Early impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and physical distancing measures on routine childhood vaccinations in England, January to April 2020.

Using electronic health records, we assessed the early impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on routine childhood vaccination in England by 26 April 2020. Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination counts fell from February 2020, and in the 3 weeks after introduction of physical distancing measures were 19.8% lower (95% confidence interval: -20.7 to -18.9) than the same period in 2019, before improving in mid-April. A gradual decline in hexavalent vaccination counts throughout 2020 was not accentuated by physical distancing

Uptake of infant and preschool immunisations in Scotland and England during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study of routinely collected data

Funding: This analysis was part of the EAVE II project. EAVE II is funded by the Medical Research Council (MC_PC_19075), https://mrc.ukri.org/, with the support of BREATHE: the Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), https://www.hdruk.ac.uk/helping-with-health-data/health-data-research-hubs/breathe, which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK.Background In 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic and lockdown control measures threatened to disrupt routine childhood immunisation programmes with early reports suggesting uptake would fall. In response, public health bodies in Scotland and England collected national data for childhood immunisations on a weekly or monthly basis to allow for rapid analysis of trends. The aim of this study was to use these data to assess the impact of different phases of the pandemic on infant and preschool immunisation uptake rates. Methods and findings We conducted an observational study using routinely collected data for the year prior to the pandemic (2019) and immediately before (22 January to March 2020), during (23 March to 26 July), and after (27 July to 4 October) the first UK “lockdown”. Data were obtained for Scotland from the Public Health Scotland “COVID19 wider impacts on the health care system” dashboard and for England from ImmForm. Five vaccinations delivered at different ages were evaluated; 3 doses of “6-in-1” diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b, and hepatitis B vaccine (DTaP/IPV/Hib/HepB) and 2 doses of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. This represented 439,754 invitations to be vaccinated in Scotland and 4.1 million for England. Uptake during the 2020 periods was compared to the previous year (2019) using binary logistic regression analysis. For Scotland, uptake within 4 weeks of a child becoming eligible by age was analysed along with geographical region and indices of deprivation. For Scotland and England, we assessed whether immunisations were up-to-date at approximately 6 months (all doses 6-in-1) and 16 to 18 months (first MMR) of age. We found that uptake within 4 weeks of eligibility in Scotland for all the 5 vaccines was higher during lockdown than in 2019. Differences ranged from 1.3% for first dose 6-in-1 vaccine (95.3 versus 94%, odds ratio [OR] compared to 2019 1.28, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] 1.18 to 1.39) to 14.3% for second MMR dose (66.1 versus 51.8%, OR compared to 2019 1.8, 95% CI 1.74 to 1.87). Significant increases in uptake were seen across all deprivation levels. In England, fewer children due to receive their immunisations during the lockdown period were up to date at 6 months (6-in-1) or 18 months (first dose MMR). The fall in percentage uptake ranged from 0.5% for first 6-in-1 (95.8 versus 96.3%, OR compared to 2019 0.89, 95% CI 0.86– to 0.91) to 2.1% for third 6-in-1 (86.6 versus 88.7%, OR compared to 2019 0.82, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.83). The use of routinely collected data used in this study was a limiting factor as detailed information on potential confounding factors were not available and we were unable to eliminate the possibility of seasonal trends in immunisation uptake. Conclusions In this study, we observed that the national lockdown in Scotland was associated with an increase in timely childhood immunisation uptake; however, in England, uptake fell slightly. Reasons for the improved uptake in Scotland may include active measures taken to promote immunisation at local and national levels during this period and should be explored further. Promoting immunisation uptake and addressing potential vaccine hesitancy is particularly important given the ongoing pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Pertussis immunisation strategies to optimise infant pertussis control : a narrative systematic review

Objective Countries routinely offering acellular pertussis vaccine, where long-term protection is not sustained, have the challenge of selecting an optimal schedule to minimise disease among young infants. We conducted a narrative systematic review and synthesis of information to evaluate different pertussis immunisation strategies at controlling pertussis disease, hospitalisation, deaths, and vaccine effectiveness among young infants. Methods We conducted a review of the literature on studies about the primary, booster, and/or maternal vaccination series and synthesised findings narratively. Countries offering the first three doses of vaccine within six-months of life and a booster on or before the second year or life were defined as accelerated primary and booster schedules, respectively. Countries offering primary and booster doses later were defined as extended primary and booster schedules. All search results were screened, and articles reviewed and reconciled, by two authors. The Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Intervention tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Findings A total of 98 studies were included in the analyses and the following recurring themes were described: timing of vaccination, vaccine coverage, waning immunity/vaccine effectiveness, direct and indirect effectiveness, switching from an accelerated to extended schedule, impact of changes in testing. The risk of bias was generally low to moderate for most studies. Conclusion Comparing schedules is challenging and there was insufficient evidence to that one schedule was superior to another. Countries must select a schedule that maintains high vaccine coverage and reduced the risk of delaying the delivery vaccines to protect infants

Bias assessment of a test-negative design study of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness used in national policymaking

National test-negative-case-control (TNCC) studies are used to monitor COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in the UK. A questionnaire was sent to participants from the first published TNCC COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness study conducted by the UK Health Security Agency, to assess for potential biases and changes in behaviour related to vaccination. The original study included symptomatic adults aged ≥70 years testing for COVID-19 between 08/12/2020 and 21/02/2021. A questionnaire was sent to cases and controls tested from 1-21 February 2021. In this study, 8648 individuals responded to the questionnaire (36.5% response). Using information from the questionnaire to produce a combined estimate that accounted for all potential biases decreased the original vaccine effectiveness estimate after two doses of BNT162b2 from 88% (95% CI: 79-94%) to 85% (95% CI: 68-94%). Self-reported behaviour demonstrated minimal evidence of riskier behaviour after vaccination. These findings offer reassurance to policy makers and clinicians making decisions based on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness TNCC studies

Evaluating the impact of a continued maternal pertussis immunisation programme in England: A modelling study and cost-effectiveness analysis.

INTRODUCTION: An unexpected resurgence of pertussis cases and infant deaths was observed in some countries that had switched to acellular pertussis vaccines in the primary immunisation schedule. In response to the outbreaks, maternal pertussis vaccination programmes in pregnant women have been adopted worldwide, including the USA in 2011 and the UK in 2012. Following the success of the programme in England, we evaluated the health and economic impact of stopping versus continuing the maternal pertussis immunisation to inform public health policy making. METHODS: We used a mathematical model to estimate the number of infant hospitalisations and deaths related to pertussis in England over 2019-2038. Losses in quality-adjusted life years, QALYs, were considered for infants (aged 0-2 months) who survived or died from pertussis, bereaved parents (of infants who died from pertussis), and women with pertussis (aged 20-44 years). Direct medical costs to the National Health Service included infant hospitalisations, maternal vaccinations, and disease in women. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3.5%. Changes in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, ICER, were explored in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The model supports continuing the maternal pertussis immunisation programme as a cost-effective intervention at an ICER of £14,500/QALY (2.5% and 97.5%-quantile: £7,300/QALY to £32,400/QALY). Stopping versus continuing the maternal programme results in an estimated mean of 972 (range 582 to 1489) versus 308 (184 to 471) infant hospitalisations annually. Results were most sensitive to the number of hospitalisations and deaths when stopping the maternal programme. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of £30,000/QALY, the probability of the maternal programme being cost-effective was 96.2%. CONCLUSION: Our findings support continuing the maternal pertussis vaccination programme as otherwise higher levels of disease activity and infant mortality are expected to return. These results have led policy makers to decide to continue the maternal programme in the UK routine immunisation schedule

Long-term health-related quality of life in non-hospitalised COVID-19 cases with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in England: Longitudinal analysis and cross-sectional comparison with controls.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to quantify the unknown losses in health-related quality of life of COVID-19 cases using quality-adjusted life days (QALDs) and the recommended EQ-5D instrument in England. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of non-hospitalised, PCR-confirmed SARSCoV2(+) cases aged 12-85 years and followed up for six months from 01 December 2020, with cross-sectional comparison to SARSCoV2() controls. Main outcomes were QALD losses; physical symptoms; and COVID-19-related private expenditures. We analysed results using multivariable regressions with post-hoc weighting by age and sex, and conditional logistic regressions for the association of each symptom and EQ-5D limitation on cases and controls. RESULTS: Of 548 cases (mean age 41.1 years; 61.5% female), 16.8% reported physical symptoms at month 6 (most frequently extreme tiredness, headache, loss of taste and/or smell, and shortness of breath). Cases reported more limitations with doing usual activities than controls. Almost half of cases spent a mean of £18.1 on non-prescription drugs (median: £10.0), and 52.7% missed work or school for a mean of 12 days (median: 10). On average, all cases lost 13.7 (95%-CI: 9.7, 17.7) QALDs, while those reporting symptoms at month 6 lost 32.9 (24.5, 37.6) QALDs. Losses also increased with older age. Cumulatively, the health loss from morbidity contributes at least 18% of the total COVID-19-related disease burden in England. CONCLUSIONS: One in 6 cases report ongoing symptoms at 6 months, and 10% report prolonged loss of function compared to pre-COVID-19 baselines. A marked health burden was observed among older COVID-19 cases and those with persistent physical symptoms

Early impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing measures on routine childhood vaccinations in England, January to April 2020.

Electronic health records were used to assess the early impact of COVID-19 on routine childhood vaccination in England to 26 April 2020. MMR vaccination counts fell from February 2020, and in the three weeks after introduction of social distancing measures were 19.8% lower (95% CI −20.7 to −18.9%) than the same period in 2019, before improving in mid-April. A gradual decline in hexavalent vaccination counts throughout 2020 was not accentuated on introduction of social distancing

Effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines on covid-19 related symptoms, hospital admissions, and mortality in older adults in England : test negative case-control study

Objective To estimate the real world effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 and Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1-S vaccines against confirmed covid-19 symptoms (including the UK variant of concern B.1.1.7), admissions to hospital, and deaths. Design Test negative case-control study. Setting Community testing for covid-19 in England. Participants 156 930 adults aged 70 years and older who reported symptoms of covid-19 between 8 December 2020 and 19 February 2021 and were successfully linked to vaccination data in the National Immunisation Management System. Interventions Vaccination with BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1-S. Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were polymerase chain reaction confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, admissions to hospital for covid-19, and deaths with covid-19. Results Participants aged 80 years and older vaccinated with BNT162b2 before 4 January 2021 had a higher odds of testing positive for covid-19 in the first nine days after vaccination (odds ratio up to 1.48, 95% confidence interval 1.23 to 1.77), indicating that those initially targeted had a higher underlying risk of infection. Vaccine effectiveness was therefore compared with the baseline post-vaccination period. Vaccine effects were noted 10 to 13 days after vaccination, reaching a vaccine effectiveness of 70% (95% confidence interval 59% to 78%), then plateauing. From 14 days after the second dose a vaccination effectiveness of 89% (85% to 93%) was found compared with the increased baseline risk. Participants aged 70 years and older vaccinated from 4 January (when ChAdOx1-S delivery commenced) had a similar underlying risk of covid-19 to unvaccinated individuals. With BNT162b2, vaccine effectiveness reached 61% (51% to 69%) from 28 to 34 days after vaccination, then plateaued. With ChAdOx1-S, effects were seen from 14 to 20 days after vaccination, reaching an effectiveness of 60% (41% to 73%) from 28 to 34 days, increasing to 73% (27% to 90%) from day 35 onwards. On top of the protection against symptomatic disease, a further 43% (33% to 52%) reduced risk of emergency hospital admission and 51% (37% to 62%) reduced risk of death was observed in those who had received one dose of BNT162b2. Participants who had received one dose of ChAdOx1-S had a further 37% (3% to 59%) reduced risk of emergency hospital admission. Follow-up was insufficient to assess the effect of ChAdOx1-S on mortality. Combined with the effect against symptomatic disease, a single dose of either vaccine was about 80% effective at preventing admission to hospital with covid-19 and a single dose of BNT162b2 was 85% effective at preventing death with covid-19. Conclusion Vaccination with either one dose of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1-S was associated with a significant reduction in symptomatic covid-19 in older adults, and with further protection against severe disease. Both vaccines showed similar effects. Protection was maintained for the duration of follow-up (>6 weeks). A second dose of BNT162b2 was associated with further protection against symptomatic disease. A clear effect of the vaccines against the B.1.1.7 variant was found