Prevalence of smoking in adults with spinal cord stimulators: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundSmoking adversely impacts pain-related outcomes of spinal cord stimulation (SCS). However, the proportion of SCS patients at risk of worse outcomes is limited by an incomplete knowledge of smoking prevalence in this population. Thus, the primary aim of this systematic review is to determine the prevalence of smoking in adults with chronic pain treated with SCS.MethodsA comprehensive search of databases from 1 January 1980 to 3 January 2019 was conducted. Eligible study designs included (1) randomized trials; (2) prospective and retrospective cohort studies; and (3) cross-sectional studies. The risk of bias was assessed using a tool specifically developed for prevalence studies. A total of 1619 records were screened, 19 studies met inclusion criteria, and the total number of participants was 10 838.ResultsThirteen studies had low or moderate risk of bias, and six had a high risk of bias. All 19 studies reported smoking status and the pooled prevalence was 38% (95% CI 30% to 47%). The pooled prevalence in 6 studies of peripheral vascular diseases was 56% (95% CI 42% to 69%), the pooled prevalence of smoking in 11 studies of lumbar spine diagnoses was 28% (95% CI 20% to 36%) and the pooled prevalence in 2 studies of refractory angina was 44% (95% CI 31% to 58%).ConclusionsThe estimated prevalence of smoking in SCS patients is 2.5 times greater than the general population. Future research should focus on development, testing and deployment of tailored smoking cessation treatments for SCS patients.

Download Full-text

Prevalence of chronic pain after spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine ◽

10.1136/rapm-2020-101960 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. rapm-2020-101960

Author(s):

Christine Hunt ◽

Rajat Moman ◽

Ashley Peterson ◽

Rachel Wilson ◽

Stephen Covington ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Spinal Cord ◽

Spinal Cord Injury ◽

Chronic Pain ◽

Classification System ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

Cord Injury ◽

Prevalence Estimates

BackgroundThe reported prevalence of chronic pain after spinal cord injury (SCI) varies widely due, in part, to differences in the taxonomy of chronic pain. A widely used classification system is available to describe subcategories of chronic pain in SCI, but the prevalence of chronic pain in SCI based on this system is unknown.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the prevalence of chronic pain after SCI based on the International Spinal Cord Injury Pain (ISCIP) classification system.Evidence reviewA comprehensive search of databases from January 1980 to August 2019 was conducted. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified tool developed for uncontrolled studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess certainty in prevalence estimates.FindingsA total of 1305 records were screened, and 37 studies met inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of overall chronic pain was 68% (95% CI 63% to 73%). The pooled prevalence of neuropathic pain in 13 studies was 58% (95% CI 49% to 68%); the pooled prevalence of musculoskeletal pain in 11 studies was 56% (95% CI 41% to 70%); the pooled prevalence of visceral pain in 8 studies was 20% (95% CI 11% to 29%) and the pooled prevalence of nociceptive pain in 2 studies was 45% (95% CI 13% to 78%). Meta-regression of risk of bias (p=0.20), traumatic versus non-traumatic etiology of injury (p=0.59), and studies where pain was a primary outcome (p=0.32) demonstrated that these factors were not significant moderators of heterogeneity. Certainty in prevalence estimates was judged to be low due to unexplained heterogeneity.ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis extends the findings of previous studies by reporting the prevalence of chronic pain after SCI based on the ISCIP classification system, thereby reducing clinical heterogeneity in the reporting of pain prevalence related to SCI.

Download Full-text

Sarcopenia in Patients With Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Frontiers in Neurology ◽

10.3389/fneur.2021.598035 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Yingying Cai ◽

Fei Feng ◽

Qianqian Wei ◽

Zheng Jiang ◽

Ruwei Ou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Clinical Features ◽

Random Effects ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

Cross Sectional Studies

Background: Parkinson's disease (PD) and sarcopenia are two common diseases in aging people. To date, the prevalence of sarcopenia in PD patients and the relationship between clinical features and sarcopenia in PD patients are not clear. The aim of the study was to (1) assess the prevalence of sarcopenia in PD patients and (2) reveal the clinical features between PD patients with and without sarcopenia.Method: A systematic review was carried out through screening PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane database in May 2020. All study designs (case–control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies) were eligible for meta-analysis. Data of patients' characteristics, sarcopenia criteria, sarcopenia prevalence, and sarcopenia measures were retrieved. The primary outcome was estimated prevalence of sarcopenia by a pooled prevalence (%) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), using a random-effects model. The secondary outcome was the differences in clinical features between PD patients with and without sarcopenia by meta-analysis. Included articles were assessed for risk of bias. Potential sources of variation were investigated by using subgroup analyses and meta-regression.Result: Ten studies were included in the review. Among them, nine were cross-sectional studies, and one was a prospective cohort study. Age of participants with PD in the studies ranged from 51.1 to 80.7 years. The estimated prevalence of sarcopenia ranged from 6 to 55.5%. The random-effects pooled prevalence was 29% (95% CIs: 0.18–0.40). When only studies at low risk of bias were considered, pooled prevalence decreased to 17% (95% CIs: 0.02–0.33), with still high heterogeneity. The incidence of falls in PD patients with sarcopenia was higher than that in PD patients without sarcopenia. There was no difference in sex ratio between PD patients with and without sarcopenia.Conclusion: Sarcopenia seems to be common in patients with PD. Early assessment of sarcopenia should be implemented in PD to avoid fall and disability.

Download Full-text

Neurophysiological changes of brain and spinal cord in individuals with patellofemoral pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049882 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (7) ◽

pp. e049882

Author(s):

Jing Nong Liang ◽

Savanna Budge ◽

Austin Madriaga ◽

Kara Meske ◽

Derrick Nguyenton ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Spinal Cord ◽

Quality Assessment ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Neuromuscular Control ◽

Patellofemoral Pain ◽

Randomised Control Trial ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Prospective Longitudinal ◽

Brain And Spinal Cord

IntroductionReduced neuromuscular control due to altered neurophysiological functions of the central nervous system has been suggested to cause movement deficits in individuals with patellofemoral pain (PFP). However, the underlying neurophysiological measures of brain and spinal cord in this population remain to be poorly understood. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence for altered cortical and spinal cord functions in individuals with PFP.Methods and analysisThe protocol for conducting the review was prepared using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. We will systematically search the literature that examines cortical and spinal cord functions in individuals with PFP, aged 18–45 years. The studies for cross-sectional, prospective, longitudinal, case–control and randomised control trial designs will be included from the following databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE and Web of Science. Only studies published in English prior to 1 February 2021 will be included. The risk of bias and quality assessment will be performed using National Institutes of Health’s Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. We will conduct meta-analysis of the data where appropriate. Narrative synthesis will be taken if a meta-analysis is not possible.Ethics and disseminationThis is a systematic review from the existing literature and does not require ethical approval. The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal in the field of rehabilitation medicine, sports/orthopaedic medicine or neurology, regardless of the outcome.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020212128.

Download Full-text

Prevalence of Depression among Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm10153406 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (15) ◽

pp. 3406

Author(s):

Beatriz Olaya ◽

María Pérez-Moreno ◽

Juan Bueno-Notivol ◽

Patricia Gracia-García ◽

Isabel Lasheras ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Healthcare Workers ◽

Mental Health Problems ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Medical Doctors ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Random Effects Models ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

Prevalence Of Depression ◽

Common Mental Health Problems

Background: There is evidence of a high psychological toll from the COVID-19 pandemic in healthcare workers. This paper was aimed at conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting levels of depression among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 and estimating the pooled prevalence of depression. Methods: We searched for cross-sectional studies listed on PubMed from 1 December 2019 to 15 September 2020 that reported prevalence of depression in healthcare workers, nurses, medical doctors, and COVID-19 frontline professionals. The pooled proportions of depression were calculated with random effects models. Results: We identified 57 studies from seventeen countries. The pooled prevalence of depression in healthcare workers was 24% (95% CI: 20%−28%), 25% for nurses (95% CI: 18%−33%), 24% for medical doctors (95% CI: 16%−31%), and 43% for frontline professionals (95% CI: 28%−59%). Conclusions: The proportion of depression in nurses and medical doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic was similar to that found in the general population as previously reported in other meta-analyses conducted with smaller numbers of studies. Importantly, almost half of the frontline healthcare workers showed increased levels of depression. There is need for a comprehensive, international response to prevent and treat common mental health problems in healthcare workers.

Download Full-text

Deep learning for pulmonary embolism detection on computed tomography pulmonary angiogram: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-021-95249-3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Shelly Soffer ◽

Eyal Klang ◽

Orit Shimon ◽

Yiftach Barash ◽

Noa Cahan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Pulmonary Embolism ◽

Deep Learning ◽

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Future Research ◽

Learning Models ◽

Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic ◽

Pulmonary Angiogram

AbstractComputed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the gold standard for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis. However, this diagnosis is susceptible to misdiagnosis. In this study, we aimed to perform a systematic review of current literature applying deep learning for the diagnosis of PE on CTPA. MEDLINE/PUBMED were searched for studies that reported on the accuracy of deep learning algorithms for PE on CTPA. The risk of bias was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted. Seven studies met our inclusion criteria. A total of 36,847 CTPA studies were analyzed. All studies were retrospective. Five studies provided enough data to calculate summary estimates. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for PE detection were 0.88 (95% CI 0.803–0.927) and 0.86 (95% CI 0.756–0.924), respectively. Most studies had a high risk of bias. Our study suggests that deep learning models can detect PE on CTPA with satisfactory sensitivity and an acceptable number of false positive cases. Yet, these are only preliminary retrospective works, indicating the need for future research to determine the clinical impact of automated PE detection on patient care. Deep learning models are gradually being implemented in hospital systems, and it is important to understand the strengths and limitations of these algorithms.

Download Full-text

Overuse and underuse of cardiovascular diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for community-dwelling adults: a protocol for a systematic review

HRB Open Research ◽

10.12688/hrbopenres.13330.1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 4 ◽

pp. 99

Author(s):

Dominic Quinn ◽

David Byrne ◽

Tom Fahey ◽

Rose Anne Kenny ◽

Christine McGarrigle ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Artery Bypass ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Community Dwelling ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Healthcare Intervention ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

International Guidelines

Background: Potentially inappropriate care can result from overuse or underuse of treatments, tests, or procedures. Overuse is defined as the use of health services with no clear benefit to the recipient or where harms outweigh benefits and/or costs of care. Underuse is defined as failure to deliver an effective and cost-effective healthcare intervention. Cardiovascular procedures such as coronary artery bypass grafting, carotid endarterectomy, coronary angiography, and coronary angioplasty (with/without stenting) are potentially both underused and overused. This systematic review aims to identify rates of potential overuse and underuse of these cardiovascular procedures and explore any associated patient or healthcare system factors. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the Cochrane library will be conducted using a predefined search strategy. Eligible studies for inclusion will examine rates of overuse and underuse of cardiovascular procedures, measured against national/international guidelines, for adults aged ≥18 years. Primary observational studies including cross-sectional and cohort studies will be included. Titles, abstracts, and full texts will be screened for inclusion by two reviewers. Data will be extracted using a standardised form. Risk of bias for all included studies will be assessed using a modified version of the Hoy risk of bias tool. Where adequate data exists, and if statistically appropriate, meta-analyses will be conducted. If statistical pooling of the data is not possible, the findings will be narratively summarised focusing on the review’s objectives. Conclusion: This systematic review will examine overuse and underuse of cardiovascular procedures for adults. The results will help inform policy makers, researchers, patients, and clinicians in the appropriate use of these procedures, in line with international guidelines. Registration: This protocol has been submitted for registration on PROSPERO (CRD42021239041).

Download Full-text

Prevalence of epilepsy in autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Autism ◽

10.1177/13623613211045029 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 136236132110450

Author(s):

Xian Liu ◽

Xin Sun ◽

Caihong Sun ◽

Mingyang Zou ◽

Yiru Chen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Intellectual Disability ◽

Human Development ◽

Human Development Index ◽

Clinical Sample ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Population Based ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Development Index ◽

Pooled Prevalence

The literature from inception to 2020 on the prevalence of epilepsy in autistic individuals was systematically reviewed and further explored by subgroup analyses and meta-regression models. This systematic review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020179725). A total of 66 studies from 53 articles were included. The updated pooled prevalence of epilepsy in autistic individuals was 10% (95% CI: 6–14). The respective prevalence estimate of epilepsy was 19% (95% CI: 6–35) in the clinical sample-based cross-sectional study, 7% (95% CI: 3–11) in the cohort study, and 9% (95% CI: 5–15) in the population-based cross-sectional study. The pooled prevalence of epilepsy was 7% (95% CI: 4–11) in autistic children and 19% (95% CI: 14–24) in autistic adults. Compared to the school-aged group, the adolescence group (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06–1.25) and the pre-school group (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.94–1.19) were positively associated with the prevalence of epilepsy. The moderators of age, human development index of the country, gender, and intellectual function accounted for most of the heterogeneity. The prevalence estimates were associated with age, female gender, intellectual disability rate, and the human development index of countries. About 1/10 autistic individuals co-occurred with epilepsy, which was common in the clinical setting, adolescents, adults, females, or patients with intellectual disability, and less common in the country with high human development index. Lay abstract Autistic individuals experience higher co-occurring medical conditions than the general population, and yet the estimates of autistic individuals with epilepsy are not updated. Co-occurrence of epilepsy in autistic individuals often aggravated cognitive impairment and increased the risk of poor long-term prognosis. Thus, an updated systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to study the relevant articles published from inception to 2020, evaluate the prevalence of epilepsy in autistic individuals, and further explore the putative factors influencing the prevalence. A total of 66 studies from 53 articles were included in this study. The results showed that epilepsy is more common in autistic individuals than in the general population. The prevalence of epilepsy in autistic individuals in the clinical sample-based studies was higher than that in the population-based based cross-sectional or cohort studies. The prevalence of epilepsy in autistic adults was higher than that in autistic children. A significantly increased prevalence of epilepsy was detected in the autistic adolescent group (11–17 years old), and a higher trend of prevalence of epilepsy was observed in the autistic pre-school group (⩽ 6 -years-old) than that of the autistic school-aged group (7–10 years-old). The prevalence of epilepsy increased with age, female rate, and low intellectual function rate of autistic individuals. However, the human development index of countries was negatively associated with the pooled prevalence, which could be attributed to the different levels of awareness, diagnostic technologies, and autism-service support worldwide. About 1/10 autistic individuals also had epilepsy, which was common in the clinical setting, adolescents, adults, females, or patients with intellectual disability and less common in the country with high human development index. Thus, these findings provided critical and innovative views on the prevalence of epilepsy in autistic individuals and contributed to the targeted clinical management and preventive measures.

Download Full-text

Dengue virus infection in people residing in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence studies

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-019-50135-x ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Fredy Brice N. Simo ◽

Jean Joel Bigna ◽

Sebastien Kenmoe ◽

Marie S. Ndangang ◽

Elvis Temfack ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Dengue Virus ◽

Dengue Fever ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Denv Infection ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Prevalence Studies ◽

Language Restriction ◽

The Face ◽

Apparently Healthy

Abstract Better knowledge of the face of the current dengue virus (DENV) epidemiology in Africa can help to implement efficient strategies to curb the burden of dengue fever. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prevalence of DENV infection in Africa. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, African Journals Online, and Africa Index Medicus from January 1st, 2000 to June 10th, 2019 without any language restriction. We used a random-effects model to pool studies. A total of 76 studies (80,977 participants; 24 countries) were included. No study had high risk of bias. Twenty-two (29%) had moderate and 54 (71%) had low risk of bias. In apparently healthy individuals, the pooled prevalence of DENV was 15.6% (95% confidence interval 9.9–22.2), 3.5% (0.8–7.8), and 0.0% (0.0–0.5) respectively for immunoglobulins (Ig) G, IgM, and for ribonucleic acid (RNA) in apparently healthy populations. In populations presenting with fever, the prevalence was 24.8% (13.8–37.8), 10.8% (3.8–20.6k) and 8.4% (3.7–14.4) for IgG, IgM, and for RNA respectively. There was heterogeneity in the distribution between different regions of Africa. The prevalence of DENV infection is high in the African continent. Dengue fever therefore deserves more attention from healthcare workers, researchers, and health policy makers.

Download Full-text

Prevalence and Determinants of Trachomatous Trichiasis towards Elimination of Trachoma in Ethiopia: A Systematic Review and Meta- Analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-743732/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Daniel Geleta ◽

Netsanet Workneh

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Adult Population ◽

Comprehensive Overview ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

The Status ◽

The Individual ◽

Study Participants ◽

Trachomatous Trichiasis

Abstract Background: Trachomatous Trichiasis is a preventable and treatable late stage of trachoma infection, mainly exacerbating the condition of poor and marginalized people. Given the hurtful nature of the infection, many countries, including Ethiopia, lack coherent data on the status of the problem toward its targeted time of elimination. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence and determinants of trachomatous trichiasis towards the elimination of trachoma in Ethiopia.Methods: Based on the predefined criteria, electronic database searches on the peer-reviewed journal papers of an English version were reviewed on the prevalence and determinants of trachomatous trichiasis among the adult population in Ethiopia from January 2015 to December 2020. After reviewing the quality of the individual sources of evidence by three reviewers, the data items were extracted using a locally devised charting form. Data were synthesized qualitatively and quantitatively in terms of publication year, design, study participants, and outcome of interest. Finally, quantitative results were pooled, explored for sources of variation, tested for a potential source of influence of prevalence estimates and publication bias in the statistical meta-analysis using STATA version-16 software.Result: After the exclusion of 121 duplicates, 108 extraneous titles & abstracts, and removal of three articles for the reasons detected on full-text screening, ten eligible studies were included for analysis. All the included studies were cross-sectional studies that took prevalence as the main outcome of interest. Accordingly, the overall pooled prevalence of Trachomatous trichiasis was 1.80 % (95%CI=1.15, 2.44) while an individual prevalence estimate of the studies ranged from 0.5% (95%CI= 0.42, 0.60) to 3.9 % (95%CI=3.82, 3.98). On subgroup analysis, the highest [3.76% (95% CI = 3.20, 4.41)] and the lowest [0.5% (95%CI= 0.42, 0.60)] prevalence were respectively reported in Gambella and Somalia. The trend of the prevalence has demonstrated unstable pattern, while there were no published studies on the determinants of trachoma trichiasis among adult over the specified period of the review.Conclusion: The prevalence of TT was significantly higher than the elimination threshold in all regions of Ethiopia, needing further implementation to facilitate roads toward the elimination.Trail registration: CRD42021260802

Download Full-text

Anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Allergy Asthma & Clinical Immunology ◽

10.1186/s13223-021-00613-7 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 17 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Saad Alhumaid ◽

Abbas Al Mutair ◽

Zainab Al Alawi ◽

Ali A. Rabaan ◽

Raghavendra Tirupathi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Series ◽

Incidence Rates ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

History Of

Abstract Background Currently there is no systematic review and meta-analysis of the global incidence rates of anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the general adult population. Objectives To estimate the incidence rates of anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions after COVID-19 vaccines and describe the demographic and clinical characteristics, triggers, presenting signs and symptoms, treatment and clinical course of confirmed cases. Design A systematic review and meta-analysis. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] statement was followed. Methods Electronic databases (Proquest, Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, and Nature) were searched from 1 December 2020 to 31 May 2021 in the English language using the following keywords alone or in combination: anaphylaxis, non-anaphylaxis, anaphylactic reaction, nonanaphylactic reaction, anaphylactic/anaphylactoid shock, hypersensitivity, allergy reaction, allergic reaction, immunology reaction, immunologic reaction, angioedema, loss of consciousness, generalized erythema, urticaria, urticarial rash, cyanosis, grunting, stridor, tachypnoea, wheezing, tachycardia, abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting and tryptase. We included studies in adults of all ages in all healthcare settings. Effect sizes of prevalence were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). To minimize heterogeneity, we performed sub-group analyses. Results Of the 1,734 papers that were identified, 26 articles were included in the systematic review (8 case report, 5 cohort, 4 case series, 2 randomized controlled trial and 1 randomized cross-sectional studies) and 14 articles (1 cohort, 2 case series, 1 randomized controlled trial and 1 randomized cross-sectional studies) were included in meta-analysis. Studies involving 26,337,421 vaccine recipients [Pfizer-BioNTech (n = 14,505,399) and Moderna (n = 11,831,488)] were analyzed. The overall pooled prevalence estimate of anaphylaxis to both vaccines was 5.0 (95% CI 2.9 to 7.2, I2 = 81%, p = < 0.0001), while the overall pooled prevalence estimate of nonanaphylactic reactions to both vaccines was 53.9 (95% CI 0.0 to 116.1, I2 = 99%, p = < 0.0001). Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech resulted in higher anaphylactic reactions compared to Moderna (8.0, 95% CI 0.0 to 11.3, I2 = 85% versus 2.8, 95% CI 0.0 to 5.7, I2 = 59%). However, lower incidence of nonanaphylactic reactions was associated with Pfizer-BioNTech compared to Moderna (43.9, 95% CI 0.0 to 131.9, I2 = 99% versus 63.8, 95% CI 0.0 to 151.8, I2 = 98%). The funnel plots for possible publication bias for the pooled effect sizes to determine the incidence of anaphylaxis and nonanaphylactic reactions associated with mRNA COVID-19 immunization based on mRNA vaccine type appeared asymmetrical on visual inspection, and Egger’s tests confirmed asymmetry by producing p values < 0.05. Across the included studies, the most commonly identified risk factors for anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were female sex and personal history of atopy. The key triggers to anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions identified in these studies included foods, medications, stinging insects or jellyfish, contrast media, cosmetics and detergents, household products, and latex. Previous history of anaphylaxis; and comorbidities such as asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopic and contact eczema/dermatitis and psoriasis and cholinergic urticaria were also found to be important. Conclusion The prevalence of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-associated anaphylaxis is very low; and nonanaphylactic reactions occur at higher rate, however, cutaneous reactions are largely self-limited. Both anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions should not discourage vaccination.

Download Full-text