Skip to main content
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2021 Nov 3;399(10320):119–121. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02322-9

The value of vaccine programme impact monitoring during the COVID-19 pandemic

Justin R Ortiz a, Kathleen M Neuzil a
PMCID: PMC8565930  PMID: 34741819

Reports of the historic vaccine development successes during the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted two critical measures of vaccine performance—vaccine efficacy, determined by randomised controlled trials, and vaccine effectiveness, estimated from post-introduction observational studies. Both these statistics describe an individual's risk reduction after vaccination. As immunisation programmes expand globally, more estimates of a third measure of vaccine performance—vaccine impact—are needed. Vaccine impact studies estimate disease reduction in a community.1 These studies are typically ecological or modelling analyses that compare disease outcomes from pre-vaccine and post-vaccine introduction periods.2 Reductions in disease outcomes are realised through direct effects of vaccination in vaccinated people and indirect effects due to reduced transmission within a community. Sometimes other concurrent interventions or phenomena unrelated to vaccine effects, such as changes in risk behaviours or health-care practices, can reduce disease outcomes and confound assessments of vaccine impact.

In The Lancet, Lucy McNamara and colleagues3 report the impressive and early impact of COVID-19 vaccines on the health of older adults in the USA.3 The authors used COVID-19 health outcome and vaccination coverage data from Nov 1, 2020, to April 10, 2021, to compare the relative change in outcomes for pre-introduction and post-introduction periods among people aged 65 years and older, a demographic that received vaccines early, with the relative change in outcomes among younger age groups, who were able to access vaccines later. The outcomes of interest were COVID-19 cases, emergency department visits, hospitalisations, and deaths. Case data and emergency department visits were from datasets that covered a large proportion of the US population, and hospitalisation and death data were national in scope, ensuring gender balance and excellent representation of minority ethnic groups; however, inputs were limited to jurisdictions and age groups with the most complete reporting. Regression models used data aggregated by week, age group, and jurisdiction to compare trends in rate ratios by age groups.

After vaccine introduction, age groups receiving COVID-19 vaccines had large relative decreases in COVID-19 cases, emergency department visits, and hospitalisations compared with a younger reference age group. For example, compared with those aged 50–59 years, the relative decrease in the ratio of pre-vaccine to post-vaccine COVID-19 hospitalisations was 39% (95% CI 29–48) in those aged 60–69 years, 60% (54–66) in those aged 70–79 years, and 68% (62–73) in those aged 80 years and older. The mortality analysis did not follow a similar pattern, as older age groups had no statistically significant differences in pre-introduction to post-introduction mortality ratios compared with a younger reference age group. This finding could have been due to the confounding effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions introduced in long-term care facilities before vaccines, which could have differentially decreased mortality in the older age groups.

Except for the mortality analysis, the disease reductions described in this study align with expectations based on the high level of vaccine protection shown by randomised controlled trials and the rapid uptake of these vaccines in older age groups.4, 5, 6 The strengths of the study include the large geographical scope of the data inputs, and the county-level analyses which, at least partly, accounted for geographically associated variables, such as public health mitigation measures or transmission patterns. The most notable limitation of the study is the ecological nature of its design, which did not allow for individual-level analyses of vaccine effectiveness against disease outcomes or of behaviours that might have affected COVID-19 risk. The authors excluded data from several states because of low quality or incompleteness due to shortcomings in public health data collection and reporting systems in the USA.

Observational assessments of vaccine performance have taken on increased importance as populations targeted for vaccination expand, the epidemiology of the pandemic evolves, and randomised placebo-controlled trials become less feasible and ethical to conduct.7, 8 It will be important to assess public health outcomes in diverse settings, given differences in circulation and emergence of viral variants, the heterogeneity of vaccines and vaccination schedules, and the diversity of populations targeted. Countries with national health-care systems, including Israel and Scotland, have been able to assess vaccine impacts rapidly and comprehensively under changing conditions.9, 10 Future COVID-19 vaccine impact studies in the USA will need to be timely to keep pace with critical public health needs. Finally, as the largest vaccine roll-out in history expands even further, we must ensure that low-income and lower–middle-income countries are supported in their efforts to establish immunisation programme monitoring and evaluation to guide appropriate and context-specific decision making.

graphic file with name fx1_lrg.jpg

© 2022 adamkaz/Getty Images

Acknowledgments

KMN holds a grant from Pfizer, without salary support, for a COVID-19 vaccine study, and salary support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for work on multiple COVID-19 vaccine trials. KMN serves as a non-voting member of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices COVID-19 Vaccines Working Group. JRO declares grants to his institution from Pfizer and NIH for COVID-19 vaccine trials, and participation on Pfizer and Moderna scientific advisory boards unrelated to COVID-19 vaccines.

References

  • 1.WHO . World Health Organization; Geneva: 2014. Principles and considerations for adding a vaccine to a national immunisation programme: from decision to implementation and monitoring. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.WHO . World Health Organization; Geneva: 2007. Global framework for immunization monitoring and surveillance: GFIMS. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.McNamara L A, Wiegand R E, Burke R M, et al. Estimating the early impact of the US COVID-19 vaccination programme on COVID-19 cases, emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and deaths among adults aged 65 years and older: an ecological analysis of national surveillance data. Lancet. 2021 doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02226-1. published online Nov 3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Baden LR, El Sahly HM, Essink B, et al. Efficacy and safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:403–416. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2035389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Polack FP, Thomas SJ, Kitchin N, et al. Safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:2603–2615. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2034577. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States. 2021. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations_vacc-total-admin-rate-total
  • 7.WHO . World Health Organization; Geneva: 2021. Evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness: interim guidance, 17 March 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Patel MK, Bergeri I, Bresee JS, et al. Evaluation of post-introduction COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness: summary of interim guidance of the World Health Organization. Vaccine. 2021;39:4013–4024. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.05.099. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Haas EJ, Angulo FJ, McLaughlin JM, et al. Impact and effectiveness of mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 cases, hospitalisations, and deaths following a nationwide vaccination campaign in Israel: an observational study using national surveillance data. Lancet. 2021;397:1819–1829. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00947-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Vasileiou E, Simpson CR, Shi T, et al. Interim findings from first-dose mass COVID-19 vaccination roll-out and COVID-19 hospital admissions in Scotland: a national prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2021;397:1646–1657. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00677-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Lancet (London, England) are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES