Occupation, Worker Vulnerability, and COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake: Analysis of the Virus Watch prospective cohort study

Beale, Sarah; Burns, Rachel J.; Braithwaite, Isobel; Byrne, Thomas; Fong, Wing Lam Erica; Fragaszy, Ellen; Geismar, Cyril; Hoskins, Susan; Kovar, Jana; Navaratnam, Annalan M D; Nguyen, Vincent; Patel, Parth; Yavlinsky, Alexei; Tongeren, Martie van; Aldridge, Robert W; Hayward, Andrew

doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.10.080

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results are consistent with the findings from the Virus Watch cohort which found that individuals working in transport, trade, service and sales had the lowest uptake (12), and also with an analysis based on 2021 Census data which suggested high uptake amongst office-based and professional workers and low uptake amongst people working in elementary occupations (14).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Another potential source of bias relates to the representativeness of the CIS. Estimated vaccine uptake reported here is similar to that observed in the Virus Watch cohort (12) but is considerably higher compared to some administrative databases, potentially indicating that response rate might be higher in vaccinated individuals. For example, we estimated the proportion of manual workers who had received three vaccinations to be over 80% by 11 th May 2022.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

“…This would be particularly important if there are groups where low vaccination rates contribute to a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the workplace. Recent studies have highlighted considerable variation in vaccine uptake across occupations (12)(13)(14), with low levels observed in people working in elementary trades. However, different data sources have different limitations, such as the possibility of non-random missing data (14).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The potential contribution of vaccination uptake to occupational differences in risk of SARS-CoV-2: Analysis of the ONS COVID-19 Infection Survey

Demou

Cherrie

Edge

et al. 2023

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess variation in vaccination uptake across occupational groups as a potential explanation for variation in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design We analysed data from the UK Office of National Statistics COVID-19 Infection Survey linked to vaccination data from the National Immunisation Management System in England from December 1st 2020 to 11th May 2022. We analysed vaccination uptake and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk by occupational group and assessed whether adjustment for vaccination reduced the variation in risk between occupational groups. Setting Results Estimated rates of triple-vaccination were high across all occupational groups (80% or above), but were lowest for food processing (80%), personal care (82%), hospitality (83%), manual occupations (84%), and retail (85%). High rates were observed for individuals working in health (95% for office-based, 92% for those in patient-facing roles) and education (91%) and office-based workers not included in other categories (90%). The impact of adjusting for vaccination when estimating relative risks of infection was generally modest (ratio of hazard ratios reduced from 1.38 to 1.32), but was consistent with the hypothesis that low vaccination rates contribute to elevated risk in some groups. Conversely, estimated relative risk for some occupational groups, such as people working in education, remained high despite high vaccine coverage. Conclusions Variation in vaccination coverage might account for a modest proportion of occupational differences in infection risk. Vaccination rates were uniformly very high in this cohort, which may suggest that the participants are not representative of the general population. Accordingly, these results should be considered tentative pending the accumulation of additional evidence.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The potential contribution of vaccination uptake to occupational differences in risk of SARS-CoV-2: Analysis of the ONS COVID-19 Infection Survey

Demou

Cherrie

Edge

et al. 2023

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Higher rates of COVID-19 disease and death were seen in minoritised groups such as ethnic minorities, migrants and those living in areas of higher deprivation, when compared with those of white ethnicity, non-migrants and those living in areas with less deprivation 1 . These characteristics can overlap and compound health inequities at intersections 2 and often relate to phenomena beyond the individual such as structural factors including occupational risks 3,4 and household overcrowding 5 . Health systems can act to both redress health inequities, but also inadvertently reinforce them, leading to differential access to healthcare occurring across demographic groups.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers in accessing healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic: analysis of the Virus Watch community cohort study

Menezes,

Siegele-Brown,

Yavlinsky

et al. 2024

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Differential barriers to accessing healthcare contribute to inequitable health outcomes. This study aims to describe the characteristics of individuals who experienced barriers, and what those barriers were, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We analysed data from Virus Watch: an online survey-based community study of households in England and Wales. The primary outcome was reported difficulty accessing healthcare in the previous year. Results: Minority ethnic participants reported difficulty accessing healthcare more than White British participants (41.6% vs 37%), while for migrants this was at broadly similar levels to non-migrants. Those living in the most deprived areas reported difficulty more than those living in the least deprived quintile (45.5% vs. 35.5%). The most frequently reported barrier was cancellation/disruption of services due to the COVID-19 pandemic (72.0%) followed by problems with digital or telephone access (21.8%). Ethnic minority participants, migrants, and those from deprived areas more commonly described 'insufficient flexibility of appointments' and 'not enough time to explain complex needs' as barriers. Conclusions: Minority ethnic individuals and those living in deprived areas were more likely to experience barriers to healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, and it is essential they are addressed as services seek to manage backlogs of care.

show abstract

“…In the United Kingdom, there is now a considerable body of evidence showing occupational differences in Covid-19 infection [4][5][6], severity [7], vaccination availability and uptake [8,9], mortality [1,[10][11][12], and mitigation strategies [13,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors for SARS-Cov-2 infection at a United Kingdom electricity-generating company: a test-negative design case-control study

Rutter,

Van Tongeren,

Fletcher

et al. 2023

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Identify workplace risk factors for SARS-Cov-2 infection, using data collected by a United Kingdom electricity-generating company. Methods Using a test-negative design case-control study we estimated the odds ratios (OR) of infection by job category, site, test reason, sex, vaccination status, vulnerability, site outage, and site COVID-19 weekly risk rating, adjusting for age, test date and test type. Results From an original 80,077 COVID-19 tests, there were 70,646 included in the final analysis. Most exclusions were due to being visitor tests (5,030) or tests after an individual first tested positive (2,968). Women were less likely to test positive than men (OR=0.71; 95% confidence interval=0.58-0.86). Test reason was strongly associated with positivity and although not a cause of infection itself, due to differing test regimes by area it was a strong confounder for other variables. Compared to routine tests, tests due to symptoms were highest risk (94.99; 78.29-115.24), followed by close contacts (16.73; 13.80-20.29) and looser work contacts 2.66 (1.99-3.56). After adjustment, we found little difference in risk by job category, but some differences by site with three sites showing substantially lower risks, and one site showing higher risks in the final model. Conclusions Infection risk was not associated with job category. Vulnerable individuals were at slightly lower risk, tests during outages were higher risk, vaccination showed no evidence of an effect on testing positive, and site COVID-19 risk rating did not show an ordered trend in positivity rates.

show abstract

Occupation, Worker Vulnerability, and COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake: Analysis of the Virus Watch prospective cohort study

Cited by 13 publications

References 32 publications

The potential contribution of vaccination uptake to occupational differences in risk of SARS-CoV-2: Analysis of the ONS COVID-19 Infection Survey

The potential contribution of vaccination uptake to occupational differences in risk of SARS-CoV-2: Analysis of the ONS COVID-19 Infection Survey

Barriers in accessing healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic: analysis of the Virus Watch community cohort study

Risk factors for SARS-Cov-2 infection at a United Kingdom electricity-generating company: a test-negative design case-control study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About