The aim of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of the pre-hospital National Early Warning Score (pNEWS) and the pre-hospital Modified Early Warning Score (pMEWS) for predicting admission and in-hospital mortality in elderly patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). We also compare the value of the pNEWS with that of the ED NEWS (eNEWS) and ED MEWS (eMEWS) for predicting admission and in-hospital mortality. This retrospective, single-centre observational study was carried out in the ED of Jikei University Kashiwa Hospital, in Chiba, Japan, from 1st April 2017 to 31st March 2018. All patients aged 65 years or older were included in this study. The pNEWS/eNEWS were derived from seven common physiological vital signs: respiratory rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, the presence of inhaled oxygen parameters, body temperature, systolic blood pressure, pulse rate and Alert, responds to Voice, responds to Pain, Unresponsive (AVPU) score, whereas the pMEWS/eMEWS were derived from six common physiological vital signs: respiratory rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, body temperature, systolic blood pressure, pulse rate and AVPU score. Discrimination was assessed by plotting the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calculating the area under the ROC curve (AUC). The median pNEWS, pMEWS, eNEWS and eMEWS were significantly higher at admission than at discharge (p < 0.001). The median pNEWS, pMEWS, eNEWS and eMEWS of non-survivors were significantly higher than those of the survivors (p < 0.001). The AUC for predicting admission was 0.559 for the pNEWS and 0.547 for the pMEWS. There was no significant difference between the AUCs of the pNEWS and the pMEWS for predicting admission (p = 0.102). The AUCs for predicting in-hospital mortality were 0.678 for the pNEWS and 0.652 for the pMEWS. There was no significant difference between the AUCs of the pNEWS and the pMEWS for predicting in-hospital mortality (p = 0.081). The AUC for predicting admission was 0.628 for the eNEWS and 0.591 for the eMEWS. The AUC of the eNEWS was significantly greater than that of the eMEWS for predicting admission (p < 0.001). The AUC for predicting in-hospital mortality was 0.789 for the eNEWS and 0.720 for the eMEWS. The AUC of the eNEWS was significantly greater than that of the eMEWS for predicting in-hospital mortality (p < 0.001). For admission and in-hospital mortality, the AUC of the eNEWS was significantly greater than that of the pNEWS (p < 0.001, p < 0.001), and the AUC of the eMEWS was significantly greater than that of the pMEWS (p < 0.01, p < 0.05). Our single-centre study has demonstrated the low utility of the pNEWS and the pMEWS as predictors of admission and in-hospital mortality in elderly patients, whereas the eNEWS and the eMEWS predicted admission and in-hospital mortality more accurately. Evidence from multicentre studies is needed before introducing pre-hospital versions of risk-scoring systems.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the antibody reaction after administration of the BNT162b2 vaccine, and to reveal the factors that affect antibody production. This prospective study was carried out in the Association of EISEIKAI Medical and Healthcare Corporation Minamitama Hospital, in Tokyo, Japan, from April 15, 2021 to June 09, 2021. All our hospital’s workers who were administered the BNT162b2 vaccine as part of a routine program were included in this study. We calculated the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibody titter (1) before vaccination, (2) 7 to 20 days after the first vaccination, and (3) A total of 7 to 20 days after the second vaccination. The low-antibody titer group (LABG) was defined as the group having less than 25 percentiles of antibody titer. Univariate and Multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to ascertain the effects of factors on the likelihood of LABG. A total of 374 participants were eventually included in our study, and they were divided into 94 LABG and 280 non-LABG. All samples showed significant antibody elevation in the second antibody test, with a mean value of 3,476 U/mL. When comparing the LABG and non-LABG groups, the median age, blood sugar, and HbA1c were significantly higher in the LABG group. The rates of participants with low BMI (<18.5) and high BMI (>30) were significantly higher in the LABG group. The proportion of chronic lung disease, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, autoimmune disease, and cancer were significantly higher in the LABG group. Although there was no significant difference confirmed with respect to the exercise hours per day, the proportion of participants that did not perform outdoor exercises was significantly higher in the LABG group. The time interval between the second vaccination and the second antibody test, and between the first and the second vaccination was significantly longer in the non-LABG group. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, older than 60 years, the past history of hypertension, HbA1c higher than 6.5%, and lack of outdoor exercises were significant suppressors of antibody responses, whereas the length of days from the first to the second vaccination longer than 25 days promoted a significant antibody response. Again, our single-center study demonstrates that older than 60 years, hypertension, HbA1c higher than 6.5%, and lack of outdoor exercises were significant suppressors of antibody responses, whereas the length of days from the first to the second vaccination longer than 25 days promoted a significant antibody response. Evidence from multi-center studies is needed to develop further vaccination strategies.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the antibody reaction after administration of the BNT162b2 vaccine, and to reveal the factors that affect antibody production. This prospective study was carried out in the Association of EISEIKAI Medical and Healthcare Corporation Minamitama Hospital, in Tokyo, Japan, from April 15, 2021 to June 09, 2021. All our hospital's workers who were administered the BNT162b2 vaccine as part of a routine program were included in this study. We calculated the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibody titter 1) before vaccination, 2) seven to twenty days after the first vaccination, and 3) seven to twenty days after the second vaccination. The low-antibody titer group (LABG) was defined as the group having less than 25 percentiles of antibody titer. Univariate and Multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to ascertain the effects of factors on the likelihood of LABG. 374 participants were eventually included in our study, and they were divided into 94 LABG and 280 non-LABG. All samples showed significant antibody elevation in the second antibody test, with a mean value of 3476 U/mL. When comparing the LABG and non-LABG groups, the median age, blood sugar, and HbA1c were significantly higher in the LABG group. The rates of participants with low BMI (<18.5) and high BMI (>30) were significantly higher in the LABG group. The proportion of chronic lung disease, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, autoimmune disease, and cancer were significantly higher in the LABG group. Although there was no significant difference confirmed with respect to the exercise hours per day, the proportion of participants that did not perform outdoor activities was significantly higher in the LABG group. The time interval between the second vaccination and the second antibody test, and between the first and the second vaccination was significantly longer in the non-LABG group. Our logistic regression analysis revealed that the age, obesity, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, antihypertensive drug, antilipid drug, γ-GT, BS, HbA1c, and lack of outdoor activity were significant suppressors of antibody reaction, whereas maintaining the appropriate time interval between the first and the second vaccination could promote a significant antibody response. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, age, obesity, and lack of outdoor activities were significant suppressors of antibody reaction, whereas the length of days from the first to the second vaccination promoted a significant antibody response. Our single-center study demonstrates that age, obesity, and lack of outdoor activities were significant suppressors of antibody response, whereas maintaining the appropriate time interval between the first and the second vaccination could promote a significant antibody response. Evidence from multi-center studies is needed to develop further vaccination strategies.

Objective Vaccination programs are important to preventing COVID-19 infection. BNT162b2 is new type of vaccine, and previous studies have shown that the antibody response was significantly elevated in patients with prior COVID-19 infection after the first dose of BNT162b2 vaccination. However, no study has evaluated the efficacy of the vaccination or the adverse reactions of people with prior COVID-19 infection in Japan. The aim of this study is to evaluate the antibody titer and adverse reactions of BNT162b2 vaccine among participants with prior COVID-19 infection in Japan. Methods The data for this prospective study was collected between April 15, 2021, and June 9, 2021. All of the hospital staff who received the BNT162b2 vaccine were included in this study and were sorted into either the prior infection group or the control group. We collected the data of adverse reactions through self-reporting and calculated the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibody titer for all participants. Results The antibody titer of the prior-infection group in first antibody test was significantly higher than that of the control group in the second antibody test. There was no significant difference in adverse reactions between the prior infection group receiving its first vaccination and the control group receiving its second vaccination. Furthermore, the history of prior infection was not related to local and systemic adverse reactions in the multivariate logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Our study shows that the antibody response following the first vaccination in the prior COVID-19 infection group was found to be comparable to that of the second vaccination in the control group; however, the evaluation of adverse reactions was inadequate and further, large-scale studies are needed.