SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake in a multi-ethnic UK healthcare workforce: A cross-sectional study
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Martin C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8570522 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundFew studies have compared SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity by ethnic group. We sought to establish whether cellular and humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination differ according to ethnicity in UK Healthcare workers (HCWs).MethodsIn this cross-sectional analysis, we used baseline data from two immunological cohort studies conducted in HCWs in Leicester, UK. Blood samples were collected between March 3, and September 16, 2021. We excluded HCW who had not received two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine at the time of sampling and those who had serological evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcome measures were SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific total antibody titre, neutralising antibody titre and ELISpot count. We compared our outcome measures by ethnic group using univariable (t tests and rank-sum tests depending on distribution) and multivariable (linear regression for antibody titres and negative binomial regression for ELISpot counts) tests. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for age, sex, vaccine type, length of interval between vaccine doses and time between vaccine administration and sample collection and expressed as adjusted geometric mean ratios (aGMRs) or adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs). To assess differences in the early immune response to vaccination we also conducted analyses in a subcohort who provided samples between 14 and 50 days after their second dose of vaccine.FindingsThe total number of HCWs in each analysis were 401 for anti-spike antibody titres, 345 for neutralising antibody titres and 191 for ELISpot. Overall, 25.4% (19.7% South Asian and 5.7% Black/Mixed/Other) were from ethnic minority groups. In analyses including the whole cohort, neutralising antibody titres were higher in South Asian HCWs than White HCWs (aGMR 1.47, 95% CI [1.06-2.06], P = 0.02) as were T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 S1 peptides (aIRR 1.75, 95% CI [1.05-2.89], P = 0.03). In a subcohort sampled between 14 and 50 days after second vaccine dose, SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibody and neutralising antibody geometric mean titre (GMT) was higher in South Asian HCWs compared to White HCWs (9616 binding antibody units (BAU)/ml, 95% CI [7178-12,852] vs 5888 BAU/ml [5023-6902], P = 0.008 and 2851 95% CI [1811-4487] vs 1199 [984-1462], P < 0.001 respectively), increments which persisted after adjustment (aGMR 1.26, 95% CI [1.01-1.58], P = 0.04 and aGMR 2.01, 95% CI [1.34-3.01], P = 0.001). SARS-CoV-2 ELISpot responses to S1 and whole spike peptides (S1 + S2 response) were higher in HCWs from South Asian ethnic groups than those from White groups (S1: aIRR 2.33, 95% CI [1.09-4.94], P = 0.03; spike: aIRR, 2.04, 95% CI [1.02-4.08]).InterpretationThis study provides evidence that, in an infection naïve cohort, humoral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are stronger in South Asian HCWs than White HCWs. These differences are most clearly seen in the early period following vaccination. Further research is required to understand the underlying mechanisms, whether differences persist with further exposure to vaccine or virus, and the potential impact on vaccine effectiveness.FundingDIRECT and BELIEVE have received funding from UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) through the COVID-19 National Core Studies Immunity (NCSi) programme (MC_PC_20060).
| S-EPMC10071048 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn most countries, healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a priority group for vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) due to their elevated risk of COVID-19 and potential contribution to nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Concerns have been raised that HCWs from ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant (defined by the World Health Organisation as refusing or delaying a vaccination) than those of White ethnicity, but there are limited data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy and its predictors in UK HCWs.MethodsNationwide prospective cohort study and qualitative study in a multi-ethnic cohort of clinical and non-clinical UK HCWs. We analysed ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy adjusting for demographics, vaccine trust, and perceived risk of COVID-19. We explored reasons for hesitancy in qualitative data using a framework analysis.Findings11,584 HCWs were included in the cohort analysis. 23% (2704) reported vaccine hesitancy. Compared to White British HCWs (21.3% hesitant), HCWs from Black Caribbean (54.2%), Mixed White and Black Caribbean (38.1%), Black African (34.4%), Chinese (33.1%), Pakistani (30.4%), and White Other (28.7%) ethnic groups were significantly more likely to be hesitant. In adjusted analysis, Black Caribbean (aOR 3.37, 95% CI 2.11 - 5.37), Black African (aOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.49 - 2.82), White Other ethnic groups (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.19 - 1.84) were significantly more likely to be hesitant. Other independent predictors of hesitancy were younger age, female sex, higher score on a COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs scale, lower trust in employer, lack of influenza vaccine uptake in the previous season, previous COVID-19, and pregnancy. Qualitative data from 99 participants identified the following contributors to hesitancy: lack of trust in government and employers, safety concerns due to the speed of vaccine development, lack of ethnic diversity in vaccine studies, and confusing and conflicting information. Participants felt uptake in ethnic minority communities might be improved through inclusive communication, involving HCWs in the vaccine rollout, and promoting vaccination through trusted networks.InterpretationDespite increased risk of COVID-19, HCWs from some ethnic minority groups are more likely to be vaccine hesitant than their White British colleagues. Strategies to build trust and dispel myths surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine in these communities are urgently required. Emphasis should be placed on the safety and benefit of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy and in those with previous COVID-19. Public health communications should be inclusive, non-stigmatising and utilise trusted networks.FundingUKRI-MRC and NIHR.
| S-EPMC8287519 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRegular vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may be needed to maintain immunity in 'at-risk' populations, which include healthcare workers (HCWs). However, little is known about the proportion of HCWs who might be hesitant about receiving a hypothetical regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or the factors associated with this hesitancy.MethodsCross-sectional analysis of questionnaire data collected as part of UK-REACH, a nationwide, longitudinal cohort study of HCWs. The outcome measure was binary, either a participant indicated they would definitely accept regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination if recommended or they indicated some degree of hesitancy regarding acceptance (probably accept or less likely). We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with hesitancy for receiving regular vaccination.ResultsA total of 5454 HCWs were included in the analysed cohort, 23.5% of whom were hesitant about regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Black HCWs were more likely to be hesitant than White HCWs (aOR 2.60, 95%CI 1.80-3.72) as were those who reported a previous episode of COVID-19 (1.33, 1.13-1.57 [vs those who tested negative]). Those who received influenza vaccination in the previous two seasons were over five times less likely to report hesitancy for regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination than those not vaccinated against influenza in either season (0.18, 0.14-0.21). HCWs who trusted official sources of vaccine information (such as NHS or government adverts or websites) were less likely to report hesitancy for a regular vaccination programme. Those who had been exposed to information advocating against vaccination from friends and family were more likely to be hesitant.ConclusionsIn this study, nearly a quarter of UK HCWs were hesitant about receiving a regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. We have identified key factors associated with hesitancy for regular SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, which can be used to identify groups of HCWs at the highest risk of vaccine hesitancy and tailor interventions accordingly. Family and friends of HCWs may influence decisions about regular vaccination. This implies that working with HCWs and their social networks to allay concerns about SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could improve uptake in a regular vaccination programme.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN11811602.
| S-EPMC9548389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSeveral countries now have mandatory SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) or the general population. HCWs' views on this are largely unknown. Using data from the nationwide UK-REACH study we aimed to understand UK HCW's views on improving SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage, including mandatory vaccination.MethodsBetween 21st April and 26th June 2021, we administered an online questionnaire via email to 17 891 UK HCWs recruited as part of a longitudinal cohort from across the UK who had previously responded to a baseline questionnaire (primarily recruited through email) as part of the United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH) nationwide prospective cohort study. We categorised responses to a free-text question "What should society do if people do not get vaccinated against COVID-19?" using qualitative content analysis. We collapsed categories into a binary variable: favours mandatory vaccination or not, using logistic regression to calculate its demographic predictors, and its occupational, health, and attitudinal predictors adjusted for demographics.FindingsOf 5633 questionnaire respondents, 3235 answered the free text question. Median age of free text responders was 47 years (IQR 36-56) and 2705 (74.3%) were female. 18% (n = 578) favoured mandatory vaccination (201 [6%] participants for HCWs and others working with vulnerable populations; 377 [12%] for the general population), but the most frequent suggestion was education (32%, n = 1047). Older HCWs (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.44-2.34 [≥55 years vs 16 years to <40 years]), HCWs vaccinated against influenza (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.11-2.01 [2 vaccines vs none]), and with more positive vaccination attitudes generally (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.06-1.15) were more likely to favour mandatory vaccination, whereas female HCWs (OR= 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.96, vs male HCWs) and Black HCWs (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.25-0.85, vs white HCWs) were less likely to.InterpretationOnly one in six of the HCWs in this large, diverse, UK-wide sample favoured mandatory vaccination. Building trust, educating, and supporting HCWs who are hesitant about vaccination may be more acceptable, effective, and equitable.FundingMRC-UK Research and Innovation grant (MR/V027549/1) and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) via the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). Core funding was also provided by NIHR Biomedical Research Centres.
| S-EPMC8923694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this single centre cohort study we assessed BNT162B2 vaccine uptake and effectiveness among UK healthcare workers (HCWs) during a time of high community COVID-19 prevalence. Early uptake among HCWs was 62.3% (1409/2260), however there were significant differences in uptake between age groups, ethnic origins, and job roles. Uptake increased to 72.9% after a vaccine hesitancy working group implemented specific measures. In the 42 days after vaccination, 49 new cases of COVID-19 were identified, of which 7 (14.3%) occurred in HCWs who were beyond 10 days of vaccination. Kaplan-Meier curves for partially vaccinated and unvaccinated groups were congruent until day 14 and continued to diverge up to 42 days. Cox regression analysis showed a 70.0% (95%CI 6.0-91.0; p=0.04) risk reduction for COVID-19 infection in partially vaccinated HCWs. Here we report early vaccination rates among HCWs are generally high although uptake is lower in certain groups. It is possible to improve vaccine uptake and efforts should focus on this, however, significant resource is required. The BNT162B2 vaccine is effective from 14 days post-vaccination in a frontline clinical setting and protection continues beyond 21 days post 1st dose without a 2nd dose, being given.
| S-EPMC8211683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSecuring an available healthcare workforce is critical to respond to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, research investigating Korea's COVID-19 staffing response is rare. To present the fundamental data of healthcare staff in response to the surge in COVID-19 cases, we investigated the healthcare workforce response in Daegu, South Korea, which experienced the first largest outbreak of COVID-19 outside of China.Materials and methodsIn response to the COVID-19 outbreak, this retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed data on the scale and characteristics of healthcare workers (HCWs). Additionally, it analyzed the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of HCWs infected with COVID-19 in six major teaching hospitals (five tertiary and one secondary) in Daegu from January 19 to April 30, 2020.ResultsDuring this study period, only 1.3% (n = 611) of the total hospitalized patients (n = 48,807) were COVID-19 inpatients, but they occupied 6.0% (n = 303) of the total hospital beds (n = 5,056), and 23.7% (n = 3,471) of all HCWs (n = 14,651) worked in response to COVID-19. HCWs participating in COVID-19-related works comprised 50.6% (n = 1,203) of doctors (n = 2,379), 26.3% (n = 1,571) of nurses (n = 5,982), and 11.4% (n = 697) of other HCWs (n = 6,108). Only 0.3% (n = 51) of HCWs (n = 14,651) developed COVID-19 infections from community-acquired (66.7%) or hospital-acquired (29.4%). Nurses were affected predominantly (33.3%), followed by doctors (9.8%), caregivers (7.8%), radiographers (5.9%), and others (45.1%), including nurse aides and administrative, facility maintenance, telephone appointment centers, and convenience store staff. All HCWs infected with COVID-19 recovered completely. The 32.7% (n = 333) of individuals (n = 1,018) exposed to HCWs who had COVID-19 were quarantined, and only one case of secondary transmission among them occurred.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated significant staffing and facility usage, which is disproportionate to the relatively low number of COVID-19 inpatients, imposing a substantial burden on healthcare resources. Therefore, beyond the current reimbursement level of the Korean National Health Insurance, a new type of rewarding system is needed to prepare hospitals for the emerging outbreaks of infectious diseases. Keeping HCWs safe from COVID-19 is crucial for maintaining the healthcare workforce during a sudden massive outbreak. Further studies are needed to determine the standards of required HCWs through detailed research on the working hours and intensity of HCWs responding to COVID-19.
| S-EPMC9259921 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the past two decades, 7 coronaviruses have infected the human population, with two major outbreaks caused by SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV in the year 2002 and 2012, respectively. Currently, the entire world is facing a pandemic of another coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, with a high fatality rate. The spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 mediates entry of virus into the host cell and is one of the most important antigenic determinants, making it a potential candidate for a vaccine. In this study, we have computationally designed a multi-epitope vaccine using spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2. The overall quality of the candidate vaccine was validated in silico and Molecular Dynamics Simulation confirmed the stability of the designed vaccine. Docking studies revealed stable interactions of the vaccine with Toll-Like Receptors and MHC Receptors. The in silico cloning and codon optimization supported the proficient expression of the designed vaccine in E. coli expression system. The efficiency of the candidate vaccine to trigger an effective immune response was assessed by an in silico immune simulation. The computational analyses suggest that the designed multi-epitope vaccine is structurally stable which can induce specific immune responses and thus, can be a potential vaccine candidate against SARS-CoV-2.
| S-EPMC7331818 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seroprevalence in pregnancy in an inner-city setting and assess associations with demographic factors and vaccination timing.DesignRepeated cross-sectional surveillance study.SettingLondon maternity centre.SampleA total of 906 pregnant women attending nuchal scans, July 2020-January 2022.MethodsBlood samples were tested for IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) proteins. Self-reported vaccination status and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection were recorded. Multivariable regression models determined demographic factors associated with seroprevalence and antibody titres.Main outcome measuresImmunoglobulin G N- and S-protein antibody titres.ResultsOf the 960 women, 196 (20.4%) were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive from previous infection. Of these, 70 (35.7%) self-reported previous infection. Among unvaccinated women, women of black ethnic backgrounds were most likely to be SARS-CoV-2 seropositive (versus white adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.88, 95% CI 1.35-2.61, p < 0.001). Women from black and mixed ethnic backgrounds were least likely to have a history of vaccination with seropositivity to S-protein (versus white aRR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.84, p = 0.004; aRR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.92, p = 0.021, respectively). Double vaccinated, previously infected women had higher IgG S-protein antibody titres than unvaccinated, previously infected women (mean difference 4.76 fold-change, 95% CI 2.65-6.86, p < 0.001). Vaccination timing before versus during pregnancy did not affect IgG S-antibody titres (mean difference -0.28 fold-change, 95% CI -2.61 to 2.04, p = 0.785).ConclusionsThis cross-sectional study demonstrates high rates of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with women of black ethnic backgrounds having higher infection risk and lower vaccine uptake. SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres were highest among double-vaccinated, infected women.
| S-EPMC10718194 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prospective serosurveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in 1,069 healthcare workers in London, UK, demonstrated that nucleocapsid antibody titers were stable and sustained for <12 weeks in 312 seropositive participants. This finding was consistent across demographic and clinical variables and contrasts with reports of short-term antibody waning.
| S-EPMC8007325 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Understanding the transmission mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 is a prerequisite to effective control measures. To investigate the potential modes of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, 21 COVID-19 patients from 12-47 days after symptom onset were recruited. We monitored the release of SARS-CoV-2 from the patients' exhaled breath and systematically investigated environmental contamination of air, public surfaces, personal necessities, and the drainage system. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 0 of 9 exhaled breath samples, 2 of 8 exhaled breath condensate samples, 1 of 12 bedside air samples, 4 of 132 samples from private surfaces, 0 of 70 samples from frequently touched public surfaces in isolation rooms, and 7 of 23 feces-related air/surface/water samples. The maximum viral RNA concentrations were 1857 copies/m3 in the air, 38 copies/cm2 in sampled surfaces and 3092 copies/mL in sewage/wastewater samples. Our results suggest that nosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV-2 can occur via multiple routes. However, the low detection frequency and limited quantity of viral RNA from the breath and environmental specimens may be related to the reduced viral load of the COVID-19 patients on later days after symptom onset. These findings suggest that the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 differ from those of SARS-CoV in healthcare settings.
| S-EPMC7446651 | biostudies-literature