Parental perspectives of vaccine safety and experience of adverse events following immunisation

Safety of 300IR house dust mite sublingual tablet from pooled clinical trial and post-marketing data

Background

The 300IR house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablet is approved for treatment of HDM-induced allergic rhinitis (AR). To provide a comprehensive review of the 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet safety profile based on randomized controlled trial (RCT) pooled data and post-marketing (PM) pharmacovigilance data.

Methods

Subjects (5-65 years) with confirmed HDM-AR with or without controlled asthma were treated with 300IR or placebo in 8 RCTs. Reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were pooled and analyzed descriptively in subsets of adults/adolescents and children. Adverse reactions (ADRs) collected from spontaneous reporting and PM studies through a pharmacovigilance system since the first marketing authorization were also analyzed.

Results

Across RCTs, 1853 subjects were treated with the 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet and 1846 with placebo. In both subsets of adults/adolescents and children whichever their asthma status, treatment-related TEAEs of higher incidence in active groups vs placebo were mostly consistent with mild or moderate local application-site reactions. They were mainly reported on the first days of treatment and decreased over time. 4 severe laryngopharyngeal reactions (2 requiring adrenaline/epinephrine) and 1 moderate eczema considered serious rapidly resolved with medications; no anaphylaxis was reported. In PM settings, ADRs reported in more than 235,000 patients were in line with RCT findings. Severe systemic reactions occurred rarely; 12 anaphylactic reactions resolved safely (5 with adrenaline). No new safety signal was raised.

Conclusion

Safety data from RCTs and more than 7 years of real-life experience confirmed the favorable safety profile of 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet in patients across different regions, regardless of age and asthma status.

Clinical trial registrations

NCT00674700; Retrospectively registered 06 May 2008.NCT01199133; Retrospectively registered 09 September 2010.NCT01527188; Retrospectively registered 01 February 2012.NCT02443805; Registered 29 April 2015/EudraCT 2014-004223-46; Registered 16 September 2015.jRCT2080221872/JapicCTI-121917; Registered 01 August 2012.jRCT2080222929/JapicCTI-15298; Registered 04 August 2015.

Medication safety perceptions in China: Media exposure, healthcare experiences, and trusted information sources

OBJECTIVE

Amid ongoing medication safety concerns in China and limited research on public perceptions, this study investigates the correlations between media exposure, healthcare experiences, and individuals' perceptions of medication safety. It also examines individuals' reliance on information sources during safety crises.

METHODS

A multistage stratified random sampling was employed with the gross sample containing 3090 Chinese adults aged 18-60 years. Data were analyzed using multiple linear regression.

RESULTS

Social media exposure was found to negatively correlate with perceptions of current medication safety and its perceived improvement, while exposure to television and print media showed positive correlations. Positive healthcare experiences were associated with improved medication safety perceptions. Among various information sources, healthcare professionals were deemed most trustworthy during medication safety incidents.

CONCLUSIONS

Media exposure and personal healthcare experiences significantly shape individuals' perceptions of medication safety in China, with healthcare professionals playing a crucial role in this context. Practiceimplications: Effective health crisis communication in China needs to be multifaceted, integrating traditional media and social media platforms to disseminate accurate information broadly. Additionally, healthcare professionals should be actively involved in crisis communication. Their role as trusted sources can be leveraged to clarify misconceptions, and reassure the public during medication safety incidents.

Factors associated with intention for revaccination among patients with adverse events following immunization

OBJECTIVES

Individuals and healthcare providers may be uncertain about the safety of revaccination after an adverse event following immunization (AEFI). We identified factors associated with physician recommendation for revaccination and participant intention to be revaccinated among patients with adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) assessed in the Canadian Special Immunization Clinic (SIC) Network from 2013 to 2019.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included patients assessed in the Canadian Special Immunization Clinic Network from 2013 to 2019 for an AEFI who required additional doses of the vaccine temporally associated with their AEFI. Participants underwent standardized assessment and data collection. Physician recommendations regarding revaccination and participant intent for revaccination were recorded. AEFI impact on daily activities and need for medical attention was captured as low, moderate, high impact and serious (e.g., requiring hospitalization). Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified factors associated with physician recommendation and participant intention for revaccination, controlling for province of assessment.

RESULTS

Physician recommendation was significantly associated with the type of AEFI and AEFI impact. Compared to large local reaction, physician recommendation for revaccination was reduced for immediate hypersensitivity (aOR: 0.24 [95% CI: 0.08-0.76]) and new onset autoimmune disease (aOR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.04-0.69). Compared to low impact AEFIs, physician recommendation was reduced for moderate (aOR: 0.22 [95% CI: 0.07-0.65]), high impact (aOR: 0.08 [95% CI: 0.02-0.30]), and serious AEFIs (aOR: 0.11 [95% CI: 0.03-0.37]). Participant intention for revaccination was significantly associated with AEFI impact, with reduced odds for high versus low impact AEFIs (aOR: 0.12 [95% CI: 0.04-0.42]).

CONCLUSION

Physicians appear to use AEFI type and impact to guide recommendations while patients use primarily AEFI impact to form intentions for revaccination. The findings may help inform counselling for patients with AEFIs.

MomsTalkShots, tailored educational app, improves vaccine attitudes: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Many pregnant women and parents have concerns about vaccines. This analysis examined the impact of MomsTalkShots, an individually tailored educational application, on vaccine attitudes of pregnant women and mothers.

METHODS

MomsTalkShots was the patient-level component of a multi-level intervention to improve maternal and infant vaccine uptake that also included provider- and practice-level interventions. The impact of these interventions was studied using a two-by-two factorial design, randomizing at both the patient- and the practice-level. Study staff recruited pregnant women from a diverse set of prenatal care practices in Colorado and Georgia between June 2017 and July 2018. All participants (n = 2087) received a baseline survey of maternal and infant vaccine intentions and attitudes, and two follow-up surveys at least 1 month and 1 year after their infant's birth, respectively. Half of participants (n = 1041) were randomly assigned to receive educational videos through MomsTalkShots, algorithmically tailored to their vaccine intentions, attitudes, and demographics. Since the practice/provider intervention did not appear impactful, this analysis focused on MomsTalkShots regardless of the practice/provider intervention.

RESULTS

By 1 month post-birth, MomsTalkShots increased perceived risk of maternal influenza disease (61% among MomsTalkShots recipients vs 55% among controls; Odds Ratio: 1.61, 95% Confidence Interval: 1.23-2.09), confidence in influenza vaccine efficacy (73% vs 63%; OR: 1.97, 95%CI: 1.47-2.65), and perceived vaccine knowledge (55% vs 48%; OR: 1.39, 95%CI: 1.13-1.72). Among those intending not to vaccinate at baseline, MomsTalkShots increased perceived risk of maternal influenza disease (38% vs 32%; OR: 2.07, 95%CI: 1.15-3.71) and confidence in influenza vaccine efficacy (44% vs 28%; OR: 2.62, 95%CI: 1.46-4.69). By 1 year post-birth, MomsTalkShots increased perceived vaccine knowledge (62% vs 50%; OR: 1.74, 95%CI: 1.36-2.24) and trust in vaccine information from obstetricians and pediatricians (64% vs 55%; OR: 1.53, 95%CI: 1.17-2.00). Among those uncertain about vaccinating at baseline, MomsTalkShots increased perceived vaccine knowledge (47% vs 12%; OR: 6.89, 95%CI: 1.52-31.25) and reduced infant vaccine safety concerns (71% vs 91%; OR: 0.24, 95%CI: 0.06-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

MomsTalkShots improved pregnant women's and mothers' knowledge and perceptions of maternal and infant vaccines and the diseases they prevent, and offers a scalable tool to address vaccine hesitancy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov on 13/09/2016 (registration number: NCT02898688).

Revaccination and Adverse Event Recurrence in Patients with Adverse Events following Immunization

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the risk of recurrence of adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) upon revaccination and to determine among patients with suspected vaccine allergy whether allergy skin test positivity was associated with AEFI recurrence.

STUDY DESIGN

This prospective observational study included patients assessed in the Canadian Special Immunization Clinic Network from 2013 to 2019 with AEFIs who required revaccination with the vaccine temporally associated with their AEFI. Participants underwent standardized assessment and data collection. Special Immunization Clinic physicians used guidelines to inform their recommendations. Participants were followed up after revaccination to capture AEFI recurrences. Data were transferred to a central database for descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 588 participants were assessed for 627 AEFIs; 570 (91%) AEFIs occurred in children <18 years of age. AEFIs included immediate hypersensitivity (130/627; 21%), large local reactions (110/627; 18%), nonurticarial rash (51/627; 8%), seizures (26/627; 4%), and thrombocytopenia (11/627; 2%). Revaccination was recommended to 513 of 588 (87%) participants. Among participants recommended and due for revaccination during the study period, 63% (299/477) were revaccinated. AEFI recurrence was 10% (31/299) overall, 31% (15/49) for large local reactions, and 7% (5/66) for immediate hypersensitivity. No recurrence was serious. Among 92 participants with suspected vaccine allergy who underwent skin testing and were revaccinated, the negative predictive value of skin testing for AEFI recurrence was 96% (95% CI 92.5%-99.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Most individuals with AEFIs were safely revaccinated. Among those with suspected vaccine allergy, skin testing may help determine the safety of revaccination.

Knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of Inonu University faculty members regarding childhood vaccine refusal

INTRODUCTION

Although there is a lot of scientific evidence that the benefits of vaccines outweigh their risks, hesitancy about the safety of vaccines can occur in every segment of the community. In this study, we aimed to determine the knowledge, attitudes, and associated factors of vaccine hesitancy among Inonu University faculty members regarding childhood vaccinations.

METHOD

This is a cross-sectional study, and 258 faculty members were included in the study. The questionnaire used in the study explored the sociodemographic characteristics of the faculty members and their knowledge, attitudes and behaviors regarding childhood vaccination. A chi-square test and a fisher exact test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Of the faculty members, 31.8% were hesitant about childhood vaccines, 51.9% stated that there were studies reporting the side effects of vaccines, 48.1% did not agree with giving booster doses of vaccines, 35.7% stated that vaccines could cause autism due to the chemicals contained in the vaccines. The most important information sources of university faculty regarding childhood vaccines members are scientific publications and health professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

Faculty members level of hesitancy about vaccines was high and since health professionals and scientific articles are the most important information sources of faculty members, misinformation here may affect their knowledge, attitudes and behaviors about vaccination.

Resources for assessing parents' vaccine hesitancy: a systematic review of the literature

The concept of Vaccine Hesitancy has begun to appear in the scientific landscape, referring to the reluctance of a growing proportion of people to accept the vaccination offer. A variety of factors were identified as being associated with vaccine hesitancy but there was no universal algorithm and currently there aren’t any established metrics to assess either the presence or impact of vaccine hesitancy. The aim of this study was to systematically review the published questionnaires evaluating parental vaccine hesitancy, to highlight the differences among these surveys and offer a general overview on this matter. This study offers a deeper perspective on the available questionnaires, helping future researches to identify the most suitable one according to their own aim and study setting.

Diagnosis and management of hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines

INTRODUCTION

Many countries in Europe now recommend and enforce mandatory vaccinations to improve vaccination coverage. Thus, the number of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) may show an increase. Among these events, severe hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines are rare. However, it is important that they be identified and recognized so that they may be adequately managed.

AREAS COVERED

The literature search was undertaken through PubMed and Embase to identify English-language papers focusing on hypersensitivity to vaccines.

EXPERT OPINION

Hypersensitivity reactions following vaccinations are rare and are classified according to their chronology and extension: immediate when they occur within the first 4 hours following administration and non-immediate when they occur later. Local reactions are the most common adverse event following injection of vaccines and generally do not require any allergy workup. Immediate reactions, however, are potentially IgE-mediated and require an allergy workup. In general, a previously known food allergy (i.e., egg or milk) is not a contraindication to immunizations. Patients with a known allergy to gelatin, yeast, latex, antibiotics, or other specific components of vaccines require an allergy workup before administration of the vaccine.

A Consent Support Resource with Benefits and Harms of Vaccination Does Not Increase Hesitancy in Parents-An Acceptability Study

It is unclear whether information given about the benefits and risks of routine childhood vaccination during consent may cue parental vaccine hesitancy. Parents were surveyed before and after reading vaccine consent information at a public expo event in Sydney, Australia. We measured vaccine hesitancy with Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccine Short Scale (PACV-SS), informed decision-making with Informed Subscale of the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS-IS), items from Stage of Decision Making, Positive Attitude Assessment, Vaccine Safety and Side Effect Concern, and Vaccine Communication Framework (VCF) tools. Overall, 416 parents showed no change in vaccine hesitancy (mean PACV-SS score pre = 1.97, post = 1.94; diff = −0.02 95% CI −0.10 to 0.15) but were more informed (mean DCS-IS score pre = 29.05, post = 7.41; diff = −21.63 95% CI −24.17 to −18.56), were more positive towards vaccination (pre = 43.8% post = 50.4%; diff = 6.5% 95% CI 3.0% to 10.0%), less concerned about vaccine safety (pre = 28.5%, post = 23.0%, diff = −5.6% 95% CI −2.3% to −8.8%) and side effects (pre = 37.0%, post = 29.0%, diff = −8.0% 95% CI −4.0% to −12.0%) with no change in stage of decision-making or intention to vaccinate. Providing information about the benefits and risks of routine childhood vaccination increases parents’ informed decision-making without increasing vaccine hesitancy.

A systematic review of factors associated with side-effect expectations from medical interventions

BACKGROUND

Fear of side-effects can result in non-adherence to medical interventions, such as medication and chemotherapy. Side-effect expectations have been identified as strong predictors of later perception of side-effects. However, research investigating predictors of side-effect expectations is disparate.

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors associated with side-effect expectations.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We systematically searched Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Global Health, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Scopus.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they investigated associations between any predictive factor and expectations of side-effects from any medical intervention.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We extracted information about participant characteristics, medication, rates of side-effects expected and predictors of side-effect expectations. Data were narratively synthesized.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified sixty-four citations, reporting on seventy-two studies. Predictors fell into five categories: personal characteristics, clinical characteristics, psychological traits and state, presentation format of information, and information sources used. Using verbal risk descriptors (eg 'common') compared to numerical descriptors (eg percentages), having lower quality of life or well-being, and currently experiencing symptoms were associated with increased side-effect expectations.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Decreasing unrealistic side-effect expectations may lead to decreased experience of side-effects and increased adherence to medical interventions. Widespread communications about medical interventions should describe the incidence of side-effects numerically. Evidence suggests that clinicians should take particular care with patients with lower quality of life, who are currently experiencing symptoms and who have previously experienced symptoms from treatment. Further research should investigate different clinical populations and aim to quantify the impact of the media and social media on side-effect expectations.

The state of vaccine safety science: systematic reviews of the evidence

This Review updates the scientific evidence assessing possible causal associations of adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) compiled in the 2012 report from the Institute of Medicine and the 2014 report from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. For 12 of 46 AEFI examined, a causal relationship has been established with at least one vaccine currently routinely recommended to the general USA population: anaphylaxis, arthralgia or arthritis (mild, acute, and transient, not chronic), deltoid bursitis (when vaccine is administered improperly), disseminated varicella infection (in immune deficient individuals for whom the varicella vaccine is contraindicated), encephalitis, febrile seizures, Guillain-Barré syndrome, hepatitis (in immune deficient individuals for whom the varicella vaccine is contraindicated), herpes zoster, immune thrombocytopenic purpura, meningitis, and syncope. Other than mild acute and transient arthralgia or arthritis, which is very common in adult women after rubella vaccine, these adverse reactions are rare or very rare. Vaccines have an excellent safety profile overall and provide protection against infectious diseases to individuals and the general population.

Immune-mediated adverse reactions to vaccines

Vaccination continues to be the single most important and successful public health intervention, due to its prevention of morbidity and mortality from prevalent infectious diseases. Severe immunologically mediated reactions are rare and less common with the vaccine than the true infection. However, these events can cause public fearfulness and loss of confidence in the safety of vaccination. In this paper, we perform a systematic literature search and narrative review of immune-mediated vaccine adverse events and their known and proposed mechanisms, and outline directions for future research. Improving our knowledge base of severe immunologically mediated vaccine reactions and their management drives better vaccine safety and efficacy outcomes.

Parental Declaration of Adverse Event Following Immunization in a Cross-Sectional Study in Poland

Vaccines are a well-known and effective preventive measure in communicable diseases. However, like any medical product, vaccines can cause some adverse effects. With increasing population awareness, the number of reported events related to vaccination has increased. Aim: The aim of the study was to assess the frequency and type of reported adverse events following childhood immunization (AEFI), and to recognize the determinant of their occurrence related with a socio-demographic situation, parental knowledge, and/or opinions on vaccinations. Material and Methods: The self-administrated questionnaire was distributed to a group of 3000 random parents or legal guardians living in the Silesian Voivodship (the southern part of Poland) in 2016. The response rate was eventually 41.3% from 1239 participants. Both, the number of children and the percentage of vaccinations given in the studied region, was representative for Poland as a whole. Results: Approximately one-third (32%) of surveyed parents declared the occurrence of AEFI in their children. The most frequently declared AEFIs were: redness, pain, swelling at the injection site (27%), and fever (24.9%). The frequency of reported AEFI was associated with a higher level of parental education and the number of vaccinations given. A negative attitude toward vaccination and the belief that vaccination is unsafe were associated with a higher number of reported AEFI. Conclusions: The results obtained confirmed that the number of declared mild and moderate AEFI is related to a lower parental educational level and is associated with a better experience as a consequence of a higher number of vaccinations given. Frequent AEFI reporters represent negative attitudes toward vaccinations. Further investigation with the exact surveillance system is needed to improve parental trust in vaccination safety.

Meningitis B vaccination: knowledge and attitudes of pediatricians and parents in Greece

Bexsero®, a meningitis B vaccine, was recently included in the National Immunization Programme (NIP) in Greece, with restricted access to high risk groups only. To map the need to expand coverage, this study assessed pediatricians and parents' perceptions and attitudes towards meningitis B, inclusion of Bexsero® in the NIP and vaccination uptake.

We analyzed data from 201 private practice pediatricians questionnaires and 1003 parents phone interviews. Both (pediatricians 64.7%, parents 88.5%) considered meningitis B a critical challenge. 77.6% of pediatricians would prioritize meningitis B vaccination in the NIP and 90.3% would recommend Bexsero® to parents. Of those who would not, 47% feared civil liability challenges and 11.8% hesitated to impose vaccine cost on parents. Only 28.9% of parents had their child vaccinated. Non-reimbursement constituted a major access hurdle. It is critical to expand immunization coverage in Greece through expanded access in the NIP, in line with pediatrician recommendations.

Parental Immunisation Needs and Attitudes Survey in paediatric hospital clinics and community maternal and child health centres in Melbourne, Australia

AIM

Despite Australia's high vaccination rates, an estimated 3.3% of children are under-vaccinated due to vaccine refusal and the proportion of parents with concerns is unclear. Amongst Australian parents, we aimed to determine the prevalence of vaccine concerns, resources and health-care providers (HCPs) accessed and satisfaction with these resources in two different settings. We also aimed to identify relationships between the level of vaccine concern, socio-economic status and vaccine uptake.

METHODS

Parents of children under 5 years attending general paediatric clinics in a tertiary paediatric hospital (n = 301/398, 76%) and children under 19 months attending community maternal child health centres (n = 311/391, 81%) completed the survey. Vaccination status was obtained from the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register.

RESULTS

Despite high support for vaccination (98%, confidence interval (CI) 97-99), 43% of parents reported vaccine concerns (CI 40-47) including the number of vaccines given in the first 2 years (25%, CI 22 to 29), vaccine ingredients (22%, CI 19-25), allergies (18%, CI 15-21), weakening of the immune system (17%, CI 14-20) and autism (11%, CI 8-13). HCPs were the most commonly accessed and trusted information source. In all, 23% of parents reported insufficient knowledge to make good vaccination decisions (CI 20-26). There was little evidence of an association between parental vaccine acceptance or socio-economic status and vaccination status.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high support for vaccines, nearly half of Australian parents have some concerns and a quarter lack vaccine decision-making confidence regarding childhood vaccines. Parents frequently access and report high trust in HCPs, who are best placed to address parental vaccine concerns through provision of clear information, using effective communication strategies. Further research in more highly hesitant populations is required to determine the relationship between the level and nature of vaccination concerns and vaccine uptake.

Socioeconomic differences in childhood vaccination in developed countries: a systematic review of quantitative studies

INTRODUCTION

The reasons for vaccine hesitancy and its relation to individual socioeconomic status (SES) must be better understood. Areas covered: This review focused on developed countries with programs addressing major financial barriers to vaccination access. We systematically reviewed differences by SES in uptake of publicly funded childhood vaccines and in cognitive determinants (beliefs, attitudes) of parental decisions about vaccinating their children. Using the PRISMA statement to guide this review, we searched three electronic databases from January 2000 through April 2016. We retained 43 articles; 34 analyzed SES differences in childhood vaccine uptake, 7 examined differences in its cognitive determinants, and 2 both outcomes. Expert commentary: Results suggest that barriers to vaccination access persist among low-SES children in several settings. Vaccination programs could be improved to provide all mandatory and recommended vaccines 100% free of charge, in both public organizations and private practices, and to reimburse vaccine administration. Multicomponent interventions adapted to the context could also be effective in reducing these inequalities. For specific vaccines (notably for measles, mumps, and rubella), in UK and Germany, uptake was lowest among the most affluent. Interventions carefully tailored to respond to specific concerns of vaccine-hesitant parents, without reinforcing hesitancy, are needed.

Childhood vaccine status and correlation with common nonvaccine-preventable illnesses

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Current trends in parental decision making involve alteration from vaccine schedules in children, citing concerns for altered immune function. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a difference in incidence of common childhood illnesses dependent on vaccination status.

METHODS

An investigator-designed survey was administered to parents of children aged 12 months to 7 years. Participants were separated into one of three groups: fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, and unvaccinated. There were 111 total participants. Power analysis indicated a minimum of 30 participants per group to detect an 80% effect. Descriptive statistics were applied to variables with chi-square for group comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicated a statistically significant difference between all three groups in the categories of ear infections, influenza, and common colds. Fully immunized group had significantly more ear infections than partial or unimmunized. The unimmunized group had significantly more colds and flu.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurse practitioner practice implications relate directly to further education of parents, support, and trust building. Many parents question the possible association between childhood vaccines and immune function and have a distrust of current research. This study showed that most common childhood illnesses are equitable across the population and not dependent on vaccine status.

Immunizing Patients With Adverse Events After Immunization and Potential Contraindications to Immunization: A Report From the Special Immunization Clinics Network

BACKGROUND

For patients who have experienced adverse events following immunization (AEFI) or who have specific medical conditions, there is limited evidence regarding the best approach to immunization. The Special Immunization Clinics (SICs) Network was established to standardize patient management and assess outcomes after reimmunization. The study objective was to describe the first 2 years of the network's implementation.

METHODS

Twelve SICs were established across Canada by infectious diseases specialists and allergists. Inclusion criteria were as follows: local reaction ≥ 10 cm, allergic symptoms < 24 hours postimmunization, neurologic symptoms and other AEFI or medical conditions of concern. Eligible patients underwent a standardized evaluation, causality assessment was performed, immunization recommendations were made by expert physicians and patients were followed up to capture AEFI. After individual consent, data were transferred to a central database for analysis.

RESULTS

From June 2013 to May 2015, 151 patients were enrolled. Most were referred for prior AEFI (132/151, 87%): 42 (32%) for allergic-like reactions, 31 (23%) for injection-site reactions, 20 (15%) for neurologic symptoms and 39 (30%) for other systemic symptoms. Nineteen patients (13%) were seen for underlying conditions that complicated immunization. Reimmunization was recommended for 109 patients, 60 of whom (55%) were immunized and followed up. Eleven patients (18%) experienced recurrence of their AEFI; none were serious (eg, resulting in hospitalization, permanent disability or death).

CONCLUSIONS

The most frequent reasons for referral to a SIC were allergic-like events and injection site reactions. Reimmunization was safe in most patients. Larger studies are needed to determine outcomes for specific types of AEFI.

Consumer reporting of adverse events following immunization

Surveillance of adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) is an essential component of vaccine safety monitoring. The most commonly utilized passive surveillance systems rely predominantly on reporting by health care providers (HCP). We reviewed adverse event reports received in Victoria, Australia since surveillance commencement in July 2007, to June 2013 (6 years) to ascertain the contribution of consumer (vaccinee or their parent/guardian) reporting to vaccine safety monitoring and to inform future surveillance system development directions. Categorical data included were: reporter type; serious and non-serious AEFI category; and, vaccinee age group. Chi-square test and 2-sample test of proportions were used to compare categories; trend changes were assessed using linear regression. Consumer reporting increased over the 6 years, reaching 21% of reports received in 2013 (P<0.001), most commonly for children aged less than 7 years. Consumer reports were 5% more likely to describe serious AEFI than HCP (P=0.018) and 10% more likely to result in specialist clinic attendance (P<0.001). Although online reporting increased to 32% of all report since its introduction in 2010, 85% of consumers continued to report by phone. Consumer reporting of AEFI is a valuable component of vaccine safety surveillance in addition to HCP reporting. Changes are required to AEFI reporting systems to implement efficient consumer AEFI reporting, but may be justified for their potential impact on signal detection sensitivity.

Sustaining motivation to immunize: exchanging lessons between India and the United States

In our recent study on vaccine uptake and parental attitudes toward immunizations in urban South India, we found strong support for vaccination due to fear of vaccine-preventable diseases and confidence in the recommendations made by health care professionals. In this commentary, we will characterize the reasons behind strong parental motivation to immunize in South India and consider ways these motivators can be enhanced in the United States, where vaccine hesitancy has led to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease. In addition, we will also discuss lessons that can be learned from the hesitancy movements in the United States and applied in India to maintain strong support for vaccination.

Awareness and utilization of reporting pathways for adverse events following immunization: online survey among pediatricians in Russia and Germany

OBJECTIVES

Vaccine safety surveillance is highly dependent on accurate reporting of adverse events following immunization (AEFI). An online survey was conducted to assess the utilization of AEFI reporting standards and pathways among pediatricians in Germany, and in Russia where pediatric specialization begins in medical school.

METHODS

In May 2011, a 31-item online questionnaire was sent to members of the German Professional Association for Pediatricians (BVKJ) and the Union of Pediatricians of Russia (UPR), capturing information on vaccine safety training, awareness of AEFI reporting pathways, and use of standardized case definitions for the ascertainment of AEFI. A convenience sample of 1,632 completed online surveys was analyzed.

RESULTS

Participating pediatricians reported spending approximately 50 min per 8-hour workday on vaccine safety consultations, but only 42 % (56 % UPR, 26 % BVKJ) have ever received any formal vaccine safety training. Two-thirds reported having observed AEFI in their practice, but only one-third utilized standardized case definitions for case ascertainment. Only 35 % of participants named accurate AEFI reporting pathways. Every second pediatrician would report AEFI to institutions that are not primarily in charge of vaccine safety surveillance; the remaining reports would either be lost or delayed. Pediatricians who had received formal vaccine safety training were significantly more likely to apply international safety standards and to report adequately, both at the p < 0.05 level.

CONCLUSION

Pediatricians play a key role in the post-marketing surveillance of vaccine safety. The lack of training represents a missed opportunity. There may be a role for professional societies to improve vaccine safety training.

Acceptance of a malaria vaccine by caregivers of sick children in Kenya

BACKGROUND

Several malaria vaccines are currently in clinical trials and are expected to provide an improved strategy for malaria control. Prior to introduction of a new vaccine, policymakers must consider the socio cultural environment of the region to ensure widespread community approval. This study investigated the acceptance of a malaria vaccine by child caregivers and analysed factors that influence these.

METHODS

Interviews from a standard questionnaire were conducted with 2,003 caregivers at 695 randomly selected health facilities across Kenya during the Kenya Service Provision Assessment Survey 2010. Multinomial regression of quantitative data was conducted using STATA to analyse determinants of caregivers accepting malaria vaccination of their child.

RESULTS

Mothers represented 90% of caregivers interviewed who brought their child to the health facility, and 77% of caregivers were 20-34 years old. Overall, 88% of respondents indicated that they would accept a malaria vaccine, both for a child in their community and their own child. Approval for a vaccine was highest in malaria-endemic Nyanza Province at 98.9%, and lowest in the seasonal transmission area of North Eastern Province at 23%. Although 94% of respondents who had attended at least some school reported they would accept the vaccine for a child, only 56% of those who had never attended school would do so. The likelihood of accepting one's own child to be immunized was correlated with province, satisfaction with health care services in the facility attended, age of the caregiver, and level of education.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this study indicate a need for targeted messages and education on a malaria vaccine, particularly for residents of regions where acceptance is low, older caregivers, and those with low literacy and school-attendance levels. This study provides critical evidence to inform policy for a new malaria vaccine that will support its timely and comprehensive uptake in Kenya.

The Yin-Yang arms of vaccines: disease-fighting power versus tissue-destructive inflammation

The disease-fighting power of vaccines has defeated many pathogens and has been credited with global reduction of mortality and morbidity. However, most vaccine developments focus on the enhancement of effector responses with systemic inflammation and the consequences overlooked. Recent evidence shows that systemic inflammatory phenotypes, acute or chronic, are both detrimental and should be avoided if possible. Since noninvasive vaccination by painless delivery of nasal vaccines and skin patch vaccines could elicit potent protective immunity without inducing systemic inflammation, it can be predicted that vaccinology will increasingly see the abandonment of the 'needle-injection' paradigm for vaccine development. The findings that specific viral particles could rapidly remodel the tissue environment postinfection in favor of some pathogens with the capacity to suppress others illustrate the pressing need for a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms in order to unlock the full potential of immunological intervention.

Consumer reporting of adverse events following immunization (AEFI): identifying predictors of reporting an AEFI

Passive reporting of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) by consumers or healthcare professionals is the primary mechanism for post-marketing surveillance of vaccine safety. Although recent initiatives have promoted consumer reporting, there is a lack of research concerning consumer reporters. Computer assisted telephone interviews (CATI) were conducted in 2011 of a cross-sectional, random, general population sample of 191 South Australian parents who stated that their children had previously experienced an AEFI. We compared awareness of surveillance, vaccine safety opinions, and demographics of parents reporting an AEFI to either healthcare professionals or surveillance authorities with those who did not report their children's AEFI. Multivariate regression analyses measured: the association between reporting and safety views; and demographic predictors of reporting an AEFI. Reporting an AEFI to a healthcare professional or a surveillance authority was not significantly associated with awareness of a surveillance system. AEFI reporters, when compared with non-reporters, were more likely to be Australian-born (OR = 4.58, [1.64, 12.78], P = 0.004); were associated with the perception that a serious reaction was more likely to occur at their children's last immunization (OR = 2.54 [95%CI 1.22, 5.30], P = 0.013); and were less accepting of the risk of febrile convulsion, (OR = 3.59 [95%CI 1.50, 8.57], P = 0.004). Although reporting an AEFI was not associated with awareness of surveillance or most socio-demographics, the results suggest some difference in safety opinions. Further studies are required to ascertain if these differences pre-date the occurrence of an AEFI or are a consequence of the AEFI and how consumers can contribute further to vaccine safety surveillance.

Teenagers' understandings of and attitudes towards vaccines and vaccine-preventable diseases: a qualitative study

•

Explored understandings of diseases and knowledge and experiences of vaccination.

•

Teenagers had limited knowledge and little direct experience of the diseases.

•

Participants attitudes towards receiving vaccines’ varied.

•

The success of mass immunisation programmes is associated with disease perceptions.

•

Need to engage with teenagers to address misconceptions about vaccines and diseases.

Background

To examine immunisation information needs of teenagers we explored understandings of vaccination and vaccine-preventable diseases, attitudes towards immunisation and experiences of immunisation. Diseases discussed included nine for which vaccines are currently offered in the UK (human papillomavirus, meningitis, tetanus, diphtheria, polio, whooping cough, measles, mumps and rubella), and two not currently included in the routine UK schedule (hepatitis B and chickenpox).

Methods

Twelve focus groups conducted between November 2010 and March 2011 with 59 teenagers (29 girls and 30 boys) living in various parts of Scotland.

Results

Teenagers exhibited limited knowledge and experience of the diseases, excluding chickenpox. Measles, mumps and rubella were perceived as severe forms of chickenpox-like illness, and rubella was not associated with foetal damage. Boys commonly believed that human papillomavirus only affects girls, and both genders exhibited confusion about its relationship with cancer. Participants considered two key factors when assessing the threat of diseases: their prevalence in the UK, and their potential to cause fatal or long-term harm. Meningitis was seen as a threat, but primarily to babies. Participants explained their limited knowledge as a result of mass immunisation making once-common diseases rare in the UK, and acknowledged immunisation's role in reducing disease prevalence.

Conclusions

While it is welcome that fewer teenagers have experienced vaccine-preventable diseases, this presents public health advocates with the challenge of communicating benefits of immunisation when advantages are less visible. The findings are timely in view of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation's recommendation that a booster of meningitis C vaccine should be offered to teenagers; that teenagers did not perceive meningitis C as a significant threat should be a key concern of promotional information. While teenagers’ experiences of immunisation in school were not always positive, they seemed enthusiastic at the prospect of introducing more vaccines for their age group.