Patterns of pneumococcal vaccination and revaccination in elderly and non-elderly adults: a Vaccine Safety Datalink study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV) is recommended for all adults 65 years of age and older and for younger adults with high-risk conditions. While data from national surveys provide information on the proportion of adults 65 years of age and older reporting ever receipt of PPV they do not collect more detailed information, such as age at vaccination or the total number of vaccinations received. In addition, there is relatively little information available on PPV coverage in younger adults with chronic conditions. To assess contemporary patterns of pneumococcal vaccination and revaccination of adults, we conducted a cross-sectional study of adults enrolled in medical care organizations (MCOs) participating in the Vaccine Safety Datalink project.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study population included 1.5 million adults 25 years of age and older enrolled in the four participating MCOs on December 1, 2006. PPVs administered to members of the study population prior to that date were identified from computerized immunization registries maintained by the MCOs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among the general population of adults 25 through 64 years of age, vaccine coverage increased from 2% in the 25–29 year old age-group to 26% in the 60–64 year old age-group. In all age-groups, coverage was substantially higher in persons defined as having a chronic high risk condition. This was particularly true for diabetes mellitus, with vaccine coverage of over 50% in the lower age-groups and 75% in those 60–64 years of age. Among adults 65 years of age and older, 82% had received at least one PPV and 18% had received two or more PPVs.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We found higher levels of PPV coverage among adults 65 years of age and older and among younger adults with diabetes mellitus than reported by national surveys and for those groups PPV coverage approached the <it>Healthy People 2010 </it>national objectives. These results suggest that achieving those objectives for PPV is possible and that high vaccination coverage may be facilitated by vaccine tracking and reminder systems.</p

COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and uptake in a national prospective cohort of essential workers

INTRODUCTION: In a multi-center prospective cohort of essential workers, we assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) by vaccine intention, prior SARS-CoV-2 positivity, and occupation, and their impact on vaccine uptake over time. METHODS: Initiated in July 2020, the HEROES-RECOVER cohort provided socio-demographics and COVID-19 vaccination data. Using two follow-up surveys approximately three months apart, COVID-19 vaccine KAP, intention, and receipt was collected; the first survey categorized participants as reluctant, reachable, or endorser. RESULTS: A total of 4,803 participants were included in the analysis. Most (70%) were vaccine endorsers, 16% were reachable, and 14% were reluctant. By May 2021, 77% had received at least one vaccine dose. KAP responses strongly predicted vaccine uptake, particularly positive attitudes about safety (aOR = 5.46, 95% CI: 1.4-20.8) and effectiveness (aOR = 5.0, 95% CI: 1.3-19.1). Participants' with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were 22% less likely to believe the COVID-19 vaccine was effective compared with uninfected participants (aOR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64-0.96). This was even more pronounced in first responders compared with other occupations, with first responders 42% less likely to believe in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (aOR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.84). Between administrations of the two surveys, 25% of reluctant, 56% reachable, and 83% of endorser groups received the COVID-19 vaccine. The reachable group had large increases in positive responses for questions about vaccine safety (10% of vaccinated, 34% of unvaccinated), and vaccine effectiveness (12% of vaccinated, 27% of unvaccinated). DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and a positive shift in attitudes over time. First responders, despite potential high exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were more vaccine reluctant. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine can shift over time. Targeting messages about the vaccine's safety and effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and illness severity may increase vaccine uptake for reluctant and reachable participants

Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines in Ambulatory and Inpatient Care Settings

BACKGROUND There are limited data on the effectiveness of the vaccines against symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) currently authorized in the United States with respect to hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or ambulatory care in an emergency department or urgent care clinic. METHODS We conducted a study involving adults (≥50 years of age) with Covid-19–like illness who underwent molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed 41,552 admissions to 187 hospitals and 21,522 visits to 221 emergency departments or urgent care clinics during the period from January 1 through June 22, 2021, in multiple states. The patients’ vaccination status was documented in electronic health records and immunization registries. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness by comparing the odds of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated patients with those among unvaccinated patients. Vaccine effectiveness was adjusted with weights based on propensity-for-vaccination scores and according to age, geographic region, calendar time (days from January 1, 2021, to the index date for each medical visit), and local virus circulation. RESULTS The effectiveness of full messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination (≥14 days after the second dose) was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87 to 91) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization, 90% (95% CI, 86 to 93) against infection leading to an ICU admission, and 91% (95% CI, 89 to 93) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. The effectiveness of full vaccination with respect to a Covid-19–associated hospitalization or emergency department or urgent care clinic visit was similar with the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines and ranged from 81% to 95% among adults 85 years of age or older, persons with chronic medical conditions, and Black or Hispanic adults. The effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was 68% (95% CI, 50 to 79) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization and 73% (95% CI, 59 to 82) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. CONCLUSIONS Covid-19 vaccines in the United States were highly effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization, ICU admission, or an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. This vaccine effectiveness extended to populations that are disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: We conducted a study involving adults (≥50 years of age) with Covid-19-like illness who underwent molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed 41,552 admissions to 187 hospitals and 21,522 visits to 221 emergency departments or urgent care clinics during the period from January 1 through June 22, 2021, in multiple states. The patients' vaccination status was documented in electronic health records and immunization registries. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness by comparing the odds of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated patients with those among unvaccinated patients. Vaccine effectiveness was adjusted with weights based on propensity-for-vaccination scores and according to age, geographic region, calendar time (days from January 1, 2021, to the index date for each medical visit), and local virus circulation. Results: The effectiveness of full messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination (≥14 days after the second dose) was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87 to 91) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization, 90% (95% CI, 86 to 93) against infection leading to an ICU admission, and 91% (95% CI, 89 to 93) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. The effectiveness of full vaccination with respect to a Covid-19-associated hospitalization or emergency department or urgent care clinic visit was similar with the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines and ranged from 81% to 95% among adults 85 years of age or older, persons with chronic medical conditions, and Black or Hispanic adults. The effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was 68% (95% CI, 50 to 79) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization and 73% (95% CI, 59 to 82) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. Conclusions: Covid-19 vaccines in the United States were highly effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization, ICU admission, or an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. This vaccine effectiveness extended to populations that are disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)

Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19–Like Illness with Infection-Induced or mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Immunity — Nine States, January–September 2021

What is already known about this topic? Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. What is added by this report? Among COVID-19–like illness hospitalizations among adults aged ≥18 years whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90–179 days earlier, the adjusted odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 among unvaccinated adults with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were 5.49-fold higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine who had no previous documented infection (95% confidence interval = 2.75–10.99). What are the implications for public health practice? All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2

Effectiveness of 2-Dose Vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Against COVID-19–Associated Hospitalizations Among Immunocompromised Adults — Nine States, January–September 2021

What is already known about this topic? Studies suggest that immunocompromised persons who receive COVID-19 vaccination might not develop high neutralizing antibody titers or be as protected against severe COVID-19 outcomes as are immunocompetent persons. What is added by this report? Effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated hospitalization was lower (77%) among immunocompromised adults than among immunocompetent adults (90%). Vaccine effectiveness varied considerably among immunocompromised patient subgroups. What are the implications for public health practice? Immunocompromised persons benefit from COVID-19 mRNA vaccination but are less protected from severe COVID-19 outcomes than are immunocompetent persons. Immunocompromised persons receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines should receive 3 doses and a booster, consistent with CDC recommendations, practice nonpharmaceutical interventions, and, if infected, be monitored closely and considered early for proven therapies that can prevent severe outcomes

Rapid, Active Surveillance for Medically Attended Acute Gastroenteritis and Norovirus Infection in a Managed Care Environment

Background/Aims: Norovirus is the leading cause of acute gastroenteritis in the United States and is the leading cause of medically attended acute gastroenteritis (MAAGE) among children younger than five years of age. Our primary goal is to describe the community incidence of MAAGE and the proportion of MAAGE encounters due to norovirus within the membership population of Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW). Our secondary goal is to describe transmission of norovirus within households. Methods: We are conducting a 12-month active surveillance project in which we identify all KPNW members with MAAGE-associated health care encounters through daily electronic abstraction of the electronic health record system. We are recruiting a sample of this population daily, along with their symptomatic household members, to complete a recruitment survey and collect a stool sample for norovirus testing. Results: During the four months of our surveillance period, we identified 6,156 members presenting for MAAGE (annualized incidence of 413/100,000). We attempted to reach 1,782 (30%) potential participants, 525 (29%) of whom were ineligible. Of those remaining, 708 (56%) refused and 549 (44%) agreed to participate. Of those agreeing to participate, 453 (83%) provided a sample from which we obtained viral testing results. Among samples tested, we identified 52 (11%) positive for norovirus. Norovirus positivity was highest among those 0–4 years of age (20%) and lowest among those 65 years or older (6%). Thus far, we have recruited 48 household members, 8 (15%) of whom tested positive for norovirus; 7 (88%) had the same laboratory results as their MAAGE-associated household member. Discussion: Our observed incidence of MAAGE and proportion of MAAGE encounters due to norovirus infection in the KPNW member population over the first four months of our surveillance period are consistent with results obtained from other studies using varying methodologies and reinforce the high burden of MAAGE and norovirus infection within the community. Our results further support the high transmission of norovirus infection within households. Importantly, our project –– with 44% agreeing to participate and 83% collecting and returning a stool sample –– demonstrates a model for conducting other community-based studies of acute infectious diseases within a managed care system

Attitudes toward a future norovirus vaccine among members of an integrated healthcare delivery system in Portland, Oregon, 2016-2017

ABSTRACTWith recent advances in U.S. clinical trials for norovirus vaccines, it is an opportune time to examine what is known about the public receptivity to this novel vaccine. From October 2016–September 2017, we surveyed Kaiser Permanente Northwest members in Portland, Oregon, to ask their level of agreement on a 5-point scale with statements about the need for and willingness to get a potential norovirus vaccine for themselves or their child and analyzed their responses according to age, occupational status, prior vaccine uptake, and history of prior norovirus diagnoses. The survey response rate was 13.5% (n = 3,894); 807 (21%) responded as legal guardians, on behalf of a child <18 y of age and 3,087 (79%) were adults aged 18+ y. The majority of respondents were in agreement about getting the norovirus vaccine, if available (60% of legal guardians, 52% of adults aged 18–64 y, and 55% of adults aged 65+ y). Prior vaccination for influenza and rotavirus (among children) was the only correlate significantly associated with more positive attitudes toward receiving norovirus vaccine. Pre-pandemic attitudes in our all-ages study population reveal generally positive attitudes toward willingness to get a norovirus vaccine, particularly among those who previously received influenza or rotavirus vaccines