Dataset Information

Absence of association between 2019-20 influenza vaccination and COVID-19: Results of the European I-MOVE-COVID-19 primary care project, March-August 2020.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Claims of influenza vaccination increasing COVID-19 risk are circulating. Within the I-MOVE-COVID-19 primary care multicentre study, we measured the association between 2019-20 influenza vaccination and COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre test-negative case-control study at primary care level, in study sites in five European countries, from March to August 2020. Patients presenting with acute respiratory infection were swabbed, with demographic, 2019-20 influenza vaccination and clinical information documented. Using logistic regression, we measured the adjusted odds ratio (aOR), adjusting for study site and age, sex, calendar time, presence of chronic conditions. The main analysis included patients swabbed ≤7 days after onset from the three countries with <15% of missing influenza vaccination. In secondary analyses, we included five countries, using multiple imputation with chained equations to account for missing data.

Results

We included 257 COVID-19 cases and 1631 controls in the main analysis (three countries). The overall aOR between influenza vaccination and COVID-19 was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.66-1.32). The aOR was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.58-1.46) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.51-1.67) among those aged 20-59 and ≥60 years, respectively. In secondary analyses, we included 6457 cases and 69 272 controls. The imputed aOR was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79-0.95) among all ages and any delay between swab and symptom onset.

Conclusions

There was no evidence that COVID-19 cases were more likely to be vaccinated against influenza than controls. Influenza vaccination should be encouraged among target groups for vaccination. I-MOVE-COVID-19 will continue documenting influenza vaccination status in 2020-21, in order to learn about effects of recent influenza vaccination.

SUBMITTER: Kissling E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8013620 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSeveral U.S. hospitals had surges in COVID-19 caseload, but their effect on COVID-19 survival rates remains unclear, especially independent of temporal changes in survival.ObjectiveTo determine the association between hospitals' severity-weighted COVID-19 caseload and COVID-19 mortality risk and identify effect modifiers of this relationship.DesignRetrospective cohort study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04688372).Setting558 U.S. hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database.ParticipantsAdult COVID-19-coded inpatients admitted from March to August 2020 with discharge dispositions by October 2020.MeasurementsEach hospital-month was stratified by percentile rank on a surge index (a severity-weighted measure of COVID-19 caseload relative to pre-COVID-19 bed capacity). The effect of surge index on risk-adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of in-hospital mortality or discharge to hospice was calculated using hierarchical modeling; interaction by surge attributes was assessed.ResultsOf 144 116 inpatients with COVID-19 at 558 U.S. hospitals, 78 144 (54.2%) were admitted to hospitals in the top surge index decile. Overall, 25 344 (17.6%) died; crude COVID-19 mortality decreased over time across all surge index strata. However, compared with nonsurging (<50th surge index percentile) hospital-months, aORs in the 50th to 75th, 75th to 90th, 90th to 95th, 95th to 99th, and greater than 99th percentiles were 1.11 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.23), 1.24 (CI, 1.12 to 1.38), 1.42 (CI, 1.27 to 1.60), 1.59 (CI, 1.41 to 1.80), and 2.00 (CI, 1.69 to 2.38), respectively. The surge index was associated with mortality across ward, intensive care unit, and intubated patients. The surge-mortality relationship was stronger in June to August than in March to May (slope difference, 0.10 [CI, 0.033 to 0.16]) despite greater corticosteroid use and more judicious intubation during later and higher-surging months. Nearly 1 in 4 COVID-19 deaths (5868 [CI, 3584 to 8171]; 23.2%) was potentially attributable to hospitals strained by surging caseload.LimitationResidual confounding.ConclusionDespite improvements in COVID-19 survival between March and August 2020, surges in hospital COVID-19 caseload remained detrimental to survival and potentially eroded benefits gained from emerging treatments. Bolstering preventive measures and supporting surging hospitals will save many lives.Primary funding sourceIntramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the National Cancer Institute.

Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 or Covid-19), which began as an epidemic in China and spread globally as a pandemic, has necessitated resource management to meet emergency needs of Covid-19 patients and other emergent cases. We have conducted a survey to analyze caseload and measures to adapt indications for a perception of crisis.MethodsWe constructed a questionnaire to survey a snapshot of neurosurgical activity, resources, and indications during 1 week with usual activity in December 2019 and 1 week during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in March 2020. The questionnaire was sent to 34 neurosurgical departments in Europe; 25 departments returned responses within 5 days.ResultsWe found unexpectedly large differences in resources and indications already before the pandemic. Differences were also large in how much practice and resources changed during the pandemic. Neurosurgical beds and neuro-intensive care beds were significantly decreased from December 2019 to March 2020. The utilization of resources decreased via less demand for care of brain injuries and subarachnoid hemorrhage, postponing surgery and changed surgical indications as a method of rationing resources. Twenty departments (80%) reduced activity extensively, and the same proportion stated that they were no longer able to provide care according to legitimate medical needs.ConclusionNeurosurgical centers responded swiftly and effectively to a sudden decrease of neurosurgical capacity due to relocation of resources to pandemic care. The pandemic led to rationing of neurosurgical care in 80% of responding centers. We saw a relation between resources before the pandemic and ability to uphold neurosurgical services. The observation of extensive differences of available beds provided an opportunity to show how resources that had been restricted already under normal conditions translated to rationing of care that may not be acceptable to the public of seemingly affluent European countries.

Project description:IntroductionAchieving high COVID-19 vaccination coverage in homeless shelters is critical in preventing morbidity, mortality, and outbreaks, however, vaccination coverage remains lower among people experiencing homelessness (PEH) than the general population.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study to retrospectively describe attitudes and identify factors associated with change in COVID-19 vaccination intent among shelter residents and staff during March 2020 - August 2021. To identify factors associated with change in COVID-19 vaccine intent becoming more positive overall compared to other attitudes, we utilized a Poisson model to calculate Risk Ratios with robust standard errors, adjusting for confounding by shelter site and demographic variables determined a priori.ResultsFrom July 12 - August 2, 2021, 97 residents and 20 staff participated in surveys across six shelters in Seattle King County, Washington. Intent to be vaccinated against COVID-19 increased from 45.3 % (n = 53) when recalling attitudes in March 2020 to 74.4 % (n = 87) as of August 2021, and was similar among residents and staff. Many participants (43.6 %, n = 51) indicated feeling increasingly accepting about receiving a COVID-19 vaccine since March 2020, while 13.7 % (n = 16) changed back and forth, 10.3 % (n = 12) became more hesitant, and 32.5 % (n = 38) had no change in intent. In the model examining the relationship between becoming more positive about receiving a COVID-19 vaccine compared to all other attitudes (n = 116), we found a 57.2 % increase in vaccine acceptability (RR 1.57; 95 % CI: 1.01, 2.45) among those who reported worsening mental health since the start of the pandemic.ConclusionsFindings highlight opportunities to improve communication with residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination and support a need for continued dialogue and a person-centered approach to understanding the sociocultural complexities and dynamism of vaccine attitudes at shelters.Clinical Trial Registry Number: NCT04141917.