Parents' attitude toward multiple vaccinations at a single visit with alternative delivery methods

A worldwide overview for hexavalent vaccines and a glimpse into Turkiye's perspective

The surge in recommended vaccinations for child's has spurred the development of combination vaccines, notably hexavalent vaccines, which provide multiple immunizations in a single dose. These vaccines offer various advantages, such as streamlining vaccination schedules, minimizing injection-related pain and exposure to preservatives, expanding vaccine coverage, and reducing administration costs. However, the intricate and expensive development of these vaccines presents substantial challenges, requiring increased investment and healthcare provider education to optimize their utilization and sustain high vaccination rates. Turkey, known for its robust vaccine coverage, strategic geographic location, and the influx of refugees, is at a critical juncture for integrating hexavalent vaccines into national programs. This transition is especially relevant given the rising vaccine hesitancy and the potential resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases. This review assesses the deployment of hexavalent vaccines, examining their benefits and challenges through clinical trials and global experiences, with a specific emphasis on Turkiye's public health context.

Facilitating the development of urgently required combination vaccines

The essence of a vaccine lies in its ability to elicit a set of immune responses specifically directed at a particular pathogen. Accordingly, vaccines were historically designed, developed, registered, recommended, procured, and administered as monopathogen formulations. Nonetheless, the control and elimination of an astonishing number of diseases was realised only after several once-separate vaccines were provided as combinations. Unfortunately, the current superabundance of recommended and pipeline vaccines is now at odds with the number of acceptable vaccine administrations and feasible health-care visits for vaccine recipients and health-care providers. Yet, few new combinations are in development because, in addition to the scientific and manufacturing hurdles intrinsic to coformulation, developers face a gauntlet of regulatory, policy, and commercialisation obstacles in a milieu still largely designed for monopathogen vaccines. We argue here that national policy makers and public health agencies should prospectively identify and advocate for the development of new multipathogen combination vaccines, and suggest ways to accelerate the regulatory pathways to licensure of combinations and other concrete, innovative steps to mitigate current obstacles.

Experimental investigation of the optimal driving pressure for a larger-volume controllable jet injection system

Jet injection technology has become the alternative drug delivery method of conventional needle-based injection due to its obvious advantages. In order to meet the demand for larger volume injection, the pneumatic jet injection systems have efficiently administrated vaccine up to 1 mL in human. Our recent study has also demonstrated that controlling the driving pressure enabled the pneumatic jet injection system to deliver larger volumes of drugs to target sites at desired rates and times. This work continues to explore the optimal two-phase driving pressure combination with better injection efficiency for typical larger-volume (1.0 mL) jet injection with controllable pneumatic jet injection system. Under the combination of a first phase driving pressure of 1.00 MPa and a second phase driving pressure ranging from 0.25 to 0.90 MPa, dynamic characteristics, dispersion characteristics and pharmacokinetic characteristics of this controllable jet injection system were quantitatively analyzed. In all experiments, it was confirmed that the optimal driving pressure combination of 1.0 mL ejection volume was close to (1.00-0.50) MPa. That is, the injection velocities of 151.85 m/s and 102.01 m/s for the first and second phase respectively facilitated better injection performance with a controlled release of 1.0 mL ejection volume. This strategy is practical for facilitating the clinical application of large-volume controllable jet injection systems.

A Voice-Annotated Digital Decision Aid to Promote Child Influenza Vaccination: A Feasibility Study

(1) Background: Child influenza vaccine uptake is suboptimal due partly to vaccine hesitancy. A voice-annotated digital decision aid, Flu Learning Object (FLO), was developed to facilitate parental decision-making. This study assessed parental views on FLO’s usability and utility and determined its preliminary effectiveness in increasing vaccine intention and uptake; (2) Methods: A single-center mixed method study was conducted in a public primary care clinic in Singapore. Parents of children aged 6 months to 5 years who were unvaccinated in the preceding year were recruited. In-depth interviews explored their views of using FLO. Pre- and post-FLO questionnaires assessed their vaccine intention and perceived usability using the System Usability Scale (SUS); (3) Results: 18 parents were recruited. They became more aware of benefits and potential complications, distinguished influenza from the common cold, and recognized recommendations by National Childhood Immunisation Schedule. FLO addressed parents’ concerns and supported their decision-making process. FLO has good usability with a mean SUS score of 79.3, ranked at approximately the 85th percentile. The usage of FLO significantly increased vaccine intention from 55.6% to 94.4% (p = 0.016) with an actual vaccine uptake rate of 50%; (4) Conclusions: Parents generally accepted FLO, which positively influenced their intention to vaccinate their child against influenza.

Challenges and opportunities in current vaccine technology and administration: A comprehensive survey examining oral vaccine potential in the United States

This study provides a snapshot of the current vaccine business ecosystem, including practices, challenges, beliefs, and expectations of vaccine providers. Our team focused on providers' firsthand experience with administering vaccines to determine if an oral vaccine (e.g. pill or oral-drop) would be well-received. We interviewed 135 healthcare providers and vaccine specialists across the US, focusing questions on routine vaccinations, not COVID-19 vaccines. Improving workflow efficiency is a top concern among vaccine providers due to shrinking reimbursement rates-determined by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs)-and the time-intensiveness of injectable vaccines. Administering injectable vaccines takes 23 minutes/patient on average, while dispensing pills takes only 5 minutes/patient. An average of 24% of patients express needle-fear, which further lengthens the processing time. Misaligned incentives between providers and PBMs could reduce the quality and availability of vaccine-related care. The unavailability of single-dose orders prevents some rural providers from offering certain vaccines. Most interviewees (74%) believe an oral vaccine would improve patient-provider experience, patient-compliance, and workflow efficiency, while detractors (26%) worry about the taste, vaccine absorption, and efficacy. Additional research could investigate whether currently non-vaccinating pharmacies would be willing to offer oral vaccines, and the impact of oral vaccines on vaccine acceptance.

Changes in Influenza Vaccination Rates After Withdrawal of Live Vaccine

BACKGROUND

Before the start of the 2016-2017 influenza season, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices withdrew its recommendation promoting the use of live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIVs). There was concern that this might lessen the likelihood that those with a previous LAIV would return for an injectable influenza vaccine (IIV) and that child influenza immunization rates would decrease overall.

METHODS

Using Oregon's statewide immunization registry, the ALERT Immunization Information System, child influenza immunization rates were compared across the 2012-2013 through 2016-2017 seasons. Additionally, matched cohorts of children were selected based on receipt of either an LAIV or an IIV during the 2015-2016 season. Differences between the IIV and LAIV cohorts in returning for the IIV in the 2016-2017 season were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, influenza immunization rates for children aged 2 to 17 years were unchanged between the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 seasons. Children aged 3 to 10 with a previous IIV were 1.03 (95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.04) times more likely to return for an IIV in 2016-2017 than those with a previous LAIV, whereas children aged 11 to 17 years with a previous IIV were 1.08 (95% confidence interval, 1.05 to -1.09) times more likely to return.

CONCLUSIONS

Withdrawal of the LAIV recommendation was not associated with an overall change in child influenza immunization rates across seasons. Children with a previous (2015-2016) IIV were slightly more likely to return during the 2016-2017 season for influenza immunization than those with a previous LAIV.

The number of injected same-day preschool vaccines relates to preadolescent needle fear and HPV uptake

PURPOSE

Fear of needles develops at approximately five years of age, and decreases compliance with healthcare. We sought to examine the relationship of preschool vaccine history, parent and preadolescent needle fear, and subsequent compliance with optional vaccines.

METHODS

As part of a private practice randomized controlled trial, parents and 10-12year olds rated needle anxiety on a 100mm visual analog scale. This follow-up cohort study compared their needle anxiety to previous vaccination records, including number of vaccinations between ages four and six years (total and same-day maximum), and subsequent initiation of the HPV vaccine through age 13.

RESULTS

Of the 120 preadolescents enrolled between 4.28.09 and 1.19.2010, 117 received preschool vaccinations between ages four and six years. The likelihood of being in the upper quartile of fear (VAS≥83) five years later increased with each additional same-day injection (OR=3.108, p=0.0100 95%CI=1.311, 7.367), but was not related to total lifetime or total four-to-six year injections. Only 12.5% (15) of parents reported anxiety about their preadolescents' vaccines (VAS>50). Parent and child anxiety was weakly correlated (r=0.15). Eight children in the upper fear quartile began their HPV series (26.67%) compared to 14 in the lower quartile (48.28% VAS<32) (OR 2.57, p=0.0889, 95%CI 0.864-7.621); there was no difference in HPV uptake between upper and lower quartile of parent anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

The more same-day preschool injections between 4 and 6years of age, the more likely a child was to fear needles five years later. Preadolescent needle fear was a stronger predictor than parent vaccine anxiety of subsequent HPV vaccine uptake.

Immunological considerations regarding parental concerns on pediatric immunizations

Despite the fundamental role of vaccines in the decline of infant mortality, parents may decide to decline vaccination for their own children. Many factors may influence this decision, such as the belief that the infant immune system is weakened by vaccines, and concerns have been raised about the number of vaccines and the early age at which they are administered. Studies focused on the infant immune system and its reaction to immunizations, summarized in this review, show that vaccines can overcome those suboptimal features of infant immune system that render them more at risk of infections and of their severe manifestations. In addition, many vaccines have been shown to improve heterologous innate and adaptive immunity resulting in lower mortality rates for fully vaccinated children. Thus, multiple vaccinations are necessary and not dangerous, as infants can respond to several antigens as well as when responding to single stimuli. Current immunization schedules have been developed and tested to avoid vaccine interference, improve benefits and reduce side effects compared to single administrations. The infant immune system is therefore capable, early after birth, of managing several antigenic challenges and exploits them to prompt its development.

Acceptability of live attenuated influenza vaccine by vaccine providers in Quebec, Canada

A live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) was offered during the 2012-13 influenza season in Quebec, Canada, to children aged between 2 and 17 years with chronic medical conditions. Despite the offer, uptake of the vaccine was low. We assessed the perceptions and opinions about seasonal influenza vaccination and LAIV use among vaccine providers who participated in the 2012-13 campaign. More than 70% of them thought that LAIV was safe and effective and more than 90% considered that the vaccine was well-received by parents and healthcare professionals. According to respondents, the most frequent concerns of parents about LAIV were linked to vaccine efficacy. LAIV is well-accepted by vaccine providers involved in influenza vaccination clinics, but more information about the vaccine and the recommendations for its use are needed to increase vaccine uptake.

Vaccination against serogroup B Neisseria meningitidis: Perceptions and attitudes of parents

BACKGROUND

A vaccine against serogroup B Neisseria meningitidis, major cause of bacterial meningitis in children and adults, has recently been developed. In a context of an increasing parental mistrust against vaccinations, understanding the reason for their choices is crucial in order to improve immunization coverage. Our study aimed at evaluating parental attitudes and perceptions towards serogroup B meningococcal invasive disease vaccination.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted in different French independent-practice medical offices (general practitioners and paediatricians) and nurseries between May 1 and December 31, 2013, using a questionnaire distributed in electronic and paper forms to parents having at least one child between the ages of 2 months and 16 years old.

RESULTS

1270 parents were included, of whom 671 (52.8%) spontaneously stated to be in favour of this vaccination. Their choice was mainly justified by the severity of the disease (63.8%) and the desire to protect their child (51.7%). In multivariate analysis, the young age of parents (OR 0.949 per additional year; p<10(-3)), the history of vaccination against serogroup C meningococcal invasive diseases (OR 6.755; p<10(-3)), and the prior knowledge of the vaccine (OR 2.081; p=0.001) were associated with vaccination acceptance. The main reasons for refusal were the lack of hindsight on this new vaccine (50.6%) and the fear of side effects (45.5%). After objective information on the disease and the vaccine, only 6.3% of the entire responding population would refuse to consider vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

The spontaneous acceptance rate of vaccination against serogroup B meningococcal invasive disease is insufficient. However, after objective information by their physician or public health authorities, only a few parents would in the end be completely resistant.