Perceptions and experiences of COVID-19 vaccines' side effects among healthcare workers at an Egyptian University Hospital: a cross-sectional study

Factors influencing adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination

Various novel platform technologies have been used for the development of COVID-19 vaccines. In this nested cohort study among healthcare workers in Australia and Brazil who received three different COVID-19-specific vaccines, we (a) evaluated the incidence of adverse events following immunization (AEFI); (b) compared AEFI by vaccine type, dose and country; (c) identified factors influencing the incidence of AEFI; and (d) assessed the association between reactogenicity and vaccine anti-spike IgG antibody responses. Of 1302 participants who received homologous 2-dose regimens of ChAdOx1-S (Oxford-AstraZeneca), BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or CoronaVac (Sinovac), 1219 (94%) completed vaccine reaction questionnaires. Following the first vaccine dose, the incidence of any systemic reaction was higher in ChAdOx1-S recipients (374/806, 46%) compared with BNT162b2 (55/151, 36%; p = 0.02) or CoronaVac (26/262, 10%; p < 0.001) recipients. After the second vaccine dose, the incidence of any systemic reaction was higher in BNT162b2 recipients (66/151, 44%) compared with ChAdOx1-S (164/806, 20%; p < 0.001) or CoronaVac (23/262, 9%; p < 0.001) recipients. AEFI risk was higher in younger participants, females, participants in Australia, and varied by vaccine type and dose. Prior COVID-19 did not impact the risk of AEFI. Participants in Australia compared with Brazil reported a higher incidence of any local reaction (170/231, 74% vs 222/726, 31%, p < 0.001) and any systemic reaction (171/231, 74% vs 328/726, 45%, p < 0.001), regardless of vaccine type. Following a primary course of ChAdOx1-S or CoronaVac vaccination, participants who did not report AEFI seroconverted at a similar rate to those who reported local or systemic reactions. In conclusion, we found that the incidence of AEFI was influenced by participant age and COVID-19 vaccine type, and differed between participants in Australia and Brazil.

Reported COVID-19 vaccines side effects among Algerian athletes: a comparison between inactivated virus, adenoviral vector, and mRNA COVID-19 vaccines

OBJECTIVES

Many types of COVID19 vaccines are administered globally, yet there is not much evidence regarding their side effects among athletes. This study evaluated the selfreported postvaccination side effects of inactivated virus, adenoviral vector, and mRNA COVID19 vaccines among Algerian athletes.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out in Algeria between March 01 and 4 April 2022. The study used a validated questionnaire with twenty-five multiple-choice items covering the participants' anamnestic characteristics, post-vaccination side effects (their onset and duration), post-vaccination medical care, and risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 273 athletes completed the survey. Overall, (54.6%) of the athletes reported at least one local side effect, while (46.9%) reported at least one systemic side effect. These side effects were more prevalent among the adenoviral vector group compared to the inactivated virus and mRNA groups. The most common local side effect was injection site pain (29.9%), while Fever (30.8%) was the most prevalent systemic side effect. The age group of 31-40 years, allergy, previous infection with COVID-19, and the first dose of vaccines were associated with an increased risk of side effects for all groups of COVID-19 vaccines. Logistic regression analysis further revealed that compared to males, the incidence of reported side effects was significantly higher in females (odd ratio (OR) = 1.16; P = 0.015*) only for the adenoviral vector vaccine group. In addition, a significantly higher percentage of athletes group of high dynamic/moderate static or high dynamic /high static components suffered from post-vaccination side effects compared to the group of athletes with high dynamic/low static components (OR = 14.68 and 14.71; P < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The adenoviral vector vaccines have the highest rate of side effects, followed by the inactivated virus and mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. COVID‑19 vaccines were well-tolerated among Algerian athletes and there were no reports of serious side effects. Nevertheless, further long-term follow-up study with a larger sample size of athletes (from different types and sports categories) is warranted to establish the long-term safety of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Disturbances of menstrual cycle after immunization against SARS-CoV-2 and their risk factors: Cross-sectional clinical study

OBJECTIVE

Abnormalities of the menstrual cycle were reported after infection with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccination against it, but the available data are very heterogeneous, do not reflect intermenstrual variations or regional differences, and their risk factors are missing.

METHODS

We performed a survey-based study among 6383 employees and students of Ulm University Hospital in Germany between March 1 and 31, 2021. Attributes of menstrual cycles such as cycle length (CL), menses duration (MD), and bleeding volume (BV) were reported as categorical variables before and after immunization against SARS-CoV-2 (first, second, third vaccination or infection). Additionally, the potential risk factors for cycle changes were evaluated and all participants reported the subjective perception of changes, their duration, and time of occurrence.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 1726 participants. CL and BV significantly changed after vaccination, but not MD. The subjective perception showed only slight levels of agreement with the objective changes, with the highest Cohen's kappa for CL. The risk factors for the variations in CL were previous cycle irregularities, and risk factors for the changes in BV were age and body mass index. The combination of vaccines (homogenous or heterogeneous) and different types of immunization (infection and vaccination) had no significant effect on cycle irregularities.

CONCLUSION

In summary, immunization against SARS-CoV-2 causes changes in the characteristics of the menstrual cycle, which are mostly temporary. The individual risk factors, but not the type of immunization, can affect the mentioned changes.

Understanding the challenges to COVID-19 vaccines and treatment options, herd immunity and probability of reinfection

Unlike pandemics in the past, the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which rapidly spread worldwide, was met with a different approach to control and measures implemented across affected countries. The lack of understanding of the fundamental nature of the outbreak continues to make COVID-19 challenging to manage for both healthcare practitioners and the scientific community. Challenges to vaccine development and evaluation, current therapeutic options, convalescent plasma therapy, herd immunity, and the emergence of reinfection and new variants remain the major obstacles to combating COVID-19. This review discusses these challenges in the management of COVID-19 at length and highlights the mechanisms needed to provide better understanding of this pandemic.

Correlates and Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Persons Living With HIV in Trinidad and Tobago

BACKGROUND

Persons living with HIV may be at risk of more severe forms of COVID-19 infection and minimizing health risks largely depends on their acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccinations.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the correlates and predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among persons living with HIV in Trinidad and Tobago.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey using a structured interview was conducted. Data were compiled on patient socio-demographics, diagnosed chronic diseases, psychological factors, and decisions to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Pearson χ² tests examined the associations between study variables and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and multivariable logistic regression analyses examined its predictors.

RESULTS

In this study, 84% were virally suppressed, i.e., HIV viral load <1000 copies/ml. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was found to be 39%. Univariate analysis showed that higher vaccine hesitancy was significantly associated with females (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.23-3.33) and patients of mixed ethnicity (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.07-3.15). In our multivariable analysis, psychological factors namely, confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.05-0.47), the perceived benefits of the vaccine (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.79), and cues to action (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.47-0.97) were observed as predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSION

Psychological factors such as confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine, perceived benefits of the vaccine, and cues to action were possible predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. This study underscored the continued need for strategies to increase confidence and knowledge about the benefits of taking the COVID-19 vaccine among persons living with HIV.

Perception of COVID-19 and Vaccine Acceptance among Healthcare Workers

Background

COVID-19 infection is more likely to be acquired and transmitted by healthcare workers (HCWs). Furthermore, they serve as role models for communities in terms of COVID-19 vaccination attitudes. As a result, HCWs' reluctance to vaccinate could have a significant impact on pandemic containment efforts.

Aim

To characterize the current COVID-19 vaccine approval situation among healthcare workers and to determine the most likely reason for agreement or disagreement with COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

This cross-sectional design included 451 HCWs from COVID-19 treatment institutions, with COVID-19 exposure risk changing depending on job function and working location.

Results

The study recruited 156 physicians and 295 nurses, of whom 58.1% were female and 41.9% were male. Physicians had a significantly higher rate of participation in COVID-19 pandemic prevention and control, with a rate of 69.9% versus 55.3% of nurses. Acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination was reported by 40.8% of HCWs. The rate of acceptance was significantly higher among physicians (55.1%) than among nurses (33.2%) (p < 0.001). Most HCWs (67.8%) believed the vaccine was not effective. Physicians showed more significant trust in the effectiveness of the vaccine than nurses (41% and 27.5, respectively) (p=0.003). Concerning vaccine safety, only 32.8% of HCWs believed it was safe. This was significantly higher in physicians (41.7%) than in nurses (28.1%) (p=0.004).

Conclusion

Vaccination uncertainty is common among healthcare personnel in Egypt, and this could be a significant barrier to vaccine uptake among the public. Campaigns to raise vaccine knowledge are critically needed.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine intention in Benin in 2021: A cross-sectional study

Introduction

The development of COVID-19 vaccines has brought considerable hope for the control of the pandemic. With a view to promoting good vaccine coverage, this study aimed to measure vaccine intention against COVID-19 and to understand the factors that promote it.

Method

In April 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional and analytical study at the national level through a telephone survey of Beninese aged 18 years or older. We used a marginal quota sampling method (n = 865) according to age, gender, and department. We constructed the questionnaire using a theoretical framework of health intention. We determined the factors associated with intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 in Benin using a multinomial logistic regression at the 5 % significance level.

Results

The intention to vaccinate was 64.7 %; 10.9 % of the population were hesitant, and 24.4 % did not want to vaccinate. Thinking that it was important to get vaccinated (AOR = 0.274; CI = 0.118-0.638) or that getting vaccinated will help protect loved ones from the virus (AOR = 0.399; CI = 0.205-0.775) increased the intention to vaccinate. Having a high level of education (AOR = 1.988; CI = 1.134-3.484), thinking that the vaccine could put one's health at risk (AOR = 2.259; CI = 1.114-4.578), and hearing something negative about the vaccine (AOR = 1.765; CI = 1.059-2.941) reduced intention to vaccinate. In addition, believing that the creators of the vaccine had ensured its safety (AOR = 0.209; CI = 0.101-0.430), and believing that it was unlikely to be infected after vaccination (AOR = 0.359; CI = 0.183-0.703) decreased hesitancy in favour of the intention to vaccinate.

Conclusion

In April 2021, vaccine intention was high, but maintaining this high rate requires building confidence in the vaccine and combating misinformation about the vaccine.

Short-Term Adverse Effects Following Booster Dose of Inactivated-Virus vs. Adenoviral-Vector COVID-19 Vaccines in Algeria: A Cross-Sectional Study of the General Population

COVID-19 booster vaccines have been adopted in almost all countries to enhance the immune response and combat the emergence of new variants. Algeria adopted this strategy in November 2021. This study was conducted to consider the self-reported side effects of COVID-19 booster vaccines by Algerians who were vaccinated with a booster dose of one of the approved inactivated-virus vaccines, such as BBIBP-CorV and CoronaVac, or one of the adenoviral-vector-based vaccines, such as Gam-COVID-Vac, AZD1222 and Ad26.COV2.S, and to determine the eventual risk factors. A cross-sectional study using an online self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) was conducted in Algeria between 28 April 2022, and 20 July 2022. A descriptive analysis of the 196 individuals who were included showed a nearly equal distribution of adenoviral- (52%) and inactivated-virus vaccines (48%) and of males (49.5%) and females (50.5%). The results showed that 74.7% of the studied population reported at least one local or systemic side effect. These side effects were more frequent among adenoviral-vector vaccinees (87.3%) than inactivated-virus vaccinees (60.6%) (sig. < 0.001). Injection site pain (40.3%), heat at the injection site (21.4%), and arm pain (16.3%) were the most common local side effects. These signs generally appeared in the first 12 h (73.3%) and generally lasted less than 24 h (32.8%). More interestingly, these signs differed from those that followed the administration of primer doses (48.5%) and were generally more severe (37%). The same observation was reported for systemic side effects, where the signs were especially most severe in the adenoviral-vaccinated group (49.4% vs. 20.8%; sig. = 0.001). These signs generally appeared within the first day (63.6%) and mostly disappeared before two days (50.8%), with fatigue (41.8%), fever (41.3%), and headache (30.1%) being the most common. Adenoviral-vector vaccinees (62.7%) were more likely to use medications to manage these side effects than were inactivated-virus vaccinees (45.7%) (sig. = 0.035) and paracetamol (48.5%) was the most used medication. Adenoviral-based vaccines were the types of vaccines that were most likely to cause side effects. In addition, being female increased the risk of developing side effects; regular medication was associated with local side effects among inactivated-virus vaccinees; and previous infection with COVID-19 was associated with systemic and local side effects among adenovirus-based vaccinees. These results support the short-term safety of booster vaccines, as has been reported for primer doses.

Self-reported side effects of the Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers in Ethiopia, Africa: A cross-sectional study

Introduction

Ethiopia is the second most populous country in Africa. Ethiopia received most of its COVID-19 vaccines through donations. The Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine is the first to be donated to Ethiopia by the COVAX facility. Healthcare workers were the priority population that received the Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. However, there was no nationwide study on the safety of the vaccine in Ethiopia. This study aimed to measure the prevalence and predictors of self-reported side effects of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine.

Materials and methods

The study employed a cross-sectional design. A sample of healthcare workers who took Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was drawn from four regions of Ethiopia; namely, Amhara, Oromia, Somali, and Southwest. Data were collected on sociodemographic characteristics, medical anamnesis, COVID-19 related anamnesis, and COVID-19 vaccine anamnesis via telephone interview. Descriptive and inferential analyses were done. The software, IBM SPSS Statistics v21.0, was used for analyses of data.

Results

Out of 384 people, 346 responded (response rate: 90.1%). Female accounted for 34.1% of the respondents. The mean age of the respondents was 31.0 years (Standard Deviation (SD) = 7.4). Nurses accounted for 43.7% of the respondents. The prevalence of at least one local- and systemic-side effect was 50.6 and 44.5%, respectively. The most frequent local- and systemic- side effect were injection site pain and headache, respectively. Both types of side effects mostly subsided in the first 3 days. A third of healthcare workers with side effects took at least one medication. Paracetamol followed by diclofenac sodium were taken by healthcare workers to overcome side effects. There was no independent predictor of local side effect. After controlling for age and chronic diseases, the odds of healthcare workers with COVID-19 like symptoms to experience systemic side effects was 1.38 (Confidence Interval (CI): 1.04–1.82) times more than that of healthcare workers without COVID-19 like symptoms.

Conclusions

The prevalence of local- and systemic-side effects of the Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was modest. As the symptoms were mostly common in the first 3 days, it is preferable to monitor healthcare workers at least in the first 3 days following the administration of the vaccine.