 28% of parents trusted politicians "a lot" for vaccine advice, versus doctors (72%; P < 0.01), nurses (62%; P < 0.01), religious leaders (49%; P < 0.01), and teachers (48%; P < 0.01). In this study, religious leaders and community leaders were willing but incompletely engaged vaccination advocates. Most community members trusted doctors and nurses a lot for vaccination advice; half trusted teachers and religious leaders similarly. Public health officials in rural Guatemala can complement efforts by doctors and nurses through partnerships with teachers and religious leaders to increase vaccination confidence and delivery.
RESUMO
In this multisite, observational, matched cohort study of more than 80,000 pregnant people, receipt of an mRNA monovalent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) booster vaccination in pregnancy was not associated with increased risk for thrombocytopenia, myocarditis, venous thromboembolism, ischemic stroke, or other serious adverse events within 21 or 42 days after booster vaccination. The mRNA monovalent COVID-19 booster in pregnancy was associated with an increased risk for medically attended malaise or fatigue within 7 days of vaccination (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] 3.64, 95% CI 2.42-5.48) and lymphadenopathy or lymphadenitis within 21 days (aRR 3.25, 95% CI 1.67-6.30) or 42 days (aRR 2.18, 95% CI 1.33-3.58) of vaccination. Our findings are consistent with prior evaluations of the primary COVID-19 vaccine series and are reassuring with respect to COVID-19 booster vaccination in pregnancy.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Estudos de Coortes , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , RNA Mensageiro , Vacinação/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Importance: Adherence to COVID-19 booster vaccine recommendations has lagged in pregnant and nonpregnant adult populations. One barrier to booster vaccination is uncertainty regarding the safety of booster doses among pregnant people. Objective: To evaluate whether there is an association between COVID-19 booster vaccination during pregnancy and spontaneous abortion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational, case-control, surveillance study evaluated people aged 16 to 49 years with pregnancies at 6 to 19 weeks' gestation at 8 health systems in the Vaccine Safety Datalink from November 1, 2021, to June 12, 2022. Spontaneous abortion cases and ongoing pregnancy controls were evaluated during consecutive surveillance periods, defined by calendar time. Exposure: Primary exposure was receipt of a third messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine dose within 28 days before spontaneous abortion or index date (midpoint of surveillance period in ongoing pregnancy controls). Secondary exposures were third mRNA vaccine doses in a 42-day window or any COVID-19 booster in 28- and 42-day windows. Main Outcomes and Measures: Spontaneous abortion cases and ongoing pregnancy controls were identified from electronic health data using a validated algorithm. Cases were assigned to a single surveillance period based on pregnancy outcome date. Eligible ongoing pregnancy time was assigned to 1 or more surveillance periods as an ongoing pregnancy-period control. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AOR) with gestational age, maternal age, antenatal visits, race and ethnicity, site, and surveillance period as covariates and robust variance estimates to account for inclusion of multiple pregnancy periods per unique pregnancy. Results: Among 112â¯718 unique pregnancies included in the study, the mean (SD) maternal age was 30.6 (5.5) years. Pregnant individuals were Asian, non-Hispanic (15.1%); Black, non-Hispanic (7.5%); Hispanic (35.6%); White, non-Hispanic (31.2%); and of other or unknown (10.6%); and 100% were female. Across eight 28-day surveillance periods, among 270â¯853 ongoing pregnancy-period controls, 11â¯095 (4.1%) had received a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a 28-day window; among 14â¯226 cases, 553 (3.9%) had received a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine within 28 days of the spontaneous abortion. Receipt of a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was not associated with spontaneous abortion in a 28-day window (AOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86-1.03). Results were consistent when using a 42-day window (AOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.05) and for any COVID-19 booster in a 28-day (AOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86-1.02) or 42-day (AOR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.89-1.04) exposure window. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case-control surveillance study, COVID-19 booster vaccination in pregnancy was not associated with spontaneous abortion. These findings support the safety of recommendations for COVID-19 booster vaccination, including in pregnant populations.
Assuntos
Aborto Espontâneo , COVID-19 , Adulto , Gravidez , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Aborto Espontâneo/epidemiologia , Aborto Espontâneo/etiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Resultado da Gravidez , Idade Materna , Vacinação/efeitos adversosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: An increased risk of chorioamnionitis in people receiving tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine during pregnancy has been reported. The importance of this association is unclear as additional study has not demonstrated increased adverse infant outcomes associated with Tdap vaccination in pregnancy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of pregnant people ages 15-49 years with singleton pregnancies ending in live birth who were members of 8 Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) sites during October 2016-September 2018. We used a time-dependent covariate Cox model with stabilized inverse probability weights applied to evaluate associations between Tdap vaccination during pregnancy and chorioamnionitis and preterm birth outcomes. We used Poisson regression with robust variance with stabilized inverse probability weights applied to evaluate the association of Tdap vaccination with adverse infant outcomes. We performed medical record reviews on a random sample of patients with ICD-10-CM-diagnosed chorioamnionitis to determine positive predictive values (PPV) of coded chorioamnionitisfor "probable clinical chorioamnionitis," "possible clinical chorioamnionitis," or "histologic chorioamnionitis." RESULTS: We included 118,211 pregnant people; 103,258 (87%) received Tdap vaccine during pregnancy; 8098 (7%) were diagnosed with chorioamnionitis. The adjusted hazard ratio for chorioamnionitis in the Tdap vaccine-exposed group compared to unexposed was 0.96 (95% CI 0.90-1.03). There was no association between Tdap vaccine and preterm birth or adverse infant outcomes associated with chorioamnionitis. Chart reviews were performed for 528 pregnant people with chorioamnionitis. The PPV for clinical (probable or possible clinical chorioamnionitis) was 48% and 59% for histologic chorioamnionitis. The PPV for the combined outcome of clinical or histologic chorioamnionitis was 81%. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Tdap vaccine exposure during pregnancy was not associated with chorioamnionitis, preterm birth, or adverse infant outcomes. ICD-10 codes for chorioamnionitis lack specificity for clinical chorioamnionitis and should be a recognized limitation when interpreting results.
Assuntos
Corioamnionite , Vacinas contra Difteria, Tétano e Coqueluche Acelular , Nascimento Prematuro , Tétano , Coqueluche , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Lactente , Toxoides , Vacinas contra Difteria, Tétano e Coqueluche Acelular/efeitos adversos , Corioamnionite/epidemiologia , Corioamnionite/induzido quimicamente , Estudos Retrospectivos , Nascimento Prematuro/etiologia , Nascimento Prematuro/induzido quimicamente , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vacinação/métodos , Coqueluche/prevenção & controle , Tétano/prevenção & controleRESUMO
In the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), we previously reported no association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in early pregnancy and spontaneous abortion (SAB). The present study aims to understand how time since vaccine rollout or other methodological factors could affect results. Using a case-control design and generalized estimating equations, we estimated the odds ratios (ORs) of COVID-19 vaccination in the 28 days before a SAB or last date of the surveillance period (index date) in ongoing pregnancies and occurrence of SAB, across cumulative 4-week periods from December 2020 through June 2021. Using data from a single site, we evaluated alternative methodological approaches: increasing the exposure window to 42 days, modifying the index date from the last day to the midpoint of the surveillance period, and constructing a cohort design with a time-dependent exposure model. A protective effect (OR = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.69, 0.89), observed with 3-cumulative periods ending March 8, 2021, was attenuated when surveillance extended to June 28, 2021 (OR = 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 0.96, 1.08). We observed a lower OR for a 42-day window compared with a 28-day window. The time-dependent model showed no association. Timing of the surveillance appears to be an important factor affecting the observed vaccine-SAB association.
Assuntos
Aborto Espontâneo , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Aborto Espontâneo/induzido quimicamente , Aborto Espontâneo/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Except for spontaneous reporting systems, vaccine safety monitoring generally involves pre-specifying health outcomes and post-vaccination risk windows of concern. Instead, we used tree-based data-mining to look more broadly for possible adverse events after Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: Vaccine Safety Datalink enrollees receiving ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine in 2020-2021 were followed for 70 days after Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna and 56 days after Janssen vaccination. Incident diagnoses in inpatient or emergency department settings were analyzed for clustering within both the hierarchical ICD-10-CM code structure and the post-vaccination follow-up period. We used the self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic and TreeScan software. Monte Carlo simulation was used to estimate p-values; p = 0.01 was the pre-specified cut-off for statistical significance of a cluster. RESULTS: There were 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively. Clusters after Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination included: (1) unspecified adverse effects, (2) common vaccine reactions, such as fever, myalgia, and headache, (3) myocarditis/pericarditis, and (4) less specific cardiac or respiratory symptoms, all with the strongest clusters generally after Dose 2; and (5) COVID-19/viral pneumonia/sepsis/respiratory failure in the first 3 weeks after Dose 1. Moderna results were similar but without a significant myocarditis/pericarditis cluster. Further investigation suggested the fifth signal group was a manifestation of mRNA vaccine effectiveness after the first 3 weeks. Janssen vaccinees had clusters of unspecified or common vaccine reactions, gait/mobility abnormalities, and muscle weakness. The latter two were deemed to have arisen from confounding related to practices at one site. CONCLUSIONS: We detected post-vaccination clusters of unspecified adverse effects, common vaccine reactions, and, for the mRNA vaccines, chest pain and palpitations, as well as myocarditis/pericarditis after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2. Unique advantages of this data mining are its untargeted nature and its inherent adjustment for the multiplicity of diagnoses and risk intervals scanned.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Miocardite , Humanos , Análise por Conglomerados , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Mineração de DadosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) has been performing safety surveillance for COVID-19 vaccines since their earliest authorization in the United States. Complementing its real-time surveillance for pre-specified health outcomes using pre-specified risk intervals, the VSD conducts tree-based data-mining to look for clustering of a broad range of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination. This study's objective was to use this untargeted, hypothesis-generating approach to assess the safety of first booster doses of Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S) COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: VSD enrollees receiving a first booster of COVID-19 vaccine through April 2, 2022 were followed for 56 days. Incident diagnoses in inpatient or emergency department settings were analyzed for clustering within both the hierarchical ICD-10-CM code structure and the follow-up period. The self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic was used, conditioning on the total number of cases for each diagnosis. P-values were estimated by Monte Carlo simulation; p = 0.01 was pre-specified as the cut-off for statistical significance of clusters. RESULTS: More than 2.4 and 1.8 million subjects received Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna boosters after an mRNA primary series, respectively. Clusters of urticaria/allergy/rash were found during Days 10-15 after the Moderna booster (p = 0.0001). Other outcomes that clustered after mRNA boosters, mostly with p = 0.0001, included unspecified adverse effects, common vaccine-associated reactions like fever and myalgia, and COVID-19. COVID-19 clusters were in Days 1-10 after booster receipt, before boosters would have become effective. There were no noteworthy clusters after boosters following primary Janssen vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: In this untargeted data-mining study of COVID-19 booster vaccination, a cluster of delayed-onset urticaria/allergy/rash was detected after the Moderna booster, as has been reported after Moderna vaccination previously. Other clusters after mRNA boosters were of unspecified or common adverse effects and COVID-19, the latter evidently reflecting immunity to COVID-19 after 10 days.