4.7 Article

Importance of vaccine action and availability and epidemic severity for delaying the second vaccine dose

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-11250-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Technology Agency of the Czech Republic [TL04000282]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines the impact of delaying the second vaccine dose on the COVID-19 epidemic, and finds that a 21-day inter-dose period is preferable in the early stage of infection, while a 42-day interval is more favorable in the late stage of infection.
Following initial optimism regarding potentially rapid vaccination, delays and shortages in vaccine supplies occurred in many countries during spring 2021. Various strategies to counter this gloomy reality and speed up vaccination have been set forth, of which the most popular has been to delay the second vaccine dose for a longer period than originally recommended by the manufacturers. Controversy has surrounded this strategy, and overly simplistic models have been developed to shed light on this issue. Here we use three different epidemic models, all accounting for then actual COVID-19 epidemic in the Czech Republic, including the real vaccination rollout, to explore when delaying the second vaccine dose by another 3 weeks from 21 to 42 days is advantageous. Using COVID-19-related deaths as a quantity to compare various model scenarios, we find that the way of vaccine action at the beginning of the infection course (preventing infection and symptoms appearance), mild epidemic and sufficient vaccine supply rate call for the original inter-dose period of 21 days regardless of vaccine efficacy. On the contrary, for the vaccine action at the end of infection course (preventing severe symptoms and death), severe epidemic and low vaccine supply rate, the 42-day inter-dose period is preferable, at any plausible vaccine efficacy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available