Immunogenicity after two doses of inactivated virus vaccine in healthcare workers with and without previous COVID-19 infection: Prospective observational study.

Vaccines have been seen as the most important solution for ending the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of this study is to evaluate the antibody levels after inactivated virus vaccination. We included 148 healthcare workers (74 with prior COVID-19 infection and 74 with not). They received two doses of inactivated virus vaccine (CoronaVac). Serum samples were prospectively collected three times (Days 0, 28, 56). We measured SARS-CoV-2 IgGsp antibodies quantitatively and neutralizing antibodies. After the first dose, antibody responses did not develop in 64.8% of the participants without prior COVID-19 infection. All participants had developed antibody responses after the second dose. We observed that IgGsp antibody titers elicited by a single vaccine dose in participants with prior COVID-19 infection were higher than after two doses of vaccine in participants without prior infection (geometric mean titer: 898 and 607 AU/ml). IgGsp antibodies, participants with prior COVID-19 infection had higher antibody levels as geometric mean titers at all time points (p < 0.001). We also found a positive correlation between IgGsp antibody titers and neutralizing capacity (rs = 0.697, p < 0.001). Although people without prior COVID-19 infection should complete their vaccination protocol, the adequacy of a single dose of vaccine is still in question for individuals with prior COVID-19. New methods are needed to measure the duration of protection of vaccines and their effectiveness against variants as the world is vaccinated. We believe quantitative IgGsp values may reflect the neutralization capacity of some vaccines.

Infection prevention and control practice for Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever-A multi-center cross-sectional survey in Eurasia.

BACKGROUND: Crimean Congo Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF) is a life threatening acute viral infection that presents significant risk of nosocomial transmission to healthcare workers. AIM: Evaluation of CCHF infection prevention and control (IP&C) practices in healthcare facilities that routinely manage CCHF cases in Eurasia. METHODS: A cross-sectional CCHF IP&C survey was designed and distributed to CCHF centers in 10 endemic Eurasian countries in 2016. RESULTS: Twenty-three responses were received from centers in Turkey, Pakistan, Russia, Georgia, Kosovo, Bulgaria, Oman, Iran, India and Kazakhstan. All units had dedicated isolation rooms for CCHF, with cohorting of confirmed cases in 15/23 centers and cohorting of suspect and confirmed cases in 9/23 centers. There was adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) in 22/23 facilities, with 21/23 facilities reporting routine use of PPE for CCHF patients. Adequate staffing levels to provide care reported in 14/23 locations. All centers reported having a high risk CCHFV nosocomial exposure in last five years, with 5 centers reporting more than 5 exposures. Education was provided annually in most centers (13/23), with additional training requested in PPE use (11/23), PPE donning/doffing (12/23), environmental disinfection (12/23) and waste management (14/23). CONCLUSIONS: Staff and patient safety must be improved and healthcare associated CCHF exposure and transmission eliminated. Improvements are recommended in isolation capacity in healthcare facilities, use of PPE and maintenance of adequate staffing levels. We recommend further audit of IP&C practice at individual units in endemic areas, as part of national quality assurance programs.