33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna Vaccines in Preventing SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Nursing Home Residents Before and During Widespread Circulation of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant — National Healthcare Safety Network, March 1–August 1, 2021

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Nursing home and long-term care facility residents live in congregate settings and are often elderly and frail, putting them at high risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and severe COVID-19–associated outcomes; therefore, this population was prioritized for early vaccination in the United States ( 1 ). Following rapid distribution and administration of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) under an Emergency Use Authorization by the Food and Drug Administration ( 2 ), observational studies among nursing home residents demonstrated vaccine effectiveness (VE) ranging from 53% to 92% against SARS-CoV-2 infection ( 3 – 6 ). However, concerns about the potential for waning vaccine-induced immunity and the recent emergence of the highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant † highlight the need to continue to monitor VE ( 7 ). Weekly data reported by the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare (CMS)–certified skilled nursing facilities or nursing homes to CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) § were analyzed to evaluate effectiveness of full vaccination (2 doses received ≥14 days earlier) with any of the two currently authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines during the period soon after vaccine introduction and before the Delta variant was circulating (pre-Delta [March 1–May 9, 2021]), and when the Delta variant predominated ¶ (Delta [June 21–August 1, 2021]). Using 17,407 weekly reports from 3,862 facilities from the pre-Delta period, adjusted effectiveness against infection for any mRNA vaccine was 74.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 70.0%–78.8%). Analysis using 33,160 weekly reports from 11,581 facilities during an intermediate period (May 10–June 20) found that the adjusted effectiveness was 67.5% (95% CI = 60.1%–73.5%). Analysis using 85,593 weekly reports from 14,917 facilities during the Delta period found that the adjusted effectiveness was 53.1% (95% CI = 49.1%–56.7%). Effectiveness estimates were similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. These findings indicate that mRNA vaccines provide protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection among nursing home residents; however, VE was lower after the Delta variant became the predominant circulating strain in the United States. This analysis assessed VE against any infection, without being able to distinguish between asymptomatic and symptomatic presentations. Additional evaluations are needed to understand protection against severe disease in nursing home residents over time. Because nursing home residents might remain at some risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection despite vaccination, multiple COVID-19 prevention strategies, including infection control, testing, and vaccination of nursing home staff members, residents, and visitors, are critical. An additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine might be considered for nursing home and long-term care facility residents to optimize a protective immune response. Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection among nursing home residents was evaluated using data reported to NHSN. CMS-certified nursing homes are required to report aggregate weekly numbers of new laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections among residents, by vaccination status (product and number of doses received), to NHSN. Vaccination status of cases was categorized as 1) unvaccinated (no COVID-19 vaccine doses); 2) fully vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine (2 doses ≥14 days before collection of a SARS-CoV-2–positive specimen), and 3) “other” (single dose of mRNA or Janssen [Johnson & Johnson] vaccine or received unspecified vaccines). Nursing homes also reported weekly on the number of residents by vaccination status; reporting on resident vaccination status was voluntary during the pre-Delta period but was required by CMS starting on June 6, 2021. Facility-level weekly records for the analysis combined case counts by vaccination status in each week with the weekly number of residents by vaccination status 2 weeks previously. This ensured that residents were counted as fully vaccinated only after ≥14 days from receipt of a second dose. Weekly reports of case counts were excluded if a facility did not report resident counts by vaccination status for the corresponding week 2 weeks earlier. Records from facilities with case data during March 1–August 1, 2021, and the corresponding data on resident vaccination status during February 15–July 18, 2021, were combined for an overall 22-week study period. During the study period, 15,254 facilities sent 330,864 weekly reports with case counts to NHSN; of these, 15,236 facilities (99.9%) sent 144,334 (43.6%) weekly reports with counts of residents by vaccination status. A generalized linear mixed effects model was used with a zero-inflated Poisson distribution (used to model data that have an excess of zero counts) for case counts by vaccination status, offset by resident counts, to estimate the ratio of infection rates among fully vaccinated and unvaccinated residents. To account for variability across sites, facility was included as a random effect. Because of potential for confounding by time, calendar week was modeled as a fixed effect covariate. Nonlinearity of infection rates over calendar weeks was modeled with cubic splines. To evaluate the effect of circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants on VE, the study period was stratified into three periods: 1) pre-Delta (March 1–May 9); 2) intermediate, the period when Delta circulation was documented but not predominant (May 10–June 20); and 3) Delta, when ≥50% of SARS-CoV-2 viruses sequenced were the Delta variant (June 21–August 1), with an interaction term between this categorical time variable and vaccination status to obtain VE estimates for each period. The following characteristics were evaluated as potential confounders of VE: 1) facility-level cumulative SARS-CoV-2 infection rates combined for staff members and residents from May 8, 2020, through the week of reporting; 2) weekly local county incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections; and 3) CDC Social Vulnerability Index score** for each facility’s county. The change-in-estimate criterion for the regression coefficient with a 10% cutoff was used to evaluate covariates; none met this criterion. VE was estimated as 1 minus the rate ratio multiplied by 100, adjusted for calendar week and facility as a random effect. VE for the “other” category is not presented because this group combines different categories, and estimates would not be meaningful. Data analysis was conducted using SAS (version 9.4; SAS Institute) and R (version 4.0.4; R Foundation); statistical significance was defined as p<0.05. This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with federal laws and institutional policies. †† After applying exclusion criteria and combining facility-level weekly case and corresponding resident counts, the analysis included 136,160 reports from 14,997 facilities (median of eight reports per facility; interquartile range = 6–10), with 3,862 (25.8%) facilities reporting during the pre-Delta period, 11,581 (77.2%) during the intermediate period, and 14,917 (99.5%) during the Delta period. Overall, the analysis included 10,428,783 aggregate weekly resident counts, including 1,531,446 (14.7%) unvaccinated residents, 5,174,098 (49.6%) fully vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech, 2,633,700 (25.3%) fully vaccinated with Moderna, and 1,089,539 (10.4%) with “other” vaccination status. Overall, 6,879 COVID-19 cases were identified, including 2,113 (30.7%) in unvaccinated residents, 2,603 (37.8%) in residents fully vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech, 1,302 (18.9%) in residents fully vaccinated with Moderna, and 861 (12.5%) in residents with “other” vaccination status. During the pre-Delta period, adjusted VE against infection among those fully vaccinated (versus unvaccinated) was 74.7% for any mRNA vaccine, 74.2% for Pfizer-BioNTech, and 74.7% for Moderna (Table). During the Delta period, adjusted VE against infection among those fully vaccinated was 53.1% for any mRNA vaccine, 52.4% for Pfizer-BioNTech, and 50.6% for Moderna. VE estimates for the Delta period were significantly lower than those for the pre-Delta period (p<0.001). VE point estimates during the intermediate period were lower than those during the pre-Delta period; however, the estimates were not significantly different (p = 0.06) (Table). TABLE Effectiveness of full vaccination* with Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection among nursing home residents, by period of B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant circulation — National Healthcare Safety Network, March 1–August 1, 2021 Vaccine type/Period† Aggregate weekly count of residents No. of cases Vaccine effectiveness, % (95% CI) p-value** Unadjusted§ Adjusted¶ Any mRNA vaccine Period 1: pre-Delta 936,123 466 74.3 (69.5–78.4) 74.7 (70.0–78.8) Ref Period 2: intermediate 1,859,929 440 65.8 (58.5–71.9) 67.5 (60.1–73.5) 0.06 Period 3: Delta 5,011,746 2,999 52.8 (48.8–56.5) 53.1 (49.1–56.7) <0.001 Pfizer-BioNTech Period 1: pre-Delta 679,288 348 74.7 (69.5–79.0) 74.2 (68.9–78.7) Ref Period 2: intermediate 1,246,078 316 63.5 (54.9–70.5) 66.5 (58.3–73.1) 0.07 Period 3: Delta 3,248,732 1,939 52.2 (47.7–56.3) 52.4 (48.0–56.4) <0.001 Moderna Period 1: pre-Delta 256,835 118 72.6 (66.1–77.8) 74.7 (66.2–81.1) Ref, Period 2: intermediate 613,851 124 73.2 (66.8–78.3) 70.4 (60.1–78.0) 0.45 Period 3: Delta 1,763,014 1,060 48.4 (42.3–53.8) 50.6 (45.0–55.7) <0.001 Unvaccinated Period 1: pre-Delta 217,534 447 Ref NA Period 2: intermediate 360,051 269 Period 3: Delta 953,861 1,397 Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; NA = not applicable; Ref = referent group. * Fully vaccinated cases were defined as infections in residents who received the second of 2 doses of either Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines ≥14 days before SARS-CoV-2–positive specimen collection. † Periods for analysis were stratified as follows: period 1 = pre-Delta (March 1–May 9, 2021); period 2 = intermediate (May 10–June 20, 2021); period 3 = Delta (June 21–August 1, 2021). § Results from a generalized linear mixed effects model with random effects for facility and zero-inflated Poisson distribution; vaccine effectiveness was estimated as 1 minus the rate ratio multiplied by 100, with rate ratio comparing rates among fully vaccinated to those among unvaccinated persons. Results for “other” category, which included those who received a single dose of Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) or mRNA vaccine, or those residents who received unspecified vaccines are not presented because this group combines the different categories and estimates will not be meaningful. ¶ Results from the same model controlling for calendar week of reporting of case counts. ** p-values for comparison of adjusted vaccine effectiveness estimates in period 2 and period 3 with estimates in period 1. The difference in estimates among periods was evaluated by adding an interaction between periods and vaccine status in the model. Discussion Analysis of nursing home COVID-19 data from NHSN indicated a significant decline in effectiveness of full mRNA COVID-19 vaccination against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, from 74.7% during the pre-Delta period (March 1–May 9, 2021) to 53.1% during the period when the Delta variant predominated in the United States. This study could not differentiate the independent impact of the Delta variant from other factors, such as potential waning of vaccine-induced immunity. Further research on the possible impact of both factors on VE among nursing home residents is warranted. Because nursing home residents might remain at some risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection despite vaccination, multipronged COVID-19 prevention strategies, including infection control, §§ testing, and vaccination of nursing home staff members, residents, and visitors are critical. These results (pre-Delta 74.7%; Delta 53.1%) fall within the range of findings from other studies of COVID-19 mRNA VE in nursing home residents conducted before the Delta variant was prevalent, with estimates against infection ranging from 53% to 92% ( 3 – 6 ). Variability in VE estimates across studies can result from differences in underlying populations, SARS-CoV-2 testing practices and diagnostics, prevalence of previous infections, analytic methods, and virus variant strains in circulation. Nursing home residents, who are often elderly and frail, might have a less robust response to vaccines, and are at higher risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2 and for severe COVID-19 ( 8 ). In addition, nursing home residents were among the earliest groups vaccinated in the United States; thus, if vaccine-induced immunity does wane over time, this decrease in VE might first be observed among nursing home residents. Because increased U.S. circulation of the Delta variant coincided with a period ≥6 months after vaccine introduction, the extent to which reduced vaccine protection against Delta and potential waning immunity contributed to the lower VE in the Delta period could not be determined by this study. Nursing homes were aggressive in case ascertainment because of guidelines recommending weekly point prevalence surveys if a single SARS-CoV-2 infection in a staff member or resident was identified. ¶¶ This analysis assessed VE against any infection, without being able to distinguish between asymptomatic and symptomatic infections. Additional evaluations are needed to understand protection against severe disease in nursing home residents over time. The findings in this report are subject to at least five limitations. First, resident-level demographic or clinical data were not reported to NHSN. Therefore, the analysis could not control for potential confounders, such as age, presence of underlying health conditions, or the influence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infections on VE. Second, vaccination dates were not available and time since vaccination could not be measured to evaluate potential waning of protection. Third, staff member vaccination data were not sufficiently complete to assess as a potential confounder. Fourth, before June 7, 2021, weekly reporting of resident vaccination status was voluntary, and missing data limited inclusion of facility records during this period. Although the magnitude of potential bias introduced by missing data could not be assessed, a bias indicator analysis was conducted, which indicated that VE was likely underestimated during the pre-Delta period (COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Team, CDC, unpublished data, 2021). Finally, the study assessed only nursing home residents and is not generalizable to the broader population. Both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines were highly effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection in nursing home residents early after vaccine introduction. However, the effectiveness among this population in recent months has been significantly lower. To prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in nursing homes, these findings highlight the critical importance of COVID-19 vaccination of staff members, residents, and visitors and adherence to rigorous COVID-19 prevention strategies. An additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine might be considered for nursing home and long-term care facility residents to optimize a protective immune response.*** Summary What is already known about this topic? Early observational studies among nursing home residents showed mRNA vaccines to be 53% to 92% effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection. What is added by this report? Two doses of mRNA vaccines were 74.7% effective against infection among nursing home residents early in the vaccination program (March–May 2021). During June–July 2021, when B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant circulation predominated, effectiveness declined significantly to 53.1%. What are the implications for public health practice? Multicomponent COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination of nursing home staff members, residents, and visitors, are critical. An additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine might be considered for nursing home and long-term care facility residents to optimize a protective immune response.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Updated Interim Recommendation for Allocation of COVID-19 Vaccine — United States, December 2020

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Among Residents of Two Skilled Nursing Facilities Experiencing COVID-19 Outbreaks — Connecticut, December 2020–February 2021

            Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs), particularly those in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), have experienced disproportionately high levels of COVID-19–associated morbidity and mortality and were prioritized for early COVID-19 vaccination ( 1 , 2 ). However, this group was not included in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, and limited postauthorization vaccine effectiveness (VE) data are available for this critical population ( 3 ). It is not known how well COVID-19 vaccines protect SNF residents, who typically are more medically frail, are older, and have more underlying medical conditions than the general population ( 1 ). In addition, immunogenicity of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was found to be lower in adults aged 65–85 years than in younger adults ( 4 ). Through the CDC Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program, SNF residents and staff members in Connecticut began receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine on December 18, 2020 ( 5 ). Administration of the vaccine was conducted during several on-site pharmacy clinics. In late January 2021, the Connecticut Department of Public Health (CT DPH) identified two SNFs experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks among residents and staff members that occurred after each facility’s first vaccination clinic. CT DPH, in partnership with CDC, performed electronic chart review in these facilities to obtain information on resident vaccination status and infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Partial vaccination, defined as the period from >14 days after the first dose through 7 days after the second dose, had an estimated effectiveness of 63% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 33%–79%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection (regardless of symptoms) among residents within these SNFs. This is similar to estimated effectiveness for a single dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in adults across a range of age groups in noncongregate settings ( 6 ) and suggests that to optimize vaccine impact among this population, high coverage with the complete 2-dose series should be recommended for SNF residents and staff members. After identification of the first infected SNF resident or staff member through weekly surveillance testing, expanded facility-wide outbreak SARS-CoV-2 testing was performed frequently for residents and staff members at both facilities in accordance with CDC and CT DPH guidelines ( 7 ). All residents who had not received a positive test result in the preceding 90 days, regardless of symptoms, received a once-weekly (facility A) or twice-weekly (facility B) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Staff members were also tested regularly (once-weekly antigen and once-weekly PCR test at facility A, and once-weekly PCR test at facility B). At both facilities, supplementary antigen testing was performed immediately for any resident or staff member who developed COVID-19 symptoms and for residents who had known COVID-19 exposures. A retrospective cohort investigation using data from electronic medical record chart abstraction was conducted to assess vaccine effectiveness. This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy. § The investigation period started on the date of each SNF’s first vaccination clinic (December 29, 2020 for facility A and December 21, 2020 for facility B) and ended on February 9, 2021 and February 12, 2021, respectively. Residents were included if they were admitted at either facility during one or more rounds of facility-wide SARS-CoV-2 testing during the week before or any time after their facility’s first vaccination clinic. Data on residents were abstracted starting on the date of their SNF’s first vaccination clinic or their admission into the facility, whichever occurred later. Electronic medical record data included demographic characteristics, facility admission and discharge dates, vaccination dates, symptoms of COVID-19 occurring within 7 days before or 14 days after a positive test result, presence of underlying medical conditions associated with potential increased risk for severe COVID-19 illness, ¶ and measures of outcome, including hospitalization and death. SARS-CoV-2 test dates, test types, and results were also obtained from the electronic medical record. A case was defined as any positive PCR- or antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 test result during the investigation period in a resident meeting the cohort inclusion criteria. Case date was defined as either the date of symptom onset or positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, whichever occurred earlier. Positive SARS-CoV-2 test results received before the investigation period were identified for each resident using the Connecticut Electronic Disease Surveillance System. Person-time began on the date of the facility’s first vaccination clinic or the date the resident was admitted, whichever occurred later. Residents stopped contributing person-time to the investigation on the case date, the final facility discharge date or date of death if applicable, or the final day of the investigation period, whichever occurred earlier. Resident person-time was categorized as 1) unvaccinated (days from cohort entry until receipt of first vaccine dose), 2) time before first vaccine dose effect (day 0 [date of vaccination] through day 14 after first dose), 3) partially vaccinated (>day 14 after first dose through day 7 after second dose), or 4) fully vaccinated (>7 days after second dose). Assuming a common VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection at both facilities, a Cox proportional hazards model with baseline hazard rates stratified by facility was applied to estimate the VE, with VE = 100% × (1−hazard ratio); 95% CIs were calculated using robust CI methods.** Use of a time-to-event analysis was necessary to adjust for expected heterogeneity in risk for infection across the investigation period attributable to underlying outbreak dynamics. Kaplan-Meier curves of SARS-CoV-2 infection were constructed to visualize the cumulative infection-free proportion of residents; 95% CIs were calculated using Greenwood’s method. †† Sensitivity analyses were conducted with exclusion of residents with past confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and using two alternative endpoints for partial vaccination (ending on second dose +0 days and second dose +14 days). The time before first dose vaccine effect was excluded from the analysis, because immune status could not be clearly categorized. Small sample sizes precluded separate analyses of VE against symptomatic or severe disease. R statistical software (version 4.0.2; The R Foundation) was used to conduct all analyses. A total of 463 residents were enrolled, including 142 (31%) from facility A and 321 (69%) from facility B. Demographic characteristics such as age and race were similar in residents at each facility (although ethnicity could not be reported because ethnicity data were missing for 30% of residents); prevalences of underlying conditions that increase the risk for severe COVID-19 illness were also similar in residents at each facility (Table). The median number of high-risk conditions per resident was three; five (1.1%) residents had no underlying high-risk conditions. Among the 463 residents, 115 (24.8%) had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection before the investigation period; two of 34 (6%) residents at facility A and 68 of 81 (84%) residents at facility B with past confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection had a positive test result ≤3 months prior to investigation start. TABLE Demographic characteristics, COVID-19 vaccination status, and SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptom, and outcome information among residents of two skilled nursing facilities — Connecticut, December 21, 2020–February 12, 2021 Characteristic No. (%) of residents* Total Facility A Facility B p-value†,§ (N = 463) (n = 142) (n = 321) Sex Female 294 (63.5) 82 (57.8) 212 (66.0) 0.09 Male 169 (36.5) 60 (42.3) 109 (34.0) Age group, yrs 3 months before investigation start 45 (9.7) 32 (22.5) 13 (4.0) day 14 after dose 1 through day 7 after dose 2) 25 (25.8) 9 (22.5) 16 (28.1) Fully vaccinated (>7 days after dose 2) 7 (7.2) 1 (2.5) 6 (10.5) Outcomes,††† no. (% of cases) Hospitalization 15 (15.5) 4 (10.0) 11 (19.3) 0.21 Vital status dead or unknown    Death from COVID-19 17 (17.5) 7 (17.5) 10 (17.5) 0.55§    Death after diagnosis (no cause specified) 4 (4.1) 1 (2.5) 3 (5.3)    Vital status unknown 3 (3.1) 0 (0.0) 3 (5.3) Abbreviations: COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; N/A = not applicable. * Percentages might not sum to 100% because of rounding. † P-values for the comparisons between facilities apply Pearson’s chi-square test for independence unless marked. For mutually exclusive categories of a characteristic a single p-value is reported. For characteristics for which more than one category might be true for a resident (e.g., symptoms), individual p-values are reported for each category. § In cases with cell counts 1 month), taking immunosuppressants, or taking tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors. §§ Examples include seizure disorders such as epilepsy, Alzheimer disease, dementia, traumatic brain injuries, and stroke. ¶¶ Vaccination is reported as the percentage of all residents included in the investigation that received no dose, 1 dose, or 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine by the date of their discharge from the facility or the end of the investigation if they were still admitted to the facility. Absolute coverage in the facility changed daily because of changes in census. *** Other symptoms included lethargy, fatigue, generalized weakness, malaise, decreased appetite or loss of appetite, and agitation. ††† Case outcomes include minimum number of confirmed COVID-19–related hospitalizations and COVID-19 deaths confirmed by the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. Hospitalizations and deaths that occurred after the investigation period were not ascertained. During the investigation period, 97 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred, including 40 (41%) at facility A and 57 (59%) at facility B (Figure 1). Including nonspecific symptoms such as malaise, lethargy, and decreased appetite, at least one COVID-19 symptom was reported in 86 (88.7%) cases. §§ By the date of discharge or the last day of the investigation, 304 residents (65.7%) had received 2 vaccine doses, 72 (15.6%) had received 1 dose only, and 87 (18.8%) had not received any doses. A total of 16,969 person-days were observed during the investigation period, with 39 cases occurring during 3,573 days categorized as unvaccinated person-time, 26 cases during 4,588 days of person-time before first vaccine dose effect, 25 cases during 4,147 days of partially vaccinated person-time, and seven cases during 4,661 days of fully vaccinated person-time. FIGURE 1 New SARS-CoV-2 cases* among residents of two skilled nursing facilities, by case date † — Connecticut, December 21, 2020–February 12, 2021§ * Any positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction or antigen test result. † Symptom onset date or positive test result date, whichever occurred earlier. § Investigation period was December 29, 2020–February 9, 2021 for facility A and December 21, 2020–February 12, 2021 for facility B. The figure is a histogram, an epidemiologic curve showing new SARS-CoV-2 cases among residents of two skilled nursing facilities, by case date, in Connecticut, during December 21, 2020–February 12, 2021. Estimated effectiveness of partial vaccination in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection was 63% (95% CI = 33%–79%) and was similar when residents with past SARS-CoV-2 were excluded (VE = 60%, 95% CI = 30%–77%). VE estimates were also similar in both partial vaccination endpoint sensitivity analyses (second dose +0 days VE = 66%, 95% CI = 29%–83%; second dose +14 days VE = 60%, 95% CI = 33%–77%). As a result of the course of the outbreaks at both facilities, most cases occurred toward the start of the investigation period (Figure 2), and because the cohort began at the first vaccination clinic, most of the unvaccinated person-time also occurred toward the start of the investigation period. Thus, once residents became fully vaccinated (second dose +7 days) toward the end of the investigation period, there were insufficient new cases and remaining person-time in the unvaccinated group to serve as a comparator for estimation of full 2-dose VE. FIGURE 2 Proportion of skilled nursing facility residents who remained uninfected with SARS-CoV-2 during the investigation period,* by COVID-19 vaccination status † and facility — Connecticut, December 21, 2020–February 12, 2021 * Investigation period was December 29, 2020–February 9, 2021 for facility A and December 21, 2020–February 12, 2021 for facility B. † Vaccination status is classified as unvaccinated or partially vaccinated. Partially vaccinated refers to the time from day 14 after first dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine through day 7 after the second dose. Greenwood’s method was used to estimate confidence intervals around the Kaplan-Meier estimator. The figure is a line chart showing the proportion of skilled nursing facility residents who remained uninfected with SARS-CoV-2 during the investigation period, by COVID-19 vaccination status and facility, in Connecticut, during December 21, 2020–February 12, 2021. Discussion Partial vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was 63% effective in preventing new SARS-CoV-2 infections in SNF residents, a disproportionately affected population excluded from initial preauthorization vaccine clinical trials. Even during a large disease outbreak in a long-term care setting, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine provided protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, including in older adults aged ≥65 years with a high prevalence of underlying medical conditions. The findings in this report are comparable to other first-dose vaccine efficacy and effectiveness estimates for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for the broader adult population in noncongregate settings. In the phase 3 clinical trial, efficacy during the interval between first and second doses was estimated at 52% (95% CI = 30%–68%) ( 8 ). In a recent study of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in Israel, effectiveness against PCR-confirmed infection in the general adult population during days 14–20 and 21–27 after the first dose was 46% (95% CI = 40%–51%) and 60% (95% CI = 53%–66%, respectively) ( 6 ). Effectiveness was somewhat lower during days 14–20 and 21–27 among persons aged ≥70 years (22%; 95% CI = −9%–44% and 50%; 95% CI = 19%–72%, respectively) and among those with three or more underlying medical conditions (37%; 95% CI = 12%–55% and 37%; 95% CI = −1%–62%) ( 6 ). In this investigation, nearly 25% of residents had confirmed past SARS-CoV-2 infection. Serologic studies have indicated that preexisting immunity might strengthen the response to a single dose of COVID-19 vaccine ( 9 ). A sensitivity analysis excluding person-time contributed by residents with confirmed past infections did not substantially alter VE estimates for residents receiving the first vaccine dose. Among residents in this investigation with past confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, first-dose vaccination rates were >90%, and only one reinfection was documented, limiting the ability to determine the impact of past infection. The findings in this report are subject to at least seven limitations. First, because there were no clear factors that would differentially affect the risk for infection among residents within either facility, such as units with higher attack rates or different infection prevention practices, each observation in the model was treated as independent. If risk was not independent, this could have biased the VE estimates. Second, 2-dose VE estimates were not possible because unvaccinated cases and person-time after second-dose vaccination clinics were insufficient. Third, small sample sizes did not allow for analyses of secondary endpoints, such as effectiveness against symptomatic illness, hospitalization, or death. Fourth, although there was no change in guidance around outbreak control measures such as cohorting and other infection prevention and control strategies concurrent with vaccine introduction, had these measures been implemented differently for vaccinated and unvaccinated residents, VE estimates could have been biased. Fifth, racial minority groups were underrepresented in this investigation compared with the general population of older adults, and ethnicity data were missing for approximately one third of residents, which might affect generalizability to other SNF populations. Sixth, although excluding person-time from residents with known past confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection did not influence VE estimates in this analysis, there could have been residents with unknown past infection who could still have acted as a source of potential bias. Finally, unrecognized underlying differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated residents might have confounded the effectiveness estimates. Strengths of the investigation include accurate collection of vaccination data through direct abstraction from resident electronic medical records and active ascertainment of SARS-CoV-2 infection through frequent, facility-wide resident testing. Findings from this retrospective cohort analysis demonstrate that partial vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was associated with a significant reduction in the risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection among SNF residents. These results, coupled with the findings from a previous study among comparable older adult populations in Israel that reported more robust protection after the second dose ( 6 ), suggest that complete 2-dose vaccination is an important strategy for preventing COVID-19 in this disproportionately affected population. Further study of this population should continue as larger sample sizes become available. LTCFs and jurisdictions should actively ensure that they have plans in place for continued allocation and administration of COVID-19 vaccines to residents and staff members ( 10 ). Summary What is already known about this topic? Skilled nursing facility (SNF) residents, generally older and with more underlying medical conditions than community-dwelling adults, were not included in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials. Little is known about COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in SNF residents. What is added by this report? A retrospective cohort analysis in two Connecticut SNFs found partial vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (from >14 days after dose 1 through 7 days after dose 2) to be 63% (95% confidence interval = 33%–79%) effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection. What are the implications for public health practice? Even with partial vaccination, Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine provides protection to SNF residents. To optimize vaccine impact among this population, high coverage with the complete 2-dose series is recommended.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Rates of COVID-19 Among Residents and Staff Members in Nursing Homes — United States, May 25–November 22, 2020

              During the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, nursing homes were identified as congregate settings at high risk for outbreaks of COVID-19 ( 1 , 2 ). Their residents also are at higher risk than the general population for morbidity and mortality associated with infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in light of the association of severe outcomes with older age and certain underlying medical conditions ( 1 , 3 ). CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) launched nationwide, facility-level COVID-19 nursing home surveillance on April 26, 2020. A federal mandate issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), required nursing homes to commence enrollment and routine reporting of COVID-19 cases among residents and staff members by May 25, 2020. This report uses the NHSN nursing home COVID-19 data reported during May 25–November 22, 2020, to describe COVID-19 rates among nursing home residents and staff members and compares these with rates in surrounding communities by corresponding U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) region.* COVID-19 cases among nursing home residents increased during June and July 2020, reaching 11.5 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks (calculated as the total number of occupied beds on the day that weekly data were reported) (week of July 26). By mid-September, rates had declined to 6.3 per 1,000 resident-weeks (week of September 13) before increasing again, reaching 23.2 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks by late November (week of November 22). COVID-19 cases among nursing home staff members also increased during June and July (week of July 26 = 10.9 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks) before declining during August–September (week of September 13 = 6.3 per 1,000 resident-weeks); rates increased by late November (week of November 22 = 21.3 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks). Rates of COVID-19 in the surrounding communities followed similar trends. Increases in community rates might be associated with increases in nursing home COVID-19 incidence, and nursing home mitigation strategies need to include a comprehensive plan to monitor local SARS-CoV-2 transmission and minimize high-risk exposures within facilities. On May 25, 2020, CMS-certified nursing homes began reporting data to NHSN in response to a federal mandate ( 4 ). This reporting included data on the number of beds occupied and the number of COVID-19 cases among residents and staff members confirmed by antigen tests or laboratory-based viral nucleic acid test results ( 5 ). Nursing home staff members and facility personnel comprise all persons working or volunteering in the facility, including contractors, temporary staff members, resident caregivers, and staff members who might work at multiple facilities ( 5 ). Data on COVID-19 cases among residents and staff members reported during May 25–November 22, 2020 were analyzed for nursing homes in all U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto Rico. Facilities are expected to enter incident COVID-19 case counts on residents and staff members weekly. Facilities were excluded from the analysis for specific weeks if data on cases, occupied beds, or staffing were not reported. Data quality checks indicated that in some cases, facilities might have misinterpreted instructions and that cumulative case counts, rather than weekly case counts, were being entered. Based on the pattern of data entry, if it appeared that cumulative data were entered consecutively, data field values were reassigned to a weekly incident value. Outlier data points were derived using the distribution of facility-level resident and staff member case counts reported on a single collection date among reporting nursing homes over the entire cohort during the data collection period, and any value above the 99.9th percentile (i.e., >55 cases for residents and >37 cases for staff members) was truncated to the corresponding cut-point value. Case count data were aggregated weekly, and resident-weeks were calculated as the total number of occupied beds on the day data were reported. Because data on number of staff members employed is not collected, the proxy denominator of resident-weeks was used as a closest best estimate of the at-risk denominator for staff members. Weekly incidence was calculated for the weekly aggregated data at the end of each calendar week. Cases per 1,000 resident-week were calculated for residents and staff members using the number of COVID-19 cases reported in a week over the corresponding 1,000 resident-weeks. Community COVID-19 rates per 100,000 population were calculated for each of the ten HHS regions as the total number of cases reported in a week over the region’s estimated population, using data available at USAFacts.org ( 6 ). Calculations of cases per 100,000 population in Region 2 excluded cases reported from Puerto Rico and in HHS Region 9 excluded cases reported from Guam. Rates among residents and staff members and in the surrounding community were compared by HHS region. Analyses were conducted using SAS software (version 9.4; SAS Institute). This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy. † Among 15,404 nursing homes, 15,342 (99.6%) were included in the analysis. Overall, 13,185 (86%) nursing homes had ≥50 beds, 10,750 (70.1%) were for-profit, and 14,349 (93.5%) had dual Medicare and Medicaid certification (Table). Most nursing homes (8,688; 62.2%) were in HHS Regions 4, 5, 6, and 7. TABLE Characteristics of nursing homes reporting COVID-19 to the National Healthcare Safety Network (N = 15,342) — United States, May 25–November 22, 2020 Characteristic No. (%) Facility bed size* 199 888 (5.8) Unknown† 31 (0.2) Facility ownership* Not-for-profit 3,678 (24.0) For-profit 10,750 (70.1) Government 883 (5.8) Unknown† 31 (0.2) Certification* Dual Medicare and Medicaid 14,349 (93.5) Medicare only 652 (4.2) Medicaid only 310 (2.0) Unknown† 31 (0.2) HHS regions § Region 1 836 (6.0) Region 2 909 (6.5) Region 3 1,225 (8.8) Region 4 2,329 (16.7) Region 5 3,108 (22.2) Region 6 1,880 (13.5) Region 7 1,371 (9.8) Region 8 567 (4.1) Region 9 1,334 (9.5) Region 10 414 (3.0) Abbreviations: COVID-19 = coronavirus disease 2019, HHS = U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. * Data source: https://data.medicare.gov/Nursing-Home-Compare/Provider-Info/4pq5-n9py/data. Unknown category includes nursing homes where the information is not available. † Unknown represents facilities without information on bed size, facility ownership, and certification § Region 1: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont; Region 2: New Jersey, New York, and Puerto Rico; Region 3: Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia; Region 4: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee; Region 5: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin; Region 6: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas; Region 7: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska; Region 8: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming; Region 9: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Guam; Region 10: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. During May 25–November 22, nursing homes reported 572,135 cases to NHSN, 296,762 (51.8%) of which occurred among residents and 275,373 (48.2%) among staff members. Among residents, cases per 1,000 resident-weeks increased during June and July, reaching 11.5 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks (week of July 26), and decreased during August–September (week of September 13 incidence = 6.3 per 1,000 resident-weeks). In November, rates increased again, reaching 23.2 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks (week of November 22) (Figure). Among staff members, cases per 1,000 resident-weeks also increased during June and July, reaching 10.9 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks (week of July 26); incidence then decreased during August and September (week of September 13, 2020 incidence = 6.3 per 1,000 resident-weeks). Incidence among staff members also increased in November, reaching 21.3 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks during the week of November 22 (Figure). Although incidence among residents (10.5 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks) was higher than that among staff members (8.9 per 1,000 resident-weeks) on May 31, during increases in July and November incidence among staff members closely matched that among residents, and trends were similar. FIGURE COVID-19 cases* per 1,000 resident-weeks † among nursing home residents (A) and staff members (B) — United States, May 25–November 22, 2020 Abbreviation: COVID-19 = coronavirus disease 2019. * Confirmed COVID-19 cases were diagnosed by a positive SARS-CoV-2 viral nucleic acid or antigen test. † Resident-weeks were calculated as the total number of occupied beds on the day data were reported. The figure is a series of two panels showing COVID-19 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks among nursing home residents and staff members in the United States during May 25–November 22, 2020. Nursing homes in HHS Regions 1 and 2 reported peak incidences of >10.0 cases per 1,000 resident-weeks among residents and staff members during May or June before rates subsequently declined to 178 cases per 100,000 in HHS Regions 4, 6, and 9. Rates declined in all HHS regions during August–September and began increasing again in October, with rates in HHS Region 5, 7, and 8 exceeding 615 cases per 100,000 during the week of November 22. For each HHS region, trends in nursing home incidence among residents and staff members were similar to population trends in the surrounding community. Discussion There has been a substantial incidence of COVID-19 among nursing home residents and staff since May 2020. Rates of COVID-19 among residents and staff members in nursing homes fluctuated during weeks ending May 31–November 22, with regional and temporal variability; however, trends resembled those in the surrounding communities. These data suggest that increases in community rates might be associated with increases in nursing home COVID-19 incidence and that nursing home mitigation strategies need to include a comprehensive plan to monitor local SARS-CoV-2 transmission and minimize high-risk exposures within facilities. Increased COVID-19 incidence in communities with nursing homes increases the risk for introduction of SARS-CoV-2 by staff members. In Minnesota, ≥34% of high-risk exposures among health care staff members involved nonpatient contacts, including household and social contacts, indicating potential lapses in adherence to mask use and social distancing recommendations during social interactions ( 7 ). Addressing health care safety gaps calls for educating staff members about the risk for community exposure, encouraging consistent use of CDC guidance § in all settings, as well as ensuring adequate access and availability of personal protective equipment ( 8 ). In addition, nursing home adherence to the CMS requirement to conduct routine testing among all staff members and isolate newly admitted or readmitted residents with an unknown COVID-19 status can reduce the risk for SARS-CoV-2 introduction into nursing homes ( 9 ). The findings in this report are subject to at least four limitations. First, nursing homes reported aggregate weekly data to NHSN, preventing patient-level analysis. Second, reported data were not validated, and trends among nursing homes excluded because of missing data might have differed. Third, the sources of introduction and direction of transmission between residents and staff members could not be determined. Finally, these results might not be generalizable to residents and staff members of other long-term care facilities, such as those for the developmentally disabled and assisted living facilities because this analysis was restricted to nursing homes reporting COVID-19 data weekly, as required by CMS. Nursing homes are high-risk, congregate settings that require a comprehensive infection prevention and control strategy to reduce SARS-CoV-2 entry into the facility and mitigate transmission to prevent severe outcomes. CDC’s nursing home guidance provides tiered recommendations for different phases of a COVID-19 response and should be implemented in addition to CMS regulatory requirements ( 9 ). Prioritization of nursing home residents and staff members for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, is an additional strategy to assist mitigation ( 10 ). Guidance and federal requirements could be further improved through assessing factors associated with the incidence of COVID-19 among nursing home staff members and residents, including factors associated with community-acquired infections leading to transmission within nursing homes. Summary What is already known about this topic? In the United States, COVID-19 among older adults living in nursing homes is associated with higher rates of severe illness and death. What is added by this report? Rates of COVID-19 among nursing home residents and staff members increased during June and July 2020, and again in November. Trends in reported COVID-19 cases among nursing home residents and staff members were similar to trends in incidence of COVID-19 in surrounding communities. What are the implications for public health practice? Increases in community rates might be associated with increases in nursing home COVID-19 incidence, and nursing home mitigation strategies need to include a comprehensive plan to monitor local SARS-CoV-2 transmission and minimize high-risk exposures within facilities.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
                MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
                WR
                Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
                Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
                0149-2195
                1545-861X
                27 August 2021
                27 August 2021
                : 70
                : 34
                : 1163-1166
                Affiliations
                CDC COVID-19 Response Team; Lantana Consulting Group, East Thetford, Vermont.
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Srinivas Nanduri, snanduri@ 123456cdc.gov .
                Article
                mm7034e3
                10.15585/mmwr.mm7034e3
                8389386
                34437519
                ba696c15-8ee8-4394-8711-6ebedcd3974c

                All material in the MMWR Series is in the public domain and may be used and reprinted without permission; citation as to source, however, is appreciated.

                History
                Categories
                Full Report

                Comments

                Comment on this article