Side Effects Reported by Jordanian Healthcare Workers Who Received COVID-19 Vaccines

Spike protein-related proteinopathies: A focus on the neurological side of spikeopathies

BACKGROUND

The spike protein (SP) is an outward-projecting transmembrane glycoprotein on viral surfaces. SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2), responsible for COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019), uses SP to infect cells that express angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) on their membrane. Remarkably, SP has the ability to cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB) into the brain and cause cerebral damage through various pathomechanisms. To combat the COVID-19 pandemic, novel gene-based products have been used worldwide to induce human body cells to produce SP to stimulate the immune system. This artificial SP also has a harmful effect on the human nervous system.

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative review.

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review presents the crucial role of SP in neurological complaints after SARS-CoV-2 infection, but also of SP derived from novel gene-based anti-SARS-CoV-2 products (ASP).

METHODS

Literature searches using broad terms such as "SARS-CoV-2", "spike protein", "COVID-19", "COVID-19 pandemic", "vaccines", "COVID-19 vaccines", "post-vaccination syndrome", "post-COVID-19 vaccination syndrome" and "proteinopathy" were performed using PubMed. Google Scholar was used to search for topic-specific full-text keywords.

CONCLUSIONS

The toxic properties of SP presented in this review provide a good explanation for many of the neurological symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 infection and after injection of SP-producing ASP. Both SP entities (from infection and injection) interfere, among others, with ACE2 and act on different cells, tissues and organs. Both SPs are able to cross the BBB and can trigger acute and chronic neurological complaints. Such SP-associated pathologies (spikeopathies) are further neurological proteinopathies with thrombogenic, neurotoxic, neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative potential for the human nervous system, particularly the central nervous system. The potential neurotoxicity of SP from ASP needs to be critically examined, as ASPs have been administered to millions of people worldwide.

Prevalence of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Healthcare Workers in Nigeria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Nigerian healthcare professionals.

Methods

An extensive language-unrestricted literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and the African Index Medicus to identify studies reporting hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers in Nigeria. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cross-sectional studies. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

Results

Of the 206 articles, 22 publications with 20,724 participants were included. The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was 75% (95% CI: 61%-88%, I2 = 99.69%, P < 0.001). Reasons for hesitancy, including concerns about side effects, lack of trust, and safety, were prevalent at 76% (CI: 0.57-0.94, I2 = 99.24%, P < 0.001), 55% (CI: 0.042-0.272, I2 = 97.42%, P < 0.001), and 68% (CI: 0.047-0.89, I2 = 98.59%, P < 0.001), respectively.

Conclusion

There was significant hesitancy among Nigerian healthcare workers towards COVID-19 vaccination; thus, strategies to increase vaccination acceptance among healthcare workers should be developed.

Comparison of T cells mediated immunity and side effects of mRNA vaccine and conventional COVID-19 vaccines administrated in Jordan

Various COVID-19 vaccines can affect the immune system. Discrepancies have been noted in immune system characteristics, such as T-lymphocyte levels, between vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals. This study investigates the variations in immune responses among the four administered COVID-19 vaccines, influencing factors, and clinical outcomes in Jordan. A total of 350 adults, who were at least two doses vaccinated, were interviewed and blood samples were collected for subsequent laboratory analyses. The study involved the quantification of T-cells specifically targeting anti-SARS CoV-2 using Flow cytometry analysis. BNT162b2 (Pfizer) recipients displayed significantly higher CD3+/CD4+ T-helper cell responses (90.84%, 87.46% - 94.22%) compared to non-Pfizer-BioNTech recipients {BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) and Sputnik V (Gamaleya Research Institute), then ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca)} (83.62%, 77.91% - 89.33%). The CD3+/CD8+ (T cytotoxic) level was notably elevated in non-Pfizer-BioNTech recipients {Sinopharm and Sputnik V then ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 AstraZeneca (73.94%, 69.38% - 78.49%) compared to BNT162b2 (Pfizer) recipients (58.26%, 53.07% - 63.44%). The CD3+ (T-cells) level showed no significant difference between BNT162b2 recipients (73.74%) and non-Pfizer-BioNTech recipients (77.83%), with both types generating T-cells. Comparing two doses of non-Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines with the third dose of BNT162b2 recipients (Pfizer), no difference in the type of immune reaction was observed, with non-Pfizer-BioNTech recipients still stimulating endogenous pathways like cell-mediated cytotoxic effects for cells. All COVID-19 vaccines administered in Jordan were effective, with respect to the total number of T cells. Non-Pfizer-BioNTech had higher in toxic T-cells and Pfizer-BioNTech was higher in helper T-cells that stimulate plasma cells to produce antibodies.

COVID-19 Vaccines Breakthrough Infections and Adverse Effects Reported by the Birzeit University Community in Palestine

Background

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines play an essential role in boosting immunity, preventing severe diseases, and alleviating the Covid-19 health crisis.

Objective

This study aimed to explore the type and severity of short-term adverse reactions associated with BNT162 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA 1273 (Moderna), and viral vector vaccines and to compare the incidence of post-vaccination Covid-19 infection among the Birzeit University community in Palestine.

Methods

This questionnaire-based retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted among individuals who were vaccinated with at least one dose of any COVID-19 vaccine offered in Palestine during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study included participants aged 18 years and older who were vaccinated with Pfizer, Moderna, Sputnik Light, or Sputnik v.

Results

A total of 558 participants who were administered COVID-19 vaccine were included in the study. Sputnik (239), Pfizer vaccine recipients (236), and Moderna vaccine recipients (83). Of the viral vector vaccine recipients, 57 (23.8%) had a post-vaccination infection, compared to 30 (12.7%) for Pfizer and seven (8.4%) for Moderna. Furthermore, the reported adverse effects in the viral victor group were higher than those in the Moderna and Pfizer groups (71.7, 66.3, and 61.9%, respectively). Chills, headache, fatigue, abdominal pain, and joint pain were significantly higher in the Viral Vector vaccine group than the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine. Vomiting, tiredness, and fatigue were significantly less likely to be complained of by Pfizer vaccine recipients compared to Moderna and Viral Vector vaccine recipients (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Breakthrough infections were associated with both viral vectors and mRNA; however, the mRNA vaccine had less reported post-vaccine infection. Furthermore, the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine group reported fewer commonly reported side effects (fever, chills, headache, fatigue, muscle pain, joint pain, nausea, and dizziness), followed by the Moderna and viral vector vaccines. Females and underweight participants experienced more adverse effects with both vaccines, and fewer common side effects were reported by all participants.

Short-term side effects of COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers: a multicenter study in Iran

Since the initiation of the COVID-19 vaccination effort, there has been widespread concern regarding vaccine efficacy and potential side effects. This study aimed to explore the short-term side effects of four available COVID-19 vaccines (Sputnik V, Sinopharm, Oxford-AstraZeneca, and Covaxin) among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Iran. The multicenter study involved 1575 HCWs, with the majority received Sputnik V (74.1%), followed by Covaxin (15.6%), Sinopharm (6.4%), and Oxford-AstraZeneca (3.8%). The prevalence of at least one side effect after the first and second dose COVID-19 vaccine was 84.6% and 72.9%, respectively. The common side effects (presented in > 50% of the study participants) after the first dose of the vaccine were injection site pain (61.7%), myalgia (51.8%), and muscle pain (50.9%). The most reported side effects after the second dose of the vaccine were injection site pain (26.8%), myalgia (15.8%), fever (10.3%), headache (9.9%), and chills (9.2%). In conclusion, according to the COVID-19 vaccine type, different side effects might occur following the first and second doses of vaccination. These findings assist in addressing the ongoing problems of vaccination hesitancy which has been driven by widespread worries about the vaccine safety profile.

Assessment of adverse events among healthcare workers following the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine in Tigray, Ethiopia

Apart from the inequality in vaccination, war zones and areas where communication is disrupted are affected by myths and misconceptions about COVID-19 vaccines, heightening vaccine hesitancy. Local data on adverse events of the vaccines and their mildness can increase confidence and acceptance of the vaccines in the respective population. In areas of conflict and communication blackouts, the perception of the vaccines by health workers is of paramount importance as public health recommendations may not reach the public. Therefore, the scientific evaluation of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination in such areas is invaluable. This cross-sectional, facility-based study was conducted using a structured, interviewer-administered questionnaire to assess the adverse events experienced by healthcare workers who received the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine. The sample was divided proportionally to the number of vaccinated healthcare workers for the different healthcare professions, and participants were then randomly selected from each profession. Prior to data collection, a pilot test was conducted with 5% of the sample size outside the selected hospital. The study was conducted using a structured questionnaire completed by an interviewer to assess adverse events in 442 healthcare workers who had received the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine between July 11 and 25, 2022. The study period was from August 15 to September 15, 2022. A significant number of healthcare workers [366 (83.3%); 95% CI 79.5%, 86.5%] experienced at least one adverse event. Nearly 90% of participants reported that the adverse events were mild to moderate. Pain at the injection site [307 (69.5%); 95% CI 65.0%, 73.6%] and headache [247 (55.9%); 95% CI 51.2%, 60.4%] were the most common local and systemic adverse events, respectively. Two HCWs experienced anaphylactic reaction. Younger age was significantly associated with the occurrence of adverse events. We deciphered that the adverse events reported by the study participants were not different from the typically occurring vaccine-related adverse reactions, and therefore concluded that post-vaccination reactions in healthcare workers were minor. Although vaccination in Tigray is currently stalled due to the siege, responsible stakeholders should develop a mechanism to track population-wide adverse events once the vaccines start to rollout.

Immunogenicity and adverse events of the COVID-19 vaccines in healthy and individuals with autoimmune diseases in an Iranian population

Introduction: Recent studies have proposed various COVID-19 vaccines to control the disease and protect susceptible individuals. However, immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in various populations are not well identified yet. Therefore, this study aimed to elucidate the efficacy and safety of the BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) vaccines in healthy subjects and patients with autoimmune diseases.Methods: Study population included 121 healthy subjects and 100 patients with autoimmune diseases. Immunization was performed based on the national vaccination protocols. Of the 221 volunteers, 201 subjects received Sinopharm and 20 cases were vaccinated with Oxford-AstraZeneca. During a 1-year follow-up, the immunogenicity was measured by ELISA before primary vaccination and 1 to 3 months after secondary immunization. Side effects were studied before entering the study and 1 week after the second dose.Results: Vaccination had a positive impact on the induction of immunogenic response (p < .0001). The rates of seropositive vaccine responses were 80% and 75% in subjects vaccinated with the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca, respectively. The neutralizing antibody values were significantly higher in subjects with autoimmune diseases than those without autoimmunity (p < .05). The rate of adverse events were 38% and 42% in subjects vaccinated with the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca, respectively. The rates of immunogenic responses induced with the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca were, respectively, 76% and 81.5% in seropositive subjects, while they were 63.8% and 79.1% in seronegative subjects vaccinated with the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca, respectively. Individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 showed a significant reduction in the value of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies compared with seronegative subjects (p < .01-.05). Seropositive individuals vaccinated with the Sinopharm had significantly higher the percentages of vaccine-related adverse events than seronegative persons (p < .05). There was no significant difference between seronegative and seropositive individuals vaccinated with the Oxford-AstraZeneca.Conclusion: Our findings revealed that the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines are effective in the production of neutralizing antibodies in healthy subjects and patients with autoimmune disorders undergoing immunosuppressive therapies without considerable reactogenicity.

Side Effects Reported by Moroccan Medical Students Who Received COVID-19 Vaccines

BACKGROUND

Low confidence in the safety of COVID-19 vaccines was found to be a key promoter of vaccine reluctance especially among youth. Furthermore, young adults are an important demographic for building herd immunity through vaccination. As a result, their reactions to getting COVID-19 vaccines are crucial in our fight against SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVE

The overall goal of this study was to look into the shortterm side effects experienced by Moroccan medical and pharmacy students after receiving COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey-based study to assess the COVID-19 vaccines' short-term AEFIs among Moroccan medical and pharmacy students. The validated questionnaire was delivered in a digital form to explore the side effects (SE) they encountered after the first or the second dose of one of three vaccines namely: AstraZeneca Vaxzevria, PfizerBioNTeck, and SinoPharm vaccines.

RESULTS

There were 510 students in total who took part. After the first and second doses, approximately 72 percent and 78 percent of subjects, respectively, reported no SE. The remainder had localized injection site side effects (26%). Fatigue (21%), fever (19%), headache (17%), and myalgia (16%) were the most common systemic adverse effects after the first dose. There were no serious SEs reported.

CONCLUSION

The majority of the reported AEFIs in our data were mild to moderate in intensity and lasted only one or two days. COVID-19 vaccinations are highly likely safe for young adults, according to the findings of this study.

The association between influenza vaccination and the perception of COVID-19 as well as COVID-19 vaccination behavior among community residents in Anhui province, China

Influenza is a significant public health threat associated with high morbidity and mortality globally. This study investigated the influenza vaccination rate (IVR) among community residents in Anhui province, China, and explored the association between participants' influenza vaccination and their key sociodemographic characteristics, perception of COVID-19 as well as COVID-19 vaccination behavior. We found that the IVR among respondents in Anhui province was 27.85% in 2020. Regression analyses revealed that males (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.01 ~ 1.96), residents with above middle school education (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.04 ~ 3.39), considered themselves likely to be infected with COVID-19 (OR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.04 ~ 2.24), had received the COVID-19 vaccine (OR = 9.85, 95% CI: 3.49 ~ 27.78), did not plan to receive COVID-19 vaccine in the future (OR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.17 ~ 2.47), and had no adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.04 ~ 2.27) were associated with a higher IVR. The acceptance of influenza vaccination was mainly associated with respondents' gender, education, perception of COVID-19, history of COVID-19 vaccination in city and countryside community residents in Anhui province.

Side effects of COVID-19 vaccines in the middle eastern population

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused severe worldwide health concerns since its first description as the SARS-COV-2 virus in December 2019. The wide dissemination of this virus, together with the lack of treatment, prompted vaccine development within a short period of time to elicit a protective immunity against COVID-19. Due to their rapid development, potential subsequent side effects of COVID-19 vaccines were overlooked, which might lead to many health concerns. This is especially true for patients at a greater risk of harm from COVID-19, such as pregnant women, children, and patients with pre-existing chronic diseases. In this review, we provide a summary of common to rare side effects of administrated COVID-19 vaccines in a Middle Eastern population. We have found that the distinction between side effects from COVID-19 vaccines in terms of frequency and severity is attributed to the differences in study populations, gender, and age. Pain at the injection site, fever, headache, fatigue, and muscle pain were the most common reported side effects. Vaccinated subjects with previous COVID-19 infection exhibited an equivalent neutralizing response after just one dose compared to two doses of vaccine. Consequently, individuals who experienced more side effects had significantly higher antibody levels. This indicates that having better immunity correlates with higher antibody levels, leading to a higher frequency of vaccine side effects. Individuals with underlying comorbidities, particularly having known allergies and with illnesses such as diabetes and cancer, might be more prone to post-vaccination side effects. Studies of a high-risk population in Middle Eastern countries are limited. Future studies should be considered to determine long-term side effects, side effects after booster doses, and side effect differences in cases of heterologous and homologous vaccination for better understanding and proper handling of high-risk populations and patients who experience these side effects.

Association Between Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Effects and Diabetes Mellitus: A Prospective Multicenter Study

Introduction The epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) triggered the contagion of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which killed many individuals globally. The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine was the first messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA)-based vaccine that boosted immunity against various adverse reactions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency of Pfizer vaccine side effects among participants with and without diabetes mellitus (DM). Methods This multicenter study was cross-sectional and was performed using a non-probability consecutive sampling technique. The study duration was six months, from October 1, 2022, to March 31, 2023. A total of 750 participants who received both doses of the Pfizer vaccine were included in the study. Demographic details such as gender, age, comorbidities, preceding COVID-19 infection, and the occurrence of any local and systemic side effects of the first and second doses of vaccine were recorded. The association between local and general side effects and the presence of DM was assessed using the chi-square test. Results Of the 750 participants included in the study, 289 (77.1%) were males with diabetes mellitus (DM), and 217 (57.9%) were non-diabetic participants; however, 86 (22.9%) females had DM, and 158 (42.1%) were non-diabetic; their mean ages were 48.23 ± 16.22 and 37.56 ± 12.15 years, respectively. The most commonly occurring side effects after receiving the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine were: injection site burning in 251 (66.9%) diabetic and 254 (67.7%) non-diabetic participants. Likewise, the frequency of side effects of the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine showed that the most commonly reported side effects were: muscle pain, found in 240 (64.0%) diabetic patients and 194 (51.7%) non-diabetics, with a statistically significant association (p =0.001). Conclusion This study concluded that participants with DM had local and general adverse effects considerably more frequently than those without DM. The most frequently observed adverse effects in both diabetic and non-diabetic participants were injection site burning, rashes, muscle pain, and fever after receiving both doses of the Pfizer vaccine. Moreover, most of the side effects were minor.

Adverse Effects Reported and Insights Following Sinopharm COVID-19 Vaccination

Vaccines are promising strategies for controlling COVID-19; however, COVID-19 vaccine side effects play a central role in public confidence in the vaccine and its uptake process. This study aimed to provide evidence on the post-vaccination early side effects of the BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) vaccine. This cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted between November 2021 and January 2022 among recipients of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine, using a questionnaire-based survey. Our final sample consisted of 657 participants, including 392 women. Among the study cases, only 103 (15.7%) participants received one dose of vaccine, and the rest received both doses (N = 554, 84.3%). Systemic symptoms (first dose: N = 187, both doses: N = 128) were the most commonly reported events after vaccination, and among them, injection site pain (first dose: 19.3%, both doses: 12.9%) was the most prevalent adverse effect. All reporting events were mild and resolved in less than 3 days without hospitalization. Among the participants, females and young people aged 35-65 were more prone to manifest side effects (N = 169, 53.3%) after the vaccine injection. Furthermore, our results revealed that the recipients who were suffering from underlying diseases, including diabetes, renal disorder, and respiratory illness, reported fewer adverse responses after vaccination in comparison with healthy individuals. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may lead to some adverse reactions in recipients. However, the frequency of post-vaccination early side effects differed in people, but all responses were slight and temporary.

Menstrual disturbances following COVID-19 vaccination: A probable puzzle about the role of endocrine and immune pathways

Menstruation is a monthly shedding of the uterine wall, presented by menstrual bleeding in women of reproductive age. Menstruation is regulated by fluctuation of estrogen and progesterone, as well as other endocrine and immune pathways. Many women experienced menstrual disturbances after vaccination against the novel coronavirus in the last two years. Vaccine-induced menstrual disturbances have led to discomfort and concern among reproductive-age women, such that some decided not to receive the subsequent doses of the vaccine. Although many vaccinated women report these menstrual disturbances, the mechanism is still poorly understood. This review article discusses the endocrine and immune changes following COVID-19 vaccination and the possible mechanisms of vaccine-related menstrual disturbances.

COVID-19 Vaccine Impacts in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background and purpose Vaccinations provide disease protection through a variety of mechanisms; however, vaccines can occasionally cause adverse effects. Therefore, the objective of this investigation was to assess the short- and long-term adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccinations in Saudi Arabia. Methods In Saudi Arabia, between October 2021 and October 2022, a cross-sectional study was conducted. A validated Arabic and English dual-language online questionnaire were utilized to collect data. Results This investigation included 492 participants who were all immunized against the COVID-19 virus. There were 152 (30.9%) male participants and 340 (69.1%) female participants, with a mean age of 35±10.7 years. About 72.2% of study participants received three doses of vaccine, with 75.6% receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, 22.2% receiving the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, and 2.2% receiving the Moderna vaccine. Fever was observed in 66.3% (326/492) of the participants following vaccination, headache in 57.3% (282/492) of the participants, fatigue in 54.7% (269/492) of the participants, and influenza-like symptoms in 51% (251/492) of the participants. Younger participants (18-29 years old) exhibited influenza-like symptoms and fever after vaccination in comparison to older participants (P=0.03, P=0.02, respectively). In contrast, older participants reported more immobilization of the hands or legs, difficulty breathing, and chest pain than younger participants (P=0.04, P=0.02, and P=0.03, respectively). There was a significant correlation between gender and injection-site pain, headache, lethargy or convulsions, and flu-like symptoms. In addition, the participants' clinical history of chronic diseases was significantly associated with the occurrence of post-vaccination adverse effects. Conclusion The majority of the documented adverse reactions are of a temporary and minimal nature. Additional research is required to assess the enduring adverse reactions and efficacy of the vaccines in preventing SARS-CoV-2 reoccurrence.

Common Side Effects of Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine: An Experience From Pakistan

Introduction The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) epidemic spread quickly. Vaccines are now being distributed to stop the infectious spread and halt fatalities. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was the first mRNA-based vaccine introduced to boost immunity against COVID-19; however, it could lead to various adverse reactions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of Pfizer vaccine side effects among participants. Methods This was a multicenter cross-sectional study that was performed using a non-probability sampling method. The study period was about six months from March 1, 2022, to August 31, 2022. A total of 1000 participants who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine met the inclusion criteria. Demographic details of participants, for example, gender, age, comorbidities, Pfizer vaccine with both doses along with booster dose, previous exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, and the incidence of any local and systemic side effects following the first and second doses of vaccine, were reported.  Results The study findings showed that out of 1000 participants, 644 (64.4%) were males and 356 (35.6%) were females; their mean age was 43.06±14.98 years. Among them, 280 (28.0%) had hypertension and 356 (35.6%) had diabetes. Following the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine, burning at the injection site and fever were the most commonly reported side effects in 704 (70.4%) and 700 (70.0%) participants, respectively. Following the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine, muscle pain was the most commonly reported side effect in 628 (62.8%) participants. Conclusion This study concluded that the most frequent adverse effects of the Pfizer vaccine were burning at the injection site, fever, pain at the injection site, muscle pain, swelling at the injection site, and joint pain. Moreover, the first dose was associated with more side effects than the second dose.

Prevalence and risk factors of adverse effects after the first COVID-19 booster dose: evidence from Greece

Background

In general, COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, but minor adverse effects are common. However, adverse effects have not been measured in several countries including Greece.

Objective

To estimate the prevalence of adverse effects after the first COVID-19 booster dose, and to identify possible risk factors.

Material and methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study with a convenience sample in Greece during November 2022. We measured several adverse effects after the booster dose, such as fatigue, headaches, fever, chills, nausea, etc. We considered gender, age, chronic disease, self-assessment of health status, COVID-19 diagnóstico, and self-assessment of COVID-19 course as possible predictors of adverse effects.

Results

In our sample, 96% developed at least one adverse effect. Half of the participants (50.2%) developed one to five adverse effects, 35.9% developed six to ten adverse effects, and 9.5% developed 11 to 16 adverse effects. Mean number of adverse effects was 5.5. The most frequent adverse effects were pain at the injection site (84.3%), fatigue (70.8%), muscle pain (61%), swelling at the injection site (55.2%), headache (49.8%), fever (42.9%), and chills (41%). Females developed more adverse effects than males (p < 0.001). The prevalence of adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines was statistically significant and positively associated with the severity of COVID-19 among COVID-recovered individuals (p < 0.05). Moreover, younger age was associated with increased adverse effects (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Almost all participants in our study developed minor adverse effects after the booster dose. Female gender, COVID-19 patients with worse clinical course, and younger individuals experienced more often adverse effects.

Headache following vaccination against COVID-19 among healthcare workers with a history of COVID-19 infection: a cross-sectional study in Iran with a meta-analytic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

There is evidence of the occurrence of headache after vaccination against COVID-19. However, only a few studies have examined the headache characteristics and related determinants, especially among healthcare workers with a history of COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

We evaluated the incidence of headaches after injection of different types of COVID-19 vaccine to determine factors relating to the incidence of headache after vaccination among the Iranian healthcare workers who had previously contracted COVID-19. A group of 334 healthcare workers with a history of COVID-19 infection were included and vaccinated (at least one month after recovery without any COVID-19 related symptoms) with different COVID-19 vaccines. The baseline information, headache characteristics and vaccine specifications were recorded.

RESULTS

Overall, 39.2% reported experiencing a post-vaccination headache. Of those with a previous history of headache, 51.1% reported migraine-type, 27.4% tension-type and 21.5% other types. The mean time between vaccination and headache appearance was 26.78 ± 6.93 h, with the headache appearing less than 24 h after vaccination in most patients (83.2%). The headaches reached its peak within 8.62 ± 2.41 h. Most patients reported a compression-type headache. The prevalence of post-vaccination headaches was significantly different according to the type of vaccine used. The highest rates were reported for AstraZeneca, followed by Sputnik V. In regression analysis, the vaccine brand, female gender and initial COVID-19 severity were the main determinants for predicting post-vaccination headache.

CONCLUSION

Participants commonly experienced a headache following vaccination against COVID-19. Our study results indicated that this was slightly more common in females and in those with a history of severe COVID-19 infection.

COVID-19, post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS, "long COVID") and post-COVID-19 vaccination syndrome (PCVS, "post-COVIDvac-syndrome"): Similarities and differences

Worldwide there have been over 760 million confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, and over 13 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered as of April 2023, according to the World Health Organization. An infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can lead to an acute disease, i.e. COVID-19, but also to a post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS, "long COVID"). Currently, the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines are increasingly being noted and studied. Here, we summarise the currently available indications and discuss our conclusions that (i) these side effects have specific similarities and differences to acute COVID-19 and PACS, that (ii) a new term should be used to refer to these side effects (post-COVID-19 vaccination syndrome, PCVS, colloquially "post-COVIDvac-syndrome"), and that (iii) there is a need to distinguish between acute COVID-19 vaccination syndrome (ACVS) and post-acute COVID-19 vaccination syndrome (PACVS) - in analogy to acute COVID-19 and PACS ("long COVID"). Moreover, we address mixed forms of disease caused by natural SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination. We explain why it is important for medical diagnosis, care and research to use the new terms (PCVS, ACVS and PACVS) in order to avoid confusion and misinterpretation of the underlying causes of disease and to enable optimal medical therapy. We do not recommend to use the term "Post-Vac-Syndrome" as it is imprecise. The article also serves to address the current problem of "medical gaslighting" in relation to PACS and PCVS by raising awareness among the medical professionals and supplying appropriate terminology for disease.

Comparison of AstraZeneca and sinopharm vaccines as boosters in protection against COVID-19 infection

BACKGROUND

As the global number of confirmed cases rises past 640 million, vaccination remains the most effective measure in controlling COVID-19. Studies have shown that two doses of vaccination can significantly reduce hospitalization and mortality rates among patients, but the effectiveness of booster doses is also important. We aimed to evaluate the role played by the type of the 3rd dose of vaccination by comparing the safety and efficacy of two common vaccination histories differing only in the 3rd received dose.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study on patients with respiratory symptoms suspected of having SARS-CoV-2 infection using Real-time PCR. We also collected information on the age, gender, and type of vaccine received for the third dose.

RESULTS

Out of 346 cases with respiratory symptoms, 120 cases tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and had received two doses of Sinopharm and a different booster dose of either AZD1222 (AstraZeneca) or BIBP (Sinopharm). Among these 120 patients, vaccination with AZD1222 as a booster dose resulted in fewer symptoms compared to those vaccinated with three doses of BIBP.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that booster doses can help reduce hospitalization and the severity of infection, and it appears that a combination of different vaccines may be effective against severe COVID-19 infection.

Patterns of diverse and changing sentiments towards COVID-19 vaccines: a sentiment analysis study integrating 11 million tweets and surveillance data across over 180 countries

OBJECTIVES

Vaccines are crucial components of pandemic responses. Over 12 billion coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines were administered at the time of writing. However, public perceptions of vaccines have been complex. We integrated social media and surveillance data to unravel the evolving perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Applying human-in-the-loop deep learning models, we analyzed sentiments towards COVID-19 vaccines in 11 211 672 tweets of 2 203 681 users from 2020 to 2022. The diverse sentiment patterns were juxtaposed against user demographics, public health surveillance data of over 180 countries, and worldwide event timelines. A subanalysis was performed targeting the subpopulation of pregnant people. Additional feature analyses based on user-generated content suggested possible sources of vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

Our trained deep learning model demonstrated performances comparable to educated humans, yielding an accuracy of 0.92 in sentiment analysis against our manually curated dataset. Albeit fluctuations, sentiments were found more positive over time, followed by a subsequence upswing in population-level vaccine uptake. Distinguishable patterns were revealed among subgroups stratified by demographic variables. Encouraging news or events were detected surrounding positive sentiments crests. Sentiments in pregnancy-related tweets demonstrated a lagged pattern compared with the general population, with delayed vaccine uptake trends. Feature analysis detected hesitancies stemmed from clinical trial logics, risks and complications, and urgency of scientific evidence.

DISCUSSION

Integrating social media and public health surveillance data, we associated the sentiments at individual level with observed populational-level vaccination patterns. By unraveling the distinctive patterns across subpopulations, the findings provided evidence-based strategies for improving vaccine promotion during pandemics.

Intention to take COVID-19 vaccine and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public health facilities in Bahir Dar city, Northwest Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Pregnant mothers are a risky population group for COVID-19 and pregnant mothers with COVID-19 are at increased risk of hospitalization, intensive-care unit admission, invasive ventilation support, and maternal mortality. Vaccination is an essential tool in stopping the effect of the pandemic on maternal and child health. However, there are only limited studies in Ethiopia on the intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine among pregnant women. Thus, this study aimed to assess intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine and associated factors among pregnant women in Bahir Dar city, Northwest Ethiopia.

METHODS

Facility based cross-sectional study was conducted among 590 pregnant women from 23 May to 07 July 2022. The study participants were selected using a systematic sampling technique. Interviewer administrative questionnaire with epicollect5 application was used to collect the data. Both bi-variable and multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was performed. Statistical significance was defined at a 95% CI with a p-value < 0.05.

RESULT

Overall, 19.8% (95% CI: 16.60-23.06%) of pregnant women intend to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Being urban residence (AOR = 3.40, 95% CI: 1.71-6.78), third trimester of gestational age (AOR = 3.11, 95% CI: 1.61-6.03), multipara (AOR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.33-3.97), knowledge of COVID-19 vaccine (AOR = 2.33, 95% CI: 1.44-3.77) and having good attitude towards COVID-19 vaccine (AOR = 2.68, 95% CI: 1.65-4.33) were significantly associated with intention to take COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the pregnant women's intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine in this study area was very low. It was significantly associated with residency, gestational age, parity, knowledge, and attitude toward the vaccine. Therefore, strengthening interventions that improve knowledge and attitude about the COVID-19 vaccine, predominantly among those primipara mothers and mothers from rural residences, may raise the intention to take it.

Side effects of Sputnik V, Oxford-AstraZeneca, Sinopharm, and Covaxin and their associations with other variables among healthcare workers of a tertiary hospital in Iran

BACKGROUND

Misinformation about the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccines' side effects (SEs) has led to concerns about and mistrust of vaccine safety. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccines' SEs.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional survey-based study on the healthcare workers (HCWs) of a tertiary hospital in Iran, the SEs of Sputnik V, Oxford-AstraZeneca, Sinopharm, and Covaxin were evaluated through a face-to-face interview by a researcher-made questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 368 HCWs received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The prevalence of people with at least one SE was higher among those who received the Oxford-AstraZeneca (95.8 %) and Sputnik V (92.1 %) vaccines than those who received Covaxin (70.5 %) or Sinopharm (66.7 %). Following the first and second doses, injection site pain (50.3 % and 58.2 %), body/muscle pain (53.5 % and 39.4 %), fever (54.5 % and 32.9 %), headache (41.3 % and 36.5 %), and fatigue (44.4 % and 32.4 %) were the most common SEs. Overall, SEs were often initiated within 12 h and subsided within 72 h of vaccination. The prevalence of SEs after the first dose of Sputnik V was higher among those aged ≤ 31 years (93.3 %) than those aged > 31 years (80.5 %). In the Sputnik V group, the number of SEs experienced after the first dose was higher in women with underlying diseases than those without such diseases. Furthermore, the body mass index of participants with SEs was lower than that of participants without SEs.

CONCLUSION

Compared to Sinopharm or Covaxin, the Sputnik V and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines were associated with a higher prevalence of SEs, a greater number of SEs per individual, and more severe SEs.

A 1-year analysis of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination in Lebanon: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Since the deployment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, skepticism about the safety, incidence, and severity of Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) was a concern. The study has two main objectives. First, to analyze AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech, AstraZeneca, Sputnik, and Sinopharm) during the vaccination campaign in Lebanon and correlate them with age and gender. Second, to correlate Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca vaccines' AEFI with the dose administered.

METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out between February 14th, 2021, and February 14th, 2022. AEFI case reports received to the Lebanese Pharmacovigilance (PV) Program were cleaned, validated, and analyzed using SPSS software.

RESULTS

A total of 6808 AEFI case reports were received to the Lebanese PV Program during the period of this study. Case reports were mostly received from females (60.7%) and from vaccine recipients aged 18-44 years. As for the vaccine type, AEFIs occurred more frequently with the AstraZeneca vaccine compared to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The latter had AEFIs mainly following dose 2, whereas AEFIs with the AstraZeneca vaccine were more frequently reported after dose 1, with general body pain being the most reported systemic AEFI with PZ (34.6%), while fatigue was the most reported AEFI with AZ vaccine (56.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The AEFI reported with COVID-19 vaccines in Lebanon were aligned with those reported worldwide. The incidence of rare serious AEFIs should not discourage the public from getting vaccinated. Further studies are needed to evaluate their long-term potential risk.

Prevalence of common adverse events experienced following COVID-19 vaccination and its associated factors in Ghana: Cross-sectional study design

Background and Aims

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (COVID-19) pandemic devasted the general life of people and various human activities across the globe, and Ghana is of no exception. This led to development of vaccines within record time to combat morbidity and mortality associated with the virus. In Ghana, COVID-19 vaccines were introduced in addition to existing COVID-19 protocols. However, the vaccines have adverse events among those who received them. In this study, we determined the prevalence of some common adverse events of the COVID-19 vaccines and its associated sociodemographic factors in Ghana.

Methods

An online snowball cross-sectional survey was conducted between April and June 2021 among 240 people who had taken at least one dose of any of the COVID-19 vaccines approved in Ghana. The penalized binary logistic regression model was used to assess the factors associated with experience of at least one adverse event and the experience of number of adverse events using Stata version 16.

Results

Among the 240 participants, 88.2% had experienced at least one adverse event. The most common adverse event after the first dose was pain at injection site (65.8%), headache (57.5%), tiredness (55.8%), fever (51.7%), chills (39.6%), and muscle pains (38.3%). Experience of adverse events was 16 times higher among those who took their vaccines in Ghana (adjusted odd ratio [AOR]: 16.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.98-132.56, p = 0.009), 94% less among those who took AstraZeneca (India) compared to AstraZeneca (Oxford) (AOR: 0.06, 95% CI: 0.01-0.37, p = 0.002) and 86% less among 40-49 years compared with less than 30 years old (AOR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.03-0.58, p = 0.007).

Conclusion

Pain at the injection site, headache, tiredness, fever, chills, and muscle pains were the most frequently reported adverse events. The study identified country of vaccination, country of origin of AstraZeneca vaccine and age to be associated with adverse events of vaccination.

Side Effects Comparison of Coronavirus Vaccines Among Healthcare Workers in Shoushtar, Iran

Objective

Vaccination is one of the effective ways to fight against COVID-19 disease. Various vaccines have been designed during the coronavirus pandemic. Each of the used vaccines has beneficial effects as well as side effects. Healthcare workers were among the first vaccinated persons against COVID-19 in different countries. The current study aims to compare the side effects of AstraZeneca, Sinopharm, Bharat, and Sputnik V on healthcare workers in Iran.

Methods

This descriptive study was conducted from July 2021 to January 2022 on 1639 healthcare workers who received the COVID-19 vaccines. Data were collected using a checklist that contained questions related to systemic, local, and severe side effects of the vaccine. The collected data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-square, and trend chi-square. P < .05 was regarded as a significant statistical difference.

Results

The most commonly injected vaccines were Sinopharm (41.80%), Sputnik V (36.65%), AstraZeneca (17.75%), and Bharat (3.80%), respectively. At least 37.5% of participants reported one complication. The most common side effects after 72 hours of the first and second doses were as follows: injection site pain, fatigue, fever, myalgia, headache, and chill. Overall complication rates were reported as follows: AstraZeneca (91.4%), Sputnik V (65.9%), Sinopharm (56.8%), and Bharat (98.4%). Bharat showed the highest overall side effects, while Sinopharm had the lowest overall side effects. Also, our results indicated that individuals with a previous history of positive COVID-19 infection had a higher rate of overall complications.

Conclusions

The majority of participants did not show life-threatening side effects after the injection of 1 of the 4 studied vaccines. Since it was well accepted and tolerable by the participants, it can be used widely and safely against SARS-CoV-2.

Short-term Side Effects of mRNA-based COVID-19 Vaccine Among Jordanian Population; a Cross-sectional Study

Introduction

One type of the developed COVID-19 vaccines that received emergency permission and was approved by the food and drug administration (FDA) is the mRNA-based vaccine. The aim of this study is to gather information on the Jordanian population's experience with the vaccine's side effects.

Methods

The study objectives were addressed through a cross-sectional study, which collected information regarding the short-term side effects experienced by the vaccinated individuals within one month following the injection of an mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine. Data collection was carried out in August 2021. Participants were invited to take part in a self-administered web-based survey created using Google Forms.

Results

Among the study's participants (n= 533), about 56% experienced side effects after the first dose of the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine. The most commonly reported side effects after the first dose were sore arm at the injection site (91.6%), and fatigue (83.06%). The female gender was significantly associated with experiencing fatigue, discomfort, chills, and hair loss. Being over 30 years old was significantly associated with experiencing cough. Being a smoker was significantly associated with experiencing shortness of breath and gastrointestinal symptoms.

Conclusion

The mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine side effects were common, yet, mild, local, and self-limited. The local pain at the injection site was the most commonly reported side effect. Hopefully, the study's findings will aid in lowering resistance to vaccination.

Long-term adverse events of three COVID-19 vaccines as reported by vaccinated physicians and dentists, a study from Jordan and Saudi Arabia

Assessment of safety of COVID-19 vaccines is an ongoing process. This study aims to explore long-term adverse events reported by physicians and dentists who received at least two COVID-19 vaccine doses. A group of physicians and dentists were invited to complete a validated questionnaire that was composed of items on: socio-demographics, medical history, administered vaccines, and long-term adverse events (LTAE). Data of a total of 498 practitioners were included. Age ranged from 22 to 71 years (mean age= 35.75 ± 11.74) with a female majority (N = 348, 69.9%). The most frequently administered vaccines were Pfizer-BioNtech, Sinopharm and AstraZeneca vaccines. A total of 80 (16.0%) participants reported LTAEs which were mainly fatigue, menstrual disturbances, myalgia, arthralgia, dizziness, and headache (N = 32, 15, 8, 6, 4, and 4, respectively). There was no statistically significant association between LTAEs and: age, gender, or medical history (P > .05). The collective symptoms of fatigue, myalgia, arthralgia, dizziness, and headache were significantly associated with Sinopharm vaccine (P = .04). This was further confirmed by general linear multivariate model analysis. Less than 20% of COVID-19 vaccine recipients may complain of LTAEs that are mostly fatigue-related. It seems that factors such as age, gender, and medical status play a negligible role in development of these AEs. On the other hand, Sinopharm vaccine showed the highest significant association with these AEs followed by AstraZeneca vaccine.

Self-Reported safety of the BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) COVID-19 vaccine among Iranian people with multiple sclerosis

To affirm the short-term safety of the BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) COVID-19 vaccine among people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), 517 vaccinated and 174 unvaccinated pwMS were interviewed. 16.2% of the vaccinated pwMS reported at least one neurological symptom in their respective vaccine-related at-risk periods (ARP) - a period from the first dose until two weeks after the second dose of the vaccine. In a multivariable logistic regression model, the presence of comorbidities (P = 0.01), use of natalizumab (P = 0.03), and experiencing post-vaccination myalgia (P < 0.01) predicted the development of post-vaccination neurological symptoms. One MS relapse, one COVID-19 contraction, and one ulcerative colitis flare after the first dose, and four MS relapses after the second dose of the vaccine were the only reported serious adverse events during the ARPs. To show if the vaccine provoked MS relapses, we compared the relapse rate of vaccinated pwMS in the vaccine-related ARP with the annualized relapse rate of unvaccinated pwMS in the prior year-a measure of baseline MS relapsing activity in the respective time-using a multivariable Poisson regression model accounting for possible confounders, which failed to show any statistically significant increase (P = 0.78). Hence, subject to replication-as the vaccinated and unvaccinated pwMS differed in baseline characteristics-the BBIBP-CorV vaccine does not seem to affect short-term MS activity. Furthermore, as 83.33% of the unvaccinated pwMS reported fear of possible adverse events to be the reason of their vaccination hesitancy, provision of evidence-based consultations to pwMS is encouraged. Limitations of our study briefly included lack of data for self-controlled analysis of relapse rates, possible presence of recall bias, and lack of on-site validations regarding the clinical outcomes due to the remote nature.

Side effects of COVID-19 vaccines and perceptions about COVID-19 and its vaccines in Bangladesh: A Cross-sectional study

•

Significant COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy exists globally, mainly due to safety concerns.

•

This study analyzed the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines in Bangladesh.

•

Less than half of those who received a COVID-19 vaccine experienced side effects.

•

The side effects were mild and regular and lasted 1–3 days only.

•

The findings demonstrate the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines.

Objective

Results

Conclusion

Prevalence of side-effects associated with the booster dose of Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) of COVID-19 Vaccine among vaccinated adults in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia

Background

Reports of local and systemic side-effects of COVID-19 vaccination may play an important role in public confidence in the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study among adults living in Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. A link to the survey was distributed to community members via WhatsApp, SMS, or e-mail. Participants' general and demographic information was also collected, as well as information about any local and systemic side-effects reported following vaccination.

Results

A total of 370/390 (94.87%) of respondents reported one or more side-effects. Pain or redness at the site of injection (88.92%), fatigue (43.78%), body pain fever (37.84%), and headache (15.95%) were the most commonly reported side-effects. Moreover, 2.43% of the participants reported side-effects needed to see a physician; only four were admitted to the hospital. The non-healthcare respondents (n=273 (97.15%), OR (95% CI) = 5.22 (2.02, 13.48, P <0.001) were more likely to report side-effects compared to the healthcare related respondents (n=36 (85.71%), OR (95% CI) = 0.25 (0.10, 0.70), P=0.013).

Conclusion

According to this study, the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine was safe when given to Saudi Arabian adults. All reported side-effects were mild to moderate. The findings will likely persuade vaccine-hesitant individuals and pessimists to accept booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine.

Short-term side effects of COVID-19 vaccines: A cross-sectional study in Jordan

The rapid manufacturing of vaccines has increased hesitancy toward receiving the COVID-19 vaccines. Clarifying what to expect after vaccination and revealing the possible side effects will lower hesitancy toward receiving the COVID-19 vaccine and increase public awareness. This descriptive cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted in Jordan (August 2021) to collect data on the short-term side effects following the COVID-19 vaccines. An extensive literature review was conducted by the research team to assist in developing the first draft of the survey. The survey was tested for face and content validity and piloted test to improve readability and clarity. The survey was organized into two sections (demographics and perceived COVID-19 vaccines' side effects). Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). A total of 1,044 participants were enrolled in the study. The most received vaccine among the participants was Pfizer-BioNTech (51.1%). The most frequently reported side effects were sore arm at the injection site (84.65%), fatigue (84.48%), discomfort (65.43%), muscles/joint pain (61.38%), drowsiness (58.73%), and headache (58.38%). More side effects were significantly associated with being older (p = 0.046), having an allergy (p = 0.024) or rheumatoid arthritis (p = 0.023), and participants who take NSAIDs regularly (p = 0.029). Short-term side effects of COVID-19 vaccines seem to be mostly local or transient in nature. Older age and certain comorbidities may increase susceptibility to side effects.

Evaluation and comparison of post-vaccination adverse effects among Janssen and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccinated adult individuals in Debre Tabor Town: A cross- sectional survey in Northwest Ethiopia

COVID 19 vaccination has recently been launched globally to halt the pandemic. But COVID 19 vaccines have some adverse effects that raise concerns in the global community. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the adverse effects of Janssen and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccinated adults. A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted from March 15 to 30, 2022 among 421 (211 Janssen and 210 Astra Zeneca vaccinated) adults recruited by a convenience sampling technique in Debre Tabor Town, Northwest Ethiopia. Data were collected via face-to-face interviews and by reviewing the immunization card. Chi-square test, independent t-test, and Mann-Whitney test were used to compare the adverse symptoms and related parameters between the two vaccines. A linear regression model was also used to identify predictors of the number of post-vaccination symptoms. The majority (75.8%) of participants reported at least one side effect after vaccination. Adverse symptoms had a significantly greater occurrence (p < .05) among recipients of the AstraZeneca vaccine (84.8%) than receivers of the Janssen vaccine (66.8%). The main adverse symptoms were injection site pain, fever, fatigue, arthralgia, and myalgia in both vaccines. Significant variations (p < .05) between the receipts of the two vaccines were shown in injection site pain, fever, and arthralgia. The total number of symptoms was significantly higher (p < .05) in participants with female sex, younger age, BMI <25 kg/m2, no prior COVID 19, and those who had received AstraZeneca vaccine. Thus, the authors advise that they should receive vaccines with no hesitation, while continuous tracking of vaccine safety is kept in place.

A retrospective evaluation of side-effects associated with the booster dose of Pfizer-BioNTech/BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine among females in Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUNDS

The development of several types of vaccines to avert COVID-19 has taken place. Despite several reports of undesirable reactions noted post-COVID-19 vaccine administration, later remains one of the best prevention and management tools in fighting the spread of the virus and its variants and reducing the harshness of this viral attack. The purpose of the current paper was to explore the side-effects experienced by the females in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia directly after receiving the booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech/BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine.

METHODS

A descriptive cross-sectional study among adults living in the East-ern Province, Saudi Arabia was applied. A survey link was, distributed through WhatsApp, SMS, or e-mail to community members. Respondent's demographic information was acquired, as well as information about any local and systemic side-effects reported following booster dose of BioNTech/BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine.

RESULTS

A total of 72.36% (432/597) of the respondents who participated in this study reported at least one side-effect. Pain and redness at the injection site (75.93%), myalgia (71.99%), headache (53.24%), fever (33.56%), and fatigue (43.78%) were the highest frequently stated side-effects. Furthermore, 9.25% of the respondents had to see a physician due to side effects, plus merely four participants were admitted to the hospital. The respondents working in the non-healthcare-related sector had a 1.677-fold more possibility of side effects in comparison with the other respondents (adjusted odds ratio = 1.677; 95% CI = 1.363, 2.064).

CONCLUSIONS

All reported side-effects were mild to moderate. These findings might persuade pessimists and refusers to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Myalgia and pain or redness at the site of injection were the most common reported side-effects in our study.

Assessment of COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers in Iraq; adverse effects and hesitancy

Several messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines are available to the global population as of 2022. The acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine will play a key role in combating the worldwide pandemic. Public confidence in this vaccine is largely based on its safety and effectiveness. This study was designed to provide independent evidence of the adverse effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers in Iraq and to identify the attitudes of healthcare workers who rejected the vaccination. We conducted a cross-sectional study to collect data on the adverse effects of the Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Sinopharm vaccines. Data were collected between October 2021 and February 2022. A total of 2,202 participants were enrolled in the study: (89.97%) received injections of the COVID-19 vaccines and (10.03%) were hesitant to receive the vaccination. Participants received either the Pfizer vaccine (62.9%), AstraZeneca vaccine (23.5%) or Sinopharm vaccine (13.6%). Most adverse effects were significantly less prevalent in the second dose than in the first dose. Notably, the adverse effects associated with the Pfizer vaccine were significantly more prevalent in females than in males. Following the first dose, the participants experienced more adverse effects with the AstraZeneca vaccine. Following the second dose, more adverse effects were associated with the Pfizer vaccine. Interestingly, the prevalence of COVID-19 infection in participants who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine was significantly reduced compared to those who received two doses of either the AstraZeneca or Sinopharm vaccines. According to vaccine-hesitated participants, insufficient knowledge (29.9%), expeditious development (27.6%) and lack of trust in the vaccines (27.1%) were the three major reasons for refusing the vaccines. The results of our study indicated that these adverse effects do not present a significant problem and should not prevent successful control of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Adverse events following administration of COVID-19 vaccines in Saudi Arabia

Previous studies investigated the frequency of different adverse events of COVID-19 vaccines. However, this study compares these adverse events between the two main COVID-19 vaccines used in Saudi Arabia (Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca) using telemedicine technology. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 958 individuals, 7 days after receiving either Pfizer-BioNTech or Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines during June 2021. Immediate adverse events were reported by 1.04% and 2.09% for Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines, respectively, with no serious events. Recipients of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine had a higher percentage of local adverse events (24.8% versus 9.8% in AstraZeneca vaccine). The most common reported systemic adverse events in both vaccines respectively were general fatigue (23.1% and 25.1%), fever (18.5% and 27.2%), myalgia (20.6% and 20.3%), and headache (15.2% and 17.2%). No significant difference was recorded between both vaccines regarding overall systemic adverse events; however, they were more frequent following the first dose of AstraZeneca vaccine compared to Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, while the reverse was observed for the second dose. Adverse events were more frequent in females and younger age groups for both vaccines. Most of systemic and local adverse events were mild in nature. Further cohort studies are recommended to investigate the long-term adverse events of COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 Vaccination Trends and Side Effects among Egyptian Hemodialysis Patients: A Multicenter Survey Study

(1) Background: Vaccination may be a key intervention to prevent infection in chronic hemodialysis (CHD) patients. This study aimed to determine the COVID-19 vaccination status in Egyptian CHD patients and to analyze the safety and detailed side effect profile of the COVID-19 vaccine among these patients. (2) Methods: This survey-based study was conducted on 670 end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on CHD from 3 December 2021 to 5 February 2022. Subjects were asked about sociodemographic characteristics, clinical and therapeutic data, in addition to their COVID-19 vaccination status. If the subject had been vaccinated, we inquired about the type of vaccine and the side effects that occurred within a few days after administration of the first and second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Additionally, subjects were asked about the onset of side effects (days from vaccination), timing of maximum symptoms, intensity of symptoms and their effect on activity and need for medical attention. (3) Results: The study included 670 CHD patients with a mean age of 50.79 years; 58.1% were females. The vast majority (614; 91.6%) of the studied patients received two doses of the vaccine. Side effects were more commonly reported after the first dose than the second dose. The main side effects reported were generalized weakness/fatigue (56%), headache (43.8%) and fever (40.4%), and sore arm/pain was also reported (29.3%). Adverse events mostly occurred within one day after vaccination and the maximum symptoms usually happened on the second day. The median duration of symptoms was 3 days with a maximum duration up to 5 days. The univariate logistic regression analysis showed that male gender (OR 1.848; (95% CI, 1.242−2.749), p = 0.002), age (OR 0.981; (95% CI, 0.969−0.993), p = 0.003), smoking (OR 6.067; (95% CI, 3.514−10.475), p < 0.001), duration since starting HD (OR 0.998; (95% CI, 0.998−0.999), p < 0.001), associated comorbidities (OR 2.202; (95% CI, 1.478−3.281), p < 0.001) and prior COVID-19 infection (OR 3.318; (95% CI, 1.952−5.642), p < 0.001) were the main determinants of adverse events related to COVID-19 vaccination. (4) Conclusions: our preliminary findings support the favorable short-term safety profile of the COVID-19 vaccine among CHD patients, and hence can reassure both clinicians and patients, as well as further promote COVID-19 vaccine administration among these patients.

Comparison of Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines: Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, Sputnik V, and Covaxin in Women in Terms of Menstruation Disturbances, Hirsutism, and Metrorrhagia: A Descriptive-Analytical Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Present study assessed whether Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, Sputnik V, and Covaxin's vaccinated women
reveal a distinct incidence of menstruation disturbances, hirsutism, and metrorrhagia.
Materials and Methods: Data collection was performed from June to August 2021, and 427 women working in seven
selected hospitals in Tehran were studied in this descriptive-analytical cross-sectional study. All of these women had
received one or both doses of the vaccines with one of the assessed vaccines. Required data was collected via questionnaire
and imported to SPSS 16 for further assessment and analysis. Fisher's Exact Test and Chi-Squared test were
main statistical tests used to understand whether any significant relation exists or not.
Results: The participant's mean age and body mass index (BMI) were 29.78 ± 10.55 and 23.27 ± 3.82, respectively.
Three hundred ninety-five cases (92.4%) had received both doses of the vaccines. Also, 154 cases (36.1%) had a history
of COVID-19. A total of 38 cases (8.8%) of menstruation disturbances, 20 cases (4.6%) of metrorrhagia, and 7
cases (1.6%) of hirsutism were reported after receiving the vaccines. There was a significant difference among the
vaccinated groups with the vaccines as mentioned earlier in terms of menstruation disturbances (hypermenorrhea,
dysmenorrhea, Amenorrhea) (P=0.01). The highest and the lowest incidence of menstruation disturbances were recorded
in the group vaccinated with Covaxin (17.6%) and Sputnik V (5%), respectively. There was also no significant
difference amongst the vaccinated groups with the four vaccines regarding the incidence of metrorrhagia and
hirsutism (P=0.10 and P=0.12, respectively). There was no significant relationship between all three complications
incidence with the previous infection concerning all vaccines (coefficient=0.46, 1.27, -0.15 respectively for menstruation
disturbances, metrorrhagia, and, hirsutism).
Conclusion: Seemingly, Covaxin revealed the most side effects in terms of menstruation disturbances. As a result, professionals
must carry out several studies with reasonable samples to recommend the vaccine to those women confidently.

Nanoparticles in clinical trials of COVID-19: An update

Once the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 (Coronavirus Infectious Disease-19) outbreak to be pandemic, massive efforts have been launched by researchers around the globe to combat this emerging infectious disease. Strategies that must be investigated such as expanding testing capabilities, developing effective medicines, as well as developing safe and effective vaccines for COVID-19 disease that produce long-lasting immunity to human system. Now-a-days, bio-sensing, medication delivery, imaging, and antimicrobial treatment are just a few of the medical applications for nanoparticles (NPs). Since the early 1990s, nanoparticle drug delivery methods have been employed in clinical trials. Since then, the discipline of nanomedicine has evolved in tandem with expanding technological demands to better medicinal delivery. Newer generations of NPs have emerged in recent decades that are capable of performing additional delivery tasks, allowing for therapy via novel therapeutic modalities. Many of these next generation NPs and associated products have entered clinical trials and have been approved for diverse indications in the present clinical environment. For systemic applications, NPs or nanomedicine-based drug delivery systems have substantial benefits over their non-formulated and free drug counterparts. Nanoparticle systems, for example, are capable of delivering medicines and treating parts of the body that are inaccessible to existing delivery systems. As a result, NPs medication delivery is one of the most studied preclinical and clinical systems. NPs-based vaccines delivering SARS-CoV-2 antigens will play an increasingly important role in prolonging or improving COVID-19 vaccination outcomes. This review provides insights about employing NPs-based drug delivery systems for the treatment of COVID-19 to increase the bioavailability of current drugs, reducing their toxicity, and to increase their efficiency. This article also exhibits their capability and efficacy, and highlighting the future aspects and challenges on nanoparticle products in clinical trials of COVID-19.

Cutaneous adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccinations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccines are currently the most effective interventions in controlling and preventing severe disease progression. Dermatologic reactions to COVID-19 vaccinations may be rare among clinical trial participants. However, since global mass vaccination became a reality, these adverse effects may become more widespread, and different skin reactions would arise.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the cutaneous adverse reactions in cases subject to vaccines for COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Embase databases, identifying the relevant records and including the eligible observational ones. After assessing the methodological quality of the included studies, we qualitatively and quantitatively synthesized the data regarding the cutaneous side effects experienced by those in the studies' population.

RESULTS

Overall, 36 studies were included in our systematic review, with the majority being cross-sectional. We found that pain, erythema, and swelling were the most common local side effects, while different types of rashes, urticaria, and angioedema were the most non-local. Few cases also reported experiencing flare-ups of their underlying diseases or developing newly-onset diseases of various etiologies. Our meta-analyses also found that while viral vector-based vaccines are, though insignificantly, safer in injection site complaints, individuals who received mRNA vaccines developed significantly fewer non-local cutaneous adverse events.

DISCUSSION

Cutaneous reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines are similar to common cutaneous drug eruptions and COVID-19 cutaneous manifestations. However, we believe that further high-quality research is needed to assess better how and why cutaneous reactions occur in different vaccines.

A study of SARS-CoV-2 delta variant breakthrough infections and side effects of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the breakthrough infection rate and safety profile of the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Methods

The breakthrough COVID-19 infection rate was defined as a positive polymerase chain reaction test 14 days after the vaccine dose. Safety was assessed as local reactions and systemic events that occurred within 14 days of receiving vaccine doses.

Results

The average age of the 265 participants was 43.85 years and 169 (63.77%) were male. . After the second dose, 18 (6.71%) participants contracted the infection. The SARS-CoV-2 delta variant was responsible for all infections but no participants required hospitalisation. We found significant correlations between post-vaccination IgG levels and post-vaccination infection (P = 0.001; odds ratio [OR] = 0.959; 95% Confidence interval [CI]: 0.944-0.974), and between a history of previous infection and post-vaccination infection rates (P = 0.005; OR = 0.1; 95%CI:0.009-0.6). IgG levels were significantly higher in women than in men (P = 0.006) and in patients who developed side effects after vaccination than in those without side effects (P = 0.04). A significant association was found between a history of COVID-19 infection prior to vaccination and IgG levels (P = 0.001).

Conclusions

The vaccine is effective in preventing severe disease, with few side effects.

Safety and Adverse Events Related to Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccines and Novavax;a Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge of the safety of vaccines is crucial, both to prevent and cure them and to decrease the public hesitation in receiving vaccines. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review the adverse events reported for inactivated vaccines and Novavax.

METHODS

In this systematic review, the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched on September 15, 2021. Then we identified the eligible studies using a two-step title/abstract and full-text screening process. Data on the subjects, studies, and types of adverse events were extracted and entered in a word table, including serious, mild, local, and systemic adverse events as well as the timing of side effects' appearance.

RESULTS

Adverse effects of inactivated coronavirus vaccines side effects were reported from phases 1, 2, and 3 of the vaccine trials. The most common local side effects included injection site pain and swelling, redness, and pruritus. Meanwhile, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, fever, and gastrointestinal symptoms including abdominal pain and diarrhea were among the most common systemic adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review indicates that inactivated COVID-19 vaccines, including Sinovac, Sinopharm, and Bharat Biotech, as well as the protein subunit vaccines (Novavax) can be considered as safe choices due to having milder side effects and fewer severe life-threatening adverse events.

Side Effects of COVID-19 Inactivated Virus vs. Adenoviral Vector Vaccines: Experience of Algerian Healthcare Workers

Healthcare workers were prioritized in vaccination campaigns globally because they are exposed to the highest risk of contamination by SARS-CoV-2. This study evaluated the self-reported post-vaccination side effects of inactivated (BBIBP-CorV and CoronaVac) and adenoviral vector-based (AZD1222, Gam-COVID-Vac and Ad26.COV2.S) vaccines among Algerian healthcare workers using a validated questionnaire. The final analysis included 721 healthcare workers, with a predominance of females (59.1%) and younger individuals 20–30 years old (39.4%). Less than half (49.1%) of the respondents reported at least one local side effect, while 53.8% reported at least one systemic side effect. These side effects were more prevalent among viral vector vaccinees than inactivated virus vaccinees. The most common local side effects were injection site pain (39%) and arm pain (25.4%), while fatigue (34.4%), fever (28.4%), headache (24.8%) and myalgia (22.7%) were the most prevalent systemic side effects. The side effects appeared earlier among inactivated virus vaccines recipients and generally lasted for 2 to 3 days for the two vaccinated groups. The risk factors associated with a higher prevalence of side effects included female gender, allergic individuals, individuals with regular medication, those who contracted the COVID-19 disease and those who received two doses for both inactivated and viral-based vaccines groups. Despite the higher prevalence of post-vaccination side effects among adenoviral vector vaccines recipients, both vaccines groups were equally effective in preventing symptomatic infections, and no life-threatening side effects were reported in either vaccine group.

A systematic review on mucocutaneous presentations after COVID-19 vaccination and expert recommendations about vaccination of important immune-mediated dermatologic disorders

With dermatologic side effects being fairly prevalent following vaccination against COVID-19, and the multitude of studies aiming to report and analyze these adverse events, the need for an extensive investigation on previous studies seemed urgent, in order to provide a thorough body of information about these post-COVID-19 immunization mucocutaneous reactions. To achieve this goal, a comprehensive electronic search was performed through the international databases including Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, Web of science, and Google scholar on July 12, 2021, and all articles regarding mucocutaneous manifestations and considerations after COVID-19 vaccine administration were retrieved using the following keywords: COVID-19 vaccine, dermatology considerations and mucocutaneous manifestations. A total of 917 records were retrieved and a final number of 180 articles were included in data extraction. Mild, moderate, severe and potentially life-threatening adverse events have been reported following immunization with COVID vaccines, through case reports, case series, observational studies, randomized clinical trials, and further recommendations and consensus position papers regarding vaccination. In this systematic review, we categorized these results in detail into five elaborate tables, making what we believe to be an extensively informative, unprecedented set of data on this topic. Based on our findings, in the viewpoint of the pros and cons of vaccination, mucocutaneous adverse events were mostly non-significant, self-limiting reactions, and for the more uncommon moderate to severe reactions, guidelines and consensus position papers could be of great importance to provide those at higher risks and those with specific worries of flare-ups or inefficient immunization, with sufficient recommendations to safely schedule their vaccine doses, or avoid vaccination if they have the discussed contra-indications.

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

Although vaccination has been adopted by the WHO to limit worldwide transmission of COVID-19, people's worries about COVID-19 vaccines may suppress their desire for vaccination despite vaccine availability. This study aimed to investigate anxiety and stress symptoms among 250 Jordanians (mean age = 43.18 ± 6.34 years, 72% females) who received their first vaccine dose. The respondents completed the anxiety and stress subscales of the Depression Anxiety and Stress scale 21 (DASS-21) before and after vaccination. The respondents expressed more moderate-severe levels of stress before than after vaccination (20.8% and 13.2%, respectively). Meanwhile, 37.2% and 45.2% of the respondents expressed moderate-severe anxiety before and after vaccination, respectively. Wilcoxon signed-rank test revealed that the drop in the level of stress from before- (median (IQR) = 5 (1-8)) to after vaccination (median (IQR) = 3 (1-7)) was statistically significant (z = -3.81, p = 0.001, r = 0.17) while the increase in anxiety was not. Anxiety significantly dropped postvaccination among individuals experiencing mild to severe anxiety before vaccination. Similarly, stress and anxiety significantly increased among individuals expressing normal anxiety before vaccination (z = -3.57 and -8.24, p values = 0.001, r = 0.16 and 0.37, respectively). Age positively correlated with postvaccination anxiety among respondents with mild prevaccination anxiety, and it negatively correlated with the prevaccination level of stress in the normal-anxiety group. Gender, marital status, respondents' level of education, and history of COVID-19 infection had no significant correlation with anxiety or stress at either point of measurement. Overcoming their hesitancy to receive COVID-19 vaccines, individuals with normal levels of anxiety experienced a rise in their distress symptoms following immunization. On the contrary, vaccination seemed to desensitize anxious individuals. Policymakers need to formulate a population-specific plan to increase vaccine preparedness and promote psychological well-being over all during the pandemic.

Safety and Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines: Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey among Staff, Workers and Students at an Egyptian University

Mass vaccination is the most effective strategy against the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, concerns about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness remain a huge obstacle to vaccine acceptance. The aim of the present study was to explore different COVID-19 vaccine outcomes, including the development of adverse events and/or COVID-19 infection following COVID-19 vaccination. A cross-sectional study was conducted by distributing an online survey targeting staff and students at the British university in Egypt. A total of 637 participants fully completed the survey. Of these, 609 (95.6%) participants received the COVID-19 vaccine. Only 12.6% of the total vaccinated participants reported COVID-19 infection after vaccination. Of these, only 2.8% reported having severe symptoms while 9.9% reported having no or mild symptoms. The most common side effects reported after the first vs. second dose were headache (36.3% vs. 14.6%), tiredness and fatigue (26.9% vs. 10.7), and fever (25.6% vs. 6.7%). In conclusion, the present study explored different COVID-19 vaccine outcomes where the overall incidence of side effects is higher after the first dose than after the second dose. There is a relationship between COVID-19 vaccines’ side effects and gastrointestinal disorders, gender, and the type of COVID-19 vaccine. Post-vaccination symptoms were more frequently reported in women compared to men and more frequent with viral vector vaccines compared to other types. The effectiveness of different types of COVID-19 vaccines was confirmed by the lower incidence rate of post-vaccination COVID-19 infection.

Safety and Adverse Events Related to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines; a Systematic Review

Introduction

Knowledge of vaccine-related adverse events is crucial as they are among the most ‎important factors ‎that cause hesitation in receiving vaccines. Therefore, we aimed to systematically ‎review the adverse events ‎related to the mRNA vaccines reported in the literature.‎.

Method

A systematic literature search was carried out in the databases of Scopus, PubMed, ‎Cochrane, and Web ‎of Science. We selected original studies that explored the side effects of ‎mRNA ‎COVID-19 vaccines using a two-phase (title/abstract and full-text) screening process.‎.

Results

Cardiac ‎complications were the most commonly reported severe adverse events. It appeared that ‎systemic adverse reactions are more ‎common after the second dose of vaccines. The number of ‎adverse effects reported after the Pfizer vaccine was ‎higher than other vaccines, mostly due to its ‎earlier approval and more widespread use throughout the world. Cardiac adverse events had a ‎‎higher prevalence but no significant association has been found between COVID-19 mRNA vaccines ‎and cardiac ‎adverse events except for myopericarditis. ‎.

Conclusion

Vaccines ‎play a crucial role in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic and decreasing ‎mortalities and the results of the present ‎review acknowledge the fact that the benefits outweigh the ‎adverse events of these vaccines.‎.

An overview of current drugs and prophylactic vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Designing and producing an effective vaccine is the best possible way to reduce the burden and spread of a disease. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies invested a great deal of time and money in trying to control and combat the disease. In this regard, due to the urgent need, many vaccines are now available earlier than scheduled. Based on their manufacturing technology, the vaccines available for COVID-19 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SAR-CoV2)) infection can be classified into four platforms: RNA vaccines, adenovirus vector vaccines, subunit (protein-based) vaccines, and inactivated virus vaccines. Moreover, various drugs have been deemed to negatively affect the progression of the infection via various actions. However, adaptive variants of the SARS-CoV-2 genome can alter the pathogenic potential of the virus and increase the difficulty of both drug and vaccine development. In this review, along with drugs used in COVID-19 treatment, currently authorized COVID-19 vaccines as well as variants of the virus are described and evaluated, considering all platforms.

More Than Three-Fourths of AstraZeneca (ChAdox1 COV-19) COVID-19 Vaccinated Individuals Develop Post Immunization Adverse Event in Northwest Ethiopia

Background

Ethiopia was using the ChAdOx1 COV-19 vaccine, and health professionals were targets of the first phase of the vaccination strategy. Evidence on the adverse events following immunization (AEFI) was barely available. The study aimed to assess the magnitude and associated factors of adverse events following ChAdOx1 COV-19 immunization among health professionals of the University of Gondar Specialized and Comprehensive Hospital, 2021.

Methods

An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among health professionals of the University of Gondar Comprehensive and specialized referral hospital. All health professionals who took the ChAdOx1 COV-19 vaccine in the 1st phase were surveyed. A total of 314 health professionals who took the ChAdOx1 COV-19 vaccine were included. The EpiData version 4.6.0.0 and Stata 16 were used for data entry and analysis, respectively. A binary logistic regression was used to identify statistically significant factors associated with AEFI. Chi-square and multicollinearity assumptions were tested. A p-value <0.2 and 0.05 were used as cut-off values of significance in the bi- and multivariable logistic regression models, respectively. An adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with 95% CI was reported for statistically significant variables.

Results

Among 314 study participants, 263 of them had at least one mild to severe AEFI of ChAdOx1 COV-19 with a prevalence of AEFI of 83.76% (95% CI: 79.23, 87.46). The commonest AEFI observed were injection site tenderness (n=198/263), fatigue (114/263), headache (n=107/263), and muscle pain (n=85/263). Females (AOR=2.75, 95% CI: 1.15, 6.58), and participants who felt the vaccine was unsafe (AOR=2.84, 95% CI: 1.03, 7.85) were having nearly three times more odds of AEFI immunization as compared to males and those who felt the vaccine was safe, respectively.

Conclusion

Adverse event following immunization has been a public health problem in Northwest Ethiopia. Being female and having a feeling that the vaccine is unsafe were statistically significantly associated with AEFI.

Side-effects of COVID-19 vaccines among the Saudi population: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To measure and assess the side-effects of Pfizer/BioNTech and AstraZeneca vaccines on residents of Saudi Arabia, as well as provide a database that gives insight into the relative safety of these 2 COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS

A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted to determine the side-effects of the two COVID-19 vaccines. The study was initiated on the 5th of June 2021 at Hail University, Hail, Saudi Arabia. The information was collected through an online survey designed on Google forms. The questionnaire was pre-tested for validity, with all information carefully reviewed.

RESULTS

The study included 2,530 participants from different regions of Saudi Arabia, with a mean age of 26.9 ± 12.4 years old. The most common vaccine among the study group was Pfizer, which 73.8% of the population were provided; the remaining 26.2% received the AstraZeneca vaccine. Regarding the Pfizer vaccine, the common systemic side-effects followed the first dose, included headaches, followed by muscle pain, fever, and joint pain. Those who had the AstraZeneca vaccine reported a few more side-effects. For example, during the first dose fever was reported as the most common side-effect, followed by headache, muscle pain and fatigue.

CONCLUSION

The present study confirmed that vaccine side-effects are more frequently reported by smokers and those who received the AstraZeneca vaccine. Further studies are needed to acquire a better understanding of the association between risk factors and the experiencing of post-vaccine side-effects.