scholarly journals Prevalence and Risk Factors of CoronaVac Side Effects: An Independent Cross-Sectional Study among Healthcare Workers in Turkey

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 2629
Author(s):  
Abanoub Riad ◽  
Derya Sağıroğlu ◽  
Batuhan Üstün ◽  
Andrea Pokorná ◽  
Jitka Klugarová ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Increased Risk

Background: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a serious threat to mass vaccination strategies that need to be accelerated currently in order to achieve a substantial level of community immunity. Independent (non-sponsored) studies have a great potential to enhance public confidence in vaccines and accelerate their uptake process. Methods: A nationwide cross-sectional study for the side effects (SE) of CoronaVac was carried out in February 2021 among Turkish healthcare workers who were recently vaccinated. The questionnaire inquired about local and systemic SEs that occurred in the short-term, within four weeks, following vaccination. Results: A total of 780 healthcare workers were included in this study; 62.5% of them experienced at least one SE. Injection site pain (41.5%) was the most common local SE, while fatigue (23.6%), headache (18.7%), muscle pain (11.2%) and joint pain (5.9%) were the common systemic SEs. Female healthcare workers (67.9%) were significantly more affected by local and systemic SEs than male colleagues (51.4%). Younger age, previous infection, and compromised health status (chronic illnesses and regular medicines uptake) can be associated with an increased risk of CoronaVac SEs; Conclusions: The independent research shows a higher prevalence of CoronaVac SEs than what is reported by phase I–III clinical trials. In general, the results of this study confirm the overall safety of CoronaVac and suggest potential risk factors for its SEs. Gender-based differences and SEs distribution among age groups are worth further investigation.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and asymptomatic viral carriage in healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study

Thorax ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (12) ◽  
pp. 1089-1094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Shields ◽  
Sian E Faustini ◽  
Marisol Perez-Toledo ◽  
Sian Jossi ◽  
Erin Aldera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
General Internal ◽  
Increased Risk

ObjectiveTo determine the rates of asymptomatic viral carriage and seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers.DesignA cross-sectional study of asymptomatic healthcare workers undertaken on 24/25 April 2020.SettingUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (UHBFT), UK.Participants545 asymptomatic healthcare workers were recruited while at work. Participants were invited to participate via the UHBFT social media. Exclusion criteria included current symptoms consistent with COVID-19. No potential participants were excluded.InterventionParticipants volunteered a nasopharyngeal swab and a venous blood sample that were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein antibodies, respectively. Results were interpreted in the context of prior illnesses and the hospital departments in which participants worked.Main outcome measureProportion of participants demonstrating infection and positive SARS-CoV-2 serology.ResultsThe point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 viral carriage was 2.4% (n=13/545). The overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 24.4% (n=126/516). Participants who reported prior symptomatic illness had higher seroprevalence (37.5% vs 17.1%, χ2=21.1034, p<0.0001) and quantitatively greater antibody responses than those who had remained asymptomatic. Seroprevalence was greatest among those working in housekeeping (34.5%), acute medicine (33.3%) and general internal medicine (30.3%), with lower rates observed in participants working in intensive care (14.8%). BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) ethnicity was associated with a significantly increased risk of seropositivity (OR: 1.92, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.23, p=0.01). Working on the intensive care unit was associated with a significantly lower risk of seropositivity compared with working in other areas of the hospital (OR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78, p=0.02).Conclusions and relevanceWe identify differences in the occupational risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 between hospital departments and confirm asymptomatic seroconversion occurs in healthcare workers. Further investigation of these observations is required to inform future infection control and occupational health practices.

scholarly journals SP189THE CHARACTERISTICS AND RISK FACTORS OF MORTALITY FOR AKI IN DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS IN CHINA—A NATIONAL CROSS SECTIONAL STUDY

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. i149-i150
Author(s):  
Qing Wei ◽  
Hong Liu ◽  
Yan Tu ◽  
Ri Ning Tang ◽  
Yan Li Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional

scholarly journals Identification of factors associated with stillbirth in Zimbabwe – a cross sectional study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kushupika Dube ◽  
Tina Lavender ◽  
Kieran Blaikie ◽  
Christopher J. Sutton ◽  
Alexander E. P. Heazell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Antenatal Care ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Model Specification ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Low And Middle Income

Abstract Introduction 98% of the 2.6 million stillbirths per annum occur in low and middle income countries. However, understanding of risk factors for stillbirth in these settings is incomplete, hampering efforts to develop effective strategies to prevent deaths. Methods A cross-sectional study of eligible women on the postnatal ward at Mpilo Hospital, Zimbabwe was undertaken between 01/08/2018 and 31/03/2019 (n = 1779). Data were collected from birth records for maternal characteristics, obstetric and past medical history, antenatal care and pregnancy outcome. A directed acyclic graph was constructed with multivariable logistic regression performed to fit the corresponding model specification to data comprising singleton pregnancies, excluding neonatal deaths (n = 1734), using multiple imputation for missing data. Where possible, findings were validated against all women with births recorded in the hospital birth register (n = 1847). Results Risk factors for stillbirth included: previous stillbirth (29/1691 (2%) of livebirths and 39/43 (91%) of stillbirths, adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 2628.9, 95% CI 342.8 to 20,163.0), antenatal care (aOR 44.49 no antenatal care vs. > 4 antenatal care visits, 95% CI 6.80 to 291.19), maternal medical complications (aOR 7.33, 95% CI 1.99 to 26.92) and season of birth (Cold season vs. Mild aOR 14.29, 95% CI 3.09 to 66.08; Hot season vs. Mild aOR 3.39, 95% CI 0.86 to 13.27). Women who had recurrent stillbirth had a lower educational and health status (18.2% had no education vs. 10.0%) and were less likely to receive antenatal care (20.5% had no antenatal care vs. 6.6%) than women without recurrent stillbirth. Conclusion The increased risk in women who have a history of stillbirth is a novel finding in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs) and is in agreement with findings from High Income Countries (HICs), although the estimated effect size is much greater (OR in HICs ~ 5). Developing antenatal care for this group of women offers an important opportunity for stillbirth prevention.

scholarly journals Seroprevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody in healthcare workers: a multicentre cross-sectional study in 10 Colombian cities

2021 ◽  
pp. oemed-2021-107487
Author(s):  
Jeadran Nevardo Malagón-Rojas ◽  
Marcela Mercado-Reyes ◽  
Yezith G Toloza-Pérez ◽  
Eliana L Parra Barrera ◽  
Marien Palma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Strong Association ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Automated Immunoassay

BackgroundHealthcare workers are at increased risk of infection due to occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. The objective of this study was to determine the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers in Colombia.MethodsThis study is a cross-sectional study focused on estimating the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers from 65 hospitals in 10 cities in Colombia during the second semester of 2020. The seroprevalence was determined using an automated immunoassay (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 CLIA IgG). The study included a survey to establish the sociodemographic variables and the risk of infection. A multivariate model was used to evaluate the association between the results of seroprevalence and risk factors.ResultsThe global seroprevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was 35% (95% Bayesian CI 33% to 37%). All the personnel reported the use of protective equipment. General services personnel and nurses presented the highest ratios of seroprevalence among the healthcare workers. Low socioeconomic strata have shown a strong association with seropositivity.ConclusionThis study estimates the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers. Even though all the personnel reported the use of protective equipment, the seroprevalence in the general services personnel and nurses was high. Also, a significant difference by cities was observed.

scholarly journals MRSA Point Prevalence among Health Care Workers in German Rehabilitation Centers: A Multi-Center, Cross-Sectional Study in a Non-Outbreak Setting

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. 1660
Author(s):  
Melanie Schubert ◽  
Daniel Kämpf ◽  
Marlena Wahl ◽  
Samuel Hofmann ◽  
Maria Girbig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Personal Characteristics ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Point Prevalence ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Occupational Risk Factors ◽  
Rehabilitation Centers ◽  
Increased Risk

People working in health care services have an increased risk of being infected with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), though little is known about the prevalence in rehabilitation centers. This cross-sectional study investigated the MRSA prevalence in employees from different rehabilitation centers and aimed to identify risk factors for MRSA transmission. We invited all staff (i.e., with and without patient contact from 22 participating rehabilitation centers; n = 2499) to participate. Study participation included a questionnaire on personal characteristics, lifestyle, personal and occupational risk factors for MRSA and nasal swabs taken by the study team. In total, 1005 persons participated in the study (response: 40.2%). Only four participants carried MRSA (0.40 (95% CI 0.00–1.00) per 100). MRSA carriage did not seem to be occupationally related, as it was found in different occupations with and without direct contact with MRSA patients, as well as in different clinics with different indications and patient clientele. We could not find a clear association between MRSA carriage and potential risk factors due to the low number of cases found. Genotyping revealed the spa types t032 (Barnim epidemic strain) and t1223. Our results suggest a low point prevalence of nasal MRSA colonization in a non-outbreak setting in employees from rehabilitation centers.

scholarly journals The characteristics and mortality risk factors for acute kidney injury in different age groups in China—a cross sectional study

Renal Failure ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (9) ◽  
pp. 1413-1417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qing Wei ◽  
Hong Liu ◽  
Yan- Tu ◽  
Ri-Ning Tang ◽  
Yan-Li Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Acute Kidney Injury ◽  
Mortality Risk ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional

scholarly journals Vaccine Hesitancy: COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccine Willingness among Parents in Wuxi, China—A Cross-Sectional Study

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 342
Author(s):  
Qiang Wang ◽  
Shixin Xiu ◽  
Shuangyu Zhao ◽  
Jianli Wang ◽  
Ying Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Eastern China ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Advisory Group ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Expanded Program On Immunization ◽  
Influenza Vaccinations ◽  
Vaccination Hesitancy

Objectives: We aimed to (1) assess parental hesitancy about category A (Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI)) and B (non-EPI) vaccines, (2) assess parental willingness for COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations, and (3) explore the association of vaccination hesitancy of parents and healthcare workers (HCWs). Methods: The study was performed in Wuxi, eastern China between 21 September 2020 and 17 October 2020. Parents of children aged <18 years and HCWs were recruited from the selected immunization clinics. Vaccine hesitancy was assessed using the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) vaccine hesitancy survey (VHS) by summing the total score for 10 items (maximum 50 points). Results: A total of 3009 parents and 86 HCWs were included in the analysis. The category A VHS scores were significantly higher than the category B VHS scores (p = 0.000). Overall, 59.3% and 52.4% of parents reported willingness to avail COVID-19 and influenza vaccination for their children, respectively; 51.2% of the HCWs wanted to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Parental category B VHS scores were associated with HCW category B VHS scores (r = 0.928, p = 0.008). Conclusions: In China, parents are more hesitant about category B vaccines than category A vaccines. More than 40% of parents showed hesitancy and a refusal to use COVID-19 and influenza vaccines.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document