Global access to COVID-19 vaccines: a scoping review of factors that may influence equitable access for low and middle-income countries

A Scoping Review of Factors Affecting COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake and Deployment in Global Healthcare Systems

Introduction: COVID-19 vaccines were rapidly developed and deployed on a large scale during a global crisis. A range of deployment strategies were used globally to maximize vaccine uptake. In this scoping review, we identify and analyze the main healthcare system and policy factors that guided and influenced COVID-19 vaccination deployment and uptake globally. Materials and Methods: JBI guidelines, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), and the population, concept, and context (PCC) framework were applied. Studies on individual COVID-19 vaccination factors, such as vaccine hesitancy, were excluded. The search was last conducted in May 2024 yielding 26,686 articles from PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and COVID-19 websites. A total of 47 articles and 3 guidance documents were included. The results of the thematic analysis were mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: The results found the following healthcare system and policy factors as integral to COVID-19 vaccination: types of vaccine products, healthcare workforce capacity, procurement strategies, distribution and cold-chain capacity, partnership, coordination, and leadership, information, communication, and registration strategies, delivery models, organizations, the existing health systems and policies on prioritization of at-risk groups and deployment plans. Discussion: Globally, COVID-19 vaccination programs responded to the pandemic by leveraging and reforming the existing healthcare systems, relying on strong leadership and global cooperation (such as the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Initiative). Deployment was enabled by effective communication and adoption of innovative technologies using data-driven policies to create high vaccine demand while overcoming limited vaccine supply and rapidly adapting to uncertainties.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Public Health: Addressing Global, Regional, and Within-Country Inequalities

The COVID-19 pandemic, with over 775 million cases and 7 million deaths by May 2024, has drastically impacted global public health and exacerbated existing healthcare inequalities. The swift development and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines have been critical in combating the virus, yet disparities in access to and administration of the vaccine have highlighted deep-seated inequities at global, regional, and national levels. Wealthier nations have benefited from early access to vaccines, while low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have faced persistent shortages. Initiatives such as COVAX aimed to address these disparities, but challenges persist. Socioeconomic factors, education, ethnic identity, and the healthcare infrastructure play crucial roles in vaccine equity. For example, lower-income individuals often face barriers such as poor access to healthcare, misinformation, and logistical challenges, particularly in rural areas. Addressing these inequities requires a multifaceted approach, integrating national policies with local strategies to enhance vaccines' accessibility, counter misinformation, and ensure equitable distribution. Collaborative efforts at all levels are essential to promote vaccine equity and effectively control the pandemic, ensuring that all populations have fair access to life-saving vaccines. This review explores these complex issues, offering insights into the barriers and facilitators of vaccine equity and providing recommendations to promote more equitable and effective vaccination programs. With a focus on the different levels at which vaccination policies are planned and implemented, the text provides guidelines to steer vaccination strategies, emphasizing the role of international cooperation and local policy frameworks as keys to achieving equitable vaccination coverage.

Comparative analysis and prediction of avian influenza in Shangrao city, China from 2016 to 2022

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of vaccination, COVID-19 pandemic and migration of migratory birds on the avian influenza positivity rate in Shangrao City and to predict the future avian influenza positivity rate. Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was used to detect nucleic acids of avian influenza A viruses. 1795 samples were collected between 2016 and 2022, of which 1086 were positive. In addition, there were seven human cases of avian influenza. The results showed that the positivity rate of H9 subtype in Shangrao City was higher than usual during the COVID-19 pandemic and migratory birds. Predictions suggest that the H9 subtype positivity rate in Shangrao City will be on the rise in the future. In recent years, the H5 positivity rate has gradually increased. Migratory birds and the COVID-19 pandemic have led to an increase in H9 subtype positivity. Therefore, the prevention and control of them should be strengthened.

Which roads lead to access? A global landscape of six COVID-19 vaccine innovation models

BACKGROUND

Unequal and inequitable access to Covid-19 vaccines in low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs) was a major political, ethical and public health failure in the pandemic. However, vaccine developers' practices were not monolithic, but rather, took diverse approaches to supplying different countries, with important implications for global access.

RESULTS

Using data on R&D investments, regulatory approvals, manufacturing and purchase agreements, and vaccine deliveries, we identified six distinct innovation models that apply across the 14 COVID-19 vaccines with more international presence from 2020-2022. "Western Early Arrivers" Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna supplied the largest volumes quickly and prioritized high-income countries (HICs) from registration to vaccine delivery. "Western Latecomers" Janssen and Novavax supplied intermediate volumes later, also prioritizing HICs but with a greater proportion to L&MICs. "Major Chinese Developers" Sinopharm and Sinovac supplied intermediate volumes early, primarily to middle-income countries (MICs). "Russian Developer" Gamaleya completed development early but ultimately supplied small volumes, primarily to middle-income countries (MICs). "Cosmopolitan Developer" Oxford/AstraZeneca supplied large volumes early to HICs and MICs at the lowest prices. Finally, "Small MIC Developers" CanSino, Bharat Biotech, Medigen, Finlay Institute and the Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CGEB), exported relatively small volumes to a few MICs. Low-income countries (LICs) were not targeted by any developer, and received far fewer doses, later, than any other income group. Almost all developers received public funding and other forms of support, but we found little evidence that such support was leveraged to expand global access.

CONCLUSIONS

Each of the six innovation models has different implications for which countries get access to which vaccines, how quickly, and at which prices. Each offers different strengths and weaknesses for achieving equitable access. Our findings also suggest that Western firms had the greatest capacity to develop and deliver vaccines quickly during the pandemic, but such capacity is rapidly becoming more globally distributed with MICs playing a significant role, especially in supplying other MICs. Given the critical role of public support in enabling pandemic vaccine development and supply, governments have both the capacity and responsibility to craft international rules that will make responses to future pandemics more equitable and effective.

COVID-19 vaccine intercountry distribution inequality and its underlying factors: a combined concentration index analysis and multiple linear regression analysis

Introduction

Inequitable access to COVID-19 vaccines among countries is a pressing global health issue. Factors such as economic power, political power, political stability, and health system strength contribute to disparities in vaccine distribution. This study aims to assess the inequality in vaccine distribution among countries based on these factors and identify their relationship with COVID-19 vaccine distribution.

Methods

A Concentration Index (CI) analysis was conducted to evaluate inequalities in the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines among countries based on four separate variables: GDP per capita, political stability (PS), World Power Index (WPI), and Universal Health Coverage (UHC). Additionally, Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) analysis was employed to explore the relationship between vaccine distribution and these independent variables. Two vaccine distribution variables were utilized for result reliability.

Results

The analysis revealed significant inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine distribution according to the countries' GDP/capita, PS, WPI, and UHC. However, the multiple linear regression analysis showed that there is no significant relationship between COVID-19 vaccine distribution and the countries' GDP/capita and that UHC is the most influential factor impacting COVID-19 vaccine distribution and accessibility.

Discussion

The findings underscore the complex interplay between economic, political, and health system factors in shaping vaccine distribution patterns. To improve the accessibility to vaccines in future pandemics, Global Health Governance (GHG) and countries should consider working on three areas; enhance political stabilities in countries, separate the political power from decision-making at the global level and most importantly support countries to achieve UHC.

An Internal Medicine Learning Collaborative Facilitating a Virtual Continuing Medical Education Program in Guyana and the Wider Caribbean During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVES

To collaborate and share medical knowledge between US and Caribbean physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic via a free online continuing medical education (CME) series.  Method: This was a multi-institution collaborative effort between the Southern Regional Area Health Education Center and Cape Fear Valley Medical Center, both located in North Carolina, USA, and its Caribbean partners, the Guyana Medical Council and Ministry of Health, and the University of the West Indies Medical Alumni Association, Jamaica. The lecture series ran from July 2021 to October 2022. The Zoom (Zoom Video Communications Inc., San Jose, CA, USA) meeting platform was used for the monthly lectures on the fourth Thursday between 7 and 8 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST).  Results: Analysis of program data from July 2021 through October 2022 (excluding December 2021) found 1,105 unique individuals engaged in the 15 continuing education sessions. The series had a cumulative total of 2,411 participants, with a mean session participation of 161 and a range of 94 to 299 participants per lecture. An outcome survey assessing the reasons for attendance identified that the most significant factors in their participation in the series were: a) the quality of educational content (83.21%), b) the ease of access and Zoom platform (81.76%), and c) the lectures being offered at no cost (61.31%), and 80.84% gained new medical knowledge leading to practice changes.  Conclusion: The Internal Medicine Learning Collaborative (IMLC) model can be easily replicated by following the steps outlined. It overcomes barriers such as travel and quarantine restrictions and is cost-effective to initiate and maintain. It allows physicians with access to resources and specialty training in the United States to share medical knowledge with colleagues in the developing world where such access may be limited, thus promoting health care and continuing education activity in their respective regions using freely available technologies.

Combination of spironolactone and sitagliptin improves clinical outcomes of outpatients with COVID-19: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

There are evidences showing that sitagliptin and spironolactone can potentially improve the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 cases. In this observational study on acutely symptomatic outpatient COVID-19 cases, we investigated the effects of spironolactone and sitagliptin on the outcomes of the disease.

METHODS

This is a prospective, naturally randomized cohort study. We followed mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 patients, who were treated with either combination (spironolactone 100 mg daily and sitagliptin 100 mg daily) or standard (steroid, antiviral and/or supportive care) therapy up to 30 days. The primary outcome was hospitalization rate. The secondary outcomes included ER visit, duration of disease, and complications, such as hypoglycemia, low blood pressure or altered mental status.

RESULTS

Of the 206 patients referred to clinics randomly, 103 received standard therapy and 103 treated with combination therapy. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, except for slightly higher clinical score in control group (6.92 ± 4.01 control, 4.87 ± 2.92 combination; P < 0.0001). Treatment with combination therapy was associated with lower admission rate (5.8% combination, 22.3% control; P = 0.0011), ER visits (7.8% combination, 23.3% control; P = 0.0021) and average duration of symptoms (6.67 ± 2.30 days combination, 18.71 ± 6.49 days control; P ≤ 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of sitagliptin and spironolactone reduced duration of COVID infection and hospital visits better than standard therapeutic approaches in outpatients with COVID-19. The effects of combination of sitagliptin and spironolactone in COVID-19 patients should be further verified in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Vaccine inequity: a threat to Africa's recovery from COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Vaccine inequity is a reality facing the Sub-Saharan Africa region as vaccine nationalism from high-income countries (HICs) leads to limited access to the lifesaving vaccines needed to end the pandemic. In Africa, a significant portion of the population has yet to be vaccinated against Covid-19; however, the barriers to accessing such vaccines, including capacity challenges, still persist despite the implementation of the COVAX facility meant to support the lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to boost vaccination.

METHODS

This study involved a systemic narrative review where literature search was conducted using the NCBI's PMC and BMC databases based on defined keywords. Three authors were involved in the literature search and consensus was applied to settle disagreements and validate the findings.

RESULTS

In this systematic narrative review, we report that vaccine nationalism remains a challenge for LMICs as HICs still hoard vaccines and even bypass COVAX to procure doses directly from the manufacturers. Factors that promote vaccine hesitancy in Africa include misinformation regarding the Covid-19 vaccine, a lack of trust in politicians and the pharmaceutical industry, and concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy. The policies implemented to enhance vaccine coverage in Africa, such as mandates, community engagement, and partnerships, all seek to promote equity of vaccination and ending Covid-19.

CONCLUSION

Covid-19 vaccine inequity persists and contributes to prolonged pandemic in LMICs. In response, African governments have taken certain measures to enhance vaccine uptake but more needs to be done to address resistance to vaccines.

Geoepidemiological perspective on COVID-19 pandemic review, an insight into the global impact

The COVID-19 pandemic showed major impacts, on societies worldwide, challenging healthcare systems, economies, and daily life of people. Geoepidemiology, an emerging field that combines geography and epidemiology, has played a vital role in understanding and combatting the spread of the virus. This interdisciplinary approach has provided insights into the spatial patterns, risk factors, and transmission dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic at different scales, from local communities to global populations. Spatial patterns have revealed variations in incidence rates, with urban-rural divides and regional hotspots playing significant roles. Cross-border transmission has highlighted the importance of travel restrictions and coordinated public health responses. Risk factors such as age, underlying health conditions, socioeconomic factors, occupation, demographics, and behavior have influenced vulnerability and outcomes. Geoepidemiology has also provided insights into the transmissibility and spread of COVID-19, emphasizing the importance of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission, super-spreading events, and the impact of variants. Geoepidemiology should be vital in understanding and responding to evolving new viral challenges of this and future pandemics.

A critical analysis of COVAX alliance and corresponding global health governance and policy issues: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

The COVAX alliance is a novel approach to international partnership in global health intended to achieve the worthy goal of 'COVID-19 vaccine equity'. This study aimed to identify the implementation challenges and framework gaps of COVAX and to explore the interconnected global health policy and governance gaps in ensuring equity, accessibility and affordability of vaccines.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to identify the implementation challenges and framework gaps of COVAX and related global health policy and governance gaps. A search was carried out in PubMed, Scopus, Springer Link and Embase databases. Manually searched the grey literature, such as official reports and articles. EndNote V.20 was used to manage the evidence screening, and data extraction was carried out in Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

Searches of four electronic databases and official UN, GAVI and WHO websites identified 4686 pieces of evidence. The 937 duplicates were removed, and the remaining 3749 articles were screened for the title and abstract. Most articles were eliminated as they do not address global COVAX or COVID-19 vaccine equity. The remaining 53 pieces of evidence were reviewed for full text, and ultimately 40 articles found eligible were included in the scoping review.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation challenges of COVAX were attributed mainly to the phenomenon of vaccine nationalism by rich countries. The future global health policy and governance structure must be re-examined to address the inadequacies of such novel super public-and-private partnership models.

Adjuvanted-SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein-Based Microparticulate Vaccine Delivered by Dissolving Microneedles Induces Humoral, Mucosal, and Cellular Immune Responses in Mice

COVID-19 continues to cause an increase in the number of cases and deaths worldwide. Due to the ever-mutating nature of the virus, frequent vaccination against COVID-19 is anticipated. Most of the approved SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are administered using the conventional intramuscular route, causing vaccine hesitancy. Thus, there is a need for an effective, non-invasive vaccination strategy against COVID-19. This study evaluated the synergistic effects of a subunit microparticulate vaccine delivered using microneedles. The microparticles encapsulated a highly immunogenic subunit protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, such as the spike protein's receptor binding domain (RBD). Adjuvants were also incorporated to enhance the spike RBD-specific immune response. Our vaccination study reveals that a microneedle-based vaccine delivering these microparticles induced spike RBD-specific IgM, IgG, IgG1, IgG2a, and IgA antibodies. The vaccine also generated high levels of CD4+ and CD8a+ molecules in the secondary lymphoid organs. Overall, dissolving microneedles delivery spike RBD antigen in microparticulate form induced a robust immune response, paving the way for an alternative self-administrable, non-invasive vaccination strategy against COVID-19.

Vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers in low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from facility surveys across six countries

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy remains a critical barrier in mitigating the effects of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The willingness of health care workers (HCWs) to be vaccinated, and, in turn, recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for their patient population is an important strategy. This study aims to understand the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and the reasoning for vaccine hesitancy among facility-based health care workers (HCWs) in LMICs.

METHODS

We conducted nationally representative phone-based rapid-cycle surveys across facilities in six LMICs to better understand COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. We gathered data on vaccine uptake among facility managers, their perceptions of vaccine uptake and hesitancy among the HCWs operating in their facilities, and their perception of vaccine hesitancy among the patient population served by the facility.

RESULTS

1,148 unique public health facilities participated in the study, with vaccines being almost universally offered to facility-based respondents across five out of six countries. Among facility respondents who have been offered the vaccine, more than 9 in 10 survey respondents had already been vaccinated at the time of data collection. Vaccine uptake among other HCWs at the facility was similarly high. Over 90% of facilities in Bangladesh, Liberia, Malawi, and Nigeria reported that all or most staff had already received the COVID-19 vaccine when the survey was conducted. Concerns about side effects predominantly drive vaccine hesitancy in both HCWs and the patient population.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that the opportunity to get vaccinated in participating public facilities is almost universal. We find vaccine hesitancy among facility-based HCWs, as reported by respondents, to be very low. This suggests that a potentially effective effort to increase vaccine uptake equitably would be to channel promotional activities through health facilities and HCWs.However, reasons for hesitancy, even if limited, are far from uniform across countries, highlighting the need for audience-specific messaging.

COVID-19 vaccination and governance in the case of low, middle and high-income countries

BACKGROUND

Global crises, regardless of the place where they started to spread or of the factors that triggered them, require a comprehensive approach, primarily based on good communication, cooperation and mutual support. No individual and no institution should remain indifferent to crises but, on the contrary, be fully aware that any involvement in curbing them matters. Although humanity can be affected by various types of crises, in this paper we refer to the one related to COVID-19 pandemic. There are certain reasons that come to justify our choice: first of all, being a shock with a strong impact on people, its analysis should be performed from several angles; this may bring to light an image with its disparate propagation and measures to counteract it both in developed countries, and especially in those with a shortage of resources. Secondly, in the context of the emergence of vaccines against COVID-19, it is helpful to have an overview of COVID-19 through the lens of the relationship between the vaccination process and the elements that characterize governance, with a differentiated dashboard by country categories worldwide: low, middle and high-income countries. Our study is far from capturing the complexity arising from such social problem, but rather aims to outline the defining role of governance when it comes to providing firm reactions to the COVID-19 crisis.

METHODS

Given that our sample consists of a large number of countries, namely 170, first, examined all together, and then, split into three groups (high, middle and low-income), it is challenging to address governance in association with COVID-19 vaccination, in order to see how much they interact and how each of the six aggregate governance indicators of the World Bank (Worldwide Governance Indicators) is reflected in this process. Even if they do not oscillate strongly over relatively short periods of time, reporting on health issues requires a sequential inventory, considering closer time intervals, so as to be able to act promptly. Thus, to better distinguish how the COVID-19 vaccination process evolved in low, middle and high-income countries, but also how it was imprinted by governance, we present the situation quarterly (March, June, September and December), in 2021, the year when the immunization campaigns were the most intense at the global level. Regarding the applied methods, we mention both OLS regressions with robust estimators and a panel model, used to investigate the determinants of COVID-19 vaccination, some of them describing the good governance, as well as other dimensions.

RESULTS

The findings point out that the influence of governance on COVID-19 vaccination differs depending on whether a country belongs to high, middle or low-income typology: the strongest determinism of governance on vaccination is encountered in high-income countries, and the weakest in low-income ones; in some cases, governance does not matter significantly. However, exploring the three groups of states included in the research, it is observed that the most relevant factors in this relationship are government effectiveness, regulatory quality and control of corruption.

CONCLUSIONS

Besides the order of importance of governance indicators on COVID-19 vaccination, our study indicates that, overall, governance positively shapes the vaccination rate at the level of the chosen sample. In normative terms, these findings can be translated particularly by the fact that they can serve as information to raise awareness on the relevance of the existence of an institutional framework that allows the formulation of strategies according to the patterns of each country, especially since the actionable tools depend on the available resources. As a general conclusion, public policies should be designed in such a way as to strengthen trust in vaccination regulations and in governments, to reduce the multifaceted negative effects of this health crisis and to hope for its total end.

Vaccine access, equity and justice: COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination

Although significant progress has been made in achieving goals for COVID-19 vaccine access, the quest for equity and justice remains an unfinished agenda. Vaccine nationalism has prompted calls for new approaches to achieve equitable access and justice not only for vaccines but also for vaccination. This includes ensuring country and community participation in global discussions and that local needs to strengthen health systems, address issues related to social determinants of health, build trust and leverage acceptance to vaccines, are addressed. Regional vaccine technology and manufacturing hubs are promising approaches to address access challenges and must be integrated with efforts to ensure demand. The current situation underlines the need for access, demand and system strengthening to be addressed along with local priorities for justice to be achieved. Innovations to improve accountability and leverage existing platforms are also needed. Sustained political will and investment is required to ensure ongoing production of non-pandemic vaccines and sustained demand, particularly when perceived threat of disease appears to be waning. Several recommendations are made to govern towards justice including codesigning the path forward with low-income and middle-income countries; establishing stronger accountability measures; establishing dedicated groups to engage with countries and manufacturing hubs to ensure that the affordable supply and predictable demand are in balance; addressing country needs for health system strengthening through leveraging existing health and development platforms and delivering on product presentations informed by country needs. Even if difficult, we must converge on a definition of justice well in advance of the next pandemic.

Experiences, Enablers, and Challenges in Service Delivery and Integration of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Rapid Systematic Review

The COVID-19 vaccination is a crucial public health intervention for controlling the spread and severity of the SARS-CoV2 virus. COVID-19 vaccines have been developed in record time, but their deployment has varied across countries, owing to differences in health system capacity, demand for the vaccine, and purchasing power of countries. The aim of this rapid review is to summarize and synthesize experiences on COVID-19 vaccine service delivery and integration to inform future COVID-19 vaccination programming and contribute to the knowledge base for future pandemic management. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Global Index Medicus databases. Twenty-five studies were included in the analysis. Included studies spanned nine countries where COVID-19 vaccines were delivered through mass, mobile, and fixed-post vaccination service delivery models. There was limited evidence of integrating COVID-19 vaccines into routine services for pregnant women, people who inject drugs, and leveraging existing health programs to deliver COVID-19 vaccines to the general population. Common challenges reported were vaccine skepticism, lack of adequate health workers, and linguistic barriers to access. Partnerships with a variety of stakeholders and the involvement of volunteers were vital in overcoming barriers and contributed to the efficient functioning of COVID-19 vaccination programs.

Identifying H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among health care providers: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to describe and map the evidence on COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal by physicians, nurses, and pharmacists in North America, the United Kingdom and the European Union, and Australia.

INTRODUCTION

Since 2009, we have experienced two pandemics: H1N1 "swine flu" and COVID-19. While severity and transmissibility of these viruses varied, vaccination has been a critical component of bringing both pandemics under control. However, uptake of these vaccines has been affected by vaccine hesitancy and refusal. The vaccination behaviors of health care providers, including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, are of particular interest as they have been priority populations to receive both H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccinations. Their vaccination views could affect the vaccination decisions of their patients.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were eligible for inclusion if they identified reasons for COVID-19 or H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, or pharmacists from the included countries. Published and unpublished literature were eligible for inclusion. Previous reviews were excluded; however, the reference lists of relevant reviews were searched to identify additional studies for inclusion.

METHODS

A search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Academic Search Premier databases was conducted April 28, 2021, to identify English-language literature published from 2009 to 2021. Gray literature and citation screening were also conducted to identify additional relevant literature. Titles, abstracts, and eligible full-text articles were reviewed in duplicate by 2 trained reviewers. Data were extracted in duplicate using a structured extraction tool developed for the review. Conflicts were resolved through discussion or with a third team member. Data were synthesized using narrative and tabular summaries.

RESULTS

In total, 83 articles were included in the review. Studies were conducted primarily across the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. The majority of articles (n=70) used cross-sectional designs to examine knowledge, attitudes, and uptake of H1N1 (n=61) or COVID-19 (n=22) vaccines. Physicians, medical students, nurses, and nursing students were common participants in the studies; however, only 8 studies included pharmacists in their sample. Across health care settings, most studies were conducted in urban, academic teaching hospitals, with 1 study conducted in a rural hospital setting. Concerns about vaccine safety, vaccine side effects, and perceived low risk of contracting H1N1 or COVID-19 were the most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy or refusal across both vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

With increased interest and attention on vaccines in recent years, intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, more research that examines vaccine hesitancy or refusal across different health care settings and health care providers is warranted. Future work should aim to utilize more qualitative and mixed methods research designs to capture the personal perspectives of vaccine hesitancy and refusal, and consider collecting data beyond the common urban and academic health care settings identified in this review.

Fighting cytokine storm and immunomodulatory deficiency: By using natural products therapy up to now

A novel coronavirus strain (COVID-19) caused severe illness and mortality worldwide from 31 December 2019 to 21 March 2023. As of this writing, 761,071,826 million cases have been diagnosed worldwide, with 6,879,677 million deaths accorded by WHO organization and has spread to 228 countries. The number of deaths is closely connected to the growth of innate immune cells in the lungs, mainly macrophages, which generate inflammatory cytokines (especially IL-6 and IL-1β) that induce "cytokine storm syndrome" (CSS), multi-organ failure, and death. We focus on promising natural products and their biologically active chemical constituents as potential phytopharmaceuticals that target virus-induced pro-inflammatory cytokines. Successful therapy for this condition is currently rare, and the introduction of an effective vaccine might take months. Blocking viral entrance and replication and regulating humoral and cellular immunity in the uninfected population are the most often employed treatment approaches for viral infections. Unfortunately, no presently FDA-approved medicine can prevent or reduce SARS-CoV-2 access and reproduction. Until now, the most important element in disease severity has been the host's immune response activation or suppression. Several medicines have been adapted for COVID-19 patients, including arbidol, favipiravir, ribavirin, lopinavir, ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, dexamethasone, and anti-inflammatory pharmaceutical drugs, such as tocilizumab, glucocorticoids, anakinra (IL-1β cytokine inhibition), and siltuximab (IL-6 cytokine inhibition). However, these synthetic medications and therapies have several side effects, including heart failure, permanent retinal damage in the case of hydroxyl-chloroquine, and liver destruction in the case of remdesivir. This review summarizes four strategies for fighting cytokine storms and immunomodulatory deficiency induced by COVID-19 using natural product therapy as a potential therapeutic measure to control cytokine storms.

Hydroxychloroquine for Non-Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Previous systematic reviews have identified no benefit of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. After publication of these reviews, the results of COPE, the largest randomized trial conducted to date, became available.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to synthesize the evidence on the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared to placebo or standard of care.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov complemented by manual search. Pairwise meta-analyses, risk of bias, and evidence certainty assessments were conducted, including optimal information size analysis (OIS). A level of significance of 0.05 was adopted in the meta-analysis. PROSPERO: CRD42021265427.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs with 3,219 participants were included. COVID-19 hospitalization and any adverse events rates were not significantly different between hydroxychloroquine (5.6% and 35.1%) and control (7.4% and 20.4%) (risk ratio, RR, 0.77, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.57-1.04, I2: 0%; RR 1.78, 95%-CI 0.90; 3.52, I2: 93%, respectively). The OIS (7,880) was not reached for COVID-19 hospitalization, independently of the simulation for anticipated event rate and RR reduction estimate.

CONCLUSION

Evidence of very low certainty showed lack of benefit with hydroxychloroquine in preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations. Despite being the systematic review with the largest number of participants included, the OIS, considering pre-vaccination response to infection, has not yet been reached.

A scoping review of facilitators and barriers influencing the implementation of surveillance and oral cholera vaccine interventions for cholera control in lower- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Cholera still affects millions of people worldwide, especially in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The Global Task Force on Cholera Control (GTFCC) has identified surveillance and oral cholera vaccines as two critical interventions to actualise the global roadmap goals-reduction of cholera-related deaths by 90% and decreasing the number of cholera endemic countries by half by 2030. Therefore, this study aimed to identify facilitators and barriers to implementing these two cholera interventions in LMIC settings.

METHODS

A scoping review using the methods presented by Arksey and O'Malley. The search strategy involved using key search terms (cholera, surveillance, epidemiology and vaccines) in three databases (PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science) and reviewing the first ten pages of Google searches. The eligibility criteria of being conducted in LMICs, a timeline of 2011-2021 and documents only in English were applied. Thematic analysis was performed, and the findings were presented according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension.

RESULTS

Thirty-six documents met the predefined inclusion criteria, covering 2011 to 2021. There were two themes identified regarding the implementation of surveillance: timeliness and reporting (1); and resources and laboratory capabilities (2). As for oral cholera vaccines, there were four themes identified: information and awareness (1); community acceptance and trusted community leaders (2); planning and coordination (3); and resources and logistics (4). Additionally, adequate resources, good planning and coordination were identified to be operating at the interface between surveillance and oral cholera vaccines.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that adequate and sustainable resources are crucial for timely and accurate cholera surveillance and that oral cholera vaccine implementation would benefit from increased community awareness and engagement of community leaders.

Low Resource Integrated Platform for Production and Analysis of Capped mRNA

The existing platform for large-scale mRNA production is fast, but consumable costs, process technicality, and complexity represent key bottlenecks limiting global mRNA biologics manufacturing. Another challenge is the lack of a consolidated platform for mRNA product characterization and assays that meet regulatory requirements. Bridging these innovation gaps to simplify processes and reduce cost would improve mRNA biologics manufacturability, especially in low-resource settings. This study develops a "cotranscriptional" capping strategy that utilizes T7 RNA polymerase, and the Vaccinia Capping System to synthesize and cap mRNA. We created an "integrated reaction buffer" that supports both capping enzymes for catalytic and in vitro transcription processes, enabling one-pot, two-step capped mRNA synthesis. Additionally, we report a novel, one-step analytic platform for rapid, quantitative, capped mRNA analysis. The assay involves target mRNA segment protection with cheap DNA primers and RNase digest of non-hybridized or non-target sequences before analysis by single nucleotide-resolving urea-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE). The integrated approach simplifies production processes and saves costs. Moreover, this assay has potential applications for mRNA analyses and post-transcriptional modification detection in biological samples. Finally, we propose a strategy that may enable unparalleled sequence coverage in RNase mass mapping by adapting the developed assay and replacing urea-PAGE with mass spectrometry.

Tracheostomies of Patients With COVID-19: A Survey of Infection Reported by Health Care Professionals

BACKGROUND

Health care professionals (HCPs) performing tracheostomies in patients with COVID-19 may be at increased risk of infection.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate factors underlying HCPs' COVID-19 infection and determine whether tracheostomy providers report increased rates of infection.

METHODS

An anonymous international survey examining factors associated with COVID-19 infection was made available November 2020 through July 2021 to HCPs at a convenience sample of hospitals, universities, and professional organizations. Infections reported were compared between HCPs involved in tracheostomy on patients with COVID-19 and HCPs who were not involved.

RESULTS

Of the 361 respondents (from 33 countries), 50% (n = 179) had performed tracheostomies on patients with COVID-19. Performing tracheostomies on patients with COVID-19 was not associated with increased infection in either univariable (P = .06) or multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.90-2.46; P = .13). Working in a low- or middle-income country (LMIC) was associated with increased infection in both univariable (P < .001) and multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 2.88; CI, 1.50-5.53; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Performing tracheostomy was not associated with COVID-19 infection, suggesting that tracheostomies can be safely performed in infected patients with appropriate precautions. However, HCPs in LMICs may face increased infection risk.

Assessment of the COVID-19 vaccine market landscape in 2021 relative to challenges in low- and middle-income countries

To evaluate the early vaccine landscape relative to challenges faced by low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), we conducted a cross-sectional study of all COVID-19 vaccines in clinical trials in 2021 (n = 123) using a structured 13-point analytic framework. Supply sustainability was defined as a composite metric of four manufacturing and regulation variables. Vaccine desirability was defined as a composite metric of nine development and distribution variables. Ten vaccines in phases 2/3, 3, or 4 and five vaccines in phases 1 and 1/2 had a sustainability score equal to or above 0.5. Ten vaccines in phases 2/3, 3, or 4 and seven vaccines in phases 1 and 1/2 had a desirability score equal to or above 0.5. No vaccines in Phases 2/3, 3, or 4 met more than one distribution criterion. Structured assessment COVID-19 vaccine candidates in clinical trials in 2021 revealed numerous challenges to adequate access in LMICs. Key policy recommendations included increasing technology transfer to LMICs, developing international legal mechanisms to prevent export bans, and increasing investment in vaccine candidates with more favorable distribution profiles.

Potential changes in vaccine access and policy landscape in Thailand post COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a dramatic impact on society, but little is known about how the pandemic affects the vaccine policy landscape and public perception of vaccines in Thailand. This study aims to describe potential changes in Thailand's policy landscape post-pandemic. We performed a literature review and in-depth interviews with 12 key informants to understand the policy landscape in Thailand. The findings were shared in a policy forum in December 2021. Several key findings were summarized. Funding and development have been thriving during the pandemic. However, a long-term commitment from all stakeholders is required to maintain policy continuation. A public-private partnership should be considered. The regulatory body needs to be prepared for product authorization. The vaccine introduction decision-making process, and investment in prevention and promotion, should further be discussed. In summary, it is important to reshape the environment and mentality of all stakeholders to create a sustainable and self-sufficient vaccine ecosystem.

Expanding current guidelines for management of COVID-19 focusing on low- and middle-income countries

Within a short time, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has evolved into a pandemic spreading at a speed and scale that has been able to overwhelm even the most advanced health care systems quickly. Multiple guidelines published by organizations such as the WHO and US' CDC address the response to COVID-19 at the international, national, and local levels. Although these guidelines are meant to be globally accessible, implementing them is a challenge given the variability in the health care systems worldwide between low- and middleincome countries (LMIC) and high-income countries and even amongst different regions within each LMIC. We have chosen to evaluate the current guidelines focusing on LMIC and expand on the guidelines as necessary.

Safety and immunogenicity of heterologous COVID-19 vaccine regimens to deal with product shortage: A randomised clinical trial in an elderly population

Objectives

In a context of COVID-19 vaccine shortages, this study sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of receiving one dose of Gam-COVID-Vac rAd26 followed by a second COVID-19 vaccine dose of either Gam-COVID-Vac rAd5, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BBIBP-CorV in a cohort of older adults.

Study design

Single-centre, randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial.

Methods

Adults aged ≥65 years who had received one dose of Gam-COVID-Vac rAd26 were randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive a second-dose COVID-19 vaccination of either Gam-COVID-Vac rAd5, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BBIBP-CorV. The primary outcome was the assessment of the humoral immune response to vaccination (i.e. antibody titres of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein at 28 days after second-dose vaccination). In addition, neutralising antibody titres at day 28 for the three schedules were measured.

Results

Of 85 participants who were enrolled in the study between 26 and July 30, 2021, 31 individuals were randomised to receive Gam-COVID-Vac rAd5, 27 to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 27 to BBIBP-CorV. The mean age of participants was 68.2 years (SD 2.9) and 49 (57.6%) were female. Participants who received Gam-COVID-Vac rAd5 and ChAdOx1 nCoV1-19 showed significantly increased anti-S titres at 28 days after second-dose vaccination, but this magnitude of difference was not observed for those who received BBIBP-CorV. The ratio between the geometric mean at day 28 and baseline within each group was 11.8 (6.98-19.89) among patients assigned to Gam-COVID-Vac rAd26/rAd5, 4.81 (2.14-10.81) for the rAd26/ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 1.53 (0.74-3.20) for the rAd26/BBIBP-CorV group. All of the schedules were shown to be safe.

Conclusions

The findings in this study contribute to the scarce information published on the safety and immunogenicity of Gam-COVID-Vac heterologous regimens and will help the development of guidelines and vaccine programme management.

COVID-19 and Kidney Disease: Progress in Health Inequity From Low-Income Settings

The acute coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on the incidence and prevalence of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease globally and in low-income settings. Chronic kidney disease increases the risk of developing COVID-19 and COVID-19 causes acute kidney injury directly or indirectly and is associated with high mortality in severe cases. Outcomes of COVID-19-associated kidney disease were not equitable globally owing to a lack of health infrastructure, challenges in diagnostic testing, and management of COVID-19 in low-income settings. COVID-19 also significantly impacted kidney transplant rates and mortality among kidney transplant recipients. Vaccine availability and uptake remains a significant challenge in low- and lower-middle-income countries compared with high-income countries. In this review, we explore the inequities in low- and lower-middle-income countries and highlight the progress made in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of patients with COVID-19 and kidney disease. We recommend further studies into the challenges, lessons learned, and progress made in the diagnosis, management, and treatment of patients with COVID-19-related kidney diseases and suggest ways to improve the care and management of patients with COVID-19 and kidney disease.

Asthma management in low and middle income countries: case for change

Asthma is the most common noncommunicable disease in children, and among the most common in adults. The great majority of people with asthma live in low and middle income countries (LMICs), which have disproportionately high asthma-related morbidity and mortality. Essential inhaled medications, particularly those containing inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), are often unavailable or unaffordable, and this explains much of the global burden of preventable asthma morbidity and mortality. Guidelines developed for LMICs are generally based on the outdated assumption that patients with asthma symptoms <1-3 times per week do not need (or benefit from) ICS. Even when ICS are prescribed, many patients manage their asthma with oral or inhaled short-acting β2-agonists (SABA) alone, owing to issues of availability and affordability. A single ICS-formoterol inhaler-based approach to asthma management for all severities of asthma, from mild to severe, starting at diagnosis, might overcome SABA overuse/over-reliance and reduce the burden of symptoms and severe exacerbations. However, ICS-formoterol inhalers are currently very poorly available or unaffordable in LMICs. There is a pressing need for pragmatic clinical trial evidence of the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of this and other strategies to improve asthma care in these countries. The global health inequality in asthma care that deprives so many children, adolescents and adults of healthy lives and puts them at increased risk of death, despite the availability of highly effective therapeutic approaches, is unacceptable. A World Health Assembly Resolution on universal access to affordable and effective asthma care is needed to focus attention and investment on addressing this need.

A novel SARS-CoV-2 subunit vaccine engineered on an immune-activating platform technology

While there are several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines currently available, additional options must be provided that are safe, effective, and affordable for the entire global population. We have developed a novel immune activating platform technology that will fill this need. This recombinant platform protein is produced in insect cells using baculoviral expression technology similar to what is currently used for several other approved vaccines as well as employed by myriad GMP facilities globally. Thus, infrastructure exists for rapid scale up following initial optimizations. Here we report initial results for a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (OMN008) based on our platform technology. Unadjuvanted OMN008 vaccination resulted in robust antigenicity and neutralization. Additionally, OMN008 vaccination induced a specific CD8 T-cell response. All of these results taken together indicate OMN008 may be an excellent candidate to fill gaps left by the currently available vaccines. Further testing is necessary to fully optimize production; however, overall cost of production should remain low given the simple formulation of this recombinant platform.

SARS-CoV-2 variants and vulnerability at the global level

Numerous variants of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic have evolved. Viral variants may evolve with harmful susceptibility to the immunity established with the existing COVID-19 vaccination. These variants are more transmissible, induce relatively extreme illness, have evasive immunological features, decrease neutralization using antibodies from vaccinated persons, and are more susceptible to re-infection. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has categorized SARS-CoV-2 mutations as variants of interest (VOI), variants of concern (VOC), and variants of high consequence (VOHC). At the moment, four VOC and many variants of interest have been defined and require constant observation. This review article summarizes various variants of SARS-CoV-2 surfaced with special emphasis on VOCs that are spreading across the world, as well as several viral mutational impacts and how these modifications alter the properties of the virus.

Risk factors associated with COVID-19 severity among patients on maintenance haemodialysis: a retrospective multicentre cross-sectional study in the UK

OBJECTIVES

To assess the applicability of risk factors for severe COVID-19 defined in the general population for patients on haemodialysis.

SETTING

A retrospective cross-sectional study performed across thirty four haemodialysis units in midlands of the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

All 274 patients on maintenance haemodialysis who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on PCR testing between March and August 2020, in participating haemodialysis centres.

EXPOSURE

The utility of obesity, diabetes status, ethnicity, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and socioeconomic deprivation scores were investigated as risk factors for severe COVID-19.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Severe COVID-19, defined as requiring supplemental oxygen or respiratory support, or a C reactive protein of ≥75 mg/dL (RECOVERY trial definitions), and its association with obesity, diabetes status, ethnicity, CCI, and socioeconomic deprivation.

RESULTS

63.5% (174/274 patients) developed severe disease. Socioeconomic deprivation associated with severity, being most pronounced between the most and least deprived quartiles (OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.22 to 6.47, p=0.015), after adjusting for age, sex and ethnicity. There was no association between obesity, diabetes status, ethnicity or CCI with COVID-19 severity. We found no evidence of temporal evolution of cases (p=0.209) or clustering that would impact our findings.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of severe COVID-19 is high among patients on haemodialysis; this cohort should be considered high risk. There was strong evidence of an association between socioeconomic deprivation and COVID-19 severity. Other risk factors that apply to the general population may not apply to this cohort.

Progress with COVID-19 vaccination in the WHO African Region in 2021

INTRODUCTION

as of end 2021, ten different vaccines have received Emergency use listing by the World Health Organisation. The vaccination response to the COVID pandemic started in February 2021 in the WHO African Region. WHO proposed a national coverage target of fully vaccinated population of 40% by the end of December 2021. This manuscript attempts to review the progress in the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccination in the African Region.

METHODS

we analysed the aggregate COVID-19 vaccine uptake and utilization data from the immunisation monitoring databases set up by countries and shared with the WHO Regional Office for Africa.

RESULTS

as of 31 December 2021, a total of 340,663,156 doses of COVID-19 vaccine were received in 46 countries in the African Region. The weekly average doses administered was 4,069,934 throughout the year. In the same period, a total of 114,498,980 persons received at least one dose, and 71,862,108 people were fully vaccinated, amounting to 6.6% of the total population in the Region. Only 5 countries attained the target of 40% full vaccination coverage. Disaggregated information was not available from all countries on the number of persons vaccinated by gender, and according to the priority population groupings. A total of 102,046 cases of adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs) were reported among which 6,260 (6.1%) were labelled as severe AEFIs.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccination coverage remains very low in the African Region, with all but 5 countries missing the 40% coverage target as of December 2021. Countries, donors and partners should mobilise political will and resources towards the attainment of the coverage targets. Countries will need to implement vaccination efforts using tailored approaches to reach unreached populations. The reporting gaps indicate the need to invest on efforts to improve the capture, analysis and use of more granular program data.

COVID-19 disease and vaccination in pregnant and lactating women

Background

More than 325,000 cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) have been reported among pregnant women in the Americas.

Aims

This review examines the impact of COVID‐19 in pregnant women and describes available evidence on the safety, effectiveness, and immune response(s) to vaccination among pregnant and lactating women.

Content

Multiple studies indicate that pregnant women are more susceptible to adverse COVID‐19 outcomes, including hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and invasive ventilation than non‐pregnant women with COVID‐19. Furthermore, COVID‐19 in pregnancy is associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Adverse COVID‐19 outcomes appear to disproportionately affect pregnant women from low‐ and middle‐income countries, likely reflecting inequities in access to quality healthcare. Despite the absence of safety and efficacy data from randomized clinical trials in this subpopulation, observational studies and data from pregnancy registries thus far have demonstrated that vaccination of pregnant or lactating women against COVID‐19 is safe, effective, and results in robust immune responses including transfer of antibodies to the newborn via the placenta and breast milk, respectively.

Implications

These data support vaccination recommendations intending to help protect these vulnerable individuals against COVID‐19 and its sequelae. Randomized clinical studies will further evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of COVID‐19 vaccines in these populations. This review examines the impact of COVID‐19 in pregnant women and describes available evidence on the safety, effectiveness, and immune response(s) to vaccination among pregnant and lactating women.

Sustained Antibody-Dependent NK Cell Functions in Mild COVID-19 Outpatients During Convalescence

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) pandemic has left researchers scrambling to identify the humoral immune correlates of protection from COVID-19. To date, the antibody mediated correlates of virus neutralization have been extensively studied. However, the extent that non-neutralizing functions contribute to anti-viral responses are ill defined. In this study, we profiled the anti-spike antibody subtype/subclass responses, along with neutralization and antibody-dependent natural killer cell functions in 83 blood samples collected between 4 and 201 days post-symptoms onset from a cohort of COVID-19 outpatients. We observed heterogeneous humoral responses against the acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein. Overall, anti-spike profiles were characterized by a rapid rise of IgA and sustained IgG titers. In addition, strong antibody-mediated natural killer effector responses correlated with milder disease and being female. While higher neutralization profiles were observed in males along with increased severity. These results give an insight into the underlying function of antibodies beyond neutralization and suggest that antibody-mediated natural killer cell activity is a key function of the humoral response against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

COVID-19 Management Missteps

In December 2019, the first case of a novel coronavirus infectious disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was identified in the province of Wuhan, China. Since the initial identification on March 11, 2020, by the World Health Organization (WHO), COVID-19 had rapidly spread all over the world, leading to the declaration of COVID-19 as a pandemic. In response to the exponential trend of reported confirmed cases, national governments worked quickly to devise plans to combat the spread and to soften the consequences which were to follow. Two primary approaches included limiting the spread of the virus and increasing hospital capacity. The implementation of these strategies, however, varied greatly among different governments and their respective populations. Countries developed similar guidelines in response to COVID-19, but with a variation. Many of these guidelines were similar in that they fell under the same general topics such as the use of facial masks, social distancing, and online learning. The effect of COVID-19 on public health was more reliant on the implementation of these recommendations rather than the recommendations themselves.  The medical therapies used to treat the widespread COVID-19 disease are flourishing and evolving rapidly. Ongoing research shows that the spectrum of treatment for COVID-19 varies from pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic interventions. Some of the treatments that are being used in clinical practice include supportive care, antiviral drugs, immunomodulatory agents, convalescent plasma transfusion, and monoclonal antibody treatments. In addition, the most promising approach thus far is the COVID-19 vaccine developed by Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and most recently Johnson & Johnson. Overall, as various treatment approaches are being explored and administered to people globally, it is important to acknowledge that there is currently no definite cure or any evidence-based treatment for COVID-19.  COVID-19 infections caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have brought devastating consequences to the lives of millions of people through their health effects and the failure of global initiatives to contain it. A review of many missteps that potentially could have altered the landscape for this virus to affect the lives of many is discussed with hope for a better approach going forward.

COVID-19 Recovery Patterns Across Alpha (B.1.1.7) and Delta (B.1.617.2) Variants of SARS-CoV-2

Background

B.1.1.7 (alpha) and B.1.617.2 (delta) variants of concern for SARS-CoV-2 have been reported to have differential infectivity and pathogenicity. Difference in recovery patterns across these variants and the interaction with vaccination status has not been reported in population-based studies.

Objective

The objective of this research was to study the length of stay and temporal trends in RT-PCR cycle times (Ct) across alpha and delta variants of SARS-CoV-2 between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.

Methods

Participants consisted of patients admitted to national COVID-19 treatment facilities if they had a positive RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, and analysis of variants was performed (using whole genome sequencing). Information on vaccination status, age, sex, cycle times (Ct) for four consecutive RT-PCR tests conducted during hospital stay, and total length of hospital stay for each participant were ascertained from electronic medical records.

Results

Patients infected with the delta variant were younger (mean age = 35years vs 39 years for alpha, p<0.001) and had lesser vaccination coverage (54% vs 72% for alpha, p<0.001). RT-PCR Ct values were similar for both variants at the baseline test; however by the fourth test, delta variant patients had significantly lower Ct values (27 vs 29, p=0.05). Length of hospital stay was higher in delta variant patients in vaccinated (3 days vs 2.9 days for alpha variant) as well as in unvaccinated patients (5.2 days vs 4.4 days for alpha variant, p<0.001). Hazards of hospital discharge after adjusting for vaccination status, age, and sex was higher for alpha variant infections (HR=1.2, 95% CI: 1.01-1.41, p=0.029).

Conclusion

Patients infected with the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 were found to have a slower recovery as indicated by longer length of stay and higher shedding of the virus compared to alpha variant infections, and this trend was consistent in both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients.

Identifying priority challenges and solutions for COVID-19 vaccine delivery in low- and middle-income countries: A modified Delphi study

BACKGROUND

The rapid implementation of global COVID-19 vaccination programs has surfaced many challenges and inequities, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, there continues to be a lack of consensus on which challenges are global priorities for action, and how to best respond to them. This study uses consensus-based methods to identify and rank the most important challenges and solutions for implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programs in LMICs.

METHODS

We conducted a three-round modified Delphi study with a global panel of vaccine delivery experts. In Round I, panelists identified broad topical challenges and solutions. Responses were collated and coded into distinct items. Through two further rounds of structured, iterative surveys panelists reviewed and ranked the identified items. Responses were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively to achieve consensus on the most important COVID-19 vaccine delivery challenges and solutions.

RESULTS

Of the 426 invited panelists, 96 completed Round I, 56 completed Round II, and 39 completed Round III. Across all three rounds there was equal representation by gender, and panelists reported work experience in all World Bank regions and across a variety of content areas and organizations. Of the 64 initially identified items, the panel achieved consensus on three challenges and 10 solutions. Challenges fell under themes of structural factors and infrastructure and human and material resources, while solutions also included items within themes of communication, community engagement, and access and planning, processes, and operations.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccine delivery is challenged by long-standing and structural inequities that disadvantage health service delivery in LMICs. These findings can, and should, be used by global health organizations to efficiently and optimally direct resources to respond to these key challenges and solutions.

mRNA-based COVID-19 Vaccines Booster Dose: Benefits, Risks and Coverage

The number of COVID-19 vaccine-rich countries that have started COVID-19 third-dose booster programs is growing dramatically despite the lack of robust evidence on the effectiveness, safety, and frequency of the required booster doses that makes the individuals/populations immune to COVID -19 infection. Beyond the ethical dilemma, the scarcity of studies on the optimal timing for offering booster doses, eligibility criteria, and if there is any association between premature or delayed administration and the degree of protection against infection. The aim of this mini- review was to collect and analyze published data on this topic in a trial to answer some questions related to the benefits versus the risks of offering frequent boosters of mRNA vaccines for increasing the population immunity against COVID-19 infection considering the current policy of providing SARS-CoV-2 vaccine booster doses in rich countries versus those in relatively poor countries with limited access to vaccination. (www.actabiomedica.it).