Efectividad de la vacuna BNT162b2 para prevenir la COVID-19 en personal sanitario <span class="so-article-trans-title" dir="auto"> Translated title: Effectiveness of BNT162b2 vaccine to preventing COVID-19 in healthcare personnel </span>

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

Objetivo: Conocer la efectividad de la vacuna BNT162b2 en personal sanitario de un departamento de salud.

Método: Estudio de casos y controles con prueba negativa. Se incluyó personal sanitario con sospecha de COVID-19 y personal sanitario que fue contacto estrecho de casos de COVID-19 entre el 25 de enero y el 6 de junio de 2021. Se les realizó prueba de reacción en cadena de la polimerasa (PCR) para SARS-CoV-2; aquellos con PCR positiva fueron considerados casos y aquellos con PCR negativa fueron considerados controles. Se calculó la efectividad vacunal ajustada (EVa) para prevenir casos de COVID-19 y su intervalo de confianza del 95% (IC95%), mediante la fórmula EV = (1 − odds ratio) × 100.

Resultados: Se incluyeron 624 profesionales sanitarios; de ellos, 43 (6,9%) casos y 581 (93,1%) controles. La EVa de la pauta completa fue del 96,3% (IC95%: 82,5-99,2) y la de la pauta incompleta del 68,0% (IC95%: 30,0-85,4).

Conclusiones: La administración de la pauta completa de vacuna es efectiva para la prevención de casos de COVID-19 en el personal sanitario.

Translated abstract

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 (BNT162b2) in healthcare personnel of a Health Department.

Method: Test-negative case-control study. Healthcare personnel with suspected COVID-19 and healthcare personnel close contacts of COVID-19 cases were included between January 27th and June 6th, 2021. They were PCR tested for SARS-CoV-2; those with positive PCR were considered cases and those with negative PCR were considered controls. The adjusted vaccine effectiveness (aVE) to prevent COVID-19 cases and their 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated using the formula VE = (1 − odds ratio) × 100.

Results: 624 healthcare personnel were included, of which 43 (6.9%) were considered cases and 581 (93.8%) controls. The aVE of the complete regimen was 96.3% (95%CI: 82.5-99.2). The aVE of the incomplete pattern was 68.0% (95%CI: 30.0-85.4).

Conclusions: The administration of the complete pattern of BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 is effective for the prevention of cases of COVID-19 in healthcare personnel.

Related collections

Most cited references 14

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

COVID-19 vaccine coverage in health-care workers in England and effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against infection (SIREN): a prospective, multicentre, cohort study

Victoria Jane Hall, Sarah Foulkes, Ayoub Saei … (2021)

Background BNT162b2 mRNA and ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 adenoviral vector vaccines have been rapidly rolled out in the UK from December, 2020. We aimed to determine the factors associated with vaccine coverage for both vaccines and documented the vaccine effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in a cohort of health-care workers undergoing regular asymptomatic testing. Methods The SIREN study is a prospective cohort study among staff (aged ≥18 years) working in publicly-funded hospitals in the UK. Participants were assigned into either the positive cohort (antibody positive or history of infection [indicated by previous positivity of antibody or PCR tests]) or the negative cohort (antibody negative with no previous positive test) at the beginning of the follow-up period. Baseline risk factors were collected at enrolment, symptom status was collected every 2 weeks, and vaccination status was collected through linkage to the National Immunisations Management System and questionnaires. Participants had fortnightly asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing and monthly antibody testing, and all tests (including symptomatic testing) outside SIREN were captured. Data cutoff for this analysis was Feb 5, 2021. The follow-up period was Dec 7, 2020, to Feb 5, 2021. The primary outcomes were vaccinated participants (binary ever vacinated variable; indicated by at least one vaccine dose recorded by at least one of the two vaccination data sources) for the vaccine coverage analysis and SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by a PCR test for the vaccine effectiveness analysis. We did a mixed-effect logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with vaccine coverage. We used a piecewise exponential hazard mixed-effects model (shared frailty-type model) using a Poisson distribution to calculate hazard ratios to compare time-to-infection in unvaccinated and vaccinated participants and estimate the impact of the BNT162b2 vaccine on all PCR-positive infections (asymptomatic and symptomatic). This study is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN11041050, and is ongoing. Findings 23 324 participants from 104 sites (all in England) met the inclusion criteria for this analysis and were enrolled. Included participants had a median age of 46·1 years (IQR 36·0–54·1) and 19 692 (84%) were female; 8203 (35%) were assigned to the positive cohort at the start of the analysis period, and 15 121 (65%) assigned to the negative cohort. Total follow-up time was 2 calendar months and 1 106 905 person-days (396 318 vaccinated and 710 587 unvaccinated). Vaccine coverage was 89% on Feb 5, 2021, 94% of whom had BNT162b2 vaccine. Significantly lower coverage was associated with previous infection, gender, age, ethnicity, job role, and Index of Multiple Deprivation score. During follow-up, there were 977 new infections in the unvaccinated cohort, an incidence density of 14 infections per 10 000 person-days; the vaccinated cohort had 71 new infections 21 days or more after their first dose (incidence density of eight infections per 10 000 person-days) and nine infections 7 days after the second dose (incidence density four infections per 10 000 person-days). In the unvaccinated cohort, 543 (56%) participants had typical COVID-19 symptoms and 140 (14%) were asymptomatic on or 14 days before their PCR positive test date, compared with 29 (36%) with typical COVID-19 symptoms and 15 (19%) asymptomatic in the vaccinated cohort. A single dose of BNT162b2 vaccine showed vaccine effectiveness of 70% (95% CI 55–85) 21 days after first dose and 85% (74–96) 7 days after two doses in the study population. Interpretation Our findings show that the BNT162b2 vaccine can prevent both symptomatic and asymptomatic infection in working-age adults. This cohort was vaccinated when the dominant variant in circulation was B1.1.7 and shows effectiveness against this variant. Funding Public Health England, UK Department of Health and Social Care, and the National Institute for Health Research.

0 comments Cited 408 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Interim Estimates of Vaccine Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 Vaccines Among Health Care Personnel — 33 U.S. Sites, January–March 2021

Tamara Pilishvili, Katherine E. Fleming-Dutra, Jennifer Farrar … (2021)

0 comments Cited 112 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Effectiveness of the Comirnaty (BNT162b2, BioNTech/Pfizer) vaccine in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers, Treviso province, Veneto region, Italy, 27 December 2020 to 24 March 2021

Massimo Fabiani, Mauro Ramigni, Valentina Gobbetto … (2021)

Data on effectiveness of the BioNTech/Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in real-world settings are limited. In a study of 6,423 healthcare workers in Treviso Province, Italy, we estimated that, within the time intervals of 14–21 days from the first and at least 7 days from the second dose, vaccine effectiveness in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection was 84% (95% confidence interval (CI): 40–96) and 95% (95% CI: 62–99), respectively. These results could support the ongoing vaccination campaigns by providing evidence for targeted communication.

0 comments Cited 50 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Gac Sanit

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Gac Sanit

Title: Gaceta Sanitaria

Publisher: SESPAS. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U.

ISSN (Print): 0213-9111

ISSN (Electronic): 1578-1283

Publication date PMC-release: 26 November 2021

Publication date (Electronic): 26 November 2021

Affiliations

[a ]Unidad de Epidemiología, Servicio de Medicina Preventiva, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante (ISABIAL), Alicante, España

[b ]Unidad de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante (ISABIAL), Alicante, España

[c ]Servicio de Microbiología, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante (ISABIAL), Alicante, España

[d ]Grupo de Investigación en Salud Pública, Universidad de Alicante, Alicante, España

[e ]CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), España

Author notes

[* ]Autor para correspondencia

[+]

Grupo COVID-19 de Medicina Preventiva del Hospital General Universitario de Alicante: Natali Juliet Jiménez-Sepúlveda, Isel Lilibeth Gómez-Sotero, María Soledad Guerrero-Soler, Guillermo Platas Abenza, Marina Fuster-Pérez, Lidia Cartagena-Llopis, María Sánchez-Valero, Patricia Cerezo-Milán, Iluminada Martínez-Tornero, Laura Tremiño-Sánchez, Verónica Nadal-Morante, Miranda Monerris-Palmer, Ana Esclapez-Martínez e Isabel Escribano-Cañadas.

Article

Publisher Item ID: S0213-9111(21)00317-4

DOI: 10.1016/j.gaceta.2021.11.003

PMC ID: 8616741

SO-VID: c1efd223-75e3-4c5b-9ef5-30c17c0cb292

License:

Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

History

Date received : 9 July 2021

Date accepted : 9 November 2021

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Efectividad de la vacuna BNT162b2 para prevenir la COVID-19 en personal sanitario Translated title: Effectiveness of BNT162b2 vaccine to preventing COVID-19 in healthcare personnel

Read this article at

Abstract

Translated abstract

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 14

COVID-19 vaccine coverage in health-care workers in England and effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against infection (SIREN): a prospective, multicentre, cohort study

Interim Estimates of Vaccine Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 Vaccines Among Health Care Personnel — 33 U.S. Sites, January–March 2021

Effectiveness of the Comirnaty (BNT162b2, BioNTech/Pfizer) vaccine in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers, Treviso province, Veneto region, Italy, 27 December 2020 to 24 March 2021

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 274