Christopher Holzmann-Littig

Dr. Christopher Holzmann-Littig

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

8Years (2019-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
12 July 2021 in Vaccines
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CHChristopher Holzmann-Littig
Christopher Holzmann-Littig
MBMatthias Christoph Braunisch
Matthias Christoph Braunisch
PMPeter Kranke, MBA
Peter Kranke, MBA
MPMaria Popp
Maria Popp
CSChristian Seeber
Christian Seeber
CSChristoph Schmaderer
Christoph Schmaderer
Vaccination hesitancy is a threat to herd immunity. Healthcare workers (HCWs) play a key role in promoting Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in the general population. We therefore aimed to provide data on COVID-19 vaccination acceptance/hesitancy among German HCWs. For this exploratory, cross-sectional study, an online survey was conducted in February 2021. The survey included 54 items on demographics; previous vaccination behavior; trust in vaccines, physicians, the pharmaceutical industry and health politics; fear of adverse effects; assumptions regarding the consequences of COVID-19; knowledge about vaccines; and information seeking behavior. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated and chi-square tests were performed. Four thousand five hundred surveys were analyzed. The overall vaccination acceptance was 91.7%. The age group ≤20 years showed the lowest vaccination acceptance. Factors associated with vaccination hesitancy were lack of trust in authorities and pharmaceutical companies. Attitudes among acquaintances were associated with vaccination hesitancy too. Participants with vaccination hesitancy more often obtained information about COVID-19 vaccines via messenger services or online video platforms and underperformed in the knowledge test. We found high acceptance amongst German HCWs. Several factors associated with vaccination hesitancy were identified which could be targeted in HCW vaccination campaigns.

23 April 2021 in medRxiv
Verified
Preprint
Open access
PDF file
CHChristopher Holzmann-Littig
Christopher Holzmann-Littig
MBMatthias Christoph Braunisch
Matthias Christoph Braunisch
PKPeter Kranke
Peter Kranke
MPMaria Popp
Maria Popp
CSChristian Seeber
Christian Seeber
CSChristoph Schmaderer
Christoph Schmaderer
Background Vaccination hesitancy is a serious threat to achieve herd immunity in a global and rapidly changing pandemic situation. Health care workers play a key role in the treatment of patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and in promoting vaccination in the general population. The aim of the study was to provide data on COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and barriers among healthcare workers in Germany to support health policymakers choosing specific vaccination campaign strategies. Methods An online survey was conducted among health care workers in Germany in February 2021. The survey included 55 items on demographics, previous vaccination behavior, trust in vaccines, physicians, pharma industry, and health politics as well as fear of adverse effects, assumptions on disease consequences, knowledge about vaccines, information seeking behavior and a short COVID-19 vaccine knowledge test. Results A total of 4500 surveys could be analyzed. The overall vaccination acceptance was 91.7%. The age group ≤20 years showed the lowest vaccination acceptance of all age groups. Regarding professional groups, residents showed the highest vaccination acceptance. Main factors for vaccination hesitancy were lack of trust in authorities and pharmaceutical companies. Personal and professional environment influenced the attitude towards a vaccination too. Participants with vaccination hesitancy were more likely to obtain information about COVID-19 vaccines via messenger services or online video platforms and underperformed in the knowledge test. Conclusions In conclusion, we found a high acceptance rate amongst German health care workers. Furthermore, several factors associated with vaccination hesitancy were identified which could be targeted in vaccination campaigns.

28 April 2022 in Vaccines
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CHChristopher Holzmann-Littig
Christopher Holzmann-Littig
TFTamara Frank
Tamara Frank
CSChristoph Schmaderer
Christoph Schmaderer
MBMatthias Christoph Braunisch
Matthias Christoph Braunisch
LRLutz Renders
Lutz Renders
OCon behalf of the CEOsys Consortium
on behalf of the CEOsys Consortium
(1) Background: Health care workers (HCWs) play a key role in increasing anti-COVID vaccination rates. Fear of potential side effects is one of the main reasons for vaccine hesitancy. We investigated which side effects are of concern to HCWs and how these are associated with vaccine hesitancy. (2) Methods: Data were collected in an online survey in February 2021 among HCWs from across Germany with 4500 included participants. Free-text comments on previously experienced vaccination side effects, and fear of short- and long-term side effects of the COVID-19 vaccination were categorized and analyzed. (3) Results: Most feared short-term side effects were vaccination reactions, allergic reactions, and limitations in daily life. Most feared long-term side effects were (auto-) immune reactions, neurological side effects, and currently unknown long-term consequences. Concerns about serious vaccination side effects were associated with vaccination refusal. There was a clear association between refusal of COVID-19 vaccination in one’s personal environment and fear of side effects. (4) Conclusions: Transparent information about vaccine side effects is needed, especially for HCW. Especially when the participants’ acquaintances advised against vaccination, they were significantly more likely to fear side effects. Thus, further education of HCW is necessary to achieve good information transfer in clusters as well.

10 June 2022 in BMC Medical Education
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CHChristopher Holzmann-Littig
Christopher Holzmann-Littig
NZNina L. Zerban
Nina L. Zerban
CSClara Storm
Clara Storm
LULilian Ulhaas
Lilian Ulhaas
MPMona Pfeiffer
Mona Pfeiffer
JHJohanna Huber
Johanna Huber
Since March 2020, COVID-19 has created a need for adaptation in many areas of life. This study explores medical students’ perspectives on digital teaching under conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic. It focuses on expectations and concerns about digital teaching, the evaluation of specific aspects of teaching, and requests for future teaching. Six German faculties have joined forces within the Bavarian network for medical education to develop and deploy a common core questionnaire. Cross-sectional surveys were conducted at the end of the summer semester 2020 and winter semester 2020/21. Medical students from different semesters participated in the online survey. Data was analyzed descriptively and/or inferentially. Item differences across semesters were examined using contingency tables and Chi2 tests. Mean values were compared using the independent samples t-test; answer frequencies in retrospective and prospective concerns were compared using contingency tables and Chi2 tests with Yates’ correction. In the summer semester 2020, 1565 students and in winter semester 2020/21, 1727 students took part in the survey. Students’ main prospective concern was lack of social exchange between fellow students (70%), but also with teachers. Second and third most often concerns were a lack of practical training (68%) and lack of integration of on-site digital teaching (50%). Approximately 7% of the students lacked sufficient access to technical equipment.. Approximately 39% of the students lacked a sufficient internet connection for synchronous digital teaching, 17% for asynchronous digital teaching. On-site teaching was the preferred form of teaching (60%), and there was a preference for asynchronous (24%) over synchronous (15%) digital teaching. Teaching recordings (79%) were particularly popular to complement future on-site teaching. The following areas of education under COVID-19 conditions are highly important to medical students: adequacy of information sharing, integration of opportunities for exchange with fellow students and teachers, possibility to perform practical trainings. After the normalization of the pandemic situation, on-site teaching should be supplemented with blended learning concepts such as the inverted classroom model. Percentages of results are rounded averages from summer and winter semesters.

16 August 2022 in Vaccines
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CCCho-Chin Cheng
Cho-Chin Cheng
LPLouise Platen
Louise Platen
CCCatharina Christa
Catharina Christa
MTMyriam Tellenbach
Myriam Tellenbach
VKVerena Kappler
Verena Kappler
MBMatthias Christoph Braunisch
Matthias Christoph Braunisch
Hemodialysis patients are exposed to a markedly increased risk when infected with SARS-CoV-2. To date, it is unclear if hemodialysis patients benefit from four vaccinations. A total of 142 hemodialysis patients received four COVID-19 vaccinations until March 2022. RDB binding antibody titers were determined in a competitive surrogate neutralization assay. Vero-E6 cells were infected with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoC), Delta (B.1.617.2), or Omicron (B.1.1.529, sub-lineage BA.1) to determine serum infection neutralization capacity. Four weeks after the fourth vaccination, serum infection neutralization capacity significantly increased from a 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50, serum dilution factor 1:x) of 247.0 (46.3–1560.8) to 2560.0 (1174.0–2560.0) for the Delta VoC, and from 37.5 (20.0–198.8) to 668.5 (182.2–2560.0) for the Omicron VoC (each p < 0.001) compared to four months after the third vaccination. A significant increase in the neutralization capacity was even observed for patients with high antibody titers after three vaccinations (p < 0.001). Ten patients with SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection after the first blood sampling had by trend lower prior neutralization capacity for Omicron (p = 0.051). Our findings suggest that hemodialysis patients benefit from a fourth vaccination in particular in the light of the highly infectious SARS-CoV-2 Omicron-variants. A routinely applied four-time vaccination seems to broaden immunity against variants and would be recommended in hemodialysis patients.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Stephan KemmnerStephan Kemmner
Stephan Kemmner
CHChristopher Holzmann-Littig
Christopher Holzmann-Littig
HSHelene Sandberger
Helene Sandberger
QBQuirin Bachmann
Quirin Bachmann
FHFlora Haberfellner
Flora Haberfellner
DSDominik Steubl
Dominik Steubl
Delayed graft function (DGF) following kidney transplantation is associated with increased risk of graft failure, but biomarkers to predict DGF are scarce. We evaluated serum uromodulin (sUMOD), a potential marker for tubular integrity with immunomodulatory capacities, in kidney transplant recipients and its association with DGF. We included 239 kidney transplant recipients and measured sUMOD pretransplant and on postoperative Day 1 (POD1) as independent variables. The primary outcome was DGF, defined as need for dialysis within one week after transplantation. In total, 64 patients (27%) experienced DGF. In multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusting for recipient, donor and transplant associated risk factors each 10 ng/mL higher pretransplant sUMOD was associated with 47% lower odds for DGF (odds ratio (OR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (95%-CI) 0.30–0.82). When categorizing pretransplant sUMOD into quartiles, the quartile with the lowest values had 4.4-fold higher odds for DGF compared to the highest quartile (OR 4.41, 95%-CI 1.54–13.93). Adding pretransplant sUMOD to a model containing established risk factors for DGF in multivariable receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC) curve analysis, the area-under-the-curve improved from 0.786 [95%-CI 0.723–0.848] to 0.813 [95%-CI 0.755–0.871, p = 0.05]. SUMOD on POD1 was not associated with DGF. In conclusion, higher pretransplant sUMOD was independently associated with lower odds for DGF, potentially serving as a non-invasive marker to stratify patients according to their risk for developing DGF early in the setting of kidney transplantation.