Vaccine effectiveness after 1 st and 2 nd dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in long-term care facility residents and healthcare workers – a Danish cohort study

  1. Ida Rask Moustsen-Helms
  2. Hanne-Dorthe Emborg
  3. Jens Nielsen
  4. Katrine Finderup Nielsen
  5. Tyra Grove Krause
  6. Kåre Mølbak
  7. Karina Lauenborg Møller
  8. Ann-Sofie Nicole Berthelsen
  9. Palle Valentiner-Branth

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

At the end of 2020, Denmark launched an immunization program against SARS-CoV-2. The Danish health authorities prioritized persons currently living in long-term care facilities (LTCF residents) and frontline healthcare workers (HCW) as the first receivers of vaccination. Here we present preliminary population based vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates in these two target groups.

Methods

The study was designed as a retrospective registry- and population-based observational cohort study including all LTCF residents and all HWC. The outcome was a polymerase chain reaction confirmed SARS-CoV-2, and VE was estimated for different periods following first and second dose. We used Poisson and Cox regressions to estimate respectively crude and calendar time-adjusted VE for the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine from Pfizer/BioNTech with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for vaccinated versus unvaccinated.

Results

A total of 39,040 LTCF residents (median age at first dose; 84 years, Interquartile range (IQR): 77-90) and 331,039 HCW (median age at first dose; 47 years, IQR: 36-57) were included. Among LTCF residents, 95.2% and 86.0% received first and second dose from 27 December 2020 until 18 February 2021, for HWC the proportion was 27.8% and 24.4%. During a median follow-up of 53 days, there were 488 and 5,663 confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases in the unvaccinated groups, whereas there were 57 and 52 in LTCF residents and HCW within the first 7 days after the second dose and 27 and 10 cases beyond seven days of second dose. No protective effect was observed for LTCF residents after first dose. In HCW, VE was 17% (95% CI; 4-28) in the > 14 days after first dose (before second dose). Furthermore, the VE in LTCF residents at day 0-7 of second dose was 52% (95% CI; 27-69) and 46% (95% CI; 28-59) in HCW. Beyond seven days of second dose, VE increased to 64% (95% CI; 14-84) and 90% (95% CI; 82-95) in the two groups, respectively.

Conclusion

The results were promising regarding the VE both within and beyond seven days of second vaccination with the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine currently used in many countries to help mitigate the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Impact of the research

So far, observational studies of the real-word effectiveness of the mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has been limited to the period after the administration of the first dose. This is the first report to date to present vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates after the second BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine. We estimated a VE of 52% and 46% in LTCF residents and HCW within seven days, which increased to 64% and 90% in the two groups respectively beyond seven days of immunization. These findings supports maintaining a two-dose schedule of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.08.21252200: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.03.08.21252200v1 on medRxiv