Presence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Antibodies Among Vietnamese Healthcare Workers by Dosing Interval for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Before the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant arrived in Vietnam, case rates suggested seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was low. Beginning in March 2021, we assessed different dosing schedules and adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study to estimate the prevalence of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 before and after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination. We conducted antibody testing among HCWs in February 2021 (baseline), before the second dose (June-July 2021), and 1 and 3 months after the second dose. We detected antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 using Tetracore® FlexImmArray™, and surrogate neutralizing antibodies using GenScript cPass™. Neither assay can distinguish natural from vaccine-induced antibodies. We assessed AEFIs through interview post-dose 1 and 1 month post-dose 2. RESULTS: Before vaccination, 1/617 participants (0.16%) had antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Of these 617, 405 were vaccinated with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 with 4-8- (60%), 9-12- (27%), or ≥13-week (13%) intervals between the 2 doses. Three months following series completion, 99% and 97% of vaccinated participants had ≥1 sample with detectable antibodies and surrogate neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, respectively. We observed no significant differences among those with different dosing intervals at last follow-up. All participants reported PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the study; 2 (0.5%) were laboratory-confirmed. AEFIs were more frequent post-dose 1 (81%) vs post-dose 2 (21%). CONCLUSIONS: In this population, regardless of dosing interval, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 induced antibodies within 3 months of the second dose. These findings may offer flexibility to policymakers when balancing programmatic considerations with vaccine effectiveness.

Individual and Occupational Differences in Perceived Organisational Culture of a Central Hospital in Vietnam.

Many hospitals in developing countries, including Vietnam, are facing the challenges of increasingly noncommunicable diseases and the financial autonomy policy from the government. To adapt to this new context requires understanding and changing the current organisational culture of the hospitals. However, little has been known about this in resource-constrained healthcare settings. The objectives of this study were to examine the four characteristics of the organisational culture and test selected individual and occupational differences in the organisational culture of a Vietnam central hospital. In a cross-sectional study using the Organisation Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) with the Competing Value Framework (CVF), including 4 factors, Clan, Adhocracy, Hierarchy, and Market, health workers currently working at Quang Nam General Hospital were interviewed. The results indicated the current cultural model was more internally focused with two dominant cultures, Clan and Hierarchy, while, for the desired model, the Clan culture was the most expected one. Comparing between the current and desired pattern, the down trend was found for all types of culture, except the Clan culture, and there were significant differences by domains of organisational culture. Furthermore, the current and desired models were differently distributed by key individual characteristics. These differences have raised a number of interesting directions for future research. They also suggest that, to build a hospital organisational culture to suit both current and future contexts as per employees' assessment and expectation, it is important to take individual and institutional variations into account.