Evaluating primary and booster vaccination prioritization strategies for COVID-19 by age and high-contact employment status using data from contact surveys.
Evaluating primary and booster vaccination prioritization strategies for COVID-19 by age and high-contact employment status using data from contact surveys.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.epidem.2023.100686
复制
发表时间：
2023-06
期刊：
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Mahmud, Ayesha S.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Roubenoff, Ethan;Feehan, Dennis;Mahmud, Ayesha S.
关于COVID-19疫苗优先次序的辩论围绕着平衡以下益处：(1)疫苗对严重疾病后果风险最高的人群提供的直接保护，以及(2)通过为感染和传播病毒风险最高的人群接种疫苗提供的间接保护。虽然65岁以上的成年人患COVID-19严重疾病和死亡的风险最高，但基本服务和其他接触率较高的面对面工作人员感染和传播SARS-CoV-2的风险可能更高。不幸的是，在了解这些人口统计群体的接触率和风险的异质性方面，可用的数据相对较少。在这里，我们回顾性地分析和评估按年龄和工人身份的疫苗接种优先策略。我们使用SARS-CoV-2传播的数学模型和作为伯克利人际接触调查的一部分收集的独特详细的接触数据来评估五种疫苗接种优先策略：(1)只优先考虑65岁以上的成年人，(2)只优先考虑高联系的员工，(3)在65岁以上的成年人和高联系的员工之间划分优先级，(4)65岁以上的成年人优先考虑高联系的员工，(5)高联系的员工优先考虑65岁以上的成年人。我们发现，对于初级两剂疫苗接种计划，假设接种率为70%，首先优先考虑65岁以上成年人的分层推广避免了最多的死亡（与没有接种疫苗的情况相比，死亡人数减少了31%），而优先考虑高接触工人的分层推广避免了最多的临床感染（与没有接种疫苗的情况相比，临床感染减少了14%）。我们还考虑了在假设的新型SARS-CoV-2变体随后爆发期间加强剂量的优先策略。我们发现，优先为65岁以上的成年人提供加强剂量的分层推广始终可以避免最多的死亡，而且根据SARS-CoV-2变体的流行病学和疫苗功效，它也可能避免最多的临床病例。
The debate around vaccine prioritization for COVID-19 has revolved around balancing the benefits from: (1) the direct protection conferred by the vaccine amongst those at highest risk of severe disease outcomes, and (2) the indirect protection through vaccinating those that are at highest risk of being infected and of transmitting the virus. While adults aged 65+ are at highest risk for severe disease and death from COVID-19, essential service and other in-person workers with greater rates of contact may be at higher risk of acquiring and transmitting SARS-CoV-2. Unfortunately, there have been relatively little data available to understand heterogeneity in contact rates and risk across these demographic groups. Here, we retrospectively analyze and evaluate vaccination prioritization strategies by age and worker status. We use a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and uniquely detailed contact data collected as part of the Berkeley Interpersonal Contact Survey to evaluate five vaccination prioritization strategies: (1) prioritizing only adults over age 65, (2) prioritizing only high-contact workers, (3) splitting prioritization between adults 65+ and high-contact workers, (4) tiered prioritization of adults over age 65 followed by high-contact workers, and (5) tiered prioritization of high-contact workers followed by adults 65+. We find that for the primary two-dose vaccination schedule, assuming 70% uptake, a tiered roll-out that first prioritizes adults 65+ averts the most deaths (31% fewer deaths compared to a no-vaccination scenario) while a tiered roll-out that prioritizes high contact workers averts the most number of clinical infections (14% fewer clinical infections compared to a no-vaccination scenario). We also consider prioritization strategies for booster doses during a subsequent outbreak of a hypothetical new SARS-CoV-2 variant. We find that a tiered roll-out that prioritizes adults 65+ for booster doses consistently averts the most deaths, and it may also avert the most number of clinical cases depending on the epidemiology of the SARS-CoV-2 variant and the vaccine efficacy.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Baker, Marissa G.;Peckham, Trevor K.;Seixas, Noah S.
通讯作者：
Seixas, Noah S.
DOI：
10.3961/jpmph.20.256
发表时间：
2020-07-01
期刊：
Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi
影响因子：
--
作者：
Hawkins, Devan
通讯作者：
Hawkins, Devan
DOI：
10.1056/nejmoa2035389
发表时间：
2021-02-04
期刊：
The New England journal of medicine
影响因子：
--
作者：
Baden LR;El Sahly HM;Essink B;Kotloff K;Frey S;Novak R;Diemert D;Spector SA;Rouphael N;Creech CB;McGettigan J;Khetan S;Segall N;Solis J;Brosz A;Fierro C;Schwartz H;Neuzil K;Corey L;Gilbert P;Janes H;Follmann D;Marovich M;Mascola J;Polakowski L;Ledgerwood J;Graham BS;Bennett H;Pajon R;Knightly C;Leav B;Deng W;Zhou H;Han S;Ivarsson M;Miller J;Zaks T;COVE Study Group
通讯作者：
COVE Study Group
DOI：
10.1097/ede.0000000000001412
发表时间：
2021-11-01
期刊：
Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)
影响因子：
--
作者：
Liu CY;Berlin J;Kiti MC;Del Fava E;Grow A;Zagheni E;Melegaro A;Jenness SM;Omer SB;Lopman B;Nelson K
通讯作者：
Nelson K
影响因子：
13.6
作者：
Levin AT;Hanage WP;Owusu-Boaitey N;Cochran KB;Walsh SP;Meyerowitz-Katz G
通讯作者：
Meyerowitz-Katz G