This was a retrospective cohort study, which aimed to investigate the factors associated with hesitancy to receive a third dose of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. A paper-based questionnaire survey was administered to all participants. This study included participants who provided answers in the questionnaire about whether they had an intent to receive a third dose of a vaccine. Data on sex, age, area of residence, adverse reactions after the second vaccination, whether the third vaccination was desired, and reasons to accept or hesitate over the booster vaccination were retrieved. Among the 2439 participants, with a mean (±SD) age of 52.6 ± 18.9 years, and a median IgG-S antibody titer of 324.9 (AU/mL), 97.9% of participants indicated their intent to accept a third vaccination dose. The logistic regression revealed that participants of a younger age (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96–1.00) and with a higher antibody level (OR = 2.52; 95% CI: 1.27–4.99) were positively associated with hesitancy over the third vaccine. The efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine and concerns about adverse reactions had a significant impact on behavior regarding the third vaccination. A rapid increase in the booster dose rate is needed to control the pandemic, and specific approaches should be taken with these groups that are likely to hesitate over the third vaccine, subsequently increasing booster contact rate.

The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with the increase in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike (S1) protein and neutralizing antibody titer following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. This observational study was conducted among healthcare workers working for a private hospital group in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan. Two blood samples were obtained from each participant. The first sample was obtained before the first dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine, and a second sample was obtained approximately 6 weeks later. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody against the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S1) protein, immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody against SARS-CoV-2 N-protein, and neutralizing activity were measured using the chemiluminescent immunoassay with iFlash 3000. A total of 231 healthcare workers who agreed to participate, and were negative for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM antibodies at enrollment, were included in the analysis. All participants had elevated IgG antibodies and neutralizing activity above the cutoff values. A total of 174 (75.3%) and 208 (90.0%) participants experienced adverse reactions after the first and second vaccine doses, respectively. Younger age, female sex, not taking immunosuppressive or antipyretic analgesic medication regularly, a lack of local adverse reactions after the first dose, and the presence of adverse reactions (fever, muscle, and joint pain) after the second dose were associated with higher IgG antibody titers and neutralizing activity. Intake of analgesic antipyretic for adverse reactions to vaccines was not significantly associated with antibody and neutralizing activity titer production. Immune responses after vaccination may differ among individuals, and continued countermeasures to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection are vital.

The objective of this study was to investigate the differences between the results of two serology assays for detection of COVID-19 among medical staff, who are at higher risks of infection. The immunochromatography (ICG) rapid test kit and the chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) quantitative antibody test were performed. The differences in IgM and IgG antibody prevalence in different serological assays were descriptively analyzed. A total of 637 participants were included in this research. Two staff were IgM positive in the CLIA quantitative antibody test (cutoff value: 10 AU/ml) of 51 staff who were IgM positive in the rapid test kit. Six staff were IgG positive in the CLIA quantitative antibody test of 56 staff who were IgG positive in the rapid test kit. The proportion of antibody positive staff differed greatly between the rapid test kit and the CLIA quantitative antibody test. There was a vast difference in the proportions of IgG and IgM antibody positive staff in the rapid test kit and the CLIA quantitative antibody test results. The results from the only rapid test kit might have to be interpreted with caution. Further studies to evaluate antibody testing accuracy are required to promote the understanding of each assay's characteristics and determine their purposes in each community.

Performing a cohort-based SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay is crucial for understanding infection status and future decision-making. The objective of this study was to examine consecutive antibody seroprevalence changes among hospital staff, a high-risk population. A two-time survey was performed in May and October 2020 for 545 hospital staff to investigate the changes in the results of the rapid kit test and chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA). The seroprevalence of each assay was summarized at both the survey periods. The proportion of seropositive individuals in the CLIA for each survey period and the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Central Fukushima were then compared. We chose 515 participants for the analysis. The proportion of IgM seroprevalence in CLIA increased from 0.19% in May to 0.39% in October, and IgG seroprevalence decreased from 0.97% in May to 0.39% in October. The proportion of IgM seroprevalence in the rapid kit test decreased from 7.96% in May to 3.50% in October, and IgG seroprevalence decreased from 7.77% in May to 2.14% in October.

Public-Private-People Partnership (4P) is a cross-sector collaboration combining “people” with a traditional Public-Private Partnership (PPP). The term “people” encompasses civil society organisations, academia, professional organisations, media, and others. 4P was proposed to compensate for the shortcomings in conventional PPPs regarding a lack of residents’ viewpoints, clarification of civil engagement, and incorporation of bottom-up strategies, especially […]

Protecting the health of farmworkers is a crucial issue. Previous studies report that safety training and educational interventions might increase farmworkers’ protective behaviors. The present study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of distributing a checklist as an interventional measure for pesticide protection in rural Asia, where pesticide poisoning is a major problem. This study was a community-based interventional study, using the distribution of a checklist with pesticide protective habits in Narail district, Bangladesh, with a total of 100 eligible males. Two questionnaire surveys were conducted before distributing the checklist and 25 days after. Change between the baseline and follow-up surveys was measured by frequency scores of protective behavior. The average pesticide-protective behavioral score increased from 4.58 in the baseline survey to 8.11 in the follow-up. Additionally, the checklist was more effective in the group with higher education, the younger group, and the group with lower pesticide-protective behavioral scores in the baseline survey. The paper checklist on protective behaviors against pesticide poisoning was effective because of the increase in the frequency of such positive behavior among farmworkers. Thus, intervention measures should be implemented to increase the knowledge and awareness regarding pesticide protection habits to protect the health of farmworkers.