Expert review on global real-world vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2

Introduction COVID-19 vaccines have been highly effective in reducing morbidity and mortality during the pandemic. While primary series vaccination rates are generally high in Southeast Asian (SEA) countries, various factors have limited the rollout and impact of booster doses. Areas covered We reviewed 79 studies in the International Vaccine Access Center (IVAC) VIEW-hub platform on vaccine effectiveness (VE) after primary immunizations with two-dose schedules. VE data were reported for SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalizations and deaths, and stratified across variants of concern, age, study design and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection for mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and combinations of both), vector vaccines (AstraZeneca, AZD1222 [ChAdOx1 nCoV-19] ‘Vaxzevria’), and inactivated virus vaccines (CoronaVac). Expert opinion The most-studied COVID-19 vaccines provide consistently high (>90%) protection against serious clinical outcomes like hospitalizations and deaths, regardless of variant. Additionally, this protection appears equivalent for mRNA vaccines and vector vaccines like AZD1222, as supported by our analysis of Asian and relevant international data, and by insights from SEA experts. Given the continued impact of COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths on health-care systems worldwide, encouraging vaccination strategies that reduce this burden is more relevant than attempting to prevent broader but milder infections with specific variants, including Omicron

Determinants of unsuccessful treatment outcomes and mortality among tuberculosis patients in Malaysia: A registry-based cohort study.

IntroductionThe monitoring of tuberculosis (TB) treatment outcomes and examination of the factors affecting these outcomes are important for evaluation and feedback of the national TB control program. This study aims to assess the TB treatment outcomes among patients registered in the national TB surveillance database in Malaysia from 2014 until 2017 and identify factors associated with unsuccessful treatment outcomes and all-cause mortality.Materials and methodsUsing registry-based secondary data, a retrospective cohort study was conducted. TB patients' sociodemographic characteristics, clinical disease data and treatment outcomes at one-year surveillance were extracted from the database and analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with unsuccessful treatment outcomes and all-cause mortality.ResultsA total of 97,505 TB cases (64.3% males) were included in this study. TB treatment success (cases categorized as cured and completed treatment) was observed in 80.7% of the patients. Among the 19.3% patients with unsuccessful treatment outcomes, 10.2% died, 5.3% were lost to follow-up, 3.6% had outcomes not evaluated while the remaining failed treatment. Unsuccessful TB treatment outcomes were found to be associated with older age, males, foreign nationality, urban dwellers, lower education levels, passive detection of TB cases, absence of bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) scar, underlying diabetes mellitus, smoking, extrapulmonary TB, history of previous TB treatment, advanced chest radiography findings and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Factors found associated with all-cause mortality were similar except for nationality (higher among Malaysians) and place of residence (higher among rural dwellers), while smoking and history of previous TB treatment were not found to be associated with all-cause mortality.ConclusionsThis study identified various sociodemographic characteristics and TB disease-related variables which were associated with unsuccessful TB treatment outcomes and mortality; these can be used to guide measures for risk assessment and stratification of TB patients in future

A qualitative exploration of tuberculosis patients who were lost to follow-up in Malaysia.

BackgroundLoss to follow-up (LTFU) is an unsuccessful treatment outcome for tuberculosis (TB) patients. In Malaysia, LTFU affects around 1 in 20 TB patients. Integration of qualitative research methods and evidence will provide a better understanding of LTFU and its underlying issues. In this study, we qualitatively explored TB patients' experiences in receiving treatment and their reasons for leaving TB care.MethodIn-depth interviews of 15 patients with a history of LTFU were conducted from January to September 2020. Interview guides were developed to explore TB patients' experiences while receiving treatment, including challenges faced and reasons for treatment interruption. Data were thematically analysed using the framework method.ResultsWe identified 11 emerging themes that occurred at four levels of interaction with TB patients. First, at the patient personal level, TB beliefs referring to patients' perception of illness and wellness, patients' perceived role of traditional and complementary medicine, and substance abuse were important. Second, the healthcare system and treatment factors that were highlighted included the organisation of care and treatment, interaction with healthcare professionals, particularly in communication and counselling, and TB medications' side effects. Third, structural factors including financial burden, logistical and transportation issues and work-related factors were identified to be barriers to treatment continuation. Fourth, the interpersonal level interaction of patients should not be neglected; this includes family relationships and support as well as peer influence.ConclusionStudy findings put forth issues and challenges faced by TB patients while receiving treatment and underscore areas where actions can be taken. This will contribute to informing the development and implementation of future TB control strategies that are responsive to TB patients' needs and concerns, to effectively address LTFU and ensure better treatment completion rates among TB patients in Malaysia

PICK-ing Malaysia’s Epidemic Apart: Effectiveness of a Diverse COVID-19 Vaccine Portfolio

Malaysia rolled out a diverse portfolio of predominantly three COVID-19 vaccines (AZD1222, BNT162b2, and CoronaVac) beginning 24 February 2021. We evaluated vaccine effectiveness with two methods, covering 1 April to 15 September 2021: (1) the screening method for COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and symptomatic COVID-19; and (2) a retrospective cohort of confirmed COVID-19 cases for COVID-19 related ICU admission and death using logistic regression. The screening method estimated partial vaccination to be 48.8% effective (95% CI: 46.8, 50.7) against COVID-19 infection and 33.5% effective (95% CI: 31.6, 35.5) against symptomatic COVID-19. Full vaccination is estimated at 87.8% effective (95% CI: 85.8, 89.7) against COVID-19 infection and 85.4% effective (95% CI: 83.4, 87.3) against symptomatic COVID-19. Among the cohort of confirmed COVID-19 cases, partial vaccination with any of the three vaccines is estimated at 31.3% effective (95% CI: 28.5, 34.1) in preventing ICU admission, and 45.1% effective (95% CI: 42.6, 47.5) in preventing death. Full vaccination with any of the three vaccines is estimated at 79.1% effective (95% CI: 77.7, 80.4) in preventing ICU admission and 86.7% effective (95% CI: 85.7, 87.6) in preventing deaths. Our findings suggest that full vaccination with any of the three predominant vaccines (AZD1222, BNT162b2, and CoronaVac) in Malaysia has been highly effective in preventing COVID-19 infection, symptomatic COVID-19, COVID-19-related ICU admission, and death

Implementation of a COVID-19 surveillance programme for healthcare workers in a teaching hospital in an upper-middle-income country.

IntroductionThe reporting of Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) mortality among healthcare workers highlights their vulnerability in managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Some low- and middle-income countries have highlighted the challenges with COVID-19 testing, such as inadequate capacity, untrained laboratory personnel, and inadequate funding. This article describes the components and implementation of a healthcare worker surveillance programme in a designated COVID-19 teaching hospital in Malaysia. In addition, the distribution and characteristics of healthcare workers placed under surveillance are described.Material and methodsA COVID-19 healthcare worker surveillance programme was implemented in University Malaya Medical Centre. The programme involved four teams: contact tracing, risk assessment, surveillance and outbreak investigation. Daily symptom surveillance was conducted over fourteen days for healthcare workers who were assessed to have low-, moderate- and high-risk of contracting COVID-19. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted for data collected over 24 weeks, from the 6th of March 2020 to the 20th of August 2020.ResultsA total of 1,174 healthcare workers were placed under surveillance. The majority were females (71.6%), aged between 25 and 34 years old (64.7%), were nursing staff (46.9%) and had no comorbidities (88.8%). A total of 70.9% were categorised as low-risk, 25.7% were moderate-risk, and 3.4% were at high risk of contracting COVID-19. One-third (35.2%) were symptomatic, with the sore throat (23.6%), cough (19.8%) and fever (5.0%) being the most commonly reported symptoms. A total of 17 healthcare workers tested positive for COVID-19, with a prevalence of 0.3% among all the healthcare workers. Risk category and presence of symptoms were associated with a positive COVID-19 test (pConclusionCOVID-19 symptom surveillance and risk-based assessment have merits to be included in a healthcare worker surveillance programme to safeguard the health of the workforce