Frequency of COVID-19 vaccine side effects and its associated factors among the vaccinated population of Pakistan: A cross-sectional study

Comparing COVID-19 literacy and vaccine hesitancy among health care workers, including oral health professionals, in Japan

BACKGROUND

Oral health professionals should have good COVID-19 vaccine literacy as should physicians and nurses. However, little is known about COVID-19 literacy and vaccine hesitancy among oral health professionals in Japan.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate the status of COVID-19 literacy and vaccine hesitancy among oral health professionals by comparing them with other healthcare workers (HCWs).

METHODS

To compare these differences, a self-administered questionnaire-based survey of 596 staff members was conducted in March 2023 at schools, an affiliated hospital, and elderly care facilities after the staff who wished to receive it completed the fifth dose of COVID-19 vaccinations. Comparison between the recognition levels and number of vaccine doses among the HCWs were examined using the Kruskal-Wallis tests. Defining the third or lower doses of COVID-19 vaccine as vaccine hesitancy, factors associated with the hesitancy were examined using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 408 (68.5%) participants were enrolled for the study. Dental hygienists' COVID-19 literacy levels were lower compared to those of nurses and physicians. Dentists received a significantly lower number of vaccine doses than did physicians. Vaccine hesitancy was positively associated with younger age and higher concern about the adverse effects of the vaccine, but it was not associated with occupation.

CONCLUSION

Interventions to improve the low COVID-19 literacy and high COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among oral health professionals, particularly young ones, are needed for COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Characteristics of Oral Adverse Effects following COVID-19 Vaccination and Similarities with Oral Symptoms in COVID-19 Patients: Taste and Saliva Secretory Disorders

Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines exhibit diverse side effects, taste and saliva secretory disorders have remained poorly understood despite their negative impact on the overall quality of life. The present study aimed to characterize oral adverse effects following COVID-19 vaccination and assess their similarities with oral symptoms in COVID-19 patients. A literature search was conducted in databases, including PubMed, LitCovid, and Google Scholar, to retrieve relevant studies. The narrative review indicated that a certain number of vaccinated people develop ageusia, dysgeusia, hypogeusia, xerostomia, and dry mouth, while they are rare compared with COVID-19 oral symptoms. The prevalence of oral adverse effects varies by country/region and such geographical differences may be related to the type of vaccine used. Similar to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, COVID-19 vaccination adversely affects taste perception and salivary secretion in females and older subjects more frequently than in males and younger subjects. Their impairments mostly appear within 3 days of vaccination, and bitter taste is specifically impaired in some cases. Considering that oral adverse effects following COVID-19 vaccination share some characteristics with oral symptoms in COVID-19 patients, it is speculated that the spike protein derived from COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection may be pathophysiologically responsible for taste and saliva secretory disorders. This is because such spike protein has the potential to interact with ACE2 expressed on the relevant cells, produce proinflammatory cytokines, and form antiphospholipid antibodies. Our results do not deny the advantages of COVID-19 vaccination, but attention should be paid to post-vaccination oral effects in addition to COVID-19 oral symptoms. Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines exhibit diverse side effects, taste and saliva secretory disorders have remained poorly understood despite their negative impact on the overall quality of life. The present study aimed to characterize oral adverse effects following COVID-19 vaccination and assess their similarities with oral symptoms in COVID-19 patients. A literature search was conducted in databases, including PubMed, LitCovid, and Google Scholar, to retrieve relevant studies. The narrative review indicated that a certain number of vaccinated people develop ageusia, dysgeusia, hypogeusia, xerostomia, and dry mouth, while they are rare compared with COVID-19 oral symptoms. The prevalence of oral adverse effects varies by country/region and such geographical differences may be related to the type of vaccine used. Similar to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, COVID-19 vaccination adversely affects taste perception and salivary secretion in females and older subjects more frequently than in males and younger subjects. Their impairments mostly appear within 3 days of vaccination, and bitter taste is specifically impaired in some cases. Considering that oral adverse effects following COVID-19 vaccination share some characteristics with oral symptoms in COVID-19 patients, it is speculated that the spike protein derived from COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection may be pathophysiologically responsible for taste and saliva secretory disorders. This is because such spike protein has the potential to interact with ACE2 expressed on the relevant cells, produce proinflammatory cytokines, and form antiphospholipid antibodies. Our results do not deny the advantages of COVID-19 vaccination, but attention should be paid to post-vaccination oral effects in addition to COVID-19 oral symptoms.

Longitudinal Follow-Up Study on the Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Telephonic Questionnaire Approach

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has prompted urgent efforts to develop and deploy effective vaccines. Covishield and Covaxin are two prominent COVID-19 vaccines authorized for emergency use; however, concerns regarding their safety persist.

OBJECTIVE

This longitudinal follow-up study aimed to comprehensively assess and compare the demographic characteristics, frequencies, severities of reported side effects, and associations between vaccine type and demographic factors among individuals vaccinated with Covishield and Covaxin.

METHODS

A telephonic questionnaire was used to collect data from individuals who attended COVID-19 vaccination programs between January 1, 2021, and January 1, 2022. Logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate the associations between vaccine type, demographic factors, and likelihood of experiencing side effects.

RESULTS

Covaxin recipients exhibited a lower incidence of mild flu-like illness (16 cases) and post-vaccination infection (55 cases) than Covishield recipients (110 and 98 cases, respectively). However, Covaxin recipients reported more cases of soreness at the injection site (139 cases) than did Covishield recipients (172 cases). Logistic regression analysis revealed significantly higher odds of experiencing side effects among Covaxin recipients than among Covishield recipients (OR = 1.687, p < 0.001). Age was inversely associated with the likelihood of experiencing side effects (OR = 0.982, p < 0.001), while sex and ethnicity also exhibited significant associations.

CONCLUSION

This study provides valuable insights into the safety profiles of the Covishield and Covaxin COVID-19 vaccines. These findings underscore the importance of ongoing surveillance and evaluation of vaccine safety and tolerability to inform public health policies and vaccination strategies.

Acceptance to take COVID-19 vaccine and its relation to COVID-19 infection

One of the biggest global health threats is vaccine hesitancy and it remains a global issue. The speed at which vaccines are developed and media misinformation contribute to vaccine reluctance. This study examined the relationship between vaccine acceptance and COVID-19 infection. A cross-sectional study was used with a sample of 1388 subjects including students and academic staff. Data were collected using the self-administered COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Behavior questionnaire, which has nine dimensions and 42 items and asks about COVID-19 infection frequency and timing. The mean COVID-19 vaccine behavior scores of hesitant subjects were low. Low trust in COVID-19 vaccines (25.4%) was the main reason for hesitancy. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is positively correlated with increased infection rates (P≤0.001). Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine can reduce infection rates, protect vulnerable populations, and aid public health efforts to control the virus.

Safety Monitoring of COVID-19 Vaccines in Persons with Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A European Multi-Country Study

In all pivotal trials of COVID-19 vaccines, the history of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was mentioned as one of the main exclusion criteria. In the absence of clinical trials, observational studies are the primary source for evidence generation. This study aims to describe the patient-reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) following the first COVID-19 vaccination cycle, as well as the administration of booster doses of different vaccine brands, in people with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, as compared to prior infection-free matched cohorts of vaccinees. A web-based prospective study was conducted collecting vaccinee-reported outcomes through electronic questionnaires from eleven European countries in the period February 2021-February 2023. A baseline questionnaire and up to six follow-up questionnaires collected data on the vaccinee's characteristics, as well as solicited and unsolicited adverse reactions. Overall, 3886 and 902 vaccinees with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and having received the first dose or a booster dose, respectively, were included in the analysis. After the first dose or booster dose, vaccinees with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection reported at least one ADR at a higher frequency than those matched without prior infection (3470 [89.6%] vs. 2916 [75.3%], and 614 [68.2%] vs. 546 [60.6%], respectively). On the contrary side, after the second dose, vaccinees with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection reported at least one ADR at a lower frequency, compared to matched controls (1443 [85.0%] vs. 1543 [90.9%]). The median time to onset and the median time to recovery were similar across all doses and cohorts. The frequency of adverse reactions was higher in individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection who received Vaxzevria as the first dose and Spikevax as the second and booster doses. The frequency of serious ADRs was low for all doses and cohorts. Data from this large-scale prospective study of COVID-19 vaccinees could be used to inform people as to the likelihood of adverse effects based on their history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, age, sex, and the type of vaccine administered. In line with pivotal trials, the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines was also confirmed in people with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Unraveling the association between vaccine attitude, vaccine conspiracies and self-reported side effects following COVID-19 vaccination among nurses and physicians in Jordan

BACKGROUND

The negative impact of vaccine conspiracies is linked with negative health behavior. The aim of the current study was to examine the association between attitudes toward booster COVID-19, influenza, and monkeypox (mpox) vaccinations with post-COVID-19 vaccine side effects, vaccine conspiracies, and attitude towards mandatory vaccination among nurses and physicians in Jordan.

METHODS

A structured closed-ended questionnaire was used to collect data on demographics, COVID-19 history, COVID-19 vaccine type and doses received, self-reported side effects post-COVID-19 vaccination, acceptance of booster COVID-19, seasonal influenza, and mpox vaccinations, attitudes towards mandatory vaccination, and beliefs in vaccine conspiracies.

RESULTS

The study sample comprised a total of 341 participants. Acceptance of yearly booster COVID-19 vaccination was expressed by 46.6% of the sample, while 73.3% accepted seasonal influenza vaccination, and only 37.0% accepted mpox vaccination. A higher frequency of self-reported side effects following the first COVID-19 vaccine dose was associated with embrace of vaccine conspiracies and vaccine type. For the second vaccine dose, a higher frequency of self-reported side effects was associated with the embrace of vaccine conspiracies, older age, and affiliation to private sector. In multinomial logistic regression analyses, the lower embrace of vaccine conspiracies was associated with lower odds of reporting side effects post-COVID-19 vaccination. The lower embrace of vaccine conspiracies and favorable attitude towards mandatory vaccination were associated with the willingness to get COVID-19, influenza, and mpox vaccinations.

CONCLUSION

The study findings highlighted the negative impact of embracing vaccine conspiracies on health-seeking behavior among nurses and physicians. The findings indicated that the willingness to get vaccinated was associated with lower endorsement of vaccine conspiracies. Additionally, the lower embrace of vaccine conspiracies was associated with a lower frequency of self-reported side effects following COVID-19 vaccination. These results emphasize the importance of addressing vaccine misinformation and promoting accurate information to ensure optimal vaccine uptake and public health outcomes.

Comparison of Biological, Pharmacological Characteristics, Indications, Contraindications, Efficacy, and Adverse Effects of Inactivated Whole-Virus COVID-19 Vaccines Sinopharm, CoronaVac, and Covaxin: An Observational Study

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an emerging viral zoonotic illness that has developed a distinctive and threatening situation globally. Worldwide, many vaccines were introduced to fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. The present study aims to compare the bio-pharmacological characteristics, indications, contraindications, efficacy, and adverse effects of inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccines, Sinopharm, CoronaVac, and Covaxin. Initially, 262 documents and 6 international organizations were selected. Finally, 41 articles, fact sheets, and international organizations were included. The data were recorded from the World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) USA, Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus. The results demonstrated that these three inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccines, Sinopharm, CoronaVac, and Covaxin, received emergency approval from the FDA/WHO, and all three of these vaccines are beneficial for the prevention of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Sinopharm vaccine has been recommended during pregnancy and for people of all age groups, and the CoronaVac and Covaxin vaccines are recommended for people over 18 years of age and older. These three vaccines have recommended intramuscular doses of 0.5 mL each, with a 3-4 week interval. These three vaccines can be stored in a refrigerator at +2 to +8 °C. The common adverse effects of these vaccines are pain at the injection site, redness, fatigue, headache, myalgias, general lethargy, body ache, arthralgia, nausea, chills, fever, and dizziness. The overall mean efficiency for the prevention of the COVID-19 disease is 73.78% for Sinopharm, 70.96% for CoronaVac, and 61.80% for Covaxin. In conclusion, all three inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccines, Sinopharm, CoronaVac, and Covaxin, are beneficial for the prevention of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, evidence suggests that the overall impact of Sinopharm is slightly better than that of CoronaVac and Covaxin.