Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines in Ambulatory and Inpatient Care Settings.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the effectiveness of the vaccines against symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) currently authorized in the United States with respect to hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or ambulatory care in an emergency department or urgent care clinic. METHODS: We conducted a study involving adults (≥50 years of age) with Covid-19-like illness who underwent molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed 41,552 admissions to 187 hospitals and 21,522 visits to 221 emergency departments or urgent care clinics during the period from January 1 through June 22, 2021, in multiple states. The patients' vaccination status was documented in electronic health records and immunization registries. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness by comparing the odds of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated patients with those among unvaccinated patients. Vaccine effectiveness was adjusted with weights based on propensity-for-vaccination scores and according to age, geographic region, calendar time (days from January 1, 2021, to the index date for each medical visit), and local virus circulation. RESULTS: The effectiveness of full messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination (≥14 days after the second dose) was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87 to 91) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization, 90% (95% CI, 86 to 93) against infection leading to an ICU admission, and 91% (95% CI, 89 to 93) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. The effectiveness of full vaccination with respect to a Covid-19-associated hospitalization or emergency department or urgent care clinic visit was similar with the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines and ranged from 81% to 95% among adults 85 years of age or older, persons with chronic medical conditions, and Black or Hispanic adults. The effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was 68% (95% CI, 50 to 79) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization and 73% (95% CI, 59 to 82) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. CONCLUSIONS: Covid-19 vaccines in the United States were highly effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization, ICU admission, or an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. This vaccine effectiveness extended to populations that are disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).

Protection of Two and Three mRNA Vaccine Doses Against Severe Outcomes Among Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19-VISION Network, August 2021 to March 2022.

BACKGROUND: We assessed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination impact on illness severity among adults hospitalized with COVID-19, August 2021-March 2022. METHODS: We evaluated differences in intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital death, and length of stay among vaccinated (2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses) versus unvaccinated patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for ≥24 hours with COVID-19-like illness and positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) molecular testing. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for ICU admission and death and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) for time to hospital discharge adjusted for age, geographic region, calendar time, and local virus circulation. RESULTS: We included 27 149 SARS-CoV-2-positive hospitalizations. During both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, protection against ICU admission was strongest among 3-dose vaccinees compared with unvaccinated patients (Delta OR, 0.52 [95% CI, .28-.96]; Omicron OR, 0.69 [95% CI, .54-.87]). During both periods, risk of in-hospital death was lower among vaccinated compared with unvaccinated patients but ORs overlapped across vaccination strata. We observed SHR >1 across all vaccination strata in both periods indicating faster discharge for vaccinated patients. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination was associated with lower rates of ICU admission and in-hospital death in both Delta and Omicron periods compared with being unvaccinated.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination in Preventing COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Nonimmunocompromised Children and Adolescents Aged 5-17 Years - VISION Network, 10 States, April 2021-January 2022.

The efficacy of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 exceeded 90% in clinical trials that included children and adolescents aged 5-11, 12-15, and 16-17 years (1-3). Limited real-world data on 2-dose mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in persons aged 12-17 years (referred to as adolescents in this report) have also indicated high levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection and COVID-19-associated hospitalization (4-6); however, data on VE against the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and duration of protection are limited. Pfizer-BioNTech VE data are not available for children aged 5-11 years. In partnership with CDC, the VISION Network* examined 39,217 emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) encounters and 1,699 hospitalizations† among persons aged 5-17 years with COVID-19-like illness across 10 states during April 9, 2021-January 29, 2022,§ to estimate VE using a case-control test-negative design. Among children aged 5-11 years, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters 14-67 days after dose 2 (the longest interval after dose 2 in this age group) was 46%. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 83% and 76%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 38% and 46%, respectively. Among adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE increased to 86% ≥7 days after dose 3 (booster dose). VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was substantially lower during the Omicron predominant period than the B.1.617.2 (Delta) predominant period among adolescents aged 12-17 years, with no significant protection ≥150 days after dose 2 during Omicron predominance. However, in adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE during the Omicron predominant period increased to 81% ≥7 days after a third booster dose. During the full study period, including pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron predominant periods, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalization among children aged 5-11 years was 74% 14-67 days after dose 2, with wide CIs that included zero. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 92% and 94%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 73% and 88%, respectively. All eligible children and adolescents should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, including a booster dose for those aged 12-17 years.

Waning 2-Dose and 3-Dose Effectiveness of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Adults During Periods of Delta and Omicron Variant Predominance - VISION Network, 10 States, August 2021-January 2022.

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after completion of a primary mRNA vaccination series and that immunocompromised persons receive a third primary dose.* Waning of vaccine protection after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine has been observed during the period of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance† (1-5), but little is known about durability of protection after 3 doses during periods of Delta or SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant predominance. A test-negative case-control study design using data from eight VISION Network sites§ examined vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years at various time points after receipt of a second or third vaccine dose during two periods: Delta variant predominance and Omicron variant predominance (i.e., periods when each variant accounted for ≥50% of sequenced isolates).¶ Persons categorized as having received 3 doses included those who received a third dose in a primary series or a booster dose after a 2 dose primary series (including the reduced-dosage Moderna booster). The VISION Network analyzed 241,204 ED/UC encounters** and 93,408 hospitalizations across 10 states during August 26, 2021-January 22, 2022. VE after receipt of both 2 and 3 doses was lower during the Omicron-predominant than during the Delta-predominant period at all time points evaluated. During both periods, VE after receipt of a third dose was higher than that after a second dose; however, VE waned with increasing time since vaccination. During the Omicron period, VE against ED/UC visits was 87% during the first 2 months after a third dose and decreased to 66% among those vaccinated 4-5 months earlier; VE against hospitalizations was 91% during the first 2 months following a third dose and decreased to 78% ≥4 months after a third dose. For both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, VE was generally higher for protection against hospitalizations than against ED/UC visits. All eligible persons should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations to best protect against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and ED/UC visits.

Effectiveness of Homologous and Heterologous COVID-19 Booster Doses Following 1 Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) Vaccine Dose Against COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Adults - VISION Network, 10 States, December 2021-March 2022.

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥18 years receive a single COVID-19 vaccine booster dose ≥2 months after receipt of an Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) adenovirus vector-based primary series vaccine; a heterologous COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is preferred over a homologous (matching) Janssen vaccine for booster vaccination. This recommendation was made in light of the risks for rare but serious adverse events following receipt of a Janssen vaccine, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome† (1), and clinical trial data indicating similar or higher neutralizing antibody response following heterologous boosting compared with homologous boosting (2). Data on real-world vaccine effectiveness (VE) of different booster strategies following a primary Janssen vaccine dose are limited, particularly during the period of Omicron variant predominance. The VISION Network§ determined real-world VE of 1 Janssen vaccine dose and 2 alternative booster dose strategies: 1) a homologous booster (i.e., 2 Janssen doses) and 2) a heterologous mRNA booster (i.e., 1 Janssen dose/1 mRNA dose). In addition, VE of these booster strategies was compared with VE of a homologous booster following mRNA primary series vaccination (i.e., 3 mRNA doses). The study examined 80,287 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits¶ and 25,244 hospitalizations across 10 states during December 16, 2021-March 7, 2022, when Omicron was the predominant circulating variant.** VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 24% after 1 Janssen dose, 54% after 2 Janssen doses, 79% after 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose, and 83% after 3 mRNA doses. VE for the same vaccination strategies against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were 31%, 67%, 78%, and 90%, respectively. All booster strategies provided higher protection than a single Janssen dose against ED/UC visits and hospitalizations during Omicron variant predominance. Vaccination with 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose provided higher protection than did 2 Janssen doses against COVID-19-associated ED/UC visits and was comparable to protection provided by 3 mRNA doses during the first 120 days after a booster dose. However, 3 mRNA doses provided higher protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations than did other booster strategies during the same time interval since booster dose. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines for their COVID-19 primary series vaccination should receive an mRNA booster dose when eligible. Adults who received a primary Janssen vaccine dose should preferentially receive a heterologous mRNA vaccine booster dose ≥2 months later, or a homologous Janssen vaccine booster dose if mRNA vaccine is contraindicated or unavailable. Further investigation of the durability of protection afforded by different booster strategies is warranted.

Effectiveness of a Third Dose of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Adults During Periods of Delta and Omicron Variant Predominance - VISION Network, 10 States, August 2021-January 2022.

Estimates of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) have declined in recent months (1,2) because of waning vaccine induced immunity over time,* possible increased immune evasion by SARS-CoV-2 variants (3), or a combination of these and other factors. CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a third dose (booster) of an mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after receipt of the second mRNA vaccine dose and that immunocompromised individuals receive a third primary dose.† A third dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine increases neutralizing antibody levels (4), and three recent studies from Israel have shown improved effectiveness of a third dose in preventing COVID-19 associated with infections with the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant (5-7). Yet, data are limited on the real-world effectiveness of third doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the United States, especially since the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant became predominant in mid-December 2021. The VISION Network§ examined VE by analyzing 222,772 encounters from 383 emergency departments (EDs) and urgent care (UC) clinics and 87,904 hospitalizations from 259 hospitals among adults aged ≥18 years across 10 states from August 26, 2021¶ to January 5, 2022. Analyses were stratified by the period before and after the Omicron variant became the predominant strain (>50% of sequenced viruses) at each study site. During the period of Delta predominance across study sites in the United States (August-mid-December 2021), VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was 86% 14-179 days after dose 2, 76% ≥180 days after dose 2, and 94% ≥14 days after dose 3. Estimates of VE for the same intervals after vaccination during Omicron variant predominance were 52%, 38%, and 82%, respectively. During the period of Delta variant predominance, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was 90% 14-179 days after dose 2, 81% ≥180 days after dose 2, and 94% ≥14 days after dose 3. During Omicron variant predominance, VE estimates for the same intervals after vaccination were 81%, 57%, and 90%, respectively. The highest estimates of VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters or hospitalizations during both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods were among adults who received a third dose of mRNA vaccine. All unvaccinated persons should get vaccinated as soon as possible. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines during their primary COVID-19 vaccination series should receive a third dose when eligible, and eligible persons should stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccinations.

Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19-Like Illness with Infection-Induced or mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Immunity - Nine States, January-September 2021.

Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. CDC used data from the VISION Network* to examine hospitalizations in adults with COVID-19-like illness and compared the odds of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and thus having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, between unvaccinated patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring 90-179 days before COVID-19-like illness hospitalization, and patients who were fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine 90-179 days before hospitalization with no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated with a COVID-19-like illness hospitalization during January-September 2021 and at least once earlier (since February 1, 2020, and ≥14 days before that hospitalization). Among COVID-19-like illness hospitalizations in persons whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, the odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics) among unvaccinated, previously infected adults were higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with no previous documented infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-10.99). These findings suggest that among hospitalized adults with COVID-19-like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Effectiveness of 2-Dose Vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations Among Immunocompromised Adults - Nine States, January-September 2021.

Immunocompromised persons, defined as those with suppressed humoral or cellular immunity resulting from health conditions or medications, account for approximately 3% of the U.S. adult population (1). Immunocompromised adults are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes (2) and might not acquire the same level of protection from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as do immunocompetent adults (3,4). To evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) among immunocompromised adults, data from the VISION Network* on hospitalizations among persons aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness from 187 hospitals in nine states during January 17-September 5, 2021 were analyzed. Using selected discharge diagnoses,† VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization conferred by completing a 2-dose series of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine ≥14 days before the index hospitalization date§ (i.e., being fully vaccinated) was evaluated using a test-negative design comparing 20,101 immunocompromised adults (10,564 [53%] of whom were fully vaccinated) and 69,116 immunocompetent adults (29,456 [43%] of whom were fully vaccinated). VE of 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was lower among immunocompromised patients (77%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 74%-80%) than among immunocompetent patients (90%; 95% CI = 89%-91%). This difference persisted irrespective of mRNA vaccine product, age group, and timing of hospitalization relative to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance in the state of hospitalization. VE varied across immunocompromising condition subgroups, ranging from 59% (organ or stem cell transplant recipients) to 81% (persons with a rheumatologic or inflammatory disorder). Immunocompromised persons benefit from mRNA COVID-19 vaccination but are less protected from severe COVID-19 outcomes than are immunocompetent persons, and VE varies among immunocompromised subgroups. Immunocompromised persons receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines should receive 3 doses and a booster, consistent with CDC recommendations (5), practice nonpharmaceutical interventions, and, if infected, be monitored closely and considered early for proven therapies that can prevent severe outcomes.

Impact and Effectiveness of State-Level Tuberculosis Interventions in California, Florida, New York, and Texas: A Model-Based Analysis.

The incidence of tuberculosis (TB) in the United States has stabilized, and additional interventions are needed to make progress toward TB elimination. However, the impact of such interventions depends on local demography and the heterogeneity of populations at risk. Using state-level individual-based TB transmission models calibrated to California, Florida, New York, and Texas, we modeled 2 TB interventions: 1) increased targeted testing and treatment (TTT) of high-risk populations, including people who are non-US-born, diabetic, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive, homeless, or incarcerated; and 2) enhanced contact investigation (ECI) for contacts of TB patients, including higher completion of preventive therapy. For each intervention, we projected reductions in active TB incidence over 10 years (2016-2026) and numbers needed to screen and treat in order to avert 1 case. We estimated that TTT delivered to half of the non-US-born adult population could lower TB incidence by 19.8%-26.7% over a 10-year period. TTT delivered to smaller populations with higher TB risk (e.g., HIV-positive persons, homeless persons) and ECI were generally more efficient but had less overall impact on incidence. TTT targeted to smaller, highest-risk populations and ECI can be highly efficient; however, major reductions in incidence will only be achieved by also targeting larger, moderate-risk populations. Ultimately, to eliminate TB in the United States, a combination of these approaches will be necessary.

Tuberculosis Incidence Among Populations at High Risk in California, Florida, New York, and Texas, 2011-2015.

OBJECTIVES: To illustrate the magnitude of between-state heterogeneities in tuberculosis (TB) incidence among US populations at high risk for TB that may help guide state-specific strategies for TB elimination. METHODS: We used data from the National Tuberculosis Surveillance System and other public sources from 2011 to 2015 to calculate TB incidence in every US state among people who were non-US-born, had diabetes, or were HIV-positive, homeless, or incarcerated. We then estimated the proportion of TB cases that reflected the difference between each state's reported risk factor-specific TB incidence and the lowest incidence achieved among 4 states (California, Florida, New York, Texas). We reported these differences for the 4 states and also calculated and aggregated across all 50 states to quantify the total percentage of TB cases nationally that reflected between-state differences in risk factor-specific TB incidence. RESULTS: On average, 24% of recent TB incidence among high-risk US populations reflected heterogeneity at the state level. The populations that accounted for the greatest percentage of heterogeneity-reflective cases were non-US-born individuals (51%) and patients with diabetes (24%). CONCLUSIONS: State-level differences in TB incidence among key populations provide clues for targeting state-level interventions.

Intraseason waning of influenza vaccine protection: Evidence from the US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network, 2011-12 through 2014-15.

Background: Recent studies suggest that influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) may wane over the course of an influenza season, leading to suboptimal VE during late influenza seasons. Methods: We examined the association between influenza VE and time since vaccination among patients ≥9 years old with medically-attended acute respiratory illness in the US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network using data pooled from the 2011-12 through 2014-15 influenza seasons. We used multivariate logistic regression with PCR-confirmed influenza infection as the outcome and vaccination status defined by days between vaccination and symptom onset as the predictor. Models were adjusted for calendar time and other potential confounding factors. Results: We observed decreasing VE with increasing time since vaccination for influenza A(H3N2) (p=0.004), influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (p=0.01), and influenza B viruses (p=0.04). Maximum VE was observed shortly after vaccination, followed by a decline in VE of about 7% (absolute) per month for influenza A(H3N2) and influenza B and 6% - 11% per month for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses. VE remained greater than zero for at least six months for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza B and at least five months for influenza A(H3N2) viruses. Decline in VE was more pronounced among patients with prior season influenza vaccination. A similar pattern of increasing influenza risk with increasing time since vaccination was seen in analyses limited to vaccinees. Conclusions: We observed decreasing influenza vaccine protection with increasing time since vaccination across influenza types/subtypes. This association is consistent with intraseason waning of host immunity, but bias or residual confounding could explain these findings.

Developing a sleep apnoea clinic for prisoners.

People in prison may experience barriers in accessing health services. By exploring some of these barriers and how they have been overcome, this article describes how prisoners were made aware of obstructive sleep apnoea and the associated risks, and how a clinic was set up in a prison healthcare centre. It shows how access to a community service was made available to the prisoners, and details how the service was set up, how it operates and what the outcomes achieved.

Severity of influenza and noninfluenza acute respiratory illness among pregnant women, 2010-2012.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to identify characteristics of influenza illness contrasted with noninfluenza acute respiratory illness (ARI) in pregnant women. STUDY DESIGN: ARI among pregnant women was identified through daily surveillance during 2 influenza seasons (2010-2012). Within 8 days of illness onset, nasopharyngeal swabs were collected, and an interview was conducted for symptoms and other characteristics. A follow-up telephone interview was conducted 1-2 weeks later, and medical records were extracted. Severity of illness was evaluated by self-assessment of 12 illness symptoms, subjective ratings of overall impairment, highest reported temperature, illness duration, and medical utilization. RESULTS: Of 292 pregnant women with ARI, 100 tested positive for influenza viruses. Women with influenza illnesses reported higher symptom severity than those with noninfluenza ARI (median score, 18 vs 16 of 36; P < .05) and were more likely to report severe subjective feverishness (18% vs 5%; P < .001), myalgia (28% vs 14%; P < .005), cough (46% vs 30%; P < .01), and chills (25% vs 13%; P < .01). More influenza illnesses were associated with fever greater than 38.9°C (20% vs 5%; P < .001) and higher subjective impairment (mean score, 5.9 vs 4.8; P < .001). Differences in overall symptom severity, fever, cough, chills, early health care-seeking behavior, and impairment remained significant in multivariate models after adjusting for study site, season, age, vaccination status, and number of days since illness onset. CONCLUSION: Influenza had a greater negative impact on pregnant women than noninfluenza ARIs, as indicated by symptom severity and greater likelihood of elevated temperature. These results highlight the importance of preventing and treating influenza illnesses in pregnant women.

Antibody response to influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 among healthcare personnel receiving trivalent inactivated vaccine: effect of prior monovalent inactivated vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on the immunogenicity of repeated annual doses of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-containing vaccines. METHODS: We enrolled healthcare personnel (HCP) in direct patient care during the autumn of 2010 at 2 centers with voluntary immunization. We verified the receipt of A(H1N1)pdm09-containing monovalent inactivated influenza vaccine (MIIV) and 2010-2011 trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV). We performed hemagglutination inhibition antibody (HI) assays on preseason, post-TIV, and end-of-season serum samples. We compared the proportion of HCPs with HI titer ≥ 40 against A(H1N1)pdm09 per receipt of prior-season MIIV, current-season TIV, both, or neither. RESULTS: At preseason (n = 1417), HI ≥ 40 was significantly higher among those who received MIIV (34%) vs those who did not (14%) (adjusted relative risk [ARR], 3.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.72-3.81). At post-TIV (n = 865), HI ≥ 40 was lower among HCP who received MIIV and TIV (66%) than among those receiving only TIV (85%) (ARR, 0.93 [95% CI, .84-.997]). At end-of-season (n = 1254), HI ≥ 40 was 40% among those who received both MIIV and TIV and 67% among those receiving only TIV (ARR, 0.76 [95% CI, .65-.88]), 52% among those who received MIIV only, and 12% among those receiving neither. CONCLUSIONS: HCP immunization programs should consider effects of host immune response and vaccine antigenic distance on immunogenicity of repeated annual doses of influenza vaccines.

Effectiveness of seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine for preventing influenza virus illness among pregnant women: a population-based case-control study during the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 influenza seasons.

BACKGROUND: Although vaccination with trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) is recommended for all pregnant women, no vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies of TIV in pregnant women have assessed laboratory-confirmed influenza outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study over 2 influenza seasons (2010-2011 and 2011-2012) among Kaiser Permanente health plan members in 2 metropolitan areas in California and Oregon. We compared the proportion vaccinated among 100 influenza cases (confirmed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) with the proportions vaccinated among 192 controls with acute respiratory illness (ARI) who tested negative for influenza and 200 controls without ARI (matched by season, site, and trimester). RESULTS: Among influenza cases, 42% were vaccinated during the study season compared to 58% and 63% vaccinated among influenza-negative controls and matched ARI-negative controls, respectively. The adjusted VE of the current season vaccine against influenza A and B was 44% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5%-67%) using the influenza-negative controls and 53% (95% CI, 24%-72%) using the ARI-negative controls. Receipt of the prior season's vaccine, however, had an effect similar to receipt of the current season's vaccine. As such, vaccination in either or both seasons had statistically similar adjusted VE using influenza-negative controls (VE point estimates range = 51%-76%) and ARI-negative controls (48%-76%). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination reduced the risk of ARI associated with laboratory-confirmed influenza among pregnant women by about one-half, similar to VE observed among all adults during these seasons.

Consistency of influenza A virus detection test results across respiratory specimen collection methods using real-time reverse transcription-PCR.

In our prospective cohort study, we compared the performance of nasopharyngeal, oropharyngeal, and nasal swabs for the detection of influenza virus using real-time reverse transcription-PCR assay. Joint consideration of results from oropharyngeal and nasal swabs was as effective as consideration of results from nasopharyngeal swabs alone, as measured by sensitivity and noninferiority analysis.

Accuracy of COVID-19-Like Illness Diagnoses in Electronic Health Record Data: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health record (EHR) data provide a unique opportunity to study the epidemiology of COVID-19, clinical outcomes of the infection, comparative effectiveness of therapies, and vaccine effectiveness but require a well-defined computable phenotype of COVID-19-like illness (CLI). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of pathogen-specific and other acute respiratory illness (ARI) International Statistical Classification of Diseases-9 and -10 codes in identifying COVID-19 cases in emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) and inpatient settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using EHR, claims, and laboratory information system data of ED or UC and inpatient encounters from 4 health systems in the United States. Patients who were aged ≥18 years, had an ED or UC or inpatient encounter for an ARI, and underwent a SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021, were included. We evaluated various CLI definitions using combinations of International Statistical Classification of Diseases-10 codes as follows: COVID-19-specific codes; CLI definition used in VISION network studies; ARI signs, symptoms, and diagnosis codes only; signs and symptoms of ARI only; and random forest model definitions. We evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each CLI definition using a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test as the reference standard. We evaluated the performance of each CLI definition for distinct hospitalization and ED or UC cohorts. RESULTS: Among 90,952 hospitalizations and 137,067 ED or UC visits, 5627 (6.19%) and 9866 (7.20%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. COVID-19-specific codes had high sensitivity (91.6%) and specificity (99.6%) in identifying patients with SARS-CoV-2 positivity among hospitalized patients. The VISION CLI definition maintained high sensitivity (95.8%) but lowered specificity (45.5%). By contrast, signs and symptoms of ARI had low sensitivity and positive predictive value (28.9% and 11.8%, respectively) but higher specificity and negative predictive value (85.3% and 94.7%, respectively). ARI diagnoses, signs, and symptoms alone had low predictive performance. All CLI definitions had lower sensitivity for ED or UC encounters. Random forest approaches identified distinct CLI definitions with high performance for hospital encounters and moderate performance for ED or UC encounters. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19-specific codes have high sensitivity and specificity in identifying adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Separate combinations of COVID-19-specific codes and ARI codes enhance the utility of CLI definitions in studies using EHR data in hospital and ED or UC settings.

Developing a sampling methodology for timely reporting of population-based COVID-19-associated hospitalization surveillance in the United States, COVID-NET 2020-2021.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) required a sampling methodology that allowed for production of timely population-based clinical estimates to inform the ongoing US COVID-19 pandemic response. METHODS: We developed a flexible sampling approach that considered reporting delays, differential hospitalized case burden across surveillance sites, and changing geographic and demographic trends over time. We incorporated weighting methods to adjust for the probability of selection and non-response, and to calibrate the sampled case distribution to the population distribution on demographics. We additionally developed procedures for variance estimation. RESULTS: Between March 2020 and June 2021, 19,293 (10.4%) of all adult hospitalized cases were sampled for chart abstraction. Variance estimates for select variables of interest were within desired ranges. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-NET's sampling methodology allowed for reporting of robust and timely, population-based data on the clinical epidemiology of COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and evolving trends over time, while attempting to reduce data collection burden on surveillance sites. Such methods may provide a general framework for other surveillance systems needing to quickly and efficiently collect and disseminate data for public health action.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines at preventing emergency department or urgent care encounters and hospitalizations among immunocompromised adults: An observational study of real-world data across 10 US states from August-December 2021.

BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised (IC) persons are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes and are less protected by 1-2 COVID-19 vaccine doses than are immunocompetent (non-IC) persons. We compared vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended COVID-19 of 2-3 mRNA and 1-2 viral-vector vaccine doses between IC and non-IC adults. METHODS: Using a test-negative design among eight VISION Network sites, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) events and hospitalizations from 26 August-25 December 2021 was estimated separately among IC and non-IC adults and among specific IC condition subgroups. Vaccination status was defined using number and timing of doses. VE for each status (versus unvaccinated) was adjusted for age, geography, time, prior positive test result, and local SARS-CoV-2 circulation. RESULTS: We analyzed 8,848 ED/UC events and 18,843 hospitalizations among IC patients and 200,071 ED/UC events and 70,882 hospitalizations among non-IC patients. Among IC patients, 3-dose mRNA VE against ED/UC (73% [95% CI: 64-80]) and hospitalization (81% [95% CI: 76-86]) was lower than that among non-IC patients (ED/UC: 94% [95% CI: 93-94]; hospitalization: 96% [95% CI: 95-97]). Similar patterns were observed for viral-vector vaccines. Transplant recipients had lower VE than other IC subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: During B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance, IC adults received moderate protection against COVID-19-associated medical events from three mRNA doses, or one viral-vector dose plus a second dose of any product. However, protection was lower in IC versus non-IC patients, especially among transplant recipients, underscoring the need for additional protection among IC adults.