Trends and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 vaccine recipients: a federated analysis of 57.9 million patients’ primary care records in situ using OpenSAFELY

Mental health conditions and COVID-19 vaccine outcomes: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Research shows that people with a history of mental health conditions were at increased risk of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, and mortality. However, the relationship between mental health conditions and COVID-19 vaccine outcomes such as vaccine intention, uptake and vaccine breakthrough is not yet well-understood.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search on the topics of COVID-19 vaccine intentions, vaccine uptake, and vaccine breakthrough, in relation to mental health conditions (e.g., depression, schizophrenia), in four databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and PsychINFO, and the publication lists of Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), The Health Improvement Network (THIN), OpenSAFELY, and QResearch. Inclusion criteria focussed on studies reporting any of the aforementioned COVID-19 vaccine outcomes among people with mental health conditions.

RESULTS

Of 251 publications initially identified, 32 met our inclusion criteria. Overall, the evidence is inconclusive regarding the levels of intention to accept COVID-19 vaccines among people with mental health conditions. People with mental health conditions were more likely to have lower uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, compared to people without. Common barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake included concerns about the safety, effectiveness, and side effects of the vaccines. Limited evidence also suggests that vaccine breakthrough may be a particular risk for those with substance use disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence for the association between COVID-19 vaccine intentions and mental health conditions is mixed. Vaccine uptake might be lower in people with mental health conditions compared to people without, yielding interventions to encourage vaccine uptake in this population. Our understanding of COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough in this population also needs enhancing.

Cohort study of cardiovascular safety of different COVID-19 vaccination doses among 46 million adults in England

The first dose of COVID-19 vaccines led to an overall reduction in cardiovascular events, and in rare cases, cardiovascular complications. There is less information about the effect of second and booster doses on cardiovascular diseases. Using longitudinal health records from 45.7 million adults in England between December 2020 and January 2022, our study compared the incidence of thrombotic and cardiovascular complications up to 26 weeks after first, second and booster doses of brands and combinations of COVID-19 vaccines used during the UK vaccination program with the incidence before or without the corresponding vaccination. The incidence of common arterial thrombotic events (mainly acute myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke) was generally lower after each vaccine dose, brand and combination. Similarly, the incidence of common venous thrombotic events, (mainly pulmonary embolism and lower limb deep venous thrombosis) was lower after vaccination. There was a higher incidence of previously reported rare harms after vaccination: vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia after first ChAdOx1 vaccination, and myocarditis and pericarditis after first, second and transiently after booster mRNA vaccination (BNT-162b2 and mRNA-1273). These findings support the wide uptake of future COVID-19 vaccination programs.

Consistency, completeness and external validity of ethnicity recording in NHS primary care records: a cohort study in 25 million patients' records at source using OpenSAFELY

BACKGROUND

Ethnicity is known to be an important correlate of health outcomes, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, where some ethnic groups were shown to be at higher risk of infection and adverse outcomes. The recording of patients' ethnic groups in primary care can support research and efforts to achieve equity in service provision and outcomes; however, the coding of ethnicity is known to present complex challenges. We therefore set out to describe ethnicity coding in detail with a view to supporting the use of this data in a wide range of settings, as part of wider efforts to robustly describe and define methods of using administrative data.

METHODS

We describe the completeness and consistency of primary care ethnicity recording in the OpenSAFELY-TPP database, containing linked primary care and hospital records in > 25 million patients in England. We also compared the ethnic breakdown in OpenSAFELY-TPP with that of the 2021 UK census.

RESULTS

78.2% of patients registered in OpenSAFELY-TPP on 1 January 2022 had their ethnicity recorded in primary care records, rising to 92.5% when supplemented with hospital data. The completeness of ethnicity recording was higher for women than for men. The rate of primary care ethnicity recording ranged from 77% in the South East of England to 82.2% in the West Midlands. Ethnicity recording rates were higher in patients with chronic or other serious health conditions. For each of the five broad ethnicity groups, primary care recorded ethnicity was within 2.9 percentage points of the population rate as recorded in the 2021 Census for England as a whole. For patients with multiple ethnicity records, 98.7% of the latest recorded ethnicities matched the most frequently coded ethnicity. Patients whose latest recorded ethnicity was categorised as Other were most likely to have a discordant ethnicity recording (32.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care ethnicity data in OpenSAFELY is present for over three quarters of all patients, and combined with data from other sources can achieve a high level of completeness. The overall distribution of ethnicities across all English OpenSAFELY-TPP practices was similar to the 2021 Census, with some regional variation. This report identifies the best available codelist for use in OpenSAFELY and similar electronic health record data.

Improving the representativeness of UK's national COVID-19 Infection Survey through spatio-temporal regression and post-stratification

Population-representative estimates of SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence and antibody levels in specific geographic areas at different time points are needed to optimise policy responses. However, even population-wide surveys are potentially impacted by biases arising from differences in participation rates across key groups. Here, we used spatio-temporal regression and post-stratification models to UK's national COVID-19 Infection Survey (CIS) to obtain representative estimates of PCR positivity (6,496,052 tests) and antibody prevalence (1,941,333 tests) for different regions, ages and ethnicities (7-December-2020 to 4-May-2022). Not accounting for vaccination status through post-stratification led to small underestimation of PCR positivity, but more substantial overestimations of antibody levels in the population (up to 21 percentage points), particularly in groups with low vaccine uptake in the general population. There was marked variation in the relative contribution of different areas and age-groups to each wave. Future analyses of infectious disease surveys should take into account major drivers of outcomes of interest that may also influence participation, with vaccination being an important factor to consider.

Clinical coding of long COVID in primary care 2020-2023 in a cohort of 19 million adults: an OpenSAFELY analysis

Background

Long COVID is the patient-coined term for the persistent symptoms of COVID-19 illness for weeks, months or years following the acute infection. There is a large burden of long COVID globally from self-reported data, but the epidemiology, causes and treatments remain poorly understood. Primary care is used to help identify and treat patients with long COVID and therefore Electronic Health Records (EHRs) of past COVID-19 patients could be used to help fill these knowledge gaps. We aimed to describe the incidence and differences in demographic and clinical characteristics in recorded long COVID in primary care records in England.

Methods

With the approval of NHS England we used routine clinical data from over 19 million adults in England linked to SARS-COV-2 test result, hospitalisation and vaccination data to describe trends in the recording of 16 clinical codes related to long COVID between November 2020 and January 2023. Using OpenSAFELY, we calculated rates per 100,000 person-years and plotted how these changed over time. We compared crude and adjusted (for age, sex, 9 NHS regions of England, and the dominant variant circulating) rates of recorded long COVID in patient records between different key demographic and vaccination characteristics using negative binomial models.

Findings

We identified a total of 55,465 people recorded to have long COVID over the study period, which included 20,025 diagnoses codes and 35,440 codes for further assessment. The incidence of new long COVID records increased steadily over 2021, and declined over 2022. The overall rate per 100,000 person-years was 177.5 cases in women (95% CI: 175.5-179) and 100.5 in men (99.5-102). The majority of those with a long COVID record did not have a recorded positive SARS-COV-2 test 12 or more weeks before the long COVID record.

Interpretation

In this descriptive study, EHR recorded long COVID was very low between 2020 and 2023, and incident records of long COVID declined over 2022. Using EHR diagnostic or referral codes unfortunately has major limitations in identifying and ascertaining true cases and timing of long COVID.

Funding

This research was supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) (OpenPROMPT: COV-LT2-0073).

A Profile of Influenza Vaccine Coverage for 2019-2020: Database Study of the English Primary Care Sentinel Cohort

BACKGROUND

Innovation in seasonal influenza vaccine development has resulted in a wider range of formulations becoming available. Understanding vaccine coverage across populations including the timing of administration is important when evaluating vaccine benefits and risks.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to report the representativeness, uptake of influenza vaccines, different formulations of influenza vaccines, and timing of administration within the English Primary Care Sentinel Cohort (PCSC).

METHODS

We used the PCSC of the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre. We included patients of all ages registered with PCSC member general practices, reporting influenza vaccine coverage between September 1, 2019, and January 29, 2020. We identified influenza vaccination recipients and characterized them by age, clinical risk groups, and vaccine type. We reported the date of influenza vaccination within the PCSC by International Standard Organization (ISO) week. The representativeness of the PCSC population was compared with population data provided by the Office for National Statistics. PCSC influenza vaccine coverage was compared with published UK Health Security Agency's national data. We used paired t tests to compare populations, reported with 95% CI.

RESULTS

The PCSC comprised 7,010,627 people from 693 general practices. The study population included a greater proportion of people aged 18-49 years (2,982,390/7,010,627, 42.5%; 95% CI 42.5%-42.6%) compared with the Office for National Statistics 2019 midyear population estimates (23,219,730/56,286,961, 41.3%; 95% CI 4.12%-41.3%; P<.001). People who are more deprived were underrepresented and those in the least deprived quintile were overrepresented. Within the study population, 24.7% (1,731,062/7,010,627; 95% CI 24.7%-24.7%) of people of all ages received an influenza vaccine compared with 24.2% (14,468,665/59,764,928; 95% CI 24.2%-24.2%; P<.001) in national data. The highest coverage was in people aged ≥65 years (913,695/1,264,700, 72.3%; 95% CI 72.2%-72.3%). The proportion of people in risk groups who received an influenza vaccine was also higher; for example, 69.8% (284,280/407,228; 95% CI 69.7%-70%) of people with diabetes in the PCSC received an influenza vaccine compared with 61.2% (983,727/1,607,996; 95% CI 61.1%-61.3%; P<.001) in national data. In the PCSC, vaccine type and brand information were available for 71.8% (358,365/498,923; 95% CI 71.7%-72%) of people aged 16-64 years and 81.9% (748,312/913,695; 95% CI 81.8%-82%) of people aged ≥65 years, compared with 23.6% (696,880/2,900,000) and 17.8% (1,385,888/7,700,000), respectively, of the same age groups in national data. Vaccination commenced during ISO week 35, continued until ISO week 3, and peaked during ISO week 41. The in-week peak in vaccination administration was on Saturdays.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCSC's sociodemographic profile was similar to the national population and captured more data about risk groups, vaccine brands, and batches. This may reflect higher data quality. Its capabilities included reporting precise dates of administration. The PCSC is suitable for undertaking studies of influenza vaccine coverage.

Testing the impact of differing behavioural science informed text message content in COVID-19 vaccination invitations on vaccine uptake: A randomised clinical trial

Behavioural science constructs can be incorporated into messaging strategies to enhance the effectiveness of public health campaigns by increasing the occurrence of desired behaviours. This study investigated the impact of behavioural science-informed text message strategies on COVID-19 vaccination rates in 18-39-year-olds in an area of low uptake in London during the first vaccination offer round in the United Kingdom. This three-armed randomised trial recruited unvaccinated residents of an urban Central London suburb being offered their first vaccination between May and June 2021. Participants were randomised to receive the control (current practice) text message or one of two different behavioural science-informed COVID-19 vaccine invitation strategies. Both intervention strategies contained the phrase "your vaccine is ready and waiting for you", aiming to evoke a sense of ownership, with one strategy also including a pre-alert message. The main outcome measures were vaccination rates at 3 and 8 weeks after message delivery. A total of 88,820 residents were randomly assigned to one of the three trial arms. Each arm had a vaccine uptake rate of 27.2 %, 27.4 % and 27.3 % respectively. The mean age of participants was 28.2 years (SD ± 5.7), the mean index of multiple deprivation was 4.3 (SD ± 2.0) and 50.4 % were women. Vaccine uptake varied by demographics, however there was no significant difference between trial arms (p = 0.872). Delivery was successful for 53.6 % of text messages. Our choice of behavioural science informed messaging strategies did not improve vaccination rates above the rate seen for the current practice message. This likely reflects the wide exposure to public health campaigns during the pandemic, as such text messages nudges were unlikely to alter existing informed decision-making processes. Text message delivery was relatively low, indicating a need for accurate mobile phone number records and multi-modal approaches to reach eligible patients for vaccination. The protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04895683) on 20/05/2021.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the general population and under-resourced communities from high-income countries: realist review

OBJECTIVE

To compare vaccination willingness before rollout and 1 year post-rollout uptake among the general population and under-resourced communities in high-income countries.

DESIGN

A realist review.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, PubMed, Dimensions ai and Google Scholar.

SETTING

High-income countries.

DEFINITIONS

We defined vaccination willingness as the proportion of participants willing or intending to receive vaccines prior to availability. We defined vaccine uptake as the real proportion of the population with complete vaccination as reported by each country until November 2021.

RESULTS

We included data from 62 studies and 18 high-income countries. For studies conducted among general populations, the proportion of vaccination willingness was 67% (95% CI 62% to 72%). In real-world settings, the overall proportion of vaccine uptake among those countries was 73% (95% CI 69% to 76%). 17 studies reported pre-rollout willingness for under-resourced communities. The summary proportion of vaccination willingness from studies reporting results among people from under-resourced communities was 52% (95% CI 0.46% to 0.57%). Real-world evidence about vaccine uptake after rollout among under-resourced communities was limited.

CONCLUSION

Our review emphasises the importance of realist reviews for assessing vaccine acceptance. Limited real-world evidence about vaccine uptake among under-resourced communities in high-income countries is a call to context-specific actions and reporting.

COVID-19 inequalities in England: a mathematical modelling study of transmission risk and clinical vulnerability by socioeconomic status

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in major inequalities in infection and disease burden between areas of varying socioeconomic deprivation in many countries, including England. Areas of higher deprivation tend to have a different population structure-generally younger-which can increase viral transmission due to higher contact rates in school-going children and working-age adults. Higher deprivation is also associated with a higher presence of chronic comorbidities, which were convincingly demonstrated to be risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease. These two major factors need to be combined to better understand and quantify their relative importance in the observed COVID-19 inequalities.

METHODS

We used UK Census data on health status and demography stratified by decile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), which is a measure of socioeconomic deprivation. We calculated epidemiological impact using an age-stratified COVID-19 transmission model, which incorporated different contact patterns and clinical health profiles by decile. To separate the contribution of each factor, we considered a scenario where the clinical health profile of all deciles was at the level of the least deprived. We also considered the effectiveness of school closures and vaccination of over 65-year-olds in each decile.

RESULTS

In the modelled epidemics in urban areas, the most deprived decile experienced 9% more infections, 13% more clinical cases, and a 97% larger peak clinical size than the least deprived; we found similar inequalities in rural areas. Twenty-one per cent of clinical cases and 16% of deaths in England observed under the model assumptions would not occur if all deciles experienced the clinical health profile of the least deprived decile. We found that more deaths were prevented in more affluent areas during school closures and vaccination rollouts.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that both clinical and demographic factors synergise to generate health inequalities in COVID-19, that improving the clinical health profile of populations would increase health equity, and that some interventions can increase health inequalities.

Characteristics of primary care practices by proportion of patients unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2: a cross-sectional cohort study

BACKGROUND

Variations in primary care practices may explain some differences in health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to evaluate the characteristics of primary care practices by the proportion of patients unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based, cross-sectional cohort study using linked administrative data sets in Ontario, Canada. We calculated the percentage of patients unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 enrolled with each comprehensive-care family physician, ranked physicians according to the proportion of patients unvaccinated, and identified physicians in the top 10% (v. the other 90%). We compared characteristics of family physicians and their patients in these 2 groups using standardized differences.

RESULTS

We analyzed 9060 family physicians with 10 837 909 enrolled patients. Family physicians with the largest proportion (top 10%) of unvaccinated patients (n = 906) were more likely to be male, to have trained outside of Canada, to be older, and to work in an enhanced fee-for-service model than those in the remaining 90%. Vaccine coverage (≥ 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine) was 74% among patients of physicians with the largest proportion of unvaccinated patients, compared with 87% in the remaining patient population. Patients in the top 10% group tended to be younger and live in areas with higher levels of ethnic diversity and immigration and lower incomes.

INTERPRETATION

Primary care practices with the largest proportion of patients unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 served marginalized communities and were less likely to use team-based care models. These findings can guide resource planning and help tailor interventions to integrate public health priorities within primary care practices.

Impact of vaccination on the association of COVID-19 with cardiovascular diseases: An OpenSAFELY cohort study

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 is associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombotic events, but the implications of vaccination for this increased risk are uncertain. With the approval of NHS England, we quantified associations between COVID-19 diagnosis and cardiovascular diseases in different vaccination and variant eras using linked electronic health records for ~40% of the English population. We defined a 'pre-vaccination' cohort (18,210,937 people) in the wild-type/Alpha variant eras (January 2020-June 2021), and 'vaccinated' and 'unvaccinated' cohorts (13,572,399 and 3,161,485 people respectively) in the Delta variant era (June-December 2021). We showed that the incidence of each arterial thrombotic, venous thrombotic and other cardiovascular outcomes was substantially elevated during weeks 1-4 after COVID-19, compared with before or without COVID-19, but less markedly elevated in time periods beyond week 4. Hazard ratios were higher after hospitalised than non-hospitalised COVID-19 and higher in the pre-vaccination and unvaccinated cohorts than the vaccinated cohort. COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of cardiovascular events after COVID-19 infection. People who had COVID-19 before or without being vaccinated are at higher risk of cardiovascular events for at least two years.

COVID-19-associated mortality in individuals with serious mental disorders in Sweden during the first two years of the pandemic- a population-based register study

BACKGROUND

Reports at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic suggested differences in COVID-19-associated mortality between individuals with serious mental disorders (SMD) and the population at large.

AIM

To compare the pattern of COVID-19-associated mortality in individuals with and without SMD in Sweden over the two main pandemic years.

METHODS

We compared the pattern of COVID-19-associated mortality in individuals with and without SMD in Sweden during 2020 and 2021. For SMD, we included psychotic disorder, bipolar disorder, and severe depression. The analysis was based on summary data from the Swedish Board of Health and Welfare covering the entire adult Swedish population.

RESULTS

The overall relative risk (RR) for experiencing a COVID-19-associated death was 1.66 (CI 1.50-1.83; p < 0.001) for individuals with SMD versus individuals without SMD. The corresponding RRs were 3.25 (CI 2.84-3.71; p < 0.001) for individuals with psychotic disorder, 1.06 (CI 0.88-1.26; p = 0.54) for individuals with bipolar disorder, and 1.03 (CI 0.80-1.32; p = 0.80) for individuals with severe depression. Compared to their respective counterparts in the non-SMD group, in the psychotic disorder and severe depression group, the RR were higher in women than in men. In the bipolar disorder group, the RR was higher in men than in women. The RR of COVID-19-associated death was generally higher in younger individuals with SMD. Individuals with psychosis between 18 and 59 years had the highest RR of COVID-19-associated death with 7.25 (CI 4.54-11.59; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with SMD, and particularly those with psychotic disorders, had a higher risk of COVID-19-associated death than the general population. As this is a pattern also seen with other infections, people with SMD may be similarly vulnerable in future pandemics.

Dimensions of equality in uptake of COVID-19 vaccination in Wales, UK: A multivariable linked data population analysis

Vaccination has proven to be effective at preventing severe outcomes of COVID-19 infection, and uptake in the population has been high in Wales. However, there is a risk that high-level vaccination coverage statistics may mask hidden inequalities in under-served populations, many of whom may be at increased risk of severe outcomes of COVID-19 infection. The study population included 1,436,229 individuals aged 18 years and over, alive and residence in Wales as at 31st July 2022, and excluded immunosuppressed or care home residents. We compared people who had received one or more vaccinations to those with no vaccination using linked data from nine datasets within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank. Multivariable analysis was undertaken to determine the impact of a range of sociodemographic characteristics on vaccination uptake, including ethnicity, country of birth, severe mental illness, homelessness and substance use. We found that overall uptake of first dose of COVID-19 vaccination was high in Wales (92.1 %), with the highest among those aged 80 years and over and females. Those aged under 40 years, household composition (aOR 0.38 95 %CI 0.35-0.41 for 10+ size household compared to two adult household) and being born outside the UK (aOR 0.44 95 %CI 0.43-0.46) had the strongest negative associations with vaccination uptake. This was followed by a history of substance misuse (aOR 0.45 95 %CI 0.44-0.46). Despite high-level population coverage in Wales, significant inequalities remain across several underserved groups. Factors associated with vaccination uptake should not be considered in isolation, to avoid drawing incorrect conclusions. Ensuring equitable access to vaccination is essential to protecting under-served groups from COVID-19 and further work needs to be done to address these gaps in coverage, with focus on tailored vaccination pathways and advocacy, using trusted partners and communities.

Predictors of Motivation to Receive a COVID-19 Vaccination and the Number of COVID-19 Vaccine Doses Received in Patients with Schizophrenia

Individuals with schizophrenia are more likely to be infected with COVID-19 than are members of the general population. No prospective study has examined the associations of multi-dimensional factors with the motivation to receive vaccination against COVID-19. This follow-up study investigated the effects of individual (sociodemographic and illness characteristics, depression, and self-esteem), environmental (perceived social support), and individual-environmental interaction factors (self-stigma and loneliness) on the motivation to receive vaccination against COVID-19 and the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received one year later among 300 individuals with schizophrenia. The associations of baseline factors with motivation to receive vaccination against COVID-19 and the number of vaccine doses received 1 year later were examined through linear regression analysis. The results indicated that greater loneliness (p < 0.01) and being married or cohabitating (p < 0.05) at baseline were significantly associated with lower motivation to receive vaccination against COVID-19 at follow-up. Disorganization (p < 0.05) at baseline was significantly associated with fewer COVID-19 vaccine doses at follow-up; greater motivation to receive vaccination was significantly associated with more COVID-19 vaccine doses at follow-up (p < 0.001). Health professionals should consider the identified predictors while developing intervention programs aimed at enhancing vaccination against COVID-19 in individuals with schizophrenia.

Understanding the leading indicators of hospital admissions from COVID-19 across successive waves in the UK

Following the end of universal testing in the UK, hospital admissions are a key measure of COVID-19 pandemic pressure. Understanding leading indicators of admissions at the National Health Service (NHS) Trust, regional and national geographies help health services plan for ongoing pressures. We explored the spatio-temporal relationships of leading indicators of hospitalisations across SARS-CoV-2 waves in England. This analysis includes an evaluation of internet search volumes from Google Trends, NHS triage calls and online queries, the NHS COVID-19 app, lateral flow devices (LFDs), and the ZOE app. Data sources were analysed for their feasibility as leading indicators using Granger causality, cross-correlation, and dynamic time warping at fine spatial scales. Google Trends and NHS triages consistently temporally led admissions in most locations, with lead times ranging from 5 to 20 days, whereas an inconsistent relationship was found for the ZOE app, NHS COVID-19 app, and LFD testing, which diminished with spatial resolution, showing cross-correlation of leads between -7 and 7 days. The results indicate that novel surveillance sources can be used effectively to understand the expected healthcare burden within hospital administrative areas though the temporal and spatial heterogeneity of these relationships is a key determinant of their operational public health utility.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antipsychotic prescribing in individuals with autism, dementia, learning disability, serious mental illness or living in a care home: a federated analysis of 59 million patients' primary care records in situ using OpenSAFELY

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic affected how care was delivered to vulnerable patients, such as those with dementia or learning disability.

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether this affected antipsychotic prescribing in at-risk populations.

METHODS

With the approval of NHS England, we completed a retrospective cohort study, using the OpenSAFELY platform to explore primary care data of 59 million patients. We identified patients in five at-risk groups: autism, dementia, learning disability, serious mental illness and care home residents. We calculated the monthly prevalence of antipsychotic prescribing in these groups, as well as the incidence of new prescriptions in each month.

FINDINGS

The average monthly rate of antipsychotic prescribing increased in dementia from 82.75 patients prescribed an antipsychotic per 1000 patients (95% CI 82.30 to 83.19) in January-March 2019 to 90.1 (95% CI 89.68 to 90.60) in October-December 2021 and from 154.61 (95% CI 153.79 to 155.43) to 166.95 (95% CI 166.23 to 167.67) in care homes. There were notable spikes in the rate of new prescriptions issued to patients with dementia and in care homes. In learning disability and autism groups, the rate of prescribing per 1000 decreased from 122.97 (95% CI 122.29 to 123.66) to 119.29 (95% CI 118.68 to 119.91) and from 54.91 (95% CI 54.52 to 55.29) to 51.04 (95% CI 50.74 to 51.35), respectively.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

We observed a spike in antipsychotic prescribing in the dementia and care home groups, which correlated with lockdowns and was likely due to prescribing of antipsychotics for palliative care. We observed gradual increases in antipsychotic use in dementia and care home patients and decreases in their use in patients with learning disability or autism.

Eleven key measures for monitoring general practice clinical activity during COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study using 48 million adults' primary care records in England through OpenSAFELY

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on delivery of NHS care. We have developed the OpenSAFELY Service Restoration Observatory (SRO) to develop key measures of primary care activity and describe the trends in these measures throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

With the approval of NHS England, we developed an open source software framework for data management and analysis to describe trends and variation in clinical activity across primary care electronic health record (EHR) data on 48 million adults.We developed SNOMED-CT codelists for key measures of primary care clinical activity such as blood pressure monitoring and asthma reviews, selected by an expert clinical advisory group and conducted a population cohort-based study to describe trends and variation in these measures January 2019-December 2021, and pragmatically classified their level of recovery one year into the pandemic using the percentage change in the median practice level rate.

Results

We produced 11 measures reflective of clinical activity in general practice. A substantial drop in activity was observed in all measures at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic. By April 2021, the median rate had recovered to within 15% of the median rate in April 2019 in six measures. The remaining measures showed a sustained drop, ranging from a 18.5% reduction in medication reviews to a 42.0% reduction in blood pressure monitoring. Three measures continued to show a sustained drop by December 2021.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a substantial change in primary care activity across the measures we developed, with recovery in most measures. We delivered an open source software framework to describe trends and variation in clinical activity across an unprecedented scale of primary care data. We will continue to expand the set of key measures to be routinely monitored using our publicly available NHS OpenSAFELY SRO dashboards with near real-time data.

Funding

This research used data assets made available as part of the Data and Connectivity National Core Study, led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics and funded by UK Research and Innovation (grant ref MC_PC_20058).The OpenSAFELY Platform is supported by grants from the Wellcome Trust (222097/Z/20/Z); MRC (MR/V015757/1, MC_PC-20059, MR/W016729/1); NIHR (NIHR135559, COV-LT2-0073), and Health Data Research UK (HDRUK2021.000, 2021.0157).

A Systematic Review of Behaviour Change Techniques within Interventions to Increase Vaccine Uptake among Ethnic Minority Populations

COVID-19 caused significant morbidity and mortality amongst ethnic minority groups, but vaccine uptake remained lower than non-minoritised groups. Interventions to increase vaccine uptake among ethnic minority communities are crucial. This systematic review synthesises and evaluates behaviour change techniques (BCTs) in interventions to increase vaccination uptake in ethnic minority populations. We searched five databases and grey literature sources. From 7637 records identified, 23 studies were included in the review. Interventions were categorised using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and Behaviour Change Taxonomy v1. Vaccines included influenza, pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria, meningitis and hepatitis. Interventions were primarily delivered in health centres/clinics and community settings. Six BCW intervention functions and policy categories and 26 BCTs were identified. The main intervention functions used were education, persuasion and enablement. Overall, effective interventions had multi-components and were tailored to specific populations. No strong evidence was observed to recommend specific interventions, but raising awareness and involvement of community organisations was associated with positive effects. Several strategies are used to increase vaccine uptake among ethnic minority communities; however, these do not address all issues related to low vaccine acceptance. There is a strong need for an increased understanding of addressing vaccine hesitancy among ethnic minority groups.

First dose COVID-19 vaccine coverage amongst adolescents and children in England: an analysis of 3.21 million patients' primary care records in situ using OpenSAFELY

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programme in England was extended to include all adolescents and children by April 2022. The aim of this paper is to describe trends and variation in vaccine coverage in different clinical and demographic groups amongst adolescents and children in England by August 2022. Methods: With the approval of NHS England, a cohort study was conducted of 3.21 million children and adolescents' records in general practice in England,  in situ and within the infrastructure of the electronic health record software vendor TPP using OpenSAFELY. Vaccine coverage across various demographic (sex, deprivation index and ethnicity) and clinical (risk status) populations is described. Results: Coverage is higher amongst adolescents than it is amongst children, with 53.5% adolescents and 10.8% children having received their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Within those groups, coverage varies by ethnicity, deprivation index and risk status; there is no evidence of variation by sex. Conclusion: First dose COVID-19 vaccine coverage is shown to vary amongst various demographic and clinical groups of children and adolescents.

Changes in medication safety indicators in England throughout the covid-19 pandemic using OpenSAFELY: population based, retrospective cohort study of 57 million patients using federated analytics

Objective

To implement complex, PINCER (pharmacist led information technology intervention) prescribing indicators, on a national scale with general practice data to describe the impact of the covid-19 pandemic on safe prescribing.

Design

Population based, retrospective cohort study using federated analytics.

Setting

Electronic general practice health record data from 56.8 million NHS patients by use of the OpenSAFELY platform, with the approval of the National Health Service (NHS) England.

Participants

NHS patients (aged 18-120 years) who were alive and registered at a general practice that used TPP or EMIS computer systems and were recorded as at risk of at least one potentially hazardous PINCER indicator.

Main outcome measure

Between 1 September 2019 and 1 September 2021, monthly trends and between practice variation for compliance with 13 PINCER indicators, as calculated on the first of every month, were reported. Prescriptions that do not adhere to these indicators are potentially hazardous and can cause gastrointestinal bleeds; are cautioned against in specific conditions (specifically heart failure, asthma, and chronic renal failure); or require blood test monitoring. The percentage for each indicator is formed of a numerator of patients deemed to be at risk of a potentially hazardous prescribing event and the denominator is of patients for which assessment of the indicator is clinically meaningful. Higher indicator percentages represent potentially poorer performance on medication safety.

Results

The PINCER indicators were successfully implemented across general practice data for 56.8 million patient records from 6367 practices in OpenSAFELY. Hazardous prescribing remained largely unchanged during the covid-19 pandemic, with no evidence of increases in indicators of harm as captured by the PINCER indicators. The percentage of patients at risk of potentially hazardous prescribing, as defined by each PINCER indicator, at mean quarter 1 (Q1) 2020 (representing before the pandemic) ranged from 1.11% (age ≥65 years and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) to 36.20% (amiodarone and no thyroid function test), while Q1 2021 (representing after the pandemic) percentages ranged from 0.75% (age ≥65 years and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) to 39.23% (amiodarone and no thyroid function test). Transient delays occurred in blood test monitoring for some medications, particularly angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (where blood monitoring worsened from a mean of 5.16% in Q1 2020 to 12.14% in Q1 2021, and began to recover in June 2021). All indicators substantially recovered by September 2021. We identified 1 813 058 patients (3.1%) at risk of at least one potentially hazardous prescribing event.

Conclusion

NHS data from general practices can be analysed at national scale to generate insights into service delivery. Potentially hazardous prescribing was largely unaffected by the covid-19 pandemic in primary care health records in England.

Comparative effectiveness of two- and three-dose COVID-19 vaccination schedules involving AZD1222 and BNT162b2 in people with kidney disease: a linked OpenSAFELY and UK Renal Registry cohort study

Background

Kidney disease is a key risk factor for COVID-19-related mortality and suboptimal vaccine response. Optimising vaccination strategies is essential to reduce the disease burden in this vulnerable population. We therefore compared the effectiveness of two- and three-dose schedules involving AZD1222 (AZ; ChAdOx1-S) and BNT162b2 (BNT) among people with kidney disease in England.

Methods

With the approval of NHS England, we performed a retrospective cohort study among people with moderate-to-severe kidney disease. Using linked primary care and UK Renal Registry records in the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform, we identified adults with stage 3-5 chronic kidney disease, dialysis recipients, and kidney transplant recipients. We used Cox proportional hazards models to compare COVID-19-related outcomes and non-COVID-19 death after two-dose (AZ-AZ vs BNT-BNT) and three-dose (AZ-AZ-BNT vs BNT-BNT-BNT) schedules.

Findings

After two doses, incidence during the Delta wave was higher in AZ-AZ (n = 257,580) than BNT-BNT recipients (n = 169,205; adjusted hazard ratios [95% CIs] 1.43 [1.37-1.50], 1.59 [1.43-1.77], 1.44 [1.12-1.85], and 1.09 [1.02-1.17] for SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalisation, COVID-19-related death, and non-COVID-19 death, respectively). Findings were consistent across disease subgroups, including dialysis and transplant recipients. After three doses, there was little evidence of differences between AZ-AZ-BNT (n = 220,330) and BNT-BNT-BNT recipients (n = 157,065) for any outcome during a period of Omicron dominance.

Interpretation

Among individuals with moderate-to-severe kidney disease, two doses of BNT conferred stronger protection than AZ against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease. A subsequent BNT dose levelled the playing field, emphasising the value of heterologous RNA doses in vulnerable populations.

Funding

National Core Studies, Wellcome Trust, MRC, and Health Data Research UK.

Changes in COVID-19-related mortality across key demographic and clinical subgroups in England from 2020 to 2022: a retrospective cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has been shown to differently affect various demographic and clinical population subgroups. We aimed to describe trends in absolute and relative COVID-19-related mortality risks across clinical and demographic population subgroups during successive SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves.

METHODS

We did a retrospective cohort study in England using the OpenSAFELY platform with the approval of National Health Service England, covering the first five SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves (wave one [wild-type] from March 23 to May 30, 2020; wave two [alpha (B.1.1.7)] from Sept 7, 2020, to April 24, 2021; wave three [delta (B.1.617.2)] from May 28 to Dec 14, 2021; wave four [omicron (B.1.1.529)] from Dec 15, 2021, to April 29, 2022; and wave five [omicron] from June 24 to Aug 3, 2022). In each wave, we included people aged 18-110 years who were registered with a general practice on the first day of the wave and who had at least 3 months of continuous general practice registration up to this date. We estimated crude and sex-standardised and age-standardised wave-specific COVID-19-related death rates and relative risks of COVID-19-related death in population subgroups.

FINDINGS

18 895 870 adults were included in wave one, 19 014 720 in wave two, 18 932 050 in wave three, 19 097 970 in wave four, and 19 226 475 in wave five. Crude COVID-19-related death rates per 1000 person-years decreased from 4·48 deaths (95% CI 4·41-4·55) in wave one to 2·69 (2·66-2·72) in wave two, 0·64 (0·63-0·66) in wave three, 1·01 (0·99-1·03) in wave four, and 0·67 (0·64-0·71) in wave five. In wave one, the standardised COVID-19-related death rates were highest in people aged 80 years or older, people with chronic kidney disease stage 5 or 4, people receiving dialysis, people with dementia or learning disability, and people who had received a kidney transplant (ranging from 19·85 deaths per 1000 person-years to 44·41 deaths per 1000 person-years, compared with from 0·05 deaths per 1000 person-years to 15·93 deaths per 1000 person-years in other subgroups). In wave two compared with wave one, in a largely unvaccinated population, the decrease in COVID-19-related mortality was evenly distributed across population subgroups. In wave three compared with wave one, larger decreases in COVID-19-related death rates were seen in groups prioritised for primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, including people aged 80 years or older and people with neurological disease, learning disability, or severe mental illness (90-91% decrease). Conversely, smaller decreases in COVID-19-related death rates were observed in younger age groups, people who had received organ transplants, and people with chronic kidney disease, haematological malignancies, or immunosuppressive conditions (0-25% decrease). In wave four compared with wave one, the decrease in COVID-19-related death rates was smaller in groups with lower vaccination coverage (including younger age groups) and conditions associated with impaired vaccine response, including people who had received organ transplants and people with immunosuppressive conditions (26-61% decrease).

INTERPRETATION

There was a substantial decrease in absolute COVID-19-related death rates over time in the overall population, but demographic and clinical relative risk profiles persisted and worsened for people with lower vaccination coverage or impaired immune response. Our findings provide an evidence base to inform UK public health policy for protecting these vulnerable population subgroups.

FUNDING

UK Research and Innovation, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health and Care Research, and Health Data Research UK.

OpenSAFELY NHS Service Restoration Observatory 2: changes in primary care clinical activity in England during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare activity across a broad range of clinical services. The NHS stopped non-urgent work in March 2020, later recommending services be restored to near-normal levels before winter where possible.

AIM

To describe changes in the volume and variation of coded clinical activity in general practice across six clinical areas: cardiovascular disease, diabetes, mental health, female and reproductive health, screening and related procedures, and processes related to medication.

DESIGN AND SETTING

With the approval of NHS England, a cohort study was conducted of 23.8 million patient records in general practice, in situ using OpenSAFELY.

METHOD

Common primary care activities were analysed using Clinical Terms Version 3 codes and keyword searches from January 2019 to December 2020, presenting median and deciles of code usage across practices per month.

RESULTS

Substantial and widespread changes in clinical activity in primary care were identified since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with generally good recovery by December 2020. A few exceptions showed poor recovery and warrant further investigation, such as mental health (for example, for 'Depression interim review' the median occurrences across practices in December 2020 was down by 41.6% compared with December 2019).

CONCLUSION

Granular NHS general practice data at population-scale can be used to monitor disruptions to healthcare services and guide the development of mitigation strategies. The authors are now developing real-time monitoring dashboards for the key measures identified in this study, as well as further studies using primary care data to monitor and mitigate the indirect health impacts of COVID-19 on the NHS.

Adapting SARS-CoV-2 vaccination delivery in England to population needs: a thematic analysis of providers and commissioner's perceptions

BACKGROUND

A national SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programme was implemented in England from 8th December 2020, adopting a series of local level service delivery models to maximise rollout. The evidence base informing service design programme at inception was limited. We examined the real-world implementation of the programme through an assessment of sub-national providers' and commissioners' perspectives on the service delivery models used, to strengthen evidence on the acceptability, effectiveness and efficiency of the service delivery approaches used for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in England or elsewhere.

METHODS

Qualitative, cross-sectional analysis based on semi-structured interviews conducted with 87 stakeholders working in SARS-CoV-2 vaccination delivery across four regions in England. Localities were selected according to geography and population socio-economic status. Participants were purposively sampled from health service providers, commissioners and other relevant bodies. Interviews were conducted between February and October 2021, and transcripts were thematically analysed using inductive and deductive approaches.

RESULTS

Various service delivery models were implemented over the course of the programme, beginning with hospital hubs and mass vaccination sites, before expanding to incorporate primary care-led services, mobile and other outreach services. Each had advantages and drawbacks but primary care-led models, and to some extent pharmacies, were perceived to offer a better combination of efficiency and community reach for equitable delivery. Common factors for success included availability of a motivated workforce, predictability in vaccine supply chains and strong community engagement. However, interviewees noted a lack of coordination between service providers in the vaccination programme, linked to differing financial incentives and fragmentated information systems, among other factors.

CONCLUSION

A range of delivery models are needed to enable vaccine rollout at pace and scale, and to mitigate effects on routine care provision. However, primary care-led services offer a tried-and-trusted framework for vaccine delivery at scale and pace and should be central to planning for future pandemic responses. Mass vaccination sites can offer delivery at scale but may exacerbate inequalities in vaccination coverage and are unlikely to offer value for money. Policymakers in England should prioritise measures to improve collaboration between service providers, including better alignment of IT systems.

Heightened COVID-19 Mortality in People With Severe Mental Illness Persists After Vaccination: A Cohort Study of Greater Manchester Residents

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Previous studies show that people with severe mental illness (SMI) are at higher risk of COVID-19 mortality, however limited evidence exists regarding risk postvaccination. We investigated COVID-19 mortality among people with schizophrenia and other SMIs before, during and after the UK vaccine roll-out.

STUDY DESIGN

Using the Greater Manchester (GM) Care Record to access routinely collected health data linked with death records, we plotted COVID-19 mortality rates over time in GM residents with schizophrenia/psychosis, bipolar disorder (BD), and/or recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) from February 2020 to September 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare mortality risk (risk ratios; RRs) between people with SMI (N = 193 435) and age-sex matched controls (N = 773 734), adjusted for sociodemographic factors, preexisting comorbidities, and vaccination status.

STUDY RESULTS

Mortality risks were significantly higher among people with SMI compared with matched controls, particularly among people with schizophrenia/psychosis (RR 3.18, CI 2.94-3.44) and/or BD (RR 2.69, CI 2.16-3.34). In adjusted models, the relative risk of COVID-19 mortality decreased, though remained significantly higher than matched controls for people with schizophrenia (RR 1.61, CI 1.45-1.79) and BD (RR 1.92, CI 1.47-2.50), but not recurrent MDD (RR 1.08, CI 0.99-1.17). People with SMI continued to show higher mortality rate ratios relative to controls throughout 2021, during vaccination roll-out.

CONCLUSIONS

People with SMI, notably schizophrenia and BD, were at greater risk of COVID-19 mortality compared to matched controls. Despite population vaccination efforts that have prioritized people with SMI, disparities still remain in COVID-19 mortality for people with SMI.

First dose COVID-19 vaccine coverage amongst adolescents and children in England: an analysis of 3.21 million patients' primary care records in situ using OpenSAFELY

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programme in England was extended to include all adolescents and children by April 2022. The aim of this paper is to describe trends and variation in vaccine coverage in different clinical and demographic groups amongst adolescents and children in England. Methods: With the approval of NHS England, a cohort study was conducted of 3.21 million children and adolescents’ records in general practice in England, in situ and within the infrastructure of the electronic health record software vendor TPP using OpenSAFELY. Vaccine coverage across various demographic (sex, deprivation index and ethnicity) and clinical (risk status) populations is described. Results: Coverage is higher amongst adolescents than it is amongst children, with 53.5% adolescents and 10.8% children having received their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Within those groups, coverage varies by ethnicity, deprivation index and risk status; there is no evidence of variation by sex. Conclusion: First dose COVID-19 vaccine coverage is shown to vary amongst various demographic and clinical groups of children and adolescents.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake in people with kidney disease: an OpenSAFELY cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To characterise factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people with kidney disease in England.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform, performed with the approval of NHS England.

SETTING

Individual-level routine clinical data from 24 million people across GPs in England using TPP software. Primary care data were linked directly with COVID-19 vaccine records up to 31 August 2022 and with renal replacement therapy (RRT) status via the UK Renal Registry (UKRR).

PARTICIPANTS

A cohort of adults with stage 3-5 chronic kidney disease (CKD) or receiving RRT at the start of the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out was identified based on evidence of reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or inclusion in the UKRR.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Dose-specific vaccine coverage over time was determined from 1 December 2020 to 31 August 2022. Individual-level factors associated with receipt of a 3-dose or 4-dose vaccine series were explored via Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

992 205 people with stage 3-5 CKD or receiving RRT were included. Cumulative vaccine coverage as of 31 August 2022 was 97.5%, 97.0% and 93.9% for doses 1, 2 and 3, respectively, and 81.9% for dose 4 among individuals with one or more indications for eligibility. Delayed 3-dose vaccine uptake was associated with younger age, minority ethnicity, social deprivation and severe mental illness-associations that were consistent across CKD severity subgroups, dialysis patients and kidney transplant recipients. Similar associations were observed for 4-dose uptake.

CONCLUSION

Although high primary vaccine and booster dose coverage has been achieved among people with kidney disease in England, key disparities in vaccine uptake remain across clinical and demographic groups and 4-dose coverage is suboptimal. Targeted interventions are needed to identify barriers to vaccine uptake among under-vaccinated subgroups identified in the present study.

Trends, variation, and clinical characteristics of recipients of antiviral drugs and neutralising monoclonal antibodies for covid-19 in community settings: retrospective, descriptive cohort study of 23.4 million people in OpenSAFELY

Objective

To ascertain patient eligibility status and describe coverage of antiviral drugs and neutralising monoclonal antibodies (nMAB) as treatment for covid-19 in community settings in England.

Design

Retrospective, descriptive cohort study, approved by NHS England.

Setting

Routine clinical data from 23.4 million people linked to data on covid-19 infection and treatment, within the OpenSAFELY-TPP database.

Participants

Outpatients with covid-19 at high risk of severe outcomes.

Interventions

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (paxlovid), sotrovimab, molnupiravir, casirivimab/imdevimab, or remdesivir, used in the community by covid-19 medicine delivery units.

Results

93 870 outpatients with covid-19 were identified between 11 December 2021 and 28 April 2022 to be at high risk of severe outcomes and therefore potentially eligible for antiviral or nMAB treatment (or both). Of these patients, 19 040 (20%) received treatment (sotrovimab, 9660 (51%); molnupiravir, 4620 (24%); paxlovid, 4680 (25%); casirivimab/imdevimab, 50 (<1%); and remdesivir, 30 (<1%)). The proportion of patients treated increased from 9% (190/2220) in the first week of treatment availability to 29% (460/1600) in the latest week. The proportion treated varied by high risk group, being lowest in those with liver disease (16%; 95% confidence interval 15% to 17%); by treatment type, with sotrovimab favoured over molnupiravir and paxlovid in all but three high risk groups (Down's syndrome (35%; 30% to 39%), rare neurological conditions (45%; 43% to 47%), and immune deficiencies (48%; 47% to 50%)); by age, ranging from ≥80 years (13%; 12% to 14%) to 50-59 years (23%; 22% to 23%); by ethnic group, ranging from black (11%; 10% to 12%) to white (21%; 21% to 21%); by NHS region, ranging from 13% (12% to 14%) in Yorkshire and the Humber to 25% (24% to 25%) in the East of England); and by deprivation level, ranging from 15% (14% to 15%) in the most deprived areas to 23% (23% to 24%) in the least deprived areas. Groups that also had lower coverage included unvaccinated patients (7%; 6% to 9%), those with dementia (6%; 5% to 7%), and care home residents (6%; 6% to 7%).

Conclusions

Using the OpenSAFELY platform, we were able to identify patients with covid-19 at high risk of severe outcomes who were potentially eligible to receive treatment and assess the coverage of these new treatments among these patients. In the context of a rapid deployment of a new service, the NHS analytical code used to determine eligibility could have been over-inclusive and some of the eligibility criteria not fully captured in healthcare data. However targeted activity might be needed to resolve apparent lower treatment coverage observed among certain groups, in particular (at present): different NHS regions, ethnic groups, people aged ≥80 years, those living in socioeconomically deprived areas, and care home residents.

COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: views and vaccination uptake rates in pregnancy, a mixed methods analysis from SAIL and the Born-In-Wales Birth Cohort

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy amongst pregnant women has been found to be a concern during past epidemics. This study aimed to (1) estimate COVID-19 vaccination rates among pregnant women in Wales and their association with age, ethnicity, and area of deprivation, using electronic health record (EHR) data linkage, and (2) explore pregnant women's views on receiving the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy using data from a survey recruiting via social media (Facebook, Twitter), through midwives, and posters in hospitals (Born-In-Wales Cohort).

METHODS

This was a mixed-methods study utilising routinely collected linked data from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank (Objective 1) and the Born-In-Wales Birth Cohort participants (Objective 2). Pregnant women were identified from 13th April 2021 to 31st December 2021. Survival analysis was utilised to examine and compare the length of time to vaccination uptake in pregnancy, and variation in uptake by; age, ethnic group, and deprivation area was examined using hazard ratios (HR) from Cox regression. Survey respondents were women who had a baby during the COVID-19 pandemic or were pregnant between 1st November 2021 and 24th March 2022 and participating in Born-In-Wales. Codebook thematic analysis was used to generate themes from an open-ended question on the survey.

RESULTS

Population-level data linkage (objective 1): Within the population cohort, 8203 (32.7%) received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy, 8572 (34.1%) remained unvaccinated throughout the follow-up period, and 8336 (33.2%) received the vaccine postpartum. Younger women (< 30 years) were less likely to have the vaccine, and those living in areas of high deprivation were also less likely to have the vaccine (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.95). Asian and Other ethnic groups were 1.12 and 1.18 times more likely to have the vaccine in pregnancy compared with White women (HR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.25) and (HR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.37) respectively. Survey responses (objective 2): 207 (69%) of participants stated that they would be happy to have the vaccine during pregnancy. The remaining 94 (31%) indicated they would not have the vaccine during pregnancy. Reasons for having the vaccine included protecting self and baby, perceived risk level, and receipt of sufficient evidence and advice. Reasons for vaccine refusal included lack of research about long-term outcomes for the baby, anxiety about vaccines, inconsistent advice/information, and preference to wait until after the pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Potentially only 1 in 3 pregnant women would have the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy, even though 2 in 3 reported they would have the vaccination, thus it is critical to develop tailored strategies to increase its acceptance rate and decrease vaccine hesitancy. A targeted approach to vaccinations may be required for groups such as younger people and those living in higher deprivation areas.

Geographic and Socioeconomic Inequalities in Delays in COVID-19 Vaccinations: A Cross-Sectional Study in Indonesia

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have provided evidence of inequalities in the coverage of COVID-19 vaccination. However, evidence of such inequalities in delays in vaccinations is lacking. Our study examined the socioeconomic and geographic disparities in terms of days to get the first and second dose of COVID-19 vaccinations in Indonesia.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study using the WhatsApp messaging app and social media platforms during December 2021-February 2022. We distributed the questionnaire through our university network to reach all regions. We included 3592 adults aged 15+ years in our analysis. We used two main dependent variables: days to receive the first dose (after national vaccine rollout) and days to receive the second dose (after receiving the first dose). We examined a range of socioeconomic and geographic indicators, including education level, income level, formal employment, working in health facilities, being a health worker, and region. We controlled for sex, age, religion, and urbanicity. We performed multivariate logistic regressions in STATA 15.

RESULTS

Our findings show considerable delays in getting the first dose among participants (160.7 days or about 5.4 months on average) from Indonesia's national COVID-19 vaccination rollout on 13 January 2021. However, we found a shorter period to receive the second dose after receiving the first dose (41.1 days on average). Moreover, we found significant socioeconomic (i.e., education, income, formal employment, working in health facilities, and being a health worker) and geographic (i.e., in and out of the Java region) inequalities in terms of delays in getting the first dose. However, we did not find significant inequalities in getting the second dose for most inequality indicators, except for working in health facilities. By region, we found that participants living in more deprived areas (out of the Java region) received the second dose 4.9 days earlier. One of the study's key limitations is that there may be an inherent bias with respect to socioeconomics factors since it was conducted online (web-based).

CONCLUSIONS

While there were considerable delays in getting the first dose, especially among those of a lower socioeconomic status and those in more deprived areas, the waiting time for the second dose was relatively similar for everyone once they were in the system. Effective efforts to address inequalities are essential to ensuring the effectiveness of the national COVID-19 vaccination rollout.

Socioeconomic Inequalities in COVID-19 Vaccination and Infection in Adults, Catalonia, Spain

Evidence on the impact of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout on socioeconomic COVID-19-related inequalities is scarce. We analyzed associations between socioeconomic deprivation index (SDI) and COVID-19 vaccination, infection, and hospitalization before and after vaccine rollout in Catalonia, Spain. We conducted a population-based cohort study during September 2020-June 2021 that comprised 2,297,146 adults >40 years of age. We estimated odds ratio of nonvaccination and hazard ratios (HRs) of infection and hospitalization by SDI quintile relative to the least deprived quintile, Q1. Six months after rollout, vaccination coverage differed by SDI quintile in working-age (40-64 years) persons: 81% for Q1, 71% for Q5. Before rollout, we found a pattern of increased HR of infection and hospitalization with deprivation among working-age and retirement-age (>65 years) persons. After rollout, infection inequalities decreased in both age groups, whereas hospitalization inequalities decreased among retirement-age persons. Our findings suggest that mass vaccination reduced socioeconomic COVID-19-related inequalities.

Estimated Infection and Vaccine Induced SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in Israel among Adults, January 2020-July 2021

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Israel in February 2020 and spread from then. In December 2020, the FDA approved an emergency use authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, and on 20 December, an immunization campaign began among adults in Israel. We characterized seropositivity for IgG anti-spike antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 between January 2020 and July 2021, before and after the introduction of the vaccine in Israel among adults. We tested 9520 serum samples, collected between January 2020 and July 2021. Between January and August 2020, seropositivity rates were lower than 5.0%; this rate increased from September 2020 (6.3%) to April 2021 (84.9%) and reached 79.1% in July 2021. Between January and December 2020, low socio-economic rank was an independent, significant correlate for seropositivity. Between January and July 2021, the 40.00–64.99-year-old age group, Jews and others, and residents of the Northern district were significantly more likely to be seropositive. Our findings indicate a slow, non-significant increase in the seropositivity rate to SARS-CoV-2 between January and December 2020. Following the introduction of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in Israel, a significant increase in seropositivity was observed from January until April 2021, with stable rates thereafter, up to July 2021.

Demographics and Outcomes of Initial Phase of COVID-19 Medicines Delivery Units Across 4 UK Centers During Peak B1.1.529 Omicron Epidemic: A Service Evaluation

Background

COVID-19 medicines delivery units (CMDU) were established in late December 2021 to deliver early antiviral therapy to patients classified as at risk with the aim of preventing hospitalization.

Methods

We performed a service evaluation at 4 CMDUs in England. We assessed demographics and triage outcomes of CMDU referral, uptake of antiviral therapy, and the rate of subsequent hospitalizations within 2 weeks of CMDU referral.

Results

Over a 3-week period, 4788 patients were referred and 3989 were ultimately assessed by a CMDU. Overall, 832 of the patients referred (17%) were judged eligible for treatment and 628 (13%) were ultimately prescribed an antiviral agent. The overall rate of admission within 14 days was 1%. Patients who were admitted were significantly older than those who did not require hospitalization. Of patients prescribed molnupiravir and sotrovimab, 1.8% and 3.2%, respectively, were admitted.

Conclusions

There was a high volume of referrals to CMDU service during the initial surge of the Omicron wave in the United Kingdom. A minority of patients were judged to be eligible for therapy. In a highly vaccinated population, the overall hospitalization rate was low.

Adverse SARS-CoV-2-associated outcomes among people experiencing social marginalisation and psychiatric vulnerability: A population-based cohort study among 4,4 million people

Background

Knowledge of the adverse problems related to SARS-CoV-2 infection in marginalised and deprived groups may help to prioritise more preventive efforts in these groups. We examined adverse outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among vulnerable segments of society.

Methods

Using health and administrative registers, a population-based cohort study of 4.4 million Danes aged at least 15 years from 27 February 2020 to 15 October 2021 was performed. People with 1) low educational level, 2) homelessness, 3) imprisonment, 4) substance abuse, 5) supported psychiatric housing, 6) psychiatric admission, and 7) severe mental illness were main exposure groups. Chronic medical conditions were included for comparison. COVID-19-related outcomes were: 1) hospitalisation, 2) intensive care, 3) 60-day mortality, and 4) overall mortality. PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and PCR-testing were also studied. Poisson regression analysis was used to compute adjusted incidence and mortality rate ratios (IRRs, MRRs).

Findings

Using health and administrative registers, we performed a population-based cohort study of 4,412,382 individuals (mean age 48 years; 51% females). In all, 257,450 (5·8%) individuals had a PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. After adjustment for age, calendar time, and sex, we found that especially people experiencing homelessness had high risk of hospitalisation (IRR 4·36, 95% CI, 3·09-6·14), intensive care (IRR 3·12, 95% CI 1·29-7·52), and death (MRR 8·17, 95% CI, 3·66-18·25) compared with people without such experiences, but increased risk was found for all studied groups. Furthermore, after full adjustment, including for status of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection, individuals with experiences of homelessness and a PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection had 41-times (95% CI, 24·84-68·44) higher risk of all-cause death during the study period compared with individuals without. Supported psychiatric housing was linked to almost 3-times higher risk of hospitalisation and 60-day mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with the general population with other living circumstances.

Interpretation

Socially marginalised and psychiatrically vulnerable individuals had substantially elevated risks of adverse health outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection. The results highlight that pandemic preparedness should address inequalities in health, including infection prevention and vaccination of vulnerable groups.

Funding

Novo Nordisk Foundation.

The Relationship between Mental Disorders and the COVID-19 Pandemic—Course, Risk Factors, and Potential Consequences

In this review the authors discuss that COVID-19 has already had a direct impact on the physical health of many people and that it appears to have put at risk the mental health of large populations. In this review, we also discuss the relationship between mental disorders and the SARS-CoV-2 infection. We convey the disorders’ risk factors and the more serious mental disorder consequences of COVID-19. People with mental health disorders could be more susceptible to the emotional responses brought on by the COVID-19 epidemic. The COVID-19 pandemic may adversely influence the mental health of patients with already diagnosed mental disorders. For the aim of dealing better with the psychological problems of people afflicted by the COVID-19 pandemic, new psychological procedures are required.

Recording of 'COVID-19 vaccine declined': a cohort study on 57.9 million National Health Service patients' records in situ using OpenSAFELY, England, 8 December 2020 to 25 May 2021

BackgroundPriority patients in England were offered COVID-19 vaccination by mid-April 2021. Codes in clinical record systems can denote the vaccine being declined.AimWe describe records of COVID-19 vaccines being declined, according to clinical and demographic factors.MethodsWith the approval of NHS England, we conducted a retrospective cohort study between 8 December 2020 and 25 May 2021 with primary care records for 57.9 million patients using OpenSAFELY, a secure health analytics platform. COVID-19 vaccination priority patients were those aged ≥ 50 years or ≥ 16 years clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) or 'at risk'. We describe the proportion recorded as declining vaccination for each group and stratified by clinical and demographic subgroups, subsequent vaccination and distribution of clinical code usage across general practices.ResultsOf 24.5 million priority patients, 663,033 (2.7%) had a decline recorded, while 2,155,076 (8.8%) had neither a vaccine nor decline recorded. Those recorded as declining, who were subsequently vaccinated (n = 125,587; 18.9%) were overrepresented in the South Asian population (32.3% vs 22.8% for other ethnicities aged ≥ 65 years). The proportion of declining unvaccinated patients was highest in CEV (3.3%), varied strongly with ethnicity (black 15.3%, South Asian 5.6%, white 1.5% for ≥ 80 years) and correlated positively with increasing deprivation.ConclusionsClinical codes indicative of COVID-19 vaccinations being declined are commonly used in England, but substantially more common among black and South Asian people, and in more deprived areas. Qualitative research is needed to determine typical reasons for recorded declines, including to what extent they reflect patients actively declining.

Comparative effectiveness of ChAdOx1 versus BNT162b2 covid-19 vaccines in health and social care workers in England: cohort study using OpenSAFELY

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech) and the ChAdOx1 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) covid-19 vaccines against infection and covid-19 disease in health and social care workers.

DESIGN

Cohort study, emulating a comparative effectiveness trial, on behalf of NHS England.

SETTING

Linked primary care, hospital, and covid-19 surveillance records available within the OpenSAFELY-TPP research platform, covering a period when the SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant was dominant.

PARTICIPANTS

317 341 health and social care workers vaccinated between 4 January and 28 February 2021, registered with a general practice using the TPP SystmOne clinical information system in England, and not clinically extremely vulnerable.

INTERVENTIONS

Vaccination with either BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 administered as part of the national covid-19 vaccine roll-out.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Recorded SARS-CoV-2 positive test, or covid-19 related attendance at an accident and emergency (A&E) department or hospital admission occurring within 20 weeks of receipt of the first vaccine dose.

RESULTS

Over the duration of 118 771 person-years of follow-up there were 6962 positive SARS-CoV-2 tests, 282 covid-19 related A&E attendances, and 166 covid-19 related hospital admissions. The cumulative incidence of each outcome was similar for both vaccines during the first 20 weeks after vaccination. The cumulative incidence of recorded SARS-CoV-2 infection 20 weeks after first-dose vaccination with BNT162b2 was 21.7 per 1000 people (95% confidence interval 20.9 to 22.4) and with ChAdOx1 was 23.7 (21.8 to 25.6), representing a difference of 2.04 per 1000 people (0.04 to 4.04). The difference in the cumulative incidence per 1000 people of covid-19 related A&E attendance at 20 weeks was 0.06 per 1000 people (95% CI -0.31 to 0.43). For covid-19 related hospital admission, this difference was 0.11 per 1000 people (-0.22 to 0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of healthcare workers where we would not anticipate vaccine type to be related to health status, we found no substantial differences in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or covid-19 disease up to 20 weeks after vaccination. Incidence dropped sharply at 3-4 weeks after vaccination, and there were few covid-19 related hospital attendance and admission events after this period. This is in line with expected onset of vaccine induced immunity and suggests strong protection against Alpha variant covid-19 disease for both vaccines in this relatively young and healthy population of healthcare workers.

OpenSAFELY: Representativeness of electronic health record platform OpenSAFELY-TPP data compared to the population of England

Background: Since its inception in March 2020, data from the OpenSAFELY-TPP electronic health record platform has been used for more than 20 studies relating to the global COVID-19 emergency. OpenSAFELY-TPP data is derived from practices in England using SystmOne software, and has been used for the majority of these studies. We set out to investigate the representativeness of OpenSAFELY-TPP data by comparing it to national population estimates.    Methods: With the approval of NHS England, we describe the age, sex, Index of Multiple Deprivation and ethnicity of the OpenSAFELY-TPP population compared to national estimates from the Office for National Statistics. The five leading causes of death occurring between the 1st January 2020 and the 31st December 2020 were also compared to deaths registered in England during the same period.  Results: Despite regional variations, TPP is largely representative of the general population of England in terms of IMD (all within 1.1 percentage points), age, sex (within 0.1 percentage points), ethnicity and causes of death. The proportion of the five leading causes of death is broadly similar to those reported by ONS (all within 1 percentage point).  Conclusions: Data made available via OpenSAFELY-TPP is broadly representative of the English population. Users of OpenSAFELY must consider the issues of representativeness, generalisability and external validity associated with using TPP data for health research. Although the coverage of TPP practices varies regionally across England, TPP registered patients are generally representative of the English population as a whole in terms of key demographic characteristics.

Variation in COVID-19 booster uptake in England: An ecological study

Introduction

Variable and low uptake of the COVID-19 booster is a recognised problem, associated with individual characteristics including age, gender, ethnicity, and deprivation. Are there other relevant predictors at area level?

Methods

Anonymous grouped data was downloaded from the UK Government Coronavirus Dashboard for Middle Super Output Areas (MSOA) in England, along with demographic, employment, and health data from public sources. Mixed models with a random intercept for Upper Tier Local Authority were analysed as quasibinomial Generalized Additive Models. The estimated random effects were then fitted with Bayesian linear mixed models using flu vaccination uptake, change in public health budgets, population proportion of vaccination sites at pharmacies, GP-led, vaccination centres, and hospital hubs, and Region.

Results

Models for the MSOA-level COVID-19 first and second vaccinations and the Third Injection (including the booster), fit well. Index of Multiple Deprivation, proportion Aged 15-24 and 25-44, and ethnicity groupings Other White, Indian-Pakistani-Bangladeshi, and African-Caribbean-Other Black-Other, are highly significant predictors of lower uptake. The estimated random effects vary widely amongst local authorities, with positive impact of flu vaccine uptake and change in public health budgets, and regional impacts which are positive for London and South East (first and second doses only), and negative for North West and North East. The impact of vaccination sites did not reach 90% credibility, in general.

Conclusion

COVID-19 vaccination rates at each stage are very well modelled if local authority random effects are included along with non-linear terms for demographic, employment and health data. Deprivation, younger age, and Other White, South Asian, and African-Caribbean-Other ethnicities are associated with lower uptake. The estimated local effects show strong regional variation and are positively associated with flu vaccination and increasing public health budgets. One simple way to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake in England would be to increase local public health allocations.

An overview of synthetic administrative data for research

Use of administrative data for research and for planning services has increased over recent decades due to the value of the large, rich information available. However, concerns about the release of sensitive or personal data and the associated disclosure risk can lead to lengthy approval processes and restricted data access. This can delay or prevent the production of timely evidence. A promising solution to facilitate more efficient data access is to create synthetic versions of the original datasets which are less likely to hold confidential information and can minimise disclosure risk. Such data may be used as an interim solution, allowing researchers to develop their analysis plans on non-disclosive data, whilst waiting for access to the real data. We aim to provide an overview of the background and uses of synthetic data and describe common methods used to generate synthetic data in the context of UK administrative research. We propose a simplified terminology for categories of synthetic data (univariate, multivariate, and complex modality synthetic data) as well as a more comprehensive description of the terminology used in the existing literature and illustrate challenges and future directions for research.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection among vulnerable and marginalised population groups in Denmark: A nationwide population-based study

BACKGROUND

Social deprivation, psychiatric and medical disorders have been associated with increased risk of infection and severe COVID-19-related health problems. We aimed to study the rates of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in these high-risk groups.

METHODS

Using health, vaccination, and administrative registers, we performed a population-based cohort study including all Danish residents aged at least 15 years, December 27, 2020, to October 15, 2021. Population groups were people experiencing: (1) homelessness, (2) imprisonment, (3) substance abuse, (4) severe mental illness, (5) supported psychiatric housing, (6) psychiatric admission, and (7) chronic medical condition. The outcome was vaccine uptake of two doses against SARS-CoV-2 infection. We calculated cumulative vaccine uptake and adjusted vaccination incidence rate ratios (IRRs) relative to the general population by sex and population group.

FINDINGS

The cohort included 4,935,344 individuals, of whom 4,277,380 (86·7%) received two doses of vaccine. Lower cumulative vaccine uptake was found for all socially deprived and psychiatrically vulnerable population groups compared with the general population. Lowest uptake was found for people below 65 years experiencing homelessness (54·6%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 53·4-55·8, p<0·0001). After adjustment for age and calendar time, homelessness was associated with markedly lower rates of vaccine uptake (IRR 0·5, 95% CI 0·5-0·6 in males and 0·4, 0·4-0·5 in females) with similar results for imprisonment. Lower vaccine uptake was also found for most of the psychiatric groups with the lower IRR for substance abuse (IRR 0·7, 0·7-0·7 in males and 0·8, 0·8-0·8 in females). Individuals with new-onset severe mental illness and, especially, those in supported psychiatric housing and with chronic medical conditions had the highest vaccine uptake among the studied population groups.

INTERPRETATION

Especially, socially deprived population groups, but also individuals with psychiatric vulnerability need higher priority in the implementation of the vaccination strategy to increase equity in immunization uptake.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk Foundation.

Overcoming COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among ethnic minorities: A systematic review of UK studies

Ethnic minority communities in the UK have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic, with increased risks of infection, severe disease, and death. Hesitancy around the COVID-19 vaccine may be contributing to disparities in vaccine delivery to ethnic minority communities. This systematic review aims to strengthen understanding of COVID-19 vaccine concerns among ethnic minorities in the UK. Five databases were searched in February 2022, yielding 24 peer-reviewed studies reporting on vaccine hesitancy or acceptance in ethnic minority groups. Data were extracted using a standardised form, and quality assessment was carried out using the Standard Quality Criteria. There were three key themes: (1). Prevalence of vaccine hesitancy; (2). Reasons for vaccine hesitancy and acceptance; and (3). Recommendations to address vaccine concerns. Vaccine hesitancy, which was more common among some ethnic minority groups, is a complex phenomenon, driven by misinformation, mistrust, concerns about safety and efficacy, and structural and systemic inequities. Community engagement and tailored communication may help to address vaccine concerns. Robust data disaggregated by ethnicities are needed to better understand barriers and facilitators for COVID-19 vaccine delivery in ethnic minority communities. Strategies to address structural disadvantage need to be inclusive, comprehensive, and behaviorally informed and foster confidence in healthcare systems and governments. Community leaders and health care practitioners may prove to be the most important agents in creating an environment of trust within ethnic minority groups.

What can general practice learn from primary care nurses' and healthcare assistants' experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic? A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

UK general practice has radically altered in response to COVID-19. The general practice nursing team has been central to these changes. To help learn from COVID-19 and maintain a sustainable nursing workforce, general practice should reflect on their support needs and perceptions of organisational strategies. This study aimed to explore primary care nurses' and healthcare assistants' experiences and perceptions of general practice, and the changes made to it, during the pandemic.

DESIGN

Exploratory qualitative study using semistructured interviews. Interview data were analysed using Braun and Clarke's 'codebook' thematic analysis.

SETTING

General practices in the Midlands, South East and South West England. Interviews were conducted in February and March 2021, as England began to unlock from its third national lockdown.

PARTICIPANTS

Practice nurses (n=12), healthcare assistants (n=7), advanced nurse practitioners (n=4) and nursing associates (n=1) recruited using convenience and snowball sampling.

RESULTS

Three themes were identified. Difficult changes describes dramatic changes made to general practice at the onset of the pandemic, creating confusion and anxiety. Dealing with change characterises how negative emotions were intensified by fear of infection, problematic government guidance, personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages and friction with doctors; but could be mitigated through effective practice communication, peer support and individual coping strategies. An opportunity for improvement highlights certain changes (eg, the increased use of telehealth) that participants believed could be adopted long term to improve efficiency.

CONCLUSION

General practice should learn from the COVID-19 pandemic to nurture the clinical role and resilience of nurses and healthcare assistants in the postpandemic 'new normal'. Robust PPE provision could enable them to undertake their patient-facing duties safely and confidently. Judicious implementation of telehealth could help preserve the practical and caring nature of nursing. Improving channels of communication and interprofessional collaboration could help realise their potential within the primary care team.

Characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake among adults aged 50 years and above in England (8 December 2020-17 May 2021): a population-level observational study

OBJECTIVE

To determine characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine coverage among individuals aged 50 years and above in England since the beginning of the programme.

DESIGN

Observational cross-sectional study assessed by logistic regression and mean prevalence margins.

SETTING

COVID-19 vaccinations delivered in England from 8 December 2020 to 17 May 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

30 624 257/61 967 781 (49.4%) and 17 360 045/61 967 781 (28.1%) individuals in England were recorded as vaccinated in the National Immunisation Management System with a first dose and a second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, respectively.

INTERVENTIONS

Vaccination status with COVID-19 vaccinations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion, adjusted ORs and mean prevalence margins for individuals not vaccinated with dose 1 among those aged 50-69 years and dose 1 and 2 among those aged 70 years and above.

RESULTS

Of individuals aged 50 years and above, black/African/Caribbean ethnic group was the least likely of all ethnic groups to be vaccinated with dose 1 of the COVID-19 vaccine. However, of those aged 70 years and above, the odds of not having dose 2 was 5.53 (95% CI 5.42 to 5.63) and 5.36 (95% CI 5.29 to 5.43) greater among Pakistani and black/African/Caribbean compared with white British ethnicity, respectively. The odds of not receiving dose 2 was 1.18 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.20) higher among individuals who lived in a care home compared with those who did not. This was the opposite to that observed for dose 1, where the odds of being unvaccinated was significantly higher among those not living in a care home (0.89 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.91)).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that there are characteristics associated with low COVID-19 vaccine coverage. Inequalities, such as ethnicity are a major contributor to suboptimal coverage and tailored interventions are required to improve coverage and protect the population from SARS-CoV-2.

Association of COVID-19 vaccines ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 with major venous, arterial, or thrombocytopenic events: A population-based cohort study of 46 million adults in England

BACKGROUND

Thromboses in unusual locations after the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine ChAdOx1-S have been reported, although their frequency with vaccines of different types is uncertain at a population level. The aim of this study was to estimate the population-level risks of hospitalised thrombocytopenia and major arterial and venous thromboses after COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In this whole-population cohort study, we analysed linked electronic health records from adults living in England, from 8 December 2020 to 18 March 2021. We estimated incidence rates and hazard ratios (HRs) for major arterial, venous, and thrombocytopenic outcomes 1 to 28 and >28 days after first vaccination dose for ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2 vaccines. Analyses were performed separately for ages <70 and ≥70 years and adjusted for age, age2, sex, ethnicity, and deprivation. We also prespecified adjustment for anticoagulant medication, combined oral contraceptive medication, hormone replacement therapy medication, history of pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis, and history of coronavirus infection in analyses of venous thrombosis; and diabetes, hypertension, smoking, antiplatelet medication, blood pressure lowering medication, lipid lowering medication, anticoagulant medication, history of stroke, and history of myocardial infarction in analyses of arterial thromboses. We selected further covariates with backward selection. Of 46 million adults, 23 million (51%) were women; 39 million (84%) were <70; and 3.7 million (8.1%) Asian or Asian British, 1.6 million (3.5%) Black or Black British, 36 million (79%) White, 0.7 million (1.5%) mixed ethnicity, and 1.5 million (3.2%) were of another ethnicity. Approximately 21 million (46%) adults had their first vaccination between 8 December 2020 and 18 March 2021. The crude incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) of all venous events were as follows: prevaccination, 140 [95% confidence interval (CI): 138 to 142]; ≤28 days post-ChAdOx1-S, 294 (281 to 307); >28 days post-ChAdOx1-S, 359 (338 to 382), ≤28 days post-BNT162b2-S, 241 (229 to 253); >28 days post-BNT162b2-S 277 (263 to 291). The crude incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) of all arterial events were as follows: prevaccination, 546 (95% CI: 541 to 555); ≤28 days post-ChAdOx1-S, 1,211 (1,185 to 1,237); >28 days post-ChAdOx1-S, 1678 (1,630 to 1,726), ≤28 days post-BNT162b2-S, 1,242 (1,214 to 1,269); >28 days post-BNT162b2-S, 1,539 (1,507 to 1,572). Adjusted HRs (aHRs) 1 to 28 days after ChAdOx1-S, compared with unvaccinated rates, at ages <70 and ≥70 years, respectively, were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.90 to 1.05) and 0.58 (0.53 to 0.63) for venous thromboses, and 0.90 (0.86 to 0.95) and 0.76 (0.73 to 0.79) for arterial thromboses. Corresponding aHRs for BNT162b2 were 0.81 (0.74 to 0.88) and 0.57 (0.53 to 0.62) for venous thromboses, and 0.94 (0.90 to 0.99) and 0.72 (0.70 to 0.75) for arterial thromboses. aHRs for thrombotic events were higher at younger ages for venous thromboses after ChAdOx1-S, and for arterial thromboses after both vaccines. Rates of intracranial venous thrombosis (ICVT) and of thrombocytopenia in adults aged <70 years were higher 1 to 28 days after ChAdOx1-S (aHRs 2.27, 95% CI: 1.33 to 3.88 and 1.71, 1.35 to 2.16, respectively), but not after BNT162b2 (0.59, 0.24 to 1.45 and 1.00, 0.75 to 1.34) compared with unvaccinated. The corresponding absolute excess risks of ICVT 1 to 28 days after ChAdOx1-S were 0.9 to 3 per million, varying by age and sex. The main limitations of the study are as follows: (i) it relies on the accuracy of coded healthcare data to identify exposures, covariates, and outcomes; (ii) the use of primary reason for hospital admission to measure outcome, which improves the positive predictive value but may lead to an underestimation of incidence; and (iii) potential unmeasured confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we observed increases in rates of ICVT and thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1-S vaccination in adults aged <70 years that were small compared with its effect in reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, although more precise estimates for adults aged <40 years are needed. For people aged ≥70 years, rates of arterial or venous thrombotic events were generally lower after either vaccine compared with unvaccinated, suggesting that either vaccine is suitable in this age group.

Global control of COVID-19: good vaccines may not suffice

The COVID-19 pandemic has unveiled health and socioeconomic inequities around the globe. Effective epidemic control requires the achievement of herd immunity, where susceptible individuals are conferred indirect protection by being surrounded by immunized individuals. The proportion of people that need to be vaccinated to obtain herd immunity is determined through the herd immunity threshold. However, the number of susceptible individuals and the opportunities for contact between infectious and susceptible individuals influence the progress of an epidemic. Thus, in addition to vaccination, control of a pandemic may be difficult or impossible to achieve without other public health measures, including wearing face masks and social distancing. This article discusses the factors that may contribute to herd immunity and control of COVID-19 through the availability of effective vaccines and describes how vaccine effectiveness in the community may be lower than that expected. It also discusses how pandemic control in some countries and populations may face vaccine accessibility barriers if market forces strongly regulate the new technologies available, according to the inverse care law.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 Vaccines against Symptomatic COVID-19 among Healthcare Workers in Kuwait: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Estimating vaccine effectiveness (VE) against severe, acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among healthcare workers (HCWs) is necessary to demonstrate protection from the disease. Between 24 December 2020 and 15 June 2021, we determined the factors associated with vaccine coverage and estimated VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs at a secondary hospital in Kuwait.

METHODS

We extracted sociodemographic, occupational, SARS-CoV-2 infection, and vaccination data for eligible HCWs from the hospital records. Vaccine coverage percentages were cross-tabulated with the HCW factors. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios in vaccinated versus unvaccinated.

RESULTS

3246 HCWs were included in the analysis, of which 82.1% received at least one vaccine dose (50.4% only one dose of ChAdOx1, 3.3% only one dose of BNT162b2, and 28.3% two doses of BNT162b2). However, 17.9% of HCWs were unvaccinated. A significantly lower vaccination coverage was reported amongst female HCWs, younger age group (20-30 years), and administrative/executive staff. The adjusted VE of fully vaccinated HCWs was 94.5% (95% CI = 89.4-97.2%), while it was 75.4% (95% CI = 67.2-81.6%) and 91.4% (95% CI = 65.1-97.9%) in partially vaccinated for ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 vaccines prevented most symptomatic infections in HCWs across age groups, nationalities, and occupations.

COVID-19 vaccination among individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

Individuals with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) are more susceptible to COVID-19 morbidity and should therefore be prioritized for vaccination. Although individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities are given some priority in Israel, it is unclear to what extent individuals with ASD are being vaccinated relative to that of the general population. This study was aimed to assess vaccination prevalence among individuals with ASD.

METHOD

Individuals with ASD, and age- and sex-matched controls (total n = 11,080), were assessed for prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination by February 2021, approximately a month and a half after the national vaccination distribution plan was launched in Israel. Data were obtained from the database of Clalit Health Services (CHS), the largest healthcare organization in Israel.

RESULTS

Individuals with ASD were more likely to be vaccinated for COVID-19 (OR = 2.55, 95 %CI 2.35-2.75, p < .001) across both sexes, but only in the 16-20 (OR = 2.04, 95 %CI 1.79-2.32, p < .001) and 21-40 (OR = 3.95, 95 %CI 3.52-4.43, p < .001) age groups. After adjusting for chronic illnesses, ASD remained significant in predicting the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to prioritize ASD patients may improve vaccination prevalence among individuals with ASD, especially among younger individuals. Healthcare providers worldwide should therefore consider prioritization policies so as to increase vaccination rates among this vulnerable population.