Search

Aim: We assessed the vaccination effectiveness (VE) of a COVID-19 booster vaccine dose and the association between morbidity and absenteeism with COVID-19 booster vaccine receipt among healthcare personnel (HCP) in 2022-2023 in Greece., Methods: We followed 5752 HCP from November 14, 2022 through May 28, 2023 for episodes of absenteeism. Absenteeism for non-infectious causes, pregnancy leave, or annual leave was not recorded. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination series plus one booster dose within the past six months. Multivariable regression models were used to estimate the association of full COVID-19 vaccination with the outcomes of interest., Results: A total of 1029 episodes of absenteeism occurred during the study period (17.9 episodes per 100 HCP). The mean duration of absence per episode was 5.2 days, and the total duration of absence was 5237 days. COVID-19 was diagnosed in 736 (12.8 %) HCP, asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in 62 (1.1 %) HCP, and influenza in 95 (1.7 %) HCP. Overall, COVID-19, influenza, and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection accounted for 71.5 %, 9.2 %, and 6.0 % of episodes of absenteeism, respectively. Multivariable regression models indicated that fully vaccinated HCP were absent from work for shorter periods [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.42; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.21-0.83], were less likely to develop COVID-19 [aOR: 0.37; 95 % CI: 0.17-0.81)], and were more likely to develop an asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (aOR: 5.90; 95 % CI: 1.27-27.45). The adjusted full VE against COVID-19 was 62.8 % (95 % CI: 18.6 %-83.0 %)., Conclusions: COVID-19 remains a significant cause of morbidity and absenteeism among HCP. Full COVID-19 vaccination status conferred significant protection against COVID-19 and was associated with shorter periods of absence from work., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Dr Maltezou received an honorarium from Novavax to participate in a symposium., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: COVID-19 vaccination has been recommended for children to protect them and to enable in-person educational and social activities., Methods: We estimated COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness (VE) against school absenteeism in children 5-17 years old hospitalized from September 1, 2021 through May 31, 2023. Full vaccination was defined as two vaccine doses., Results: We studied 231 children admitted to hospital with COVID-19, including 206 (89.2 %) unvaccinated/partially vaccinated and 25 (10.8 %) fully vaccinated. Unvaccinated/partially vaccinated children were absent from school for longer periods compared to fully vaccinated children (median absence: 14 versus 10 days; p-value = 0.05). Multivariable regression showed that full COVID-19 vaccination was associated with fewer days of absence compared to no/partial vaccination on average (adjusted relative risk: 0.77; 95 % CI: 0.61 to 0.98). COVID-19 VE was 50.7 % (95 % CI: -11.3 % to 78.2 %) for school absenteeism above the median duration of absenteeism., Conclusions: Full COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against school absenteeism in hospitalized school-aged children with COVID-19., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In the United States, most real-world estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness are based on data drawn from large health systems or sentinel populations. More data is needed to understand how the benefits of vaccination may vary across US populations with disparate risk profiles and policy contexts. We aimed to provide estimates of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against moderate and severe outcomes of COVID-19 based on state population-level data sources. Using statewide integrated administrative and clinical data and a test-negative case-control study design, we assessed mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalizations and emergency department visits among adults in South Carolina. We presented estimates of vaccine effectiveness at discrete time intervals for adults who received one, two or three doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine compared to adults who were unvaccinated. We also evaluated changes in vaccine effectiveness over time (waning) for the overall sample and in subgroups defined by age. We showed that while two doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine were initially highly effective, vaccine effectiveness waned as time elapsed since the second dose. Compared to protection against hospitalizations, protection against emergency department visits was found to wane more sharply. In all cases, a third dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine conferred significant gains in protection relative to waning protection after two doses. Further, over more than 120 days of follow-up, the data revealed relatively limited waning of vaccine effectiveness after a third dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: XL, BO & TG reported receiving funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under award number R01AI127203-04S1 during the conduct of the study., (Copyright: © 2024 Giannouchos et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Although rural communities have been hard-hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, there is limited evidence on COVID-19 outcomes in rural America using up-to-date data. This study aimed to estimate the associations between hospital admissions and mortality and rurality among COVID-19 positive patients who sought hospital care in South Carolina. We used all-payer hospital claims, COVID-19 testing, and vaccination history data from January 2021 to January 2022 in South Carolina. We included 75,545 hospital encounters within 14 days after positive and confirmatory COVID-19 testing. Associations between hospital admissions and mortality and rurality were estimated using multivariable logistic regressions. About 42% of all encounters resulted in an inpatient hospital admission, while hospital-level mortality was 6.3%. Rural residents accounted for 31.0% of all encounters for COVID-19. After controlling for patient-level, hospital, and regional characteristics, rural residents had higher odds of overall hospital mortality (Adjusted Odds Ratio - AOR = 1.19, 95% Confidence Intervals - CI = 1.04-1.37), both as inpatients (AOR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.05-1.34) and as outpatients (AOR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.03-2.59). Sensitivity analyses using encounters with COVID-like illness as the primary diagnosis only and encounters from September 2021 and beyond - a period when the Delta variant was dominant and booster vaccination was available - yielded similar estimates. No significant differences were observed in inpatient hospitalizations (AOR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.75-1.33) between rural and urban residents. Policymakers should consider community-based public health approaches to mitigate geographic disparities in health outcomes among disadvantaged population subgroups., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Aim: We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of full (booster) vaccination against severe outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the Delta and Omicron waves., Methods: The study extended from November 15, 2021 to April 17, 2022. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination plus a booster ≥ 6 months later., Results: We studied 1138 patients (mean age: 66.6 years), of whom 826 (72.6 %) had ≥ 1 comorbidity. Of the 1138 patients, 75 (6.6 %) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), 64 (5.6 %) received mechanical ventilation, and 172 (15.1 %) died. There were 386 (33.9 %) fully vaccinated, 172 (15.1 %) partially vaccinated, and 580 (51 %) unvaccinated patients. Unvaccinated patients were absent from work for longer periods compared to partially or fully vaccinated patients (mean absence of 20.1 days versus 12.3 and 17.3 days, respectively; p-value = 0.03). Compared to unvaccinated patients, fully vaccinated patients were less likely to be admitted to ICU [adjusted relative risk (ARR: 0.49; 95 % CI: 0.29-0.84)], mechanically ventilated (ARR: 0.43; 95 % CI: 0.23-0.80), and die (ARR: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.42-0.78), while they were hospitalized for significantly shorter periods (ARR: 0.79; 95 % CI: 0.70-0.89). The adjusted full VE was 48.8 % (95 % CI: 42.7 %-54.9 %) against ICU admission, 55.4 % (95 % CI: 52.0 %-56.2 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 22.6 % (95 % CI: 7.4 %-34.8 %) against death. For patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities, VE was 56.2 % (95 % CI: 43.9 %-67.1 %) against ICU admission, 60.2 % (95 % CI: 53.7 %-65.4 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 43.9 % (95 % CI: 19.9 %-59.7 %) against death., Conclusions: Full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against severe outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and prolonged work absenteeism., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: We assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination status and time elapsed since the last vaccine dose on morbidity and absenteeism among healthcare personnel (HCP) in the context of a mandatory vaccination policy., Methods: We followed 7592 HCP from November 15, 2021 through April 17, 2022. Full COVID-19 vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination series plus a booster dose at least six months later., Results: There were 6496 (85.6 %) fully vaccinated, 953 (12.5 %) not fully vaccinated, and 143 (1.9 %) unvaccinated HCP. A total of 2182 absenteeism episodes occurred. Of 2088 absenteeism episodes among vaccinated HCP with known vaccination status, 1971 (94.4 %) concerned fully vaccinated and 117 (5.6 %) not fully vaccinated. Fully vaccinated HCP had 1.6 fewer days of absence compared to those not fully vaccinated (8.1 versus 9.7; p-value < 0.001). Multivariable regression analyses showed that full vaccination was associated with shorter absenteeism compared to not full vaccination (OR: 0.56; 95 % CI: 0.36-0.87; p-value = 0.01). Compared to a history of ≤ 17.1 weeks since the last dose, a history of > 17.1 weeks since the last dose was associated with longer absenteeism (OR: 1.22, 95 % CI:1.02-1.46; p-value = 0.026) and increased risk for febrile episode (OR: 1.33; 95 % CI: 1.09-1.63; p-value = 0.004), influenza-like illness (OR: 1.53, 95 % CI: 1.02-2.30; p-value = 0.038), and COVID-19 (OR: 1.72; 95 % CI: 1.24-2.39; p-value = 0.001)., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impose a considerable impact on HCP. The administration of a vaccine dose in less than four months before significantly protected against COVID-19 and absenteeism duration, irrespective of COVID-19 vaccination status. Defining the optimal timing of boosters is imperative., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To estimate the frequency and factors associated with foregone and delayed medical care attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic among nonelderly adults from August to December 2020 in the United States., Methods: We used three survey waves from the Urban Institute's Household Pulse Survey (HPS) collected between August 19-31, October 14-26 and December 9-21. The final sample included 155,825 nonelderly (18-64) respondents representing 135,835,598 million individuals in the United States. We used two multivariable logistic regressions to estimate the association between respondents' characteristics and foregone and delayed care., Results: The frequency of foregone and delayed medical care was 26.9% and 35.9%, respectively. Around 60% of respondents reported difficulties in paying for usual household expenses in the last 7 days. More than half reported several days of mental health issues. The regression results indicated that foregone or delayed care were significantly associated with difficulties in paying usual household expenses (p < 0.001), worse self-reported health status (p < 0.001), increased mental health problems (p < 0.001), Veterans Affairs (p <0.001) or Medicaid (p = 0.003) coverage compared to private healthcare coverage, and older age groups. Individuals who participated in the latter two waves of the survey (October, December) were less likely to report foregone and delayed care compared to those who participated in Wave 1 (August)., Conclusion: Overall, the frequency of foregone and delayed medical care remained high from August to December 2020 among nonelderly US adults. Our findings highlight that pandemic-induced access barriers are major drivers of reduced healthcare provision during the second half of the pandemic and highlight the need for policies to support patients in seeking timely care., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: We estimate the association between forgetfulness to take medications as prescribed and polypharmacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among a cohort of patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia or both in Greece during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: A telephone survey of 1018 randomly selected adults was conducted in Greece in June 2020. Participants were included in the survey, if they (a) had a diagnosis of hypertension, dyslipidemia or both and (b) were on prescription treatment for these conditions. HRQoL was calculated using the short form (SF) -12 Patient Questionnaire. A multivariable generalized linear regression model (GLM) was used to estimate the association between forgetfulness and polypharmacy and HRQoL, controlling for sociodemographic and health-related covariates., Results: Overall, 351 respondents met the inclusion criteria, of whom 28 did not fully complete the questionnaire (response rate: 92%, n = 323). Of those, 37% were diagnosed with hypertension only, 28% with dyslipidemia only, and 35% with both. Most reported good to average physical (64.1%) and mental health (48.6%). Overall, 25% indicated that they sometimes forget to take their prescribed medications, and 12% took two or more pills multiple times daily. Total HRQoL score was 68.9% (s.d. = 18.0%). About 10% of participants reported paying less attention to their healthcare condition during the pandemic. Estimates of multivariable analyses indicated a negative association between forgetfulness (- 9%, adjusted β: - 0.047, 95% confidence interval - 0.089 to - 0.005, p = 0.029), taking two or more pills multiple times daily compared to one pill once a day (- 16%, adjusted β: - 0.068, 95% confidence interval - 0.129 to - 0.008, p = 0.028) and total HRQoL., Conclusion: Our results suggest that among adult patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia or both in Greece, those who forget to take their medications and those with more complex treatment regimens had lower HRQoL. Such patients merit special attention and require targeted approaches by healthcare providers to improve treatment compliance and health outcomes., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of healthcare professionals is currently under research and prevalence of mental health symptoms across the world vary a lot. Moreover, knowledge and perceptions of healthcare professionals towards the new coronavirus is yet to be explored since very few data have been published to date. Thus, we decided to conduct a cross-sectional, web-based survey to measure the levels of depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms using the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21. The knowledge and perceptions of healthcare professionals towards the new coronavirus were also examined with a self-constructed questionnaire. Data were collected between April 19th and May 31st 2020. In total, 1484 professionals participated in the survey and 1064 completed it in full; 60.8% were females, 66.5% were physicians and 24.3% were first-line healthcare workers. The prevalence of at least moderate symptoms was 13% for depression, 11.9% for anxiety, and 11.3% for stress. Women, younger participants, residents in urban areas, having lower income and worse self-reported health status had higher scores in all outcomes. First-line healthcare workers also indicated higher anxiety scores compared to those who were not first responders. Regarding knowledge and perceptions, most participants agreed with the asymptomatic nature of the virus and its heightened danger for older individuals and those with underlying health conditions. Different views were expressed regarding the possibility of airborne transmission, its similarity to common flu, and the statements that the new coronavirus is manufactured and serves a specific purpose and that it is out of control. In conclusion, the results of our study suggest that the prevalence of depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms in Greek healthcare professionals is placed in the lower end of the range reported from various recent studies across the world. Nevertheless, professionals at risk should be monitored closely and supported when needed.airborne transmission, its similarity to common flu, and the statements that the new coronavirus is manufactured and serves a specific purpose and that it is out of control. In conclusion, the results of our study suggest that the prevalence of depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms in Greek healthcare professionals is placed in the lower end of the range reported from various recent studies across the world. Nevertheless, professionals at risk should be monitored closely and supported when needed.

Aim: Healthcare personnel (HCP) are prioritized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination to protect them and non-disruptive provision of healthcare services. We assessed the impact of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on morbidity and absenteeism among HCP., Methods: We studied 7445 HCP in five tertiary-care hospitals in Greece from November 15, 2020 through April 18, 2021., Results: A total of 910 episodes of absenteeism and 9695 days of absence were recorded during the entire study period. Starting from January 4, 2021, 4823/7445 HCP (64.8%) were fully or partially vaccinated. Overall, 535 episodes of absenteeism occurred from January 4, 2021 through April 18, 2021, including 309 (57.76%) episodes among 2622 unvaccinated HCP and 226 (42.24%) episodes among 4823 vaccinated HCP (11.8 versus 4.7 episodes of absenteeism per 100 HCP, respectively; p-value < 0.001). The mean duration of absenteeism was 11.9 days among unvaccinated HCP compared with 6.9 days among vaccinated HCP (p-value < 0.001). Unvaccinated HCP more frequently developed acute respiratory infection, influenza-like illness, and COVID-19 (p-values < 0.001 for all comparisons). Vaccine effectiveness for fully vaccinated HCP was estimated at 94.16% [confidence interval (CI): 88.50%-98.05%) against COVID-19, 83.62% (CI: 73.36%-90.38%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection (asymptomatic or COVID-19), and 66.42% (CI: 56.86%-74.15%) against absenteeism., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic had a considerable impact on healthcare workforce. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine significantly reduced morbidity, COVID-19, absenteeism and duration of absenteeism among HCP during a period of high SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the community. It is expected that HCP vaccination will protect them and healthcare services and contain healthcare costs., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To explore rates and factors associated with mandatory vaccination support overall and intentions to get vaccinated specifically for COVID-19 among individuals in Greece., Methods: Using data from a nationally representative cross-sectional survey conducted in October 2020 among 855 adults (≥18 years) in Greece, we estimated support rates for mandatory vaccination and respondents' intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19 as well as associations thereof with individual sociodemographic, clinical and contextual characteristics., Results: About 74% of respondents supported mandatory vaccination and 62% intended to get vaccinated for COVID-19. The most prevalent reasons against COVID-19 vaccination were safety concerns related to the duration of clinical trials and potential side effects. Individuals who reported increased trust in healthcare authorities' recommendations, who revealed that their trust in the State increased due to the way the COVID-19 pandemic was handled, who used preventive services more often, and those with higher income were more likely to both support mandatory vaccination and to indicate intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19. Participants with worse or better self-reported health status (compared to average), younger adults, and females were less likely to intend to get vaccinated for COVID-19., Conclusion: The survey revealed that the majority of the Greek citizens favour mandatory vaccination overall and intend to get vaccinated for COVID-19, driven mostly by utilization of preventive services and trust in healthcare authorities. However, intention to get vaccinated for COVID-19 was lower relative to mandatory vaccination support. This suggests a need to intensify evidence-based yet simplified messaging by esteemed healthcare providers to inform the public on the risks and benefits of vaccines., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The objective of this cross-sectional survey was to estimate the association between multiple socioeconomic, and health-related characteristics, COVID-19 related attitudes and adoption of public health preventive behaviors. A national cross-sectional survey among 1205 adults was conducted in April 2020 in Greece. Multivariable ordered logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between COVID-19 related attitudes and knowledge and adoption of preventive behaviors, controlling for socioeconomic and health-related characteristics. A total of 923 individuals fully completed the survey. Individuals who believed that the virus is out of control, is transmitted through the air, and is not similar to the common flu were more likely to adopt public health preventive behaviors more frequently, particularly wearing masks in public spaces, washing their hands, and spending fewer hours out of their homes. Uncertainty about the virus symptomatology was associated with less frequent mask-wearing and handwashing. Increased social support, frequent media use for COVID-19 updates, trust to authorities, older age, worse health status, female gender and being a healthcare professional were also associated with uptake of some preventive health behaviors. Attitudinal and socioeconomic determinants critically affect public engagement in preventive behaviors. Health policy initiatives should focus on community outreach approaches to raise awareness and to strengthen social support mechanisms by integrating multiple stakeholders.

Existing research on the association between COVID-19 vaccination and quantitatively measured mental health outcomes is scarce. We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey on a random sample of 1039 adult Greek citizens in June 2021. Among the participants, 39.6% were vaccinated with two doses, 23.1% with one dose, 21.4% were planning to become vaccinated later, and 8.1% refused vaccination. Compared to those fully vaccinated, those against vaccination ("deniers") and those who planned to do so later on ("not vaccinated yet") had significantly higher scores across three stress, anxiety, and depression construct scales. Our findings suggest an association between COVID-19 vaccination status and mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Healthcare personnel (HCP) are at increased risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the aetiological agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Aim: To estimate the costs related to SARS-CoV-2 exposure and infection among HCP in Greece.Methods: Data were retrieved from the national database of SARS-CoV-2 infections and from the database of HCP exposed to patients with COVID-19. A cost-of-illness analysis was performed to estimate total, direct and indirect costs.Results: In total, 254 HCP with COVID-19 and 3332 HCP exposed to patients with COVID-19 during the first epidemic wave were studied. Of the 254 HCP with COVID-19, 49 (19.3%) were hospitalized (mean length of hospitalization 11.6 days) and four were admitted to intensive care units (mean duration 10.8 days). Overall, 1332 (40%) exposed HCP had a mean duration of absenteeism of 7.5 days, and 252 (99.2%) HCP with COVID-19 had a mean duration of absenteeism of 25.8 days. The total costs for the management of the two groups were estimated at €1,735,830 (€772,890 Euros for HCP with COVID-19 and €962,940 for exposed HCP). Absenteeism accounted for a large proportion of the total costs (80.4% of all expenditures), followed by costs for reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction and hospitalization (10.2% and 6.5% of all expenditures, respectively).Conclusion: COVID-19 is associated with increased rates and duration of absenteeism among HCP. Indirect costs, particularly absenteeism, are the major driver of total costs among exposed HCP and HCP with COVID-19. The estimated total costs are conservative. Studies are needed to explore the impact of COVID-19 vaccination of HCP on absenteeism and COVID-19-associated costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has critically affected healthcare delivery in the United States. Little is known on its impact on the utilization of emergency department (ED) services, particularly for conditions that might be medically urgent. The objective of this study was to explore trends in the number of outpatient (treat and release) ED visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective study of outpatient emergency department visits from January 1, 2019 to August 31, 2020 using data from a large, urban, academic hospital system in Utah. Using weekly counts and trend analyses, we explored changes in overall ED visits, by patients' area of residence, by medical urgency, and by specific medical conditions.Results: While outpatient ED visits were higher (+6.0%) in the first trimester of 2020 relative to the same period in 2019, the overall volume between January and August of 2020 was lower (-8.1%) than in 2019. The largest decrease occurred in April 2020 (-30.4%), followed by the May to August period (-12.8%). The largest declines were observed for visits by out-of-state residents, visits classified as non-emergent, primary care treatable or preventable, and for patients diagnosed with hypertension, diabetes, headaches and migraines, mood and personality disorders, fluid and electrolyte disorders, and abdominal pain. Outpatient ED visits for emergent conditions, such as palpitations and tachycardia, open wounds, syncope and collapse remained relatively unchanged, while lower respiratory disease-related visits were 67.5% higher in 2020 relative to 2019, particularly from March to April 2020. However, almost all types of outpatient ED visits bounced back after May 2020.Conclusions: Overall outpatient ED visits declined from mid-March to August 2020, particularly for non-medically urgent conditions which can be treated in other more appropriate care settings. Our findings also have implications for insurers, policymakers, and other stakeholders seeking to assist patients in choosing more appropriate setting for their care during and after the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]