ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between antenatal messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of individuals with singleton pregnancies with live deliveries between June 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022, with data available from eight integrated health care systems in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Vaccine exposure was defined as receipt of one or two mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses (primary series) during pregnancy. Outcomes were preterm birth (PTB) before 37 weeks of gestation, small-for-gestational age (SGA) neonates, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), gestational hypertension, and preeclampsia-eclampsia-HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count) syndrome. Outcomes in individuals vaccinated were compared with those in propensity-matched individuals with unexposed pregnancies. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs were estimated for PTB and SGA using a time-dependent covariate Cox model, and adjusted relative risks (aRRs) were estimated for GDM, gestational hypertension, and preeclampsia-eclampsia-HELLP syndrome using Poisson regression with robust variance. RESULTS: Among 55,591 individuals eligible for inclusion, 23,517 (42.3%) received one or two mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses during pregnancy. Receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination varied by maternal age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, and history of COVID-19. Compared with no vaccination, mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a decreased risk of PTB (rate: 6.4 [vaccinated] vs 7.7 [unvaccinated] per 100, aHR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94). Messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with SGA (8.3 vs 7.4 per 100; aHR 1.06, 95% CI, 0.99-1.13), GDM (11.9 vs 10.6 per 100; aRR 1.00, 95% CI, 0.90-1.10), gestational hypertension (10.8 vs 9.9 per 100; aRR 1.08, 95% CI, 0.96-1.22), or preeclampsia-eclampsia-HELLP syndrome (8.9 vs 8.4 per 100; aRR 1.10, 95% CI, 0.97-1.24). CONCLUSION: Receipt of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy was not associated with an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes; this information will be helpful for patients and clinicians when considering COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Pregnancy Outcome , Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Adult , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Infant, Newborn , Premature Birth/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/prevention & control , Infant, Small for Gestational Age , Young Adult , Vaccination/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
Importance: After SARS-CoV-2 infection, many patients present with persistent symptoms for at least 6 months, collectively termed post-COVID conditions (PCC). However, the impact of PCC on health care utilization has not been well described. Objectives: To estimate COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization following acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and describe utilization for select PCCs among patients who had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (including reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and antigen tests) compared with control patients whose results were negative. Design, Setting, and Participants: This matched retrospective cohort study included patients of all ages from 8 large integrated health care systems across the United States who completed a SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test during March 1 to November 1, 2020. Patients were matched on age, sex, race and ethnicity, site, and date of SARS-CoV-2 test and were followed-up for 6 months. Data were analyzed from March 18, 2021, to June 8, 2022. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ratios of rate ratios (RRRs) for COVID-19-associated health care utilization were calculated with a difference-in-difference analysis using Poisson regression models. RRRs were estimated overall, by health care setting, by select population characteristics, and by 44 PCCs. COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization was estimated by health care setting. Results: The final matched cohort included 127â¯859 patients with test results positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 127â¯859 patients with test results negative for SARS-CoV-2. The mean (SD) age of the study population was 41.2 (18.6) years, 68â¯696 patients in each group (53.7%) were female, and each group included 66â¯211 Hispanic patients (51.8%), 9122 non-Hispanic Asian patients (7.1%), 7983 non-Hispanic Black patients (6.2%), and 34â¯326 non-Hispanic White patients (26.9%). Overall, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a 4% increase in health care utilization over 6 months (RRR, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.03-1.05]), predominantly for virtual encounters (RRR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.12-1.16]), followed by emergency department visits (RRR, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.04-1.12]). COVID-19-associated utilization for 18 PCCs remained elevated 6 months from the acute stage of infection, with the largest increase in COVID-19-associated utilization observed for infectious disease sequelae (RRR, 86.00 [95% CI, 5.07-1458.33]), COVID-19 (RRR, 19.47 [95% CI, 10.47-36.22]), alopecia (RRR, 2.52 [95% CI, 2.17-2.92]), bronchitis (RRR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.62-2.12]), pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis (RRR, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.36-2.23]), and dyspnea (RRR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.61-1.86]). In total, COVID-19-associated excess health care utilization amounted to an estimated 27â¯217 additional medical encounters over 6 months (212.9 [95% CI, 146.5-278.4] visits per 1000 patients). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study documented an excess health care burden of PCC in the 6 months after the acute stage of infection. As health care systems evolve during a highly dynamic and ongoing global pandemic, these data provide valuable evidence to inform long-term strategic resource allocation for patients previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Evidence indicates that mRNA COVID-19 vaccination is associated with risk of myocarditis and possibly pericarditis, especially in young males. It is not clear if risk differs between mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2. We assessed if risk differs using comprehensive health records on a diverse population. METHODS: Members 18-39 years of age at eight integrated healthcare-delivery systems were monitored using data updated weekly and supplemented with medical record review of myocarditis and pericarditis cases. Incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis events that occurred among vaccine recipients 0 to 7 days after either dose 1 or 2 of a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was compared with that of vaccinated concurrent comparators who, on the same calendar day, had received their most recent dose 22 to 42 days earlier. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by conditional Poisson regression, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, health plan, and calendar day. Head-to-head comparison directly assessed risk following mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 during 0-7 days post-vaccination. RESULTS: From December 14, 2020 - January 15, 2022 there were 41 cases after 2,891,498 doses of BNT162b2 and 38 cases after 1,803,267 doses of mRNA-1273. Cases had similar demographic and clinical characteristics. Most were hospitalized for ≤1 day; none required intensive care. During days 0-7 after dose 2 of BNT162b2, the incidence was 14.3 (CI: 6.5-34.9) times higher than the comparison interval, amounting to 22.4 excess cases per million doses; after mRNA-1273 the incidence was 18.8 (CI: 6.7-64.9) times higher than the comparison interval, amounting to 31.2 excess cases per million doses. In head-to-head comparisons 0-7 days after either dose, risk was moderately higher after mRNA-1273 than after BNT162b2 (RR: 1.61, CI 1.02-2.54). CONCLUSIONS: Both vaccines were associated with increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in 18-39-year-olds. Risk estimates were modestly higher after mRNA-1273 than after BNT162b2.
Subject(s)
2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Myocarditis , Pericarditis , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273/adverse effects , BNT162 Vaccine/adverse effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Male , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Myocarditis/etiology , Pericarditis/epidemiology , Pericarditis/etiology , RNA, Messenger , Vaccination/adverse effectsABSTRACT
COVID-19 vaccines are recommended during pregnancy to prevent severe maternal morbidity and adverse birth outcomes; however, vaccination coverage among pregnant women has been low (1). Concerns among pregnant women regarding vaccine safety are a persistent barrier to vaccine acceptance during pregnancy. Previous studies of maternal COVID-19 vaccination and birth outcomes have been limited by small sample size (2) or lack of an unvaccinated comparison group (3). In this retrospective cohort study of live births from eight Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) health care organizations, risks for preterm birth (<37 weeks' gestation) and small-for-gestational-age (SGA) at birth (birthweight <10th percentile for gestational age) after COVID-19 vaccination (receipt of ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine doses) during pregnancy were evaluated. Risks for preterm and SGA at birth among vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women were compared, accounting for time-dependent vaccine exposures and propensity to be vaccinated. Single-gestation pregnancies with estimated start or last menstrual period during May 17-October 24, 2020, were eligible for inclusion. Among 46,079 pregnant women with live births and gestational age available, 10,064 (21.8%) received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine doses during pregnancy and during December 15, 2020-July 22, 2021; nearly all (9,892; 98.3%) were vaccinated during the second or third trimester. COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with preterm birth (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.82-1.01). Among 40,627 live births with birthweight available, COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy was not associated with SGA at birth (aHR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.87-1.03). Results consistently showed no increased risk when stratified by mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose, or by second or third trimester vaccination, compared with risk among unvaccinated pregnant women. Because of the small number of first-trimester exposures, aHRs for first-trimester vaccination could not be calculated. These data add to the evidence supporting the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. To reduce the risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness, CDC recommends COVID-19 vaccination for women who are pregnant, recently pregnant (including those who are lactating), who are trying to become pregnant now, or who might become pregnant in the future (4).
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Infant, Premature , Infant, Small for Gestational Age , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Patient Safety , Pregnancy , Prevalence , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
COVID-19 vaccination is critical to ending the COVID-19 pandemic. Members of minority racial and ethnic groups have experienced disproportionate COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality (1); however, COVID-19 vaccination coverage is lower in these groups (2). CDC used data from CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)* to assess disparities in vaccination coverage among persons aged ≥16 years by race and ethnicity during December 14, 2020-May 15, 2021. Measures of coverage included receipt of ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose (i.e., receipt of the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines or 1 dose of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine [Johnson & Johnson]) and full vaccination (receipt of 2 doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines or 1 dose of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine). Among 9.6 million persons aged ≥16 years enrolled in VSD during December 14, 2020-May 15, 2021, ≥1-dose coverage was 48.3%, and 38.3% were fully vaccinated. As of May 15, 2021, coverage with ≥1 dose was lower among non-Hispanic Black (Black) and Hispanic persons (40.7% and 41.1%, respectively) than it was among non-Hispanic White (White) persons (54.6%). Coverage was highest among non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) persons (57.4%). Coverage with ≥1 dose was higher among persons with certain medical conditions that place them at higher risk for severe COVID-19 (high-risk conditions) (63.8%) than it was among persons without such conditions (41.5%) and was higher among persons who had not had COVID-19 (48.8%) than it was among those who had (42.4%). Persons aged 18-24 years had the lowest ≥1-dose coverage (28.7%) among all age groups. Continued monitoring of vaccination coverage and efforts to improve equity in coverage are critical, especially among populations disproportionately affected by COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/ethnology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Racial Groups/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
COVID-19 vaccines are critical for ending the COVID-19 pandemic; however, current data about vaccination coverage and safety in pregnant women are limited. Pregnant women are at increased risk for severe illness and death from COVID-19 compared with nonpregnant women of reproductive age, and are at risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as preterm birth (1-4). Pregnant women are eligible for and can receive any of the three COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States via Emergency Use Authorization.* Data from Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), a collaboration between CDC and multiple integrated health systems, were analyzed to assess receipt of ≥1 dose (first or second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines or a single dose of the Janssen [Johnson & Johnson] vaccine) of any COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy, receipt of first dose of a 2-dose COVID-19 vaccine (initiation), or completion of a 1- or 2-dose COVID-19 vaccination series. During December 14, 2020-May 8, 2021, a total of 135,968 pregnant women were identified, 22,197 (16.3%) of whom had received ≥1 dose of a vaccine during pregnancy. Among these 135,968 women, 7,154 (5.3%) had initiated and 15,043 (11.1%) had completed vaccination during pregnancy. Receipt of ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy was highest among women aged 35-49 years (22.7%) and lowest among those aged 18-24 years (5.5%), and higher among non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) (24.7%) and non-Hispanic White (White) women (19.7%) than among Hispanic (11.9%) and non-Hispanic Black (Black) women (6.0%). Vaccination coverage increased among all racial and ethnic groups over the analytic period, likely because of increased eligibility for vaccination and increased availability of vaccine over time. These findings indicate the need for improved outreach to and engagement with pregnant women, especially those from racial and ethnic minority groups who might be at higher risk for severe health outcomes because of COVID-19 (4). In addition, providing accurate and timely information about COVID-19 vaccination to health care providers, pregnant women, and women of reproductive age can improve vaccine confidence and coverage by ensuring optimal shared clinical decision-making.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pregnant Women , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women/ethnology , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
Objectives: To compare health care utilization patterns and cost among insured adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), adults with attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and adults with neither condition (general population [GP] controls). Method: We conducted a case-control study among adults (≥18 years) who were members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) for at least 9 months each year from 2008 to 2012. Cases (N = 1507) were adults with an ASD diagnosis (ICD-9-CM 299.0-299.8) recorded in the electronic medical record on at least two separate occasions by December 31, 2012. Two control groups, adults with ADHD (N = 9042) defined by ICD-9-CM code 314 and GP (N = 15,070), were randomly selected and frequency matched to cases on gender and age. Health care utilization and cost data were obtained from KPNC databases for the year 2012. Results: Compared with adults with ADHD, adults with ASD had significantly higher utilization of outpatient visits for primary care (74.2% vs. 66.6%), mental health (43.3% vs. 33.2%), and laboratory services (60.9% vs. 54.4%). Hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive diagnoses (5.4% vs. 2.3%) were less frequent overall but more common among adults with ASD than with ADHD. Group differences were larger comparing adults with ASD with GP controls. Gynecology visits and screening for cervical cancer were significantly less common among women with ASD than among women with ADHD (35% vs. 50%) or GP (35% vs. 49%). Total annual mean healthcare costs for adults with ASD were 20% higher than costs for adults with ADHD and double costs for GP. Conclusion: Adults with ASD had significantly higher rates of utilization across most health care service areas compared with adults with ADHD or GP; however, women with ASD were significantly less likely to have gynecology visits and have screening for cervical cancer. Lay Summary: We conducted a study among adults (≥18 years) who were members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) from 2008 to 2012. We compared how often people attended different types of health care and costs of health care among adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), adults with attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and adults with neither condition (general population [GP] controls). The study included 1507 adults with ASD, 9042 with ADHD but not ASD, and 15,070 GP controls with no ASD or ADHD. Health care and cost data were obtained from KPNC databases for the year 2012. The study found that adults with ASD used more outpatient visits for primary care, mental health, and laboratory services than adults with ADHD. Gynecology visits and screening for cervical cancer were less common among women with ASD than among women with ADHD or GP. Health care costs for adults with ASD were higher than costs for adults with ADHD and costs for GP. In conclusion, adults with ASD had higher rates of use of most health care service areas than adults with ADHD or GP; however, women with ASD were less likely to have gynecology visits and have screening for cervical cancer.
ABSTRACT
Importance: In recent years, rates of vaccination have been declining. Whether this phenomenon disproportionately affects children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or their younger siblings is unknown. Objectives: To investigate if children after receiving an ASD diagnosis obtain their remaining scheduled vaccines according to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommendations and to compare the vaccination patterns of younger siblings of children with ASD with the vaccination patterns of younger siblings of children without ASD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This investigation was a retrospective matched cohort study. The setting was 6 integrated health care delivery systems across the United States within the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Participants were children born between January 1, 1995, and September 30, 2010, and their younger siblings born between January 1, 1997, and September 30, 2014. The end of follow-up was September 30, 2015. Exposures: Recommended childhood vaccines between ages 1 month and 12 years. Main Outcome and Measure: The proportion of children who received all of their vaccine doses according to ACIP recommendations. Results: The study included 3729 children with ASD (676 [18.1%] female), 592â¯907 children without ASD, and their respective younger siblings. Among children without ASD, 250â¯193 (42.2%) were female. For vaccines recommended between ages 4 and 6 years, children with ASD were significantly less likely to be fully vaccinated compared with children without ASD (adjusted rate ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.85-0.88). Within each age category, vaccination rates were significantly lower among younger siblings of children with ASD compared with younger siblings of children without ASD. The adjusted rate ratios varied from 0.86 for siblings younger than 1 year to 0.96 for those 11 to 12 years old. Parents who had a child with ASD were more likely to refuse at least 1 recommended vaccine for that child's younger sibling and to limit the number of vaccines administered during the younger sibling's first year of life. Conclusions and Relevance: Children with ASD and their younger siblings were undervaccinated compared with the general population. The results of this study suggest that children with ASD and their younger siblings are at increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases.
Subject(s)
Autism Spectrum Disorder/epidemiology , Family Health/statistics & numerical data , Siblings , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Refusal/statistics & numerical data , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Immunization Schedule , Infant , Male , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
We conducted an online survey of adult health care providers at Kaiser Permanente Northern California and semi-structured interviews with a subset of physicians. The survey assessed providers' ability to recognize autism spectrum disorder (ASD), asked them to rate their autism knowledge, comfort level in treating affected patients, and evaluated training and resource needs. 922 providers completed the survey (response rate 25.3 %), and 9 were interviewed by telephone regarding their autism training and experiences caring for patients with autism. Most providers reported lacking skills and tools to care for this adult patient population. A high proportion of adult providers were not aware that they had patients with ASD. These findings underscore the need to educate physicians caring for adults with ASD.