On March 29, 2021, this report was posted as an MMWR Early Release on the MMWR website (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr)Messenger RNA (mRNA) BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 in randomized placebo-controlled Phase III trials (1,2); however, the benefits of these vaccines for preventing asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection, particularly when administered in real-world conditions, is less well understood. Using prospective cohorts of health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers* in eight U.S. locations during December 14, 2020-March 13, 2021, CDC routinely tested for SARS-CoV-2 infections every week regardless of symptom status and at the onset of symptoms consistent with COVID-19-associated illness. Among 3,950 participants with no previous laboratory documentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2,479 (62.8%) received both recommended mRNA doses and 477 (12.1%) received only one dose of mRNA vaccine. † Among unvaccinated participants, 1.38 SARS-CoV-2 infections were confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) per 1,000 person-days. § In contrast, among fully immunized (≥14 days after second dose) persons, 0.04 infections per 1,000 person-days were reported, and among partially immunized (≥14 days after first dose and * Occupational categories: primary health care personnel (physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and dentists), other allied health care personnel (nurses, therapists, technicians, medical assistants, orderlies, and all other persons providing clinical support in inpatient or outpatient settings), first responders (firefighters, law enforcement, corrections, and emergency medical technicians), other essential and frontline workers (workers in hospitality, delivery, and retail; teachers; and all other occupations that require contact within 3 feet of the public, customers, or coworkers as a routine part of their job). † An additional five participants received the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine (Johnson & Johnson), resulting in 2,961 vaccinated participants. § Person-days is an estimate of the time-at-risk (to SARS-CoV-2 infection) that each participant contributed to the study.
March 11, 2022, this report was posted as an MMWR Early Release on the MMWR website (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr).The BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was recommended by CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices for persons aged 12-15 years (referred to as adolescents in this report) on May 12, 2021, and for children aged 5-11 years on November 2, 2021 (1-4). Realworld data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) in these age groups are needed, especially because when the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant became predominant in the United States in December 2021, early investigations of VE demonstrated a decline in protection against symptomatic infection for adolescents aged 12-15 years and adults* (5). The PROTECT † prospective cohort of 1,364 children and adolescents aged 5-15 years was tested weekly for SARS-CoV-2, irrespective of symptoms, and upon COVID-19-associated illness during July 25, 2021-February 12, 2022. Among unvaccinated participants (i.e., those who had received no COVID-19 vaccine doses) with any laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, those with B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant infections were more likely to report COVID-19 symptoms (66%) than were those with Omicron infections (49%). Among fully vaccinated children aged 5-11 years, VE against any symptomatic and asymptomatic Omicron infection 14-82 days (the longest interval after dose 2 in this age group) after receipt of dose 2 of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 31% (95% CI = 9%-48%), adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, health information, frequency of social contact, mask use, location, and local virus circulation. Among adolescents aged 12-15 years, adjusted VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 87% (95% CI = 49%-97%) against symptomatic and asymptomatic Delta infection and 59% (95% CI = 22%-79%) against Omicron infection. Fully *
BACKGROUND: Information is limited on messenger RNA (mRNA) BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) and mRNA–1273 (Moderna) COVID–19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing SARS–CoV–2 infection or attenuating disease when administered in real–world conditions. METHODS: Prospective cohorts of 3,975 healthcare personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers completed weekly SARS–CoV–2 testing during December 14 2020—April 10 2021. Self–collected mid–turbinate nasal swabs were tested by qualitative and quantitative reverse–transcription—polymerase–chain–reaction (RT–PCR). VE was calculated as 100%× (1−hazard ratio); adjusted VE was calculated using vaccination propensity weights and adjustments for site, occupation, and local virus circulation . RESULTS: SARS–CoV–2 was detected in 204 (5.1%) participants; 16 were partially (≥14 days post–dose–1 to 13 days after dose–2) or fully (≥14 days post–dose–2) vaccinated, and 156 were unvaccinated; 32 with indeterminate status (<14 days after dose–1) were excluded. Adjusted mRNA VE of full vaccination was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]=76%—97%) against symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS–CoV–2 infection; VE of partial vaccination was 81% (95% CI=64%–90%). Among partially or fully vaccinated participants with SARS–CoV–2 infection, mean viral RNA load (Log10 copies/mL) was 40% lower (95% CI=16%–57%), the risk of self–reported febrile COVID–19 was 58% lower (Risk Ratio=0.42, 95% CI=0.18–0.98), and 2.3 fewer days (95% CI=0.8–3.7) were spent sick in bed compared to unvaccinated infected participants. CONCLUSIONS: Authorized mRNA vaccines were highly effective among working–age adults in preventing SARS–CoV–2 infections when administered in real–world conditions and attenuated viral RNA load, febrile symptoms, and illness duration among those with breakthrough infection despite vaccination.
Background African American adults suffer disproportionately from obesity-related chronic diseases, particularly at younger ages. In order to close the gap in these health disparities, efforts to develop and test culturally appropriate interventions are critical. Methods A PRISMA-guided systematic review was conducted to identify and critically evaluate health promotion interventions for African Americans delivered in barbershops and hair salons. Subject headings and keywords used to search for synonyms of ‘barbershops,’ ‘hair salons,’ and ‘African Americans’ identified all relevant articles (from inception onwards) from six databases: Academic Search Ultimate, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science (Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies for adult (> 18 years) African Americans delivered in barbershops and hair salons that evaluated interventions focused on risk reduction/management of obesity-related chronic disease: cardiovascular disease, cancer, and type 2 diabetes were included. Analyses were conducted in 2020. Results Fourteen studies met criteria for inclusion. Ten studies hosted interventions in a barbershop setting while four took place in hair salons. There was substantial variability among interventions and outcomes with cancer the most commonly studied disease state (n = 7; 50%), followed by hypertension (n = 5; 35.7%). Most reported outcomes were focused on behavior change (n = 10) with only four studies reporting clinical outcomes. Conclusions Health promotion interventions delivered in barbershops/hair salons show promise for meeting cancer screening recommendations and managing hypertension in African Americans. More studies are needed that focus on diabetes and obesity and utilize the hair salon as a site for intervention delivery. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42020159050.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.