Emotional Reaction to the First Dose of COVID-19 Vaccine: Postvaccination Decline in Anxiety and Stress among Anxious Individuals and Increase among Individuals with Normal Prevaccination Anxiety Levels

Impact of COVID-19 vaccination on adolescent and youth students' mental health and bullying behaviors after the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions in China

Background

Vaccination plays an important role in fighting against COVID-19. However, it is unclear about the association among vaccination, mental health, and bullying behaviors in China.

Method

This online survey was conducted to investigate the association among vaccination status, mental health problems and bullying behaviors in students from December 14, 2022 to February 28, 2023 in Sichuan, China. All participants (N = 82,873) were adolescents recruited via their teachers and professors. Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), Sleep Severity Index Scale (ISI) and Cyberbullying behaviors were tested.

Results

The rates of depression, anxiety and PTSD in participants without vaccination were significantly higher than that in those with vaccination. Moreover, participants with more doses of vaccines had significantly lower rates of depression, anxiety, PTSD, school and cyber bullying (p < 0.001). The rates of homosexual orientation, drinking, smoking were higher in participants with three or more doses of vaccines than those with less doses of vaccines (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

This study suggests that COVID-19 vaccination will not only protect students' physical health, but also improve mental health. It is crucial to explore the mechanism between vaccination and mental health problems and bullying behaviors in further studies.

Budget impact analysis of subcutaneous infliximab (CT-P13 SC) for treating inflammatory bowel disease in Saudi Arabia: Analysis from payer perspective

BACKGROUND

The Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) has approved the subcutaneous (SC) administration of infliximab, presenting a more convenient alternative with reduced outpatient visits and diminished expenses compared to the intravenous (IV) administration. However, the financial implications of this formulation have not been examined from the perspective of Saudi payers.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A prevalence-based budget impact model was developed to evaluate the financial effects of introducing "environment without" versus "with infliximab SC." The model's time horizon spanned over 2 years (2021-2023), aligning with the biennial national pharmaceutical procurement cycle. The comparison focused on infliximab SC versus all available formulations of infliximab IV in the Saudi market for two inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD): Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and Crohn's Disease (CD). Treatment comparators' comparability and dose escalations were substantiated by published studies, utilizing dosing information from the summary of product characteristics. Drug acquisition costs were derived from SFDA registered prices, with IV formulation administration costs included. Scenario analysis assessed the budget impact of infliximab SC introduction at uptake rates ranging from 0% to 100%.

RESULTS

Introducing infliximab SC demonstrated cost-saving potential in the treatment of IBD. At 100% uptake with UC patients for 2 years, infliximab SC resulted in savings of -SAR-31.9 million (-SAR29,145 per patient). Similarly, for CD, introducing infliximab SC at 100% uptake over 2 years yielded savings of -SAR106.2 million (-SAR36,585 per patient).

CONCLUSION

This study reveals that infliximab SC is associated with cost-saving potential when compared to infliximab IV formulations available in Saudi Arabia. Future research should address uncertainties related to real-world comparative effectiveness, the convenience of administration, patient tolerability, and physician acceptance of the SC formulation of infliximab, alongside comparisons with other TNF-alpha inhibitors.

How stressful was the COVID-19 vaccination procedure? Comparison between mass vaccination centers and general practices

Negative past experiences with vaccines or unfamiliar environments can be sources of stress during the COVID-19 vaccination procedure. We examined whether the perceived stressfulness of the vaccination procedure differ between mass vaccination centers and general practitioner (GP) practices. A survey was distributed (07/2021-10/2021) among newly vaccinated individuals in ten GP practices (n = 364) and two vaccine centers (n = 474). Stress was low at all sites. The perceived stressfulness of the procedure was higher among younger participants and those in GP practices, and increased with longer waiting time at the site. Stress decreased with better comprehensibility of the procedure and higher satisfaction with patient education. Participants who expressed greater concern about the health risks of COVID-19 vaccines perceived the vaccination procedure as more stressful. Our findings indicate opportunities for improvements in future vaccination campaigns and highlight the important role of healthcare providers in mitigating stress by addressing individual concerns.

Nurses Lived Experiences, Burdens and Coping Strategies During COVID-19 Pandemic

This is a qualitative phenomenological study that was designed to navigate through nurses' lived experiences, burdens, and coping strategies while working with COVID-19 patients. The sample included 20 nurses who had worked with COVID-19 patients for more than or equal to 6 months. The interviews were conducted between October 1, 2021, and April 15, 2022. At that time, the third COVID wave had elapsed, and we were peaking on a fourth pandemic wave, so included participants had lived through a minimum of 2 to 3 peaks. Six themes emerged, which were: nurses coping with COVID-19 crisis, professional relationship burden, personal burden, environmental burden, physical symptom burden, and emotional burden of the crisis. Nurses' lived experiences during the pandemic were deep, intense, and moderately to highly affecting their ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving. That experience opened nurses' eyes on countless number of challenges that require special attention, care, and preparation on many levels. The minimal preparatory levels are personal, departmental, organizational, and strategic.

The Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression before and after COVID-19 Vaccines Were Universally Available for Adults in the United States

Our objective was to examine the influence of COVID-19 vaccination on recent (i.e., past month) moderate or severe symptoms of anxiety (GAD-7 ≥ 10) or depression (PHQ-8 ≥ 10) before and after the COVID-19 vaccine became universally available for adults in the U.S. Participants belonged to the Communities, Households, and SARS-CoV-2 Epidemiology Cohort (CHASING COVID), a national longitudinal study. Our analytic population included 4,832 participants who reported vaccination status from December 2020 to December 2021 with follow-up outcomes assessed through March 2022. We emulated a hypothetical randomized experiment, a target trial, to estimate the effect of COVID-19 vaccination on symptoms of anxiety or depression. Before vaccines were universally available, participants who were vaccinated versus not had significantly lower adjusted odds of symptoms of moderate or severe anxiety (aOR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.70-0.89). In the universal vaccine era, vaccination was associated with marginally higher adjusted odds of symptoms of moderate or severe anxiety (aOR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.00-1.50). Vaccination did not influence subsequent moderate or severe depressive symptoms in the preuniversal vaccine era (aOR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.82-1.03) or universal vaccine era (aOR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.91-1.36). Research into the longitudinal relationship between COVID-19 vaccination and symptoms of depression and anxiety is warranted, with a focus on advancing understanding of potential mediators on the pathway between vaccination and mental health as well as modifiable factors, such as vaccine hesitancy or vaccine beliefs, that may help identify populations for whom vaccination may be particularly beneficial to their mental health.

The second dose of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy among health care workers in China: A multicenter cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 outbreak in China exposed health care workers (HCWs) to an increased risk of infection. The acquired immunity rapidly diminishes after the previous COVID-19 vaccination and the second booster vaccination has been recommended in several countries. HCWs are a priority group for vaccination because they are at increased risk of being infected, however, a certain amount of HCWs were hesitant.

METHODS

The survey was conducted among 5805 HCWs in China from January 5 to February 9, 2023. Questionnaire included sociodemographic information, COVID-19-related variables, psychological factors, and the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influencing factors of the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy.

RESULTS

42.2% of HCWs self-reported having the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy. Occupations, years of working, COVID-19 infection status were associated with less vaccine hesitancy. HCWs who had received 3 doses of COVID-19 vaccine were less likely to be hesitant compared to those had not received. HCWs with PTSD symptoms and anxiety symptoms were more likely to be hesitant. No relation was observed between COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy and age, marriage, salary, and perceived an increased risk of COVID-19 infection due to work (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable proportion of HCWs were hesitant to accept the second dose of the COVID-19 booster vaccine. Incorporating vaccine knowledge and new evidence into routine health educations and procedures to raise confidence and reduce complacency may be effective and feasible in promoting the vaccination and implementing future vaccination programs.

Rasch Modeling and Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis for the Usability of the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) during the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Several instruments are currently used to assess Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) -induced psychological distress, including the 22-item Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R). The IES-R is a self-administered scale used to assess post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The current study aimed to examine the construct validity of the IES-R, based on the Rasch model, with COVID-19-related data, as well as to test the multilevel construct validity of the IES-R within and among countries during the pandemic crisis.

METHODS

A multi-country web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted utilizing the 22-item IES-R. A total of 1020 participants enrolled in our survey, of whom 999 were included in the analyses. Data were analyzed using Rasch modeling and multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA).

RESULTS

The Rasch modeling results of the IES-R demonstrated that the IES-R is a satisfactory instrument with the five-point Likert scale, asserting that its 22 items are significant contributors to assessing PTSD as a unidimensional construct covered by the items of the IES-R. The MCFA confirmed that the 22-item IES-R, with its three factors, including intrusion, avoidance, and hyperarousal, demonstrates adequate construct validity at the within- and among-country levels. However, the results of the Akaike information criterion (AIC) model determined that the 16-item IES-R is better than the 22-item IES-R.

CONCLUSION

The results suggested that the 22-item IES-R is a reliable screening instrument for measuring PTSD related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and can be utilized to provide timely psychological health support, when needed, based on the screening results.

Psychological effects and associated factors among vaccinated and unvaccinated general population against COVID-19 infection in Bangladesh

Background

The global effort to develop herd immunity in the general public against the COVID-19 pandemic is currently ongoing. However, to the best of our knowledge, there have been no studies on how the COVID-19 vaccine affects mental health in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh. The present study investigated the psychological effects and associated factors among vaccinated and unvaccinated general populations against COVID-19 infection in Bangladesh.

Methods

A nationwide online cross-sectional survey was conducted in Bangladesh from June 23 to December 25, 2021. The frequency of symptoms of psychological distress, depression, anxiety, stress, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), insomnia, and fear was assessed using the Bangla versions of the GHQ-12, PHQ-2, GAD-2, PSS-4, PC-PTSD-5, ISI, and FCV-19S scales, respectively.

Results

The study included 3,013 persons from all eight divisions of Bangladesh, with 1,272 (42.2%) being vaccinated and 1,741 (57.8%) being unvaccinated. Compared with unvaccinated populations, vaccinated populations had significantly lower prevalence rates of psychological distress (36.4 vs. 51.5%), depression (21.1 vs. 37.9%), anxiety (25.1 vs. 44.9%), stress (19.4 vs. 30.4%), PTSD (29.4 vs. 38.3%), insomnia (18.7 vs. 39.4%), and fear symptoms (16.1 vs. 27.5%). Among vaccinated populations, respondents who lived in nuclear families were significantly associated with higher risk of psychological distress (AOR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.09-1.78), depression (AOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.11-1.98), anxiety (AOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.21-1.98), and fear (AOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.11-1.83) symptoms. Participants who lost family members, friends, or colleagues due to the COVID-19 pandemic had significantly higher risk of symptoms of psychological distress (AOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.02-1.79), anxiety (AOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.87), and PTSD (AOR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.24-2.19). On the other hand, unvaccinated populations who lived in the Dhaka division were significantly associated with an increased risk of depression (AOR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.40-2.52), anxiety (AOR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.15-2.47), stress (AOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.12-2.88), and insomnia (AOR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.20-2.94) symptoms. Except for PTSD and fear symptoms, unemployed participants had considerably higher rates of psychological distress, depression, anxiety, stress, and insomnia symptoms (e.g., psychological distress: AOR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.10-2.62; depression: AOR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.37-2.19).

Conclusions

This study recommends immunizing unvaccinated populations as soon as possible to prevent infection and boost mental health. Vulnerable people needed special care, health-related education, and psychological assistance.