Abstract
Introduction 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.
Methods 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.
Results 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 BIBP-CorV vaccine (Sinopharm) (9%). Most PVS were BNT162b2 vaccine (68%) and BIBP-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, and - 46% (95% CI -156 – 17) at ≥ 60 days. 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, and -9% (95% CI -82 – 34) at ≥ 60 days.
Conclusion 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.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Yes
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the NCDC and WHO Research Ethics Review Committees (reference numbers IRB 2021-014 and CERC.0097C, respectively). The CDC humans review determined the activity to be a public health evaluation. All participants provided written informed consent. The study is also registered at clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier NCT04868448).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions. The authors do not have consent from study participants to share the data.
