Skip to main content

Continued effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination among urban healthcare workers during delta variant predominance



Data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) among healthcare workers (HCWs) during periods of delta variant predominance are limited.


We followed a population of urban Massachusetts HCWs (45% non-White) subject to epidemiologic surveillance. We accounted for covariates such as demographics and community background infection incidence, as well as information bias regarding COVID-19 diagnosis and vaccination status.


During the study period (December 16, 2020 to September 30, 2021), 4615 HCWs contributed to a total of 1,152,486 person-days at risk (excluding 309 HCWs with prior infection) and had a COVID-19 incidence rate of 5.2/10,000 (114 infections out of 219,842 person-days) for unvaccinated person-days and 0.6/10,000 (49 infections out of 830,084 person-days) for fully vaccinated person-days, resulting in an adjusted VE of 82.3% (95% CI 75.1–87.4%). For the secondary analysis limited to the period of delta variant predominance in Massachusetts (i.e., July 1 to September 30, 2021), we observed an adjusted VE of 76.5% (95% CI 40.9–90.6%). Independently, we found no re-infection among those with prior COVID-19, contributing to 74,557 re-infection-free person-days, adding to the evidence base for the robustness of naturally acquired immunity.


We found a VE of 76.5% against the delta variant. Our work also provides further evidence of naturally acquired immunity.

Peer Review reports


Data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) among healthcare workers (HCWs) during periods of delta variant predominance are limited. Literature accounting for other potential determinants of infection rates (e.g., age, sex, race, and surrounding community rate [1]) is even more scarce. Therefore, we conducted this study to investigate the continued effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination during the delta variant predominance in a diverse and urban healthcare setting, accounting for other transmission determinants.


A community-based healthcare system in Massachusetts runs a COVID-19 vaccination program for employees (described previously [2]), with the BNT162b2/Pfizer vaccine starting on December 16, mRNA-1273/Moderna on December 23, 2020, and Janssen vaccine/Ad26.COV2.S in February 2021. Vaccination was available to all workers regardless of their in-person/remote working status from December 29, 2020. In addition, the system announced a vaccine mandate on August 16, 2021, which requires employees to receive their final dose by October 18, 2021 barring an approved religious or medical exemption.

We followed all actively serving HCWs in the system from December 16, 2020 to September 30, 2021, excluding those with prior COVID-19 infection from the main analyses. The outcome was having a positive PCR assay during the study period documented by the healthcare system’s Occupational Health department [3]. The established master database, comprised of workers’ demographics, prior infection, de novo PCR positivity, vaccination (validated by the Massachusetts Immunization Information System and/or the healthcare system’s medical records), and human resource administrative data, has been previously described [2, 3]. For each HCW, we calculated the person-days at risk and categorized them according to vaccination status. The categorization measure has been used in previous literature [2]. A HCW’s follow-up person-days were censored at the end of the study period, his/her termination date, the date tested positive for COVID, or the date he/she received a booster/3rd vaccine dose (to account for the study period intersecting with the booster doses period), whichever came first. The present study is an extension of our previous VE study on the same population prior to delta variant predominance [2].

The Andersen–Gill extension of the Cox proportional hazards models were built to account for correlated data. We further adjusted for age, sex, race, and the Massachusetts statewide 7-day average of tested COVID cases [4] on the date the first dose was given to control for background rates. We estimated VE by calculating 100% × (1 − hazard ratio). The R software (version 3.6.3) was used for statistical analyses.


A total of 4615 HCWs (average age of 45.0 ± 13.3 years and female predominance (76.0%)) contributed to 1,152,486 person-days at risk during the study period (Table 1). 45% of the study population was non-White (including 20% African American, 13.5% Hispanic, and 9.0% Asian). Of all HCWs, 4418 (95.7%) had received at least one dose by the end of the study. Among them, 58.3% got mRNA-1273/Moderna, 39.4% BNT162b2/Pfizer, 2.3% Janssen vaccine/Ad26.COV2.S, and one (0.02%) got mixed doses of Janssen vaccine/Ad26.COV2.S and mRNA-1273/Moderna. The results showed that throughout the study period, for fully vaccinated HCWs the VE is 82.3% (95% CI 75.1–87.4%) after multivariable adjustment (Table 1, Fig. 1).

Table 1 Rate of infection during the study period (Dec 16, 2020–Sep 30, 2021) across the four vaccination categories (excluding 309 people infected before Dec 15, 2020)
Fig. 1
figure 1

The Kaplan–Meier curve for the survival (i.e. infection-free) person-days across the four categories based on vaccination status

We further conducted a secondary analysis limiting the study period from July 1, 2021 to September 30, 2021, corresponding to delta variant predominance in Massachusetts [5]. We observed an incidence rate of 5.8/10,000 (15 events out of 25,910 person-days) for unvaccinated person-days and 1.3/10,000 (39 events out of 308,267 person-days) for 14 days after fully vaccinated, resulting in an adjusted VE of 76.5% (95% CI 40.9–90.6%). The model coefficients derived from the main versus secondary analysis were compared to test whether the VEs were different. We used the equation proposed by Clogg et al. [6] and found the decline in VE from 82.3 to 76.5% was not statistically significant (P = 0.570).

When we examined HCWs (n = 423) with infections occurring before vaccination, no re-infection was observed, accumulating 74,557 re-infection-free person-days (starting 10 days after initial infection and censoring at the date of receiving their first vaccine dose). Further, after vaccination, previously infected HCWs did not contribute any breakthrough infection events among the vaccinated HCWs.

Discussion and conclusions

To our knowledge, this study is one of the first in healthcare settings regarding continued VE during delta variant predominance. Our work also provides further evidence of naturally acquired immunity as we did not observe any reinfections or breakthrough infections among those having contracted COVID-19 prior to vaccination during nearly 75,000 person-days of exposure. We found similar VE against the delta variant, 76%, compared to another study’s findings, 66% [7]. Strengths included accounting for covariates and information bias such as demographics and background incidence, a multiethnic study population, consistent COVID-19 screening criteria, and well-validated vaccination records. Nonetheless, we did not examine individual manufacturers’ VE due to a limited power. In addition, we did not account for remote/in-person working status due to a lack of information. Finally, our observations were limited by the study period and events may occur after the end of the follow-up (i.e., September 30, 2021).

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are stored on an internal server of Cambridge Health Alliance, which is not publicly available, but the de-identified datasets are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


  1. Lan FY, Filler R, Mathew S, Buley J, Iliaki E, Bruno-Murtha LA, et al. Sociodemographic risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection among Massachusetts healthcare workers: a retrospective cohort study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2021;42(12):1473–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Iliaki E, Lan FY, Christophi CA, Guidotti G, Jobrack AD, Buley J, et al. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in a diverse urban healthcare worker population. Mayo Clin Proc. 2021;96(12):3180–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lan FY, Filler R, Mathew S, Buley J, Iliaki E, Bruno-Murtha LA, et al. COVID-19 symptoms predictive of healthcare workers’ SARS-CoV-2 PCR results. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(6):e0235460.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Massachusetts Department of Public Health. Archive of COVID-19 cases in Massachusetts. Accessed 30 Dec 2021.

  5. Brown CM, Vostok J, Johnson H, Burns M, Gharpure R, Sami S, et al. Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 infections, including COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections, associated with large public gatherings—Barnstable County, Massachusetts, July 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021;70(31):1059–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Clogg CC, Petkova E, Haritou A. Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. Am J Sociol. 1995;100(5):1261–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fowlkes A, Gaglani M, Groover K, Thiese MS, Tyner H, Ellingson K, et al. Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection among frontline workers before and during B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance—Eight U.S. locations, December 2020–August 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021;70(34):1167–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors are grateful to all the healthcare workers of Cambridge Health Alliance.


None reported.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



FYL, AS, EI, and SNK formulated the study question and research design. FYL performed the statistical analyses. EI and SNK consulted on the analyses. FYL, AS, and SNK drafted the manuscript. FYL, AS, EI, JB, NN, LAB-M, and SNK worked on data methods, data acquisition and data verification. All authors contributed to the interpretation of data and critical revision of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefanos N. Kales.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The data we used were de-identified. The need for a consent was waived by the Cambridge Health Alliance Institutional Review Board (Protocol number 4/29/202-003). Additionally, the study was exempted by the Cambridge Health Alliance Institutional Review Board (Protocol number 4/29/202-003). We confirm that all methods were carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

S.N.K. has received COVID-19-related consulting fees from Open Health and has owned shares of Regeneron, Moderna and Astra-Zeneca. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lan, FY., Sidossis, A., Iliaki, E. et al. Continued effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination among urban healthcare workers during delta variant predominance. BMC Infect Dis 22, 457 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: