Value of inventory information in allocating a limited supply of influenza vaccine during a pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To understand the value of information on vaccine inventory levels during an influenza pandemic, we propose a simulation study to compare vaccine allocation strategies using: (i) only population information (pro-rata, or population-based, PB), (ii) both population and vaccine inventory information (population and inventory-based, PIB).Methods
We adapt an agent-based simulation model to predict the spread of the disease both geographically and temporally. We study PB and PIB when uptake rates vary geographically. The simulation study is done from 2015 to 2017, using population and commuting data from the state of Georgia from the United States census.Findings
Compared to PB under reasonable scenarios, PIB reduces the infection attack rate from 23.4% to 22.4%, decreases the amount of leftover inventory from 827 to 152 thousand, and maintains or increases the percentage of vaccinated population.Conclusions
Our results indicate the need for greater vaccine inventory visibility in public health supply chains, especially when supply is limited, and uptake rates vary geographically. Such visibility has a potential to decrease the number of infections, help identify locations with low uptake rates and to motivate public awareness efforts.
SUBMITTER: Li Z
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6201932 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND: Public adherence to influenza vaccination recommendations has been low, particularly among younger adults and children under 2, despite the availability of safe and effective seasonal vaccine. Intention to receive 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) vaccine has been estimated to be 50% in select populations. This report measures knowledge of and intention to receive pandemic vaccine in a population-based setting, including target groups for seasonal and H1N1 influenza. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: On August 28-29, 2009, we conducted a population-based survey in 2 counties in North Carolina. The survey used the 30x7 two-stage cluster sampling methodology to identify 210 target households. Prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated. Knowledge of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) vaccine was high, with 165 (80%) aware that a vaccine was being prepared. A total of 133 (64%) respondents intended to receive pandemic vaccine, 134 (64%) intended to receive seasonal vaccine, and 109 (53%) intended to receive both. Reporting great concern about H1N1 infection (PR 1.55; 95%CI: 1.30, 1.85), receiving seasonal influenza vaccine in 2008-09 (PR 1.47; 95%CI: 1.18, 1.82), and intending to receive seasonal influenza vaccine in 2009-10 (PR 1.27; 95%CI: 1.14, 1.42) were associated with intention to receive pandemic vaccine. Not associated were knowledge of vaccine, employment, having children under age 18, gender, race/ethnicity and age. Reasons cited for not intending to get vaccinated include not being at risk for infection, concerns about vaccine side effects and belief that illness caused by pandemic H1N1 would be mild. Forty-five percent of households with children under 18 and 65% of working adults reported ability to comply with self-isolation at home for 7-10 days if recommended by authorities. CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first report of a population based rapid assessment used to assess knowledge and intent to receive pandemic vaccine in a community sample. Intention to receive pandemic and seasonal vaccines was higher than previously published reports. To reach persons not intending to receive pandemic vaccine, public health communications should focus on the perceived risk of infection and concerns about vaccine safety.
| S-EPMC2887902 | biostudies-other
Project description:The 1918 influenza A virus caused the most devastating pandemic, killing approximately 50 million people worldwide. Immunization with 1918-like and classical swine H1N1 virus vaccines results in cross-protective antibodies against the 2009 H1N1 pandemic influenza, indicating antigenic similarities among these viruses. In this study, we demonstrate that vaccination with the 2009 pandemic H1N1 vaccine elicits 1918 virus cross-protective antibodies in mice and humans, and that vaccination or passive transfer of human-positive sera reduced morbidity and conferred full protection from lethal challenge with the 1918 virus in mice. The spread of the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus in the population worldwide, in addition to the large number of individuals already vaccinated, suggests that a large proportion of the population now have cross-protective antibodies against the 1918 virus, greatly alleviating concerns and fears regarding the accidental exposure/release of the 1918 virus from the laboratory and the use of the virus as a bioterrorist agent.
| S-EPMC2964451 | biostudies-other
Project description:Amidst a pandemic, operators of emergency medical service (EMS) systems aim at upholding service at sufficiently low response times while reducing the infection probability of their personnel. Designating ambulances to serve only infected patients and suspected cases may reduce the outage probabilities of ambulances and consequently the response times of the EMS. We investigate the benefits that EMS personnel and patients can gain from such a split. As a solution method to quantify these benefits, we apply a two-stage approach. First, we run a first-stage optimization model to pre-select ambulance splits with the highest emergency call coverage. Second, we solve the approximate Hypercube Queuing Model (AHQM) to evaluate the performance of the pre-selected ambulance splits at the second stage. We contribute to the existing literature by including multiple incident categories and outages of ambulances in the AHQM and combining it with the first-stage optimization model. Further, we conduct a case study for the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic to draw conclusions on the benefits of splitting. We observe that an ambulance split would not reduce the average response time for the examined data set since the Covid-related call volume in Munich and the infection probability are too low. However, a sensitivity analysis shows that long isolation times and high infection probabilities make an ambulance split beneficial for patients and EMS personnel, as an ambulance split reduces the average response time without significantly increasing the mean infection probability for EMS personnel.
| S-EPMC8638217 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundManaging emerging vaccine safety signals during an influenza pandemic is challenging. Federal regulators must balance vaccine risks against benefits while maintaining public confidence in the public health system.MethodsWe developed a multi-criteria decision analysis model to explore regulatory decision-making in the context of emerging vaccine safety signals during a pandemic. We simulated vaccine safety surveillance system capabilities and used an age-structured compartmental model to develop potential pandemic scenarios. We used an expert-derived multi-attribute utility function to evaluate potential regulatory responses by combining four outcome measures into a single measure of interest: 1) expected vaccination benefit from averted influenza; 2) expected vaccination risk from vaccine-associated febrile seizures; 3) expected vaccination risk from vaccine-associated Guillain-Barre Syndrome; and 4) expected change in vaccine-seeking behavior in future influenza seasons.ResultsOver multiple scenarios, risk communication, with or without suspension of vaccination of high-risk persons, were the consistently preferred regulatory responses over no action or general suspension when safety signals were detected during a pandemic influenza. On average, the expert panel valued near-term vaccine-related outcomes relative to long-term projected outcomes by 3:1. However, when decision-makers had minimal ability to influence near-term outcomes, the response was selected primarily by projected impacts on future vaccine-seeking behavior.ConclusionsThe selected regulatory response depends on how quickly a vaccine safety signal is identified relative to the peak of the pandemic and the initiation of vaccination. Our analysis suggested two areas for future investment: efforts to improve the size and timeliness of the surveillance system and behavioral research to understand changes in vaccine-seeking behavior.
| S-EPMC4275236 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Test-negative (TN) studies have become the most widely used study design for the estimation of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) and are easily incorporated into existing influenza surveillance networks. We seek to determine the bias of TN-based VE estimates during a pandemic using a dynamic probability model. The model is used to evaluate and compare the bias of VE estimates under various sources of bias when vaccination occurs after the beginning of an outbreak, such as during a pandemic. The model includes two covariates (health status and health awareness), which may affect the probabilities of vaccination, developing influenza and non-influenza acute respiratory illness (ARI), and seeking medical care. Specifically, we evaluate the bias of VE estimates when (1) vaccination affects the probability of developing a non-influenza ARI; (2) vaccination affects the probability of seeking medical care; (3) a covariate (e.g. health status) is related to both the probabilities of vaccination and developing an ARI; and (4) a covariate (e.g. health awareness) is related to both the probabilities of vaccination and of seeking medical care. We considered two outcomes against which the vaccine is supposed to protect: symptomatic influenza and medically-attended influenza. When vaccination begins during an outbreak, we found that the effect of delayed onset of vaccination is unpredictable. VE estimates from TN studies were biased regardless of the source of bias present. However, if the core assumption of the TN design is satisfied, that is, if vaccination does not affect the probability of non-influenza ARI, then TN-based VE estimates against medically-attended influenza will only suffer from small (<0.05) to moderate bias (≥0.05 and <0.10). These results suggest that if sources of bias listed above are ruled out, TN studies are a valid study design for the estimation of VE during a pandemic.
| S-EPMC6449847 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Initial supply of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccine may be limited, necessitating its effective use. Herein, an age-structured model of COVID-19 spread in South Korea is parameterized to understand the epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19. The model determines optimal vaccine allocation for minimizing infections, deaths, and years of life lost while accounting for population factors, such as country-specific age distribution and contact structure, and various levels of vaccine efficacy. A transmission-blocking vaccine should be prioritized in adults aged 20-49 years and those older than 50 years to minimize the cumulative incidence and mortality, respectively. A strategy to minimize years of life lost involves the vaccination of adults aged 40-69 years, reflecting the relatively high case-fatality rates and years of life lost in this age group. An incidence-minimizing vaccination strategy is highly sensitive to vaccine efficacy, and vaccines with lower efficacy should be administered to teenagers and adults aged 50-59 years. Consideration of age-specific contact rates and vaccine efficacy is critical to optimize vaccine allocation. New recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines under consideration by the Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are mainly based on a mortality-minimizing allocation strategy.
| S-EPMC7914460 | biostudies-literature
Project description:More than 15 years after the first human cases of influenza A/H5N1 in Hong Kong, the world remains at risk for an H5N1 pandemic. Preparedness activities have focused on antiviral stockpiling and distribution, development of a human H5N1 vaccine, operationalizing screening and social distancing policies, and other non-pharmaceutical interventions. The planning of these interventions has been done in an attempt to lessen the cumulative mortality resulting from a hypothetical H5N1 pandemic. In this theoretical study, we consider the natural limitations on an H5N1 pandemic's mortality imposed by the virus' epidemiological-evolutionary constraints. Evolutionary theory dictates that pathogens should evolve to be relatively benign, depending on the magnitude of the correlation between a pathogen's virulence and its transmissibility. Because the case fatality of H5N1 infections in humans is currently 60 per cent, it is doubtful that the current viruses are close to their evolutionary optimum for transmission among humans. To describe the dynamics of virulence evolution during an H5N1 pandemic, we build a mathematical model based on the patterns of clinical progression in past H5N1 cases. Using both a deterministic model and a stochastic individual-based simulation, we describe (i) the drivers of evolutionary dynamics during an H5N1 pandemic, (ii) the range of case fatalities for which H5N1 viruses can successfully cause outbreaks in humans, and (iii) the effects of different kinds of social distancing on virulence evolution. We discuss two main epidemiological-evolutionary features of this system (i) the delaying or slowing of an epidemic which results in a majority of hosts experiencing an attenuated virulence phenotype and (ii) the strong evolutionary pressure for lower virulence experienced by the virus during a period of intense social distancing.
| S-EPMC3675429 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAlthough total influenza vaccine doses available in the 2005/2006 influenza season were over 80 million, CDC received many reports of delayed and diminished vaccine shipments in October to November of 2005. To better understand the supply problems, CDC and partners surveyed several health care professional groups.MethodsSurveys were sent to representative samples of influenza vaccine providers including pediatricians, internists, federally qualified health centers, visiting nurse organizations, and all 64 state and other health departments receiving federal immunization funds directly. In November and December, 2005, providers were asked questions about their experience in ordering influenza vaccine, sources where orders were placed, proportion of orders received, and referral of patients to other vaccination sites.ResultsThe number of providers surveyed (median: 154; range: 64-308) and response rates (median: 62%; range: 51%-77%) varied among groups. Less than half of the providers in most groups placed a single order that was accepted (median: 31%; range: 8%-53%), and most placed multiple orders. Only 57% of federally qualified health centers and 60% of internists reported they received at least 40% of their orders by the middle of December; the other provider groups received a greater proportion of their orders. Most internists (80%) and federally qualified health centers (54%) reported that they had referred priority group patients to other locations to receive the influenza vaccine due to inadequate supplies. Vaccine providers who ordered only from Chiron received a lower proportion of their orders than providers that ordered from another source or ordered from multiple sources.ConclusionMost of the providers surveyed received only part of their orders by the middle of December. Disruptions in receipt of influenza vaccine during the fall of 2005 were due primarily to shortfalls in vaccine from Chiron and also due to delays and partial shipments from other distributors.
| S-EPMC1871587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Because many Aboriginal Canadians had severe cases of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza, they were given priority access to vaccine. However, it was not known if the single recommended dose would adequately protect people at high risk, prompting our study to assess responses to the vaccine among Aboriginal Canadians.We enrolled First Nations and Métis adults aged 20-59 years in our prospective cohort study. Participants were given one 0.5-mL dose of ASO3-adjuvanted pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccine (Arepanrix, GlaxoSmithKline Canada). Blood samples were taken at baseline and 21-28 days after vaccination. Paired sera were tested for hemagglutination-inhibiting antibodies at a reference laboratory. To assess vaccine safety, we monitored the injection site symptoms of each participant for seven days. We also monitored patients for general symptoms within 7 days of vaccination and any use of the health care system for 21-28 days after vaccination.We enrolled 138 participants in the study (95 First Nations, 43 Métis), 137 of whom provided all safety data and 136 of whom provided both blood samples. First Nations and Métis participants had similar characteristics, including high rates of chronic health conditions (74.4%-76.8%). Pre-existing antibody to the virus was detected in 34.3% of the participants, all of whom boosted strongly with vaccination (seroprotection rate [titre ? 40] 100%, geometric mean titre 531-667). Participants with no pre-existing antibody also responded well. Fifty-eight of 59 (98.3%) First Nations participants showed seroprotection and a geometric mean titre of 353.6; all 30 Métis participants with no pre-existing antibody showed seroprotection and a geometric mean titre of 376.2. Pain at the injection site and general symptoms frequently occurred but were short-lived and generally not severe, although three participants (2.2%) sought medical attention for general symptoms.First Nations and Métis adults responded robustly to ASO3-adjuvanted pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccine. Virtually all participants showed protective titres, including those with chronic health conditions.
| S-EPMC3176866 | biostudies-other
Project description:Published series on COVID-19 support the notion that patients with cancer are a particularly vulnerable population. There is a confluence of risk factors between cancer and COVID-19, and cancer care and treatments increase exposure to the virus and may dampen natural immune responses. The available evidence supports the conclusion that patients with cancer, in particular with hematologic malignancies, should be considered among the very high-risk groups for priority COVID-19 vaccination.
| S-EPMC8053003 | biostudies-literature