Survival of health workers infected by SARS-CoV-2 in the context of vaccination against COVID-19 in Peru

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the survival of health workers infected by SARS-CoV-2 in the context of the vaccination process against COVID-19 in Peru.

Methods

A survival analysis was performed using data from national health databases. Data from people between 18 and 59 years old infected with SARS-CoV-2 as evidenced by molecular or antigenic tests were included. Kaplan Meier graphs were produced to compare the survival of health workers and the rest of the population during 2021 and health workers during the first and second wave of mortality in Peru in 2020 and 2021, respectively.

Results

Data from 998,295 people were included. The average age was 41.2 years (SD 15.8) and 485,167 (48.6%) were women. A higher level of survival of health workers after vaccination was found compared to the general population and to the population of health workers before vaccination. It was evidenced that, at the beginning of the second wave, the risk of dying for health workers was twice that of the first wave (HR = 2). After vaccination (in the sixth month of the second wave), the risk of dying decreased to 87.5% less than in the first wave (HR = 0.125).

Conclusions

A positive change has been evidenced in the level of survival of health workers infected by SARS-CoV-2 during the context of vaccination against COVID-19 in Peru.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.08.03.21260614: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot 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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    The present study has some limitations. In the first place, since we do not have nominal data on people vaccinated at the national level, it cannot be determined whether all the health workers included were finally vaccinated during the study period. However, given the wide vaccination coverage in Peru for this population, it is estimated that the percentage of unvaccinated health workers would be low, and their exclusion would not significantly modify the results found. Additionally, in comparing survival between COVID-19 waves, the use of retrospective data does not allow an accurate assessment of the 60-day prognosis of patients infected in the last weeks of the year study period. However, this bias would act by attenuating the differences in survival found between the first and second waves, which could be even greater if patient mortality data were included in the following two months. Another aspect in this analysis is the difference in the availability of Peruvian health resources to face the COVID-19 pandemic in the first and second waves. Although this situation has been able to favor the reduction of mortality in the second wave, the change in survival seen during the start of the first and second doses and the period of protection strongly suggest the contribution of the vaccination process in the change in survival of health workers. The results found coincide with the evidence presented at the national level that suggests a potential influence of vaccination on t...

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    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.