COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report: Week 2

COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report
Week 2
13 January 2022
COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report – week 2
Contents
Executive summary ...................................................................................................................... 3

Vaccine effectiveness ............................................................................................................... 3
Population impact ..................................................................................................................... 3
Vaccine effectiveness .................................................................................................................. 5
Effectiveness against symptomatic disease ............................................................................. 6
Effectiveness against hospitalisation ........................................................................................ 8
Effectiveness against mortality ............................................................................................... 10
Effectiveness against infection ............................................................................................... 11
Effectiveness against transmission ........................................................................................ 11
Vaccine effectiveness against the Omicron variant ................................................................ 13
Population impact ...................................................................................................................... 21
Vaccine coverage ................................................................................................................... 21
Vaccination in immunosuppressed individuals ....................................................................... 25
Vaccination in pregnancy ....................................................................................................... 26
Vaccination status in cases, deaths and hospitalisations ....................................................... 35
Vaccine impact on proportion of population with antibodies to COVID-19.............................. 44
Summary of impact on hospitalisations, infections and mortality ............................................ 51
References................................................................................................................................. 52
2
Executive summary
Four coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines have now been approved for use in the UK. Rigorous
clinical trials have been undertaken to understand the immune response, safety profile and
efficacy of these vaccines as part of the regulatory process. Ongoing monitoring of the vaccines
as they are rolled out in the population is important to continually ensure that clinical and public
health guidance on the vaccination programme is built upon the best available evidence.
UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), formerly Public Health England (PHE), works closely with
the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency (MHRA), NHS England, and other
government, devolved administration and academic partners to monitor the COVID-19
vaccination programme. Details of the vaccine surveillance strategy are set on the page
COVID-19: vaccine surveillance strategy (1). As with all vaccines, the safety of COVID-19
vaccines is continuously being monitored by the MHRA. They conclude that overall, the benefits
of COVID-19 vaccines outweigh any potential risks (2).
Vaccine effectiveness
Several studies of vaccine effectiveness have been conducted in the UK which indicate that 2
doses of vaccine are between 65 and 95% effective at preventing symptomatic disease with
COVID-19 with the Delta variant, with higher levels of protection against severe disease
including hospitalisation and death. There is some evidence of waning of protection against
infection and symptomatic disease over time, though protection against severe disease remains
high in most groups at least 5 months after the second dose.
Population impact
The impact of the vaccination programme on the population is assessed by taking into account
vaccine coverage, evidence on vaccine effectiveness and the latest COVID-19 disease
surveillance indicators.
Vaccine coverage tells us about the proportion of the population that have received 1, 2 and 3
doses of COVID-19 vaccines. By 9 January 2022, the overall vaccine uptake in England for
dose 1 was 68.8% and for dose 2 was 63.4%. Overall vaccine uptake in England in people with
at least 3 doses was 47.5%. In line with the programme rollout, coverage is highest in the oldest
age groups.
We present data on COVID-19 cases, hospitalisations and deaths by vaccination status. These
raw data should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness as the data does not take
into account inherent biases present such as differences in risk, behaviour and testing in the
vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Vaccine effectiveness is measured in other ways as
detailed in the ‘Vaccine Effectiveness’ section.
3
Based on antibody testing of blood donors, 98.7% of the adult population now have antibodies
to COVID-19 from either infection or vaccination compared to 24.1% that have antibodies from
infection alone.
4
Vaccine effectiveness
Large clinical trials have been undertaken for each of the COVID-19 vaccines approved in the
UK which found that they are highly efficacious at preventing symptomatic disease in the
populations that were studied. The clinical trials have been designed to be able to assess the
efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory confirmed symptomatic disease with a relatively short
follow up period so that effective vaccines can be introduced as rapidly as possible.
Nevertheless, understanding the effectiveness against different outcomes (such as severe

disease and onwards transmission), effectiveness in different subgroups of the population and
understanding the duration of protection are equally important in decision making around which
vaccines should be implemented as the programme evolves, who they should be offered to and
whether booster doses are required.
Vaccine effectiveness is estimated by comparing rates of disease in vaccinated individuals to

rates in unvaccinated individuals. Below we outline the latest real-world evidence on vaccine
effectiveness from studies in UK populations. We focus on data related to the Delta variant
which is currently dominant in the UK. The findings are also summarised in Table 1.
5
Effectiveness against symptomatic disease

Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 has been assessed in England based on community testing data linked to
vaccination data from the National Immunisation Management System (NIMS), cohort studies such as the COVID Infection Survey and GP
electronic health record data. After 2 doses, observed vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease with the Delta variant reaches
approximately 65 to 70% with AstraZeneca Vaxzevria and 80 to 95% with Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty and Moderna Spikevax (3, 4) Vaccine
effectiveness is generally slightly higher in younger compared to older age groups. With both Vaxzevria and Comirnaty, there is evidence of
waning of protection over time, most notably among older adults. There is not yet enough follow-up with Spikevax to assess waning (Figure
1, 3).
Figure 1. Vaccine effectiveness against Delta symptomatic disease among individuals aged over 16, with 2 doses of Vaxzevria
(AZ), Comirnaty (PF) or Spikevax (MD) in England and 95% confidence intervals
Data (based primarily on the Alpha variant) suggest that in most clinical risk groups, immune response to vaccination is maintained and high
levels of VE are seen with both the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines. Reduced antibody response and vaccine effectiveness were seen
after 1 dose of vaccine among the immunosuppressed group, however, after a second dose the reduction in vaccine effectiveness is
6
smaller (5). Analyses by dosing interval suggest that immune response to vaccination and vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic
disease improves with a longer (greater than 6 week interval) compared to a shorter interval of 3 to 4 weeks (Figure 1, 6, 3).
Data on booster vaccination in adults aged 50 years and older indicate that after a booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, vaccine
effectiveness increases to 93.8% among those who received the AstraZeneca vaccine as their primary course and 94.3% among those who
received the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine as their primary course (Figure 2,7).
Figure 2. Vaccine Effectiveness estimates in time intervals post booster according to primary course: Unvaccinated baseline
7
Effectiveness against hospitalisation

Several studies have estimated vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation in older ages, all of which indicate higher levels of protection
against hospitalisation with all vaccines against the Alpha variant (8, 9, 10, 11). Effectiveness against hospitalisation of over 90% is also
observed with the Delta variant with all 3 vaccines (Figure 3, 3). In most groups there is relatively limited waning of protection against
hospitalisation over a period of at least 5 months after the second dose. Greater waning appears to occur among those in clinical risk
groups (Figure 3, 3).
Figure 3. Vaccine effectiveness against Delta hospitalisation among individuals aged over 16, with 2 doses of Vaxzevria (AZ),
Comirnaty (PF) or Spikevax (MD) in England and 95% confidence intervals
8
Data on booster vaccination in adults aged 50 years and older indicates that after a booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, vaccine
effectiveness against hospitalisation increases to 98.8% among those who received either the AstraZeneca vaccine or the Pfizer vaccine as
their primary course (Figure 4,7).
Figure 4. Vaccine Effectiveness estimates against hospitalisation in time intervals post booster according to primary course:
Unvaccinated as baseline
9
Effectiveness against mortality

High levels of protection (over 90%) are also seen against mortality with all 3 vaccines and against both the Alpha and Delta variants
(Figure 5, 8, 12, 3). Relatively limited waning of protection against mortality is seen over a period of at least 5 months.
Figure 5. Vaccine effectiveness against Delta death among individuals aged over 16, with 2 doses of Vaxzevria (AZ), Comirnaty
(PF) or Spikevax (MD) in England and 95% confidence intervals
10
Effectiveness against infection

Although individuals may not develop symptoms of COVID-19 after vaccination, it is possible
that they could still be infected with the virus and could transmit to others. Understanding how
effective vaccines are at preventing infection is therefore important to predict the likely impact of
the vaccination programme on the wider population. In order to estimate vaccine effectiveness
against infection, repeat asymptomatic testing of a defined cohort of individuals is required.
Studies have now reported on vaccine effectiveness against infection in healthcare workers,
care home residents and the general population (13, 14, 15, 16). With the delta variant, vaccine
effectiveness against infection has been estimated at around 65% with Vaxzevria and 80% with
Comirnaty (4).
Effectiveness against transmission

As described above, several studies have provided evidence that vaccines are effective at
preventing infection. Uninfected individuals cannot transmit; therefore, the vaccines are also
effective at preventing transmission. There may be additional benefit, beyond that due to
prevention of infection, if some of those individuals who become infected despite vaccination
are also at a reduced risk of transmitting (for example, because of reduced duration or level of
viral shedding). A household transmission study in England found that household contacts of
cases vaccinated with a single dose had approximately 35 to 50% reduced risk of becoming a
confirmed case of COVID-19. This study used routine testing data so would only include
household contacts that developed symptoms and went on to request a test via pillar 2. It
cannot exclude asymptomatic secondary cases or mildly symptomatic cases who chose not to
request a COVID-19 test (17).
Data from Scotland has also shown that household contacts of vaccinated healthcare workers
are at reduced risk of becoming a case, which is in line with the studies on infection (18). Both
of these studies relate to a period when the Alpha variant dominated. An analysis from the ONS
Community Infection Survey found that contacts of vaccinated index cases had around 65 to
80% reduced odds of testing positive with the Alpha variant and 35 to 65% reduced odds of
testing positive with the Delta variant compare to contacts of unvaccinated index cases (19).
A summary of vaccine effectiveness evidence can be seen in Table 1.
11
Table 1. Summary of evidence on vaccine effectiveness against different outcomes Delta
Vaccine effectiveness*
Outcome Pfizer-BioNTech AstraZeneca Moderna
Comirnaty Vaxzevria Spikevax
Infection 75-85% 60-70%
Symptomatic 80-90% 65-75% 90-99%
disease
Hospitalisation 95-99% 90-99% 95-99%
Mortality 90-99% 90-95%
High Evidence from multiple studies which is consistent

Confidence and comprehensive
Medium Evidence is emerging from a limited number of
Confidence studies or with a moderately level of uncertainty
Low Little evidence is available at present and results are
Confidence inconclusive
* Estimates of initial vaccine effectiveness in the general population after a 2 dose course. This typically applies for
at least the first 3 to 4 months after vaccination. For some outcomes there may be waning of effectiveness beyond
this point.
12
Vaccine effectiveness against the Omicron variant

Background
Early data has indicated lower vaccine effectiveness against mild disease due to Omicron when
compared to Delta variant; this is supported by the observation of a lower neutralising antibody
response. Here we present updated UKHSA estimates of vaccine effectiveness against
symptomatic disease based on community PCR testing in England and early estimates of
vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation.
Methods
A test negative case control design was used to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against
symptomatic COVID-19 with the Omicron variant compared to the Delta variant. Here
vaccination rates in PCR positive cases are compared to vaccination rates in those who test
negative. Individuals who reported symptoms and tested in pillar 2 (community testing) between
November 27 and January 6 2022 were included in the analysis.
Cases were defined as the Omicron variant or Delta variant based on whole genome
sequencing, genotyping or S-gene target status on PCR testing. The Omicron variant has been
associated with a negative S-gene target result on PCR testing with the Taqpath assay whereas
with the Delta variant the S-gene target is almost always positive. Vaccine effectiveness was
estimated by period after dose 2 and dose 3. Results are presented for 18 year olds and over.
Pillar 2 symptomatic confirmed cases were then linked to the Emergency Care Dataset (ECDS)
to identify admissions via emergency care 0 to 14 days after the positive test (excluding
admissions due to injuries). Cox survival analysis was then used to estimate the risk of hospital
admission by vaccination status. Due to small numbers all vaccine brands are considered
together. Adjustments were made or age, gender, previous positive test, region, ethnicity, travel
history, clinically extremely vulnerable status, risk group status and period. To estimate vaccine
effectiveness against hospitalisation the odds ratios (OR) for symptomatic disease were
multiplied by the hazards ratios (HR) for hospitalisation among symptomatic cases:
VEhospitalisation = 1-(ORsymptomatic disease x HRhospitalisation).
Results
The symptomatic disease test negative case control analysis included 236,023 Delta cases and
760,647 Omicron cases. Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease by period after
dose 2 and dose 3 is shown in Figure 6 for those who received a primary course of the
AstraZeneca vaccine (Figure 6a), Pfizer (Figure 6b) or Moderna (Figure 6c). Effectiveness of
booster doses of Pfizer and Moderna are shown. In all periods, effectiveness was lower for
13
Omicron compared to Delta. Among those who had received 2 doses of AstraZeneca,
effectiveness dropped from 45 to 50% to almost no effect against Omicron from 20 weeks after
the second dose. Among those who had received 2 doses of Pfizer or Moderna effectiveness
dropped from around 65 to 70% down to around 10% by 20 weeks after the 2nd dose. 2 to 4
weeks after a booster dose vaccine effectiveness ranged from around 65 to 75%, dropping to
55 to 65% at 5 to 9 weeks and 45 to 50% from 10+ weeks after the booster.
14
Figure 6. Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic diseases by period after dose 1 and dose 2 for Delta (black squares) and
Omicron (grey circles) for a) recipients of 2 doses of Astrazeneca(ChAdOx1-S) vaccine as the primary course and Pfizer
(BNT162b2) or Moderna (mRNA-1273) as a booster; b) recipients of 2 doses of Pfizer vaccine as the primary course and Pfizer or
Moderna as a booster, and c) 2 doses of Moderna as a primary course (insufficient data for boosters after a Moderna primary
course)
Supplementary data are not available for this figure.

a)
15
b)
16
c)
17
Results for hospitalisations are shown in table 2. One dose of vaccine was associated with a
43% reduced risk of hospitalisation among symptomatic cases with the Omicron variant, 2
doses with a 55% reduction up to 24 weeks after the 2nd dose and a 40% reduced risk 25 or
more weeks after the 2nd dose, and a 3rd dose was associated with a 74% reduced risk of
hospitalisation in the first 2-4 weeks after vaccination dropping slightly to a 66% reduction by
10+ weeks after the booster dose. When combined with vaccine effectiveness against
symptomatic disease this was equivalent to vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation of 58%
after 1 dose, 64% 2-24 weeks after dose 2, 44% 25+ weeks after dose 2, and 92% dropping to
83% 10+ weeks after a booster dose. Combining the dose 3 periods, overall vaccine
effectiveness 2+ weeks after the booster was 89% (95% confidence interval 86-91%).
Table 2. Hazard ratios and vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation (all vaccine
brands combined). OR = odds ratio, HR = hazards ratio, VE = vaccine effectiveness
Interval OR v
after dose symptomatic HR vs VE vs
Dose (weeks) disease hospitalisation hospitalisation
1 4+ 0.74 (0.72-0.76) 0.57 (0.38-0.85) 58% (37-72)
2 2 to 24 0.81 (0.8-0.82) 0.45 (0.36-0.56) 64% (54-71)
2 25+ 0.94 (0.92-0.95) 0.6 (0.49-0.74) 44% (30-54)
3 2 to 4 0.32 (0.31-0.33) 0.26 (0.19-0.35) 92% (89-94)
3 5 to 9 0.42 (0.41-0.43) 0.29 (0.23-0.37) 88% (84-91)
3 10+ 0.5 (0.49-0.51) 0.34 (0.26-0.44) 83% (78-87)
Conclusions
These estimates suggest that vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease with the
Omicron variant is significantly lower than compared to the Delta variant and wane rapidly.
Nevertheless, protection against hospitalisation is much greater, in particular after a booster
dose, where vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation is around 85-90%%. Further data is
needed to estimate the duration of protection against hospitalisation.
18
Vaccine effectiveness publications

UKHSA have published a significant amount of research into vaccine effectiveness, which is
summarised on pages 5 to 18 and in the publications in Table 3.
Table 3. UKHSA publications on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination
Publication Subject
Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against This study reports on the vaccine
the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of concern effectiveness against symptomatic disease
with the Omicron variant for 2 dose courses
of BNT1622 and ChAdOx1-S as well as
booster doses of BNT162b2 following a
primary course of either BNT1622 or
ChAdOx1-S.
Vaccine effectiveness and duration of This study reports on the vaccine
protection of Comirnaty, Vaxzevria and effectiveness and duration of protection of
Spikevax against mild and severe COVID-19 in Comirnaty, Vaxzevria and Spikevax against
the UK mild and severe COVID-19 in the UK.
Higher serological responses and increased This study investigates the impact of
vaccine effectiveness demonstrate the value of different dosing schedules on immune
extended vaccine schedules in combatting response and vaccine effectiveness.
COVID-19 in England
Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford AstraZeneca This study reports on the immune response
COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and immune and clinical effectiveness of COVID-19
response among individuals in clinical risk vaccine among individuals in clinical risk
groups groups. A supplementary appendix is also
available to download.
Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against This study reports on the effectiveness of
hospital admission with the Delta (B.1.617.2) COVID-19 vaccines on hospitalisation
variant disease with the Delta variant. A
supplementary appendix is also available to
download.
Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines against the This study reports on the effectiveness of
B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant COVID-19 vaccines on symptomatic disease
with the Delta variant.
Effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA and A study using the SARI watch surveillance
ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector COVID-19 system of COVID-19 hospitalisations found
vaccines on risk of hospitalisation among older high levels of protection against
adults in England: an observational study using hospitalisation after both a single dose and 2
surveillance data doses of COVID-19 vaccines.
19
Publication Subject
Effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and A study on deaths with COVID-19 indicates
ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector vaccine on that COVID-19 vaccines offer high levels of
mortality following COVID-19 protection against mortality.
Effect of Vaccination on Household Impact of vaccination on household
Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in England transmission of SARS-COV-2 in England is
an analysis to determine whether individuals
who have received vaccine, but still become
infected with SARS-COV-2 up to 60 days
after the first dose, are less likely than
unvaccinated cases to transmit to their
unvaccinated household contacts.
Vaccine effectiveness of the first dose of The VIVALDI study found evidence that
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 against COVID-19 vaccines were associated with a
SARS-CoV-2 infection in residents of Long- substantially reduced risk of infection in care
Term Care Facilities (VIVALDI study) home residents.
Assessing the Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and The Avon CAP study, conducted in 2
ChAdOx1nCoV-19 COVID-19 Vaccination in hospitals in Bristol, found evidence of high
Prevention of Hospitalisations in Elderly and levels of protection against hospitalisation in
Frail Adults: A Single Centre Test Negative 80+ year olds with a single dose of either
Case-Control Study vaccine.
COVID-19 vaccine coverage in health-care Early data from PHE’s SIREN study shows a
workers in England and effectiveness of promising impact on infection in healthcare
BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against infection workers aged under 65. Healthcare workers
(SIREN): a prospective, multicentre, cohort in the study are tested for COVID-19 every 2
study weeks – whether or not they have
symptoms.
Effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Early data from routine COVID-19 testing in
Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines on covid-19 older adults shows that vaccines are
related symptoms, hospital admissions, and effective at preventing COVID-19 disease
mortality in older adults in England: test and severe outcomes.
negative case-control study
Impact of COVID-19 vaccination programme on Report on the Impact of COVID-19
seroprevalence in blood donors in England, vaccination programme on seroprevalence
2021 in blood donors in England, 2021.
20
Population impact
Vaccines typically have both direct effects on those who are vaccinated and indirect effects on
the wider population due to a reduced probability that people will come into contact with an
infected individual. The overall impact of the vaccination programme may therefore extend
beyond that estimated through vaccine effectiveness analysis.
Estimating the impact of a vaccination programme is challenging as there is no completely

unaffected control group. Furthermore, the effects of the vaccination programme need to be
differentiated from that of other interventions (for example, lockdowns or outbreak control
measures), changes in behaviour and any seasonal variation in COVID-19 activity.
UKHSA and other government and academic partners monitor the impact of the of the
vaccination programme on levels of COVID-19 antibodies in the population and different
disease indicators, including hospitalisations and mortality. This is done through population-
based testing and through modelling which combines vaccine coverage rates in different
populations, estimates of vaccine effectiveness and disease surveillance indicators.
Vaccine coverage
The data in this week’s report covers the period from 8 December 2020 to 9 January 2022
(week 1) (Figure 7). It shows the provisional number and percentage of living people in England
who have had received 1, 2 or 3 doses of a COVID-19 vaccination by age group and week
since the start of the programme. Further data on vaccine uptake by age in England can be
found in the national flu and COVID-19 surveillance reports. Age is calculated as age on the 31
August 2021, that is, academic cohort for all ages.
21
Figure 7. Cumulative weekly vaccine uptake by age

a) Dose 1
Over 80 D1 75 to under 80 D1 70 to under 75 D1 65 to under 70 D1 60 to under 65 D1 55 to under 60
50 to under 55 45 to under 50 40 to under 45 35 to under 40 30 to under 35 25 to under 30
20 to under 25 18 to under 20 16 to under 18 12 to under 16 Under 12
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
% vaccine uptake
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Week number
22
b) Dose 2
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
% vaccine uptake
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Week number
23
c) Dose 3 - please note the data for this graph is shown from week 35 (week ending 05/09/2021)
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
% vaccine uptake
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
2021-35 2021-36 2021-37 2021-38 2021-39 2021-40 2021-41 2021-42 2021-43 2021-44 2021-45 2021-46 2021-47 2021-48 2021-49 2021-50 2021-51 2021-52 2022-01
Week number
24
Vaccination in immunosuppressed individuals

Provisional vaccine uptake data in living and resident people identified as immunosuppressed in England to the end of week 1 can be found
in Table 4. This shows that vaccine uptake in the 535,752 identified as immunosuppressed was 95.5% for at least dose 1, 93.9% for at least
2 doses and 85.6% for at least 3 doses. Data on vaccine uptake in people with at least 3 doses by age in England can be found in the
National flu and COVID-19 surveillance reports.
Table 4. Vaccine uptake in people identified as immunosuppressed in England
Immuno- People Numbers Percentage Numbers Percentage Numbers Percentage

suppression in NIMs vaccinated vaccine vaccinated vaccine vaccinated vaccine uptake
Cohort with at least uptake with at with at least uptake with at with at least with at least 3
1 dose least 1 dose 2 doses least 2 doses 3 doses doses
England 535,752 511,487 95.5 503,025 93.9 458,504 85.6
Detailed information on the characterisation of the immunosuppressed group by NHS Digital is available.
25
Vaccination in pregnancy
Vaccination of pregnant women alongside their peers is recommended in the UK and other
countries as an important way to protect pregnant women and their unborn children against
COVID-19 disease. Vaccination of pregnant women is strongly recommended by the Royal
College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives.
As of 16 April, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) advice is that
pregnant women should be offered COVID-19 vaccines at the same time as people of the same
age or risk group. Therefore, any pregnant women not in a higher-risk group would likely have
received their first dose from mid-April 2021 as part of the general adult population programme
in those aged under 50 years. This was offered by age group, working back from older to
younger individuals.
Prior to this, COVID-19 vaccine was delivered to priority groups based on clinical risk and risk of
exposure, and delivered in order of priority. It was advised that vaccine could be offered to
pregnant and breast-feeding women who were in these risk categories and at high risk of
ongoing exposure or at high risk of serious complications of COVID-19 after the JCVI met on 22
December 2020. The Pfizer vaccine was rolled out from early December 2020, AstraZeneca
vaccine was approved for use in the UK at the end of December 2020 and the Moderna vaccine
became available from April 2021.
In England more than 80,000 women indicated that they were or could be pregnant at the time
they were vaccinated by the end of September 2021 (21). In Scotland more than 14,000 women
were vaccinated during pregnancy to the end of August 2021 (22) and nearly 2,000 women in
Wales to the end September 2021 (23). In the USA more than 175,000 women have indicated
they were pregnant at the time they received COVID-19 vaccination to 22 November 2021 (24).
There is evidence of high levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women
after COVID-19 vaccination (25-27) and evidence that vaccination induces higher antibody
levels than after disease (27). Between February and September 2021, 0.4% of 1,714 pregnant
women with COVID-19 symptoms who required hospital treatment in the UK had received 2
doses of COVID-19 vaccine and, of 235 pregnant women who were admitted to intensive care
with COVID-19 disease in that period, none had received 2 doses of vaccine (28).
Complications linked with COVID-19 disease in pregnancy (critical care admission and perinatal
deaths) in Scotland were far more common in unvaccinated than in vaccinated pregnant women
(29, 30). No safety concerns relating to COVID-19 vaccination of pregnant women have been
found in published studies to date (31, 32, 33, 34). The vaccine side-effects appear to be similar
in pregnant and non-pregnant populations (31).
Increased severity of COVID-19 disease in pregnant and recently pregnant women has been
reported after the first SARS-CoV-2 wave in England (35, 36) and in Scotland (29). Pregnant
women who develop severe disease have increased rates of admission to ICU, need for
26
invasive ventilation and pre-term delivery. Data from the US Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) found that pregnant women are around 3 times more likely to be admitted to
ICU and nearly 3 times more likely to require invasive ventilation compared to non-pregnant
women with COVID-19 disease and 25% more likely to die (37).
COVID-19 vaccines used in the UK programme do not contain live SARS-CoV-2 virus and
therefore cannot infect a pregnant woman or her unborn child with the virus. Whilst, as is
commonly the case in trials of medicinal products, pregnant women were excluded from the
original COVID-19 vaccine trials, there is accumulating experience and evidence of the safe and
effective use of mRNA vaccines (such as the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) in pregnant women.
This report provides first the early data on COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women and
provides preliminary findings.
Vaccine coverage
COVID-19 vaccine coverage in women before they give birth has increased as more women
have become eligible for vaccination. In May 2021, only 2.8% of women giving birth had
received at least 1 dose of vaccine. This increased to 9.8% of women who gave birth in June,
16.0% in July and 22.2% in August 2021 (Table 5).
In the overall 8 month period between January and August 2021 a total of 355,299 women gave
birth of whom 24,759 had received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine prior to delivery. For
the 18,187 women where enough information was available to derive the trimester in which the
vaccine was administered, 695 (3.8%) were immunised with their earliest vaccine dose in
pregnancy in their first trimester, 4,487 (24.7%) were immunised in their second trimester and
13,005 (71.5%) were immunised in their third trimester.
Of all vaccinated women giving birth, 80.8% had received Pfizer vaccine, 11.1% had received
AstraZeneca vaccine and 8.1% had received Moderna vaccine.
Table 5. Overall vaccine coverage in women giving birth, by month of delivery
Month Women giving birth Vaccinated Unvaccinated Unknown vaccine status
Jan-21 41,955 18 (0.0%) 41,766 (99.5%) 171 (0.4%)

Feb-21 40,105 84 (0.2%) 39,879 (99.4%) 142 (0.4%)
Mar-21 44,657 292 (0.7%) 44,230 (99.0%) 135 (0.3%)
Apr-21 43,363 495 (1.1%) 42,687 (98.4%) 181 (0.4%)
May-21 44,831 1,255 (2.8%) 43,387 (96.8%) 189 (0.4%)
Jun-21 44,822 4,383 (9.8%) 40,277 (89.9%) 162 (0.4%)
Jul-21 48,409 7,746 (16.0%) 40,468 (83.6%) 195 (0.4%)
Aug-21 47,157 10,486 (22.2%) 36,464 (77.3%) 207 (0.4%)
27
Table 6. Vaccine coverage by ethnicity, for women giving birth June to August 2021
Ethnicity Women giving birth Vaccinated Unvaccinated

in June to August
Asian 17,248 2,320 (13.5%) 14,928 (86.5%)
Black 6,736 370 (5.5%) 6,366 (94.5%)
Other 5,579 865 (15.5%) 4,714 (84.5%)
Mixed 3,311 463 (14.0%) 2,848 (86.0%)
White 100,555 17,599 (17.5%) 82,956 (82.5%)
Unknown1 6,395 998 (15.6%) 5,397 (84.4%)
1 564women of could not be matched with a NIMS record and their ethnicity and vaccine status are therefore
unknown.
Table 7. Vaccine coverage by quintile of deprivation of the small area in which the
woman lived, for women giving birth June to August 2021
Quintile of Women giving birth Vaccinated Unvaccinated

deprivation in June to August
1 - most deprived 35,263 2,751 (7.8%) 32,512 (92.2%)
2 30,448 3,964 (13.0%) 26,484 (87.0%)
3 27,146 4,847 (17.9%) 22,299 (82.1%)
4 24,462 5,189 (21.2%) 19,273 (78.8%)
5 - least deprived 21,751 5,770 (26.5%) 15,981 (73.5%)
Unknown1 754 94 (12.5%) 660 (87.5%)
1 564 women of could not be matched with a NIMS record and their quintile of deprivation and vaccine status are
therefore unknown.
Table 8. Vaccine coverage by age of mother, for women giving birth June to August 2021
Age Women giving birth Vaccinated Unvaccinated

in June to August
Under 20 2,463 71 (2.9%) 2,392 (97.1%)
20 to 24 15,903 738 (4.6%) 15,165 (95.4%)
25 to 29 35,417 2,915 (8.2%) 32,502 (91.8%)
30 to 34 48,655 9,164 (18.8%) 39,491 (81.2%)
35 to 39 29,719 7,709 (25.9%) 22,010 (74.1%)
40 to 44 7,246 1,924 (26.6%) 5,322 (73.4%)
45 and above1 420 93 (22.1%) 327 (77.9%)
1 564women of could not be matched with a NIMS record and their age group and vaccine status are therefore
unknown.
28
Using the most recent 3-month period (during which time there were 22,615 vaccinated women
giving birth, accounting for 91.3% of all vaccinated women giving birth since January) there
were differences in vaccine coverage by both ethnicity (Table 6) and by quintile of deprivation
(Table 7). Women of Black ethnicity and women living in the most deprived areas in England
were least likely to have been vaccinated with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine before they
gave birth. Coverage increased as levels of deprivation decreased (Table 7). Vaccine coverage
increased with increasing age group to those aged 40 to 44 years in whom uptake was 26.6%
(Table 8). Women who gave birth between January and August 2021 aged 45 years or older
had vaccine coverage of 22.1% and were offered vaccine earlier than the younger age groups.
Methods
Data on vaccination status are recorded in a central dataset called the National Immunisation
Management Service (NIMS).1 In addition, NHS Digital manages the Hospital Episode Statistics
(HES) datasets, containing information about hospital activity in England.
Records of women giving birth (‘delivery records’) in the months since 1 January 2021 were
identified in HES. De-duplication of delivery records resulted in a dataset of women who had
given birth with 1 record per woman, identified by her NHS Number, and the latest ‘delivery
episode’ associated with her. These were then linked back to women in the NIMS using the
NHS Number, and each woman’s vaccine status was established as either vaccinated or
unvaccinated (plus a small number where vaccine status was unknown), using the NIMS
vaccine records. The date the vaccine was administered had to be on an earlier date than the
date the woman gave birth. The ethnicity, residence and age information used to generate
Tables 6 to 8 was taken from the NIMS record.
In order to establish the trimester each woman first received the vaccine, the gestational age on
the date at which she gave birth was required and was used to establish the start of her
pregnancy. Women recorded as receiving their earliest dose of the vaccine within 97 days of
the start of their pregnancy were counted as having received the vaccine in trimester 1; women
recorded as receiving their earliest dose of the vaccine between 98 and 195 days of the start of
their pregnancy were counted as having received the vaccine in trimester 2 and women
receiving the vaccine over 195 days (but before the day of delivery) were counted as having
received the vaccine in trimester 3.
The analysis within this section was carried out on 16 November 2021. The latest HES data
available are for August 2021, and HES data since April 2021 is considered provisional.
1NIMS Data controllers are NHSEI and NHSD. The NIMS IT software is commissioned by NHSEI via
South Central West CSU and is provided by the System C and Graphnet Care Alliance.
29
Pregnancy outcomes
The following figures present rates of women in England who gave birth to a stillborn baby
(based on recorded diagnoses), the proportion of women giving birth to a baby with low
birthweight (<2,500g) or a very low birthweight (<1,500g) and the proportion of women giving
birth prematurely (<37 weeks gestation), very prematurely (<32 weeks gestation) and extremely
prematurely (<28 weeks gestation). It assesses whether rates were different in women who
received a COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy compared with the unvaccinated and overall
population but does not take other factors that might affect these outcomes into account, such
as age and whether the woman was categorised as clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV). More
detailed statisical analyses are planned. These pregnancy outcomes are routinely reported as
official statistics annually by ONS, however HES data was used to monitor outcomes more
quickly than ONS data allow.
Figure 8. Stillbirths experienced by women giving birth January to August 2021
30
Figure 9. Low birthweight births, women giving birth January to August 2021
The stillbirth rate for vaccinated women who gave birth (3.35 per 1,000, 95%CI 2.71 to 4.15)
was similar to the rate for unvaccinated women (3.60 per 1,000, 95%CI 3.40 to 3.81) giving birth
between January and August 2021 (Figure 8). In the same period, the proportion of vaccinated
women giving birth to babies with low birthweight (5.28%, 95%CI 5.01 to 5.57) was comparable
to the proportion for unvaccinated women (5.36%, 95%CI 5.29 to 5.44) (Figure 9). Similarly,
0.93% (95%CI 0.82 to 1.06) of vaccinated pregnant women and 0.80% (95%CI 0.77 to 0.83) of
unvaccinated pregnant women had a very low birthweight baby.
The proportion of women with premature births was 6.51% (95%CI 6.21 to 6.82) in vaccinated
women and 5.99% (95%CI 5.91 to 6.08) in unvaccinated women. The proportion of women with
very premature births was 1.71% (95%CI 1.55 to 1.88) in vaccinated and 1.74% (95%CI 1.70 to
1.79) in unvaccinated women. The proportion of women with extremely premature births was
1.09% (95%CI 0.97 to 1.23) in vaccinated women and 1.21% (95%CI 1.17 to 1.25) in
unvaccinated women.
31
Figure 10. Premature births in women giving birth January to August 2021
The first women to be offered COVID-19 vaccine were those who were categorised as CEV and
women of older age who are at increased risk of the 3 outcomes presented here (given the
medical conditions that placed them in this category), together with healthcare professionals at
higher risk of COVID-19 exposure. Women with underlying conditions that put them at very high
risk of serious complications of COVID-19 and older pregnant women will therefore account for
a relatively high proportion of early deliveries in vaccinated women. For example, whilst 26.7%
of the women who gave birth were aged 35 years or older this age group accounted for 43.0%
of all vaccinated women who gave birth. It is therefore very reassuring that vaccinated women
had no increased risk of suffering a stillbirth or having low birthweight babies. Whilst the
proportion of women with a premature birth was slightly higher in vaccinated women, this could
be explained by differences in their age and underlying health risk. The proportion of very or
extremely premature births, where the baby is at more risk, was similar in vaccinated and
unvaccinated women.
Methods
For the analysis in this section, women aged under 50 years were identified in the NIMS dataset
and their vaccine status was established as either vaccinated or unvaccinated, using the NIMS
vaccine records. These records were then linked, where the woman had given birth, to the de-
duplicated delivery records from the HES dataset by NHS number. The date the vaccine was
32
administered had to be on an earlier date than the date the woman gave birth. The analysis
within this section was carried out on 16 November 2021. The latest HES data available are for
August 2021, and HES data since April 2021 is considered provisional.
Stillbirths were identified as records where any 1 or more of the first 12 diagnoses was the
following: Z37.1: Single stillbirth; Z37.3 Twins, 1 liveborn and 1 stillborn; Z37.4 Twins, both
stillborn; Z37.6: Other multiple births, some liveborn; Z37.7: Other multiple births, all stillborn.
Low birthweight and very low birthweight deliveries were identified as records where any of the
first 4 babies born had a known birthweight between 500g and 2499g (1499g or lower for very
low birthweight).
Premature deliveries were identified as records where the gestational length was less than 37
weeks (less than 32 weeks for very premature, and less than 28 weeks for extremely
premature).
Low birthweight is by convention presented as a percentage of all deliveries with known

birthweights, and prematurity usually presented as a percentage of all deliveries with known
gestational length. However here they are presented as percentages of all deliveries, to reduce
the chance of significant findings arising from a change in the overall success of recording these
fields during the pandemic. Figures will therefore differ from official statistics and should be
considered for surveillance purposes only.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the Wilson Score method (38). A confidence interval
is a range of values that is used to quantify the imprecision in the estimate of a particular
indicator. Specifically it quantifies the imprecision that results from random variation in the
measurement of the indicator. A wider confidence interval shows that the indicator value
presented is likely to be a less precise estimate of the true underlying value.
Main findings
COVID-19 vaccination is the safest and most effective way for women to protect themselves
and their babies against severe COVID-19 disease.
COVID-19 vaccine coverage in pregnant women at delivery has increased as more women
have become eligible for vaccination reaching 22.2% for women who gave birth in August 2021.
This coverage is in line with the 25% of women in Scotland and 18.4% in Wales delivering in
August 2021 who had received any dose and their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine respectively
prior to delivery.
Coverage increased with decreasing levels of deprivation. Women of Black ethnicity had the
lowest vaccine coverage.
33
Coverage increased with increasing age group to 40 to 44 years. This reflects the roll out of the
vaccine by age group and the longer availability of vaccination in older pregnant women.
Women who had received COVID-19 vaccine and delivered between January and August 2021
were more likely to be in older age groups and to be in clinically extremely vulnerable risk
groups as these women were offered COVID-19 vaccination earlier than younger women and
those who were not in clinical risk categories.
It is reassuring, therefore, that vaccinated and unvaccinated women had a similar risk of
stillbirth between January and August 2021. Vaccinated and unvaccinated women who gave
birth in this period also had similar proportions of low and very low birthweight babies.
Whilst the proportion of premature births was slightly higher in vaccinated women, this could be
explained by differences in their age and underlying health risk (as CEV women were prioritised
in the earlier months of the roll-out). The proportions of very or extremely premature births,
where the baby is at more risk, were similar in vaccinated and unvaccinated women.
34
Vaccination status in cases, deaths and

hospitalisations
Vaccination status of COVID-19 cases, deaths and hospitalisations by week of specimen date
over the past 4 weeks up to week 1 (up to 9 January 2022) are shown in tables 9 to 11.
These data are published to help understand the implications of the pandemic to the NHS, for
example understanding workloads in hospitals, and to help understand where to prioritise
vaccination delivery. These raw data should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness.
We have published a blog post to accompany this section of the vaccine surveillance report.
Methods
COVID-19 cases and deaths identified through routine collection from the Second Generation
Surveillance System (SGSS) and from UKHSA EpiCell's deaths data, as described in the
technical summary, were linked to the National Immunisation Management System (NIMS) to
derive vaccination status, using an individual’s NHS number as the unique identifier.
Attendance to emergency care at NHS trusts was derived from the Emergency Care DataSet
(ECDS) managed by NHS Digital. The same data source was used to identify COVID-19 cases
where the attendance to emergency care resulted in admission to an NHS trust.
ECDS is updated weekly, and cases are linked to these data twice weekly. Data from ECDS are
subject to reporting delays as, although NHS trusts may update data daily, the mandatory
deadline for submission is by the 21st of every month. This means that for weeks immediately
following the 21st of a month, numbers may be artificially low and are likely to be higher in later
versions of the report.
Data from ECDS also only report on cases who have been presented to emergency care and
had a related overnight patient admission and do not show those who are currently in hospital
with COVID-19. As such, it is not appropriate for use for surveillance of those currently
hospitalised with COVID-19. In addition, these data will not show cases who were directly
admitted as inpatients without presenting to emergency care.
The outcome of overnight inpatient admission following presentation to emergency care, was
limited to those occurring within 28 days of the earliest specimen date for a COVID-19 case.
Deaths include those who died (a) within 28 days of the earliest specimen date or (b) within 60
days of the first specimen date or more than 60 days after the first specimen date with COVID-
19 mentioned on the death certificate.
The rate of COVID-19 cases, hospitalisation, and deaths in fully vaccinated and unvaccinated
groups was calculated using vaccine coverage data for each age group extracted at the mid-
point of the reporting period from the National Immunisation Management Service.
35
Results
The rate of a positive COVID-19 test varies by age and vaccination status. The rate of a positive
COVID-19 test is substantially lower in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated
individuals up to the age of 29. In individuals aged greater than 30, the rate of a positive
COVID-19 test is higher in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated (Table 12). This is
likely to be due to a variety of reasons, including differences in the population of vaccinated and
unvaccinated people as well as differences in testing patterns.
The rate of hospitalisation within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test increases with age, and is
substantially greater in unvaccinated individuals compared to vaccinated individuals.
The rate of death within 28 days or within 60 days of a positive COVID-19 test increases with
age, and again is substantially greater in unvaccinated individuals compared to fully vaccinated
individuals.
Interpretation of data
These data should be considered in the context of the vaccination status of the population
groups shown in the rest of this report. In the context of very high vaccine coverage in the
population, even with a highly effective vaccine, it is expected that a large proportion of cases,
hospitalisations and deaths would occur in vaccinated individuals, simply because a larger
proportion of the population are vaccinated than unvaccinated and no vaccine is 100% effective.
This is especially true because vaccination has been prioritised in individuals who are more
susceptible or more at risk of severe disease. Individuals in risk groups may also be more at risk
of hospitalisation or death due to non-COVID-19 causes, and thus may be hospitalised or die
with COVID-19 rather than from COVID-19.
The vaccination status of cases, inpatients and deaths should not be used to assess vaccine
effectiveness because of differences in risk, behaviour and testing in the vaccinated and
unvaccinated populations. The case rates in the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are
crude rates that do not take into account underlying statistical biases in the data. There are
likely to be systematic differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, for
example:
• people who are fully vaccinated may be more health conscious and therefore more
likely to get tested for COVID-19 and so more likely to be identified as a case (based
on the data provided by the NHS Test and Trace)
• many of those who were at the head of the queue for vaccination are those at higher
risk from COVID-19 due to their age, their occupation, their family circumstances or
because of underlying health issues
• people who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave
differently, particularly with regard to social interactions and therefore may have
differing levels of exposure to COVID-19
36
• people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19 in
the weeks or months before the period of the cases covered in the report. This gives
them some natural immunity to the virus which may have contributed to a lower case
rate in the past few weeks
These biases become more evident as more people are vaccinated and the differences
between the vaccinated and unvaccinated population become systematically different in ways
that are not accounted for without undertaken formal analysis of vaccine effectiveness. Vaccine
effectiveness has been formally estimated from a number of different sources and is described
on pages 5 to 18 in this report.
Denominator
The potential sources of denominator data are either the National Immunisation Management
Service (NIMS) or the Office for National Statistics (ONS) mid-year population estimates. Each
source has its strengths and limitations which have been described in detail on the NHS website
and GOV.Wales.
NIMS may over-estimate denominators in some age groups, for example because people are
registered with the NHS but may have moved abroad. However, as it is a dynamic register,
such patients, once identified by the NHS, are able to be removed from the denominator. On the
other hand, ONS data uses population estimates based on the 2011 census and other sources
of data. When using ONS, vaccine coverage exceeds 100% of the population in some age
groups, which would in turn lead to a negative denominator when calculating the size of the
unvaccinated population.
UKHSA uses NIMS throughout its COVID-19 surveillance reports including in the calculation
rates of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and deaths by vaccination status because it is a
dynamic database of named individuals, where the numerator and the denominator come from
the same source and there is a record of each individual’s vaccination status. Additionally,
NIMS contains key sociodemographic variables for those who are targeted and then receive the
vaccine, providing a rich and consistently coded data source for evaluation of the vaccine
programme. Large scale efforts to contact people in the register will result in the identification of
people who may be overcounted, thus affording opportunities to improve accuracy in a dynamic
fashion that feeds immediately into vaccine uptake statistics and informs local vaccination
efforts.
Sources of further information

UKHSA has published a blog post to accompany this section of the report.
The Office of the Statistics Regulator has published a blog post.
37
UKHSA has published a significant amount of research into vaccine effectiveness which is
summarised on pages 5 to 18 of this report.
The Office for National Statistics has published research into the risk of testing positive for
COVID-19 by vaccination status, impact of Delta on viral burden and vaccine effectiveness (4),
and the risk of death by vaccination status.
38
Table 9. COVID-19 cases by vaccination status between week 50 2021 and week 1 2022
Please note that corresponding rates by vaccination status can be found in Table 12.
Received one Received one

Second dose
Cases reported by Not dose (1 to 20 dose, ≥21 days
Total Unlinked* ≥14 days before
specimen date between vaccinated days before before
specimen date1
week 50 2021 and week 1 specimen date) specimen date
2022 [These data should be interpreted with caution. See information below in footnote about the correct
interpretation of these figures]
Under 18 501,913 39,487 348,431 7,711 90,854 15,430
18 to 29 785,297 65,993 126,426 7,161 45,408 540,309
30 to 39 639,522 47,573 90,211 3,738 24,845 473,155
40 to 49 484,912 30,460 42,645 1,480 11,162 399,165
50 to 59 396,008 22,864 21,184 716 5,471 345,773
60 to 69 202,505 12,150 7,872 383 1,984 180,116
70 to 79 100,553 6,161 2,554 147 667 91,024
80 or over 50,548 4,413 1,546 61 548 43,980
* Individuals whose NHS numbers were unavailable to link to the NIMS.

1 In the context of very high vaccine coverage in the population, even with a highly effective vaccine, it is expected that a large proportion of cases, hospitalisations and
deaths would occur in vaccinated individuals, simply because a larger proportion of the population are vaccinated than unvaccinated and no vaccine is 100% effective.
This is especially true because vaccination has been prioritised in individuals who are more susceptible or more at risk of severe disease. Individuals in risk groups may
also be more at risk of hospitalisation or death due to non-COVID-19 causes, and thus may be hospitalised or die with COVID-19 rather than because of COVID-19.
39
Table 10. COVID-19 cases presenting to emergency care (within 28 days of a positive specimen) resulting in an overnight
inpatient admission by vaccination status between week 50 2021 and week 1 2022
Cases presenting to
emergency care (within 28 Second dose
dose (1 to 20 dose, ≥21 days
days of a positive test) Total Unlinked* Not vaccinated ≥14 days before
days before before
resulting in overnight specimen date1
specimen date) specimen date
inpatient admission, by
specimen date between
week 50 2021 and week 1 [These data should be interpreted with caution. See information below in footnote about the correct
2022 interpretation of these figures]
Under 18 1,295 78 1,124 12 69 12

18 to 29 1,329 40 525 14 116 634
30 to 39 1,335 28 581 10 80 636
40 to 49 1,349 16 542 12 67 712
50 to 59 1,703 23 615 6 78 981
60 to 69 1,672 18 535 17 68 1,034
70 to 79 1,997 4 411 5 62 1,515
80 or over 2,834 3 405 7 66 2,353

40
Table 11. COVID-19 deaths (a) within 28 days and (b) within 60 days of positive specimen or with COVID-19 reported on
death certificate, by vaccination status between week 50 2021 and week 1 2022
(a)
Received one Received one Second dose
Death within 28 days of dose (1 to 20 dose, ≥21 days ≥14 days
positive COVID-19 test by Total** Unlinked* Not vaccinated
days before before before
date of death between specimen date) specimen date specimen date1
week 50 2021 and week 1
Under 18 8 0 8 0 0 0
18 to 29 23 0 15 0 0 8
30 to 39 64 0 37 0 3 24
40 to 49 115 2 69 0 5 39
50 to 59 263 2 116 1 15 129
60 to 69 499 10 181 0 21 287
70 to 79 715 6 196 2 35 476
80 or over 1,487 11 302 4 44 1,126
** number of deaths of people who had had a positive test result for COVID-19 and either died within 60 days of the first positive test or have COVID-19 mentioned on
their death certificate.
41
(b)

Death within 60 days of Second dose
dose (1 to 20 dose, ≥21 days
positive COVID-19 test by Total** Unlinked* Not vaccinated ≥14 days before
days before before
date of death between specimen date1
specimen date) specimen date
week 50 2021 and week 1
Under 18 11 0 11 0 0 -
18 to 29 28 1 18 1 0 8
30 to 39 86 1 47 0 5 33
40 to 49 142 3 84 0 6 49
50 to 59 344 2 153 1 18 170
60 to 69 621 13 213 0 25 370
70 to 79 925 7 218 2 41 657
80 or over 1,828 13 321 4 49 1,441
** number of deaths of people who had had a positive test result for COVID-19 and either died within 60 days of the first positive test or have COVID-19 mentioned on
their death certificate.
42
Table 12. Unadjusted rates of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and death in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.
Please note that the following table should be read in conjunction with pages 35 to 38 of this report, and the footnotes provided on page 43.
Cases presenting to emergency care (within Death within 60 days of positive

Death within 28 days of positive COVID-19
Cases reported by specimen date 28 days of a positive test) resulting in COVID-19 test by date of death
test by date of death between week 50 2021
between week 50 2021 and week 1 2022 overnight inpatient admission, by specimen between week 50 2021 and week 1
and week 1 2022
date between week 50 2021 and week 1 2022 2022
[see information on population bases and unadjusted rates in footnotes 1 and 2 below this table]
Unadjusted rates Unadjusted rates
Unadjusted rates Unadjusted rates Unadjusted rates Unadjusted rates Unadjusted rates Unadjusted rates
among persons among persons
among persons not among persons among persons not among persons among persons not among persons
vaccinated with 2 vaccinated with
vaccinated (per vaccinated with 2 vaccinated (per vaccinated with 2 vaccinated (per not vaccinated
doses (per 2 doses (per
100,000)1,2 doses (per 100,000) 2 100,000)2 doses (per 100,000)2 100,000)2 (per 100,000)2
100,000)1,2 100,000)2
Under 18 2,356.6 3,376.1 1.8 10.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1
18 to 29 8,926.0 4,058.9 10.5 16.9 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.6
30 to 39 7,618.8 3,268.8 10.2 21.1 0.4 1.3 0.5 1.7
40 to 49 6,330.1 2,585.9 11.3 32.9 0.6 4.2 0.8 5.1
50 to 59 4,796.2 2,117.0 13.6 61.5 1.8 11.6 2.4 15.3
60 to 69 3,099.9 1,477.9 17.8 100.4 4.9 34.0 6.4 40.0
70 to 79 1,926.2 1,059.6 32.1 170.5 10.1 81.3 13.9 90.4
80 or over 1,657.7 1,262.9 88.7 330.8 42.4 246.7 54.3 262.2
1 Comparing case rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection. Vaccine effectiveness has been formally
estimated from a number of different sources and is summarised on pages 5 to 18 in this report.
The rates are calculated per 100,000 in people who have received either 2 doses of a COVID-19 vaccine or in people who have not received a COVID-19 vaccine. These figures are updated each week as
the number of unvaccinated individuals and individuals vaccinated with 2 doses in the population changes.
The case rates in the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are unadjusted crude rates that do not take into account underlying statistical biases in the data and there are likely to be systematic
differences between these 2 population groups. For example:
• people who are fully vaccinated may be more health conscious and therefore more likely to get tested for COVID-19 and so more likely to be identified as a case (based on the data provided by the NHS
Test and Trace)
• many of those who were at the head of the queue for vaccination are those at higher risk from COVID-19 due to their age, their occupation, their family circumstances or because of underlying health
issues
• people who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave differently, particularly with regard to social interactions and therefore may have differing levels of exposure to COVID-19
• people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19 in the weeks or months before the period of the cases covered in the report. This gives them some natural immunity to
the virus which may have contributed to a lower case rate in the past few weeks
2
Case rates are calculated using NIMS - a database of named individuals from which the numerator and the denominator come from the same source and there is a record of each individuals vaccination
status. Further information on the use of NIMS as the source of denominator data is presented on page 37 of this report.
Unadjusted case rates among persons vaccinated have been formatted in grey to further emphasise the caution to be employed when interpreting these data.
43
Vaccine impact on proportion of population with

antibodies to COVID-19
Seroprevalence
The results from testing samples provided by healthy adult blood donors aged 17 years and
older, supplied by the NHS Blood and Transplant (NHS BT collection) between weeks 35 2020
and week 52 2021 are summarised. As of week 44 2020, approximately 250 samples from each
geographic NHS region are tested each week.
The COVID-19 vaccination campaign began on the 8 December 2020 (week 50) with a phased
roll out by age and risk group. From the beginning of September 2021, a third dose was offered
to individuals with severe immunosuppression. A booster dose was introduced from 16
September 2021 for individuals aged 50 years and over, frontline health and social care staff,
individuals aged 16 to 49 with certain underlying health conditions and household contacts of
immunosuppressed individuals. Eligibility for booster doses was extended to individuals aged
40 years and over from 22 November and from December to those aged 18 to 39 in a phased
rollout by age group. Booster doses are generally given at least 6 months after the second
dose, although the minimum interval was reduced to at least 3 months from the second or third
dose in an effort to accelerate the roll out with the emergence of the Omicron variant.
Please note that this section will be updated monthly. Last update was published on 13 January
2022.
Seroprevalence in blood donors aged 17 years and older

The results presented here are based on testing samples with Roche nucleoprotein (N) and
Roche spike (S) antibody assays.
Nucleoprotein (Roche N) assays only detect post-infection antibodies, whereas spike (Roche S)
assays will detect both post-infection antibodies and vaccine-induced antibodies. Thus, changes
in seropositivity for the Roche N assay reflect the effect of natural infection. Increases in
seropositivity as measured by S antibody reflect both infection and vaccination. Antibody
responses to both targets reflect infection or vaccination occurring at least 2 to 3 weeks
previously given the time taken to generate a COVID-19 antibody response. Currently donors
are asked to defer donations for at least 7 full days post vaccination, and for at least 28 days
post recovery if side-effects following vaccination or COVID-19 infection.
This report presents Roche N and Roche S seropositivity estimates on the same set of
samples, using a 12-week rolling prevalence for national, age group and regional estimates.
Seropositivity estimates are plotted using the mid-point of a 12-weekly rolling period that
reduces to 8 weeks in the most recent weeks to allow for a more representative current
estimate of seropositivity. However, this also means the data will reflect seroprevalence several
44
weeks previously, and are unlikely to reflect the recent increase in infection due to the Omicron
variant. Seroprevalence estimates reported are based on seropositivity which are unadjusted for
the sensitivity and specificity of the assays used.
National prevalence
Overall population weighted (by age group, sex and NHS region) antibody prevalence among
blood donors aged 17 years and older in England was 24.1% (95% CI 23.3% - 24.9%) using the
Roche N assay and 98.7% (95% CI 98.4% - 98.9%) using the Roche S assay for the period 8
November to 31 December (weeks 45 to 52 2021). 2,855 out of 12,163 were Roche N positive
and 11,848 out of 12,010 samples were Roche S positive. This compares with 20.5% (95% CI
19.9% - 21.1%) Roche N seropositivity and 98.1% (95% CI 97.9% - 98.3%) Roche S
seropositivity for the period of 16 August to 7 November 2021 (weeks 33 to 44 2021).
Seropositivity (weighted by region, age group and sex) varies over time. Figure 11 shows the
overall 12-weekly rolling proportion seropositive over time for the Roche N and Roche S assays.
Seropositivity estimates are plotted weekly using the mid-point of a rolling 12-weekly period.
Figure 11. Overall 12-weekly rolling SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence (%

seropositive) in blood donors
100
90
80
70
% seropositive
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
35 39 43 47 51 2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 46 50
week number (12-week period mid point)
Roche S (infection / vaccination) Roche N (infection) vaccination introduced
45
Regional prevalence of infection over time

Seropositivity (weighted by age group and sex) using the Roche N assay which detects
infection only, varies by region (Figure 12).
Figure 12. 12-weekly rolling SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence (% seropositive) in

blood donors by region, using Roche N test; error bars show 95% confidence intervals.
35
30
25
% seropositive
20
15
10
0
48 50 52 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51
London Midlands North West
North East & Yorks South West South East
East of Eng
Table 13. Roche N seropositivity (95%CI) estimates by NHS region
NHS region Weeks 33 to 44 Weeks 45 to 52

East of England 15.9% (14.6% - 17.3%) 17.5% (15.8% - 19.5%)
London 28.6% (27.0% - 30.2%) 29.2% (26.9% - 31.5%)
Midlands 19.2% (17.6% - 20.8%) 26.5% (24.3% - 28.8%)
North East and Yorkshire 21.0% (19.5% - 22.7%) 27.7% (25.6% - 29.9%)
North West 26.6% (24.9% - 28.4%) 28.5% (26.4% -30.8%)
South East 16.1% (14.8% - 17.6%) 17.8% (16.0% - 19.7%)
South West 14.0% (12.7% - 15.4%) 17.6% (15.9% - 19.4%)
Increases in Roche N seropositivity have recently been observed across all regions (Table 13)
compared to the previous 12-week period with the most notable increases in the Midlands and
North East and Yorkshire regions.
46
London has consistently seen the highest Roche N seropositivity although levels have remained
relatively stable in recent weeks. Seropositivity in the North West has continued to increase
and is approaching similar levels to London. Whilst seropositivity has consistently been lowest
in the South West, recent increases have resulted in the region reaching similar levels to those
observed in the East of England and the South East. With the emergence of the Omicron
variant considerable increases in COVID-19 case rates in England have been observed across
all regions with the highest case rates are in the North West and North East (Weekly national
Influenza and COVID-19 surveillance report week 1). However the impact of the Omicron wave
is not currently evident in the most recent seroprevalence data, given that it takes approximately
2 to 3 weeks to developing an antibody response following infection and the 28 day deferral for
individuals to donate following infection.
Prevalence by age group

Seropositivity estimates by age group using the Roche N assay are presented below.
Figure 13. Population weighted 12-weekly rolling SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence

(% seropositive) in blood donors from the Roche N assay by age group
40
35
30
25
% seropositive
20
15
10
0
48 50 52 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51
17-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-84
Based on testing samples using the Roche N assay (Figure 13) as a marker of infection, the
highest seropositivity continues to be observed in those aged 17 to 29 and the lowest in those
aged 70 to 84.
47
Table 14. Roche N seropositivity (95%CI) estimates by age group
Age group Weeks 33 to 44 Weeks 45 to 52
17-29 30.0% (28.2% - 31.9%) 33.6% (31.3% - 36.1%)

30-39 23.3% (22.0% - 24.7%) 25.7% (23.9% - 27.6%)
40-49 21.3% (20.1% - 22.6%) 29.8% (27.9% - 31.7%)
50-59 19.6% (18.6% - 20.7%) 22.9% (21.4% - 24.4%)
60-69 14.5% (13.4% - 15.7%) 17.2% (15.7% - 19.0%)
70-84 8.8% (7.4% - 10.4%) 9.2% (7.3% - 11.4%)
Increases in Roche N seropositivity have recently been observed across all age groups (Table
14) compared to the previous 12-week period. In the most recent period, the largest increase in
seropositivity was observed in those aged 40 to 49, this age group has the second highest
seropositivity after the 17 to 29 year olds. In England, COVID-19 case rates for weeks 48 to 52
increased across all age groups with the highest rates in individuals aged 20 to 29 followed by
30 to 39 years olds (Weekly national Influenza and COVID-19 surveillance report week 1).
Roche S seropositivity in blood donors has plateaued and is now over 96% across all age
groups.
Seropositivity estimates for S antibody in blood donors are likely to be higher than would be
expected in the general population and this probably reflects the fact that donors are more likely
to be vaccinated. Seropositivity estimates for N antibody will underestimate the proportion of
the population previously infected due to (i) blood donors are potentially less likely to be
exposed to natural infection than age matched individuals in the general population (ii) waning
of the N antibody response over time and (iii) recent observations from UK Health Security
Agency (UKHSA) surveillance data that N antibody levels are lower in individuals who acquire
infection following 2 doses of vaccination. These lower N antibody responses in individuals with
breakthrough infections (post-vaccination) compared to primary infection likely reflect the
shorter and milder infections in these patients. Patients with breakthrough infections do have
significant increases in S antibody levels consistent with boosting of their antibody levels.
Vaccination has made an important contribution to the overall Roche S increases observed
since the roll out of the vaccination programme, initially amongst individuals aged 50 years and
above who were prioritised for vaccination as part of the phase 1 programme and subsequently
in younger adults as part of phase 2 of the vaccination programme. The impact of the booster
vaccination programme can be assessed by monitoring Roche S antibody levels across the
population over time.
48
Roche S levels by age group and month

The Roche S assay that the UKHSA uses for serological surveillance is fully quantitative,
meaning that it measures the level of antibodies in a blood sample; an antibody level above 0.8
AU/ml (approximately 1 IU/ml using the WHO standard) is deemed positive. The PHE/ UKHSA
surveillance over the past few months has found that over 97% of the population of blood
donors test positive for S-antibodies, which may have resulted from either COVID-19 infection
or vaccination. With such high seropositivity, it is important to look at population antibody levels
in order to assess the impact of the vaccination booster programme. In the previous report,
groupings of antibody level ranges were updated to better illustrate changes over time.
Figure 14 shows monthly categorised Roche S levels in N-antibody negative individuals by age
group. Almost all tested S-antibody negative during December. In the 3 oldest age groups, the
impact of first vaccine dose, then second vaccine dose, can be seen from January through
June, as the profile of population antibody levels increases. Then from June through September
the profile of antibody levels in these cohorts gradually decreases, consistent with waning.
During October there was a small increase in percentage of donors with very high antibody
levels of 10,000+ AU/ml for the 50 to 84 age group, following the initiation of the booster
programme. In November the proportion of donors with very high antibody levels of 10,000+
AU/ml increased further particularly in those aged 70 to 84 years. In December large increases
were observed in the proportion of donors aged 50 to 69 with very high antibody levels of
10,000+ AU/ml. Increases were also observed in younger age groups as the booster
programme was accelerated due to the emergence of the Omicron variant. The higher profile of
antibody levels in the youngest age group, is likely a result of a combination of factors including
stronger immune responses in younger individuals and the higher antibody levels produced
after mRNA vaccination.
Figure 15 shows categorised Roche S levels in N-antibody positive individuals, those likely to
have experienced past infection. Pre-vaccination antibody levels will be influenced by time since
infection, variant and severity of infection, as well as individual factors such as underlying health
conditions and age. At the start of the vaccination rollout in December 2020 antibody levels
typically sat within the range of 0.8 to 2,500 AU/ml, after vaccination antibody levels typically
exceed 2,500 AU/ml. In November more than half of donors aged 70 to 84 years had very high
antibody levels of 25,000+ AU/ml. In December increases in the proportion of donors with very
high antibody levels of 25,000+ AU/ml were observed across all age groups with the largest
increases in the 50 to 69 age groups. Comparing Figure 14 with Figure 15, the overall higher
profile of antibody levels in those who have experienced past infection is evident; both
vaccination post infection and breakthrough infection following vaccination are expected to
boost existing antibody levels.
Researchers across the globe are working to better understand what antibody levels mean in
terms of protection against COVID-19. Current thinking is that there is no threshold antibody
level that offers complete protection against infection, but instead that higher antibody levels are
likely to be associated with lower probability of infection.
49
Figure 14. Categorised Roche S antibody levels by age group and month in N negative
samples, December 2020 to December 2021
Figure 15. Categorised Roche S antibody levels by age group and month in N positive
samples, December 2020 to December 2021
50
Summary of impact on hospitalisations, infections

and mortality
UKHSA previously reported on the number of hospitalisations directly averted by vaccination. In
total, around 261,500 hospitalisations have been prevented in those aged 45 years and over up
to 19 September 2021.
UKHSA and University of Cambridge MRC Biostatistics Unit previously reported on the direct
and indirect impact of the vaccination programme on infections and mortality. Estimates suggest
that 127,500 deaths and 24,144,000 infections have been prevented as a result of the COVID-
19 vaccination programme, up to 24 September.
Neither of these models will be updated going forward. This is due to these models being
unable to account for the interventions that would have been implemented in the absence of
vaccination. Consequently, over time the state of the actual pandemic and the no-vaccination
pandemic scenario have become increasingly less comparable. For further context surrounding
this figure and for previous estimates, please see previous vaccine surveillance reports.
51
References
1. Public Health England. ‘COVID-19: vaccine surveillance strategy 2021’
2. Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. ‘Coronavirus vaccine –
weekly summary of Yellow Card reporting 2021’
3. Andrews N, Tessier E, Stowe J, Gower C, Kirsebom F, Simmons R and others.
‘Vaccine effectiveness and duration of protection of Comirnaty, Vaxzevria and
Spikevax against mild and severe COVID-19 in the UK’. medRxiv. 2021.
4. Pouwels K, Pritchard E, Matthews P, Stoesser N, Eyre D and others. ‘Impact of
Delta on viral burden and vaccine effectiveness against new SARS-CoV-2
infections in the UK’. medRxiv. 2021
5. Whitaker H, Tsang R, Byford R, Andrews N, Sherlock J, Sebastian Pillai P and
others. ‘Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness
and immune response among individuals in clinical risk groups’
6. Amirthalingham G, Lopez Bernal J, Andrews N, Whitaker H, Gower C, Stowe J and
others. ‘Higher serological responses and increased vaccine effectiveness
demonstrate the value of extended vaccine schedules in combatting COVID-19 in
England.’ medRxiv. 2021
7. Andrews N, Stowe J, Kirsebom F, Gower C, Ramsay M, Lopez Bernal J.
Effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 booster
vaccine against covid-19 related symptoms in England: test negative case-control
study medRxiv. 2021
8. Lopez Bernal J, Andrews N, Gower C, Robertson C, Stowe J, Tessier E and
others. ‘Effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines on
COVID-19-related symptoms, hospital admissions, and mortality in older adults in
England: test negative case-control study.’ British Medical Journal 2021: volume
373, n1,088
9. Vasileiou E, Simpson CR, Robertson C, Shi T, Kerr S, Agrawal U and others.
‘Effectiveness of first dose of COVID-19 vaccines against hospital admissions in
Scotland: national prospective cohort study of 5.4 million people.’ 2021
10. Hyams C, Marlow R, Maseko Z, King J, Ward L, Fox K and others. ‘Effectiveness
of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 COVID-19 vaccination at preventing
hospitalisations in people aged at least 80 years: a test-negative, case-control
study.’ Lancet Infectious Diseases 2021
11. Ismail SA, Vilaplana TG, Elgohari S, Stowe J, Tessier E, Andrews N and others.
‘Effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA and ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector COVID-19
vaccines on risk of hospitalisation among older adults in England: an observational
study using surveillance data.’ PHE Preprints. 2021
12. Lopez Bernal J, Andrews N, Gower C, Stowe J, Tessier E, Simmons R and others.
‘Effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector
vaccine on mortality following COVID-19.’ medRxiv. 2021
13. Pritchard E, Matthews PC, Stoesser N, Eyre DW, Gethings O, Vihta K-D and
others. ‘Impact of vaccination on SARS-CoV-2 cases in the community: a
52
population-based study using the UK’s COVID-19 Infection Survey.’ medRxiv

2021: 2021.04.22.21255913
14. Hall VJ, Foulkes S, Saei A, Andrews N, Oguti B, Charlett A and others. ‘COVID-19
vaccine coverage in health-care workers in England and effectiveness of
BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against infection (SIREN): a prospective, multicentre,
cohort study.’ Lancet 2021
15. Shrotri M, Krutikov M, Palmer T, Giddings R, Azmi B, Subbarao S and others.
‘Vaccine effectiveness of the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2
against SARS-CoV-2 infection in residents of long-term care facilities in England
(VIVALDI): a prospective cohort study.’ Lancet Infectious Diseases 2021
16. Menni C, Klaser K, May A, Polidori L, Capdevila J, Louca P and others. ‘Vaccine
side-effects and SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination in users of the COVID
Symptom Study app in the UK: a prospective observational study.’ The Lancet
Infectious Diseases 2021
17. Harris RJ, Hall JA, Zaidi A, Andrews NJ, Dunbar JK, Dabrera G. ‘Effect of
Vaccination on Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in England’ NEJM 2021
18. V Shah AS, Gribben C, Bishop J, Hanlon P, Caldwell D, Wood R and others.
‘Effect of vaccination on transmission of COVID-19: an observational study in
healthcare workers and their households.’ medRxiv 2021: 2021.03.11.21253275
19. Eyre DW, Taylor D, Purver M, Chapman D, Fowler T, Pouwels KB, Walker S, Peto
T. ‘The impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on Alpha and Delta variant
transmission’ medRxiv 2021: 2021.09.28.21264260
20. Andrews N, Stowe J, Kirsebom F, Toffa S, Rickeard T, Gallagher E, Gower C, Kall
M, Groves N, O'Connell A, Simons D, Blomquist P B, Dabrera G, Myers R, Ladhani
S N, Amirthalingam G, Gharbia S, Barrett J C, Elson R, Ferguson N, Zambon M,
Campbell CNJ, Brown K, Hopkins S, Chand M, Ramsay M, Lopez Bernal J.
‘Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of
concern’ medRxiv 2021.12.14.21267615
21. UKHSA, COVID-19 vaccine weekly surveillance report week 42, 21 October 2021
22. University of Edinburgh, Outputs and information for the public.
23. Public Health Wales, Wales COVID-19 Vaccination enhanced surveillance,
Equality Report 9, 28 October 2021
24. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Vaccine Pregnancy Registry.
25. Goldshtein I and others. Association between BNT162b2 vaccination and
incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection inpregnant women. Journal of the American
Medical Association, 2021, volume 326 issue 8, pages 728-35
26. Dagan N and others. Effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in
pregnancy. Nature Medicine. 2021, volume 27, issue 10, pages 1693-5
27. Gray KJ and others. Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine response in pregnant and
lactating women: a cohort study. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.
2021, volume 225, issue 3: pages 303 e1- e17.
28. Key information on COVID-19 in pregnancy | UKOSS | NPEU (ox.ac.uk)
29. Public Health Scotland, Scottish Intensive Care Society Audit Group report on
COVID-19, 23 September 2021
53
30. Stock S and others. COVID-19 vaccination rates and SARS-CoV-2 infection in
pregnant women in Scotland. Research Square, 2021
31. Shimabukuro TT and others. Preliminary findings of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine
safety in pregnant persons. New England Journal of Medicine, 2021, volume 384,
issue 24, pages 2273-82
32. Kharbanda EO and others. Spontaneous abortion following COVID-19 vaccination
during pregnancy. Journal of the American Medical Association, 2021, volume 326,
issue 16, pages 1629-1631
33. Magnus MC and others. COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and first-
trimester miscarriage. New England Journal of Medicine 2021
34. Vousden N and others. Impact of SARS-CoV-2 variant on the severity of maternal
infection and perinatal outcomes: Data from the UK Obstetric Surveillance System
national cohort. medRxiv, 2021
35. Zauche LH and others. Receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and risk of
spontaneous abortion. New England Journal of Medicine, 2021 volume 385, issue
16, pages 1533-5
36. Kadiwar S and others. Were pregnant women more affected by COVID-19 in the
second wave of the pandemic?. The Lancet, 2021, volume 397 issue 10284, pages
1539-40
37. Zambrano LD and others. Update: characteristics of symptomatic women of
reproductive age with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection by pregnancy
status - United States, January 22 to October 3
38. Wilson EB. ‘Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference.’
The Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1927;22:209-12
54
About the UK Health Security Agency
UKHSA is responsible for protecting every member of every community from the impact of
infectious diseases, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents and other health
threats. We provide intellectual, scientific and operational leadership at national and local level,
as well as on the global stage, to make the nation heath secure.
UKHSA is an executive agency, sponsored by the Department of Health and Social Care.
© Crown copyright 2022
Published: 13 January 2022

Publishing reference: GOV-11055
You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium,
under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence, visit OGL. Where
we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from
the copyright holders concerned.
55

COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report: Week 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report: Week 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report

Executive summary ...................................................................................................................... 3

Nevertheless, understanding the effectiveness against different outcomes (such as severe

Vaccine effectiveness is estimated by comparing rates of disease in vaccinated individuals to

Effectiveness against symptomatic disease

Effectiveness against hospitalisation

Effectiveness against mortality

Effectiveness against infection

Effectiveness against transmission

A summary of vaccine effectiveness evidence can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of evidence on vaccine effectiveness against different outcomes Delta

High Evidence from multiple studies which is consistent

Vaccine effectiveness against the Omicron variant

Supplementary data are not available for this figure.

Vaccine effectiveness publications

Table 3. UKHSA publications on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination

Estimating the impact of a vaccination programme is challenging as there is no completely

Figure 7. Cumulative weekly vaccine uptake by age

Vaccination in immunosuppressed individuals

Table 4. Vaccine uptake in people identified as immunosuppressed in England

Immuno- People Numbers Percentage Numbers Percentage Numbers Percentage

Table 5. Overall vaccine coverage in women giving birth, by month of delivery

Month Women giving birth Vaccinated Unvaccinated Unknown vaccine status

Jan-21 41,955 18 (0.0%) 41,766 (99.5%) 171 (0.4%)

Ethnicity Women giving birth Vaccinated Unvaccinated

Quintile of Women giving birth Vaccinated Unvaccinated

Age Women giving birth Vaccinated Unvaccinated

Figure 8. Stillbirths experienced by women giving birth January to August 2021

Low birthweight is by convention presented as a percentage of all deliveries with known

Vaccination status in cases, deaths and

Sources of further information

The Office of the Statistics Regulator has published a blog post.

Received one Received one

* Individuals whose NHS numbers were unavailable to link to the NIMS.

Under 18 1,295 78 1,124 12 69 12

* Individuals whose NHS numbers were unavailable to link to the NIMS.

Received one Received one

Cases presenting to emergency care (within Death within 60 days of positive

Vaccine impact on proportion of population with

Seroprevalence in blood donors aged 17 years and older

Figure 11. Overall 12-weekly rolling SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence (%

Regional prevalence of infection over time

Figure 12. 12-weekly rolling SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence (% seropositive) in

Table 13. Roche N seropositivity (95%CI) estimates by NHS region

NHS region Weeks 33 to 44 Weeks 45 to 52

Prevalence by age group

Figure 13. Population weighted 12-weekly rolling SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence

17-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-84

Table 14. Roche N seropositivity (95%CI) estimates by age group

Age group Weeks 33 to 44 Weeks 45 to 52

17-29 30.0% (28.2% - 31.9%) 33.6% (31.3% - 36.1%)

Roche S levels by age group and month

Summary of impact on hospitalisations, infections

population-based study using the UK’s COVID-19 Infection Survey.’ medRxiv

© Crown copyright 2022

Published: 13 January 2022

You might also like