Dataset Information

A rapid evidence appraisal of influenza vaccination in health workers: An important policy in an area of imperfect evidence.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The World Health Organization recommends vaccination of health workers (HWs) against influenza, but low uptake is intransigent.We conducted a Rapid Evidence Appraisal on: the risk of influenza in HWs, transmission risk from HWs to patients, the benefit of HW vaccination, and strategies for improving uptake. We aimed to capture a 'whole-of-system' perspective to consider possible benefits for HWs, employers and patients.

Methods

We executed a comprehensive search of the available literature published from 2006 to 2018 in the English language. We developed search terms for seven separate questions following the PICO framework (population, intervention, comparators, outcomes) and queried nine databases.

Results

Of 3784 publications identified, 52 met inclusion criteria. Seven addressed HW influenza risk, of which four found increased risk; 15 addressed influenza vaccine benefit to HWs or their employers, of which 10 found benefit; 11 addressed influenza transmission from HWs to patients, of which 6 found evidence for transmission; 12 unique studies addressed whether vaccinating HWs produced patient benefit, of which 9 concluded benefits accrued. Regarding the number of HWs needed to vaccinate (NNV) to deliver patient benefit, NNV estimates ranged from 3 to 36,000 but were in significant disagreement. Fourteen studies provided insights on strategies to improve uptake; the strongest evidence was for mandatory vaccination.

Conclusions

The evidence on most questions related to influenza vaccination in HWs is mixed and often of low-quality. Substantial heterogeneity exists in terms of study designs and settings, making comparison between studies difficult. Notwithstanding these limitations, a majority of studies suggests that influenza vaccination benefit HWs and their employers; and HWs are implicated in transmission events. The effects of vaccinating HWs on patient morbidity and mortality may include reductions in all-cause mortality and influenza-like illness (ILI). Taken together, the evidence suggests that HW vaccination is an important policy for HWs themselves, their employers, and their patients.

SUBMITTER: Jenkin DC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6668237 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A rapid evidence appraisal of influenza vaccination in health workers: An important policy in an area of imperfect evidence.

Jenkin Dawn C DC Mahgoub Hamid H Morales Kathleen F KF Lambach Philipp P Nguyen-Van-Tam Jonathan S JS

Vaccine: X 20190711

<h4>Introduction</h4>The World Health Organization recommends vaccination of health workers (HWs) against influenza, but low uptake is intransigent.We conducted a <i>Rapid Evidence Appraisal</i> on: the risk of influenza in HWs, transmission risk from HWs to patients, the benefit of HW vaccination, and strategies for improving uptake. We aimed to capture a 'whole-of-system' perspective to consider possible benefits for HWs, employers and patients.<h4>Methods</h4>We executed a comprehensive searc ...[more]

PMID: 31384750

Similar Datasets

Project description:Influenza imposes a significant burden worldwide from the healthcare and socio-economic standpoints. This is also due to suboptimal vaccination coverage among the target population, even though immunization is recommended since many years and still remains the fundamental tool for its prevention. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of exposure to respiratory pathogens compared with the general population, including flu, with potential threat for their health and for patients' safety. Nevertheless, despite recommendation for immunization of this work-category in most of Western Countries, inadequate flu vaccine uptake is reported during the last decade in the European area. According to recent systematic reviews on this topic, the main determinants of vaccine acceptance among HCWs have been largely investigated and include desire for self-protection and to protect family rather than absolute disease risk or desire to protect patients, among the main drivers. On the other hand, concerns regarding safety of the vaccines resulted in decreased vaccine uptake. Moreover, influenza vaccine hesitancy among HCWs was also associated with several issues such as low risk perception, denial of the social benefit of influenza vaccination, low social pressure, lack of perceived behavioral control, negative attitude toward vaccines, not having been previously vaccinated against influenza, not having previously had influenza, lack of adequate influenza-specific knowledge, lack of access to vaccination facilities, and socio-demographic variables. The topic of influenza vaccination among HCWs is challenging, full of ethical issues. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of interventions for improving vaccine uptake among HCWs found that combined strategies were more effective than isolate approaches. Mandatory policies are currently under debate in several countries. High quality studies would help policy-makers and stake-holders to shape evidence-based initiatives and programs to improve the control of influenza.

Project description:BackgroundFour cluster randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) conducted in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) have reported reductions in patient risk through increased healthcare worker (HCW) influenza vaccination. This evidence has led to expansive policies of enforcement that include all staff of acute care hospitals and other healthcare settings beyond LTCFs. We critique and quantify the cRCT evidence for indirect patient benefit underpinning policies of mandatory HCW influenza vaccination.MethodsPlausibility of the four cRCT findings attributing indirect patient benefits to HCW influenza vaccination was assessed by comparing percentage reductions in patient risk reported by the cRCTs to predicted values. Plausibly predicted values were derived according to the basic mathematical principle of dilution, taking into account HCW influenza vaccine coverage and the specificity of patient outcomes for influenza. Accordingly, predicted values were calculated as a function of relevant compound probabilities including vaccine efficacy (ranging 40-60% in HCWs and favourably assuming the same indirect protection conferred through them to patients) × change in proportionate HCW influenza vaccine coverage (as reported by each cRCT) × percentage of a given patient outcome (e.g. influenza-like illness (ILI) or all-cause mortality) plausibly due to influenza virus. The number needed to vaccinate (NNV) for HCWs to indirectly prevent patient death was recalibrated based on real patient data of hospital-acquired influenza, with adjustment for potential under-detection (5.2-fold), and using favourable assumptions of HCW-attributable risk (ranging 60-80%).ResultsIn attributing patient benefit to increased HCW influenza vaccine coverage, each cRCT was found to violate the basic mathematical principle of dilution by reporting greater percentage reductions with less influenza-specific patient outcomes (i.e., all-cause mortality > ILI > laboratory-confirmed influenza) and/or patient mortality reductions exceeding even favourably-derived predicted values by at least 6- to 15-fold. If extrapolated to all LTCF and hospital staff in the United States, the prior cRCT-claimed NNV of 8 would implausibly mean >200,000 and >675,000 patient deaths, respectively, could be prevented annually by HCW influenza vaccination, inconceivably exceeding total US population mortality estimates due to seasonal influenza each year, or during the 1918 pandemic, respectively. More realistic recalibration based on actual patient data instead shows that at least 6000 to 32,000 hospital workers would need to be vaccinated before a single patient death could potentially be averted.ConclusionsThe four cRCTs underpinning policies of enforced HCW influenza vaccination attribute implausibly large reductions in patient risk to HCW vaccination, casting serious doubts on their validity. The impression that unvaccinated HCWs place their patients at great influenza peril is exaggerated. Instead, the HCW-attributable risk and vaccine-preventable fraction both remain unknown and the NNV to achieve patient benefit still requires better understanding. Although current scientific data are inadequate to support the ethical implementation of enforced HCW influenza vaccination, they do not refute approaches to support voluntary vaccination or other more broadly protective practices, such as staying home or masking when acutely ill.

Dataset Information

A rapid evidence appraisal of influenza vaccination in health workers: An important policy in an area of imperfect evidence.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A rapid evidence appraisal of influenza vaccination in health workers: An important policy in an area of imperfect evidence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure