Dataset Information

Patient Perspectives on the COVID-19 Vaccine: A Pilot Survey Study of Patients in Endocrinology Clinics.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Vaccine hesitancy is an impediment to fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. Endocrinology clinics routinely see patients who are at high risk for more aggressive COVID-19 disease including patients with diabetes, obesity and hypertension. As endocrine patients often require multiple visits each year, endocrine clinics provide a significant opportunity for vaccine education. The aim of our study was to evaluate patient perspectives about COVID-19 vaccination in outpatient endocrinology clinics.

Methods

A pilot survey study of patients who visited 3 endocrinology clinics between May 31, 2021, and June 18, 2021. A 7-item questionnaire explored patient perspectives and behaviors regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics.

Results

A total of 446 patients from 3 clinic locations (1 urban; 2 suburban) completed our survey. There were 361 (81%) patients who indicated that they were planning to or had already received the COVID-19 vaccination, while 56 (13%) reported no intention of vaccination, and 29 (7%) were unsure. Of the 85 patients who were unsure or did not intend to be vaccinated, 51% were Black, 35% were White, and 14% had racial/ethnic identities. When asked about vaccine hesitancy, 29% wanted to wait and see how others did with the vaccine, 24% had concerns about side effects, 14% did not believe in vaccines, and 13% felt that COVID-19 was not as bad as the media had portrayed it. Significantly more Black patients had vaccine hesitancy than White patients (p=0.035).

Conclusion

Although most endocrinology patients were amenable to COVID-19 vaccination, a subpopulation still expressed vaccine hesitancy, indicating that endocrinology clinics may be an ideal place for targeted vaccine education.

SUBMITTER: Mikkilineni P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9250825 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAs COVID-19 vaccine distribution continues, policy makers are struggling to decide which groups should be prioritized for vaccination.ObjectiveTo assess US adults' preferences regarding COVID-19 vaccine prioritization.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study involved 2 independent, online surveys of US adults aged 18 years and older, 1 conducted by Gallup from September 14 to 27, 2020, and the other conducted by the COVID Collaborative from September 19 to 25, 2020. Samples were weighted to reflect sociodemographic characteristics of the US population.ExposuresRespondents were asked to prioritize groups for COVID-19 vaccine and to rank their prioritization considerations.Main outcomes and measuresThe study assessed prioritization preferences and agreement with the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine's Preliminary Framework for Equitable Allocation of COVID-19 Vaccine.ResultsA total of 4735 individuals participated, 2730 (1474 men [54.1%]; mean [SD] age, 59.2 [14.5] years) in the Gallup survey and 2005 (944 men [47.1%]; 203 participants [21.5%] aged 55-59 years) in the COVID Collaborative survey. In both the Gallup COVID-19 Panel and COVID Collaborative surveys, respondents listed health care workers (Gallup, 93.6% [95% CI, 91.2%-95.3%]; COVID Collaborative, 80.0% [95% CI, 78.0%-81.9%]) and adults of any age with serious comorbid conditions (Gallup, 78.6% [95% CI, 75.2%-81.7%]; COVID Collaborative, 72.9% [95% CI, 70.7%-74.9%]) among their 4 highest priority groups. Respondents of all political affiliations agreed with prioritizing Black, Hispanic, Native American, and other communities that have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 (Gallup, 74.2% [95% CI, 70.6%-77.5%]; COVID Collaborative, 84.9% [95% CI, 83.1%-86.5%]), and COVID Collaborative respondents were willing to be preceded in line by teachers and childcare workers (92.5%; 95% CI, 91.2%-93.7%) and grocery workers (85.9%; 95% CI, 84.2%-87.5%). Older respondents in both surveys were significantly less likely than younger respondents to prioritize healthy adults aged 65 years and older among their 4 highest priority groups (Gallup, 23.7% vs 39.1% [χ2 = 2160.8; P < .001]; COVID Collaborative, 23.3% vs 28.8% [χ2 = 5.0198; P = .03]). COVID Collaborative respondents believed the 4 most important considerations for prioritization were preventing COVID-19 spread (78.4% [95% CI, 76.3%-80.3%]), preventing the most deaths (72.1% [95% CI, 69.9%-74.2%]), preventing long-term complications (68.9% [66.6%-71.9%]), and protecting frontline workers (63.8% [95% CI, 61.5%-66.1%]).Conclusions and relevanceUS adults broadly agreed with the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine's prioritization framework. Respondents endorsed prioritizing racial/ethnic communities that are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, and older respondents were significantly less likely than younger respondents to endorse prioritizing healthy people older than 65 years. This provides reason for caution about COVID-19 vaccine distribution plans that prioritize healthy adults older than a cutoff age without including those younger than that age with preexisting conditions, that aim solely to prevent the most deaths, or that give no priority to frontline workers or disproportionately affected communities.

Project description:In the last two years, the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been a scientific and social challenge worldwide. Vaccines have been the most effective intervention for reducing virus transmission and disease severity. However, virus genetic variants are still circulating among vaccinated individuals with different symptomatology disease cases. Understanding the protective or disease associated mechanisms in vaccinated individuals is relevant to advance in vaccine development and implementation. To address this objective, serum protein profiles were characterized by quantitative proteomics and data analysis algorithms in four cohorts of vaccinated individuals uninfected and SARS-CoV-2 infected with asymptomatic, nonsevere and severe disease symptomatology. The results showed that immunoglobulins were the most overrepresented proteins in infected cohorts when compared to PCR-negative individuals. The immunoglobulin profile varied between different infected cohorts and correlated with protective or disease associated capacity. Overrepresented immunoglobulins in PCR-positive individuals correlated with protective response against SARS-CoV-2, other viruses, and thrombosis in asymptomatic cases. In nonsevere cases, correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 and HBV together with risk of myasthenia gravis and allergy and autoantibodies were observed. Patients with severe symptoms presented risk for allergy, chronic idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, and autoantibodies. The analysis of underrepresented immunoglobulins in PCR-positive compared to PCR-negative individuals identified vaccine-induced protective epitopes in various coronavirus proteins including the Spike receptor-binding domain RBD. Non-immunoglobulin proteins were associated with COVID-19 symptoms and biological processes. These results evidence host-associated differences in response to vaccination and the possibility of improving vaccine efficacy against SARS-CoV-2.

Project description:Background Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a multi-systemic infection caused by the novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), that has become a pandemic. Although its prevailing symptoms include anosmia, ageusia, dry couch, fever, shortness of brief, arthralgia, myalgia, and fatigue, regional and methodological assessments vary, leading to heterogeneous clinical descriptions of COVID-19. Aging, uncontrolled diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and exposure to androgens have been correlated with worse prognosis in COVID-19. Abnormalities in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) and the androgen-driven transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2) have been elicited as key modulators of SARS-CoV-2. Main text While safe and effective therapies for COVID-19 lack, the current moment of pandemic urges for therapeutic options. Existing drugs should be preferred over novel ones for clinical testing due to four inherent characteristics: 1. Well-established long-term safety profile, known risks and contraindications; 2. More accurate predictions of clinical effects; 3. Familiarity of clinical management; and 4. Affordable costs for public health systems. In the context of the key modulators of SARS-CoV-2 infectivity, endocrine targets have become central as candidates for COVID-19. The only endocrine or endocrine-related drug class with already existing emerging evidence for COVID-19 is the glucocorticoids, particularly for the use of dexamethasone for severely affected patients. Other drugs that are more likely to present clinical effects despite the lack of specific evidence for COVID-19 include anti-androgens (spironolactone, eplerenone, finasteride and dutasteride), statins, N-acetyl cysteine (NAC), ACE inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), and direct TMPRSS-2 inhibitors (nafamostat and camostat). Several other candidates show less consistent plausibility. In common, except for dexamethasone, all candidates have no evidence for COVID-19, and clinical trials are needed. Conclusion While dexamethasone may reduce mortality in severely ill patients with COVID-19, in the absence of evidence of any specific drug for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, researchers should consider testing existing drugs due to their favorable safety, familiarity, and cost profile. However, except for dexamethasone in severe COVID-19, drug treatments for COVID-19 patients must be restricted to clinical research studies until efficacy has been extensively proven, with favorable outcomes in terms of reduction in hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, and death.