Evaluation of Adverse Effects after the Second Dose of BNT162b2 Mrna Vaccination for COVID-19: A Survey-based Analysis among Italian Healthcare Workers

Gianluigi Ferrazza, Alessandro Nucera, Susanna Longo, Cristiana Ferrari, Andrea Mazza, Andrea Magrini, Luca Coppeta, Stefano Rizza
{"title":"Evaluation of Adverse Effects after the Second Dose of BNT162b2 Mrna Vaccination for COVID-19: A Survey-based Analysis among Italian Healthcare Workers","authors":"Gianluigi Ferrazza, Alessandro Nucera, Susanna Longo, Cristiana Ferrari, Andrea Mazza, Andrea Magrini, Luca Coppeta, Stefano Rizza","doi":"10.2174/0118749445268028230921100630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, healthcare workers have been at elevated risk of contracting COVID-19. Although COVID-19 vaccines have contributed to the eradication of, or substantial decreases in, the incidence of lethal diseases, the major determinant of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a fear of associated adverse effects. Here, we performed a survey assessing the reactogenicity and safety of BNT162b2 in a real-world setting.\n \n \n \n Data were collected from March 1 and June 14, 2021. A total of 206 hospital employees undergoing BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination completed the survey. These hospital workers received a questionnaire to collect the common and uncommon adverse effects developing 2–6 days after the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.\n \n \n \n After the second dose, female sex was found to be associated with a higher risk of vaccine-related severe systemic adverse effects than male sex (odds ratio [OR] 3.116, 95% CI 2.365–7.113). We also observed that the anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain titer, determined on the day when the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was administered, was significantly higher in participants with severe systemic effects than those without such effects (OR 1.017, 95% CI 1.001–1.034).\n \n \n \n Our study suggested that healthy female healthcare workers had a three-fold higher risk than healthy male healthcare workers of developing severe adverse effects after the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Further research is warranted to determine whether a high anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD titer determined at the time of the second vaccination might indicate a disproportionate inflammatory systemic reaction leading to severe adverse effects. Our findings might contribute to a decrease in the disappearance of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.","PeriodicalId":38960,"journal":{"name":"Open Public Health Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Public Health Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0118749445268028230921100630","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, healthcare workers have been at elevated risk of contracting COVID-19. Although COVID-19 vaccines have contributed to the eradication of, or substantial decreases in, the incidence of lethal diseases, the major determinant of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a fear of associated adverse effects. Here, we performed a survey assessing the reactogenicity and safety of BNT162b2 in a real-world setting. Data were collected from March 1 and June 14, 2021. A total of 206 hospital employees undergoing BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination completed the survey. These hospital workers received a questionnaire to collect the common and uncommon adverse effects developing 2–6 days after the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. After the second dose, female sex was found to be associated with a higher risk of vaccine-related severe systemic adverse effects than male sex (odds ratio [OR] 3.116, 95% CI 2.365–7.113). We also observed that the anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain titer, determined on the day when the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was administered, was significantly higher in participants with severe systemic effects than those without such effects (OR 1.017, 95% CI 1.001–1.034). Our study suggested that healthy female healthcare workers had a three-fold higher risk than healthy male healthcare workers of developing severe adverse effects after the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Further research is warranted to determine whether a high anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD titer determined at the time of the second vaccination might indicate a disproportionate inflammatory systemic reaction leading to severe adverse effects. Our findings might contribute to a decrease in the disappearance of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
第二剂BNT162b2 Mrna疫苗对COVID-19的不良反应评估:基于意大利医护人员的调查分析
背景和目的:自SARS-CoV-2大流行开始以来,医护人员感染COVID-19的风险一直在增加。尽管COVID-19疫苗有助于根除或大幅降低致命疾病的发病率,但对COVID-19疫苗犹豫不决的主要决定因素是担心相关的不良反应。在这里,我们进行了一项调查,评估了BNT162b2在现实环境中的反应性和安全性。方法:数据采集时间为2021年3月1日至6月14日。接受BNT162b2 mRNA疫苗接种的206名医院员工完成了调查。这些医院工作人员收到了一份问卷,以收集在第二剂辉瑞- biontech疫苗后2-6天发生的常见和不常见不良反应。结果:第二次接种后,女性发生疫苗相关严重全身不良反应的风险高于男性(比值比[OR] 3.116, 95% CI 2.365-7.113)。我们还观察到,在注射第二剂辉瑞- biontech疫苗当天测定的抗sars - cov -2受体结合域滴度,在有严重全身效应的参与者中显著高于没有这种效应的参与者(OR 1.017, 95% CI 1.001-1.034)。结论:我们的研究表明,健康女性医护人员在第二次接种辉瑞- biontech疫苗后发生严重不良反应的风险比健康男性医护人员高3倍。有必要进行进一步研究,以确定在第二次疫苗接种时检测到的高抗sars - cov -2 RBD滴度是否可能表明存在不成比例的全身炎症反应,导致严重的不良反应。我们的发现可能有助于减少COVID-19疫苗犹豫的消失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Open Public Health Journal
Open Public Health Journal Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: The Open Public Health Journal is an Open Access online journal which publishes original research articles, reviews/mini-reviews, short articles and guest edited single topic issues in the field of public health. Topics covered in this interdisciplinary journal include: public health policy and practice; theory and methods; occupational health and education; epidemiology; social medicine; health services research; ethics; environmental health; adolescent health; AIDS care; mental health care. The Open Public Health Journal, a peer reviewed journal, is an important and reliable source of current information on developments in the field. The emphasis will be on publishing quality articles rapidly and freely available worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Manual Lymphatic Drainage with Thai Traditional Massage on Breast Milk Volume, Breast Pain and Engorgement in Post-Cesarean Mothers of Preterm Infants: A Randomized Controlled Trial HIV/AIDS Risky Behavior Model for LGBT Youth in the Gorontalo Province Evaluation of Adverse Effects after the Second Dose of BNT162b2 Mrna Vaccination for COVID-19: A Survey-based Analysis among Italian Healthcare Workers Awareness among Healthcare Workers regarding Physical Hazards in Dental and Oral Hospitals of Semarang, Indonesia Linear and Nonlinear Associations between Meteorological Variables and the Incidence of Malaria in Zahedan District Southwest of Iran 2000-2019
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1