Covid-19 vaccine acceptance among individuals incarcerated in Connecticut state jails.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy is common among incarcerated populations and, despite vaccination programs, vaccine acceptance within residents remains low, especially within jails. With the goal of assessing the Connecticut DOC's COVID-19 vaccine program within jails we examined if residents of DOC operated jails were more likely to become vaccinated following incarceration than in the community. Specifically, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis among people who spent at least one night in a DOC-operated jail between February 2 and November 8, 2021, and were eligible for vaccination at the time of incarceration (intake). We compared the vaccination rates before and after incarceration using an age-adjusted survival analysis with a time-varying exposure of incarceration and an outcome of vaccination. RESULTS: During the study period, 3,716 people spent at least one night in jail and were eligible for vaccination at intake. Of these residents, 136 were vaccinated prior to incarceration, 2,265 had a recorded vaccine offer, and 479 were vaccinated while incarcerated. The age-adjusted hazard of vaccination following incarceration was significantly higher than prior to incarceration (12.5; 95% Confidence Intervals: 10.2-15.3). CONCLUSIONS: We found that residents were more likely to become vaccinated in jail than in the community. Though these findings highlight the utility of vaccination programs within jails, the low level of vaccination in this population speaks to the need for additional program development within jails and the community.

Association between primary or booster COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and Omicron lineage BA.1 SARS-CoV-2 infection in people with a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection: A test-negative case-control analysis.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of primary and booster vaccination in people who experienced a prior Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains unclear. The objective of this study was to estimate the effectiveness of primary (two-dose series) and booster (third dose) mRNA vaccination against Omicron (lineage BA.1) infection among people with a prior documented infection. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a test-negative case-control study of reverse transcription PCRs (RT-PCRs) analyzed with the TaqPath (Thermo Fisher Scientific) assay and recorded in the Yale New Haven Health system from November 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. Overall, 11,307 cases (positive TaqPath analyzed RT-PCRs with S-gene target failure [SGTF]) and 130,041 controls (negative TaqPath analyzed RT-PCRs) were included (median age: cases: 35 years, controls: 39 years). Among cases and controls, 5.9% and 8.1% had a documented prior infection (positive SARS-CoV-2 test record ≥90 days prior to the included test), respectively. We estimated the effectiveness of primary and booster vaccination relative to SGTF-defined Omicron (lineage BA.1) variant infection using a logistic regression adjusted for date of test, age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance, comorbidities, social venerability index, municipality, and healthcare utilization. The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14 to 149 days after the second dose was 41.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 14.1% to 59.4%, p 0.006) and 27.1% (95% CI: 18.7% to 34.6%, p < 0.001) for people with and without a documented prior infection, respectively. The effectiveness of booster vaccination (≥14 days after booster dose) was 47.1% (95% CI: 22.4% to 63.9%, p 0.001) and 54.1% (95% CI: 49.2% to 58.4%, p < 0.001) in people with and without a documented prior infection, respectively. To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds of infection among boosted (≥14 days after booster dose) and booster-eligible people (≥150 days after second dose). The odds ratio (OR) comparing boosted and booster-eligible people with a documented prior infection was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.54 to 1.16, p 0.222), whereas the OR comparing boosted and booster-eligible people without a documented prior infection was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49 to 0.59, p < 0.001). This study's limitations include the risk of residual confounding, the use of data from a single system, and the reliance on TaqPath analyzed RT-PCR results. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that primary vaccination provided significant but limited protection against Omicron (lineage BA.1) infection among people with and without a documented prior infection. While booster vaccination was associated with additional protection against Omicron BA.1 infection in people without a documented prior infection, it was not found to be associated with additional protection among people with a documented prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of documented prior infection status but suggest that infection history may impact the relative benefit of booster doses.

Pediatric Patients' and Parents' Perspectives of Unsedated Transnasal Endoscopy in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Qualitative Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis is an increasingly common inflammatory disease of the esophagus. Diagnosis and management are based on the histological presence of eosinophils in the esophageal mucosa, often requiring multiple endoscopies with sedation. Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE), an alternative method of assessing the mucosa without the risks of sedation, is now being performed in the pediatric population. This is the first qualitative study on pediatric patients' and parents' experiences with TNE. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to describe pediatric patients' and parents' experiences of TNE with the goal of refining TNE protocols to improve the clinical experience. METHODS: We used a qualitative descriptive approach that included in-depth, semistructured interviews with patients and parents following completion of TNE. Interviews continued until we reached thematic saturation. We analyzed data using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 21 interviews were completed. We identified 4 themes: Appeal of TNE; Expectations and Preparation for TNE; Tolerance of TNE; and Evaluation of TNE. Perceived positive aspects of TNE were no exposure to intravenous anesthesia; helpful and clear preparation for the procedure with a demonstration video and physician phone call; distraction during TNE with virtual reality goggles and a stress ball; parent able to accompany the patient; and TNE requiring less time than an esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Negative aspects included patient stress before TNE, patient dislike of nasal spray taste and sensation, and discomfort during the TNE procedure. CONCLUSION: The overall perception of TNE among our participants was positive. Study data will allow pediatric gastroenterologists the opportunity to improve both preparation for and comfort during TNE.