Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
LanguageLanguage
-
SubjectSubject
-
Item TypeItem Type
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersIs Peer Reviewed
Done
Filters
Reset
38
result(s) for
"Kissling, Esther"
Sort by:
Training for Foodborne Outbreak Investigations by Using Structured Learning Experience
by
Kissling, Esther
,
Burckhardt, Florian
in
Case studies
,
Criminal investigation
,
Development and progression
2020
We created a free and interactive training activity based on playing cards (disease detective cards) that introduces foodborne outbreak investigations to public health professionals and students. Competencies taught cover selected descriptive and analytic epidemiologic topics, such as case definition, epidemic curve, 2-by-2 tables, relative risks, attack rates, stratification, and confounding.
Journal Article
COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among healthcare workers during the Omicron period in the country of Georgia, January – June 2022
by
Ward, Caleb L.
,
Rojas Castro, Madelyn Yiseth
,
Chakhunashvili, Giorgi
in
Adult
,
Antibodies, Viral - blood
,
Biology and life sciences
2025
Understanding COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in healthcare workers (HCWs) is critical to inform vaccination policies. We measured COVID-19 VE against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic infection in HCWs in the country of Georgia from January - June 2022, during a period of Omicron circulation.
We conducted a cohort study of HCWs in six hospitals in Georgia. HCWs were enrolled in early 2021. Participants completed weekly symptom questionnaires. Symptomatic HCWs were tested by RT-PCR and/or rapid antigen test (RAT). Participants were also routinely tested, at varying frequencies during the study period, for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR or RAT, regardless of symptoms. Serology was collected quarterly throughout the study and tested by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We estimated absolute and relative VE of a first booster dose compared to a primary vaccine series as (1-hazard ratio)*100 using Cox proportional hazards models.
Among 1253 HCWs, 141 (11%) received a primary vaccine series (PVS) and a first booster, 855 (68%) received PVS only, and 248 (20%) were unvaccinated. Most boosters were BNT162b2 (Comirnaty original monovalent) vaccine (90%) and BBIBP-CorV vaccine (Sinopharm) (9%). Most PVS were BNT162b2 vaccine (68%) and BBIBP-CorV vaccine (24%). Absolute VE for a first booster was 40% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) -56-77) at 7-29 days following vaccination, -9% (95% CI -104-42) at 30-59 days following vaccination, and -46% (95% CI -156-17) at ≥ 60 days following vaccination. Relative VE of first booster dose compared to PVS was 58% (95% CI 1-82) at 7-29 days following vaccination, 21% (95% CI -33-54) at 30-59 days following vaccination, and -9% (95% CI -82-34) at ≥ 60 days following vaccination.
In Georgia, first booster dose VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs was moderately effective but waned very quickly during Omicron. Increased efforts to vaccinate priority groups in Georgia, such as healthcare workers, prior to periods of anticipated high COVID-19 incidence are essential.
Journal Article
Primary series COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among health care workers in the country of Georgia, March–December 2021
by
Ward, Caleb L.
,
Rojas Castro, Madelyn Yiseth
,
Chakhunashvili, Giorgi
in
Adult
,
Analysis
,
Antibodies, Viral - blood
2024
Healthcare workers (HCWs) have suffered considerable morbidity and mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) are available from middle-income countries in the WHO European Region. We evaluated primary series COVID-19 VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 among HCWs in Georgia.
HCWs in six hospitals in Georgia were invited to enroll in a prospective cohort study conducted during March 19-December 5, 2021. Participants completed weekly symptom questionnaires. Symptomatic HCWs were tested by RT-PCR and/or rapid antigen test (RAT), and participants were routinely tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR or RAT, regardless of symptoms. Serology was collected at enrolment, and quarterly thereafter, and tested by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We defined primary series vaccination as two doses of COVID-19 vaccine received ≥14 days before symptom onset. We estimated VE as (1-hazard ratio)*100 using a Cox proportional hazards model with vaccination status as a time-varying covariate. Estimates were adjusted by potential confounders that changed the VE estimate by more than 5%, according to the change-in-estimate approach.
Overall, 1561/3849 (41%) eligible HCWs enrolled and were included in the analysis. The median age was 40 (IQR: 30-53), 1318 (84%) were female, and 1003 (64%) had laboratory evidence of prior SARS-Cov-2 infection. At enrolment, 1300 (83%) were unvaccinated; By study end, 1082 (62%) had completed a primary vaccine series (69% BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech); 22% BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm); 9% other). During the study period, 191(12%) participants had a new PCR- or RAT-confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. VE against PCR- or RAT- confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was 58% (95%CI: 41; 70) for all primary series vaccinations, 68% (95%CI: 51; 79) for BNT162b2, and 40% (95%CI: 1; 64) for BBIBP-CorV vaccines. Among previously infected HCWs, VE was 58% (95%CI: 11; 80). VE against medically attended COVID-19 was 52% (95%CI: 28; 68), and VE against hospitalization was 69% (95% CI: 36; 85). During the period of predominant Delta variant circulation (July-December 2021), VE against symptomatic COVID-19 was 52% (95%CI: 30; 66).
Primary series vaccination with BNT162b2 and BBIBP-CorV was effective at preventing COVID-19 among HCWs, most of whom had previous infection, during a period of mainly Delta circulation. Our results support the utility of COVID-19 primary vaccine series, and the importance of increasing coverage, even among previously infected individuals.
Journal Article
Estimates of Pandemic Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe, 2009–2010: Results of Influenza Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe (I-MOVE) Multicentre Case-Control Study
2011
A multicentre case-control study based on sentinel practitioner surveillance networks from seven European countries was undertaken to estimate the effectiveness of 2009-2010 pandemic and seasonal influenza vaccines against medically attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as pandemic influenza A (H1N1) (pH1N1).
Sentinel practitioners swabbed ILI patients using systematic sampling. We included in the study patients meeting the European ILI case definition with onset of symptoms >14 days after the start of national pandemic vaccination campaigns. We compared pH1N1 cases to influenza laboratory-negative controls. A valid vaccination corresponded to >14 days between receiving a dose of vaccine and symptom onset. We estimated pooled vaccine effectiveness (VE) as 1 minus the odds ratio with the study site as a fixed effect. Using logistic regression, we adjusted VE for potential confounding factors (age group, sex, month of onset, chronic diseases and related hospitalizations, smoking history, seasonal influenza vaccinations, practitioner visits in previous year). We conducted a complete case analysis excluding individuals with missing values and a multiple multivariate imputation to estimate missing values. The multivariate imputation (n = 2902) adjusted pandemic VE (PIVE) estimates were 71.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 45.6-85.5) overall; 78.4% (95% CI 54.4-89.8) in patients <65 years; and 72.9% (95% CI 39.8-87.8) in individuals without chronic disease. The complete case (n = 1,502) adjusted PIVE were 66.0% (95% CI 23.9-84.8), 71.3% (95% CI 29.1-88.4), and 70.2% (95% CI 19.4-89.0), respectively. The adjusted PIVE was 66.0% (95% CI -69.9 to 93.2) if vaccinated 8-14 days before ILI onset. The adjusted 2009-2010 seasonal influenza VE was 9.9% (95% CI -65.2 to 50.9).
Our results suggest good protection of the pandemic monovalent vaccine against medically attended pH1N1 and no effect of the 2009-2010 seasonal influenza vaccine. However, the late availability of the pandemic vaccine and subsequent limited coverage with this vaccine hampered our ability to study vaccine benefits during the outbreak period. Future studies should include estimation of the effectiveness of the new trivalent vaccine in the upcoming 2010-2011 season, when vaccination will occur before the influenza season starts.
Journal Article
I-MOVE Multi-Centre Case Control Study 2010-11: Overall and Stratified Estimates of Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe
by
Ciancio, Bruno Christian
,
Kissling, Esther
,
Savulescu, Camelia
in
Adolescent
,
Adult
,
Age groups
2011
In the third season of I-MOVE (Influenza Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe), we undertook a multicentre case-control study based on sentinel practitioner surveillance networks in eight European Union (EU) member states to estimate 2010/11 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza.
Using systematic sampling, practitioners swabbed ILI/ARI patients within seven days of symptom onset. We compared influenza-positive to influenza laboratory-negative patients among those meeting the EU ILI case definition. A valid vaccination corresponded to > 14 days between receiving a dose of vaccine and symptom onset. We used multiple imputation with chained equations to estimate missing values. Using logistic regression with study as fixed effect we calculated influenza VE adjusting for potential confounders. We estimated influenza VE overall, by influenza type, age group and among the target group for vaccination.
We included 2019 cases and 2391 controls in the analysis. Adjusted VE was 52% (95% CI 30-67) overall (N = 4410), 55% (95% CI 29-72) against A(H1N1) and 50% (95% CI 14-71) against influenza B. Adjusted VE against all influenza subtypes was 66% (95% CI 15-86), 41% (95% CI -3-66) and 60% (95% CI 17-81) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and ≥60 respectively. Among target groups for vaccination (N = 1004), VE was 56% (95% CI 34-71) overall, 59% (95% CI 32-75) against A(H1N1) and 63% (95% CI 31-81) against influenza B.
Results suggest moderate protection from 2010-11 trivalent influenza vaccines against medically-attended ILI laboratory-confirmed as influenza across Europe. Adjusted and stratified influenza VE estimates are possible with the large sample size of this multi-centre case-control. I-MOVE shows how a network can provide precise summary VE measures across Europe.
Journal Article
Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines administered in the 2023 autumnal campaigns in Europe: Results from the VEBIS primary care test-negative design study, September 2023–January 2024
by
Latorre-Margalef, Neus
,
Rodrigues, Ana Paula
,
Kaczmarek, Marlena
in
Adolescent
,
Adult
,
Adults
2024
In autumn 2023, European vaccination campaigns predominantly administered XBB.1.5 vaccine. In a European multicentre study, we estimated 2023 COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic infection at primary care level between September 2023 and January 2024. Using a test-negative case–control design, we estimated VE in the target group for COVID-19 vaccination overall and by time since vaccination. We included 1057 cases and 4397 controls. Vaccine effectiveness was 40 % (95 % CI: 26–53 %) overall, 48 % (95 % CI: 31–61 %) among those vaccinated < 6 weeks of onset and 29 % (95 % CI: 3–49 %) at 6–14 weeks. Our results suggest that COVID-19 vaccines administered to target groups during the autumn 2023 campaigns showed clinically significant effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed, medically attended symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the 3 months following vaccination. A longer study period will allow for further variant-specific COVID-19 VE estimates, better understanding decline in VE and informing booster administration policies.
Journal Article
COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among healthcare workers in Albania (COVE-AL): protocol for a prospective cohort study and cohort baseline data
by
Ibrahim, Rawi
,
Kissling, Esther
,
Jorgensen, Pernille
in
Adult
,
Albania - epidemiology
,
Asymptomatic
2022
IntroductionCritical questions remain about COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in real-world settings, particularly in middle-income countries. We describe a study protocol to evaluate COVID-19 VE in preventing laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in health workers (HWs) in Albania, an upper-middle-income country.Methods and analysisIn this 12-month prospective cohort study, we enrolled HWs at three hospitals in Albania. HWs are vaccinated through the routine COVID-19 vaccine campaign. Participants completed a baseline survey about demographics, clinical comorbidities, and infection risk behaviours. Baseline serology samples were also collected and tested against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and respiratory swabs were collected and tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Participants complete weekly symptom questionnaires and symptomatic participants have a respiratory swab collected, which is tested for SARS-CoV-2. At 3, 6, 9 months and 12 months of the study, serology will be collected and tested for antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein and spike protein. VE will be estimated using a piecewise proportional hazards model (VE=1−HR).Baseline dataFrom February to May 2021, 1504 HWs were enrolled. The median age was 44 (range: 22–71) and 78% were female. At enrolment, 72% of participants were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2. 56% of participants were vaccinated with one dose, of whom 98% received their first shot within 4 days of enrolment. All HWs received the Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol and procedures were reviewed and approved by the WHO Ethical Review Board, reference number CERC.0097A, and the Albanian Institute of Public Health Ethical Review Board, reference number 156. All participants have provided written informed consent to participate in this study. The primary results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal at the time of completion.Trial registration numberNCT04811391.
Journal Article
Sociodemographic and Occupational Factors Associated with Low Early Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccine in Hospital-Based Healthcare Workers, Georgia, March–July 2021
by
McKnight, Carl Jason
,
Chakhunashvili, Giorgi
,
Kissling, Esther
in
Attitudes
,
Cohort analysis
,
Coronaviruses
2022
In Georgia, an upper-middle income European country, the COVID-19 vaccine rollout began on 15 March 2021 with health workers (HWs), a priority group for vaccination. We assessed the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination among HWs at six large hospitals in the early stages of the vaccine rollout (March–July 2021). Among 1533 HWs, 274 (17.9%) had received one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Strong independent predictors of early vaccine uptake were age > 40 years, especially 50–59 years old (aOR 2.40, 95% CI 1.50–3.88), considering the vaccine as “somewhat effective” or “very effective” rather than “not effective” (aOR 6.33, 95% CI 2.29–26.3 and aOR 10.9, 95% CI 3.88–45.70, respectively), and previous vaccination against seasonal influenza (aOR 2.98, 95% CI 2.19–4.08). Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was negatively associated with receiving the vaccine (aOR 0.6, 95% CI 0.40–0.80). Compared to physicians, nurses/midwives (aOR 0.22, 95% CI 0.15–0.32), administrative staff (aOR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22–0.56), and ancillary staff (aOR 0.07, 95% CI 0.04–0.15) were less likely to have received the COVID-19 vaccine. Tailoring the COVID-19 vaccine communications campaign to younger and non-physician HWs, and emphasizing the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine, could help further increase vaccine coverage among HWs in Georgia.
Journal Article
Exploring the effect of previous inactivated influenza vaccination on seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness against medically attended influenza: Results of the European I‐MOVE multicentre test‐negative case‐control study, 2011/2012‐2016/2017
2018
Background Results of previous influenza vaccination effects on current season influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) are inconsistent. Objectives To explore previous influenza vaccination effects on current season VE among population targeted for vaccination. Methods We used 2011/2012 to 2016/2017 I‐MOVE primary care multicentre test‐negative data. For each season, we compared current season adjusted VE (aVE) between individuals vaccinated and unvaccinated in previous season. Using unvaccinated in both seasons as a reference, we then compared aVE between vaccinated in both seasons, current only, and previous only. Results We included 941, 2645 and 959 influenza‐like illness patients positive for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B, respectively, and 5532 controls. In 2011/2012, 2014/2015 and 2016/2017, A(H3N2) aVE point estimates among those vaccinated in previous season were −68%, −21% and −19%, respectively; among unvaccinated in previous season, these were 33%, 48% and 46%, respectively (aVE not computable for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B). Compared to current season vaccination only, VE for both seasons' vaccination was (i) similar in two of four seasons for A(H3N2) (absolute difference [ad] 6% and 8%); (ii) lower in three of four seasons for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 18%, 26% and 29%), in two seasons for influenza A(H3N2) (ad 27% and 39%) and in two of three seasons for influenza B (ad 26% and 37%); (iii) higher in one season for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 20%) and influenza B (ad 24%). Conclusions We did not identify any pattern of previous influenza vaccination effect. Prospective cohort studies documenting influenza infections, vaccinations and vaccine types are needed to understand previous influenza vaccinations' effects.
Journal Article
BBIBP-CorV vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 in patients aged 60 years and older during the Delta-dominant period in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a test-negative case-control study
by
Cilovic-Lagarija, Seila
,
Musa, Sanjin
,
Skocibusic, Sinisa
in
Aged
,
Aged, 80 and over
,
Allergy and Immunology
2024
•Two doses of BBIBP-CorV provided considerable protection against moderate to severe COVID-19 in older adults during the Delta-dominant period.•Protection peaked within 3 months after the second dose of vaccine.•There is a need for additional doses.•We observed no effectiveness against mild COVID-19.
COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH) accelerated in the second half of 2021, with greater vaccine availability. In this study, we estimated the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of complete primary series BBIBP-CorV vaccine against COVID-19 in patients aged 60 years and older, during the Delta-dominant period, using a test-negative case-control design. Surveillance sites were 11 primary health care centers (PHC) collecting patient data from October 1, 2021, to January 4, 2022, retrospectively according to a common protocol. In total, we included 1711 participants in the analysis: 933 cases and 778 controls. Of the 933 cases, 508 (54.4 %) had mild and 425 (45.6 %) had moderate to severe disease presentation. We observed no effectiveness against mild COVID-19. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 65.0 % (95 %CI: 40.1–79.5) against moderate to severe COVID-19. In time since vaccination analysis, VE was 78.7 % (95 % CI: 54.8–89.9) in patients who received their last dose < 90 days before onset; 66.0 % (95 % CI: −0.5–88.5) in those 90–119 days before onset; 42.1 % (95 % CI: −88.6–82.3) in those 120–149 days before onset and 45.0 % (95 % CI: −94.0–84.4) in those ≥ 150 days before onset. In our study, two doses of BBIBP-CorV provided considerable protection against moderate to severe COVID-19 in older adults, highest within 3 months after second dose, during the Delta-dominant period. Point estimates declined thereafter, suggesting a need for additional doses.
Journal Article