Vaccination against the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) among healthcare workers in the major teaching hospital of Sicily (Italy)

Influenza Vaccination Uptake and Prognostic Factors among Health Professionals in Italy: Results from the Nationwide Surveillance PASSI 2015-2018

(1) Influenza causes a significant health and socio-economic burden every year, and health personnel (HP) are at higher risk of exposure to respiratory pathogens than the general population. (2) The study's purpose was to describe and compare influenza vaccine uptake and its prognostic factors among Medical Doctors (MDs) and Non-Medical Health Personnel (NMHP) vs. Non-HP (NHP). We analyzed 2014-2018 data (n = 105,608) from the Italian Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System PASSI that, since 2008, has been collecting health-related information continuously in sampled adults. (3) MDs and NMHP represented, respectively, 1.1% and 4.6% of the sample. Among HP, 22.8% (CI 19.8-26.1%) of MDs and 8.5% (CI 7.5-9.5%) of NMHP reported to have been vaccinated vs. 6.3% (CI 6.1-6.5%) in NHP. This difference is confirmed in the three categories (MDs, NMHP, NHP), even more across age groups: in 18-34 yy, respectively, 9.9%, 4.4%, 3.4% vs. 28.4%, 13.9%, 10.6% in 50-64 yy. PASSI surveillance shows an increasing influenza vaccination uptake over time, especially among MDs (22.2% in 2014 vs. 30.5% in 2018). (4) Despite such an increase, especially among younger HP, influenza vaccination uptake is low. Even more under pandemic scenarios, these figures represent key information to address effective strategies for disease prevention and health promotion.

Identifying H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among health care providers: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to describe and map the evidence on COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal by physicians, nurses, and pharmacists in North America, the United Kingdom and the European Union, and Australia.

INTRODUCTION

Since 2009, we have experienced two pandemics: H1N1 "swine flu" and COVID-19. While severity and transmissibility of these viruses varied, vaccination has been a critical component of bringing both pandemics under control. However, uptake of these vaccines has been affected by vaccine hesitancy and refusal. The vaccination behaviors of health care providers, including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, are of particular interest as they have been priority populations to receive both H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccinations. Their vaccination views could affect the vaccination decisions of their patients.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were eligible for inclusion if they identified reasons for COVID-19 or H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, or pharmacists from the included countries. Published and unpublished literature were eligible for inclusion. Previous reviews were excluded; however, the reference lists of relevant reviews were searched to identify additional studies for inclusion.

METHODS

A search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Academic Search Premier databases was conducted April 28, 2021, to identify English-language literature published from 2009 to 2021. Gray literature and citation screening were also conducted to identify additional relevant literature. Titles, abstracts, and eligible full-text articles were reviewed in duplicate by 2 trained reviewers. Data were extracted in duplicate using a structured extraction tool developed for the review. Conflicts were resolved through discussion or with a third team member. Data were synthesized using narrative and tabular summaries.

RESULTS

In total, 83 articles were included in the review. Studies were conducted primarily across the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. The majority of articles (n=70) used cross-sectional designs to examine knowledge, attitudes, and uptake of H1N1 (n=61) or COVID-19 (n=22) vaccines. Physicians, medical students, nurses, and nursing students were common participants in the studies; however, only 8 studies included pharmacists in their sample. Across health care settings, most studies were conducted in urban, academic teaching hospitals, with 1 study conducted in a rural hospital setting. Concerns about vaccine safety, vaccine side effects, and perceived low risk of contracting H1N1 or COVID-19 were the most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy or refusal across both vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

With increased interest and attention on vaccines in recent years, intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, more research that examines vaccine hesitancy or refusal across different health care settings and health care providers is warranted. Future work should aim to utilize more qualitative and mixed methods research designs to capture the personal perspectives of vaccine hesitancy and refusal, and consider collecting data beyond the common urban and academic health care settings identified in this review.

Influenza Vaccination Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in South Al Batinah Governorate in Oman: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Seasonal influenza infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are an important target group for vaccination against influenza due to their increased risk of infection and their potential to transmit the infection to their patients, families and communities. The aim of this study was to assess the potential hesitancy and its associated factors towards influenza vaccination amongst HCWs in the South Al Batinah governorate in Oman. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 390 HCWs with direct or indirect patient contact was conducted in May and June 2019 using a self-administered questionnaire. Associations between HCW characteristics and vaccination status were examined using bivariate and multivariate analyses to identify the likelihood of vaccination against seasonal influenza among HCWs. Results: Overall, 60% of HCWs were vaccinated in the 2018/2019 season; vaccine uptake among nurses was 52% and uptake was higher among women. Self-protection and protection of the community were the most cited reasons for vaccine acceptance, with side effects being the main reason for hesitancy. Vaccinated respondents had a higher mean knowledge score (7.18; standard deviation SD: 2.14) than unvaccinated respondents (6.30; SD: 2.2). Odds of vaccination were highest among respondents who believed influenza vaccine should be mandatory for HCWs (Odds ratio (OR): 2.04 [1.30–3.18]), those working in the general medicine, emergency medicine, or intensive care units (OR: 1.92 [1.20–3.10]), nurses and doctors (OR: 1.75 [1.09–2.79]) and those who believe that HCWs should receive an influenza vaccine (OR: 1.35 [1.07–2.77]). Conclusions: The study provides valuable insights into the enablers and barriers of influenza vaccination practices among HCWs and may inform interventions to increase acceptance of vaccination.

Healthcare Students' Flu Vaccine Uptake in the Last 5 Years and Future Vaccination Acceptance: Is There a Possible Association?

Background: Despite the free-of-charge offer of influenza vaccines to at-risk subgroups, vaccine coverage remains low and far from the target, probably due to the false myths and misperceptions. We aimed to explore the healthcare students’ vaccination behavior and beliefs to find any association between vaccination uptake during the last 5 years and future vaccination acceptance.

Study design: A multicentre cross-sectional study.

Methods: From Oct 2017 to Nov 2018, the Italian healthcare students from 14 different universities in 2017/2018 were enrolled, through an online and anonymous questionnaire previously validated. Absolute and relative frequencies were calculated and Pearson's Chi-square test was used. A multinomial logistic regression model was performed. Results are expressed as relative Risk Ratio (RR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CI). The level of significance chosen was P-value <0.05.

Results: A total of 3137 students were enrolled and 3131 questionnaires were analysed. 82.7% of the sample declared they had not received any flu vaccination during the last 5 years. Students who received flu vaccination 4 times or more during the last 5 years were more likely to do it again next year as well (95.1% vs 4.9%). The regression model showed that having received flu vaccination over the last 5 years was statistically associated with the intention of getting vaccinated during next season.

Conclusions: Frequency of flu vaccination is predictive for future acceptance among healthcare students. This association could have both implications for the organization of vaccination campaigns and improve educational strategies for this category of students.

Benevolent personification of the MoH increases compliance with an emergency polio vaccination

OBJECTIVE

Parental compliance is crucial to the success of mass vaccination campaigns targeting children. Relying on psychological/neuroscientific research concerning the role of personification (i.e., viewing the inanimate as human) in behavior, the authors examined the effect of parents' personification of the Israeli Ministry of Health (MoH) on compliance with a publicly controversial mass vaccination campaign, which was aimed at stopping the spread of a wild poliovirus.

METHODS

Participants were 555 parents of children aged 9 or younger, residing in the center/north of Israel, an area covered by Phase 2 of the campaign. T1 assessment, employed two days prior to Phase 2, tapped into demographics, attitudes towards vaccination, intent to comply, and a benevolent personification of the MoH (i.e., "The MoH is caring") vs. a malevolent personification of the MoH ("The MoH is hysteric"). T2 assessment, transpiring four months after the end of the campaign, addressed presence and reasons for (non-)compliance.

RESULTS

The study's overall compliance rate was 61.8%. The principal reason for compliance was "adherence to the recommendations of the MoH" (68.49%). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, prospective predictors of compliance were: an early intent to comply (O.R.=2.56, p=0.000), being male (O. R.=1.51, p=0.023), and a benevolent personification of the MoH (O.R.=1.21, p=0.019).

CONCLUSION

Parents who experienced the Israeli MoH as a benevolent protagonist were more likely to comply with the mass vaccination campaign. Findings highlight the role of leadership in public health campaigns during emergencies.

The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research

BACKGROUND

During pandemics, health authorities may be uncertain about the spread and severity of the disease and the effectiveness and safety of available interventions. This was the case during the swine flu (H1N1) pandemic of 2009-2010, and governments were forced to make decisions despite these uncertainties. While many countries chose to implement wide scale vaccination programmes, few accomplished their vaccination goals. Many research studies aiming to explore barriers and facilitators to vaccine uptake have been conducted in the aftermath of the pandemic, including several qualitative studies.

AIMS

1. To explore public attitudes to the swine flu vaccine in different countries through a review of qualitative primary studies. 2. To describe and discuss the implications drawn by the primary study authors.

METHODS

Systematic review of qualitative research studies, using a broadly comparative cross case-study approach. Study quality was appraised using an adaptation of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) quality assessment tool.

RESULTS

The review indicates that the public had varying opinions about disease risk and prevalence and had concerns about vaccine safety. Most primary study authors concluded that participants were uninformed, and that more information about the disease and the vaccine would have led to an increase in vaccine uptake. We find these conclusions problematic. We suggest instead that people's questions and concerns were legitimate given the uncertainties of the situation at the time and the fact that the authorities did not have the necessary information to convince the public. Our quality assessment of the included studies points to a lack of reflexivity and a lack of information about study context. We suggest that these study weaknesses are tied to primary study authors' lack of acknowledgement of the uncertainties surrounding the disease and the vaccine.

CONCLUSION

While primary study authors suggest that authorities could increase vaccine uptake through increased information, we suggest instead that health authorities should be more transparent in their information and decision-making processes in future pandemic situations.

Health care workers' influenza vaccination: motivations and mandatory mask policy

BACKGROUND

Vaccination of health care workers (HCW) against seasonal influenza (SI) is recommended but vaccination rate rarely reach >30%. Vaccination coverage against 2009 pandemic influenza (PI) was 52% in our hospital, whilst a new policy requiring unvaccinated HCW to wear a mask during patient care duties was enforced.

AIMS

To investigate the determinants of this higher vaccination acceptance for PI and to look for an association with the new mask-wearing policy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study, involving HCW of three critical departments of a 1023-bed, tertiary-care university hospital in Switzerland. Self-reported 2009-10 SI and 2009 PI vaccination statuses, reasons and demographic data were collected through a literature-based questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, uni- and multivariate analyses were then performed.

RESULTS

There were 472 respondents with a response rate of 54%. Self-reported vaccination acceptance was 64% for PI and 53% for SI. PI vaccination acceptance was associated with being vaccinated against SI (OR 9.5; 95% CI 5.5-16.4), being a physician (OR 7.7; 95% CI 3.1-19.1) and feeling uncomfortable wearing a mask (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.0-2.8). Main motives for refusing vaccination were: preference for wearing a surgical mask (80% for PI, not applicable for SI) and concerns about vaccine safety (64%, 50%) and efficacy (44%, 35%).

CONCLUSIONS

The new mask-wearing policy was a motivation for vaccination but also offered an alternative to non-compliant HCW. Concerns about vaccine safety and efficiency and self-interest of health care workers are still main determinants for influenza vaccination acceptance. Better incentives are needed to encourage vaccination amongst non-physician HCW.

Seroprevalence of Pandemic A(H1N1) pmd09 Virus Antibodies in Mexican Health Care Workers Before and After Vaccination

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In April 2009, a new strain of influenza A(H1N1) was identified in Mexico and in the U.S. In June 2009, WHO declared this a pandemic. Health care workers constituted a risk group for their close contact with infected individuals. The aim was to estimate seropositivity for A(H1N1)pdm09 in health staff at the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social.

METHODS

A two-stage cross-sectional study, before and after vaccination in the same workers, was performed on a random sample of health-care workers. A socio-occupational questionnaire was applied and serum antibodies against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 were determined through neutralization of retroviral pseudotypes; two logistic regression models for both were constructed.

RESULTS

The average (median/mean) age of 1378 participants from 13 work centers was 41.7 years and 68.7% (947) were women. Seroprevalence for the first stage was 26.5% (365) (7.4-43%) vs. 20.8% (11) in a control group from the blood bank; for the second stage, the vaccinated group was 33% (215) (18.2-47%) and 27% (196) (11.6-50%) for the unvaccinated group. In regression models, seropositivity was associated with occupational exposure to suspected influenza infected patients, being physicians, and being vaccinated.

CONCLUSIONS

Seropositivity against pandemic virus is similar to what was reported, both for vaccinated (2.8-40.9%) and unvaccinated (18.8-64.7%). Low seroprevalence in the vaccinated group indicates that between 67% and 73% were susceptible to infection. Given the relatively low vaccine-induced seropositivity, it is imperative to increase, hygiene and safety for health staff and at-risk populations, and strengthen epidemiological surveillance.

Healthcare worker compliance with seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccination

Healthcare workers (HCWs) can be an important source of transmission of influenza to patients and family members, and their well-being is fundamental to the maintenance of healthcare services during influenza outbreaks and pandemics. Unfortunately, studies have shown consistently low levels of compliance with influenza vaccination among HCWs, a finding that became particularly pronounced during recent pandemic vaccination campaigns. Among the variables associated with vaccine acceptance in this group are demographic factors, fears and concerns over vaccine safety and efficacy, perceptions of risk and personal vulnerability, past vaccination behaviours and experience with influenza illness, as well as certain situational and organisational constructs. We report the findings of a review of the literature on these factors and highlight some important challenges in interpreting the data. In particular, we point out the need for longitudinal study designs, as well as focused research and interventions that are adapted to the most resistant HCW groups. Multi-pronged strategies are an important step forward in ensuring that future influenza vaccination campaigns, whether directed at seasonal or pandemic strains, will be successful in ensuring broad coverage among HCWs.

Clinic accessibility and clinic-level predictors of the geographic variation in 2009 pandemic influenza vaccine coverage in Montreal, Canada

Background

Nineteen mass vaccination clinics were established in Montreal, Canada, as part of the 2009 influenza A/H1N1p vaccination campaign. Although approximately 50% of the population was vaccinated, there was a considerable variation in clinic performance and community vaccine coverage.

Objective

To identify community- and clinic-level predictors of vaccine uptake, while accounting for the accessibility of clinics from the community of residence.

Methods

All records of influenza A/H1N1p vaccinations administered in Montreal were obtained from a vaccine registry. Multivariable regression models, specifically Bayesian gravity models, were used to assess the relationship between vaccination rates and clinic accessibility, clinic-level factors, and community-level factors.

Results

Relative risks compare the vaccination rates at the variable's upper quartile to the lower quartile. All else being equal, clinics in areas with high violent crime rates, high residential density, and high levels of material deprivation tended to perform poorly (adjusted relative risk [ARR]: 0·917, 95% CI [credible interval]: 0·915, 0·918; ARR: 0·663, 95% CI: 0·660, 0·666, ARR: 0·649, 95% CI: 0·645, 0·654, respectively). Even after controlling for accessibility and clinic-level predictors, communities with a greater proportion of new immigrants and families living below the poverty level tended to have lower rates (ARR: 0·936, 95% CI: 0·913, 0·959; ARR: 0·918, 95% CI: 0·893, 0·946, respectively), while communities with a higher proportion speaking English or French tended to have higher rates (ARR: 1·034, 95% CI: 1·012, 1·059).

Conclusion

In planning future mass vaccination campaigns, the gravity model could be used to compare expected vaccine uptake for different clinic location strategies.

Diagnosis of influenza: only a problem of coding?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the characteristics of hospital discharge diagnoses of influenza measured by using specific International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9 CM) codes.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

The study was conducted for the 3 years 2007, 2008 and 2011. The database included (1) administrative and clinical data on Sicilian patients admitted to acute care hospitals and (2) data from the influenza virological surveillance of 10 European countries (FluNet database). All Sicilian patients diagnosed with at least 1 ICD-9 CM code for influenza (487.0, 487.1 and 487.9) were considered influenza cases.

RESULTS

Overall, 2,880 patients with an ICD-9 CM code attributable to influenza were hospitalized in Sicily: 2,119 (73.6%) were admitted from November to April, whereas 761 (26.4%) were admitted from May to October. In the 3 years studied, the analyzed European influenza surveillance systems recorded a peak of laboratory-confirmed influenza activity from November to April with 36,753 (99.7%) influenza cases, whereas only 124 cases (0.3%) were observed from May to October.

CONCLUSIONS

In Sicily, more than one quarter of all hospital admissions with an ICD-9 CM code for influenza were observed in the months with a negligible circulation of influenza viruses. Our findings show that several hospital discharge records included ICD-9 CM codes for influenza with low levels of sensitivity, specificity and/or appropriateness for clinical information and support the need for improving medical education on the epidemiology and hospital management of influenza cases.

Acceptability of pandemic A(H1N1) influenza vaccination by Essential Community Workers in 2010 Alicante (Spain), perceived seriousness and sources of information

OBJECTIVE

Describe acceptability of pandemic A(H1N1) influenza vaccination by Essential Community Workers (ECWs) from Alicante province (Spain) in January 2010. Evaluate the correlation with attitudes, beliefs, professional advice and information broadcasted by media.

METHOD

In this cross-sectional study, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 742 ECWs to assess their attitudes towards vaccination against the pandemic influenza strain. A multivariable regression model was made to adjust the Odds Ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Some ECWs reported having been vaccinated with seasonal vaccine, 21.5% (95%IC 18.6-24.9); only 15.4% (95%IC 12.8-18.4) with the pandemic one. ECWs vaccinated regularly against seasonal flu (OR 5.1; 95%IC 2.9-9.1), those who considered pandemic influenza as a severe or more serious disease than seasonal flu (OR 3.8; 95%IC 2.1-6.7) and those who never had doubts about vaccine safety (OR 3.7; 95%IC2.1-6.7) had a better acceptance of pandemic vaccine. Finally, 78.7% (95%IC 75.1-81.4) had doubts about pandemic vaccine's effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

The vast amount of information provided by the media did not seem to be decisive to prevent doubts or to improve the acceptability of the vaccine in ECWs. Professional advice should be the focus of interest in future influenza vaccination campaigns. These results should be taken into account by health authorities.

Participation of ICUs in critical care pandemic research: a province wide, cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

Little information exists to identify barriers to participation in pandemic research involving critically ill patients. We sought to characterize clinical research activity during the recent influenza A pandemic and to understand the experiences, beliefs, and practices of key stakeholders involved in pandemic research implementation.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional, provincial postal questionnaire.

SETTING

Level III ICUs.

PARTICIPANTS

ICU administrators and research coordinators.

MEASUREMENTS

We used rigorous survey methodology to identify potential respondents and to develop, test, and administer two-related questionnaires.

MAIN RESULTS

We analyzed responses from 39 research coordinators and 139 administrators (response rates: 70.9% and 73.2%, respectively). Compared with non-influenza A studies, influenza A studies were less likely to be randomized trials and most often investigator-initiated and peer-review funded. Whereas both respondent groups felt that pandemic research would be helpful in providing care during future pandemics, research coordinators placed significantly greater importance on their ICU's participation in pandemic research. Both respondent groups expressed a need for rapid approval processes, designated funding for research personnel, adequate funding for start-up and patient screening, preapproved template protocols and consent forms, and clearer guidance regarding co-enrollment. Research coordinators acknowledged a need for alternative consent models to increase their capacity to participate in future pandemic research. More administrators expressed willingness to participate in the next pandemic if the required research resources were made available to them.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas research personnel and administrators support participation in pandemic ICU research, several modifiable barriers to participation exist. Pandemic research preparedness planning with regulatory bodies and dedicated funding to support research infrastructure, especially in community settings, are required to optimize future pandemic research participation.

Neighborhood determinants of 2009 pandemic A/H1N1 influenza vaccination in Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Neighborhood-level analyses of influenza vaccination can identify the characteristics of vulnerable neighborhoods, which can inform public health strategy for future pandemics. In this study, the authors analyzed rates of 2009 pandemic A/H1N1 influenza vaccination in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, using individual-level vaccination records from a vaccination registry with census, survey, and administrative data to estimate the population at risk. The neighborhood socioeconomic and demographic determinants of vaccination were identified using Bayesian ecologic logistic regression, with random effects to account for spatial autocorrelation. A total of 918,773 (49.9%) Montreal residents were vaccinated against pandemic A/H1N1 influenza from October 22, 2009, through April 8, 2010. Coverage was greatest among females, children under age 5 years, and health-care workers. Neighborhood vaccine coverage ranged from 33.6% to 71.0%. Neighborhoods with high percentages of immigrants (per 5% increase, odds ratio = 0.90, 95% credible interval: 0.86, 0.95) and material deprivation (per 1-unit increase in deprivation score, odds ratio = 0.93, 95% credible interval: 0.88, 0.98) had lower vaccine coverage. Half of the Montreal population was vaccinated; however, considerable heterogeneity in coverage was observed between neighborhoods and subgroups. In future vaccination campaigns, neighborhoods that are materially deprived or have high percentages of immigrants may benefit from focused interventions.

H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccination of U.S. healthcare personnel, 2010

BACKGROUND

Seasonal influenza vaccination routinely has been recommended for healthcare personnel (HCP) since 1984. The influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccine (H1N1 vaccine) became available in the U.S. in October 2009.

PURPOSE

To assess 2009 H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccination coverage and identify factors independently associated with vaccination among HCP in the U.S.

METHODS

Data from the 2009-2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) influenza supplemental survey were analyzed in 2011. Multivariable logistic regression and predictive marginal models were performed to identify factors independently associated with vaccination among HCP. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis procedure was used to estimate the cumulative proportion of people vaccinated.

RESULTS

Among 16,975 HCP surveyed, 2009 H1N1, seasonal, and any-dose vaccination coverage were 34.1% (95% CI=32.7%, 35.5%); 52.4% (95% CI=50.9%, 53.9%); and 58.0% (95% CI=56.5%, 59.5%), respectively, all of which were significantly higher than those for non-HCP (19.1%, 34.9%, and 40.3%, respectively). The H1N1 vaccination coverage among HCP ranged from 18.4% in Mississippi to 56.1% in Massachusetts and seasonal influenza vaccination coverage ranged from 40.4% in Florida to 73.1% in Nebraska. Characteristics independently associated with an increased likelihood of 2009 H1N1, seasonal, and any-dose vaccinations among HCP were as follows: non-Hispanic white, higher income, having a high-risk condition, having health insurance, the ability to see a doctor if needed, and having had a routine checkup in the previous year.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination coverage was higher among HCP than non-HCP but still below the national health objective of 90%. Knowledge of national and state-specific H1N1 and seasonal vaccination coverage among HCP is useful for evaluating the vaccination campaign and implementing strategies for increasing yearly seasonal vaccination coverage and improving vaccination coverage among HCP in possible future pandemics.

Impact of the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic on Canadian health care workers: a survey on vaccination, illness, absenteeism, and personal protective equipment

BACKGROUND

Data are limited on the impact of the 2009 H1N1 influenza A pandemic on health care worker (HCW) vaccination, illness, absenteeism, and personal protective equipment (PPE) use.

METHODS

A survey was completed by HCWs from 14 hospitals participating in the Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program who provided direct care to patients with pH1N1 influenza in high-risk units between September and December 2009.

RESULTS

Surveys were returned from 986 HCWs (80% nurses, 14% respiratory therapists, and 6% physicians). HCWs working in an intensive care unit (78%) or a designated influenza ward (67%) were more compliant with wearing an N95 respirator for aerosol-generating medical procedures than those working in an emergency department (47%; P < .001). HCWs who worked in health care for >11 years were more compliant with wearing protective eyewear than those who worked for ≤11 years (69% vs 54%; P < .001). A total of 815 HCWs (83%) reported having received the pH1N1 influenza vaccine, and 372 (38%) reported having received the 2009-2010 seasonal influenza vaccine. Influenza-like illness was reported by 236 (24%) HCWs, 170 of whom (72%) reported missing work.

CONCLUSIONS

Experience working in health care improves PPE use and HCWs in emergency departments should be targeted for interventions to improve PPE compliance. pH1N1 influenza vaccine coverage was high, but seasonal influenza vaccine coverage was low, and significant HCW illness and absenteeism were reported.

Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 vaccination coverage, adverse reactions, and reasons for vaccine refusal among medical students in Brazil

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to determine, among medical students at a public university in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the acceptance of the pandemic influenza A/H1N1 vaccine during the 2010 mass immunization campaign and the vaccine safety in this group and, among unvaccinated students, the reasons for refusing vaccination. Of a total of 858 students, 678 (79%) participated in the study. Vaccination coverage was 60.4% among students aged 20 to 39 years (an age group targeted for vaccination) and 43.8% among those who did not belong to this age group. The most frequent adverse reactions to the vaccine were pain at the injection site (8.7%) and fever (7.9%). There were no serious adverse reactions. Among students aged 20 to 39 years, the most common reasons for refusing the vaccine were "lack of time" (42.4%), "fear of adverse reactions" (41.9%), and "difficult access to the vaccine" (11.5%). Other reasons for vaccine refusal were "uncertainties about vaccine safety and efficacy" and "vaccination was not needed". To increase the acceptance of the influenza vaccine, a comprehensive immunization program should be offered to these students.

Two years after pandemic influenza A/2009/H1N1: what have we learned?

The world had been anticipating another influenza pandemic since the last one in 1968. The pandemic influenza A H1N1 2009 virus (A/2009/H1N1) finally arrived, causing the first pandemic influenza of the new millennium, which has affected over 214 countries and caused over 18,449 deaths. Because of the persistent threat from the A/H5N1 virus since 1997 and the outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus in 2003, medical and scientific communities have been more prepared in mindset and infrastructure. This preparedness has allowed for rapid and effective research on the epidemiological, clinical, pathological, immunological, virological, and other basic scientific aspects of the disease, with impacts on its control. A PubMed search using the keywords "pandemic influenza virus H1N1 2009" yielded over 2,500 publications, which markedly exceeded the number published on previous pandemics. Only representative works with relevance to clinical microbiology and infectious diseases are reviewed in this article. A significant increase in the understanding of this virus and the disease within such a short amount of time has allowed for the timely development of diagnostic tests, treatments, and preventive measures. These findings could prove useful for future randomized controlled clinical trials and the epidemiological control of future pandemics.

The determinants of 2009 pandemic A/H1N1 influenza vaccination: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pandemic A/H1N1 influenza vaccine coverage varied widely across countries. To understand the factors influencing pandemic influenza vaccination and to guide the development of successful vaccination programs for future influenza pandemics, we identified and summarized studies examining the determinants of vaccination during the 2009 influenza pandemic.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review using the PubMED electronic database from June 2009 to February 2011. We included studies examining an association between a possible predictive variable and actual receipt of the pandemic A/H1N1 influenza vaccine. We excluded studies examining intention or willingness to receive the vaccine.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were identified from twelve countries. Pandemic influenza vaccine coverage varied from 4.8% to 92%. Coverage varied by population sub-group, country, and assessment method used. Most studies used questionnaires to estimate vaccine coverage, however seven (26%) used a vaccination registry. Factors that positively influenced pandemic influenza vaccination were: male sex, younger age, higher education, being a doctor, being in a priority group for which vaccination was recommended, receiving a prior seasonal influenza vaccination, believing the vaccine to be safe and/or effective, and obtaining information from official medical sources.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine coverage during the pandemic varied widely across countries and population sub-groups. We identified some consistent determinants of this variation that can be targeted to increase vaccination during future influenza pandemics.

High effectiveness of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) vaccination in healthcare workers from a Portuguese hospital

OBJECTIVES

Vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs) was made a high priority during the phase six pandemic of the novel influenza A H1N1 (pH1N1) virus. We surveyed adherence to pH1N1 vaccination and the incidence of pH1N1 infection between vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs.

METHODS

Employees at the S. João Hospital in Porto, Portugal, were offered pH1N1 vaccinations free of charge. Pandemrix(®) was the vaccine administered. As part of the pandemic plan, employees with influenza-like symptoms (ILS) were called upon to take an RT-PCR H1N1 test. If the test results were positive, they had to stay off work for at least 7 days. Sociodemographic data, vaccination status, contact with infectious patients, ILS and pH1N1 test results were documented in a standardised manner.

RESULTS

The survey population comprised 5,592 employees. The vaccination rate was 30.8% (n = 1,720) for pH1N1 and 50.4% (n = 2,819) for the 2009/2010 seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV). One mild anaphylactic reaction occurred after pH1N1 vaccination. Minor local side effects occurred more often after pH1N1 vaccination than after 2009/2010 seasonal TIV (38.0% vs. 12.3%). Pandemic H1N1 infection was diagnosed in 97 HCWs (1.7%). Compared to employees with no regular patient contact, nurses (2.8%) had the highest risk of pH1N1 infection (adjusted OR 3.8; 95% CI 1.2-6.8). Vaccination reduced the pH1N1 infection risk (OR 0.12; 95% CI 0.05-0.29). Vaccine effectiveness was 90.4% (95% CI 73.5-97.3%).

CONCLUSION

Vaccination reduced the pH1N1 infection risk considerably. The pandemic plan to contain the pH1N1 infection was successful. Nurses had the highest risk of pH1N1 infection and are therefore a target group for vaccination measures.

Are medical residents a "core group" for future improvement of influenza vaccination coverage in health-care workers? A study among medical residents at the University Hospital of Palermo (Sicily)

Despite international recommendations, vaccination coverage among European healthcare workers, including physicians, is widely recognized as unsatisfactory. In order to plan tailored vaccination campaigns and increase future coverage, we investigated reasons for refusing vaccination and determinants associated with influenza vaccine uptake among young health care workers. A survey was carried out during September and October 2010 on medical residents attending post-graduate Schools of the Medical Faculty at the University of Palermo (Italy). Each participant completed an anonymous web-based questionnaire including items on demographic and occupational characteristics, knowledge, attitudes and behaviours with regard to influenza and influenza vaccination, and main sources of information. A total of 202 (66.9%) out of 302 medical residents participated in the survey. During the 2009-2010 influenza vaccine campaign, 44 residents (21.8%) were vaccinated against seasonal influenza and 84 (41.6%) against pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009. For the impending 2010-2011 influenza season, 45 (22.3%) stated their intention to get vaccinated against seasonal influenza, 40 (19.8%) were uncertain and 117 (57.9%) were opposed. Considering themselves to be a high risk group for developing influenza was significantly associated with vaccination against both 2009-2010 seasonal (adj-OR=1.46; 95% CI=1.05-2.04) and pandemic A (H1N1) influenza (adj-OR 1.38; 95% CI=1.08-1.75). Intention to get vaccinated against 2010-2011 seasonal influenza was significantly more frequent in participants who had a high perception of efficacy/safety (adj-OR=1.49; 95% CI=1.05-2.12). After adjusting for confounding, vaccinations against seasonal 2009-2010 influenza, pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 and seasonal 2010-2011 influenza were significantly more frequent in residents who were vaccinated against influenza at least once in the previous five influenza seasons. Influenza vaccination among medical residents appears to be habitual, with little comprehension of the rationale and logic for vaccination, including the need to be vaccinated to protect patients from nosocomial influenza infection. Our study suggests the importance of prioritizing residents for vaccination campaigns, as they represent "the future" and include a core group that habitually accepts vaccination.

Factors associated with 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) vaccination acceptance among university students from India during the post-pandemic phase

Background

There was a low adherence to influenza A (H1N1) vaccination program among university students and health care workers during the pandemic influenza in many parts of the world. Vaccination of high risk individuals is one of the recommendations of World Health Organization during the post-pandemic period. It is not documented about the student's knowledge, attitude and willingness to accept H1N1 vaccination during the post-pandemic period. We aimed to analyze the student's knowledge, attitude and willingness to accept H1N1 vaccination during the post-pandemic period in India.

Methods

Vaccine against H1N1 was made available to the students of Vellore Institute of Technology, India from September 2010. The data are based on a cross-sectional study conducted during October 2010 to January 2011 using a self-administered questionnaire with a representative sample of the student population (N = 802).

Results

Of the 802 respondents, only 102/802 (12.7%) had been vaccinated and 105/802 (13%) planned to do so in the future, while 595/802 (74%) would probably or definitely not get vaccinated in the future. The highest coverage was among the female (65/102, 63.7%) and non-compliance was higher among men in the group (384/595; 64.5%) (p < 0.0001). The representation of students from school of Bio-sciences and Bio-technology among vaccinees is significantly higher than that of other schools. Majority of the study population from the three groups perceived vaccine against H1N1 as the effective preventive measure when compared to other preventive measures. 250/595 (42%) of the responders argued of not being in the risk group. The risk perception was significantly higher among female (p < 0.0001). With in the study group, 453/802 (56.4%) said that they got the information, mostly from media.

Conclusions

Our study shows that the vaccination coverage among university students remains very low in the post-pandemic period and doubts about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine are key elements in their rejection. Our results indicate a need to provide accessible information about the vaccine safety by scientific authorities and fill gaps and confusions in this regard.