Dataset Information

Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines in Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of influenza vaccination in persons with asthma and its impact on asthma outcomes, which may contribute to the suboptimal vaccination rates in persons with asthma. This systematic review and meta-analysis involved searching 12 international databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and high-quality quasi-experimental and epidemiological studies (1970-2016). The risk of bias was low for 3 included RCTs. The quality of 3 included observational studies was moderate. The quality of evidence was very low for all study outcomes. Pooled vaccine effectiveness in 1825 persons with asthma from 2 test-negative design case-control studies was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 31%-56%) for laboratory-confirmed influenza. Pooled efficacy of live vaccines in reducing influenza was 81% (95% CI, 33%- 94%). Live vaccine reduced febrile illness by 72% (95% CI, 20%-90%). Influenza vaccine prevented 59%-78% of asthma attacks leading to emergency visits and/or hospitalizations. For persons with asthma, influenza vaccination may be effective in both reducing influenza infection and asthma attacks.

SUBMITTER: Vasileiou E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5850022 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines in Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Vasileiou Eleftheria E Sheikh Aziz A Butler Chris C El Ferkh Karim K von Wissmann Beatrix B McMenamin Jim J Ritchie Lewis L Schwarze Jürgen J Papadopoulos Nikolaos G NG Johnston Sebastian L SL Tian Lilly L Simpson Colin R CR

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 20171001 8

There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of influenza vaccination in persons with asthma and its impact on asthma outcomes, which may contribute to the suboptimal vaccination rates in persons with asthma. This systematic review and meta-analysis involved searching 12 international databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and high-quality quasi-experimental and epidemiological studies (1970-2016). The risk of bias was low for 3 included RCTs. The quality of 3 included observational s ...[more]

PMID: 28591866

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Patients with liver disease frequently require hospitalisation with infection often the trigger. Influenza vaccination is an effective infection prevention strategy in healthy and elderly but is often perceived less beneficial in patients with liver disease. We investigated whether influenza vaccination triggered serological response and prevented hospitalisation and death in liver disease. DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and CENTRAL up to January 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:Randomised or observational studies of the effects of influenza vaccine in adults with liver disease. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Two reviewers screened studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and quality of evidence. Primary outcomes were all-cause hospitalisation and mortality. Secondary outcomes were cause-specific hospitalisation and mortality, and serological vaccine response. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate pooled effects of vaccination. RESULTS:We found 10 041 unique records, 286 were eligible for full-text review and 12 were included. Most patients had viral liver disease. All studies were of very low quality. Liver patients both with and without cirrhosis mounted an antibody response to influenza vaccination, and vaccination was associated with a reduction in risk of hospital admission from 205/1000 to 149/1000 (risk difference -0.06, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.04) in patients with viral liver disease. Vaccinated patients were 27% less likely to be admitted to hospital compared with unvaccinated patients (risk ratio 0.73, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.80). No effect against all-cause or cause-specific mortality or cause-specific hospitalisation was found. CONCLUSIONS:The low quantity and quality of the evidence means that the protective vaccine effect may be uncertain. Considering the high risk of serious health outcomes from influenza infection in patients with liver disease and the safety and low cost of vaccination, overall, the potential benefits of seasonal vaccination both to patients and the healthcare systems are likely to outweigh the costs and risks associated with vaccination. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017067277.

Project description:Rotavirus was the leading cause of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in infants and young children prior to the introduction of routine vaccination. Since 2006 there have been two licensed vaccines available; with successful clinical trials leading the World Health Organization to recommend rotavirus vaccination for all children worldwide. In order to inform immunisation policy we have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observation studies to assess population effectiveness against acute gastroenteritis.We systematically searched PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Cinhal and Academic Search Premier and grey literature sources for studies published between January 2006 and April 2014. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were observational measuring population effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination against health care attendances for rotavirus gastroenteritis or AGE. To evaluate study quality we use used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-randomised studies, categorising studies by risk of bias. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. If two or more studies reported a measure of vaccine effectiveness (VE), we conducted a random effects meta-analysis. We stratified analyses by World Bank country income level and used study quality in sensitivity analyses.We identified 30 studies, 19 were from high-income countries and 11 from middle-income countries. Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization for laboratory confirmed rotavirus gastroenteritis was highest in high-income countries (89% VE; 95% CI 84-92%) compared to middle-income countries (74% VE; 95% CI 67-80%). Vaccine effectiveness was higher for those receiving the complete vaccine schedule (81% VE; 95% CI 75-86%) compared to partial schedule (62% VE; 95% CI 55-69%). Two studies from high-income countries measured VE against community consultations for AGE with a pooled estimate of 40% (95% CI 13-58%; 2 studies).We found strong evidence to further support the continued use of rotavirus vaccines. Vaccine effectiveness was similar to that reported in clinical trials for both high and middle-income countries. There is limited data from Low income settings at present. There was lower effectiveness against milder disease. Further studies, should continue to report effectiveness against AGE and less-severe rotavirus disease because as evidenced by pre-vaccine introduction studies this is likely to contribute the greatest burden on healthcare resources, particularly in high-income countries.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines in Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines in Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets