Antibody levels and protection after Hepatitis B vaccine in adult vaccinated healthcare workers in northern Uganda.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ocan M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8782524 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Follow-up studies of recipients of hepatitis B vaccine from endemic areas have reported loss of antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) in a high proportion of persons vaccinated at birth. In contrast, the long-term durability of antibody in persons vaccinated as adults in nonendemic areas is not well defined. We aimed to assess the durability of anti-HBs among healthcare workers (HCWs) vaccinated as adults and response to a booster among those without protective levels of antibody.Adult HCWs aged 18-60 at the time of initial vaccination were recruited. All were tested for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc), and anti-HBs level. HCWs with anti-HBs <12 mIU/mL were offered a booster and levels were measured 1, 7, and 21 days afterward.Anti-HBs levels were <12 mIU/mL in 9 of 50 (18%), 13 of 50 (26%), and 14 of 59 (24%) HCWs 10-15, 16-20, and >20 years postvaccination, respectively, (P = ns). Four HCWs were anti-HBc positive; none had HBsAg. By logistic regression, older age at vaccination was the only predictor of inadequate anti-HBs level (P = .0005). Thirty-four of 36 subjects with inadequate anti-HBs levels received a booster and 32 (94%) developed levels >12 mIU/mL within 3 weeks.Anti-HBs levels decrease after 10-31 years and fall below a level considered protective in approximately 25% of cases. The rapid and robust response to a booster vaccine suggests a long-lasting amnestic response. Hepatitis B vaccination provides long-term protection against hepatitis B and booster vaccination does not appear to be necessary in HCWs. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01182311.
| S-EPMC4318915 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic is changing rapidly and requires different strategies to maintain immunization. In Korea, different COVID-19 vaccines are recommended and available for various populations, including healthcare workers (HCWs) at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We plan to evaluate the adverse events (AEs) and immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 vaccines in HCWs at a single center. This cohort study included HCWs fully vaccinated with either BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Blood samples were taken eight weeks after the second vaccination with both COVID-19 vaccines and six months after the second vaccination from participants with the BNT162b2 vaccine. The primary endpoint for immunogenicity was the serum neutralizing antibody responses eight weeks after vaccination. The secondary endpoint was the incidence of various AEs within 28 days of each vaccination. Between 16 March and 23 June 2021, 115 participants were enrolled (65 in the ChAdOx1 group and 50 in the BNT162b2 group). Significantly higher surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) inhibition was observed in participants vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2 (mean (SD) 91.4 (9.68)%) than in those vaccinated with ChAdOx1 (mean (SD) 73.3 (22.57)%). The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine was maintained across all age and gender categories. At six months after the second dose, serum antibody levels declined significantly in the BNT162b2 group. The main adverse events, including fever, myalgia, fatigue, and headache, were significantly higher in the ChAdOx1 group after the first dose, whereas, after the second dose, those AEs were significantly higher in the BNT162b2 group (p < 0.05). Two doses of either the ChAdOx1 or the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine resulted in very high seropositivity among the HCWs at our center. The quality of the antibody response, measured by sVNT inhibition, was significantly better with the BNT162b2 vaccine than with the ChAdOx1 vaccine. There was no significant association between neutralizing antibody response and AE after each vaccination in our cohort.
| S-EPMC8708890 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe durability of the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination remains unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate a rapid SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibody detection kit as a qualitative screen for the humoral response to vaccination.MethodsStudy participants (n = 125) included pediatric healthcare workers (HCWs) who had received two doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. Participants were tested on study entry (March 12, 2021 to April 9, 2021). The mean number of days post second dose was 22 (range 17-36). Participants were tested for IgM/IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein with the RightSign COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette. ELISA/competitive inhibition ELISA (CI-ELISA) were subsequently run to assess for the neutralization effect and SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid IgM/IgG antibodies.ResultsOverall, 98.4% of participants were IgG-positive and 0.8% were IgM-positive on rapid RightSign testing. Of those with IgG-positive results, 100% were anti-spike protein IgG-positive on CI-ELISA; none of those who tested IgG-negative via the rapid test were IgG-positive on CI-ELISA. All HCWs who tested RightSign positive demonstrated neutralizing capability on CI-ELISA. Overall, 1.6% demonstrated anti-nucleocapsid IgM antibodies and 5.6% demonstrated anti-nucleocapsid IgG antibodies.ConclusionsThe strong agreement between the rapid RightSign IgG results and confirmatory CI-ELISA testing suggests that this test may be used to assess for positive, and neutralizing, antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination.
| S-EPMC8482557 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND AND AIM:Vietnam's burden of liver cancer is largely due to its high prevalence of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. This study aimed to examine healthcare workers' (HCWs) knowledge, attitude and practices regarding HBV prevention and management. METHODS:A cross-sectional survey among health care workers working at primary and tertiary facilities in two Northern provinces in Vietnam in 2017. A standardized questionnaire was administered to randomly selected HCWs. Multivariate regression was used to identify predictors of the HBV knowledge score. RESULTS:Among the 314 participants, 75.5% did not know HBV infection at birth carries the highest risk of developing chronic infection. The median knowledge score was 25 out of 42 (59.5%). About one third (30.2%) wrongly believed that HBV can be transmitted through eating or sharing food with chronic hepatitis B patients. About 38.8% did not feel confident that the hepatitis B vaccine is safe. Only 30.1% provided correct answers to all the questions on injection safety. Up to 48.2% reported they consistently recap needles with two hands after injection, a practice that would put them at greater risk of needle stick injury. About 24.2% reported having been pricked by a needle at work within the past 12 months. More than 40% were concerned about having casual contact or sharing food with a person with chronic hepatitis B infection (CHB). In multivariate analysis, physicians scored significantly higher compared to other healthcare professionals. Having received training regarding hepatitis B within the last two years was also significantly associated with a better HBV knowledge score. CONCLUSIONS:Findings from the survey indicated an immediate need to implement an effective hepatitis B education and training program to build capacity among Vietnam's healthcare workers in hepatitis B prevention and control and to dispel hepatitis B stigma.
| S-EPMC6791544 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 and may therefore be a suitable population for COVID-19 vaccine trials. We conducted a survey to evaluate willingness-to-participate in COVID-19 vaccine trials in a population of HCWs at three hospitals in Uganda.MethodsThe survey was conducted between September and November 2020. Using a standardised questionnaire, data were collected on socio-demographics, previous participation in health research, COVID-19 information sources, underlying health conditions, and willingness-to-participate in COVID-19 vaccine trials. Data were analysed descriptively and a binomial generalised linear model with a log link function used to investigate factors associated with unwillingness to participate.Results657 HCWs (female, 63%) were enrolled with a mean age of 33 years (Standard Deviation, 10). Overall willingness-to-participate was 70.2%. Key motivating factors for participation were: hope of being protected against COVID-19 (81.1%), altruism (73.3%), and the opportunity to get health care (26.0%). Selected hypothetical trial attributes reduced willingness-to-participate as follows: weekly-quarterly study visits over a 12-month period (70.2%-63.2%, P = 0.026); provision of approximately 50ml of blood at each study visit (70.2%-63.2%, P = 0.026); risk of mild-moderate local adverse reactions (70.2%-60.3%, P<0.001); chance of receiving candidate vaccine or placebo (70.2%-56.9%, P<0.001); and delay of pregnancy [Overall, 70.2%-57.1% P<0.001); Female, 62.8%-48.4% (P = 0.002); Male, 82.5%-71.5% (P = 0.003)]. Collectively, these attributes reduced willingness-to-participate from [70.2%-42.2% (P<0.001) overall; 82.5%-58.1% (P<0.001) in men; 62.8%-32.6% (P<0.001) in women]. Among individuals that were unwilling to participate, the commonest barriers were concerns over vaccine safety (54.6%) and fear of catching SARS-CoV-2 (31.6%). Unwillingness to participate was associated with being female (aRR 1.97, CI 1.46-2.67, P<0.001) and having university or other higher-level education (aRR 1.52, CI 1.05-2.2, P = 0.026).ConclusionsWillingness-to-participate in COVID-19 vaccine trials among HCWs in Uganda is high but may be affected by vaccine trial requirements and concerns about the safety of candidate vaccines.
| S-EPMC8158909 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2009, a novel influenza A/H1N1pdm09 emerged and caused a pandemic. This strain continued to circulate and was therefore included in the seasonal vaccines up to the 2016/2017-season. This provided a unique opportunity to study the long-term antibody responses to H1N1pdm09 in healthcare workers (HCW) with a different vaccination history.MethodsHCW at Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway were immunized with the AS03-adjuvanted H1N1pdm09 vaccine in 2009 (N=55) and divided into groups according to their vaccination history; one vaccination (N=10), two vaccinations (N=15), three vaccinations (N=5), four vaccinations (N=15) and five vaccinations (N=10). HCW are recommended for influenza vaccination to protect both themselves and their patients, but it is voluntary in Norway. Blood samples were collected pre- and at 21 days, 3, 6, and 12 months after each vaccination, or annually from 2010 HCW without vaccination. ELISA, haemagglutination inhibition (HI) and microneutralization (MN) assays were used to determine the antibody response.ResultsPandemic vaccination induced a significant increase in the H1N1-specific antibodies measured by ELISA, HI and MN. Seasonal vaccination boosted the antibody response, both in HCW with only the current vaccination and those with prior and current vaccination during 2010/11-2013/14. We observed a trend of increased antibody responses in HCW with only the current vaccination in 2013/14. A two- and three-year gap before vaccination in 2013/14 provided a more potent antibody response compared to annually vaccinated HCW.ConclusionsOur long term follow up study elucidates the antibody response in HCW with different vaccination histories. Our findings contribute to our understanding of the impact of repeated vaccination upon antibody responses.
| S-EPMC8685392 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 poses significant health and economic threat prompting international firms to rapidly develop vaccines and secure quick regulatory approval. Although COVID-19 vaccination priority is given for high-risk individuals including healthcare workers (HCWs), the success of the immunization efforts hinges on peoples' willingness to embrace these vaccines.ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess HCWs intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and the reasons underlying vaccine hesitancy.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted among HCWs in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia from March to July 2021. Data were collected from eligible participants from 18 health facilities using a pre-tested semi-structured questionnaire. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression was performed to explore factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. A p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsA total of 614 HCWs participated in the study, with a mean age of 30.57±6.87 years. Nearly two-thirds (60.3%) of HCWs were hesitant to use the COVID-19 vaccine. Participants under the age of 30 years were approximately five times more likely to be hesitant to be vaccinated compared to those over the age of 40 years. HCWs other than medical doctors and/or nurses (AOR = 2.1; 95%CI; 1.1, 3.8) were more likely to be hesitant for COVID-19 vaccine. Lack of believe in COVID-19 vaccine benefits (AOR = 2.5; 95%CI; 1.3, 4.6), lack of trust in the government (AOR = 1.9; 95%CI; 1.3, 3.1), lack of trust science to produce safe and effective vaccines (AOR = 2.6; 95%CI; 1.6, 4.2); and concern about vaccine safety (AOR = 3.2; 95%CI; 1.9, 5.4) were also found to be predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.ConclusionCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy showed to be high among HCWs. All concerned bodies including the ministry, regional health authorities, health institutions, and HCWs themselves should work together to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and overcome the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8682893 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHBV infection affects about 257 million people globally and Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest burden. The disease still constitutes a major public health problem despite the advent of preventive measures like the HBV vaccine. This study was aimed at identifying factors that influence vaccine uptake and the efficacy of administered vaccines among people at high risk of HBV infection.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study conducted between January 2016 and December 2017. A pretested semi-structured questionnaire was used to capture information on sociodemographic and vaccination status from healthcare workers, household and sexual contacts to HBV infected people. HBV serological panel as well as quantitative anti-HBs ELISA test was done for all participants. Additional information was obtained from the institutions that administered the vaccines.ResultsA total of 265 participants with a mean age of 32.1±8.7 were enrolled. Eighty (30.2%) of them had received at least 1 dose of the HBV vaccine while 185 (69.8%) were unvaccinated. Healthcare workers were the most vaccinated (37%). Ignorance, negligence, fear of injection and the cost of the vaccine all contributed to poor vaccine uptake in the study population. Natural immunity was seen in 9 (3.4%) of the participants. Only 64.9% of the vaccinated participants attained the desirable level of anti-HBs (?10mIU/ml) 1-2 months after ? 3 doses of the vaccine. Age, gender, obesity, alcohol and smoking were not significantly associated with poor immune responses. No standardized protocol was followed by the institutions administering the vaccine.ConclusionThis study revealed very poor vaccine uptake and poor immune responses to the HBV vaccine in the study population and this should urge the health sector in Cameroon to intensify their sensitization on HBV vaccine, standardize the protocol for storing and administering the vaccine, subsidize the cost of the vaccine especially amongst healthcare workers and encourage anti-HBs post vaccination testing.
| S-EPMC6047772 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Medical staff caring for COVID-19 patients face mental stress, physical exhaustion, separation from families, stigma, and the pain of losing patients and colleagues. Many of them have acquired SARS-CoV-2 and some have died. In Africa, where the pandemic is escalating, there are major gaps in response capacity, especially in human resources and protective equipment. We examine these challenges and propose interventions to protect healthcare workers on the continent, drawing on articles identified on Medline (Pubmed) in a search on 24 March 2020. Global jostling means that supplies of personal protective equipment are limited in Africa. Even low-cost interventions such as facemasks for patients with a cough and water supplies for handwashing may be challenging, as is 'physical distancing' in overcrowded primary health care clinics. Without adequate protection, COVID-19 mortality may be high among healthcare workers and their family in Africa given limited critical care beds and difficulties in transporting ill healthcare workers from rural to urban care centres. Much can be done to protect healthcare workers, however. The continent has learnt invaluable lessons from Ebola and HIV control. HIV counselors and community healthcare workers are key resources, and could promote social distancing and related interventions, dispel myths, support healthcare workers, perform symptom screening and trace contacts. Staff motivation and retention may be enhanced through carefully managed risk 'allowances' or compensation. International support with personnel and protective equipment, especially from China, could turn the pandemic's trajectory in Africa around. Telemedicine holds promise as it rationalises human resources and reduces patient contact and thus infection risks. Importantly, healthcare workers, using their authoritative voice, can promote effective COVID-19 policies and prioritization of their safety. Prioritizing healthcare workers for SARS-CoV-2 testing, hospital beds and targeted research, as well as ensuring that public figures and the population acknowledge the commitment of healthcare workers may help to maintain morale. Clearly there are multiple ways that international support and national commitment could help safeguard healthcare workers in Africa, essential for limiting the pandemic's potentially devastating heath, socio-economic and security impacts on the continent.
| S-EPMC7227172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor Malaysia, a nation highly dependent on migrant labour, the large non-citizen workforce presents a unique health system challenge. Although documented migrant workers are covered by mandatory healthcare insurance (SPIKPA), financial constraints remain a major barrier for non-citizen healthcare access. Malaysia recently extended protection for migrant workers under the national social security scheme (SOCSO), previously exclusive to citizens. This study aims to evaluate healthcare financing and social security policies for migrant workers to identify policy gaps and opportunities for intervention.MethodsA total of 37 in-depth interviews were conducted of 44 stakeholders from July 2018 to July 2019. A mixed-methods analysis combining major themes from qualitative interviews with policy document reviews was conducted. Descriptive analysis of publicly available secondary data, namely revenues collected at government healthcare facilities, was conducted to contextualise the policy review and qualitative findings.ResultsWe found that migrant workers and employers were unaware of SPIKPA enrolment and entitlements. Higher fees for non-citizens result in delayed care-seeking. While the Malaysian government nearly doubled non-citizen healthcare fees revenues from RM 104 to 182 million (USD 26 to 45 million) between 2014 to 2018, outstanding revenues tripled from RM 16 to 50 million (USD 4 to 12 million) in the same period. SPIKPA coverage is likely inadequate in providing financial risk protection to migrant workers, especially with increased non-citizens fees at public hospitals. Undocumented workers and other migrant populations excluded from SPIKPA contribution to unpaid fees revenues are unknown. Problems described with the previous Foreign Workers Compensation Scheme (FWCS), could be partially addressed by SOCSO, in theory. Nevertheless, questions remain on the feasibility of implementing elements of SOCSO, such as recurring payments to workers and next-of-kin overseas.ConclusionMalaysia is moving towards migrant inclusion with the provision of SOCSO for documented migrant workers, but more needs to be done. Here we suggest the expansion of the SPIKPA insurance scheme to include all migrant populations, while broadening its scope towards more comprehensive coverage, including essential primary care.
| S-EPMC7725341 | biostudies-literature