In Belgium, nursing home staff (NHS) and residents were prioritised for COVID-19 vaccination. However, vaccine hesitancy may have impacted vaccination rates. In this study, a random stratified sample of NHS (N = 1142), vaccinated and unvaccinated, completed an online questionnaire on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (between 31 July and 15 November 2021). NHS who hesitated or refused the vaccine were asked for the main reason for their hesitation/refusal. Those who hesitated, but eventually accepted vaccination, were asked why they changed their minds. Overall, 29.5% of all respondents hesitated before accepting vaccination, were still hesitating, or refused vaccination. Principal reasons were fear of unknown future effects (55.1% of vaccinated participants that hesitated and 19.5% who refused), fear of side-effects (12.7% of vaccinated participants that hesitated and 12.2% who refused), and mistrust in vaccination (10.5% of vaccinated participants that hesitated and 12.2% who refused). For vaccinated participants who hesitated initially, protecting the vulnerable was the main reason they changed their minds. Given this degree of fear and proposals to mandate vaccination among healthcare workers, communicating with NHS on the safety and efficacy of the vaccine should be prioritised.

Since the implementation of newly developed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the general population, serological tests are of increasing importance. Because DBS samples can be obtained with a finger prick and can be shipped and stored at room temperature, they are optimal for use in large-scale SARS-CoV-2 serosurveillance or postauthorization vaccination studies, even in an elderly study population.

In the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, testing for SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies is paramount to monitor immune responses in post-authorization vaccination and sero-epidemiology studies. However, large scale and iterative serological testing by venipuncture in older persons can be challenging. Capillary blood sampled using a finger prick and collected on protein saver cards, i.e. dried blood spots (DBS), has already proven to be a promising alternative. However, elderly persons have a reduced cutaneous microvasculature, which may affect DBS-based antibody testing. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the performance of DBS for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in nursing homes residents. We collected venous blood and paired Whatman and EUROIMMUN DBS from nursing home residents, and from staff as a reference population. Venous blood samples were analyzed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies using the Abbot chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA). DBS were analyzed by the EUROIMMUN enzyme-linked immuno sorbent assay (ELISA) for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. We performed a statistical assessment to optimize the ELISA cut-off value for the DBS using the Youden's J index. A total of 273 paired DBS-serum samples were analyzed, of which 129 were positive as assessed by the reference test. The sensitivities and specificities of DBS ranged from 95% to 97.1% and from 97.1% to 98.8%, respectively, depending on population (residents or staff) or DBS card type. These results demonstrate that DBS sampling is a valid alternative to venepuncture for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the elderly.

In an early response after COVID-19 vaccination, fewer vaccinated nursing home residents (77%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies than staff (98%), suggesting an impaired vaccine-induced antibody response in the elderly. In nursing home residents, age 80 years old, comorbidity and high care-dependency predict SARS-CoV-2 seronegativity.

In the SCOPE study, we monitored SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a national sample of residents and staff from Belgian nursing homes. Here, we report the seroprevalence among infected and infection-naive residents and staff after the primary COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Among 1554 vaccinated nursing home residents and 1082 vaccinated staff from 69 nursing homes in Belgium, we assessed the proportion having SARS-CoV-2 antibodies approximately two (April 2021), four (June 2021), and six months (August 2021) after a two-dose regimen of the BNT162b2 vaccine. We measured the seroprevalence using SARS-CoV-2 antibody rapid tests and collected socio-demographic and COVID-19 medical data using an online questionnaire. Two months after vaccination (baseline), we found a seroprevalence of 91% (95% CI: 89–93) among vaccinated residents and 99% (95% CI: 98–99) among vaccinated staff. Six months after vaccination, the seroprevalence significantly decreased to 68% (95% CI: 64–72) among residents and to 89% (95% CI; 86–91) among staff (p < 0.001). The seroprevalence was more likely to decrease among infection-naive residents, older residents, or residents with a high care dependency level. These findings emphasize the need for close monitoring of nursing home residents, as a substantial part of this population fails to mount a persistent antibody response after BNT162b2 vaccination.

Seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgG antibodies, using dried blood spots, was determined in October-November 2020, among residents and staff randomly selected from 20 nursing homes (NH) geographically distributed in Flanders, Belgium. Sociodemographic and medical data [including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms and results of RT-PCR tests] were retrieved using questionnaires. The overall seroprevalence was 17.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 14.9-19.5], with 18.9% (95% CI 15.9-22.2) of the residents and 14.9% (95% CI 11.9-18.4) of the staff having antibodies, which was higher than the seroprevalence in blood donors. The seroprevalence in the 20 NH varied between 0.0% and 45.0%. Fourteen per cent of the staff with antibodies, reported no typical COVID-19 symptoms, while in residents, 51.0% of those with antibodies had no symptoms. The generalised mixed effect model showed a positive association between COVID-19 symptoms and positive serology, but this relation was weaker in residents compared to staff. This study shows that NH are more affected by SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. The large variation between NH, suggests that some risk factors for the spread among residents and staff may be related to the NH. Further, the results suggest that infected people, without the typical COVID-19 symptoms, might play a role in outbreaks. 8Heidi Janssens et al.

Vitamin D is an essential nutrient for various physiological functions, including immunity. While it has been suggested that higher vitamin D levels/supplementation are associated with a better immune response to COVID-19 vaccination, conflicting data exist. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the association between vitamin D (25-hydroxyvitamin D) deficiency/supplementation, and SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses post-vaccination in nursing home residents (NHRs) and staff (NHS). Blood samples were collected from 115 NHRs and 254 NHS at baseline and 14 days after primary course BNT162b2 vaccination. Baseline samples were assessed for serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, while follow-up samples were analyzed for spike protein S1 receptor-binding domain (S1RBD) IgG antibody concentrations and 50% pseudoneutralization titers. Vitamin D supplementation status was obtained from NHRs medical records. We compared immune responses between (severe) vitamin D-deficient and -sufficient NHRs/NHS and between supplemented and non-supplemented NHRs, stratified for history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and participant type. No significant differences in either binding or neutralizing COVID-19 vaccine antibody response were found between groups. The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (<20 ng/mL) was 45% (95% CI: 36–54%) among NHRs and 60% (95% CI: 54–66%) among NHS. Although we showed that vitamin D status may not be related to a better COVID-19 vaccine antibody response, addressing the high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in the nursing home population remains important.

No abstract