Real-World Effectiveness of Four Types of COVID-19 Vaccines.

BACKGROUND: There is a scarcity of evidence regarding the real-world effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. This was the first study to evaluate the effectiveness of four types of vaccines against asymptomatic and symptomatic infection, and COVID-19 outcomes among the general population. METHODS: This was a matched comparison group quasi-experimental study conducted in Jordan between 1 January and 29 August 2021. In the first part of the study, 1200 fully vaccinated individuals were matched with 1200 unvaccinated control participants. In order to measure vaccine effectiveness, the infection rates of both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups were calculated. The second part of the study included measuring specific anti-SARS CoV-2 immune cells and antibodies. RESULTS: BNT162b2 (Pfizer, New York, NY, USA) showed a significantly higher effectiveness against asymptomatic COVID-19 infection (91.7%) and hospitalization (99.5%) than BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm, Beijing, China) (88.4% and 98.7%, respectively) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK) (84.3%, and 98.9%, respectively). The effectiveness rates of the Sputnik V (Gamaleya Research Institute, Moscow, Russia) vaccine against asymptomatic, symptomatic, and hospitalization were 100%, 100%, and 66.7%, respectively. The highest median anti-spike (S) IgG values were seen in individuals who received BNT162b2 (2.9 AU/mL) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (2.8 AU/mL) vaccines. The levels of anti-S IgG were significantly decreased after 7 months of vaccination with BNT162b2 and BBIBP-CorV. There were significant decreases in the median number of neutralizing antibodies one month and seven months after receiving BNT162b2 (from 88.5 to 75.2 4 Bioequivalent Allergen Unit per milliliter/mL), BBIBP-CorV (from 69.5 to 51.5 BAU/mL), and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (from 69.2 to 58.BAU/mL) vaccines. The highest percentage of T cells specific to COVID-19 vaccine was found in individuals who received BNT162b2 (88.5%). CONCLUSION: All four vaccines evaluated in this study showed effectiveness against asymptomatic COVID-19 infection, symptomatic infection, hospitalization, and death. Furthermore, BNT162b2, BBIBP-CorV, and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 induced high levels of immunology markers within one month of vaccination.

Active Safety Surveillance of Four Types of COVID-19 Vaccines: A National Study from Jordan.

BACKGROUND: Although the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19), Sinopharm (BBIBP-CorV), and Sputnik V coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have been granted emergency approval in many nations, their safety has never been studied and compared in one community-based study. This study aimed to investigate and compare the incidence, nature, severity, and predictors of adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) with COVID-19 vaccines. METHOD: This was a prospective observational study conducted in Jordan between 1 January and 21 September 2021. A team of pharmacists and nurses (n = 407) collected the local and systemic AEFIs of four COVID-19 vaccines by prospectively contacting participants registered in the national vaccination program platform. A red-flag technology was inserted to classify and track rare and serious AEFIs. RESULTS: This study included 658,428 participants who were vaccinated with 1,032,430 doses; 610,591, 279,606, 140,843, and 1390 participants received the first and second doses of the BNT162b2, BBIBP-CorV, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and Sputnik V vaccines, respectively. The overall incidence of AEFIs was 28.8%, and the overall rates of systemic, local, and immediate hypersensitivity AEFIs were 22.2%, 18.8%, and 0.5%, respectively. The highest proportions of immediate hypersensitivity AEFIs and systemic AEFIs were reported after administration of the Sputnik V vaccine and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 first dose, respectively. The most severe AEFIs were reported after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 first dose and BNT162b2 second dose. The hospitalization and mortality rates after vaccination were 20 in 10,000 and 1 in 10,000, respectively. Based on red-flag tracking, the top three outcome events were lymphadenopathy (157.9/100,000), anxiety disorders (136.6/100,000), and lower respiratory tract infection (100.9/100,000), with Guillain-Barré syndrome (1.8/100,000), vasculitis (3.0/100,000), and myopericarditis (4.8/100,000) being the least common. CONCLUSION: The incidence rates of local, systemic, and immediate hypersensitivity AEFIs of four COVID-19 vaccines occur frequently. High incidence rates of rare and serious AEFIs were reported in this study. Younger participants, females, those who had previously had COVID-19, and smokers were more likely to encounter AEFIs.

Pharmacists-physicians collaborative intervention to reduce vaccine hesitancy and resistance: A randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Given their negative influence on community health, vaccine hesitancy and resistance are emerging challenges that require healthcare intervention. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the impact of physician-pharmacist collaborative health coaching on rates of hesitancy and resistance for a COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: After an initial assessment of rates of hesitancy and resistance for a COVID-19 vaccine was conducted, hesitant and resistant participants were approached, recruited, and randomized into an active and control group. Pharmacists-physicians collaborative coaching intervention was delivered to active group subjects over two months through Facebook live sessions. The outcome measures were assessed in both groups before coaching, directly after coaching, and a month after coaching. RESULTS: The proportions of hesitancy and resistance for a COVID-19 vaccine among subjects in the active group were significantly reduced from 64.3% and 35.7% before coaching to 20.1% and 7.8% directly after coaching, respectively. These proportions were further reduced to 11.1% and 3.3% a month after coaching, respectively. Furthermore, the mean scores for knowledge on, and attitude towards COVID-19 vaccine were significantly increased from 4.6 ± 1.8 and 4.1 ± 1.7 before coaching to 7.5 ± 3.1 and 8.9 ± 3.8 directly after coaching, respectively. However, the change in mean score of beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines among active group subjects was not significant. CONCLUSION: High rates of hesitancy and resistance for a COVID-19 vaccine were found in Jordan. These rates can be significantly reduced through online pharmacists-physicians collaborative coaching, which can also improve knowledge of and attitude towards COVID-19 vaccines.

A three-phase population based sero-epidemiological study: Assessing the trend in prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 during COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan.

The evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan during the first 10 months of the epidemic was peculiar and can be easily categorized in three different phases: a first period featuring a very low number of reported cases, a second period with exponential growth from August with up to 8000 cases on the 18th November 2020, and a third phase with steady and progressive decline of the epidemiological curve. With the aim of better determine the entity of the population exposed to SARS-CoV-2, the Jordan Ministry of Health with the support of the WHO launched three rounds of the nationwide sero-prevalence survey. Using population proportionate to size (PPS) methodology, around 5000 individuals were selected from all Jordan governorates. Blood samples were collected from all participants and ELISA assays for total IgM, IgG antibodies to COVID-19 were used for testing at the National Public Health Laboratory. Results revealed that seroprevalence dramatically increased over time, with only a tiny fraction of seropositive individuals in August (0.3%), to increase up to more than 20-fold in October (7.0%) and to reach one-third of the overall population exposed by the end of 2020 (34.2%). While non age-specific trends were detected in infection rates across different age categories, in all three rounds of the seroprevalence study two out of three positive participants did not report any sign and/or symptom compatible with COVID-19. The serial cross-sectional surveys experience in Jordan allowed to gain additional insights of the epidemic over time in combination with context-specific aspects like adherence to public health and social measures (PHSM). On the other hand, such findings would be helpful for planning of public health mitigation measures like vaccinations and tailored restriction policies.

Knowledge of health care workers regarding COVID-19 pandemic response plan; A study from a university affiliated hospital in Jordan.

BACKGROUND: The education and training of healthcare workers (HCWs) about pandemic response plans, infection control protocols (ICP), and precautions are critical for breaking the virus transmission chain. This study aimed to assess the knowledge of HCWs regarding the COVID-19 pandemic response plan and the ICP. Concomitantly, evaluating the effectiveness and impact of institutional measures, policies, and training programs. METHODS: A cross-sectional study using an electronic questionnaire was used to collect data from 267 HCWs at a University-affiliated-hospital during April 2020. RESULTS: In this study, 90.7% of participants were nurses and 66% were females. 60.3% of participants received specific training about caring for COVID-19 patients while at least 94.3% reviewed the pandemic response plan and ICP for COVID-19. 47.5% and 29.2% of participants provided direct care for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients, respectively. Between 85.7% and 100% of the participants answered all items correctly regarding the COVID-19 pandemic response plan, measures, and precautions. Furthermore, the correct answers were above 95% for each item. CONCLUSION: HCWs have a high level of knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic response plan and ICP. Training and disseminating updated plans and protocols in different methods such as an intranet and onsite training in addition to regular methods were very effective.

COVID-19 outbreak in Jordan: Epidemiological features, clinical characteristics, and laboratory findings.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, an outbreak of coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) was detected in the North of Jordan. This retrospective study is the first from Jordan to report the epidemiologic, clinical, laboratory, and radiologic characteristics of COVID-19 infected patients. METHODS: All patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection by RT-PCR in the North of Jordan admitted between March 15 and April 2, 2020 were included. The clinical features, radiological, and laboratory findings were reviewed. RESULTS: Of 81 patients affected, 79 (97.5%) shared a common exposure to four recent travelers from endemic areas. The mean age was 40 years. Although about half (44 [54.3%]) were females, symptomatic patients were mostly females (75%). The most common presenting symptoms were nasal congestion, sore throat and dry cough. Less than one-third (31%) had chronic diseases. Although 84% of patients reported receiving Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination, more asymptomatic patients had BCG than symptomatic (p = 0.017). Almost all patients (97.5%) had an elevated D-dimer level. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and c-reactive protein were elevated in 50% and 42.7% of patients, respectively. High ESR found to be the predictor of abnormal chest radiograph observed in 13 (16%) patients with OR of 14.26 (95% CI 1.37-147.97, p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: An outbreak of COVID-19 infection in northern Jordan affected more females and relatively young individuals and caused mainly mild illnesses. The strict outbreak response measures applied at early stages probably contributed to the lenient nature of this outbreak, but the contribution of other factors to such variability in COVID-19 presentation is yet to be explained.

Prevalence of positive COVID-19 among asymptomatic health care workers who care patients infected with the novel coronavirus: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Limited information is available about COVID-19 infections among health care workers. Sensitive detection of COVID-19 cases in health care workers is crucial for hospital infection prevention policy, particularly for those who work with vulnerable patients. The aim of this study is to describe the prevalence of positive COVID-19 among asymptomatic health care workers who took care of patients with COVID-19 during the pandemic. METHODS: This retrospective study included all health care workers at King Abdullah University Hospital who take care of patients infected with COVID-19 patients from March 18, 2020 to April 29, 2020. They were tested for COVID-19 infection by use of real-time reverse-transcriptase rRT-PCR on samples from nasopharyngeal swabs. RESULTS: A total number of 370 health care workers were screened. The majority were nurses followed by physicians and other personnel. This study showed that all asymptomatic health care workers were tested negative for COVID-19Q. CONCLUSION: Unexpectedly, the prevalence of positive COVID-19 among asymptomatic health care workers who take care of patients infected with the novel coronavirus was 0%. This result must be cautiously interpreted. Further studies are needed in order to find effective strategy of screening health care workers to insure a safe working environment.

Multidisciplinary team management and cesarean delivery for a Jordanian woman infected with SARS-COV-2: A case report.

The SARS-COV-2 virus appears to have originated in Hubei Province in China towards the end of 2019 and has spread worldwide. Currently, there is little literature on COVID-19, and even less on its effect on pregnant mothers and infants. At this time, there are no clear recommendations specific to pregnant women with COVID-19. We report the multidisciplinary team management of a cesarean delivery for a woman infected with SARS-COV-2, including her pre-delivery care, intraoperative considerations, and post-delivery recommendations for the mother and baby. We also discuss the currently available recommendations and guidelines on the management of such cases.