1
|
Besselink D, Herber GCM, van der Lucht F, Sealy MJ, Krijnen WP, Jager-Wittenaar H, Finnema EJ. Evaluating changes in the well-being of older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal cohort study. Eur J Public Health 2024:ckae130. [PMID: 39190888 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckae130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/29/2024] Open
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic affected the lives of older adults. Yet, little is known about changes in well-being among older adults during the pandemic, especially when COVID-19 measures were relaxed. Therefore, we aimed to assess changes in the well-being of older adults during multiple turning points of the pandemic. This longitudinal study included data from Dutch older adults (≥65 years old) participating in the Lifelines COVID-19 cohort. Data consisted of seven questionnaires, administered every 2-4 months between May 2020 and October 2021. The outcomes were quality of life (n = 14 682), physical fitness (n = 14 761), and feelings of isolation (n = 14 611), all graded on a scale from 0 to 10. Changes in well-being were analysed by multivariable linear mixed-effects models. The context of measures was described using the Government Stringency Index. Quality of life and feelings of isolation decreased when measures were tightened and increased when measures were relaxed. For example, when measures relaxed after the first lockdown in May 2020, quality of life increased by 0.23 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.16-0.29] towards July 2020. Physical fitness decreased by 0.26 [95% CI: 0.15-0.37] during the study period. Differences between subsamples were not found, except for sex in feelings of isolation, which differences diminished after a period of relaxed measures. Changes in quality of life and feelings of isolation improved after periods of stringent COVID-19 measures. Physical fitness did not improve after measures were relaxed, suggesting a possible negative effect of the pandemic on the physical fitness of older adults.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Djoeke Besselink
- Research Group Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands
- FAITH Research, Groningen/Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
- Regional Public Health Service, GGD Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Health Science-Nursing Science and Education, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Gerrie-Cor M Herber
- Centre for Prevention, Lifestyle and Health, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Fons van der Lucht
- Research Group Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands
- FAITH Research, Groningen/Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
- Centre for Public Health, Healthcare and Society, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Martine J Sealy
- Research Group Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands
- FAITH Research, Groningen/Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| | - Wim P Krijnen
- Research Group Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands
- FAITH Research, Groningen/Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| | - Harriët Jager-Wittenaar
- Research Group Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands
- FAITH Research, Groningen/Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Dietetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Research Unit Experimental Anatomy, Department Physiotherapy and Human Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Evelyn J Finnema
- FAITH Research, Groningen/Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
- Health Science-Nursing Science and Education, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Research Group Nursing Diagnostics, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Research Group Living, Wellbeing and Care for Older People, NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lambooij MS, Pijpers J, van de Kassteele J, Fransen MP, Hahné SJ, Hof N, Kroese FM, de Melker H, van Dijk M, Uiters E, de Bruin M. Mobile vaccination units to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake in areas with lower coverage: a within-neighbourhood analysis using national registration data, the Netherlands, September-December 2021. Euro Surveill 2024; 29. [PMID: 39176986 DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.es.2024.29.34.2300503] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/24/2024] Open
Abstract
BackgroundVaccine uptake differs between social groups. Mobile vaccination units (MV-units) were deployed in the Netherlands by municipal health services in neighbourhoods with low uptake of COVID-19 vaccines.AimWe aimed to evaluate the impact of MV-units on vaccine uptake in neighbourhoods with low vaccine uptake.MethodsWe used the Dutch national-level registry of COVID-19 vaccinations (CIMS) and MV-unit deployment registrations containing observations in 253 neighbourhoods where MV-units were deployed and 890 contiguous neighbourhoods (total observations: 88,543 neighbourhood-days). A negative binomial regression with neighbourhood-specific temporal effects using splines was used to study the effect.ResultsDuring deployment, the increase in daily vaccination rate in targeted neighbourhoods ranged from a factor 2.0 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8-2.2) in urbanised neighbourhoods to 14.5 (95% CI: 11.6-18.0) in rural neighbourhoods. The effects were larger in neighbourhoods with more voters for the Dutch conservative Reformed Christian party but smaller in neighbourhoods with a higher proportion of people with non-western migration backgrounds. The absolute increase in uptake over the complete intervention period ranged from 0.22 percentage points (95% CI: 0.18-0.26) in the most urbanised neighbourhoods to 0.33 percentage point (95% CI: 0.28-0.37) in rural neighbourhoods.ConclusionDeployment of MV-units increased daily vaccination rate, particularly in rural neighbourhoods, with longer travel distance to permanent vaccination locations. This public health intervention shows promise to reduce geographic and social health inequalities, but more proactive and long-term deployment is required to identify its potential to substantially contribute to overall vaccination rates at country level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mattijs S Lambooij
- Centre for Prevention, Lifestyle and Health, Department Behaviour & Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
- Erasmus University, Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joyce Pijpers
- Centre for Epidemiology and Surveillance of Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Jan van de Kassteele
- Department of Statistics, Data Science and Mathematical Modelling, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Mirjam P Fransen
- Centre for Prevention, Lifestyle and Health, Department Behaviour & Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Susan Jm Hahné
- Centre for Epidemiology and Surveillance of Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Niek Hof
- Dutch National Coordination for COVID-19 Control, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | - Floor M Kroese
- Centre for Prevention, Lifestyle and Health, Department Behaviour & Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
- Utrecht University, Department of Social, Health and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Hester de Melker
- Centre for Epidemiology and Surveillance of Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Mart van Dijk
- Centre for Prevention, Lifestyle and Health, Department Behaviour & Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Ellen Uiters
- Centre for Food, Prevention and Health Care, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Marijn de Bruin
- Centre for Prevention, Lifestyle and Health, Department Behaviour & Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
- Radboud University Medical Centre, Institute of Health Sciences, IQ Health, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Vos ERA, van Hagen CCE, Wong D, Smits G, Kuijer M, Wijmenga-Monsuur AJ, Kaczorowska J, van Binnendijk RS, van der Klis FRM, den Hartog G, de Melker HE. SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence Trends in the Netherlands in the Variant of Concern Era: Input for Future Response. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2024; 18:e13312. [PMID: 38837866 DOI: 10.1111/irv.13312] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2024] [Revised: 04/23/2024] [Accepted: 04/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/07/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To inform future response planning we aimed to assess SARS-CoV-2 trends in infection- and/or vaccine-induced immunity, including breakthrough infections, among (sub)groups, professions and regions in the Dutch population during the Variant of Concern (VOC)-era. METHODS In this prospective population-based cohort, randomly selected participants (n = 9985) aged 1-92 years (recruited early-2020) donated home-collected fingerstick-blood samples at six timepoints in 2021/2022, covering waves dominated by Alpha, Delta, and multiple Omicron (sub-)variants. IgG antibody assessment against Spike-S1 and Nucleoprotein was combined with vaccination- and testing data to estimate infection-induced (inf) and total (infection- and vaccination-induced) seroprevalence. RESULTS Nationwide inf-seroprevalence rose modestly from 12% (95% CI 11-13) since Alpha to 26% (95% CI 24-28) amidst Delta, while total seroprevalence increased rapidly to 87% (95% CI 85-88), particularly in elderly and those with comorbidities (i.e., vulnerable groups). Interestingly, highest infection rates were noticeable among low/middle educated elderly, non-Western, those in contact professions, adolescents and young adults, and in low-vaccination coverage regions. Following Omicron emergence, inf-seroprevalence elevated sharply to 62% (95% CI 59-65) and further to 86% (95% CI 83-90) in late-2022, with frequent breakthrough infections and decreasing seroprevalence dissimilarities between most groups. Whereas > 90% of < 60-year-olds had been infected at least once, 30% of vaccinated vulnerable individuals had still not acquired hybrid immunity. CONCLUSIONS Groups identified to have been infected disproportionally during the acute phase of the pandemic require specific attention in evaluation of control measures and future response planning worldwide. Furthermore, ongoing tailored vaccination efforts and (sero-)monitoring of vulnerable groups may remain important.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric R A Vos
- Centre for Epidemiology and Surveillance, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Cheyenne C E van Hagen
- Centre for Epidemiology and Surveillance, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Denise Wong
- Centre for Epidemiology and Surveillance, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Gaby Smits
- Centre for Immunology of Infectious Diseases and Vaccines, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Marjan Kuijer
- Centre for Immunology of Infectious Diseases and Vaccines, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Alienke J Wijmenga-Monsuur
- Centre for Immunology of Infectious Diseases and Vaccines, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Joanna Kaczorowska
- Centre for Immunology of Infectious Diseases and Vaccines, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Robert S van Binnendijk
- Centre for Immunology of Infectious Diseases and Vaccines, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Fiona R M van der Klis
- Centre for Immunology of Infectious Diseases and Vaccines, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Gerco den Hartog
- Centre for Immunology of Infectious Diseases and Vaccines, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
- Laboratory of Medical Immunology, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Hester E de Melker
- Centre for Epidemiology and Surveillance, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
van Roekel C, Labuschagne L, Pijpers J, van Roon A, Smagge B, Ferreira JA, Hahné S, de Melker H. Factors associated with COVID-19 autumn 2022 booster uptake in the Netherlands among older adults aged ≥ 60 years and younger adults with chronic conditions. Vaccine 2024; 42:146-155. [PMID: 38101955 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.12.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2023] [Revised: 11/21/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A booster with bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was offered in the Netherlands in autumn, 2022. We aimed to investigate vaccine uptake during the autumn 2022 booster round among the population subgroups at risk for severe COVID-19 that were specifically targeted by this campaign: the medical risk group aged 18-59 years and individuals ≥ 60 years. We calculated booster uptake in both populations and analyzed determinants of booster uptake among those who had received at least one prior COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS Having had an autumn 2022 booster dose was defined as having received a COVID-19 vaccination between 19 September 2022 and 7 March 2023. The study population included individuals who received at least one previous COVID-19 vaccination. National registries of sociodemographic determinants and COVID-19 vaccination were linked by a unique person identifier. Voting proportions for political parties were included at neighborhood level. Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine autumn booster uptake were ranked by importance by random forest analyses. RESULTS Booster uptake was 68 % among those aged ≥ 60 and 30 % among those aged 18-59 years with a medical risk factor for severe disease. For both target groups the most important determinant for booster uptake was age (15 % in 18-29 years to 72 % in 80 + years). Voting proportions for progressive liberal political parties ranked second in the random forest analysis in both groups, with an increasing proportion of votes associated with higher uptake. In the 60 + group, household type ranked third, with highest vaccine uptake among married couples without children (72 %) and the lowest uptake among unmarried couples with children (47 %). In the medical risk group, migration status ranked third. Migrants with two parents born abroad had the lowest uptake (18 %), whereas migrants with both parents born in the Netherlands had the highest uptake (35 %). CONCLUSION The target group of people aged ≥ 60 years was much better reached than the target group of people with a medical risk aged 18-59 years. Uptake varied considerably among subgroups in both target groups. The findings of this study can be used in future vaccination strategies as well as for further research to better understand the drivers and barriers of vaccine uptake among the subgroups with notably low uptake.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caren van Roekel
- Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
| | - Lisanne Labuschagne
- Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Joyce Pijpers
- Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Annika van Roon
- Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Bente Smagge
- Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - José A Ferreira
- Statistics and Modelling, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Susan Hahné
- Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Hester de Melker
- Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Campman SL, Boyd A, Coyer L, Schinkel J, Agyemang C, Galenkamp H, Koopman ADM, Chilunga FP, Schim van der Loeff MF, van Houtum L, Leenstra T, Stronks K, Prins M. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination uptake in six ethnic groups living in Amsterdam, the Netherlands: A registry-based study within the HELIUS cohort. Prev Med 2024; 178:107822. [PMID: 38103796 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2023.107822] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2023] [Revised: 12/01/2023] [Accepted: 12/11/2023] [Indexed: 12/19/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Ethnic minority groups have experienced a disproportionate burden of COVID-19, and should therefore be especially encouraged to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. This study compared first-dose uptake of the primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination series across six ethnic groups in Amsterdam, the Netherlands in 2021. METHODS We analyzed data from participants of the population-based HELIUS cohort. We linked their data to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination registry data of the Public Health Service of Amsterdam. We included registry data from January 6, 2021 (the start of the Dutch vaccination campaign) until September 6, 2021 (a date by which all adults in the Netherlands could have received one or two vaccine doses). SARS-CoV-2 vaccination uptake was defined as having received at least one vaccine dose of the primary vaccination series. We examined the association between ethnicity and vaccination uptake using multivariable logistic regression, while accounting for the age and sex distribution of ethnic groups in Amsterdam. RESULTS We included 19,006 participants (median age 53 years [interquartile range 41-62], 57% female). SARS-CoV-2 vaccination uptake was highest in the South-Asian Surinamese group (60.3%, 95%CI = 58.2-62.3%), followed by the Dutch (59.6%, 95%CI = 58.0-61.1%), Ghanaian (54.1%, 95%CI = 51.7-56.5%), Turkish (47.7%, 95%CI = 45.9-49.6%), African Surinamese (43.0%, 95%CI = 41.2-44.7%), and Moroccan (35.8%, 95%CI = 34.1-37.5%) groups. After adjusting for age, sex, perceived social support, and presence of relevant comorbidities, participants of African Surinamese, Ghanaian, Turkish and Moroccan origin were significantly less likely to be vaccinated than those of Dutch origin. CONCLUSIONS Prevention strategies should continue tailoring to specific ethnic groups to encourage vaccination uptake and reduce barriers to vaccination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie L Campman
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Infectious Diseases, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Anders Boyd
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Infectious Diseases, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Stichting hiv monitoring, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Liza Coyer
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Infectious Diseases, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Janke Schinkel
- Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, Meibergdreef 15, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Charles Agyemang
- Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Henrike Galenkamp
- Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Health Behaviors and Chronic Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anitra D M Koopman
- Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Health Behaviors and Chronic Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Felix P Chilunga
- Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Health Behaviors and Chronic Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten F Schim van der Loeff
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Infectious Diseases, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lieke van Houtum
- Department of Healthy Living, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Tjalling Leenstra
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Karien Stronks
- Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Health Behaviors and Chronic Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maria Prins
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Infectious Diseases, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|