A Simatupang, Y R M B Sitompul, B Simanungkalit, K Kurniyanto, L N Achmad, F Sitompul, S M Mahmud, E Suarthana
{"title":"Adverse event following immunisation of adsorbed-inactivated Coronavac (Sinovac) and ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 (Astra Zeneca) of COVID-19 vaccines.","authors":"A Simatupang, Y R M B Sitompul, B Simanungkalit, K Kurniyanto, L N Achmad, F Sitompul, S M Mahmud, E Suarthana","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Countries around the world organised mass vaccinations using various types of vaccines against COVID-19, like inactivated viruses and mRNA. The study aimed to look at adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) of Coronavac® (SIN) and ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 ® (AZ) COVID-19 vaccines in Indonesia.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Subjects who received SIN or AZ vaccines were sent questionnaires twice: after they received the first and the second doses of vaccine, respectively. AEFI data on the first- and second-day post-vaccination were collected and analyzed descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1547 people vaccinated with SIN vaccine, 529 (33.3%) responded to the first-dose and 239 (47%) to the second-dose questionnaires, whereas 936 people vaccinated with AZ vaccine, 483 (51.6%) answered the firstdose and 123 (25%) to the second-dose questionnaires. Some important AEFIs on the first- and second-day post receiving SIN vs. AZ vaccination were as follows: fever 4% vs 59%; pain at the injection site 27% vs 87%; redness and swelling at the injection site 4% vs 18%; nausea 5% vs 30%; diarrhea 1.8% vs 5.7%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SIN seemed to have fewer AEFIs than AZ. Apart from different vaccine materials and excipients, the gap in AEFIs between SIN and AZ could be caused by the distinct population where AZ recipients were more exposed to COVID-19.</p>","PeriodicalId":39388,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Malaysia","volume":"79 5","pages":"507-511"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Malaysia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Countries around the world organised mass vaccinations using various types of vaccines against COVID-19, like inactivated viruses and mRNA. The study aimed to look at adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) of Coronavac® (SIN) and ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 ® (AZ) COVID-19 vaccines in Indonesia.
Materials and methods: Subjects who received SIN or AZ vaccines were sent questionnaires twice: after they received the first and the second doses of vaccine, respectively. AEFI data on the first- and second-day post-vaccination were collected and analyzed descriptively.
Results: A total of 1547 people vaccinated with SIN vaccine, 529 (33.3%) responded to the first-dose and 239 (47%) to the second-dose questionnaires, whereas 936 people vaccinated with AZ vaccine, 483 (51.6%) answered the firstdose and 123 (25%) to the second-dose questionnaires. Some important AEFIs on the first- and second-day post receiving SIN vs. AZ vaccination were as follows: fever 4% vs 59%; pain at the injection site 27% vs 87%; redness and swelling at the injection site 4% vs 18%; nausea 5% vs 30%; diarrhea 1.8% vs 5.7%, respectively.
Conclusion: SIN seemed to have fewer AEFIs than AZ. Apart from different vaccine materials and excipients, the gap in AEFIs between SIN and AZ could be caused by the distinct population where AZ recipients were more exposed to COVID-19.
期刊介绍:
Published since 1890 this journal originated as the Journal of the Straits Medical Association. With the formation of the Malaysian Medical Association (MMA), the Journal became the official organ, supervised by an editorial board. Some of the early Hon. Editors were Mr. H.M. McGladdery (1960 - 1964), Dr. A.A. Sandosham (1965 - 1977), Prof. Paul C.Y. Chen (1977 - 1987). It is a scientific journal, published quarterly and can be found in medical libraries in many parts of the world. The Journal also enjoys the status of being listed in the Index Medicus, the internationally accepted reference index of medical journals. The editorial columns often reflect the Association''s views and attitudes towards medical problems in the country. The MJM aims to be a peer reviewed scientific journal of the highest quality. We want to ensure that whatever data is published is true and any opinion expressed important to medical science. We believe being Malaysian is our unique niche; our priority will be for scientific knowledge about diseases found in Malaysia and for the practice of medicine in Malaysia. The MJM will archive knowledge about the changing pattern of human diseases and our endeavours to overcome them. It will also document how medicine develops as a profession in the nation. We will communicate and co-operate with other scientific journals in Malaysia. We seek articles that are of educational value to doctors. We will consider all unsolicited articles submitted to the journal and will commission distinguished Malaysians to write relevant review articles. We want to help doctors make better decisions and be good at judging the value of scientific data. We want to help doctors write better, to be articulate and precise.