Construction and use of a risk stratification instrument for vaccination of elderly against Covid-19 / Construção e utilização de instrumento de estratificação de risco para vacinação de idosos contra a Covid-19 / Construcción y uso de un instrumento de estratificación de riesgo para la vacunación del anciano contra el Covid- 19

Objetivo: Relatar a experiência da construção e utilização de um instrumento de estratificação de risco para vacinação de idosos contra a COVID-19. Métodos: Relato da experiência desenvolvida no município de Massapê ­ Ceará, durante o ano de 2021, a partir do início da campanha de vacinação de idosos contra a COVID-19. Descrição da Experiência: Por conta da escassez de imunobiológicos, na fase inicial da vacinação contra a COVID-19, a Secretaria da Saúde do município de Massapê, estado do Ceará, criou um instrumento para estratificação de riscos sanitários, epidemiológicos e sociais dos idosos, contendo seus dados sociodemográficos e as comorbidades. Após o estabelecimento das variáveis, foram estabelecidos escores para os estratos de risco, que foram classificados em baixo (um a três pontos), médio (quatro a seis pontos), alto (sete a nove pontos) e muito alto (dez pontos e mais). Considerações Finais: O estudo mostra que, apesar da pandemia de COVID-19, uma crise sanitária global sem precedentes como já dito, ações pontuais, mesmo que localizadas, podem ter efeito em cadeia e ser replicadas em outros cenários e momentos.

Objective: To report the experience of building and using a risk stratification instrument for vaccinating the elderly against COVID-19. Methods: Report of the experience developed in the municipality of Massapê - Ceará, during the year 2021, from the beginning of the vaccination campaign for the elderly against COVID-19. Experience Description: Due to the scarcity of immunobiologicals, in the initial phase of vaccination against COVID-19, the Department of Health of the municipality of Massapê, state of Ceará, created an instrument to stratify the health, epidemiological and social risks of the elderly, containing sociodemographic data and comorbidities of the elderly. After establishing the variables, scores were established for the risk strata, which were classified as low (one to three points), medium (four to six points), high (seven to nine points) and very high (ten points and more). Final Considerations: The study shows that, despite the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented global health crisis as already mentioned, specific actions, even if localized, can have a chain effect and be replicated in other scenarios and times.

Objetivo: Relatar la experiencia de construcción y uso de un instrumento de estratificación de riesgo para la vacunación de ancianos contra la COVID-19. Métodos: Informe de la experiencia desarrollada en el municipio de Massapê - Ceará, durante el año 2021, desde el inicio de la campaña de vacunación de ancianos contra la COVID-19. Descripción de la Experiencia: Debido a la escasez de inmunobiológicos, en la fase inicial de la vacunación contra la COVID-19, la Secretaría de Salud del municipio de Massapê, estado de Ceará, creó un instrumento para estratificar los riesgos sanitarios, epidemiológicos y sociales de los ancianos, que contiene datos sociodemográficos y comorbilidades de los ancianos. Luego de establecer las variables, se establecieron puntajes para los estratos de riesgo, los cuales se clasificaron en bajo (uno a tres puntos), medio (cuatro a seis puntos), alto (siete a nueve puntos) y muy alto (diez puntos y más). Consideraciones finales: El estudio muestra que, a pesar de la pandemia de COVID-19, una crisis sanitaria mundial sin precedentes como ya se mencionó, las acciones específicas, aunque sean localizadas, pueden tener un efecto en cadena y replicarse en otros escenarios y tiempos.

Retrospective study of the effect of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in seriously ill patients admitted to an intensive care unit. / Estudio retrospectivo del efecto de la vacunación frente al SARS-CoV-2 en enfermos graves que ingresan en una unidad de cuidados intensivos.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to compare the clinical and epidemiological characteristics, length of stay in the ICU, and mortality rates of COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU who are fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, or unvaccinated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study (March 2020-March 2022). Patients were classified into unvaccinated, fully vaccinated, and partially vaccinated groups. We initially performed a descriptive analysis of the sample, a multivariable survival analysis adjusting for a Cox regression model, and a 90-day survival analysis using the Kaplan-Meier method for the death time variable. RESULTS: A total of 894 patients were analyzed: 179 with full vaccination, 32 with incomplete vaccination, and 683 were unvaccinated. Vaccinated patients had a lower incidence (10% vs. 21% and 18%) of severe ARDS. The survival curve did not show any differences in the probability of surviving for 90 days among the studied groups (p = 0.898). In the Cox regression analysis, only the need for mechanical ventilation during admission and the value of LDH (per unit of measurement) in the first 24 hours of admission were significantly associated with mortality at 90 days (HR: 5.78; 95% CI: 1.36-24.48); p = 0.01 and HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 1.00-1.02; p = 0.03, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 disease who are vaccinated against COVID-19 have a lower incidence of severe ARDS and mechanical ventilation than unvaccinated patients.

Case-fatality rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the third and fifth epidemic waves in Spain: Impact of vaccination.

INTRODUCTION: During the first and second epidemic waves in Spain, the SARS-CoV-2 case-fatality rates (CFRs) showed significant differences between Autonomous Communities (ACs). Comparing CFRs in the third and fifth epidemic waves can provide information on the impact of the different vaccination coverages in the ACs. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of vaccination on COVID-19 CFRs in the third and fifth epidemic waves in Spain, according to sex, age, and AC. METHODS: This work is an observational, descriptive study which uses data on COVID-19 infections, deaths, and vaccinees published by the Spanish Ministry of Health and the regional Health Departments of the ACs. The third epidemic wave was defined as the period from 26th December 2020 to 19th April 2021, and the fifth wave, from 19th July to 19th September 2021. The CFRs (deaths per 1000 infected [‰]) were calculated according to sex, age group, and AC. The standardized case-fatality ratio (SCFR) was adjusted for age and sex for each wave. We estimated the correlation between CFRs and their change between the two epidemic waves with the vaccination coverages reached at the beginning of the fifth wave. RESULTS: The CFR in the fifth wave (5.7‰) was lower than in the third wave (16.5‰). In addition, the CFR in both waves was significantly higher in men than in women, and in older people than in younger ones. A decrease in the CFR between both waves was only observed in those older than 49. A strong direct and positive correlation (R2a=0.8399) was found between vaccination coverage by age group and decrease in CFR between both epidemic waves. Significant differences were seen between ACs in the two waves, as regards both CFRs and SCFRs. When comparing ACs, a direct correlation was observed between vaccination coverage and CFRs in the fifth wave, and also - although weak - between vaccination coverage and decrease in CFR between both waves. CONCLUSION: The CFR significantly decreased in Spain between the third and the fifth epidemic waves in population aged 50 or older, probably due to the high vaccination coverage in that age group. Differences were observed between CFRs and SCFRs between ACs that are not explained by the differences in vaccination coverage, suggesting the need for further research and evaluation.

For the return of high vaccination coverage / Pela reconquista das altas coberturas vacinais / Para la recuperación de altas coberturas de vacunación

O declínio global das coberturas vacinais levou a Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS), em 2019, a definir a hesitação vacinal como uma das dez maiores ameaças mundiais à saúde pública. No Brasil, a queda da cobertura vacinal teve início em 2012, acentuando-se a partir de 2016, e sendo agravada pela pandemia de COVID-19. O alerta da baixa cobertura vacinal vem acompanhado pela reintrodução de doenças imunopreveníveis como o sarampo. O retorno de doenças até então eliminadas, como a poliomielite, pode agravar a crise sanitária ainda em curso. Mesmo sendo reconhecido como um dos mais efetivos programas de imunizações do mundo e dos esforços permanentes, o Programa Nacional de Imunizações enfrenta um cenário extremamente adverso no que tange às coberturas vacinais. Este artigo descreve o Projeto pela Reconquista das Altas Coberturas Vacinais (PRCV) e a estratégia de trabalhar na ponta do sistema, executada nos territórios, que vem sendo implementada desde 2021 e já começa a apresentar resultados promissores. O PRCV foi organizado em três eixos temáticos com atuação compartilhada e ações específicas, a saber: vacinação; sistemas de informação; comunicação e educação. Os resultados já alcançados permitem afirmar que é possível conseguir a reversão das baixas coberturas vacinais, a partir da articulação de ações estruturais e interinstitucionais, com o fortalecimento das políticas públicas e desenvolvimento de medidas de curto, médio e longo prazos. Os fatores mais potentes do PRCV são sua abordagem junto aos profissionais da ponta, o pacto social pela vacinação, e a estruturação de redes locais de apoio às imunizações.

The global decline in vaccine coverage led the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2019 to define vaccine hesitation as one of the world's top ten threats to public health. In Brazil, the drop in vaccination coverage began in 2012, increasing from 2016, and was aggravated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The warning of low vaccination coverage is accompanied by the reintroduction of immunopreventable diseases such as measles. The return of diseases so far eradicated, such as polio, can aggravate the ongoing health crisis. Despite the Brazilian National Immunization Program being recognized as one of the most effective worldwide and its continuous efforts, it is facing an extremely challenging scenario regarding immunization coverage. This article describes the Project for the Regaining of the High Vaccination Coverage (PRCV) and the strategy of working at the frontline, conducted in the local level, which has been implemented since 2021 and is already starting to show promising results. The PRCV was organized in three thematic axes with shared and specific actions, including: vaccination; information systems; communication and education. The outcomes achieved allow us to affirm that it is possible to reverse the low vaccination coverage, based on the articulation of structural and interinstitutional actions, with the strengthening of public policies and development of short-, medium-, and long-term measures. The most powerful factors of the PRCV are its approach to frontline professionals, the social pact for vaccination, and the establishment of local support networks for vaccinations.

La disminución global de las coberturas de vacunación llevó a la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS), en 2019, a definir la vacilación de la vacunación como una de las diez mayores amenazas para la salud pública en el mundo. En Brasil, la caída de la cobertura de vacunación comenzó en 2012, se acentuó a partir de 2016 y se vio agravada por la pandemia de COVID-19. La alerta de baja cobertura vacunal va acompañada de la reintroducción de enfermedades prevenibles por vacunación como el sarampión. El regreso de enfermedades hasta ahora eliminadas, como la poliomielitis, puede agravar la crisis sanitaria aún en curso. A pesar de ser reconocido como uno de los programas de inmunización más efectivos del mundo y de los esfuerzos permanentes, el Programa Nacional de Inmunización enfrenta un escenario extremadamente adverso en lo que se refiere a las coberturas vacunales. Este artículo describe el Proyecto por la Reconquista de las Altas Coberturas Vacunales (PRCV) y la estrategia de trabajo al final del sistema, ejecutada en los territorios, que se implementa desde 2021 y ya comienza a mostrar resultados prometedores. El PRCV fue organizado en tres ejes temáticos con actuación compartida y acciones específicas, a saber: vacunación; sistemas de Información; comunicación y educación. Los resultados ya alcanzados permiten afirmar que es posible lograr la reversión de las bajas coberturas vacunales, a partir de la articulación de acciones estructurales e interinstitucionales, con el fortalecimiento de las políticas públicas y desarrollo de medidas de corto, mediano y largo plazo. Los factores más potentes del PRCV son su abordaje junto a los profesionales de la punta, el pacto social por la vacunación, y la estructuración de redes locales de apoyo a las inmunizaciones.

Retinal vein occlusion in the general population after COVID-19 vaccination and infection.

INTRODUCTION: Retinal vein occlusion (RVO) is mostly a consequence of vascular risk factors (VRF). COVID-19 vaccines have been related to vascular and thrombotic events (VTE). OBJECTIVE: To assess the RVO incidence in the general population in our health area and the possible relation with COVID-19 infection and vaccination. METHODS: Demographic features, classic VRF, thrombophilia data, COVID-19 status, and Framingham risk score were collected prospectively. RESULTS: 472 consecutive patients studied over 13 years with RVO were included (Valdecilla Cohort). Classic VRFs were present in 90%, antiphospholipid syndrome in 12.3%, and genetic thrombophilia in 13.5%. Ninety-one percent of RVO patients were vaccinated and 6.8% suffered COVID-19 infection. In the cohort, no patient had a new RVO after vaccination or infection. In the general population, 20 subjects had RVO after receiving the vaccine (0.006%). Overall, 8 cases occurred in the first-month post-vaccination and 12 after 30 days. In the early and late groups, there are 3 and 4 patients respectively, with a low-intermediate risk Framingham score. Twenty-nine patients in the cohort suffered SARS-CoV-2 infection, twenty-seven of them had RVO before infection. Two patients with low-risk Framingham scores had RVO after infection, one of them early (<1 month). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination and COVID-19 might be involved in the development of RVO in some cases, mainly in patients without VRF, thrombophilia, or chronic inflammatory conditions and with a lower Framingham score, especially in the first month after vaccination or infection.

Differences in elderly stress levels before Covid-19 vaccination: History of exposure to Covid-19 reduces stress before vaccination

Background The Covid-19 pandemic requires the government to take various prevention and countermeasures, one of which is the Covid-19 Vaccination program, however, the program experiences a high dropout at various doses and causes immunization stress related response (ISRR), especially in the elderly. The research aims to determine differences in the stress levels of the elderly before the covid-19 vaccination. Methods Descriptive study with the elderly population who will take vaccinations at the Bojong Purbalingga Health Center. Sampling used random sampling, the inclusion criteria were 45–79 years old, with a total sample of 90 respondents. Research instruments developed by research, relating to vaccination containing cognitive responses (such as difficulty concentrating), physiological responses (such as shortness of breath, dry lips) feelings of fear, anxiety, trust in vaccination. Data were analyzed descriptively with percentages and proportions. Results The results showed that the most moderate stress levels were middle age (22.2%), women 33.3% had higher stress levels than men (10%), the highest vaccination coverage was 26.7% at a distance of 1–2 KM. The level of stress is in the moderate category 33.3% in the elderly who have never been exposed to Covid-19 and 10% in the elderly who have been exposed. Non-family health workers, 36.7% higher than families of health workers (6.7%). Conclusion Stress levels before vaccination are higher in the elderly who have never been exposed to Covid-19, compared to those who have been exposed to Covid-19. The need for family assistance to prepare for vaccination in the elderly. Resumen Antecedentes La pandemia de Covid-19 requiere que el gobierno tome varias medidas de prevención y contramedidas, una de las cuales es el programa de vacunación de Covid-19, sin embargo, el programa experimenta una alta deserción en varias dosis y provoca una respuesta relacionada con el estrés de la inmunización, especialmente en el anciano. Die Forschung zielt darauf ab, Unterschiede im Stresslevel älterer Menschen vor der Covid-19-Impfung festzustellen. Métodos Estudio descriptivo con la población adulta mayor que se vacunará en el Centro de Salud de Bojong Purbalingga. El muestreo utilizó un muestreo aleatorizado, los criterios de inclusión fueron de 45 a 79 años, con una muestra total de 90 encuestados. Instrumentos de investigación desarrollados por la investigación, relacionados con la vacunación que contienen respuestas cognitivas (como dificultad para concentrarse), respuestas fisiológicas (como dificultad para respirar, labios secos) sentimientos de miedo, ansiedad, confianza en la vacunación. Los datos fueron analizados descriptivamente con porcentajes y proporciones. Resultados Los resultados mostraron que los niveles de estrés más moderados fueron la mediana edad (22,2%), las mujeres 33,3% presentaron niveles de estrés más altos que los hombres (10%), la mayor cobertura de vacunación fue 26,7% a una distancia de 1–2 KM. El nivel de estrés está en la categoría moderado 33,3% en ancianos que nunca han estado expuestos al Covid-19 y 10% en ancianos que han estado expuestos. Trabajadores de la salud no familiares, 36,7% superior a los familiares de los trabajadores de la salud (6,7%). Conclusión Los niveles de estrés antes de la vacunación son mayores en los adultos mayores que nunca han estado expuestos a Covid-19, en comparación con aquellos que han estado expuestos a Covid-19. La necesidad de asistencia familiar para preparar la vacunación en los ancianos.

Active medical recommendation is the best tool for increasing influenza vaccine coverage in healthy adult workers

Introduction In Spain, influenza vaccination is available in companies free of charge for their workers. Despite this, vaccination coverage against influenza is very low in these groups. Objectives The aim of this work is to know the reasons for acceptance of influenza vaccination in a working population. Methods During the 2021–2022 influenza vaccination campaign, we conducted a survey of two groups of workers at the automobile factories of RENAULT ESPAÑA S.A. in the cities of Valladolid and Palencia (Spain). The first group (NV) was formed by 304 (33.5%) workers who did not receive the influenza vaccine in the previous season. The second (V) was formed by 604 workers (66.5%) who had been vaccinated against influenza at least the previous season. In the NV group, they were asked the reasons why they did not get vaccinated the previous season and if they did so in 2021–2022. In group V, only the reasons for continuing to be vaccinated were asked. Results In NV, the main reason for avoiding vaccination in the previous season was the lack of perception of the severity of the influenza infection (74.7%), and 31.6% and 29.0% of them decided to get vaccinated during the 2021–2022 season due to the fear of co-infection of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza and medical recommendations respectively. The 83.5% of group V responded that the reason for getting vaccinated in 2021–2022 was their adherence to vaccination. Conclusions The results show that medical recommendation is the best tool to vaccinate workers against influenza and make them adhere to it. Also, the fear to co-infection of COVID-19 and flu was a frequent reason for getting vaccinated, above all in NV. Resumen Introducción En España la vacunación antigripal está disponible en las empresas de manera gratuita para sus trabajadores. A pesar de esto, las coberturas vacunales frente a la gripe son muy bajas en estos grupos. Objetivos El objetivo es conocer los motivos de aceptación de la vacunación antigripal en la población trabajadora. Métodos Durante la campaña de vacunación de gripe 2021–2022 realizamos una encuesta a dos grupos de trabajadores de las factorías automovilísticas de RENAULT ESPAÑA S.A. en las ciudades de Valladolid y Palencia. El primer grupo (NV) estuvo formado por 304 (33,5%) trabajadores que no recibieron la vacuna antigripal la temporada anterior. El segundo (V) estaba formado por 604 trabajadores (66,5%) que habían sido vacunados contra la gripe al menos la temporada anterior. En el grupo NV se les preguntó las razones de porque no se vacunaron la temporada anterior y si lo hicieron en 2021–2022. En el grupo V se preguntó únicamente las razones para seguirse vacunando. Resultados En NV, la principal razón para evitar la vacunación en la temporada anterior fue la falta de percepción de la gravedad de la gripe (74,7%), y el 31,6% y 29,0% de ellos decidió vacunarse durante la temporada 2021–2022 por el miedo a la co-infección del SARS-Cov-2 y gripe y a las recomendaciones médicas respectivamente. El 83,5% del grupo V respondió que el motivo de vacunarse en el 2021–2022 fue su adherencia a la vacunación. Conclusiones Los resultados muestran que la recomendación médica es la mejor herramienta para vacunar frente a la gripe a los trabajadores y hacerles adherentes a la misma. También, el miedo a la co-infección de COVID-19 y gripe fue una de las razones más frecuentes para vacunarse, sobre todo en NV.

SARS-COV-2 antibodies after booster vaccination. Identification of subgroups with poor response.

OBJECTIVE: To determine which patients within the high-risk group are most likely to have insufficient post-vaccination immunity. METHODS: Determination of IgG titers against SARS-CoV-2 after the booster dose. Vaccine response was categorized as negative (IgG titers < 34 BAU/ml), indeterminate (titers 34-259 BAU/ml) or positive (≥260 BAU/ml). RESULTS: 765 patients were included (31.25% of those vaccinated). 54 (7.1%) on treatment with biologics, 90 (11.8%) with hematologic disease, 299 (39.1%) with oncologic pathology, 304 (39.7%) with solid organ transplant and 18 (2.4%) with immunosuppression for other reasons. 74 patients (9.7%) had negative serology and 45 (5.9%) had indeterminate titers. By diagnostic group, the patients with the highest proportion of negative or indeterminate serology were patients with biologic treatment (55.6%, mainly at expense of antiCD20), hematologic (35.4%) and transplant patients (17.8%, mainly lung and kidney). Oncology and other immunosuppressed patients had a favorable response to vaccination. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with antiCD20 drugs, hematologic patients and transplanted patients (mainly lung and kidney) have a higher risk of not achieving post-vaccination immunity. It is essential to identify them in order to individualize and optimize their management.

Immunogenicity, effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccine in older adults living in nursing homes: A real-life study.

INTRODUCTION: BNT162b2 (BioNTech and Pfizer) is a nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine that provides protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and is generally well tolerated. However, data about its efficacy, immunogenicity and safety in people of old age or with underlying chronic conditions are scarce. PURPOSE: To describe BNT162b2 (BioNTech and Pfizer) COVID-19 vaccine immunogenicity, effectiveness and reactogenicity after complete vaccination (two doses), and immunogenicity and reactogenicity after one booster, in elders residing in nursing homes (NH) and healthy NH workers in real-life conditions. METHODS: Observational, ambispective, multicenter study. Older adults and health workers were recruited from three nursing homes of a private hospital corporation located in three Spanish cities. The primary vaccination was carried out between January and March 2021. The follow-up was 13 months. Humoral immunity, adverse events, SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalizations and deaths were evaluated. Cellular immunity was assessed in a participant subset. RESULTS: A total of 181 residents (mean age 84.1 years; 89.9% females, Charlson index ≥2: 45%) and 148 members of staff (mean age 45.2 years; 70.2% females) were surveyed (n:329). After primary vaccination of 327 participants, vaccine response in both groups was similar; ≈70% of participants, regardless of the group, had an antibody titer above the cut-off considered currently protective (260BAU/ml). This proportion increased significantly to ≈ 98% after the booster (p<0.0001 in both groups). Immunogenicity was largely determined by a prior history of COVID-19 infection. Twenty residents and 3 workers were tested for cellular immunity. There was evidence of cellular immunity after primary vaccination and after booster. During the study, one resident was hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2. No SARS-CoV-2-related deaths were reported and most adverse events were mild. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is immunogenic, effective and safe in elderly NH residents with underlying chronic conditions.

Remdesivir plus dexamethasone is associated to improve the clinical outcome of COVID-19 hospitalized patients regardless of their vaccination status.

INTRODUCTION: Remdesivir seems to reduce the risk of hospitalization and improve clinical outcome in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical outcome of COVID-19 hospitalized patients treated with remdesivir plus dexamethasone versus dexamethasone alone, according to their vaccination status. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study was carried out in 165 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from October 2021 to January 2022. Multivariate logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier and the log-rank tests were used to evaluate the event (need for ventilation or death). RESULTS: Patients treated with remdesivir plus dexamethasone (n=87) compared with dexamethasone alone (n=78) showed similar age (60±16, 47-70 vs. 62±37, 51-74 years) and number of comorbidities: 1 (0-2) versus 1.5 (1-3). Among 73 fully vaccinated patients, 42 (47.1%) were in remdesivir plus dexamethasone and 31 (41%) in dexamethasone alone. Patients treated with remdesivir plus dexamethasone needed intensive care less frequently (17.2% vs. 31%; p=0.002), high-flow oxygen (25.3% vs. 50.0%; p=0.002) and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (16.1% vs. 47.4%; p<0.001). Furthermore, they had less complications during hospitalization (31.0% vs. 52.6%; p=0.008), need of antibiotics (32.2% vs. 59%; p=0.001) and radiologic worsening (21.8% vs. 44.9%; p=0.005). Treatment with remdesivir plus dexamethasone (aHR, 0.26; 95% CI: 0.14-0.48; p<0.001) and vaccination (aHR 0.39; 95% CI: 0.21-0.74) were independent factors associated with lower progression to mechanical ventilation or death. CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir in combination with dexamethasone and vaccination independently and synergistically protects hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen therapy from progression to severe disease or dead.

Influenza vaccination in older adults in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: current situation and future perspectives / Vacinação contra influenza em idosos no contexto da pandemia da COVID-19: situação atual e perspectivas futuras / Vacunación antigripal en ancianos en el contexto de la pandemia COVID-19: situación actual y perspectivas de futuro

A vacinação anual contra influenza em idosos tem sido exitosa desde a sua implementação no Brasil, atingindo as metas de cobertura vacinal. Com o surgimento da COVID-19, observaram-se dois cenários. Em 2020, a cobertura vacinal contra influenza nos idosos atingiu 120,7%; e em 2021, com o advento da vacina contra a COVID-19 e a vacinação no mesmo período da campanha de influenza, a cobertura foi de 70,9% em idosos. Em 2022, a campanha contra esta doença também foi concomitante com a aplicação das doses de reforço contra a COVID-19. Até agosto de 2022, a cobertura vacinal da influenza foi 70,2% em idosos, apesar da sua relevância para a proteção contra o subtipo A (H3N2). O texto discute estratégias para o aumento da cobertura vacinal contra influenza em idosos nos próximos anos, visando ao fortalecimento da Atenção Primária à Saúde para a sensibilização dos idosos e a adoção de estratégias de vacinação extramuros.

Annual influenza vaccination in older adults has been successful since its implementation in Brazil, reaching vaccination coverage targets. With the emergence of COVID-19, two scenarios were observed. In 2020, influenza vaccination coverage in older adults reached 120.7%; and in 2021, with the advent of the vaccine against COVID-19 and vaccination in the same period of the influenza campaign, coverage was 70.9% in the older group. In 2022, the influenza campaign was also concomitant with the application of booster doses against COVID-19. Until August 2022, influenza vaccination coverage was 70.2% in older adults, despite its relevance for protection against subtype A (H3N2). The text discusses some strategies to increase influenza vaccination coverage in older adults in the next years, aiming to strengthen Primary Health Care to raise awareness among the older adults and adopt extramural vaccination strategies.

La vacunación anual contra la influenza en ancianos ha sido existosa desde su implementación en Brasil, alcanzando las metas de cobertura de vacunación. Con la aparición del COVID-19, fue posible observar dos escenarios. En 2020, la cobertura de vacunación contra la influenza en adultos mayores alcanzó el 120,7%; y en 2021, con el advenimiento de la vacuna contra la COVID-19 y la vacunación en el mismo período de la campaña de influenza, la cobertura fue del 70,9% en los adultos mayores. En 2022, la campaña de influenza también fue concomitante con la aplicación de dosis de refuerzo contra el COVID-19. Hasta agosto de 2022, la cobertura de vacunación contra la influenza era del 70,2% en adultos mayores, a pesar de su relevancia para la protección contra el subtipo A (H3N2). El texto discute algunas estrategias para aumentar la cobertura de vacunación antigripal en ancianos en los próximos años, con el objetivo de fortalecer la Atención Primaria de Salud para sensibilizar a los ancianos y adoptar estrategias de vacunación extramuros.

Role of vaccination and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the clinical outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Although vaccination has considerably reduced the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID19, the impact of vaccination and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody status on the outcome of patients who required hospitalization has been poorly investigated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective observational study in 232 patients hospitalized for COVID19 was carried out from October 2021 to January 2022 to evaluate the role on patient outcome of their vaccination and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody status and titer, comorbidities, analytical determinations, clinical presentation at admission, treatments and requirements for respiratory support. Cox regression and survival analyzes were performed. The SPSS and "R" programs were used. RESULTS: Patients with complete vaccination schedule had higher S-protein antibody titers (log10 3.73 [2.83-4.6]UI/ml vs 1.6 [2.99-2.61]UI/ml; p<0.001), lower probability of radiographic worsening (21.6% vs. 35.4%; p=0.005), less likely required high doses of dexamethasone (28.4% vs. 45.4%; p=0.012), high-flow oxygen (20.6% vs. 35.4%; p=0.02), ventilation (13.7% vs, 33.8%; p=0.001) and intensive care admissions (10.8% vs. 32.6%; p<0.001). Remdesivir (HR=0.38; p<0.001) and complete vaccination schedule (HR=0.34; p=0.008) were protective factors. No differences in antibody status were detected between groups (HR=0.58; p=0.219). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was associated with higher S-protein antibody titers and lower probability of radiological progression, immunomodulators requirement and respiratory support or death. However, vaccination but not antibody titters protected from adverse events pointing a role of immune-protective mechanisms in addition to humoral response.

COVID-19 vaccination rate and willingness of an additional dose among inflammatory bowel disease patients receiving biologic therapy: Fearless and with desire.

Effective vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 are already available and offer a promising action to control the COVID-19 pandemic. IBD patients on biological agents accept the vaccine as well as an additional dose if recommended. BACKGROUND: Vaccination against COVID-19 prevents its severe forms and associated mortality and offers a promising action to control this pandemic. In September 2021, an additional dose of vaccine was approved in patients with immunosuppression including IBD patients on biologic agents. We evaluated the vaccination rate and additional dose willingness in this group of at risk patients. METHODS: A single-center, cross-sectional study was performed among IBD patients on biologic agents and eligible for an additional dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. IBD clinical characteristics and type of vaccine and date of administration were checked in medical records. Acceptance was evaluated after telephone or face-to-face surveys in IBD patients. RESULTS: Out of a total of 344 patients, 269 patients (46.1% male; mean age 47±16 years; Crohn's disease 73.6%) were included. Only 15 (5.6%) patients refused the COVID-19 vaccine mainly (40%) for conviction (COVID-19 pandemic denial). 33.3% would re-consider after discussing with their doctor and/or receiving information on the adverse effects of the vaccine. Previous to the additional dose, the COVID-19 vaccination was present in 94.4% of patients (n=254). Adverse effects occurred in 53.9% of the cases, mainly pain in the arm (40%). Up to 94.1% of the patients agreed to an additional dose and 79.4% had already received the additional dose at the final time of the assessment. CONCLUSIONS: IBD patients on biological agents accept the vaccine as well as an additional dose if recommended. Physicians in charge of IBD units should provide information and confidence in the use of the vaccine in these IBD patients.

Transmisión del SARS-CoV-2 en escolares durante el primer trimestre del curso 2021/2022 en la provincia de Albacete: incidencia e impacto de las nuevas variantes.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to know the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic in the school setting, and the effect of the new variants on it. DESIGN: It is an observational longitudinal descriptive study during the first term of the academic year 21/22. SITE: Community health services. PARTICIPANTS: Preschool, elementary, secondary, and high school students. INTERVENTIONS: none. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: We calculated cumulative incidence stratified by grade, source of infection and follow-up period, percentage of vaccinated cases and correlation between cumulative incidence in schooled children per week and cumulative incidence in the general population. RESULTS: 1526 cases were reported, and the cumulative incidence was 3,17% and 0,48% in within-school acquired cases. 20,9% were vaccinated. During follow-up, there was an important change in incidence from weeks 49/21 on, at the time Omicron began to appear in Spain, with an increase in secondary cases, mostly high school students. We found a high correlation between general population and schooled children's cumulative incidence (R2 = 0,59). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 transmission in school settings has been affected by new circulating variants. Two propagation scenarios were identified, and they were like the community propagation pattern. This supports the hypothesis that school settings reflect the transmission in the community. Reinforcement of preventive measures and surveillance would have a positive effect on school settings.

The vaccine against COVID-19 and institutional trust. / La vacuna frente a la COVID-19 y la confianza institucional.

Major public and private laboratories have entered into a race to find an effective COVID-19 vaccine. When that vaccine arrives, the governments will have to implement vaccination programs to achieve the necessary immunization levels to prevent the disease transmission. In this context, the ethical dilemma of compulsory vaccination vs. voluntary vaccination will be raised. Underlying this dilemma, lies the problem of the ethical models on which the political decisions of governments in matters of health are based. The article proposes and argues the need to base health policy decisions on an ethical «first person¼ model, based on responsibility, that allows us to move from a normative ethic to an ethic of responsible behavior. This change in the ethical model, together with certain proposals for political action, will help us to restore institutional trust so that the necessary levels of collective immunity against COVID-19 can be achieved through the voluntary vaccination of the citizens.

Systemic lupus erythematosus myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination.

INTRODUCTION: Cases of acute myocarditis have been after administration of the BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. OBJECTIVE: Describe another possible mechanism of myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe the clinical case of a 72-year-old female with pleuritic chest pain one week after the third of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. Serological tests for cardiotropic pathogens were negative, and autoimmunity screening was positive with anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) in 1:160 dilution, Anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA), and anti-histone antibodies. 18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) showed a focal myocardial and pericardial inflammatory process in the cardiac apex. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) diagnosis was made with myocardial affection. As far as we know, this is the first report of a case of lupus myocarditis after the COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: Given the pathogenic rationales, the association between SLE and myocarditis should be considered.

The heart and SARS-CoV-2. / Corazón y SARS-CoV-2.

SARS-CoV-2 is currently causing a persistent COVID-19 pandemic, which poses a risk of causing long-term cardiovascular sequels in the population. The viral mechanism of cell infection through the angiotensin 2 converter enzyme receptor and the limited antiviral innate immune response are the suspected causes for a more frequent cardiovascular damage in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Knowledge of the appearance during acute infection of other cardiac conditions beyond the classical myocarditis and pericarditis, the long-term cardiac manifestations (persistent COVID-19), and the increased incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis after vaccination is of special interest in order to offer our patients best practices based on current scientific evidence.

Vacuna contra el SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) y enfermedad renal crónica

La literatura más reciente indica que la enfermedad renal crónica constituye la comorbilidad con mayor riesgo de desarrollar enfermedad grave por SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Muchas sociedades científicas se han posicionado a favor de la vacunación de los pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica como prioritaria, debido a esta alta vulnerabilidad. En España, la quinta actualización de la Estrategia de vacunación frente a COVID-19 del Consejo Interterritorial de Salud, incluyó a los pacientes con ERC dentro del grupo 7 (personas con condiciones de muy alto riesgo). A lo largo del artículo se describen los tipos de vacunas según mecanismo de acción, las vacunas actualmente aprobadas por la Agencia Europea del Medicamento (EMA) y todo lo relacionado con el proceso de vacunación (preparación, administración y seguimiento), además de los aspectos a tener en cuenta en los pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica.Alternate : The most recent evidence indicates that chronic kidney disease is the comorbidity with the highest risk of developing severe disease due to SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Many scientific societies have advocated for vaccination of patients with chronic kidney disease as a priority, due to this high vulnerability. In Spain, the fifth update of the COVID-19 vaccination strategy published by the Interterritorial Health Council included CKD patients in group 7 (people with very high-risk conditions). This manuscript describes the types of vaccines according to mechanism of action, the vaccines currently approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and information related to the vaccination process (preparation, administration and follow-up), as well as aspects to be taken into account in patients with CKD.

COVID-19 en receptores de trasplante renal: ¿qué hemos aprendido tras 18 meses de pandemia?

La infección por el SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) ha supuesto un importante impacto en la actividad trasplantadora en nuestro país. En su condición de paciente inmunodeprimido y con frecuentes comorbilidades, era esperable que la mortalidad y el riesgo de complicaciones asociadas a la COVID-19 en el receptor de trasplante renal (TR) fueran mayores en comparación con la población general, si bien la información al respecto en los primeros meses de la pandemia era muy limitada. Desde marzo de 2020 hemos mejorado rápidamente nuestro conocimiento acerca de la epidemiología, características clínicas y manejo de la COVID-19 post-trasplante. La presente revisión pretende recopilar la información disponible a julio de 2021 en respuesta a una serie de cuestiones relevantes: ¿cómo se manifiesta clínicamente la infección por SARS-CoV-2 en receptores de TR?, ¿cuáles son sus factores pronósticos?, ¿es más grave la COVID-19 en el contexto del TR respecto a los pacientes inmunocompetentes?, ¿de qué opciones de tratamiento antiviral disponemos actualmente para el receptor de TR?, ¿cuál es la experiencia disponible con los tratamientos inmunomoduladores? y, por último, ¿son eficaces las vacunas frente a la COVID-19 basadas en ARN mensajero en esta población?. A pesar de los avances realizados, aún son varios los aspectos que debemos mejorar en nuestro abordaje de la infección por SARS-CoV-2 en el ámbito específico del TR.Alternate : SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) has profoundly impacted transplant activity in our country. As immunocompromised hosts with common comorbidities, kidney transplant (KT) recipients were expected to have higher mortality and risk of complications associated to COVID-19 compared to the overall population. The available experience at the beginning of the pandemic, however, was very limited. Since March 2020 our knowledge on the epidemiology, clinical features and management of post-transplant COVID-19 has rapidly evolved. The present review is aimed at summarizing the information generated by July 2021 to answer a number of relevant questions: How does SARS-CoV-2 infection present in KT recipients? What are the prognostic factors? Does COVID-19 entail a worse prognosis in the setting of KT as compared to non-immunocompromised individuals? What are the antiviral agents currently available for KT recipients? What is the experience with the use of immunomodulatory therapies? And lastly, are mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines effective in this patient population? Despite notable advances achieved, we should still improve various aspects of our approach to SARS-CoV-2 infection in the specific setting of KT.

Needle-related Fear versus Vaccination Fear, Vaccination Intention, and Declared Reasons for Avoiding Vaccination

El objetivo de este estudio es analizar la relación entre el miedo a la aguja (MA) y el miedo a la vacunación (MV), la intención de vacunarse (IV) y los motivos más comúnmente alegados para evitarlo (MEV). Se pretende ampliar la información sobre el tema en un contexto de pandemia. Justo antes de iniciar el plan de vacunación. Se aplicó una encuesta transversal a una muestra (N = 2,175) de ciudadanos españoles adultos (37.60 ± 12.98 años), de ambos sexos (mujeres: 67.3%). Se realizó análisis descriptivo, correlacional y de regresión. Para el MV la prevalencia fue de 5.1%, siendo factores de riesgo ser mujer, entre 20 y 40 años y sin dependientes a cargo. La relación entre MA y MV, IV y MEV (excepto la relacionada con la eficacia de la vacuna) era escasa aunque significativa. Esta relación fue positiva con el MA y los MEV y negativa con el MV. Se comentan los resultados y se recomienda actuar sobre el MA para reducir el MV y los MEV y aumentar la IV. (Spanish) [ FROM AUTHOR]