4.7 Article

Tolerability of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccine during Pregnancy among Polish Healthcare Professionals

期刊

VACCINES
卷 10, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10020200

关键词

COVID-19; vaccine; pregnancy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to determine the tolerability of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in pregnancy in a Polish population. Pregnant women who received the COVID-19 vaccine had less adverse reactions compared to the control group, especially in terms of fever, gastrointestinal symptoms, local skin reactions, and myalgia.
The tolerance and safety of vaccination in pregnancy should be assessed in local populations based on ethnic differences across countries. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the tolerability of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination in pregnancy in a Polish population. An online questionnaire enquiring about the safety and tolerability of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine was distributed to pregnant and non-pregnant female healthcare professionals who had voluntarily received one or two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine in Poland. The two groups were compared simultaneously considering the COVID-19 infection status before vaccination. Compared with that noted in the control group, pregnant women in the COVID-19-free group were less likely to have fever (p = 0.002) or gastrointestinal symptoms (p = 0.009) after the second dose. In the COVID-19-exposed group, pregnant women were less likely to experience local skin reactions (p = 0.009), and myalgia (p = 0.003) after the first dose. After the second dose, the only noticeable difference was a lower incidence of myalgia (p = 0.001) in pregnant women. The tolerability of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was similar in both the groups. No severe local, generalised, or pregnancy complications related to mother or foetus were observed. Good tolerability of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in pregnancy in the Polish population may facilitate the decision to vaccinate pregnant women against COVID-19.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据