Search

During June-October 2022, the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5 sublineage accounted for most of the sequenced viral genomes in the United States, with further Omicron sublineage diversification through November 2022.* Bivalent mRNA vaccines contain an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain component plus an updated component of the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineages. On September 1, 2022, a single bivalent booster dose was recommended for adults who had completed a primary vaccination series (with or without subsequent booster doses), with the last dose administered ≥2 months earlier (1). During September 13-November 18, the VISION Network evaluated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of a bivalent mRNA booster dose (after 2, 3, or 4 monovalent doses) compared with 1) no previous vaccination and 2) previous receipt of 2, 3, or 4 monovalent-only mRNA vaccine doses, among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years with an emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) encounter or hospitalization for a COVID-19-like illness.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination coverage remains lower in communities with higher social vulnerability. Factors such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exposure risk and access to healthcare are often correlated with social vulnerability and may therefore contribute to a relationship between vulnerability and observed vaccine effectiveness (VE). Understanding whether these factors impact VE could contribute to our understanding of real-world VE. Methods We used electronic health record data from 7 health systems to assess vaccination coverage among patients with medically attended COVID-19-like illness. We then used a test-negative design to assess VE for 2- and 3-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) adult (≥18 years) vaccine recipients across Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) quartiles. SVI rankings were determined by geocoding patient addresses to census tracts; rankings were grouped into quartiles for analysis. Results In July 2021, primary series vaccination coverage was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (56% vs 36%, respectively). In February 2022, booster dose coverage among persons who had completed a primary series was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (43% vs 30%). VE among 2-dose and 3-dose recipients during the Delta and Omicron BA.1 periods of predominance was similar across SVI quartiles. Conclusions COVID-19 vaccination coverage varied substantially by SVI. Differences in VE estimates by SVI were minimal across groups after adjusting for baseline patient factors. However, lower vaccination coverage among more socially vulnerable groups means that the burden of illness is still disproportionately borne by the most socially vulnerable populations.

Background We assessed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination impact on illness severity among adults hospitalized with COVID-19, August 2021–March 2022. Methods We evaluated differences in intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital death, and length of stay among vaccinated (2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses) versus unvaccinated patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for ≥24 hours with COVID-19–like illness and positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) molecular testing. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for ICU admission and death and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) for time to hospital discharge adjusted for age, geographic region, calendar time, and local virus circulation. Results We included 27 149 SARS-CoV-2–positive hospitalizations. During both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, protection against ICU admission was strongest among 3-dose vaccinees compared with unvaccinated patients (Delta OR, 0.52 [95% CI, .28–.96]; Omicron OR, 0.69 [95% CI, .54–.87]). During both periods, risk of in-hospital death was lower among vaccinated compared with unvaccinated patients but ORs overlapped across vaccination strata. We observed SHR >1 across all vaccination strata in both periods indicating faster discharge for vaccinated patients. Conclusions COVID-19 vaccination was associated with lower rates of ICU admission and in-hospital death in both Delta and Omicron periods compared with being unvaccinated.

Background Identifying severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections during peripartum hospitalizations is important to guide care, implement prevention measures, and understand infection burden. Methods This cross-sectional analysis used electronic health record data from hospitalizations during which pregnancies ended (peripartum hospitalizations) among a cohort of pregnant persons at 3 US integrated healthcare networks (sites 1–3). Maternal demographic, medical encounter, SARS-CoV-2 testing, and pregnancy and neonatal outcome information was extracted for persons with estimated delivery and pregnancy end dates during March 2020–February 2021 and ≥1 antenatal care record. Site-stratified multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with testing and compare pregnancy and neonatal outcomes among persons tested. Results Among 17 858 pregnant persons, 10 863 (60.8%) had peripartum SARS-CoV-2 testing; 222/10 683 (2.0%) had positive results. Testing prevalence varied by site and was lower during March–May 2020. Factors associated with higher peripartum SARS-CoV-2 testing odds were Asian race (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03–1.79; referent: White) (site 1), Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (aOR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.08–1.64) (site 2), peripartum Medicaid coverage (aOR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.06–1.66) (site 1), and preterm hospitalization (aOR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.19–2.39 [site 1]; aOR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.03–1.88 [site 2]). Conclusions Findings highlight potential disparities in SARS-CoV-2 peripartum testing by demographic and pregnancy characteristics. Testing practice variations should be considered when interpreting studies relying on convenience samples of pregnant persons testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Efforts to address testing differences between groups could improve equitable testing practices and care for pregnant persons with SARS-CoV-2 infections.

The Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was first identified in the United States in November 2021, with the BA.1 sublineage (including BA.1.1) causing the largest surge in COVID-19 cases to date. Omicron sublineages BA.2 and BA.2.12.1 emerged later and by late April 2022, accounted for most cases.* Estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) can be reduced by newly emerging variants or sublineages that evade vaccine-induced immunity (1), protection from previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated persons (2), or increasing time since vaccination (3). Real-world data comparing VE during the periods when the BA.1 and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 predominated (BA.1 period and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 period, respectively) are limited. The VISION network

OBJECTIVES We assessed BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mild to moderate and severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children and adolescents through the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 period. METHODS Using VISION Network records from April 2021 to September 2022, we conducted a test-negative, case-control study assessing VE against COVID-19-associated emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) encounters and hospitalizations using logistic regression, conditioned on month and site, adjusted for covariates. RESULTS We compared 9800 ED/UC cases with 70 232 controls, and 305 hospitalized cases with 2612 controls. During Delta, 2-dose VE against ED/UC encounters at 12 to 15 years was initially 93% (95% confidence interval 89 to 95), waning to 77% (69% to 84%) after ≥150 days. At ages 16 to 17, VE was initially 93% (86% to 97%), waning to 72% (63% to 79%) after ≥150 days. During Omicron, VE at ages 12 to 15 was initially 64% (44% to 77%), waning to 13% (3% to 23%) after ≥150 days; at ages 16 to 17 VE was 31% (10% to 47%) during days 60 to 149, waning to 7% (−8 to 20%) after 150 days. A monovalent booster increased VE to 54% (40% to 65%) at ages 12 to 15 and 46% (30% to 58%) at ages 16 to 17. At ages 5 to 11, 2-dose VE was 49% (33% to 61%) initially and 41% (29% to 51%) after 150 days. During Delta, VE against hospitalizations at ages 12 to 17 was high (>97%), and at ages 16 to 17 remained 98% (73% to 100%) beyond 150 days; during Omicron, hospitalizations were too infrequent to precisely estimate VE. CONCLUSIONS BNT162b2 protected children and adolescents against mild to moderate and severe COVID-19. VE was lower during Omicron predominance including BA.4/BA.5, waned after dose 2 but increased after a monovalent booster. Children and adolescents should receive all recommended COVID-19 vaccinations.

Background Data are limited on influenza testing among adults with acute respiratory illness (ARI)–associated hospitalizations. We identified factors associated with influenza testing in adult ARI-associated hospitalizations across the 2016–2017 through 2019–2020 influenza seasons. Methods Using data from 4 health systems in the United States, we identified hospitalizations that had an ARI discharge diagnosis or respiratory virus test. A hospitalization with influenza testing was based on testing performed within 14 days before through 72 hours after admission. We used random forest analysis to identify patient characteristics and influenza activity indicators that were most important in terms of their relationship to influenza testing. Results Across 4 seasons, testing rates ranged from 14.8%–19.4% at 3 pooled sites and 60.1%–78.5% at a fourth site with different testing practices. Discharge diagnoses of pneumonia or infectious disease of noninfluenza etiology, presence of ARI signs/symptoms, hospital admission month, and influenza-like illness activity level were consistently among the variables with the greatest relative importance. Conclusions Select ARI diagnoses and indicators of influenza activity were the most important factors associated with influenza testing among ARI-associated hospitalizations. Improved understanding of which patients are tested may enhance influenza burden estimates and allow for more timely clinical management of influenza-associated hospitalizations.

Background Data assessing protection conferred from COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection during Delta and Omicron predominance periods in the United States are limited. Methods This cohort study included persons ≥18 years who had ≥1 health care encounter across 4 health systems and had been tested for SARS-CoV-2 before 26 August 2021. COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection defined the exposure. Cox regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for the Delta and Omicron periods; protection was calculated as (1−HR)×100%. Results Compared to unvaccinated and previously uninfected persons, during Delta predominance, protection against COVID-19–associated hospitalizations was high for those 2- or 3-dose vaccinated and previously infected, 3-dose vaccinated alone, and prior infection alone (range, 91%–97%, with overlapping 95% confidence intervals [CIs]); during Omicron predominance, estimates were lower (range, 77%–90%). Protection against COVID-19–associated emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) encounters during Delta predominance was high for those exposure groups (range, 86%–93%); during Omicron predominance, protection remained high for those 3-dose vaccinated with or without a prior infection (76%; 95% CI = 67%–83% and 71%; 95% CI = 67%–73%, respectively). Conclusions COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provided protection against COVID-19–associated hospitalizations and ED/UC encounters regardless of variant. Staying up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccination still provides protection against severe COVID-19 disease, regardless of prior infection.

To determine whether children aged 4-7 years with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) were at increased risk of fever, febrile seizures, or emergency department (ED) visits following measles- or pertussis-containing vaccines compared with children without ASD.The study included children born between 1995-2012, aged 4-7 years at vaccination, and members of six healthcare delivery systems within Vaccine Safety Datalink. We conducted self-controlled risk interval analyses comparing rates of outcomes in risk and control intervals within each group defined by ASD status, and then compared outcome rates between children with and without ASD, in risk and control intervals, by estimating difference-in-differences using logistic regressions.The study included 14,947 children with ASD and 1,650,041 children without ASD. After measles- or pertussis-containing vaccination, there were no differences in association between children with and without ASD for fever (ratio of rate ratio for measles-containing vaccine = 1.07, 95% CI 0.58-1.96; for pertussis-containing vaccine = 1.16, 95% CI 0.63-2.15) or ED visits (ratio of rate ratio for measles-containing vaccine = 1.11, 95% CI 0.80-1.54; for pertussis-containing vaccine = 0.87, 95% CI 0.59-1.28). Febrile seizures were rare. Pertussis-containing vaccines were associated with small increased risk of febrile seizures in children without ASD.Children with ASD were not at increased risk for fever or ED visits compared with children without ASD following measles- or pertussis-containing vaccines. These results may provide further reassurance that these vaccines are safe for all children, including those with ASD.

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥18 years receive a single COVID-19 vaccine booster dose ≥2 months after receipt of an Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [JohnsonJohnson]) adenovirus vector-based primary series vaccine; a heterologous COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is preferred over a homologous (matching) Janssen vaccine for booster vaccination. This recommendation was made in light of the risks for rare but serious adverse events following receipt of a Janssen vaccine, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome

COVID-19 vaccines are recommended during pregnancy to prevent severe maternal morbidity and adverse birth outcomes; however, vaccination coverage among pregnant women has been low (1). Concerns among pregnant women regarding vaccine safety are a persistent barrier to vaccine acceptance during pregnancy. Previous studies of maternal COVID-19 vaccination and birth outcomes have been limited by small sample size (2) or lack of an unvaccinated comparison group (3). In this retrospective cohort study of live births from eight Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) health care organizations, risks for preterm birth (37 weeks' gestation) and small-for-gestational-age (SGA) at birth (birthweight10th percentile for gestational age) after COVID-19 vaccination (receipt of ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine doses) during pregnancy were evaluated. Risks for preterm and SGA at birth among vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women were compared, accounting for time-dependent vaccine exposures and propensity to be vaccinated. Single-gestation pregnancies with estimated start or last menstrual period during May 17-October 24, 2020, were eligible for inclusion. Among 46,079 pregnant women with live births and gestational age available, 10,064 (21.8%) received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine doses during pregnancy and during December 15, 2020-July 22, 2021; nearly all (9,892; 98.3%) were vaccinated during the second or third trimester. COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with preterm birth (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.82-1.01). Among 40,627 live births with birthweight available, COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy was not associated with SGA at birth (aHR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.87-1.03). Results consistently showed no increased risk when stratified by mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose, or by second or third trimester vaccination, compared with risk among unvaccinated pregnant women. Because of the small number of first-trimester exposures, aHRs for first-trimester vaccination could not be calculated. These data add to the evidence supporting the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. To reduce the risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness, CDC recommends COVID-19 vaccination for women who are pregnant, recently pregnant (including those who are lactating), who are trying to become pregnant now, or who might become pregnant in the future (4).

Background Following historically low influenza activity during the 2020–2021 season, the United States saw an increase in influenza circulating during the 2021–2022 season. Most viruses belonged to the influenza A(H3N2) 3C.2a1b 2a.2 subclade. Methods We conducted a test-negative case-control analysis among adults ≥18 years of age at 3 sites within the VISION Network. Encounters included emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits or hospitalizations with ≥1 acute respiratory illness (ARI) discharge diagnosis codes and molecular testing for influenza. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated by comparing the odds of influenza vaccination ≥14 days before the encounter date between influenza-positive cases (type A) and influenza-negative and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–negative controls, applying inverse probability-to-be-vaccinated weights, and adjusting for confounders. Results In total, 86 732 ED/UC ARI-associated encounters (7696 [9%] cases) and 16 805 hospitalized ARI-associated encounters (649 [4%] cases) were included. VE against influenza-associated ED/UC encounters was 25% (95% confidence interval (CI), 20%–29%) and 25% (95% CI, 11%–37%) against influenza-associated hospitalizations. VE against ED/UC encounters was lower in adults ≥65 years of age (7%; 95% CI, −5% to 17%) or with immunocompromising conditions (4%; 95% CI, −45% to 36%). Conclusions During an influenza A(H3N2)-predominant influenza season, modest VE was observed. These findings highlight the need for improved vaccines, particularly for A(H3N2) viruses that are historically associated with lower VE.

Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. CDC used data from the VISION Network* to examine hospitalizations in adults with COVID-19-like illness and compared the odds of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and thus having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, between unvaccinated patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring 90-179 days before COVID-19-like illness hospitalization, and patients who were fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine 90-179 days before hospitalization with no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated with a COVID-19-like illness hospitalization during January-September 2021 and at least once earlier (since February 1, 2020, and ≥14 days before that hospitalization). Among COVID-19-like illness hospitalizations in persons whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, the odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics) among unvaccinated, previously infected adults were higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with no previous documented infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-10.99). These findings suggest that among hospitalized adults with COVID-19-like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Background Electronic health record (EHR) data provide a unique opportunity to study the epidemiology of COVID-19, clinical outcomes of the infection, comparative effectiveness of therapies, and vaccine effectiveness but require a well-defined computable phenotype of COVID-19–like illness (CLI). Objective The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of pathogen-specific and other acute respiratory illness (ARI) International Statistical Classification of Diseases-9 and -10 codes in identifying COVID-19 cases in emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) and inpatient settings. Methods We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using EHR, claims, and laboratory information system data of ED or UC and inpatient encounters from 4 health systems in the United States. Patients who were aged ≥18 years, had an ED or UC or inpatient encounter for an ARI, and underwent a SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021, were included. We evaluated various CLI definitions using combinations of International Statistical Classification of Diseases-10 codes as follows: COVID-19–specific codes; CLI definition used in VISION network studies; ARI signs, symptoms, and diagnosis codes only; signs and symptoms of ARI only; and random forest model definitions. We evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each CLI definition using a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test as the reference standard. We evaluated the performance of each CLI definition for distinct hospitalization and ED or UC cohorts. Results Among 90,952 hospitalizations and 137,067 ED or UC visits, 5627 (6.19%) and 9866 (7.20%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. COVID-19–specific codes had high sensitivity (91.6%) and specificity (99.6%) in identifying patients with SARS-CoV-2 positivity among hospitalized patients. The VISION CLI definition maintained high sensitivity (95.8%) but lowered specificity (45.5%). By contrast, signs and symptoms of ARI had low sensitivity and positive predictive value (28.9% and 11.8%, respectively) but higher specificity and negative predictive value (85.3% and 94.7%, respectively). ARI diagnoses, signs, and symptoms alone had low predictive performance. All CLI definitions had lower sensitivity for ED or UC encounters. Random forest approaches identified distinct CLI definitions with high performance for hospital encounters and moderate performance for ED or UC encounters. Conclusions COVID-19–specific codes have high sensitivity and specificity in identifying adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Separate combinations of COVID-19-specific codes and ARI codes enhance the utility of CLI definitions in studies using EHR data in hospital and ED or UC settings.

COVID-19 vaccination coverage remains lower in communities with higher social vulnerability. Factors such as SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk and access to health care are often correlated with social vulnerability and may therefore contribute to a relationship between vulnerability and observed vaccine effectiveness (VE). Understanding whether these factors impact VE could contribute to our understanding of real-world VE.We used electronic health record data from seven health systems to assess vaccination coverage among patients with medically attended COVID-19-like illness. We then used a test-negative design to assess VE for 2- and 3-dose mRNA adult (≥18 years) vaccine recipients across Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) quartiles. SVI rankings were determined by geocoding patient addresses to census tracts; rankings were grouped into quartiles for analysis.In July 2021, primary series vaccination coverage was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (56% vs. 36%, respectively). In February 2022, booster dose coverage among persons who had completed a primary series was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (43% vs. 30%). VE among 2-dose and 3-dose recipients during the Delta and Omicron BA.1 periods of predominance was similar across SVI quartiles.COVID-19 vaccination coverage varied substantially by SVI. Differences in VE estimates by SVI were minimal across groups after adjusting for baseline patient factors. However, lower vaccination coverage among more socially vulnerable groups means that the burden of illness is still disproportionately borne by the most socially vulnerable populations.

Background There are limited data on the effectiveness of the vaccines against symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) currently authorized in the United States with respect to hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or ambulatory care in an emergency department or urgent care clinic. Methods We conducted a study involving adults (≥50 years of age) with Covid-19–like illness who underwent molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed 41,552 admissions to 187 hospitals and 21,522 visits to 221 emergency departments or urgent care clinics during the period from January 1 through June 22, 2021, in multiple states. The patients’ vaccination status was documented in electronic health records and immunization registries. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness by comparing the odds of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated patients with those among unvaccinated patients. Vaccine effectiveness was adjusted with weights based on propensity-for-vaccination scores and according to age, geographic region, calendar time (days from January 1, 2021, to the index date for each medical visit), and local virus circulation. Results The effectiveness of full messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination (≥14 days after the second dose) was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87 to 91) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization, 90% (95% CI, 86 to 93) against infection leading to an ICU admission, and 91% (95% CI, 89 to 93) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. The effectiveness of full vaccination with respect to a Covid-19–associated hospitalization or emergency department or urgent care clinic visit was similar with the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines and ranged from 81% to 95% among adults 85 years of age or older, persons with chronic medical conditions, and Black or Hispanic adults. The effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was 68% (95% CI, 50 to 79) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization and 73% (95% CI, 59 to 82) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. Conclusions Covid-19 vaccines in the United States were highly effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization, ICU admission, or an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. This vaccine effectiveness extended to populations that are disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)

BackgroundImmunocompromised (IC) persons are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes and are less protected by 1-2 COVID-19 vaccine doses than are immunocompetent (non-IC) persons. We compared vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended COVID-19 of 2-3 mRNA and 1-2 viral-vector vaccine doses between IC and non-IC adults.MethodsUsing a test-negative design among eight VISION Network sites, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) events and hospitalizations from 26 August-25 December 2021 was estimated separately among IC and non-IC adults and among specific IC condition subgroups. Vaccination status was defined using number and timing of doses. VE for each status (versus unvaccinated) was adjusted for age, geography, time, prior positive test result, and local SARS-CoV-2 circulation.ResultsWe analyzed 8,848 ED/UC events and 18,843 hospitalizations among IC patients and 200,071 ED/UC events and 70,882 hospitalizations among non-IC patients. Among IC patients, 3-dose mRNA VE against ED/UC (73% [95% CI: 64-80]) and hospitalization (81% [95% CI: 76-86]) was lower than that among non-IC patients (ED/UC: 94% [95% CI: 93-94]; hospitalization: 96% [95% CI: 95-97]). Similar patterns were observed for viral-vector vaccines. Transplant recipients had lower VE than other IC subgroups.ConclusionsDuring B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance, IC adults received moderate protection against COVID-19–associated medical events from three mRNA doses, or one viral-vector dose plus a second dose of any product. However, protection was lower in IC versus non-IC patients, especially among transplant recipients, underscoring the need for additional protection among IC adults.Key pointsDuring Delta variant predominance, immunocompromised (IC) adults received moderate protection against COVID-19-associated medical events from three mRNA doses, but IC patients, especially transplant recipients, were less protected than non-IC patients, underscoring the need for additional protection beyond the primary series.

Persons with moderate-to-severe immunocompromising conditions might have reduced protection after COVID-19 vaccination, compared with persons without immunocompromising conditions (1-3). On August 13, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended that adults with immunocompromising conditions receive an expanded primary series of 3 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. ACIP followed with recommendations on September 23, 2021, for a fourth (booster) dose and on September 1, 2022, for a new bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster dose, containing components of the BA.4 and BA.5 sublineages of the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant (4). Data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) of monovalent COVID-19 vaccines among persons with immunocompromising conditions since the emergence of the Omicron variant in December 2021 are limited. In the multistate VISION Network

Background Limited data exist on population-based risks and risk ratios (RRs) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)–associated hospitalizations and clinical outcomes stratified by age and race/ethnicity. Methods Using data from electronic health records and claims from 4 US health systems for the period March 2020–March 2021, we calculated risk and RR by age and race/ethnicity for COVID-19–associated hospitalizations and clinical outcomes among adults (≥18 years). COVID-19–associated hospitalizations were defined based on COVID-19 discharge codes or a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 result. Proportions of acute exacerbations of underlying conditions were estimated among hospitalized patients with select underlying conditions, stratified by age and race/ethnicity. Results Among 2.6 million adults included in the patient cohort, 6879 had COVID-19–associated hospitalizations during March 2020–March 2021 (risk: 264 per 100 000 population). Compared with younger, non-Hispanic White adults, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic adults aged ≥65 years had the highest hospitalization risk ratios (RR, 8.6; 95% CI, 7.6–9.9; and RR, 9.3; 95% CI, 8.5–10.3, respectively). Among hospitalized adults with COVID-19 and renal disease or cardiovascular disease, the highest proportion of acute renal failure (55.5%) or congestive heart failure (43.9%) occurred in older, non-Hispanic Black patients. Among hospitalized adults with chronic lung disease or asthma, the highest proportion of respiratory failure (62.9%) or asthma exacerbation (66.7%) occurred in older, Hispanic patients. Conclusions During the first year of the US COVID-19 pandemic in this cohort, older non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic adults had the highest relative risks of COVID-19–associated hospitalization and adverse outcomes and, among those with select underlying conditions, the highest occurrences of acute exacerbations of underlying conditions.

ImportanceRecent sublineages of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, including BA.4 and BA.5, may be associated with greater immune evasion and less protection against COVID-19 following vaccination.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between COVID-19 mRNA vaccination with 2, 3, or 4 doses among immunocompetent adults and the risk of medically attended COVID-19 illness during a period of BA.4/BA.5 predominant circulation; to evaluate the relative severity of COVID-19 in hospitalized cases across Omicron BA.1, BA.2/BA.2.12.1, and BA.4/BA.5 sublineage periods.Setting, Design and ParticipantsTest-negative study of adults with COVID-19-like illness (CLI) and molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 conducted in 10 states from December 16, 2021, to August 20, 2022.ExposuremRNA COVID-19 vaccination.Main Outcomes and MeasuresEmergency department/urgent care encounters, hospitalizations, and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or in-hospital death. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for the association between prior vaccination and medically attended COVID-19 was used to estimate VE, stratified by care setting and vaccine doses (2, 3, or 4 doses vs 0 doses as reference group). Among hospitalized case-patients, demographic and clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes including ICU admission and death were compared across sublineage periods.ResultsBetween June 19 – August 20, 2022, 82,229 ED/UC and 21,007 hospital encounters were included for the BA.4/BA.5 vaccine effectiveness analysis. Among adults hospitalized with CLI, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.68-0.83) for receipt of 2 vaccine doses at ≥150 days after receipt, 0.32 (95% CI: 0.20-0.50) for a third dose 7-119 days after receipt, and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.58-0.71) for a third dose ≥120 days (median 235 days) after receipt for cases vs controls. For COVID-19-associated hospitalization, among patients ages ≥65 years 7-59 and ≥60 days (median 88 days) after a fourth dose, ORs were 0.34 (95% CI: 0.25-0.47) and 0.43 (95% CI: 0.34-0.56), respectively. Among hospitalized cases, ICU admission and/or in-hospital death occurred in 21.4% during the BA.1 vs 14.7% during the BA.4/BA.5 period (standardized mean difference: 0.17).ConclusionVE against medically attended COVID-19 illness decreased over time since last dose; receipt of one or two booster doses increased effectiveness over a primary series alone.KEY POINTSQuestionWhat is the association between receipt of first-generation COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and medically attended COVID-19 during Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineage predominance?FindingsThis test-negative analysis included 82,229 emergency department or urgent care encounters and 21,007 hospitalizations for COVID-19-like illness. Among hospitalized patients, the likelihood of recent vaccination (7-119 days) with 3 mRNA vaccine doses (vs unvaccinated) was significantly lower (odds ratio, 0.32) in cases than SARS-CoV-2-negative controls, but with lower associated protection ≥120 days post-vaccination (odds ratio, 0.64).MeaningFirst-generation COVID-19 vaccines were associated with protection against COVID-19 during the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineage-predominant periods but this declined over time.

Objective To estimate the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against moderate and severe covid-19 in adults by time since second, third, or fourth doses, and by age and immunocompromised status. Design Test negative case-control study. Setting Hospitals, emergency departments, and urgent care clinics in 10 US states, 17 January 2021 to 12 July 2022. Participants 893 461 adults (≥18 years) admitted to one of 261 hospitals or to one of 272 emergency department or 119 urgent care centers for covid-like illness tested for SARS-CoV-2. Main outcome measures The main outcome was waning of vaccine effectiveness with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine during the omicron and delta periods, and the period before delta was dominant using logistic regression conditioned on calendar week and geographic area while adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, local virus circulation, immunocompromised status, and likelihood of being vaccinated. Results 45 903 people admitted to hospital with covid-19 (cases) were compared with 213 103 people with covid-like illness who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (controls), and 103 287 people admitted to emergency department or urgent care with covid-19 (cases) were compared with 531 168 people with covid-like illness who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. In the omicron period, vaccine effectiveness against covid-19 requiring admission to hospital was 89% (95% confidence interval 88% to 90%) within two months after dose 3 but waned to 66% (63% to 68%) by four to five months. Vaccine effectiveness of three doses against emergency department or urgent care visits was 83% (82% to 84%) initially but waned to 46% (44% to 49%) by four to five months. Waning was evident in all subgroups, including young adults and individuals who were not immunocompromised; although waning was morein people who were immunocompromised. Vaccine effectiveness increased among most groups after a fourth dose in whom this booster was recommended. Conclusions Effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against moderate and severe covid-19 waned with time after vaccination. The findings support recommendations for a booster dose after a primary series and consideration of additional booster doses.

ObjectiveStudies suggest infants may be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 relative to older children, but few data exist regarding the incidence of COVID-19 episodes and associated risk factors. We estimate incidence rates and describe characteristics associated with medically attended COVID-19 episodes among infants younger than 6 months of age.MethodsWe analyzed electronic medical record data from a cohort of infants born March 1, 2020‒ February 28, 2021. Data from three health care delivery systems included demographic characteristics, maternal and infant outpatient visit and hospitalization diagnoses, and SARS-CoV-2 test results. Medically attended COVID-19 episodes were defined by positive SARS-CoV-2 clinical tests and/or COVID-19 diagnosis codes during medical care visits. Unadjusted and site-adjusted incidence rates by infant month of age, low and high SARS-CoV-2 circulation periods and maternal COVID-19 diagnosis were calculated.ResultsAmong 18,192 infants aged ConclusionMost medically attended COVID-19 episodes in infants aged Article SummaryThis report describes incidence rates and characteristics of medically attended outpatient and inpatient COVID-19 episodes among infants aged What’s Known on This SubjectSurveillance data and case series suggest that infants aged What this Study AddsAmong infants aged

We assessed COVID-19 vaccination impact on illness severity among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 August 2021-March 2022.We evaluated differences in intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital death, and length of stay among vaccinated (2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses) versus unvaccinated patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for ≥24 hours with COVID-19-like illness (CLI) and positive SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing. We calculated odds ratios for ICU admission and death and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) for time to hospital discharge adjusted for age, geographic region, calendar time, and local virus circulation.We included 27,149 SARS-CoV-2 positive hospitalizations. During both Delta and Omicron-predominant periods, protection against ICU admission was strongest among 3-dose vaccinees compared with unvaccinated patients (Delta OR [CI]: 0.52 [0.28-0.96]); Omicron OR [CI]: 0.69 [0.54-0.87]). During both periods, risk of in-hospital of death was lower among vaccinated compared with unvaccinated but ORs were overlapping; during Omicron, lowest among 3-dose vaccinees (OR [CI] 0.39 [0.28-0.54]). We observed SHR1 across all vaccination strata in both periods indicating faster discharge for vaccinated patients.COVID-19 vaccination was associated with lower rates of ICU admission and in-hospital death in both Delta and Omicron periods compared with being unvaccinated.

Background Recent studies have reported an increase in Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) incidence in young children, highlighting the need to better understand risk factors for the development of IBD. Licensed for use in infants in 2006, the oral, live-attenuated rotavirus vaccine has biologic plausibility for instigating inflammation of the gut mucosa as a pathway to immune dysregulation. Methods Over a ten-year period, we evaluated incidence of IBD within a cohort of children under the age of ten, enrolled in seven integrated healthcare delivery systems. We conducted a nested case-control study to evaluate the association between rotavirus vaccination and IBD using conditional logistic regression. Cases were confirmed via medical record review and matched to non-IBD controls on date of birth, sex, and study site. Results Among 2.4 million children under the age of 10 years, 333 cases of IBD were identified with onset between 2007 and 2016. The crude incidence of IBD increased slightly over the study period (p-value for trend = 0.046). Of the 333 cases, 227 (68%) were born prior to 2007. Forty-two cases born in 2007 or later, with continuous enrollment since birth were included in the case-control study and matched to 210 controls. The adjusted odds ratio for any rotavirus vaccination in IBD cases, compared to matched controls, was 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.19–2.65). Conclusions Data from this large pediatric cohort demonstrate a small overall increase in IBD incidence in young children over a ten-year period. The data suggest that rotavirus vaccination is not associated with development of IBD.

COVID-19 vaccines are critical for ending the COVID-19 pandemic; however, current data about vaccination coverage and safety in pregnant women are limited. Pregnant women are at increased risk for severe illness and death from COVID-19 compared with nonpregnant women of reproductive age, and are at risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as preterm birth (1-4). Pregnant women are eligible for and can receive any of the three COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States via Emergency Use Authorization.* Data from Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), a collaboration between CDC and multiple integrated health systems, were analyzed to assess receipt of ≥1 dose (first or second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines or a single dose of the Janssen [Johnson & Johnson] vaccine) of any COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy, receipt of first dose of a 2-dose COVID-19 vaccine (initiation), or completion of a 1- or 2-dose COVID-19 vaccination series. During December 14, 2020-May 8, 2021, a total of 135,968 pregnant women were identified, 22,197 (16.3%) of whom had received ≥1 dose of a vaccine during pregnancy. Among these 135,968 women, 7,154 (5.3%) had initiated and 15,043 (11.1%) had completed vaccination during pregnancy. Receipt of ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy was highest among women aged 35-49 years (22.7%) and lowest among those aged 18-24 years (5.5%), and higher among non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) (24.7%) and non-Hispanic White (White) women (19.7%) than among Hispanic (11.9%) and non-Hispanic Black (Black) women (6.0%). Vaccination coverage increased among all racial and ethnic groups over the analytic period, likely because of increased eligibility for vaccination† and increased availability of vaccine over time. These findings indicate the need for improved outreach to and engagement with pregnant women, especially those from racial and ethnic minority groups who might be at higher risk for severe health outcomes because of COVID-19 (4). In addition, providing accurate and timely information about COVID-19 vaccination to health care providers, pregnant women, and women of reproductive age can improve vaccine confidence and coverage by ensuring optimal shared clinical decision-making.

Background Pregnant individuals are at increased risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and death, and primary and booster COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for this population. Methods Among a cohort of pregnant individuals who received prenatal care at three healthcare systems in the United States, we estimated the cumulative incidence of hospitalization with symptomatic COVID-19 illness. We also identified factors associated with COVID-19 hospitalization using a multivariable Cox proportional-hazards model with pregnancy weeks as the timescale and a time-varying adjustor that accounted for SARS-CoV-2 circulation; model covariates included site, age, race, ethnicity, insurance status, pre-pregnancy weight status, and selected underlying medical conditions. Data were collected primarily through medical record extraction. Results Among 19,456 pregnant individuals with an estimated due date March 1, 2020-February 28, 2021, 75 (0.4%) were hospitalized with symptomatic COVID-19. Factors associated with hospitalization for symptomatic COVID-19 were Hispanic ethnicity (aHR: 2.7; 95% CI: 1.3,5.5), native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander race (aHR: 12; 95% CI: 3.2,45.5), age Conclusion Although hospitalization with symptomatic COVID-19 was uncommon, pregnant individuals should be aware of risk factors associated with severe illness when considering COVID-19 vaccination.

Identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections during peripartum hospitalizations is important to guide care, implement prevention measures, and understand infection burden.This cross-sectional analysis used electronic health record data from hospitalizations during which pregnancies ended (peripartum hospitalizations) among a cohort of pregnant persons at 3 U.S. integrated healthcare networks (Sites 1-3). Maternal demographic, medical encounter, SARS-CoV-2 testing, and pregnancy and neonatal outcome information was extracted for persons with estimated delivery and pregnancy end dates during March 2020-February 2021 and ≥1 prenatal care record. Site-stratified multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with testing and compare pregnancy and neonatal outcomes among persons tested.Among 17,858 pregnant persons, 10,863 (60.8%) had peripartum SARS-CoV-2 testing; 222/10,683 (2.0%) had positive results. Testing prevalence varied by site and was lower during March-May 2020. Factors associated with higher peripartum SARS-CoV-2 testing odds were Asian race (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.03-1.79; referent: White) (Site 1), Hispanic or Latina ethnicity (aOR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.08-1.64) (Site 2), peripartum Medicaid coverage (aOR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.06-1.66) (Site 1), and preterm hospitalization (aOR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.19-2.39 [Site 1]; aOR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.03-1.88 [Site 2]).Findings highlight potential disparities in SARS-CoV-2 peripartum testing by demographic and pregnancy characteristics. Testing practice variations should be considered when interpreting studies relying on convenience samples of pregnant persons testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Efforts to address testing differences between groups could improve equitable testing practices and care for pregnant persons with SARS-CoV-2 infections.

To assess the association between cumulative aluminum exposure from vaccines before age 24 months and persistent asthma at age 24 to 59 months.A retrospective cohort study was conducted in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Vaccination histories were used to calculate cumulative vaccine-associated aluminum in milligrams (mg). The persistent asthma definition required one inpatient or 2 outpatient asthma encounters, and ≥2 long-term asthma control medication dispenses. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association between aluminum exposure and asthma incidence, stratified by eczema presence/absence. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) per 1 mg increase in aluminum exposure were calculated, adjusted for birth month/year, sex, race/ethnicity, VSD site, prematurity, medical complexity, food allergy, severe bronchiolitis, and health care utilization.The cohort comprised 326,991 children, among whom 14,337 (4.4%) had eczema. For children with and without eczema, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) vaccine-associated aluminum exposure was 4.07 mg (SD 0.60) and 3.98 mg (SD 0.72), respectively. Among children with and without eczema, 6.0% and 2.1%, respectively, developed persistent asthma. Among children with eczema, vaccine-associated aluminum was positively associated with persistent asthma (aHR 1.26 per 1 mg increase in aluminum, 95% CI 1.07, 1.49); a positive association was also detected among children without eczema (aHR 1.19, 95% CI 1.14, 1.25).In a large observational study, a positive association was found between vaccine-related aluminum exposure and persistent asthma. While recognizing the small effect sizes identified and the potential for residual confounding, additional investigation of this hypothesis appears warranted.

ImportanceRecent SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant sublineages, including BA.4 and BA.5, may be associated with greater immune evasion and less protection against COVID-19 after vaccination.ObjectivesTo evaluate the estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 2, 3, or 4 doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination among immunocompetent adults during a period of BA.4 or BA.5 predominant circulation; and to evaluate the relative severity of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients across Omicron BA.1, BA.2 or BA.2.12.1, and BA.4 or BA.5 sublineage periods.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis test-negative case-control study was conducted in 10 states with data from emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) encounters and hospitalizations from December 16, 2021, to August 20, 2022. Participants included adults with COVID-19–like illness and molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2. Data were analyzed from August 2 to September 21, 2022.ExposuresmRNA COVID-19 vaccination.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe outcomes of interest were COVID-19 ED or UC encounters, hospitalizations, and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or in-hospital death. VE associated with protection against medically attended COVID-19 was estimated, stratified by care setting and vaccine doses (2, 3, or 4 doses vs 0 doses as the reference group). Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, demographic and clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were compared across sublineage periods.ResultsDuring the BA.4 and BA.5 predominant period, there were 82 229 eligible ED and UC encounters among patients with COVID-19–like illness (median [IQR] age, 51 [33-70] years; 49 682 [60.4%] female patients), and 19 114 patients (23.2%) had test results positive for SARS-CoV-2; among 21 007 hospitalized patients (median [IQR] age, 71 [58-81] years; 11 209 [53.4%] female patients), 3583 (17.1 %) had test results positive for SARS-CoV-2. Estimated VE against hospitalization was 25% (95% CI, 17%-32%) for receipt of 2 vaccine doses at 150 days or more after receipt, 68% (95% CI, 50%-80%) for a third dose 7 to 119 days after receipt, and 36% (95% CI, 29%-42%) for a third dose 120 days or more (median [IQR], 235 [204-262] days) after receipt. Among patients aged 65 years or older who had received a fourth vaccine dose, VE was 66% (95% CI, 53%-75%) at 7 to 59 days after vaccination and 57% (95% CI, 44%-66%) at 60 days or more (median [IQR], 88 [75-105] days) after vaccination. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, ICU admission or in-hospital death occurred in 21.4% of patients during the BA.1 period vs 14.7% during the BA.4 and BA.5 period (standardized mean difference: 0.17).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this case-control study of COVID-19 vaccines and illness, VE associated with protection against medically attended COVID-19 illness was lower with increasing time since last dose; estimated VE was higher after receipt of 1 or 2 booster doses compared with a primary series alone.

Introduction Children may receive measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and varicella (VAR) vaccines separately or as measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV). We examined whether pediatric herpes zoster (HZ) incidence varied by pattern of varicella vaccine administration. Methods In six integrated health systems, we examined HZ incidence among children turning 12 months old during 2003–2008. All received varicella and MMR vaccines on recommended schedules. Cases were identified through 2014 using ICD-9 codes. Incidence was examined by number of varicella vaccine doses and same-day MMR. Results Among 199,797 children, overall HZ incidence was 18.6/100,000 person-years in the first-dose MMR + VAR group, 17.9/100,000 person-years in the MMRV group, and 7.5/100,000 person-years in the VAR-alone group. HZ incidence was lower following the second dose than before the second dose in all first-dose groups. Conclusions HZ incidence was not meaningfully different between the MMRV and MMR + VAR first-dose groups. Overall and within first-dose groups, HZ incidence was lower among children receiving two varicella vaccine doses.

Estimates of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) have declined in recent months (1,2) because of waning vaccine induced immunity over time,* possible increased immune evasion by SARS-CoV-2 variants (3), or a combination of these and other factors. CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a third dose (booster) of an mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after receipt of the second mRNA vaccine dose and that immunocompromised individuals receive a third primary dose.

Background Between May 2005 and March 2007, three vaccines were recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices for routine use in adolescents in the United States: quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY), tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap), and human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV). Understanding historical adolescent vaccination patterns may inform future vaccination coverage efforts for these and emerging adolescent vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines. Methods This was a descriptive, retrospective cohort study. All vaccines administered to adolescents aged 11 through 18 years in the Vaccine Safety Datalink population between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016 were examined. Vaccination coverage was assessed by study year for ≥1 dose Tdap or Td, ≥1 dose Tdap, ≥1 dose MenACWY, ≥1 dose HPV, and ≥3 dose HPV. The proportion of vaccine visits with concurrent vaccination (≥2 vaccines administered at the same visit) was calculated by sex and study year. The most common vaccine combinations administered in the study population were described by sex for two time periods: 2007–2010 and 2011–2016. Results The number of 11–18-year-olds in the study population averaged 522,565 males and 503,112 females per study year. Between January 2007 and December 2016 there were 4,884,553 vaccine visits in this population (45% among males). The overall proportion of concurrent vaccine visits among males was 43% (33–61% by study year). Among females, 39% of all vaccine visits included concurrent vaccination (32–48% by study year). Vaccine coverage for Tdap, MenACWY, and 1- and 3-dose HPV increased across the study period. A wide variety of vaccine combinations were administered among both sexes and in both time periods. Conclusions The high vaccine uptake and multitude of vaccine combinations administered concurrently in the adolescent population of the Vaccine Safety Datalink provide historical patterns with which to compare future adolescent vaccination campaigns.

Background The Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) uses vaccination data from electronic health records (EHR) at eight integrated health systems to monitor vaccine safety. Accurate capture of data from vaccines administered outside of the health system is critical for vaccine safety research, especially for COVID-19 vaccines, where many are administered in non-traditional settings. However, timely access and inclusion of data from Immunization Information Systems (IIS) into VSD safety assessments is not well understood. Methods We surveyed the eight data-contributing VSD sites to assess: 1) status of sending data to IIS; 2) status of receiving data from IIS; and 3) integration of IIS data into the site EHR. Sites reported separately for COVID-19 vaccination to capture any differences in capacity to receive and integrate data on COVID-19 vaccines versus other vaccines. Results All VSD sites send data to and receive data from their state IIS. All eight sites (100%) routinely integrate IIS data for COVID-19 vaccines into VSD research studies. Six sites (75%) also routinely integrate all other vaccination data; two sites integrate data from IIS following a reconciliation process, which can result in delays to integration into VSD datasets. Conclusions COVID-19 vaccines are being administered in a variety of non-traditional settings, where IIS are commonly used as centralized reporting systems. All eight VSD sites receive and integrate COVID-19 vaccine data from IIS, which positions the VSD well for conducting quality assessments of vaccine safety. Efforts to improve the timely receipt of all vaccination data will improve capacity to conduct vaccine safety assessments within the VSD.

ImportancePregnant people are at high risk for severe COVID-19 but were excluded from mRNA vaccine trials; data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) are needed.ObjectiveTo evaluate the estimated effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against medically attended COVID-19 among pregnant people during Delta and Omicron predominance.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis test-negative, case-control study was conducted from June 2021 to June 2022 in a network of 306 hospitals and 164 emergency department and urgent care (ED/UC) facilities across 10 US states, including 4517 ED/UC encounters and 975 hospitalizations among pregnant people with COVID-19–like illness (CLI) who underwent SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing.ExposuresTwo doses (14-149 and ≥150 days prior) and 3 doses (7-119 and ≥120 days prior) of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (≥1 dose received during pregnancy) vs unvaccinated.Main Outcomes and MeasuresEstimated VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated ED/UC encounter or hospitalization, based on the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for prior vaccination; VE was calculated as (1 − aOR) × 100%.ResultsAmong 4517 eligible CLI-associated ED/UC encounters and 975 hospitalizations, 885 (19.6%) and 334 (34.3%) were SARS-CoV-2 positive, respectively; the median (IQR) patient age was 28 (24-32) years and 31 (26-35) years, 537 (12.0%) and 118 (12.0%) were non-Hispanic Black and 1189 (26.0%) and 240 (25.0%) were Hispanic. During Delta predominance, the estimated VE against COVID-19–associated ED/UC encounters was 84% (95% CI, 69% to 92%) for 2 doses within 14 to 149 days, 75% (95% CI, 5% to 93%) for 2 doses 150 or more days prior, and 81% (95% CI, 30% to 95%) for 3 doses 7 to 119 days prior; estimated VE against COVID-19–associated hospitalization was 99% (95% CI, 96% to 100%), 96% (95% CI, 86% to 99%), and 97% (95% CI, 79% to 100%), respectively. During Omicron predominance, for ED/UC encounters, the estimated VE of 2 doses within 14 to 149 days, 2 doses 150 or more days, 3 doses within 7 to 119 days, and 3 doses 120 or more days prior was 3% (95% CI, −49% to 37%), 42% (95% CI, −16% to 72%), 79% (95% CI, 59% to 89%), and −124% (95% CI, −414% to 2%), respectively; for hospitalization, estimated VE was 86% (95% CI, 41% to 97%), 64% (95% CI, −102% to 93%), 86% (95% CI, 28% to 97%), and −53% (95% CI, −1254% to 83%), respectively.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, maternal mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, including booster dose, was associated with protection against medically attended COVID-19. VE estimates were higher against COVID-19–associated hospitalization than ED/UC visits and lower against the Omicron variant than the Delta variant. Protection waned over time, particularly during Omicron predominance.

Background Many countries recommend influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Despite this recommendation, influenza vaccine among pregnant individuals remains under-utilized and uptake varies by country. Factors associated with influenza vaccine uptake during pregnancy may also vary across countries. Methods As members of the Pregnancy Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (PREVENT), five sites from four countries (Australia, Canada, Israel, and the United States) retrospectively identified cohorts of individuals aged 18–50 years who were pregnant during pre-defined influenza seasons. Influenza vaccine coverage estimates were calculated for the 2010–11 through 2015–16 northern hemisphere and the 2012 through 2015 southern hemisphere influenza seasons, by site. Sites used electronic health records, administrative data, and immunization registries to collect information on pregnancy, health history, demographics, and vaccination status. Each season, vaccination coverage was calculated as the percentage of individuals who received influenza vaccine among the individuals in the cohort that season. Characteristics were compared between those vaccinated and unvaccinated, by site. Results More than two million pregnancies were identified over the study period. Influenza vaccination coverage ranged from 5% to 58% across sites and seasons. Coverage increased consistently over the study period at three of the five sites (Western Australia, Alberta, and Israel), and was highest in all seasons at the United States study site (39–58%). Associations with vaccination varied by country and across seasons; where available, parity >0, presence of a high-risk medical condition, and urban residence were consistently associated with increased likelihood of vaccination. Conclusions Though increasing, uptake of influenza vaccine among pregnant individuals remains lower than recommended. Coverage varied substantially by country, suggesting an ongoing need for targeted strategies to improve influenza vaccine uptake in this population.

Background: Identifying pregnancy episodes and accurately estimating their beginning and end dates are imperative for observational maternal vaccine safety studies using electronic health record (EHR) data. Methods: We modified the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) Pregnancy Episode Algorithm (PEA) to include both the International Classification of Disease, ninth revision (ICD-9 system) and ICD-10 diagnosis codes, incorporated additional gestational age data, and validated this enhanced algorithm with manual medical record review. We also developed the new Dynamic Pregnancy Algorithm (DPA) to identify pregnancy episodes in real time. Results: Around 75% of the pregnancy episodes identified by the enhanced VSD PEA were live births, 12% were spontaneous abortions (SABs), 10% were induced abortions (IABs), and 0.4% were stillbirths (SBs). Gestational age was identified for 99% of live births, 89% of SBs, 69% of SABs, and 42% of IABs. Agreement between the PEA-assigned and abstractor-identified pregnancy outcome and outcome date was 100% for live births, but was lower for pregnancy losses. When gestational age was available in the medical record, the agreement was higher for live births (97%), but lower for pregnancy losses (75%). The DPA demonstrated strong concordance with the PEA and identified pregnancy episodes ⩾6 months prior to the outcome date for 89% of live births. Conclusion: The enhanced VSD PEA is a useful tool for identifying pregnancy episodes in EHR databases. The DPA improves the timeliness of pregnancy identification and can be used for near real-time maternal vaccine safety studies. Plain Language Summary Improving identification of pregnancies in the Vaccine Safety Datalink electronic medical record databases to allow for better and faster monitoring of vaccination safety during pregnancy Introduction: It is important to monitor of the safety of vaccines after they have been approved and licensed by the Food and Drug Administration, especially among women vaccinated during pregnancy. The Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) monitors vaccine safety through observational studies within large databases of electronic medical records. Since 2012, VSD researchers have used an algorithm called the Pregnancy Episode Algorithm (PEA) to identify the medical records of women who have been pregnant. Researchers then use these medical records to study whether receiving a particular vaccine is linked to any negative outcomes for the woman or her child. Methods: The goal of this study was to update and enhance the PEA to include the full set of medical record diagnostic codes [both from the older International Classification of Disease, ninth revision (ICD-9 system) and the newer ICD-10 system] and to incorporate additional sources of data about gestational age. To ensure the validity of the PEA following these enhancements, we manually reviewed medical records and compared the results with the algorithm. We also developed a new algorithm, the Dynamic Pregnancy Algorithm (DPA), to identify women earlier in pregnancy, allowing us to conduct more timely vaccine safety assessments. Results: The new version of the PEA identified 2,485,410 pregnancies in the VSD database. The enhanced algorithm more precisely estimated the beginning of pregnancies, especially those that did not result in live births, due to the new sources of gestational age data. Conclusion: Our new algorithm, the DPA, was successful at identifying pregnancies earlier in gestation than the PEA. The enhanced PEA and the new DPA will allow us to better evaluate the safety of current and future vaccinations administered during or around the time of pregnancy.

Introduction A recent study reported an association between inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) and spontaneous abortion (SAB), but only among women who had also been vaccinated in the previous influenza season. We sought to estimate the association between IIV administered in three recent influenza seasons and SAB among women who were and were not vaccinated in the previous influenza season. Methods We conducted a case-control study over three influenza seasons (2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15) in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Cases (women with SAB) and controls (women with live births) were matched on VSD site, date of last menstrual period, age group, and influenza vaccination status in the previous influenza season. Of 1908 presumptive cases identified from the electronic record, 1236 were included in the main analysis. Administration of IIV was documented in several risk windows, including 1–28, 29–56, and >56 days before the SAB date. Results Among 627 matched pairs vaccinated in the previous season, no association was found between vaccination in the 1–28 day risk window and SAB (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6–1.5). The season-specific aOR ranged from 0.5 to 1.7 with all CIs including the null value of 1.0. Similarly, no association was found among women who were not vaccinated in the previous season; the season-specific aOR in the 1–28 day risk window ranged from 0.6 to 0.7 and the 95% CI included 1.0 in each season. There was no association found between SAB and influenza vaccination in the other risk windows, or when vaccine receipt was analyzed relative to date of conception. Conclusion During these seasons we found no association between IIV and SAB, including among women vaccinated in the previous season. These findings lend support to current recommendations for influenza vaccination at any time during pregnancy, including the first trimester.

This study uses data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink on receipt of booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant individuals aged 18 to 49 years.

PURPOSE: Given the 2015 transition to International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) diagnostic coding, updates to our previously published algorithms for major structural birth defects (BDs) were necessary. Aims of this study were to update, validate, and refine algorithms for identifying selected BDs, and then to use these algorithms to describe BD prevalence in the vaccine safety datalink (VSD) population. METHODS: We converted our ICD-9-CM list of selected BDs to ICD-10-CM using available crosswalks with manual review of codes. We identified, chart reviewed, and adjudicated a sample of infants in the VSD with ≥2 ICD-10-CM diagnoses for one of seven common BDs. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated; for BDs with suboptimal PPV, algorithms were refined. Final automated algorithms were applied to a cohort of live births delivered 10/1/2015–9/30/2017 at eight VSD sites to estimate BD prevalence. This research was approved by the HealthPartners Institutional Review Board, by all participating VSD sites, and by the CDC, with a waiver of informed consent. RESULTS: Of 573 infants with ≥2 diagnoses for a targeted BD, on adjudication, we classified 399 (69.6%) as probable cases, 31 (5.4%) as possible cases and 143 (25.0%) as not having the targeted BD. PPVs for the final BD algorithms ranged from 0.76 (hypospadias) to 1.0 (gastroschisis). Among 212 857 births over 2 years following transition to ICD-10-CM coding, prevalence for the full list of selected defects in the VSD was 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Algorithms can identify infants with selected BDs using automated healthcare data with reasonable accuracy. Our updated algorithms can be used in observational studies of maternal vaccine safety and may be adapted for use in other surveillance systems.