Search

The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the critical importance of vaccination to global health security and highlighted the potential of digital health solutions to improve immunization strategies. This article explores integrating digital health technologies with immunization programs to improve coverage, monitoring, and public health outcomes. It examines the current landscape of digital tools used in immunization initiatives, such as mobile health apps, electronic health records, and data analytics platforms. Case studies from different regions demonstrate the effectiveness of these technologies in addressing challenges such as vaccine hesitancy, logistics, and real-time monitoring of vaccine distribution and adverse events. The paper also examines ethical considerations, data privacy issues, and the need for a robust digital infrastructure to support these innovations. By analyzing the successes and limitations of digital health interventions in immunization campaigns during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, we provide recommendations for future integration strategies to ensure resilient and responsive immunization systems. This research aims to guide policymakers, health professionals, and technologists in leveraging digital health to strengthen immunization efforts and prepare for future public health emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: An unexpected batch-dependent safety signal for the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was recently identified in a nationwide study from Denmark, but the generalizability of this finding is unknown. Therefore, we compared batch-dependent rates of suspected adverse events (SAEs) reported to national authorities in Denmark and Sweden. Materials and Methods: SAE and vaccine batch data were received from national authorities in Denmark and Sweden, and analyses of heterogeneity in the relationship between numbers of vaccine doses and SAEs per batch were performed, along with comparison of SAE rates and severities for batches that were shared between the two countries. Results: Significant batch-dependent heterogeneity was found in the number of SAEs per 1000 doses for both countries, with batches associated with high SAE rates detected in the early phase of the vaccination campaign and positive correlations observed between the two countries for the severity of SAEs from vaccine batches that they shared. Mild SAEs predominated in the batches used in the early part of the vaccination roll-out, where markedly higher SAE rates per 1000 doses in Denmark for the batches that were shared between the two countries suggested that a large proportion of these SAEs were under-reported in Sweden. Conclusions: The batch-dependent safety signal observed in Denmark and now confirmed in Sweden suggests that early commercial batches of BNT162b2 may have differed from those used later on, and these preliminary and hypothesis-generating results warrant further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Severe post-vaccination neurological complications are rare. Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) is an immune-mediated polyneuropathy affecting the peripheral nerve roots, which is not well described as a post-vaccination side effect. Here, we present a rare complication of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, reaching a diagnosis of CIDP. Case presentation: A 67-year-old diabetic male presented with lower extremity paresthesia and weakness following the third dose of the Sinopharm (BBIBP-CorV) vaccine. Despite initial dismissal as a diabetic complication, symptoms escalated, affecting all extremities. Electromyography study revealed abnormal spontaneous activity with chronic reinnervation changes, which was more significant in the lower extremities. Based on the clinical course, radiographic imaging, and laboratory data, a diagnosis of CIDP with severe axonal demyelinating features was established. Treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), prednisolone, and azathioprine resulted in marked improvement of the upper extremities but limited recovery in distal lower extremity muscles. Conclusion: Although CIDP is a rare complication following COVID-19 vaccination, it should be considered in the differential diagnosis. Timely diagnosis of vaccine-induced CIDP is challenging, and any delay can adversely affect treatment response in affected patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• BNT162b2 vaccine is associated with increased risk for psoriasis, colitis and polymyalgia rheumatic. • SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with increased risk for fibromyalgia and hypothyroidism. • Vaccination programs should include risk–benefit assessment for various population groups. A large vaccination campaign was initiated worldwide in December 2020 in order to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2 and severe Covid-19 disease. However, long-term adverse effects of vaccination remain unclear. Therefore, our objective was to examine the association between vaccination and the incidence of autoimmune diagnoses in the first year after vaccine uptake. This retrospective cohort study based on Clalit Health Services (CHS) comprehensive database compared the rates of immune-mediated diagnoses among BNT162b2 vaccinated versus unvaccinated individuals. As a reference, a secondary cohort compared individuals infected with Sars-CoV-2 versus uninfected individuals. The minimum follow-up period was 4 months. The cohorts were divided into 4 age groups (12–17, 18–44, 45–64, 65 years or older). Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models were applied, followed by a correction for multiple comparisons using the False Discovery Rate (FDR) method, hence accounting for the investigation of multiple clinical outcomes. Increased risk for immune-mediated diagnoses following vaccination with BNT162b2 was observed for psoriasis in all age groups (HR 1.41–1.69), colitis among patients younger than 65 years (HR 1.38–1.93), vitiligo in patients aged 45–64 (HR 2.82, 95 %CI: 1.57–5.08) and for polymyalgia-rheumatica in patients aged 65 years or older (HR 2.12, 95 % CI: 1.3–3.47). In the reference cohort, patients who were infected by Covid-19 were at increased risk for fibromyalgia (HR 1.72, 95 % CI: 1.36–2.19 in individuals aged 18–44; HR 1.71, 95 % CI: 1.31–2.22 in individuals aged 45–64), and hypothyroidism (HR 1.54, 95 % CI: 1.15–2.07 in individuals aged 65 years or older). The BNT162b2 vaccine was associated with increased risk (though rare) for psoriasis, colitis and polymyalgia rheumatica. These findings should be considered as a part of the risk–benefit assessment when planning future vaccination programs for various population groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To date, multiple cases of adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines have been reported worldwide. Alopecia areata (AA) is an uncommon type of adverse reaction reported in some articles and has a significant social and psychological impact on patients. Our study aimed to review the AA and COVID-19 vaccine literature. Methods: This systematic review was conducted by searching for articles on AA following COVID-19 vaccines in international databases such as Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Ovid from December 2019 to December 30, 2023. We included studies that provided data for AA patients following COVID-19 vaccination with at least one dose. Data on sex, age, country/region of origin, vaccine type, days between vaccination and symptom presentation, manifestations of AA, trichoscopy and histopathological findings, treatment, and outcomes were included. Results: In total, 579 explored studies were identified and assessed, and 25 articles with a total of 51 patients were included in the review. Twenty-seven (52.9%) patients developed new-onset AA following receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, and AA recurrence or exacerbation occurred after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine in 24 (47.1%) patients with preexisting disease. Five vaccines were reported to cause AA in all cases. The Pfizer vaccine (45.1%) was the most frequently reported, followed by the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (27.5%), Moderna mRNA-1273 (19.6%), Sinopharm (3.9%) and SinoVac (3.9%). AA occurred most frequently within one month after the 1st dose, and then, the incidence decreased gradually with time. Topical or systemic corticosteroids were used in 38 patients. Eleven patients were treated with a Janus Kinase inhibitor (jakinib) inhibitor, eight with tofacitinib, and three with an unspecified jakinib. However, 3 of the 11 patients experienced exacerbations after treatment. Conclusion: AA after COVID-19 vaccination is rare, and physicians should be aware of this phenomenon to improve early diagnosis and appropriate treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a questionnaire, this study investigated the numerous factors affecting the Jordanian population's rejection of COVID-19 vaccines. The data were collected in 2020 to 2021. Using the chi-square test, t -test, Cramer's V -test, and analysis of variance, we found that most of the Sample (72.6%) obtained information on COVID-19 and its vaccines from social media, radio, and television. In comparison, 31.1% and 35.4% of the Sample obtained from government/official sources or health specialists, respectively, with a lesser share relying on colleagues (13.7%) and scientific lectures (17.5%). Furthermore, depending on the participants' characteristics, there were significant differences in the information sources or abstinence factors. Several factors were associated with vaccine refusal and hesitancy, including contradictory/conflicting information, lack of trust in vaccines/manufacturers, doubt about the vaccines' effectiveness, and the belief that the risks of COVID-19 are minimal. Based on these findings, we present several recommendations for policymakers. Plain Language Summary: Vaccine Refusal Factors associated with vaccination refusal among a sample of the Jordanian population This study aimed to comprehend what causes Jordanians to refuse vaccinations. Most participants of the present study learned about COVID-19 and vaccines from radio, television, and social media. Fewer of them turned to official and professional sources. Conflicting information about COVID-19, skepticism about the effectiveness of vaccines and potential side effects, skepticism toward vaccine manufacturers and media sources, uncertainty regarding the efficacy of vaccines, and mistrust in information sources regarding the virus and vaccines have led to confusion and resistance to following health recommendations. These factors resulted in vaccine rejection by considerable percentages of the Jordanian population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the COVID-19 global vaccination campaign was launched in December of 2020, vaccination became mandatory for many healthcare workers (HCWs) worldwide. Large minorities resisted the policy, and the responses of authorities to this resistance led to damage d professional reputations, job losses, and suspension or termination of practice licenses. The joint effect of dismissals, early retirements, career changes, and vaccine injuries disabling some compliant HCWs from adequate performance has exacerbated existing crises within health systems. Nevertheless, leading health authorities have maintained that the benefits of a fully vaccinated healthcare labor force--believed to be protecting health systems, vulnerable patient populations, and even HCWs themselves--achieved through mandates, if necessary, outweigh its potential harms. Informed by critical policy and discourse traditions, we examine the expert literature on vaccine mandates for HCWs. We find that this literature neglects evidence that contradicts official claims about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines, dismisses the science supporting the contextual nature of microbial virulence, miscalculates patient and system-level harms of vaccination policies, and ignores or legitimizes the coercive elements built into their design. We discuss the implications of our findings for the sustainability of health systems, for patient care, and for the well-being of HCWs, and suggest directions for ethical clinical and policy practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the digital age, operations can be improved by a wise use of information and technological tools. During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments faced various choices of vaccines possessing different efficacy and availability levels at different time points. In this article, we consider a two-stage vaccine ordering problem of a government from a first and only supplier in the first stage, and either the same supplier or a new second supplier in the second stage. Between the two stages, potential demand information for the vaccine is collected to update the forecast. Using dynamic programming, we derive the government's optimal vaccine ordering policy. We find that the government should select its vaccine supplier based on the disease's infection rate in the society. When the infection rate is low, the government should order nothing at the first stage and order from the supplier with a higher efficacy level at the second stage. When the disease's infection rate is high, the government should order vaccines at the first stage and switch to the other supplier with a lower efficacy level at the second stage. We extend our model to examine (i) the value of blockchain adoption and (ii) the impact of vaccines' side effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Convergent self-report and objective biometric findings indicate that short-term systemic side effects of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination are associated with greater long-lasting neutralizing antibody responses. This may be relevant in addressing negative attitudes towards vaccine side effects, which are a barrier to vaccine uptake. Visual Abstract. COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects and Long-Term Neutralizing Antibody Response: Convergent self-report and objective biometric findings indicate that short-term systemic side effects of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination are associated with greater long-lasting neutralizing antibody responses. This may be relevant in addressing negative attitudes towards vaccine side effects, which are a barrier to vaccine uptake. Background: Concern about side effects is a common reason for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy. Objective: To determine whether short-term side effects of SARS-CoV-2 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination are associated with subsequent neutralizing antibody (nAB) response. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: San Francisco Bay Area. Participants: Adults who had not been vaccinated against or exposed to SARS-CoV-2, who then received 2 doses of either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. Measurements: Serum nAB titer at 1 month and 6 months after the second vaccine dose. Daily symptom surveys and objective biometric measurements at each dose. Results: 363 participants were included in symptom-related analyses (65.6% female; mean age, 52.4 years [SD, 11.9]), and 147 were included in biometric-related analyses (66.0% female; mean age, 58.8 years [SD, 5.3]). Chills, tiredness, feeling unwell, and headache after the second dose were each associated with 1.4 to 1.6 fold higher nAB at 1 and 6 months after vaccination. Symptom count and vaccination-induced change in skin temperature and heart rate were all positively associated with nAB across both follow-up time points. Each 1 °C increase in skin temperature after dose 2 was associated with 1.8 fold higher nAB 1 month later and 3.1 fold higher nAB 6 months later. Limitations: The study was conducted in 2021 in people receiving the primary vaccine series, making generalizability to people with prior SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or exposure unclear. Whether the observed associations would also apply for neutralizing activity against non-ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strains is also unknown. Conclusion: Convergent self-report and objective biometric findings indicate that short-term systemic side effects of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination are associated with greater long-lasting nAB responses. This may be relevant in addressing negative attitudes toward vaccine side effects, which are a barrier to vaccine uptake. Primary Funding Source: National Institute on Aging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccination is an effective way to control many infectious diseases in fish. Israeli fish farming has successfully used two vaccines over the last 30 years and has no problem with the side effects of vaccination. However, after introducing new species, a new problem emerged: these fish, after vaccination, demonstrated peritoneal lesions such as granulomas. At the same time, the fish did not show retarded growth or suffering during the fattening period. This study was conducted to establish the connection between vaccination and the appearance of granulomas. Evidence drawn from this research work and comparing vaccinated and non-vaccinated fish confirms that intraperitoneal granulomas do not impact the growth, performance, or fish fillet quality at harvest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The emergence of new SARS‐CoV‐2 variants and the global COVID‐19 pandemic spurred urgent vaccine development. While common vaccine side effects are well‐documented, rare adverse events necessitate post‐marketing surveillance. Recent research linked messenger RNA vaccines to thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA), a group of syndromes characterized by microvascular hemolytic anemia and thrombocytopenia. This report describes a new‐onset atypical hemolytic‐uremic syndrome (aHUS) occurring after COVID‐19 vaccination and complements recent literature. Case Presentation: A previously healthy 25‐year‐old woman developed malaise, nausea, edema, and renal dysfunction 60 days postvaccination. Laboratory findings confirmed TMA diagnosis. Genetic testing for complement system mutations was negative. Kidney biopsy supported the diagnosis, and the patient required hemodialysis. Conclusion: This case illustrates the rare occurrence of aHUS following COVID‐19 vaccination, with unique characteristics compared to previous reports. Despite the critical role of vaccination in pandemic control, emerging adverse events, such as vaccine‐related TMA, must be recognized and investigated. Additional clinical trials are imperative to comprehend the clinical features and pathophysiological mechanisms underlying TMA associated with COVID‐19 vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Bell's palsy is one of the most concerning complications of the COVID vaccine that has impacted vaccine acceptance among the general population. These vaccines were introduced to provide immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus and have been found to be quite effective. Little did we know that Bell's palsy could be one of its serious complications. Materials and Methods: We used various search engines to gather data in the form of a case series and case reports related to patients who were affected by the vaccine and had developed Bell's palsy. Results: A total of eleven case reports and 4 case series were included in the analysis. The vaccines mentioned in the case reports were Pfizer, Moderna, Sinovac, AstraZeneca, and Janssen, while the case series included Pfizer and Sinovac. The majority of patients were female and aged between 31-40 years. Rightsided laterality was observed in 45.45% of patients, left-sided laterality in 45.45% of patients, and bilateral laterality in 9.1% of patients. Three patients had a history of Bell's palsy or stroke. After treatment, three patients showed partial improvement, six patients fully recovered, and the status of two patients was unknown. Conclusions: Bell's palsy is a rare complication that can occur after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. This review aims to increase awareness about this rare adverse event of the vaccine so that it can be properly addressed and managed. Additionally, it will serve as a foundation for future research on the administration of the COVID-19 vaccine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Several types of vaccines were manufactured by different companies to control and stop the spread of COVID-19. This study aimed to identify the postvaccination side effects of the three different vaccines (Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Sinopharm) among the Iraqi population in Baghdad, Iraq. Design/methodology/approach: A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted in Baghdad, Iraq from May 2021 to March 2022. An online-based questionnaire was used to collect the data through social media, i.e. WhatsApp, Messenger and Google Classroom. A total of 737 vaccinated participants using a snowball sampling methodology were used in this study. Findings: Among the study population, 328 (44.50%) were males and 409 (55.50%) were females. The highest age group that participated was 18–30 years (79.10%) followed by 31–40 years (12.10%), 41–50 years (4.20%), 51–60 years (2.40%) and 60 = years (2.20%). However, 58.8% of the participants received Pfizer-BioNTech, 23.7% received the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine and 17.5% received Sinopharm. Out of the total participants, 56.60% showed postvaccination side-effects such as fever, headache, fatigue and dizziness, while 33% showed no side-effects and 10.40% were not sure. Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccines were the most vaccines prevalent of side-effects. Originality/value: The majority of the side reactions associated with the AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines were manageable and self-limiting, including fever, fatigue, headache, joint pain and dizziness, compared to the Sinopharm vaccines, which reported lower postside effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to explore the type and severity of short-term adverse reactions associated with BNT162 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA 1273 (Moderna), and viral vector vaccines and to compare the incidence of post-vaccination Covid-19 infection among the Birzeit University community in Palestine. Methods: This questionnaire-based retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted among individuals who were vaccinated with at least one dose of any COVID-19 vaccine offered in Palestine during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study included participants aged 18 years and older who were vaccinated with Pfizer, Moderna, Sputnik Light, or Sputnik v. Results: A total of 558 participants who were administered COVID-19 vaccine were included in the study. Sputnik (239), Pfizer vaccine recipients (236), and Moderna vaccine recipients (83). Of the viral vector vaccine recipients, 57 (23.8%) had a post-vaccination infection, compared to 30 (12.7%) for Pfizer and seven (8.4%) for Moderna. Furthermore, the reported adverse effects in the viral victor group were higher than those in the Moderna and Pfizer groups (71.7, 66.3, and 61.9%, respectively). Chills, headache, fatigue, abdominal pain, and joint pain were significantly higher in the Viral Vector vaccine group than the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine. Vomiting, tiredness, and fatigue were significantly less likely to be complained of by Pfizer vaccine recipients compared to Moderna and Viral Vector vaccine recipients (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Breakthrough infections were associated with both viral vectors and mRNA; however, the mRNA vaccine had less reported post-vaccine infection. Furthermore, the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine group reported fewer commonly reported side effects (fever, chills, headache, fatigue, muscle pain, joint pain, nausea, and dizziness), followed by the Moderna and viral vector vaccines. Females and underweight participants experienced more adverse effects with both vaccines, and fewer common side effects were reported by all participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Everyone, everywhere, should have access to COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccines are a key strategy to stop escalation of the Coronavirus disease-(COVID-19) pandemic. Vaccine Myths and hesitancy can be due to lack of knowledge, false beliefs, or anti-vaccine misinformation. Unfortunately, there has been a lot of deception surrounding vaccines and their development. When deciding whether to get vaccine, it’s important to separate myths from facts. Objectives: To determine the myths regarding Covid-19 vaccine among adults. Materials and Methods: A community based cross sectional study was done for three months among adults of an urban area. Data regarding sociodemographic details and myths pertaining to Covid-19 vaccine were collected and entered in Microsoft excel and presented as frequencies and percentages. Results: 193 adults took part in study. Maximum were aged 32-38years, 80% were literates and majority of them were males. Residing in nuclear families was common. The most common myths were related to vaccine having an effect on woman’s fertility (47.67%), side effects due to vaccine (56.99%) and not requiring vaccine if already infected with Covid-19 (55.95%) and researchers rushed the development of covid-19 vaccine which makes it not trustworthy (43.52%). Majority of the study participants considered vaccines can be developed for common cold, HIV and other diseases. Conclusion: The circumstances in different parts of world varies and while vaccines may be very effective at reducing number of people getting infected, they cannot assure cent percent protection, since virus can mutate for new variants. Ending vaccination myths may also takes some time but at least can be lessened significantly if there is enough effort and collaboration from everyone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Folia Pharmacologica Japonica is the property of Japanese Pharmacological Society and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study addresses the issue of how to set a consumer price of a vaccination against an infectious disease. We especially focus on the effects of strategic behaviors of individuals within a social group. In characterizing an equilibrium level of vaccination rate, the spill-over effect of vaccination is important not only in the light of group efficiency but also from each individual's viewpoint. By constructing a simple game-theoretic model under the Nash conjecture where individuals rationally predict the resulting vaccination rate based on their own information, we analyze how the efficient vaccination subsidy is related to epidemiological as well as economic variables. In particular, we show that individuals over-react to the changes in their expectations over the virulency of a disease and also over the scale of adverse effects of vaccinations. We also discuss the necessary adjustment of a vaccination price when the public have misperception over certain epidemiological parameters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: There has been hesitancy among people with regard to accepting vaccines, especially that of coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19). This hesitancy is aggravated by the different vaccine alternatives available and what one considers before choosing a particular vaccine. The aim of this article was to investigate some driving factors that can influence an individual's COVID‐19 vaccine preference in the presence of other alternatives, using some specific vaccine characteristics. Methods: Discrete choice questionnaire was designed using the attributes and their corresponding levels to collect data on participants' preference for a COVID vaccine over a period of 12 Weeks in Sunyani, Ghana, with the help of an observational study design. A total of 150 participants receiving Covid‐19 vaccines at the University of Energy and Natural Resources Hospital were systematically selected and interviewed. Factors considered included: Efficacy of the vaccine, credibility of the manufacturing company, side effects of the vaccine, and availability of the vaccine. Data was analyzed using the conditional probit of the discrete choice experiment (DCE). Results: Results from the study using the conditional probit of the discrete choice experiment (DCE) showed efficacy, side effects, and availability as significant attributes for preference. However, there was no preference with respect to the credibility of the manufacturing company. In addition, vaccine availability was not a dis‐utility in comparison to the alternatives that are readily available. This disutility was however higher among males than females. Conclusion: From the study, most respondents preferred a COVID‐19 vaccine that is highly efficacious or a vaccine with milder side effect or a vaccine that may not necessarily be readily available. It was also observed that dis‐utility is higher among males when it comes to vaccine not being readily available than females as the odds of a female choosing a vaccine that is readily available is much higher compared to their males counterparts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the rapid and worldwide development and investigation of multiple vaccines. While most side effects of these vaccines are mild and transient, potentially severe adverse events may occur and involve the endocrine system. This narrative review aimed to explore the current knowledge on potential adverse endocrine effects following COVID-19 vaccination, with thyroid disorders being the most common. Data about pituitary, adrenal, diabetes, and gonadal events are also reviewed. This review also provides a comprehensive understanding of the pathogenesis of endocrine disorders associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase database (Elsevier), and Google Scholar searches were performed. Case reports, case series, original studies, and reviews written in English and published online up to 31 August 2023 were selected and reviewed. Data on endocrine adverse events of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are accumulating. However, their causal relationship with COVID-19 vaccines is not strong enough to make a definite conclusion, and further studies are needed to clarify the pathogenesis mechanisms of the endocrine disorders linked to COVID-19 vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Studies on the effect of vaccine type and two other vaccines other than inactivated vaccines approved in China on in vitro fertilization (IVF) pregnancy outcomes are rare. To complement and confirm the existing findings, this research aimed to investigate whether there are adverse effects of different vaccine types in females and males on reproductive function and clinical pregnancy. Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 6,455 fresh embryo transfer cycles at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University between May 1, 2021, and October 31, 2022. The primary outcome is the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR). At the same time, the secondary results are the number of oocytes retrieved, two pronuclei (2PN) rate, blastocyst formation rate, high-quality blastocyst rate, and semen parameters (volume, density, sperm count, forward motility rate, total motility rate, immobility rate, and DNA fragment index (DFI) rate). Results: In the comparison of ovarian stimulation indicators, no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) were found in Gn days, endometrial thickness, 2PN rate, metaphase 2 (MII) rate, high-quality embryo rate, and blastocyst formation rate. No significant differences (P>0.05) were found in age, body mass index (BMI), education level, and semen parameters (volume, density, sperm count, forward motility rate, total motility rate, immobility rate, and DFI rate) in these four groups. The multivariate regression model showed that neither the types of vaccines nor the vaccination status of both infertile couples significantly affected clinical pregnancy. Discussion: The type of vaccine does not appear to have an unfavorable effect on ovarian stimulation, embryo development, semen parameters, and clinical pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The propensity to accept vaccines and factors that affect vaccine acceptance and hesitancy will determine the overall success of the COVID-19 vaccination program. Therefore, countries need to understand the factors that influence vaccine acceptance and hesitancy to prevent further future shocks, and it is necessary to have a thorough understanding of these factors. As a result, this study aims to review selected published works in the study's domain and conduct valuable analysis to determine the most influential factors in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in Ghana. The review also explored the acceptance rate of COVID-19 vaccines in Ghana. We selected published works from 2021 to April 2023 and extracted, analyzed, and summarized the findings based on the key factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in Ghana, the acceptance rate in Ghana, the demographic factors that are often examined, and the study approach used to examine these factors. The study found that positive vaccination perception, safety, belief in vaccine efficacy, knowledge of COVID-19, and a good vaccine attitude influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Ghana. The negative side effects of the vaccines, mistrust in the vaccine, lack of confidence in the vaccine's safety, fear, and spiritual and religious beliefs all played significant roles in influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. For this study, the COVID-19 acceptance rates observed in the reviewed articles ranged from 17.5% to 82.6%. The demographic parameters frequently included in these studies that have a significant impact include educational attainment, gender, religious affiliation, age, and marital status. The positive perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and concerns about its negative effects influenced Ghanaians' acceptance and hesitancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the known benefits, some individuals remain apprehensive about receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, which hampers vaccination efforts and the achievement of herd immunity. Therefore, this cross-sectional study aimed to assess vaccination rates and identify factors influencing fear of the COVID-19 vaccine among individuals served by the public healthcare system (Family Health Strategy ‐ FHS) and in a university community in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Surveys were conducted face-to-face with FHS participants and online with university members, employing a free sharing approach on social media. A total of 1896 and 312 responses were collected, respectively. The survey covered sociodemographic information, COVID-19 fear levels, and vaccination status for both individuals and their children Vaccination coverage was 83% among FHS participants and 99.1% in the university setting. Female respondents in both groups exhibited higher levels of COVID-19 fear (p<0.05), with FHS-assisted women reporting greater apprehension towards vaccination (p<0.05). Educated parents demonstrated better understanding of the importance of child vaccination, while younger parents expressed heightened concerns about vaccine side effects. Among FHS participants, women exhibited a 1.6 times higher fear of vaccination compared to men. Additionally, fear of vaccination increased by 1.10 times for each additional point on the COVID-19 Fear Scale (physiological domain). Effective communication strategies and dispelling misconceptions surrounding immunization could alleviate fear and promote vaccination acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We conducted an overview to assess immune adverse effects associated with the COVID-19 vaccine, guiding safer choices and providing evidence-based information to clinicians. Methods: Forty-three studies on adverse effects of vaccines were reviewed from PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Single-arm meta-analyses estimated summary effects, incidence, presentation, etc. An overview using single-arm metaanalysis and reported the findings following the guidelines outlined in the 'Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) specifically focusing on myocarditis and thrombosis. After screening 2,591 articles, 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was evaluated using AMSTAR 2. Disagreements were resolved via consensus. Data analysis utilized a random-effects model in R software to estimate incidence rates of selected adverse events. Results: After removing 1,198 duplicates and screening out irrelevant articles from a total of 2,591, we included 42 studies. Adverse reactions to vaccinations include myocarditis, thrombosis, skin reactions, GBS, etc. thrombosis and myocarditis are the most dangerous diseases associated with vaccination. Myocarditis occurred in 6% of Vector vaccine recipients, compared to 61% of mRNA vaccine recipients. Thrombosis was more common after Vector vaccination (91%) than after mRNA vaccination (9%). Furthermore, eight studies conducted anti-PF4 antibody tests and yielded a positivity rate of 67%. Meta-analysis showed that among all patients with Vaccine-induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis occurred in 66%, and intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 43%. The rates of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary thromboembolism in vaccinated patients were 13% and 23%, respectively, with a pooled case fatality rate of 30%. Conclusion: The results of this overview indicate the majority of adverse reactions are self-limiting and require minimal intervention, while rare occurrences such as myocarditis and thrombosis pose a potentially fatal threat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: For the past three years, the pandemic has had a major effect on global public health, mainly on those with underlying medical conditions, such as people living with Multiple Sclerosis. Vaccination among this group is of great importance, and the long-term impacts of vaccination and its safety on the health of these patients will continue to be revealed. Therefore, risks related to vaccination and immune response need to be assessed. The objective here was to characterize the immune response, short-term safety, and the effects of multiple variables on these factors after COVID-19 vaccination (mainly Sinopharm) among people with Multiple Sclerosis. We assessed the short-term safety and humoral SARS-COV-2 anti-RBD IgG response using a data collection form and Immunoassay, respectively. Results: No severe adverse events or MS relapse was observed. Myalgia/body pain (26.7%), low-grade fever (22.2%), and mild headache (15.6%) were the most common adverse events. The use and type of vaccine influenced the frequency of side effects with a p-value < 0.0001. Regarding immune response, patients on rituximab and fingolimod had a lower antibody titer compared to other medications. With a significant difference, hybrid immunity (p-value: 0.047) and type of DMTs (p-value: 0.017) affected the humoral response. Conclusion: There is a low incidence of serious adverse effects, MS worsening or relapse after COVID-19 vaccination, and mainly, side effects are similar to that of the general population. It appears that treatment with various disease-modifying therapies does not induce or worsen the post-vaccination side effects, although some, including Rituximab and fingolimod, may affect the immunity induced after vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Active and passive surveillance studies have found that a greater proportion of females report adverse events (AE) following receipt of either the COVID-19 or seasonal influenza vaccine compared to males. In a predominately young adult female population of healthcare workers, we sought to determine the intersection of biological sex and sociocultural gender differences in prospective active reporting of vaccine outcomes, which remains poorly characterized. Methods: This cohort study enrolled Johns Hopkins Health System healthcare workers (HCWs) who were recruited from the mandatory annual fall 2019–2022 influenza vaccine and the fall 2022 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine campaigns. Vaccine recipients were enrolled the day of vaccination and AE surveys were administered two days post-vaccination for bivalent COVID-19 and influenza vaccine recipients. Data were collected regarding the presence of a series of solicited local and systemic AEs. Open-ended answers about participants' experiences with AEs also were collected for the COVID-19 vaccine recipients. Results: Females were more likely to report local AEs after either influenza (OR = 2.28, p = 0.001) or COVID-19 (OR = 2.57, p = 0.008) vaccination compared to males, regardless of age or race. Males and females had comparable probabilities of reporting systemic AEs after either influenza (OR = 1.18, p = 0.552) or COVID-19 (OR = 0.96, p = 0.907) vaccination. Hormonal birth control use did not impact the rates of reported AEs following influenza vaccination among reproductive-aged female HCWs. Women reported more interruptions in their daily routine following COVID-19 vaccination than men and were more likely to seek out self-treatment. More women than men scheduled their COVID-19 vaccination before their days off in anticipation of AEs. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the need for sex- and gender-inclusive policies to inform more effective mandatory occupational health vaccination strategies. Further research is needed to evaluate the potential disruption of AEs on occupational responsibilities following mandated vaccination for healthcare workers, a predominately female population, and to more fully characterize the post-vaccination behavioral differences between men and women. Plain English summary: Research that addresses both the sex and gender differences of vaccine outcomes and behaviors is lacking. In this survey study of healthcare workers, comprised of mostly reproductive-aged females/women, we investigated biological sex (male/female) and gender (man/woman) differences in vaccine adverse events and outcomes following either influenza or bivalent COVID-19 vaccination. Regardless of age or race, females were more likely to report local (at injection site), but not systemic (whole body), adverse events than males, consistent across influenza and bivalent COVID-19 vaccine cohorts. Sex hormones are hypothesized to play a role in the differences in immune response following vaccination between males and females. We investigated if hormonal birth control use among females may be associated with differences in vaccine adverse events among the influenza vaccine cohort. However, there was no difference in the likelihood of reporting adverse events between birth control users and non-users. Based on open-ended responses to survey questions, women were found to report more interruptions to their daily routine than men following COVID-19 vaccination. Women were also more likely to seek out self-treatment with over-the-counter medication and intentionally schedule their vaccination around days off in anticipation of adverse events. With nearly 80% of healthcare jobs held by women, even higher for direct patient care positions like nursing, females/women may be disproportionately impacted by mandated annual vaccinations. Vaccinations are necessary for the prevention of disease transmission; however, our findings highlight a need for more equitable occupational vaccine strategies that consider both sex and gender differences. Highlights: • Research that addresses both the sex and gender disparities of vaccine outcomes and behaviors is lacking. • This active reporting study implements both logistic regression and thematic analyses to examine sex and gender differences in AEs following influenza or bivalent COVID-19 vaccination among a cohort of predominately female, reproductive-aged healthcare workers. • Females report more local adverse events than males following either influenza or bivalent COVID-19 vaccination, regardless of age or race. • Women report more disruptions to their daily routines than men. Women also are more likely to seek out self-treatment and schedule their vaccinations around days off in anticipation of adverse events. • Sex and gender differences in vaccine AEs and outcomes should drive the development of more equitable vaccine strategies and policies in occupational health settings, particularly for mandated vaccinations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vaccine-related myocarditis associated with the BNT162b2 vaccine is a rare complication, with a higher risk observed in male adolescents. However, the contribution of genetic factors to this condition remains uncertain. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive genetic association analysis in a cohort of 43 Hong Kong Chinese adolescents who were diagnosed with myocarditis shortly after receiving the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. A comparison of whole-genome sequencing data was performed between the confirmed myocarditis cases and a control group of 481 healthy individuals. To narrow down potential genomic regions of interest, we employed a novel clustering approach called ClusterAnalyzer, which prioritised 2,182 genomic regions overlapping with 1,499 genes for further investigation. Our pathway analysis revealed significant enrichment of these genes in functions related to cardiac conduction, ion channel activity, plasma membrane adhesion, and axonogenesis. These findings suggest a potential genetic predisposition in these specific functional areas that may contribute to the observed side effect of the vaccine. Nevertheless, further validation through larger-scale studies is imperative to confirm these findings. Given the increasing prominence of mRNA vaccines as a promising strategy for disease prevention and treatment, understanding the genetic factors associated with vaccine-related myocarditis assumes paramount importance. Our study provides valuable insights that significantly advance our understanding in this regard and serve as a valuable foundation for future research endeavours in this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cases of tinnitus have been reported following administration of COVID-19 vaccines. The aim of this study was to characterize COVID-19 vaccinationrelated tinnitus to assess whether there is a causal relationship, and to examine potential risk factors for COVID-19 vaccination-related tinnitus. We analyzed a survey on 398 cases of COVID-19 vaccination-related tinnitus, and 699,839 COVID-19 vaccine-related reports in the Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System (VAERS) database that was retrieved on 4 December 2021. We found that following COVID-19 vaccination, 1) tinnitus report frequencies for Pfizer, Moderna and Janssen vaccines in VAERS are 47, 51 and 70 cases per million full vaccination; 2) the symptom onset was often rapid; 3)more women thanmen reported tinnitus and the sex difference increased with age; 4) for 2-dose vaccines, the frequency of tinnitus was higher following the first dose than the second dose; 5) for 2-dose vaccines, the chance of worsening tinnitus symptoms after second dose was approximately 50%; 6) tinnitus was correlated with other neurological and psychiatric symptoms; 7) preexisting metabolic syndromes were correlated with the severity of the reported tinnitus. These findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccination increases the risk of tinnitus, and metabolic disorders is a risk factor for COVID-19 vaccination-related tinnitus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The global health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in severe mortality and morbidity. Immunosuppressed patients, such as kidney transplant recipients, are particularly susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. Objective: The aim of this cohort study was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on clinical outcomes in patients with kidney transplants. Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, 254 patients with kidney transplants were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 and a fraction of these contracted COVID-19. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was carried out by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction testing, and the patients received treatment involving immunosuppressive and COVID-19-specific protocols. Results: SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed in 38 (14.96%) patients before the COVID-19 vaccine was administered. After vaccination, an additional 29 (11.42%) patients were diagnosed with COVID-19. Risk factors for hospitalization included age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, and time elapsed since renal transplantation (p 0.025, 0.038, 0.012, and 0.046, respectively). COVID-19 vaccination resulted in a significant decrease in the rate of hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection from 63.16% to 34.48% (p = 0.020). The proportion of patients from this cohort placed in intensive care units decreased from 23.68% to zero. Allograft rejections exhibited a decreasing trend from 13.16% to 6.90% (p = 0.690). This patient cohort displayed 15.79% mortality prior to COVID-19 vaccination that was reduced to nil after immunization. Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccination significantly reduced COVID-19 severity and mortality in this cohort of patients with kidney transplants. The risk factors for hospitalization were determined to be age, BMI, comorbidities, and time since renal transplantation. COVID-19 vaccination resulted in a clinical outcome of reduced hospitalization and a decrease in clinical complications. The COVID-19 vaccination-derived adverse effects in this cohort were found to be comparable to those in the immunocompetent population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Perceptions of COVID-19 and vaccination depend on personal beliefs, experiences, and trust in health authorities' information. Cultural and social factors also influence perceptions. Effective government messaging can minimize barriers to vaccination. Methodology: This cross-sectional research examines socio-demographic parameters related to risk factors, conducted using questionnaires at the vaccination center of Hippokrateio General Hospital of Athens, Greece (n=167), in the last quarter of 2022. Participants were asked to answer questions regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, a measurement tool for assessing good health status developed by the World Health Organization. The data were analyzed using IBM SPSS v26. Results: The study found that women perceive vaccines to cause more harm than men, with younger individuals viewing the infection as harmless. Educational level also influences vaccine side effects and long-term harm. Perceptions of COVID-19 differ based on vaccination status. Conclusions: This research confirms the link between socio-demographic variables and pandemic severity perception, emphasizing the importance of correlated with medical public health services management in enhancing communication strategies and creating effective vaccination campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: People vaccinated with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 [SARS-CoV-2]) mRNA vaccine have reported experiencing various adverse effects. For instance, reproductive-age women have presented with complaints of abnormal uterine bleeding or menstrual cycle changes. We speculated that differences in basal sex hormone levels before and after vaccination may be present in women who experienced irregular bleeding or menstrual cycle changes; thus, this study aimed to investigate the differences in basal sex hormone levels of women before and after two doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Methods: This retrospective study included patients who received SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines between January 2021 and February 2022 at a single center. In an outpatient setting, patients were queried regarding their menstrual cycle, the date of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination, vaccination type, and vaccination side effects. Differences in basal hormone levels (menstrual cycle days 2–3, follicle-stimulating hormone [FSH], luteinizing hormone [LH], and estradiol) before and after vaccination were compared. Results: Among the 326 patients, patients with no laboratory records of the hormones were excluded. The median time interval between SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination and the laboratory test day was 79 days (interquartile range, 44 to 127). A comparative analysis of these hormones before and after vaccination revealed no significant differences. Subgroup analyses based on age and reported adverse events also found no statistically significant differences. Conclusion: This study showed no significant differences in basal hormone levels (FSH, LH, and estradiol) before and after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake among adults living with HIV in Tanzania. The study reveals that the majority of participants have received the COVID-19 vaccine, with higher vaccination rates among females, attendees of faith-based clinics, self-employed individuals, and those without health insurance. Reasons for vaccine hesitancy include fear of side effects and personal preference. Factors such as the duration since testing HIV-positive and the type of HIV clinic attended were found to influence vaccine uptake. The study emphasizes the importance of tailored public health initiatives to address vaccine hesitancy and ensure equitable vaccine access. [Extracted from the article]

Background: The incidence of adverse events following the administration of COVID-19 vaccination was significantly related to the total number of doses administered. This study aimed to assess the association between COVID-19 vaccines and the risk of adverse effects occurrence among Zagazig University Personnel. Methods: This cross-sectional retrospective study included 1041 participants, who have taken 1 or more of COVID-19 doses. They were divided into those who had taken either Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Sinopharm, Sinovac, Moderna, Johnson, or Sputnik vaccine. Data were collected from using a designated questionnaire. The frequency of the adverse reactions was estimated. Results: There is a significant difference between vaccine type and adverse effects of different vaccines (like local pain, fever, headache, myalgia, and chills) among the studied group who received the first dose, 2nd dose, or 3rd doses of vaccines, also between vaccine type and abdominal adverse effects (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea or abdominal pain), between vaccine type and all of the following respiratory(cough, runny nose, sore throat, dyspnea), cardiac adverse effects (palpitations), abdominal adverse effects of different vaccines among the studied group who received the 1st or 2nd or 3rd doses of different types of vaccines (with a p-value of <0.001 for all significant previous differences). People who received Sinopharm had the highest vaccine with no or minimal side effects followed by Sinovac. Conclusion: Vaccinations against COVID-19 come with some mild side effects. Safest vaccine was Sinovac, dangerous side effects as dyspnea and chest pain were associated with Pfizer vaccine while the vaccine accompanied by many side effects was AstraZeneca. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2n first appeared in Wuhan, China in 2019. Soon after, it was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. The health crisis imposed by a new virus and its rapid spread worldwide prompted the fast development of vaccines. For the first time in human history, two vaccines based on recombinant genetic material technology were approved for human use. These mRNA vaccines were applied in massive immunization programs around the world, followed by other vaccines based on more traditional approaches. Even though all vaccines were tested in clinical trials prior to their general administration, serious adverse events, usually of very low incidence, were mostly identified after application of millions of doses. Establishing a direct correlation (the cause‐effect paradigm) between vaccination and the appearance of adverse effects has proven challenging. This review focuses on the main adverse effects observed after vaccination, including anaphylaxis, myocarditis, vaccine‐induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia, Guillain–Barré syndrome, and transverse myelitis reported in the context of COVID‐19 vaccination. We highlight the symptoms, laboratory tests required for an adequate diagnosis, and briefly outline the recommended treatments for these adverse effects. The aim of this work is to increase awareness among healthcare personnel about the serious adverse events that may arise post‐vaccination. Regardless of the ongoing discussion about the safety of COVID‐19 vaccination, these adverse effects must be identified promptly and treated effectively to reduce the risk of complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key Clinical Message: Vincristine therapy can be effective in refractory Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) following COVID‐19 vaccination. Our case report highlights the need for further research to establish standard management guidelines for COVID‐19‐vaccine‐associated ITP. Adult immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) can occur as a rare complication following several viral infections or a rare adverse event or complication of vaccination. In this paper, we report a case of a 39‐year‐old male patient with severe refractory ITP that began 4‐weeks after receiving his third (booster) dose of the COVID‐19 vaccine (BNT162b2, Pfizer‐BioNTech). He was given oral dexamethasone 40 mg daily for 4 days followed by prednisone at 1 mg/kg (85 mg daily) for 10 days. In the following weeks, we attempted several other lines of therapy to treat his ITP, including anti‐RhD immunoglobulin, which, unfortunately, caused moderate hemolysis requiring packed red blood cell transfusion, intravenous immunoglobulin (given at a subtherapeutic dose of 0.4 g/kg for only 1 day since it was not available), rituximab, and eltrombopag. The patient, unfortunately, showed no response to any of these treatments. This was an indicator to initiate salvage therapy with vincristine 2 mg weekly for 3 weeks. The patient's platelet count started to increase remarkably during the third week of vincristine and normalized after 4 weeks. We review the findings, clinical characteristics, and management approaches that were reported in the literature regarding COVID‐19‐vaccine‐induced ITP. More in‐depth research is needed to delineate standard guidelines for the management of such cases. This report underscores the importance of resorting to vincristine and eltrombopag as great options for severe and refractory ITP related to the COVID‐19 vaccine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the updated 2023–2024 COVID-19 vaccines by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna on September 11, 2023. Despite the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's recommendation that everyone aged ≥6 years receive the updated COVID-19 vaccine, the general public's intentions to receive the new 2023–2024 vaccine are unknown. Intentions to receive the new COVID-19 vaccine and the demographic predictors of those intentions were assessed from a survey of adult residents, aged ≥18 years, of Los Angeles County, California conducted in October 2023. Of the 1,090 participants, 701 (64.3%) indicated they were planning on receiving the new COVID-19 vaccine, 217 (19.9%) responded no, and 172 (15.8%) were unsure. Male gender (versus female); age groups of 50–64 and ≥65 years (versus 18–29 years); and ≥$100,000 household income (versus ≤$49,999) were associated with higher odds of reporting yes than reporting no regarding their vaccination intentions. Asian and Hispanic race/ethnicity (versus Non-Hispanic White) were associated with higher odds of indicating not sure than the odds of indicating no vaccination intentions. A significantly higher proportion of not-sure respondents reported "I plan to wait and see if it is safe and may get it later", whereas a significantly higher proportion of no respondents reported "I don't believe I need a COVID-19 vaccine booster" and "I don't trust COVID-19 vaccines." This study demonstrates demographic differences in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination intentions and highlights the importance of promotional messages and initiatives that target more hesitant populations. These messages should address possible side effects and vaccine safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to assess COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among dialysis patients atDr. Salma Center for Dialysis in 2022, highlighting the primary reasons for hesitancy within this vulnerable group. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at Dr. Salma Center in Khartoum, Sudan, in 2022. A systematic random sampling method was employed to select participants, who were interviewed using a structured questionnaire. Results: Of a sample of 137 patients, 125 completed the questionnaire with 91.2% response rate. Approximately half of the respondents reported vaccine hesitancy 50%, with 77% acknowledging the severity of COVID-19 but only 53% advised vaccination among their peers. Primary concerns included vaccine side effects 24.8% and mistrust of production companies 10.4%. No significant associations were found between vaccine hesitancy and demographic factors. Conclusion: The study reveals a notable prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among dialysis patients at Dr. Salma Center in Khartoum, 2022. Addressing this hesitancy requires concerted efforts to bridge the trust gap between patients and healthcare systems, coupled with targeted awareness campaigns to correct misinformation and reinforce confidence in vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Paying reparations to Black Americans has long been contentiously debated. This article addresses an unexamined pillar of this debate: the United States has a long-standing social norm that if an individual or community has suffered a harm, it is considered right for the federal government to provide some measure of what we term “reparatory compensation.” In discussing this norm and its implications for Black American reparations, we first describe the scale, categories, and interlocking and compounding effects of discriminatory harms by introducing a taxonomy of illustrative racial harms from slavery to the present. We then reveal how the social norm, precedent, and federal programs operate to provide victims with reparatory compensation, reviewing federal programs that offer compensation, such as environmental disasters, market failures, and vaccine injuries. We conclude that the government already has the norm, precedent, expertise, and resources to provide reparations to Black Americans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer survivors are at higher risk of developing severe complications from influenza due to their compromised immune systems. Despite their increased vulnerability to influenza and the availability of vaccines, vaccine hesitancy among cancer survivors remains a significant public health concern in China. Methods: A multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted among cancer survivors in China from January to December 2023. A total of 500 participants were recruited from the oncology departments of five tertiary hospitals. A structured, self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data on socio-demographic characteristics, cancer-related information, medical history, lifestyle factors, and influenza vaccine hesitancy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with influenza vaccine hesitancy. Results: The response rate was 97.0% (485/500). Among all participants, 204 (42.06%) reported vaccine hesitancy. The results of multiple logistic regression showed that the longer the end of anti-cancer treatment, without a history of adverse vaccine reactions, and the level of family support played a protective role in vaccine hesitancy. Current rehabilitation status, frequent colds, not being informed by doctors about vaccination, exercising, lack of community vaccination education programs, and concerns about vaccine safety were risk factors that increase vaccine hesitancy. Conclusions: A high proportion of cancer survivors in our study reported influenza vaccine hesitancy. Addressing concerns about vaccine safety, improving access to vaccination services, and enhancing doctor–patient communication are crucial for increasing influenza vaccine uptake in this vulnerable population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated an urgent global response in vaccine deployment, achieving over 70.6% global vaccination coverage with at least one dose. This study focuses on Taiwan's vaccine administration and adverse event reporting, set against a global backdrop. Using data from Taiwan's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and global vaccination data, this study investigates vaccine safety and the public health implications of vaccination strategies from local and global perspectives. Taiwan's proactive approach, resulting in high vaccination rates, provides a case study for the monitoring and management of vaccine-related adverse events. This study offers insights into the safety profiles of various COVID-19 vaccines and further explores the implications of adverse event reporting rates for vaccine policy and public health strategies. The comparative analysis reveals that, while vaccination has been effective in controlling the virus's spread, safety monitoring remains critical for maintaining public trust. It underscores the necessity of enhanced surveillance and the importance of transparent and tailored risk communication to support informed public health decisions. The findings aim to contribute to the global dialogue on vaccine safety, equitable distribution, evidence-based policy-making, and development of mitigation measures with consideration of local demographics in the ongoing fight against COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following mass vaccinations for the control of the COVID-19 epidemic, a spectrum of cardiac and neurological disorders was reported among vaccinated individuals. This study examined the range of complications documented and factors related to their occurrence. Three electronic databases were searched for case reports and case series with descriptions of cardiac and/or neurological complications in COVID-19 vaccine recipients. A total of 698 vaccinees were included in this review, of which 259 (37.1%) had cardiac and 439 (62.9%) had neurological complications. Inflammatory conditions were the commonest among the cardiac complications; while polyneuropathy, demyelinating diseases and cerebrovascular disorders were the more common neurological complications. The mean age of those with cardiac complications (33.8 years) was much younger than those with neurological complications (49.7 years). There was no notable difference in the gender distribution between these two groups of vaccine recipients. mRNA vaccines (all brands) were associated with almost 90.0% of the cardiac complications, whereas viral vector vaccines were associated with slightly over half (52.6%) of the neurological complications. With regard to the dose, cardiac complications were more common after the second (69.1%), whereas neurological complications were more common after the first dose (63.6%). The majority of the cases had an uncomplicated clinical course. Nevertheless, 5.9% of cases with neurological complications and 2.5% of those with cardiac complications were fatal, underscoring the significance of the consistent surveillance and vigilant monitoring of vaccinated individuals to mitigate these occurrences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is a rare complication of vaccination. In this study, we sought to provide insight into the characteristics of reported TTS induced by vaccination. Methods and results: We did a systematic review, searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, Journals@Ovid, and Scopus databases up to 26 April 2023 to identify case reports or case series of vaccine‐induced TTS. We then extracted and summarized the data from these reports. Eighteen reports were identified, with a total of 19 patients with TTS associated with vaccinations. Of the 19 included patients, the majority were female (n = 13, 68.4%) with a mean age of 56.6 ± 21.9 years. Seventeen patients developed TTS after coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination, 14 of whom received an mRNA vaccination. Two cases of TTS occurred after influenza vaccination. Among the 19 patients, 17 (89.5%) completed transthoracic echocardiography and 16 (84.2%) underwent angiography procedures. Seven patients (36.8%) completed cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. The median time to symptom onset was 2 (inter‐quartile range, 1–4) days. The most common symptoms were chest pain (68.4%), dyspnoea (57.9%), and digestive symptoms (31.6%). A total of 57.9% of patients developed nonspecific symptoms such as fatigue, myalgia, diaphoresis, and fever. Among the 16 reported cases of TTS, 15 patients (93.8%) exhibited elevated cardiac troponin levels, while among the nine reported cases, eight patients (88.9%) had elevated natriuretic peptide levels. All patients had electrocardiographic changes: ST‐segment change (47.1%), T‐wave inversion (58.8%), and prolonged corrected QT interval (35.3%). The most common TTS type was apical ballooning (88.2%). Treatment during hospitalization typically included beta‐blockers (44.4%), angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (33.3%), and diuretics (22.2%). After treatment, 81.3% of patients were discharged with improved symptoms. Among this group, nine patients (56.3%) were reported to have recovered ventricular wall motion during follow‐up. Two patients (12.5%) died following vaccination without resuscitation attempts. Conclusions: TTS is a rare but potentially life‐threatening complication of vaccination. Typical TTS symptoms such as chest pain and dyspnoea should be considered alarming symptoms, though nonspecific symptoms are common. The risks of such rare adverse events should be balanced against the risks of infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Study assessed four adverse events following 2022–2023 seasonal influenza vaccines. • Study population was 12.7 million Medicare enrollees 65 years and older. • There was no increase in post-vaccination incidence rates for three adverse events. • Anaphylaxis rates were elevated and possibly modified by concomitant vaccination. While safety of influenza vaccines is well-established, some studies have suggested potential associations between influenza vaccines and certain adverse events (AEs). This study examined the safety of the 2022–2023 influenza vaccines among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. A self-controlled case series compared incidence rates of anaphylaxis, encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), and transverse myelitis following 2022–2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations (i.e., any, high-dose or adjuvanted) in risk and control intervals among Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 65 years. We used conditional Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for event-dependent observation time and seasonality. Analyses also accounted for uncertainty from outcome misclassification where feasible. For AEs with any statistically significant associations, we stratified results by concomitant vaccination status. Among 12.7 million vaccine recipients, we observed 76 anaphylaxis, 276 encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, 134 GBS and 75 transverse myelitis cases. Only rates of anaphylaxis were elevated in risk compared to control intervals. With all adjustments, an elevated, but non-statistically significant, anaphylaxis rate was observed following any (IRR: 2.40, 95% CI: 0.96–6.03), high-dose (IRR: 2.31, 95% CI: 0.67–7.91), and adjuvanted (IRR: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.71–15.08) influenza vaccination; anaphylaxis IRRs were 2.54 (95% CI: 0.49–13.05) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.38–7.05) for persons with and without concomitant vaccination, respectively. Rates of encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, GBS, or transverse myelitis were not elevated following 2022–2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. There was an increased rate of anaphylaxis following influenza vaccination that may have been influenced by concomitant vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The vaccination status of post-stroke patients, who are at high risk of severe outcomes from Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a significant concern, yet it remains unclear. We aimed to explore the vaccination status, factors associated with vaccine hesitancy, and adverse effects after vaccination among post-stroke patients. Methods: This multi-center observational study enrolled hospitalized post-stroke patients from six Chinese hospitals (Oct 1, 2020 - Mar 31, 2021), examining vaccine uptake and self-reported reasons for vaccine hesitancy, utilizing logistic regression to investigate risk factors for vaccine hesitancy, and recording any adverse reactions post-vaccination. Results: Of the total 710 post-stroke patients included in the study, 430 (60.6%) had completed the recommended full-3 dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, with 176 (24.8%) remaining unvaccinated. The most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy were concerns about vaccine side effects (41.5%) and impaired mobility (33.9%). Logistic regression identified advanced age (aOR = 1.97, 95%CI: 1.36–2.85, P = 0.001), lower Barthel Index score (aOR = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.82–0.93, P = 0.018), higher Modified Rankin Scale score (aOR = 1.85, 95%CI: 1.32–2.56, P = 0.004), and poorer usual activity level of EuroQol 5-Dimension (aOR = 2.82, 95%CI: 1.51–5.28, P = 0.001) as independent risk factors for vaccine hesitancy. Approximately 14.8% reported minor adverse reactions, mainly pain at the injection site. Conclusion: We found that post-stroke patients have insufficient SARS-CoV-2 vaccination rates, with key risk factors for vaccine hesitancy including concerns about side effects, advanced age, and functional impairments. No severe adverse reactions were observed among the vaccinated population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aimed to report any suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) experienced by all vaccinated staff and students in a tertiary teaching hospital following COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign at Sultan Qaboos University and Hospital in Muscat, Oman, from August to September 2021. An online survey was generated and sent to all staff and students via email and text messages. An announcement was made on the hospital website with a link to the survey. Results: A total of 8,421 individuals reported being vaccinated at least once with a total of 11,468 doses administered from January to July 2021; 8,014 staff and students received the Pfizer-Biotech vaccine while 3,454 staff and students received the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. The survey received a total of 3,275 responses (response rate = 38.8%). Of these, 741 individuals (22.6%) experienced an ADR after vaccination and 67.2% (n = 498) were females (P <0.001). The majority of the ADRs reported were fever and chills (19.7%) followed by localised pain and swelling at the injection site (18.8%). Other ADRs such as hair loss (0.5%) were reported, and one staff/student reported a clot in the right leg. Among the responders, 27.0% considered their ADRs as mild while 25.0% considered them as severe. Conclusions: In the study cohort, mild symptoms of COVID-19 vaccines were reported. Females experienced more ADRs compared to males. Long-term observation of ADRs to the vaccines and follow-up monitoring should be done on subjects to preclude any unwanted effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]