RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Belief that vaccination is not needed for individuals with prior infection contributes to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy. Among individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) before vaccines became available, we determined whether vaccinated individuals had reduced odds of reinfection. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study among adult New York City residents who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection in 2020 and had not died or tested positive again >90 days after an initial positive test as of 1 July 2021. Case patients with reinfection during July 2021-November 2021 and controls with no reinfection were matched (1:3) on age, sex, timing of initial positive test in 2020, and neighborhood poverty level. Matched odds ratios (mORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 349 827 eligible adults, 2583 were reinfected during July 2021-November 2021. Of 2401 with complete matching criteria data, 1102 (45.9%) were known to be symptomatic for COVID-19-like illness, and 96 (4.0%) were hospitalized. Unvaccinated individuals, compared with individuals fully vaccinated within the prior 90 days, had elevated odds of reinfection (mOR, 3.21; 95% CI, 2.70 to 3.82), of symptomatic reinfection (mOR, 2.97; 95% CI, 2.31 to 3.83), and of reinfection with hospitalization (mOR, 2.09; 95% CI, .91 to 4.79). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination reduced odds of reinfections when the Delta variant predominated. Further studies should assess risk of severe outcomes among reinfected persons as new variants emerge, infection- and vaccine-induced immunity wanes, and booster doses are administered.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Cidade de Nova Iorque/epidemiologia , Vacinação , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , ReinfecçãoRESUMO
During the course of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, reports of a new multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) have been increasing in Europe and the United States (1-3). Clinical features in children have varied but predominantly include shock, cardiac dysfunction, abdominal pain, and elevated inflammatory markers, including C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, D-dimer, and interleukin-6 (1). Since June 2020, several case reports have described a similar syndrome in adults; this review describes in detail nine patients reported to CDC, seven from published case reports, and summarizes the findings in 11 patients described in three case series in peer-reviewed journals (4-6). These 27 patients had cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, dermatologic, and neurologic symptoms without severe respiratory illness and concurrently received positive test results for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or antibody assays indicating recent infection. Reports of these patients highlight the recognition of an illness referred to here as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A), the heterogeneity of clinical signs and symptoms, and the role for antibody testing in identifying similar cases among adults. Clinicians and health departments should consider MIS-A in adults with compatible signs and symptoms. These patients might not have positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or antigen test results, and antibody testing might be needed to confirm previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Because of the temporal association between MIS-A and SARS-CoV-2 infections, interventions that prevent COVID-19 might prevent MIS-A. Further research is needed to understand the pathogenesis and long-term effects of this newly described condition.
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Síndrome de Resposta Inflamatória Sistêmica/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Resposta Inflamatória Sistêmica/virologia , Adulto , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
In April 2020, during the peak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Europe, a cluster of children with hyperinflammatory shock with features similar to Kawasaki disease and toxic shock syndrome was reported in England* (1). The patients' signs and symptoms were temporally associated with COVID-19 but presumed to have developed 2-4 weeks after acute COVID-19; all children had serologic evidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1). The clinical signs and symptoms present in this first cluster included fever, rash, conjunctivitis, peripheral edema, gastrointestinal symptoms, shock, and elevated markers of inflammation and cardiac damage (1). On May 14, 2020, CDC published an online Health Advisory that summarized the manifestations of reported multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), outlined a case definition, and asked clinicians to report suspected U.S. cases to local and state health departments. As of July 29, a total of 570 U.S. MIS-C patients who met the case definition had been reported to CDC. A total of 203 (35.6%) of the patients had a clinical course consistent with previously published MIS-C reports, characterized predominantly by shock, cardiac dysfunction, abdominal pain, and markedly elevated inflammatory markers, and almost all had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. The remaining 367 (64.4%) of MIS-C patients had manifestations that appeared to overlap with acute COVID-19 (2-4), had a less severe clinical course, or had features of Kawasaki disease.§ Median duration of hospitalization was 6 days; 364 patients (63.9%) required care in an intensive care unit (ICU), and 10 patients (1.8%) died. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to expand in many jurisdictions, clinicians should be aware of the signs and symptoms of MIS-C and report suspected cases to their state or local health departments; analysis of reported cases can enhance understanding of MIS-C and improve characterization of the illness for early detection and treatment.
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Síndrome de Resposta Inflamatória Sistêmica/epidemiologia , Síndrome de Resposta Inflamatória Sistêmica/virologia , Adolescente , COVID-19 , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
New York City (NYC) was an epicenter of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in the United States during spring 2020 (1). During March-May 2020, approximately 203,000 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases were reported to the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH). To obtain more complete data, DOHMH used supplementary information sources and relied on direct data importation and matching of patient identifiers for data on hospitalization status, the occurrence of death, race/ethnicity, and presence of underlying medical conditions. The highest rates of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths were concentrated in communities of color, high-poverty areas, and among persons aged ≥75 years or with underlying conditions. The crude fatality rate was 9.2% overall and 32.1% among hospitalized patients. Using these data to prevent additional infections among NYC residents during subsequent waves of the pandemic, particularly among those at highest risk for hospitalization and death, is critical. Mitigating COVID-19 transmission among vulnerable groups at high risk for hospitalization and death is an urgent priority. Similar to NYC, other jurisdictions might find the use of supplementary information sources valuable in their efforts to prevent COVID-19 infections.
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Surtos de Doenças , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , COVID-19 , Teste para COVID-19 , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/mortalidade , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cidade de Nova Iorque/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/mortalidade , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto JovemRESUMO
In September 2012, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene identified an outbreak of Neisseria meningitidis serogroup C invasive meningococcal disease among men who have sex with men (MSM). Twenty-two case-patients and 7 deaths were identified during August 2010-February 2013. During this period, 7 cases in non-MSM were diagnosed. The slow-moving outbreak was linked to the use of websites and mobile phone applications that connect men with male sexual partners, which complicated the epidemiologic investigation and prevention efforts. We describe the outbreak and steps taken to interrupt transmission, including an innovative and wide-ranging outreach campaign that involved direct, internet-based, and media-based communications; free vaccination events; and engagement of community and government partners. We conclude by discussing the challenges of managing an outbreak affecting a discrete community of MSM and the benefits of using social networking technology to reach this at-risk population.
Assuntos
Surtos de Doenças/estatística & dados numéricos , Homossexualidade Masculina/estatística & dados numéricos , Infecções Meningocócicas/epidemiologia , Neisseria meningitidis Sorogrupo C/patogenicidade , Características de Residência/estatística & dados numéricos , Comportamento Sexual/estatística & dados numéricos , Parceiros Sexuais , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Infecções Meningocócicas/patologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neisseria meningitidis Sorogrupo C/genética , Neisseria meningitidis Sorogrupo C/imunologia , Cidade de Nova Iorque/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: We determined the success of the school-located vaccination (SLV) program, implemented in 2009 in New York City to deliver pandemic influenza A (H1N1) monovalent vaccine (pH1N1), versus provider offices in reaching children who had never previously received influenza vaccine. METHODS: We compared the immunization history of children vaccinated in school versus provider offices. We included records in the Citywide Immunization Registry with pH1N1 administered between October 2009 and March 2010 to elementary school-aged children. RESULTS: In total, 96,524 children received pH1N1 vaccine in schools, and 102,933 children received pH1N1 vaccine in provider offices. Of children vaccinated in schools, 34% had never received seasonal influenza vaccination in the past, compared with only 10% of children vaccinated at provider offices (P < .001). Children vaccinated in schools were more likely to have received a second dose of pH1N1 in 2009-2010 than those vaccinated in provider offices (80% vs 45%). CONCLUSIONS: The SLV program was more successful at reaching children who had never received influenza immunization in the past and should be considered as a strategy for delivering influenza vaccine in routine and emergency situations.
Assuntos
Programas de Imunização/organização & administração , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Serviços de Saúde Escolar/organização & administração , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1 , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Masculino , Cidade de Nova Iorque/epidemiologia , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: To control an outbreak of invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) among men who have sex with men (MSM) in New York City, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene recommended vaccination of all HIV-infected MSM and at-risk HIV-uninfected MSM in October 2012. METHODS: A decision-analytic model estimated the cost-effectiveness of meningococcal vaccination compared with no vaccination. Model inputs, including IMD incidence of 20.5 per 100,000 HIV-positive MSM (42% fatal) and 7.6 per 100,000 HIV-negative MSM (20% fatal), were from Department of Health and Mental Hygiene reported data and published sources. Outcomes included costs (2012 US dollars), IMD cases averted, IMD deaths averted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; $/QALY). Scenarios with and without herd immunity were considered, and sensitivity analyses were performed on key inputs. RESULTS: Compared with no vaccination, the targeted vaccination campaign averted an estimated 2.7 IMD cases, 1.0 IMD deaths, with an ICER of $66,000/QALY when herd immunity was assumed. Without herd immunity, vaccination prevented 1.1 IMD cases, 0.4 IMD deaths, with an ICER of $177,000/QALY. In one-way sensitivity analyses, variables that exerted the greatest influence on results in order of effect were the magnitude of herd immunity, IMD case fatality ratio, and IMD incidence. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100,000/QALY, vaccination was preferred in 97% of simulations with herd immunity and 20% of simulations without herd immunity. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination during an IMD outbreak among MSM with and without HIV infection was projected to avert IMD cases and deaths and could be cost-effective depending on IMD incidence, case fatality, and herd immunity.
Assuntos
Infecções por HIV/complicações , Infecções Meningocócicas/economia , Vacinas Meningocócicas/economia , Neisseria meningitidis/imunologia , Vacinação/economia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Análise Custo-Benefício , Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Surtos de Doenças/economia , Surtos de Doenças/prevenção & controle , Infecções por HIV/economia , Infecções por HIV/epidemiologia , Homossexualidade Masculina , Humanos , Imunidade Coletiva , Programas de Imunização , Incidência , Masculino , Infecções Meningocócicas/mortalidade , Infecções Meningocócicas/prevenção & controle , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Modelos Econômicos , Cidade de Nova Iorque/epidemiologia , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de VidaAssuntos
COVID-19/etnologia , Etnicidade/estatística & dados numéricos , Grupos Raciais/estatística & dados numéricos , SARS-CoV-2 , Síndrome de Resposta Inflamatória Sistêmica/etnologia , Negro ou Afro-Americano/estatística & dados numéricos , Asiático/estatística & dados numéricos , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Hispânico ou Latino/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Havaiano Nativo ou Outro Ilhéu do Pacífico/estatística & dados numéricos , Cidade de Nova Iorque/epidemiologia , População Branca/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Methods of measuring influenza vaccination of healthcare personnel (HCP) vary substantially, as do the groups of HCP that are included in any given set of measurements. Thus, comparison of vaccination rates across healthcare facilities is difficult. PURPOSE: The goal of the study was to determine the feasibility of implementing a standardized measure for reporting HCP influenza vaccination data in various types of healthcare facilities. METHODS: A total of 318 facilities recruited in four U.S. jurisdictions agreed to participate in the evaluation, including hospitals, long-term care facilities, dialysis clinics, ambulatory surgery centers, and physician practices. HCP in participating facilities were categorized as employees, credentialed non-employees, or other non-employees using standard definitions. Data were gathered using cross-sectional web-based surveys completed at three intervals between October 2010 and May 2011; data were analyzed in February 2012. RESULTS: 234 facilities (74%) completed all three surveys. Most facilities could report on-site employee vaccination; almost one third could not provide complete data on HCP vaccinated outside the facility, contraindications, or declinations, primarily due to missing non-employee data. Inability to determine vaccination status of credentialed and other non-employees was cited as a major barrier to measure implementation by 24% and 27% of respondents, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using the measure to report employee vaccination status was feasible for most facilities; tracking non-employee HCP was more challenging. Based on evaluation findings, the measure was revised to limit the types of non-employees included. Although the revised measure is less comprehensive, it is more likely to produce valid vaccination coverage estimates. Use of this standardized measure can inform quality improvement efforts and facilitate comparison of HCP influenza vaccination among facilities.
Assuntos
Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Transversais , Coleta de Dados/métodos , Estudos de Viabilidade , Instalações de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Internet , Projetos Piloto , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Green housing reduces energy costs and may mitigate indoor allergens and pollutants, improving asthma morbidity. High asthma burden is seen in low-income neighborhoods. Past studies show improvements in respiratory symptoms when living in green homes. OBJECTIVE: Develop partnership with Blue Sea Development Company to determine impacts of living in Melrose Commons V (MCV), a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum-certified affordable housing complex, on asthma in the South Bronx. METHODS: Participants completed a home-based respiratory health questionnaire before moving into MCV. Follow-up occurred at 6, 12, and 18 months post-move. A home-based educational module was delivered on indoor environmental interventions to avoid asthma triggers. A pretest was given before the module and a posttest was given 9 months later, including an evaluation of behavioral practice changes. RESULTS: Outcomes included decreases in continuous daily respiratory symptoms (p < .001), asthma symptoms disrupting sleep in the past month (p = .028), and urgent visits to a healthcare professional for asthma in the past 3 months (p = .038). Clinically relevant outcomes included fewer days with asthma symptoms; asthma episodes; days of work, school, or daycare missed; and emergency department visits. Education changes from pretest to posttest included increased knowledge about dust mites, roaches, mold, and chemical irritants (p = .007). Common behavioral changes included using hypoallergenic mattress covers, using green cleaning products, and eliminating bedroom carpets. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the beneficial effect of LEED Platinum-certified buildings on respiratory health. Trends may be clinically and economically relevant. Advocacy efforts should promote the expansion of green housing and emphasize the development of healthy communities.
Assuntos
Poluição do Ar em Ambientes Fechados/prevenção & controle , Asma/prevenção & controle , Planejamento Ambiental/normas , Exposição Ambiental/prevenção & controle , Química Verde/normas , Habitação Popular/normas , Adolescente , Adulto , Poluição do Ar em Ambientes Fechados/efeitos adversos , Asma/etiologia , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Pesquisa Participativa Baseada na Comunidade , Progressão da Doença , Exposição Ambiental/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Química Verde/métodos , Educação em Saúde/métodos , Serviços de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cidade de Nova Iorque , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Habitação Popular/tendências , Adulto JovemRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability and validity of a standardized measure of healthcare personnel (HCP) influenza vaccination. SETTING: Acute care hospitals, long-term care facilities, ambulatory surgery centers, physician practices, and dialysis centers from 3 US jurisdictions. PARTICIPANTS: Staff from 96 healthcare facilities randomly sampled from 234 facilities that completed pilot testing to assess the feasibility of the measure. METHODS: Reliability was assessed by comparing agreement between facility staff and project staff on the classification of HCP numerator (vaccinated at facility, vaccinated elsewhere, contraindicated, declined) and denominator (employees, credentialed nonemployees, other nonemployees) categories. To assess validity, facility staff completed a series of case studies to evaluate how closely classification of HCP groups aligned with the measure's specifications. In a modified Delphi process, experts rated face validity of the proposed measure elements on a Likert-type scale. RESULTS: Percent agreement was high for HCP vaccinated at the facility (99%) and elsewhere (95%) and was lower for HCP who declined vaccination (64%) or were medically contraindicated (64%). While agreement was high (more than 90%) for all denominator categories, many facilities' staff excluded nonemployees for whom numerator and denominator status was difficult to determine. Validity was lowest for credentialed and other nonemployees. CONCLUSIONS: The standardized measure of HCP influenza vaccination yields reproducible results for employees vaccinated at the facility and elsewhere. Adhering to true medical contraindications and tracking declinations should improve reliability. Difficulties in establishing denominators and determining vaccination status for credentialed and other nonemployees challenged the measure's validity and prompted revision to include a more limited group of nonemployees.