Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly transmissible and pathogenic coronavirus responsible for the pandemic coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). It has significant impact on human health and public safety along with negative social and economic consequences. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is likely the most effective approach to sustainably control the global COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccination is highly effective in reducing the risk of severe COVID-19 disease. Mass-scale vaccination will help us in attaining herd immunity and will lessen the negative impact of the disease on public health, social and economic conditions. The present pandemic stimulated the development of several effective vaccines based on different platforms. Although the vaccine is safe and efficacious, rare cases of thrombosis and thrombocytopenia following the use of vaccination with the ChAdOx1 CoV-19 vaccine (AstraZeneca, University of Oxford, and Serum Institute of India) or the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson) have been reported globally. This review focussed on the definition, epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical features, diagnosis, and management of vaccine associated thrombosis.

Introduction: COVID-19 has spread all over the world and most of the countries are still grappled with the Pandemic . Health-care-workers (HCWs) being the frontlines during such pandemics have different beliefs and faiths with regards to ethical aspects of preparations. Methodology: In order to study the perception of HCW about ethical aspects of COVID-19, a cross-sectional study was done in a tertiary-care-teaching hospital. A pretested questionnaire was circulated among the participants on a digital platform. Results: The HCWs were divided over many statements, like if COVID-19 was more hype than reality (45.77% disagreed and 43.25% agreed). 57.44% of participants either agreed or strongly agreed that the treatment of non-COVID-19 cases suffered due to arrangements made for COVID-19 cases. When the responses received against individual statements were compared with various other socio-demographic variables as a denominator, various interesting results were revealed. There was a significant difference of opinion among the participating HCWs ( P < 0.05). Conclusion: Differences of the opinions had their relationships to demographic characteristics of the subjects as well as related to perceived knowledge of COVID-19.