Assessment of humoral immune response to two mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (Moderna and Pfizer) in healthcare workers fully vaccinated with and without a history of previous infection.

AIMS: Presence of anti-S1 region of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was analysed, at two and eight months, in 477 immunocompetent healthcare workers in Zaragoza, Spain, vaccinated with mRNA-1273 (Moderna) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer). METHODS AND RESULTS: Antibody analysis was performed with Alinity i System (Abbott). At 2 months, 100% of vaccinated had anti-S1 IgG (mean = 13,285 AU ml-1 ). This value was significantly higher with Moderna (18,192 AU ml-1 ) than with Pfizer (10,441 AU ml-1 ). The mean value of anti-S1 IgG after vaccination was significantly higher in patients with than without previous infection (18,539 vs. 7919 AU ml-1 ); in both groups was significantly higher with Moderna than with Pfizer (21,881 vs. 15,733 AU ml-1 and 11,949 vs. 6387 AU ml-1 ), respectively. At 8 months, 100% of patients were IgG positive, with higher levels with Moderna than with Pfizer. Nevertheless, in ensemble of cases, a mean decrease of antibody levels of 11,025 AU ml-1 was observed. CONCLUSION: At 2 and 8 months after vaccination, IgG response persists with both vaccines but with important decrease which suggests the need for revaccination. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF STUDY: The study contributes to know the immune status after vaccination with two of more used anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. This knowledge is important for establishing the best vaccination strategy.

A Student Assessment Tool for Standardized Patient Simulations (SAT-SPS): Psychometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: The evaluation of the level of clinical competence acquired by the student is a complex process that must meet various requirements to ensure its quality. The psychometric analysis of the data collected by the assessment tools used is a fundamental aspect to guarantee the student's competence level. AIM: To conduct a psychometric analysis of an instrument which assesses clinical competence in nursing students at simulation stations with standardized patients in OSCE-format tests. METHOD: The construct of clinical competence was operationalized as a set of observable and measurable behaviors, measured by the newly-created Student Assessment Tool for Standardized Patient Simulations (SAT-SPS), which was comprised of 27 items. The categories assigned to the items were 'incorrect or not performed' (0), 'acceptable' (1), and 'correct' (2). PARTICIPANTS: 499 nursing students. Data were collected by two independent observers during the assessment of the students' performance at a four-station OSCE with standardized patients. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the variables. The difficulty levels and floor and ceiling effects were determined for each item. Reliability was analyzed using internal consistency and inter-observer reliability. The validity analysis was performed considering face validity, content and construct validity (through exploratory factor analysis), and criterion validity. RESULTS: Internal reliability and inter-observer reliability were higher than 0.80. The construct validity analysis suggested a three-factor model accounting for 37.1% of the variance. These three factors were named 'Nursing process', 'Communication skills', and 'Safe practice'. A significant correlation was found between the scores obtained and the students' grades in general, as well as with the grades obtained in subjects with clinical content. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment tool has proven to be sufficiently reliable and valid for the assessment of the clinical competence of nursing students using standardized patients. This tool has three main components: the nursing process, communication skills, and safety management.

The Spanish version of the Position on Nursing Diagnosis scale: cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric assessment.

AIM: To report the adaptation into Spanish and psychometric testing of the Position on Nursing Diagnosis scale. BACKGROUND: The Position on Nursing Diagnosis is a scale that uses the semantic differential technique to measure nurses' attitudes towards the nursing diagnosis concept. DESIGN: Methodological design. METHOD: The scale was cross-culturally adapted through a process including translation, comparison with versions in other languages, back-translation, review, and pre-testing. An opportunistic sample of 621 Spanish registered nurses was recruited from August-December 2011. Reliability was evaluated through internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Construct validity, using both exploratory factor analysis and the known-group technique, and concurrent validity were assessed. FINDINGS: The Position on Nursing Diagnosis-Spanish Version was obtained from the cross-cultural adaptation process. High internal consistency and satisfactory test-retest reliability over a two week period (n = 240) were found. In the principal component analysis, all items loaded strongly on a single-factor which accounted for adequate variance, supporting the unidimensionality of the scale. A statistically significant difference was found comparing the scores of nurses who were members of the Spanish Association of Nomenclature, Taxonomy and Nursing Diagnosis and those who were not. Concurrent validity was supported by the significant correlation found between the scores and the degree of nursing diagnosis utilization and attendance to training sessions. CONCLUSION: The findings support the validity and reliability of the Position on Nursing Diagnosis-Spanish Version for its use among Spanish registered nurses as a measurement of their attitude towards the nursing diagnosis concept.