METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science was conducted up to June 7, 2024, following PRISMA guidelines to identify studies related to COVID-19 vaccines and POTS. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, case series, and case reports. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were independently performed by two reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklists and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS: Of the 1,531 articles identified, 10 met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 284,678 participants. These studies included five case reports, two case series, one cross-sectional study, one prospective observational study, and one cohort study. The cohort study reported that the odds of new POTS diagnoses post-vaccination were 1.33 (95% CI: 1.25-1.41) compared to the 90 days prior. In contrast, the post-infection odds were 2.11 (95% CI: 1.70-2.63), and the risk of POTS was 5.35 times higher (95% CI: 5.05-5.68) post-infection compared to post-vaccination. Diagnostic findings across studies included elevated norepinephrine levels and reduced heart rate variability. Reported management strategies involved ivabradine, intravenous therapies, and lifestyle modifications.
CONCLUSION: The risk of POTS following COVID-19 vaccination is lower than that observed post-SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, existing studies are limited by small sample sizes and methodological variability. Further research is needed to clarify the incidence, mechanisms, and long-term outcomes of vaccine-related POTS to inform effective clinical management strategies.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey using an online questionnaire was conducted between January 3 to 25, 2021, among HCPs (n = 834) in Bangladesh.
RESULTS: Less than 50% of HCPs would receive the vaccine against COVID-19 if available and 54% were willing to take the vaccine at some stage in the future. Female participants (OR:1.64;95%CI:1.172-2.297), respondents between 18-34 years old (OR:2.42; 95% CI:1.314-4.463), HCPs in the public sector (OR:2.09; 95% CI:1.521-2.878), and those who did not receive a flu vaccine in the previous year (OR:3.1; 95% CI:1.552-6.001) were more likely to delay vaccination.
CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed that, if available, less than half of the HCPs would accept a COVID-19 vaccine in Bangladesh. To ensure the broader success of the vaccination drive, tailored strategies and vaccine promotion campaigns targeting HCPs and the general population are needed.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was carried out using a self-administered questionnaire that was distributed to eligible participants using convenience sampling.
RESULTS: A total of 1,396 participants completed the questionnaire. The respondents showed a median knowledge score of influenza of 11.0/15.0, and most of them (70%) were able to recognize its modes of transmission. However, only 11.3% of the participants reported receiving the seasonal influenza vaccine. Physicians were the respondents' most preferred information source for influenza (35.2%), and their recommendation (44.3%) was the most cited reason for taking its vaccine. On the contrary, not knowing about the vaccine's availability (50.1%), concerns regarding the safety of the vaccine (17%), and not considering influenza as a threat (15.9%) were the main reported barriers to getting vaccinated.
CONCLUSION: The current study showed a low uptake of influenza vaccines in Yemen. The physician's role in promoting influenza vaccination seems to be essential. Extensive and sustained awareness campaigns would likely increase the awareness of influenza and remove misconceptions and negative attitudes toward its vaccine. Equitable access to the vaccine can be promoted by providing it free of charge to the public.
METHODS: Articles were searched from three databases which were WOS, Scopus, and PubMed. The systemic review identified the primary articles related to SIA that focused on the impact of immunization coverage, challenges, and improvement strategies. The inclusion criteria were open access English articles that were published between 2012 and 2021 and conducted in the Asia region.
RESULTS: There are nine articles described and explained regarding some form of supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) in their findings across Asia region. The majority of studies selected reported on post vaccination coverage and revealed a multifaceted challenge faced during SIAs which are widely diverse range from the microlevel of interpersonal aspects up to the macrolevel of government policy. Upon further analysis, the intervention at community level was the most dominant strategies reported during the SIA program.
CONCLUSIONS: An effective SIAs program provides the opportunity to increase the national capacity of the polio immunization program, reducing inequities in service delivery and offering additional public health benefits in controlling polio outbreaks in both endemic and nonendemic countries. Strengthening routine immunization (RI) programmes is also important for the sustainability of SIA's programs. Despite the challenges and hurdles, many Asian countries exhibited great political willingness to boost polio immunization coverage through SIA efforts.
METHODS: Adults were selected through a stratified, two-stage cluster community sample in Selangor, Malaysia. The reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the measurement model were assessed before implementing a partial least squares structural equation model (PLS-SEM) to evaluate the significance of the structural paths.
RESULTS: A total of 728 participants were enrolled. The five constructs all showed adequate internal reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. There was a significant, positive relationship to WTP from constructs (perceived barriers [Path coefficient (β) = 0.082, P = 0.036], perceived susceptibility [β = 0.214, P<0.001], and cues to action [β = 0.166, P<0.001]), and the model all together accounted for 8.8% of the variation in WTP. There was a significant, negative relationship between perceived barriers and perceived benefit [β = -0.261, P<0.001], which accounted for 6.8% of variation in perceived benefit.
CONCLUSIONS: Policy and programs should be targeted that can modify individuals' thoughts about disease risk, their obstacles in obtaining the preventive action, and their readiness to obtain a vaccine. Such programs include educational materials about disease risk and clinic visits that can pair HepB screening and vaccination.
METHODS: The first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups.
RESULTS: We analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A living systematic review will be conducted which includes an initial systematic review and bimonthly review updates. Searching and screening for the review and subsequent updates will be done in four streams: a systematic search of six databases, grey literature review, preprint review and citizen sourcing. The screening will be done by a minimum of two reviewers at title/abstract and full-text in Covidence, a systematic review management software. Data will be extracted across predefined fields in an excel spreadsheet that includes information about article characteristics, context and population, community engagement approaches, and outcomes. Synthesis will occur using the convergent integrated approach. We will explore the potential to quantitatively synthesise primary outcomes depending on heterogeneity of the studies.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The initial review and subsequent bimonthly searches and their results will be disseminated transparently via open-access methods. Quarterly briefs will be shared on the reviews' social media platforms and across other interested networks and repositories. A dedicated web link will be created on the Community Health-Community of Practice site for sharing findings and obtaining feedback. A mailing list will be developed and interested parties can subscribe for updates.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022301996.
METHODS: We define effective vaccine coverage (EVC) of measles as the proportion of a population vaccinated with measles-containing vaccine (MCV) and effectively protected against measles infection. A quantitative evaluation of EVC throughout the life course of Malaysian birth cohorts was conducted accounting for both vaccine efficacy (VE) and between-dose correlation (BdC). Measles vaccination coverage was sourced from WHO-UNICEF estimates of Malaysia's routine immunisation coverage and supplementary immunisation activities (SIAs). United Nations World population estimates and projections (UNWPP) provided birth cohort sizes stratified by age and year. A step wise joint Bernoulli distribution was used to proportionate the Malaysian population born between 1982, the first year of Malaysia's measles vaccination programme, and 2021, into individuals who received zero dose, one dose and multiple doses of MCV. VE estimates by age and doses received are then adopted to derive EVC. A sensitivity analysis was conducted using 1000 random combinations of BdC and VE parameters.
RESULTS: This study suggests that no birth cohort in the Malaysian population has achieved > 95% population immunity (EVC) conferred through measles vaccination since the measles immunisation programme began in Malaysia.
CONCLUSION: The persistence of measles in Malaysia is due to pockets of insufficient vaccination coverage against measles in the population. Monitoring BdC through immunisation surveillance systems may allow for the identification of susceptible subpopulations (primarily zero-dose MCV individuals) and increase the coverage of individuals who are vaccinated with multiple doses of MCV. This study provides a tool for assessment of national-level population immunity of measles conferred through vaccination and does not consider subnational heterogeneity or vaccine waning. This tool can be readily applied to other regions and vaccine-preventable diseases.