Vaccine hesitancy, spurred by misinterpretation of Adverse Events (AEs), threatens public health. Despite sporadic reports of oral AEs post-COVID-19 vaccination, systematic analysis is scarce. This study evaluates these AEs using the Australian Database of Adverse Event Notifications (DAEN). A secondary analysis of DAEN data was conducted, with the analysis period commencing from the start of the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in February 2021 and the inception of the influenza vaccine database in 1971, both through until December 2022. The focus of the analysis was on oral AEs related to COVID-19 and influenza vaccines. Reports were extracted according to a predefined schema and then stratified by vaccine type, sex, and age. Oral paresthesia was the most common oral AE after COVID-19 vaccination (75.28 per 10,000 reports), followed by dysgeusia (73.96), swollen tongue (51.55), lip swelling (49.43), taste disorder (27.32), ageusia (25.85), dry mouth (24.75), mouth ulceration (18.97), oral hypoaesthesia (15.60), and oral herpes (12.74). While COVID-19 and influenza vaccines shared most oral AEs, taste-related AEs, dry mouth, and oral herpes were significantly more common after COVID-19 vaccination. mRNA vaccines yielded more oral AEs than other types. Females had higher oral AE incidence. Most oral AEs did not differ significantly between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination. However, specific oral AEs, particularly taste-related, dry mouth, and oral herpes, were more prevalent after COVID-19 vaccination compared with seasonal influenza, especially in females and mRNA vaccine recipients.

• Keywords
• COVID-19 vaccines, drug-related side effects and adverse reactions, herpes zoster, pharmacovigilance, taste disorders,
• MeSH
• Influenza, Human * epidemiology   prevention & control   MeSH
• COVID-19 * prevention & control   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Vaccination adverse effects   MeSH
• Influenza Vaccines * adverse effects   MeSH
• COVID-19 Vaccines * adverse effects   MeSH
• Xerostomia * MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Geographicals
• Australia epidemiology   MeSH
• Names of Substances
• Influenza Vaccines * MeSH
• COVID-19 Vaccines * MeSH

• Keywords
• COVID-19, VAERS, Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, cross-sectional study, side effects, systematic review, vaccination,
• MeSH
• COVID-19 * MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Vaccination MeSH
• COVID-19 Vaccines MeSH
• Vaccines * MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Editorial MeSH
• Names of Substances
• COVID-19 Vaccines MeSH
• Vaccines * MeSH

BACKGROUND: Side effects emerging after COVID-19 vaccines may adversely impact public confidence in vaccines. Therefore, this study was designed to explore the short-term side effects of COVID-19 vaccines as a part of the COVID-19 Vaccines Safety Tracking (CoVaST) study. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out to collect data from healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia. The study was initiated between June and December 2021. A validated questionnaire was used in this study consisting of four categories, including demographic characteristics and medical anamnesis of the participants, COVID-19-associated anamnesis, and side effects of vaccine uptake. RESULTS: The study included 1039 participants, of which 70.2% were females, and their median age was 34. About 82.9% and 52.3% of the participants reported a minimum of both one local and systemic side effect, respectively. Females, young participants (≤34 years old), and non-obese participants had more potential to disclose post-vaccination side effects than their counterparts. Heterologous schedules and viral vector-based vaccines were linked with a greater rate of systemic side effects, whereas homologous vaccination schedules and mRNA-based vaccines were linked with a greater rate of local side effects. CONCLUSION: Future studies on COVID-19 vaccines should focus on the role of BMI, previous infection, and vaccination schedule in terms of vaccine safety and reactogenicity.

• Keywords
• COVID-19 vaccines, CoVaST, Saudi Arabia, drug-related side effects and adverse reactions, health personnel,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

INTRODUCTION: Ethiopia is the second most populous country in Africa. Ethiopia received most of its COVID-19 vaccines through donations. The Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine is the first to be donated to Ethiopia by the COVAX facility. Healthcare workers were the priority population that received the Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. However, there was no nationwide study on the safety of the vaccine in Ethiopia. This study aimed to measure the prevalence and predictors of self-reported side effects of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study employed a cross-sectional design. A sample of healthcare workers who took Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was drawn from four regions of Ethiopia; namely, Amhara, Oromia, Somali, and Southwest. Data were collected on sociodemographic characteristics, medical anamnesis, COVID-19 related anamnesis, and COVID-19 vaccine anamnesis via telephone interview. Descriptive and inferential analyses were done. The software, IBM SPSS Statistics v21.0, was used for analyses of data. RESULTS: Out of 384 people, 346 responded (response rate: 90.1%). Female accounted for 34.1% of the respondents. The mean age of the respondents was 31.0 years (Standard Deviation (SD) = 7.4). Nurses accounted for 43.7% of the respondents. The prevalence of at least one local- and systemic-side effect was 50.6 and 44.5%, respectively. The most frequent local- and systemic- side effect were injection site pain and headache, respectively. Both types of side effects mostly subsided in the first 3 days. A third of healthcare workers with side effects took at least one medication. Paracetamol followed by diclofenac sodium were taken by healthcare workers to overcome side effects. There was no independent predictor of local side effect. After controlling for age and chronic diseases, the odds of healthcare workers with COVID-19 like symptoms to experience systemic side effects was 1.38 (Confidence Interval (CI): 1.04-1.82) times more than that of healthcare workers without COVID-19 like symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of local- and systemic-side effects of the Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was modest. As the symptoms were mostly common in the first 3 days, it is preferable to monitor healthcare workers at least in the first 3 days following the administration of the vaccine.

• Keywords
• Africa, COVID-19 vaccine, Ethiopia, Healthcare workers, Oxford AstraZeneca, side effects,
• MeSH
• ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 * adverse effects   MeSH
• COVID-19 * prevention & control   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Cross-Sectional Studies MeSH
• Surveys and Questionnaires MeSH
• Health Personnel MeSH
• Self Report MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Geographicals
• Ethiopia epidemiology   MeSH
• Names of Substances
• ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 * MeSH

BACKGROUND: Oral adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 vaccination have been sporadically reported during the previous months, warranting further investigation for their prevalence and suspected relationship with vaccine-elicited immune response. METHODS: A retrospective analysis using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data was conducted to evaluate AEs within the oral cavity (mucosa, tongue, lips, palate, dentition, salivary glands) and AEs involving taste and other sensations. Oral AEs reported after receiving COVID-19 vaccination (test group) and seasonal influenza vaccination (control group) were extracted and cross-tabulated to assess their relative prevalence. RESULTS: Among the 128 solicited (suspected) oral AEs, oral paresthesia (0.872%) was most reported after receiving COVID-19 vaccines, followed by the swelling of lips (0.844%), ageusia (0.722%), oral hypoesthesia (0.648%), swollen tongue (0.628%), and dysgeusia (0.617%). The reported prevalence of oral AEs was higher in the COVID-19 vaccine group than in the seasonal influenza group. The distribution pattern of the most reported oral AEs was similar for both COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. Female sex, older age (>39 years old), primer doses, and mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines exhibited a higher reported prevalence of oral AEs. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, COVID-19 vaccines were found to be associated with rare oral AEs that are predominantly similar to those emerging following seasonal influenza vaccines. The most commonly reported oral AEs were oral paraesthesia (mouth-tingling), lip swelling, and ageusia, representing various pathophysiologic pathways that remain unclear. Taste-related AEs should be acknowledged in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the public should be adequately informed about a potential taste dysfunction after receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. Dentists and dental teams need to be aware of the prevalence, severity, and prognosis of oral AEs to inform their patients and increase public confidence in vaccines.

• Keywords
• COVID-19 vaccines, anaphylaxis, drug-related side effects and adverse reactions, oral manifestations, pharmacovigilance oral adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination 2,
• MeSH
• Ageusia * chemically induced   MeSH
• Influenza, Human * MeSH
• COVID-19 * epidemiology   prevention & control   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Pandemics MeSH
• Retrospective Studies MeSH
• Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems MeSH
• Vaccination MeSH
• Influenza Vaccines * adverse effects   MeSH
• COVID-19 Vaccines * adverse effects   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Names of Substances
• Influenza Vaccines * MeSH
• COVID-19 Vaccines * MeSH

With the arrival of the highly transmissible Omicron variants (BA.4 and BA.5), dentistry faces another seasonal challenge to preserve the biosafety of dental care and education. With the aim of protecting patients, students, teachers and healthcare professionals, this paper introduces a prospective sustainable biosafety setting for everyday dental care and education. The setting developed by dental clinicians, epidemiologists, and teachers of dentistry consists of a combination of modern technologies focused on the air-borne part of the viral pathway. The introduced biosafety setting has been clinically evaluated after 18 months of application in the real clinical environment. The protocol has three fundamental pillars: (1) UVC air disinfection; (2) air saturation with certified virucidal essences with nebulizing diffusers; (3) complementary solutions including telehealth and 3D printing. A pseudonymous online smart form was used as the evaluation method. The protocol operates on the premise that everybody is a hypothetical asymptomatic carrier. The results of a clinical evaluation of 115 patient feedbacks imply that no virus transmission from patient to patient or from doctor to nurse was observed or reported using this protocol, and vice versa, although nine patients retrospectively admitted that the clinic visit is likely to be infectious. Despite these promising results, a larger clinical sample and exposition to the current mutated strains are needed for reliable conclusions about protocol virucidal efficiency in current dental environments.

• Keywords
• COVID-19, UVC, biosafety, dental education, dentistry, infection, orthodontics, prevention, sustainability, teledentistry, virucidal oil dispersion,
• MeSH
• COVID-19 * prevention & control   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Containment of Biohazards MeSH
• Prospective Studies MeSH
• Retrospective Studies MeSH
• SARS-CoV-2 * genetics   MeSH
• Dental Care MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH

Healthcare workers were prioritized in vaccination campaigns globally because they are exposed to the highest risk of contamination by SARS-CoV-2. This study evaluated the self-reported post-vaccination side effects of inactivated (BBIBP-CorV and CoronaVac) and adenoviral vector-based (AZD1222, Gam-COVID-Vac and Ad26.COV2.S) vaccines among Algerian healthcare workers using a validated questionnaire. The final analysis included 721 healthcare workers, with a predominance of females (59.1%) and younger individuals 20-30 years old (39.4%). Less than half (49.1%) of the respondents reported at least one local side effect, while 53.8% reported at least one systemic side effect. These side effects were more prevalent among viral vector vaccinees than inactivated virus vaccinees. The most common local side effects were injection site pain (39%) and arm pain (25.4%), while fatigue (34.4%), fever (28.4%), headache (24.8%) and myalgia (22.7%) were the most prevalent systemic side effects. The side effects appeared earlier among inactivated virus vaccines recipients and generally lasted for 2 to 3 days for the two vaccinated groups. The risk factors associated with a higher prevalence of side effects included female gender, allergic individuals, individuals with regular medication, those who contracted the COVID-19 disease and those who received two doses for both inactivated and viral-based vaccines groups. Despite the higher prevalence of post-vaccination side effects among adenoviral vector vaccines recipients, both vaccines groups were equally effective in preventing symptomatic infections, and no life-threatening side effects were reported in either vaccine group.

• Keywords
• COVID-19, adenoviral-based vaccine, health workers, inactivated virus vaccine, side effects,
• MeSH
• Pain MeSH
• ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 MeSH
• COVID-19 * epidemiology   prevention & control   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• SARS-CoV-2 MeSH
• Ad26COVS1 MeSH
• Influenza Vaccines * MeSH
• Health Personnel MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Geographicals
• Algeria epidemiology   MeSH
• Names of Substances
• ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 MeSH
• Ad26COVS1 MeSH
• Influenza Vaccines * MeSH

COVID-19 booster hesitancy (VBH) is a serious public health challenge which acts simultaneously with the waning vaccine-elicited immunity and the emerging viral variants to prolong the pandemic interval. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of COVID-19 VBH among a highly educated subset of the German population and to explore the potential demographic, anamnestic, and psychosocial determinants of this problem. A cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted in December 2021 among German university students and employees to evaluate their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine booster (VB) doses. The study used a self-administered questionnaire that was developed and disseminated digitally, and the questionnaire inquired about participants' demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related anamnesis, COVID-19 vaccine-related anamnesis, and psychosocial predictors of COVID-19 VBH. A total of 930 participants were recruited, of which 608 (65.4%) were students, 682 (73.3%) were females, and their mean age was 29.08 ± 10.93 years. Fifty-five participants (5.9%) had been previously infected by COVID-19 and the vast majority of infections happened before the first vaccine dose. Over 95% of the participants had received at least one vaccine dose, and the most commonly administered vaccine was BNT162b2. The overall COVID-19 VB acceptance was satisfactory (87.8%) and induced by various altruistic promoters, e.g., family health protection, community health protection, and patients' health protection. The students (86.3%), the previously infected participants (76.4%), the participants who did not receive primer doses of COVID-19 vaccines (2.5 %), and those who were hospitalized (40%) and sought medical care/treatment after receiving primer doses (86.8%) were less likely to accept COVID-19 VB compared to the employees (90.7%), the participants who were not previously infected (88.6%) and those who received primer dose (91.7%), and the participants who were not hospitalized (92%) nor sought medical care/treatment after primer doses (92.9%), respectively. The perceived effectiveness of COVID-19 VB against severe illness (adjusted odds ratio "AOR": 47.65-95% confidence interval "CI": 23.65-96.49), symptomatic infection (AOR: 9.87-95% CI: 5.20-18.71), community transmission (AOR: 5.34-95% CI: 3.00-9.49) and emerging variants (AOR: 19.12-95% CI: 10.57-34.55) were key predictors for COVID-19 VB acceptance; therefore, it needs to be highlighted in vaccine messaging. In addition, the perceived safety of COVID-19 VB and ethical dilemmas of vaccine justice need to be addressed publicly.

• Keywords
• COVID-19 vaccines, Germany, cross-sectional studies, decision making, social determinants of health, vaccination hesitancy,
• MeSH
• COVID-19 * epidemiology   prevention & control   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Adolescent MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Prevalence MeSH
• Cross-Sectional Studies MeSH
• SARS-CoV-2 MeSH
• Immunization, Secondary MeSH
• Students MeSH
• Universities MeSH
• BNT162 Vaccine MeSH
• COVID-19 Vaccines MeSH
• Vaccines * MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Adolescent MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Names of Substances
• BNT162 Vaccine MeSH
• COVID-19 Vaccines MeSH
• Vaccines * MeSH

BACKGROUND: Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to reduce the risk of developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the significant benefits in terms of reduced risk of hospitalization and death, different adverse events may present after vaccination: among them, headache is one of the most common, but nowadays there is no summary presentation of its incidence and no description of its main features. METHODS: We searched PubMed and EMBASE covering the period between January 1st 2020 and August 6th, 2021, looking for record in English and with an abstract and using three main search terms (with specific variations): COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination; headache/adverse events. We selected manuscript including information on subjects developing headache after injection, and such information had to be derived from a structured form (i.e. no free reporting). Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Analyses were carried out by vaccine vs. placebo, by first vs. second dose, and by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" vaccines; finally, we addressed the impact of age and gender on post-vaccine headache onset. RESULTS: Out of 9338 records, 84 papers were included in the review, accounting for 1.57 million participants, 94% of whom received BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Headache was generally the third most common AE: it was detected in 22% (95% CI 18-27%) of subjects after the first dose of vaccine and in 29% (95% CI 23-35%) after the second, with an extreme heterogeneity. Those receiving placebo reported headache in 10-12% of cases. No differences were detected across different vaccines or by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" ones. None of the studies reported information on headache features. A lower prevalence of headache after the first injection of BNT162b2 among older participants was shown. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that vaccines are associated to a two-fold risk of developing headache within 7 days from injection, and the lack of difference between vaccine types enable to hypothesize that headache is secondary to systemic immunological reaction than to a vaccine-type specific reaction. Some descriptions report onset within the first 24 h and that in around one-third of the cases, headache has migraine-like features with pulsating quality, phono and photophobia; in 40-60% of the cases aggravation with activity is observed. The majority of patients used some medication to treat headache, the one perceived as the most effective being acetylsalicylic acid.

• Keywords
• Adverse Event, BNT162b2, COVID-19, ChAdOx1, Headache, SARS-CoV-2, Vaccination,
• MeSH
• Headache etiology   MeSH
• COVID-19 * prevention & control   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• SARS-CoV-2 * MeSH
• BNT162 Vaccine MeSH
• Vaccination adverse effects   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Meta-Analysis MeSH
• Systematic Review MeSH
• Names of Substances
• BNT162 Vaccine MeSH

Pregnant and lactating women (PLW) represent a particular population subset with increased susceptibility for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, even though the evidence about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines was delayed due to their initial exclusion from development trials. This unclear situation could have led to increased COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy levels among PLW; therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of Czech PLW towards COVID-19 vaccines and the determinants of their attitudes. An analytical cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out in the University Hospital Brno (South Moravia, Czechia) between August and October 2021. The study utilised a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) adapted from previous instruments used for the same purpose. The SAQ included closed-ended items covering demographic characteristics, clinical and obstetric characteristics, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, and potential psychosocial predictors of vaccine acceptance. Out of the 362 included participants, 278 were pregnant (PW) and 84 were lactating women (LW). The overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (immediate and delayed) level was substantially high (70.2%), with a significant difference between PW (76.6%) and LW (48.8%). Out of the 70.2% who agreed to receive the vaccine, 3.6% indicated immediate acceptance, and 66.6% indicated delayed acceptance. Only 13.3% of the participants indicated their acceptance of their physician's vaccination recommendation during pregnancy or while lactating, and 62.2% were against it. Our results agreed with the recent studies that revealed that PW tended to have a high level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, and they were also inclined to resist professional recommendations because they predominantly preferred to delay their vaccination. The pregnancy trimester, education level, employment status, and previous live births were significant determinants for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. The most commonly preferred vaccine type was mRNA-based vaccines, followed by viral vector-based and inactivated virus vaccines. The first top priority of PLW was vaccine safety for their children, followed by vaccine safety for the PLW and vaccine effectiveness. Regarding psychosocial predictors, media/social media, trust in the government, the pharmaceutical industry, and healthcare professionals, partners, and a positive risk-benefit ratio were significant promoters for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Findings from this study suggest that promotional interventions targeting PLW should use web platforms and focus on vaccine safety evidence, the expected benefits of vaccines and potential harms of the infection.

• Keywords
• COVID-19 vaccines, Czech Republic, breastfeeding, decision making, health promotion, pregnant women, risk assessment,
• MeSH
• COVID-19 * MeSH
• Child MeSH
• Lactation MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Vaccination Hesitancy MeSH
• Cross-Sectional Studies MeSH
• SARS-CoV-2 MeSH
• Pregnancy MeSH
• Pregnant People MeSH
• Vaccine Efficacy MeSH
• Vaccination MeSH
• COVID-19 Vaccines * MeSH
• Check Tag
• Child MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Pregnancy MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Geographicals
• Czech Republic MeSH
• Names of Substances
• COVID-19 Vaccines * MeSH