Effect of gender, age and vaccine on reactogenicity and incapacity to work after COVID-19 vaccination: a survey among health care workers.
COVID-19
Circadian rhythm
Reactogenicity
Sex differences
Vaccination
Working capacity
Journal
BMC infectious diseases
ISSN: 1471-2334
Titre abrégé: BMC Infect Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968551
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Mar 2022
26 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
26
11
2021
accepted:
15
03
2022
entrez:
29
3
2022
pubmed:
30
3
2022
medline:
31
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of our study was to assess the impact the impact of gender and age on reactogenicity to three COVID-19 vaccine products: Biontech/Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) and AstraZeneca (ChAdOx). Additional analyses focused on the reduction in working capacity after vaccination and the influence of the time of day when vaccines were administered. We conducted a survey on COVID-19 vaccinations and eventual reactions among 73,000 employees of 89 hospitals of the Helios Group. On May 19th, 2021 all employees received an email, inviting all employees who received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 to participate using an attached link. Additionally, the invitation was posted in the group's intranet page. Participation was voluntary and non-traceable. The survey was closed on June 21st, 2021. 8375 participants reported on 16,727 vaccinations. Reactogenicity was reported after 74.6% of COVID-19 vaccinations. After 23.0% vaccinations the capacity to work was affected. ChAdOx induced impairing reactogenicity mainly after the prime vaccination (70.5%), while mRNA-1273 led to more pronounced reactions after the second dose (71.6%). Heterologous prime-booster vaccinations with ChAdOx followed by either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 were associated with the highest risk for impairment (81.4%). Multivariable analyses identified the factors older age, male gender and vaccine BNT162b as independently associated with lower odds ratio for both, impairing reactogenicity and incapacity to work. In the comparison of vaccine schedules, the heterologous combination ChAdOx + BNT162b or mRNA-1273 was associated with the highest and the homologue prime-booster vaccination with BNT162b with the lowest odds ratios. The time of vaccination had no significant influence. Around 75% of the COVID-19 vaccinations led to reactogenicity and nearly 25% of them led to one or more days of work loss. Major risk factors were female gender, younger age and the administration of a vaccine other than BNT162b2. When vaccinating a large part of a workforce against COVID-19, especially in professions with a higher proportion of young and women such as health care, employers and employees must be prepared for a noticeable amount of absenteeism. Assuming vaccine effectiveness to be equivalent across the vaccine combinations, to minimize reactogenicity, employees at risk should receive a homologous prime-booster immunisation with BNT162b2. The study was approved by the Ethic Committee of the Aerztekammer Berlin on May 27th, 2021 (Eth-37/21) and registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS 00025745). The study was supported by the Helios research grant HCRI-ID 2021-0272.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The aim of our study was to assess the impact the impact of gender and age on reactogenicity to three COVID-19 vaccine products: Biontech/Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) and AstraZeneca (ChAdOx). Additional analyses focused on the reduction in working capacity after vaccination and the influence of the time of day when vaccines were administered.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a survey on COVID-19 vaccinations and eventual reactions among 73,000 employees of 89 hospitals of the Helios Group. On May 19th, 2021 all employees received an email, inviting all employees who received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 to participate using an attached link. Additionally, the invitation was posted in the group's intranet page. Participation was voluntary and non-traceable. The survey was closed on June 21st, 2021.
RESULTS
RESULTS
8375 participants reported on 16,727 vaccinations. Reactogenicity was reported after 74.6% of COVID-19 vaccinations. After 23.0% vaccinations the capacity to work was affected. ChAdOx induced impairing reactogenicity mainly after the prime vaccination (70.5%), while mRNA-1273 led to more pronounced reactions after the second dose (71.6%). Heterologous prime-booster vaccinations with ChAdOx followed by either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 were associated with the highest risk for impairment (81.4%). Multivariable analyses identified the factors older age, male gender and vaccine BNT162b as independently associated with lower odds ratio for both, impairing reactogenicity and incapacity to work. In the comparison of vaccine schedules, the heterologous combination ChAdOx + BNT162b or mRNA-1273 was associated with the highest and the homologue prime-booster vaccination with BNT162b with the lowest odds ratios. The time of vaccination had no significant influence.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Around 75% of the COVID-19 vaccinations led to reactogenicity and nearly 25% of them led to one or more days of work loss. Major risk factors were female gender, younger age and the administration of a vaccine other than BNT162b2. When vaccinating a large part of a workforce against COVID-19, especially in professions with a higher proportion of young and women such as health care, employers and employees must be prepared for a noticeable amount of absenteeism. Assuming vaccine effectiveness to be equivalent across the vaccine combinations, to minimize reactogenicity, employees at risk should receive a homologous prime-booster immunisation with BNT162b2.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
The study was approved by the Ethic Committee of the Aerztekammer Berlin on May 27th, 2021 (Eth-37/21) and registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS 00025745). The study was supported by the Helios research grant HCRI-ID 2021-0272.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35346089
doi: 10.1186/s12879-022-07284-8
pii: 10.1186/s12879-022-07284-8
pmc: PMC8960217
doi:
Substances chimiques
COVID-19 Vaccines
0
Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis Vaccine
0
BNT162 Vaccine
N38TVC63NU
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
291Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Lancet Respir Med. 2021 Nov;9(11):1255-1265
pubmed: 34391547
Aging Cell. 2015 Jun;14(3):309-21
pubmed: 25720438
J Clin Invest. 2020 Oct 1;130(10):5603-5617
pubmed: 32692732
Immunology. 2020 Dec;161(4):268-277
pubmed: 31837013
Arch Intern Med. 2008 Dec 8;168(22):2405-14
pubmed: 19064822
Cureus. 2020 May 13;12(5):e8094
pubmed: 32542149
N Engl J Med. 2021 Feb 4;384(5):403-416
pubmed: 33378609
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2019 Apr;143(4):1465-1473
pubmed: 30654049
Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2018 Jun 18;9(8):475-493
pubmed: 30364900
Lancet Respir Med. 2021 May;9(5):447-448
pubmed: 33721558
N Engl J Med. 2021 Jun 3;384(22):2124-2130
pubmed: 33835768
NPJ Vaccines. 2019 Jul 12;4:29
pubmed: 31312529
N Engl J Med. 2020 Dec 31;383(27):2603-2615
pubmed: 33301246
Lancet. 2021 Jan 9;397(10269):99-111
pubmed: 33306989
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021 Feb 26;70(8):283-288
pubmed: 33630816
Clin Pharmacokinet. 2009;48(3):143-57
pubmed: 19385708
Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2017 Oct 6;33:577-599
pubmed: 28992436
Adv Ther. 2020 Feb;37(2):644-655
pubmed: 31873866
J Infect Dis. 2014 Jul 15;209 Suppl 3:S114-9
pubmed: 24966191
Lancet. 2021 May 29;397(10289):2043-2046
pubmed: 33991480
Euro Surveill. 2021 Jul;26(28):
pubmed: 34269172
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2021 Apr 30;118(17):298-299
pubmed: 34180800
Lancet. 2021 Dec 19;396(10267):1979-1993
pubmed: 33220855
N Engl J Med. 2021 Jun 3;384(22):2092-2101
pubmed: 33835769
Nat Commun. 2021 Jul 6;12(1):4015
pubmed: 34230477