Pandemic 2009 influenza H1N1 virus vaccination: compliance and safety in a single hemodialysis center

The coverage of influenza and pneumococcal vaccination among kidney transplant recipients and waiting list patients: A cross-sectional survey in Denmark

BACKGROUND

To characterize level and predictors of influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake among Danish kidney transplant recipients (KTR) and kidney transplant waiting list patients (WLP).

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey based on self-reported vaccine uptake including WLP and KTR ≤ 1½ years post transplantation. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses identifying factors associated with influenza vaccine uptake in the latest season were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 220 participants were included in the study, 54% KTR and 46% WLP. Self-reported influenza vaccine uptake in the latest season was overall 41.8%. Uptake of influenza vaccine on any prior season apart from the latest season was 53.2% and significantly higher among WLP than KTR (P = .007). Pneumococcal vaccine uptake was only 4% overall. The only factor positively associated with influenza vaccine uptake in the latest season was any prior influenza vaccine uptake (OR 5.79, CI95 2.44-13.76) (P < .001). Recommendations given by other persons (non-physician) were negatively associated with receiving the influenza vaccination in the latest season (OR 0.34, CI95 0.13-0.92) (P = .03). Reasons for not being vaccinated were primarily lack of information, perception of own good health, and fear of adverse reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptakes were suboptimal among Danish WLP and KTR. Increased awareness about guidelines and physicians´ education are warranted.

The benefit of the doubt or doubts over benefits? A systematic literature review of perceived risks of vaccines in European populations

OBJECTIVES

The success of vaccination strategies depends in part on population perceptions of benefits and risks of vaccines and related confidence in vaccination. Better knowledge of public concerns about vaccines and what is driving them is needed to inform vaccination strategies and communications. This literature reviewer examined studies on vaccine and vaccination risk perceptions and concerns across European populations.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies published between 2004 and 2014 in Europe. A descriptive analysis was performed.

FINDINGS

A total of 145 articles were selected, most of which were conducted in the UK, the Netherlands and France and studied seasonal influenza, HPV and pandemic influenza vaccination. Across all countries and vaccines, the primary area of concern was vaccine safety, followed by perceptions of low likelihood of contracting vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), perceived low severity of VPDs, beliefs that vaccines do not work, and overall lack of information. Concerns were found to be vaccine-, country- and population-specific.

CONCLUSION

In addition to identifying concerns about vaccination in Europe, this study confirmed the notion that individuals have many safety concerns about vaccination and often believe that the risks of vaccination outweigh their benefits. More research needs to be conducted to explore the impact of different types of communication strategies, which would frame the benefits of vaccination as well as risks of not vaccinating. Strategies to better inform public perceptions of vaccines should include the provision of unbiased, comprehensive information tailored to population information needs, and delivered using multiple and new communication technologies such as social media.

ADHERENCE TO INFLUENZA VACCINATION AMONG MEDICAL STUDENTS DURING AND AFTER INFLUENZA A (H1N1) PANDEMIC

This study evaluated the adherence to influenza vaccination among medical students in 2010 and 2011. From August to December 2011, a questionnaire was used to record the influenza vaccination in 2010 and 2011, reasons for acceptance of the influenza vaccine and knowledge of healthcare workers about the influenza vaccine recommendation. One hundred and forty-four students from the 2ndto the 6th years of the medical school were interviewed. A great adherence to pandemic influenza vaccine was noted in 2010, (91% of the students), with "self-protection" being the most common reason cited for vaccination. Other determinants for the vaccination during pandemic were "convenient access to vaccine" and "encouragement by peers and teachers in workplaces and at the university". However, there was a great decay in the acceptance to vaccine in the next influenza season (2011). Only 42% of the students received the vaccine. They claimed "lack of time" and "have forgotten to take the vaccine" as the main reasons. The "knowledge on the recommendation of influenza vaccine to healthcare workers" increased when the students come to attend the last year of the medical school, but that was an insufficient motivator for vaccination. Strategies to increase vaccination should be based on the abovementioned aspects for the adoption of effective measures in both, pandemic and seasonal periods.

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.

Factors influencing pandemic influenza vaccination of healthcare workers--a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Maintaining the health and availability of Health care workers (HCW) is an essential component of pandemic preparedness. A key to protecting HCW during the H1N1 pandemic was influenza vaccination. Numerous researchers have reported on factors influencing H1N1 vaccination behaviour in various HCW groups. This systematic review aims to inform future influenza vaccine interventions and pandemic planning processes via the examination of literature in HCW H1N1 vaccination, in order to identify factors that are (1) unique to pandemic influenza vaccination and (2) similar to seasonal influenza vaccination research.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive review of literature (MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINHAL, AMED, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, and grey literature sources) published between January 2005 and December 2011 to identify studies relevant to HCW pH1N1 vaccine uptake/refusal.

RESULTS

20 publications sampling HCW from different geographic regions are included in this review. H1N1 vaccine coverage was found to be variable (9-92%) across HCW populations, and self-reported vaccine status was the most frequently utilized predictor of pandemic vaccination. HCW were likely to accept the H1N1 vaccine if they perceived, (1) the H1N1 vaccine to be safe, (2) H1N1 vaccination to be effective in preventing infection to self and others (i.e. loved ones, co-workers and patients), and (3) H1N1 was a serious and severe infection. Positive cues to action, such as the access of scientific literature, trust in public health communications and messaging, and encouragement from loved ones, physicians and co-workers were also found to influence HCW H1N1 uptake. Previous seasonal influenza vaccination was found to be an important socio-demographic predictor of vaccine uptake. Factors unique to HCW pandemic vaccine behaviour are (1) lack of time and vaccine access related barriers to vaccination, (2) perceptions of novel and rapid pandemic vaccine formulation, and (3) the strong role of mass media on vaccine uptake.

CONCLUSIONS

Many of the factors that influenced HCW pandemic vaccination decisions have previously been reported in seasonal influenza vaccination literature, but some factors were unique to pandemic vaccination. Future influenza vaccine campaigns should emphasize the benefits of vaccination and highlight positive cues to vaccination, while addressing barriers to vaccine uptake in order to improve vaccine coverage among HCW populations. Since pandemic vaccination factors tend be similar among different HCW groups, successful pandemic vaccination strategies may be effective across numerous HCW populations in pandemic scenarios.

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.

Efficacy of influenza A H1N1/2009 vaccine in hemodialysis and kidney transplant patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Data are needed to assess safety and efficacy of the 2009 pandemic influenza A H1N1 vaccine in renal patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We prospectively evaluated seroconversion, predictors of response, and vaccine safety in renal patients. Hemagglutination inhibition tests to detect serum antibodies against a new influenza A-H1N1 virus were performed in 79 transplant patients, 48 hemodialysis patients, and 15 healthy workers before and 1 month after vaccination. Healthy controls and 88 of 127 renal patients were vaccinated. Seroconversion was defined as at least 2 dilutions increase in titer.

RESULTS

We excluded 19 individuals seroprotected (≥1/40) against the novel H1N1 in the initial sample. Efficacy rate in the 96 vaccinated individuals was 43.7% (42 of 96 seroconverted versus four of 27 nonvaccinated patients, P = 0.007). For vaccinated subgroups, efficacy was 41.8% in transplant patients (P = 0.039 versus nonvaccinated), 33.3% in hemodialysis patients (P = 0.450), and 81.8% in controls. Healthy controls showed better response to vaccine than transplant (P = 0.021) and dialysis (P = 0.012) patients. For the transplant subgroup, longer time after transplantation (P = 0.028) was associated with seroconversion, but no influence was found for age, gender, renal function, or immunosuppression. In the hemodialysis subgroup, younger age was associated with response (55.7 ± 20.8 versus 71.6 ± 10.1 years, P = 0.042), but other specific variables, including Kt/V or time on dialysis, were not. No serious adverse events were reported, and kidney function was stable.

CONCLUSION

The novel influenza A 2009 H1N1 vaccine was safe in renal patients, although administration of a single dose of adjuvanted vaccine induced a poor response in these patients.