RESUMEN
BackgroundCOVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, is one of the deadliest pandemics over the last 100 years. Sequencing is playing an important role in monitoring the evolution of the virus, including the detection of new viral variants. This study describes the genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infections in The Gambia. MethodsNasopharyngeal and/or oropharyngeal swabs collected from suspected cases and travellers were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using standard RT-PCR methods. SARS-CoV-2 positive samples were sequenced following standard library preparation and sequencing protocols. Bioinformatic analysis was done using ARTIC pipelines and lineages assigned using Pangolin. FindingsBetween March 2020 to January 2022, there were almost 12,000 SARS-CoV-2 confirmed cases distributed into four waves, each of them lasting between 4 weeks and 4 months, with more cases during the rainy seasons (July-October). As shown by the 1643 sequenced samples, each wave occurred after new viral variants and/or lineages were introduced in The Gambia, generally those already established in Europe and/or in other African countries. Local transmission was higher during the first and third wave, with mostly B.1.416/Senegal/Gambian lineage and AY.34.1/Delta subtype, respectively. The second wave was driven by two variants, namely Alpha and Eta and B.1.1.420 lineage. The Omicron/fourth wave was the shortest. InterpretationEfficient surveillance, including strengthening entry points and screening asymptomatic individuals especially during the rainy seasons would be important to promptly detect and control future waves in The Gambia and the subregion. FundingMedical Research Unit The Gambia at LSHTM, UK Research and Innovation funding (grant reference MC_PC_19084), MRC/UKRI MC_PC_19084 and World Health Organisation.
RESUMEN
In many countries, non-pharmaceutical interventions to limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission resulted in significant reductions in other respiratory viruses. However, similar data from Africa are limited. We explored the extent to which viruses such as influenza and rhinovirus co-circulated with SARS-CoV-2 in The Gambia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Between April 2020 and March 2022, respiratory viruses were detected using RT-PCR in nasopharyngeal swabs from 1397 participants with influenza-like illness. Overall virus positivity was 44.2%, with prevalence higher in children <5 years (80%) compared to children aged 5-17 years (53.1%), adults aged 18-50 (39.5%) and >50 years (39.9%), p<0.0001. After SARS-CoV-2 (18.3%), rhinoviruses (10.5%) and influenza viruses (5.5%) were the most prevalent. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was lower in children <5 (4.3%) and 5-17 years (12.7%) than in adults aged 18-50 (19.3%) and >50 years (24.3%), p<0.0001. In contrast, rhinoviruses were most prevalent in children <5 years (28.7%), followed by children aged 5-17 (15.8%), adults aged 18-50 (8.3%) and >50 years (6.3%), p<0.0001. Four SARS-CoV-2 waves occurred, with 36.1%-52.4% SARS-CoV-2 positivity during peak months. Influenza infections were observed in both 2020 and 2021 during the rainy season as expected (peak positivity 16.4%-23.5%). Peaks of rhinovirus were asynchronous to the months when SARS-CoV-2 and influenza peaked.
RESUMEN
BackgroundTo control the spread of the novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome novel Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), countries around the world subsequently implemented several public health measures, including the adoption of mandatory institutional quarantine for close contacts. This study explored the experiences of individuals who underwent institutional quarantine in The Gambia to inform government measures to increase its effectiveness and reduce its associated negative impacts. MethodsQuestionnaires were administered via mobile phone call with data collectors calling and directly recording participant responses on a tablet in an electronic online form developed in REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture). The questionnaire contained questions on COVID-19 related knowledge, health care behaviour, attitudes, perceptions and stigma. Data were analysed using STATA v.13 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, USA). ResultsIn total, 205 adults who observed the mandatory institutional quarantine were interviewed. There was varied knowledge of COVID-19 causes, spread, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and severity. Participants believed the purpose of quarantine was monitoring for signs and symptoms of coronavirus disease, testing for SARS-CoV-2, separation from the community, and protection from coronavirus disease. While a majority reported positive experiences while in quarantine, some expressed prominent dissatisfaction related to the essential services and quality of care provided. Different forms of stigma were also experienced before, during and after the quarantine experience. ConclusionThis study provides important information on quarantine experiences in The Gambia during the global COVID-19 pandemic. The Ministry of Health in The Gambia and other countries could improve the experience of quarantined individuals by consistently providing psychosocial support, compensation for loss of earnings, and timely provision of SARS-CoV-2 test results. Furthermore, stigma experiences and practices should be addressed during and after individuals stay in quarantine via the provision of psychosocial support.
RESUMEN
BackgroundCOVID-19 changed access to healthcare, including vaccinations, in the United Kingdom (UK). This study explored UK womens experiences of accessing pertussis vaccination during pregnancy and infant vaccinations during COVID-19. MethodsAn online cross-sectional survey was completed, between 3rd August-11 th October 2020, by 1404 women aged 16+ years who were pregnant at some point after the first UK lockdown from March 23rd, 2020. Ten follow-up semi-structured interviews were conducted. ResultsMost women surveyed were pregnant (65.7%) and a third postnatal (34.3%). Almost all women (95.6%) were aware that pertussis vaccination is recommended in pregnancy. Most pregnant (72.1%) and postnatal women (84.0%) had received pertussis vaccination; however, access issues were reported. Over a third (39.6%) of women had a pregnancy vaccination appointment changed. COVID-19 made it physically difficult to access pregnancy vaccinations for one fifth (21.5%) of women and physically difficult to access infant vaccinations for almost half of women (45.8%). Nearly half of women (45.2%) reported feeling less safe attending pregnancy vaccinations and over three quarters (76.3%) less safe attending infant vaccinations due to COVID-19. The majority (94.2%) felt it was important to get their baby vaccinated during COVID-19. Pregnant women from ethnic-minorities and lower-income households were less likely to have been vaccinated. Minority-ethnicity women were more likely to report access problems and feeling less safe attending vaccinations for both themselves and their babies. Qualitative analysis found women experienced difficulties accessing antenatal care and relied on knowledge from previous pregnancies to access vaccines in pregnancy. ConclusionDuring the ongoing and future pandemics, healthcare services should prioritise equitable access to routine vaccinations, including tailoring services for ethnic-minority families who experience greater barriers to vaccination. HighlightsO_LIAccess to pregnancy vaccines in the United Kingdom was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. C_LIO_LIUK women reported difficulties in physically accessing vaccine appointments and feeling less safe accessing vaccine appointments for themselves when pregnant and for their babies during COVID-19, with women from ethnic minorities in the UK were more likely to report difficulties. C_LIO_LIVaccine services must ensure equitable access to vaccine appointments during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic including tailoring services for lower income and ethnic minority families. C_LI
RESUMEN
BackgroundPregnant women with COVID-19 are at an increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness as well as adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Many countries are vaccinating or considering vaccinating pregnant women with limited available data about the safety of this strategy. Early identification of safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines, including their components, or their technological platforms is therefore urgently needed. MethodsWe conducted a rapid systematic review, as the first phase of an ongoing full systematic review, to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women, including their components, and their technological platforms (whole virus, protein, viral vector or nucleic acid) used in other vaccines, following the Cochrane methods and the PRISMA statement for reporting (PROSPERO-CRD42021234185). We searched literature databases, COVID-19 and pregnancy registries from inception February 2021 without time or language restriction and explored the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews retrieved. We selected studies of any methodological design that included at least 50 pregnant women or pregnant animals exposed to the vaccines that were selected for review by the COVAX MIWG in August 2020 or their components or platforms included in the COVID-19 vaccines, and evaluated adverse events during pregnancy and the neonatal period. Pairs of reviewers independently selected studies through the COVIDENCE web software and performed the data extraction through a previously piloted online extraction form. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. ResultsWe identified 6768 records, 256 potentially eligible studies were assessed by full-text, and 37 clinical and non-clinical studies (38 reports, involving 2,397,715 pregnant women and 56 pregnant animals) and 12 pregnancy registries were included. Most studies (89%) were conducted in high-income countries. The most frequent study design was cohort studies (n=21), followed by surveillance studies, randomized controlled trials, and registry analyses. Most studies (76%) allowed comparisons between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women (n=25) or animals (n=3) and reported exposures during the three trimesters of pregnancy. The most frequent exposure was to AS03 adjuvant in the context of A/H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccines (n=24), followed by aluminum-based adjuvants (n=11). Aluminum phosphate was used in Respiratory Syncytial Virus Fusion candidate vaccines (n=3) and Tdap vaccines (n=3). Different aluminum-based adjuvants were used in hepatitis vaccines. The replication-deficient simian adenovirus ChAdOx1 was used for a Rift Valley fever vaccine. Only one study reported exposure to messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines that also used lipid nanoparticles. Except for one preliminary report about A/H1N1 influenza vaccination (adjuvant AS03) - corrected by the authors in a more thorough analysis, all studies concluded that there were no safety concerns. ConclusionThis rapid review found no evidence of pregnancy-associated safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines that were selected for review by the COVAX MIWG or of their components or platforms when used in other vaccines. However, the need for further data on several vaccine platforms and components is warranted given their novelty. Our findings support current WHO guidelines recommending that pregnant women may consider receiving COVID-19 vaccines, particularly if they are at high risk of exposure or have comorbidities that enhance the risk of severe disease.
RESUMEN
BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccines are the cornerstone of the pandemic response and now advised for pregnant women in the United Kingdom(UK) however COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women is unknown. MethodsAn online survey and semi-structured interviews were used to investigate pregnant womens views on COVID-19 vaccine acceptability for themselves when pregnant, not pregnant and for their babies. 1,181 women, aged over 16 years, who had been pregnant since 23rd March 2020, were surveyed between 3rd August-11th October 2020. Ten women were interviewed. ResultsThe majority of women surveyed (81.2%) reported that they would definitely or were leaning towards accepting a COVID-19 vaccine when not pregnant. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was significantly lower during pregnancy (62.1%, p<0.005) and for their babies (69.9%, p<0.005). Ethnic minority women were twice as likely to reject a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies compared to women from White ethnic groups (p<0.005). Women from lower-income households, aged under 25-years, and from some geographic regions were more likely to reject a COVID-19 vaccine when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies. Multivariate analysis revealed that income and ethnicity were the main drivers of the observed age and regional differences. Women unvaccinated against pertussis in pregnancy were over four times more likely to reject COVID-19 vaccines when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies. Thematic analysis of the survey freetext responses and interviews found safety concerns about COVID-19 vaccines were common though wider mistrust in vaccines was also expressed. Trust in vaccines and the health system were also reasons women gave for accepting COVID-19 vaccines. ConclusionSafety information on COVID-19 vaccines must be clearly communicated to pregnant women to provide reassurance and facilitate informed pregnancy vaccine decisions. Targeted interventions to promote COVID-19 vaccine uptake among ethnic minority and lower-income women may be needed.
