Clinical outcomes of chikungunya: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chikungunya is a viral disease caused by a mosquito-borne alphavirus. The acute phase of the disease includes symptoms such as fever and arthralgia and lasts 7-10 days. However, debilitating symptoms can persist for months or years. Despite the substantial impact of this disease, a comprehensive assessment of its clinical picture is currently lacking. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review on the clinical manifestations of chikungunya, their prevalence and duration, and related hospitalization. Embase and MEDLINE were searched with no time restrictions. Subsequently, meta-analyses were conducted to quantify pooled estimates on clinical outcomes, the symptomatic rate, the mortality rate, and the hospitalization rate. The pooling of effects was conducted using the inverse-variance weighting methods and generalized linear mixed effects models, with measures of heterogeneity reported. RESULTS: The systematic literature review identified 316 articles. Out of the 28 outcomes of interest, we were able to conduct 11 meta-analyses. The most prevalent symptoms during the acute phase included arthralgia in 90% of cases (95% CI: 83-94%), and fever in 88% of cases (95% CI: 85-90%). Upon employing broader inclusion criteria, the overall symptomatic rate was 75% (95% CI: 63-84%), the chronicity rate was 44% (95% CI: 31-57%), and the mortality rate was 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1-0.7%). The heterogeneity between subpopulations was more than 92% for most outcomes. We were not able to estimate all predefined outcomes, highlighting the existing data gap. CONCLUSION: Chikungunya is an emerging public health concern. Consequently, a thorough understanding of the clinical burden of this disease is necessary. Our study highlighted the substantial clinical burden of chikungunya in the acute phase and a potentially long-lasting chronic phase. Understanding this enables health authorities and healthcare professionals to effectively recognize and address the associated symptoms and raise awareness in society.

Evaluating the reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines from network-meta analyses.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based reassurances addressing vaccine-related concerns are crucial to promoting primary vaccination, completion of the primary series, and booster vaccination. By summarizing and comparing the reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines authorized by the European Medicines Agency, this analysis aims to support in-formed decision-making by the lay public and help overcome vaccine hesitancy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A systematic literature review identified 24 records reporting solicited adverse events for AZD1222, BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, NVX-Cov2373, and VLA2001 in individuals aged 16 or older. Network meta-analyses were conducted for each solicited adverse events reported for at least two vaccines that were not compared head-to-head but could be connected through a common comparator. RESULTS: A total of 56 adverse events were investigated through network meta-analyses within a Bayesian framework with random-effects models. Overall, the two mRNA vaccines were found to be the most reactogenic vaccines. VLA2001 had the highest likelihood of being the least reactogenic vaccine after the first and second vaccine dose, especially for systemic adverse events after the first dose. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced chance of experiencing an adverse event with some COVID-19 vaccines may help to overcome vaccine hesitancy in population groups with concerns about the side effects of vaccines.