Project description:Compared with individuals unvaccinated in the current and three previous influenza seasons, in 2021/22, influenza vaccine effectiveness at primary care level was 37% (95% CI: 16 to 52) for current season vaccination, regardless of previous doses, and 35% (95% CI: -3 to 45) for only previous seasons vaccination. Against influenza A(H3N2), estimates were 39% (95% CI: 16 to 55) and 24% (95% CI: -8 to 47) suggesting moderate effectiveness of current season vaccination and possible remaining effect of prior vaccinations.
Project description:BackgroundAlthough vaccination can be a useful tool for control of avian influenza epidemics, it might engender emergence of a vaccine-resistant strain. Field and experimental studies show that some avian influenza strains acquire resistance ability against vaccination. We investigated, in the context of the emergence of a vaccine-resistant strain, whether a vaccination program can prevent the spread of infectious disease. We also investigated how losses from immunization by vaccination imposed by the resistant strain affect the spread of the disease.Methods and findingsWe designed and analyzed a deterministic compartment model illustrating transmission of vaccine-sensitive and vaccine-resistant strains during a vaccination program. We investigated how the loss of protection effectiveness impacts the program. Results show that a vaccination to prevent the spread of disease can instead spread the disease when the resistant strain is less virulent than the sensitive strain. If the loss is high, the program does not prevent the spread of the resistant strain despite a large prevalence rate of the program. The epidemic's final size can be larger than that before the vaccination program. We propose how to use poor vaccines, which have a large loss, to maximize program effects and describe various program risks, which can be estimated using available epidemiological data.ConclusionsWe presented clear and simple concepts to elucidate vaccination program guidelines to avoid negative program effects. Using our theory, monitoring the virulence of the resistant strain and investigating the loss caused by the resistant strain better development of vaccination strategies is possible.
Project description:IntroductionThe purpose of TheShinISS-Vax|Flu study is to examine the association between influenza vaccines and adverse events requiring hospital admission or emergency care during the influenza vaccination campaigns 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 in Italy.Methods and analysisThis is a Self-Controlled Case Series multiregional study using linked routinely collected data from regional healthcare databases of the participating regions. Study participants will be persons aged ≥6 months, unvaccinated or who have received influenza vaccine during the influenza vaccination campaigns in the seasons 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 in Italy and who have experienced the outcome of interest for the first time during the study period (1 September 2021-30 June 2022 and 1 September 2022-30 June 2023 for the first and second vaccination campaigns, respectively). Risk periods will be specifically defined for each outcome and further subdivided into periods of 7 days. The exposures will be the first or second dose of the influenza vaccines administered during the two vaccination campaigns. Statistical analysis will be conducted separately for the data of the two campaigns. Exposure risk period will be compared with baseline risk period defined as any time of observation out of the risk periods. The modified SCCS method will be applied to handle event-dependent exposure and mortality and fitted using unbiased estimating equations to estimate relative incidences and excess of cases per 100 000 vaccinated by dose, age, sex and type of vaccine. Calendar period will be included as time-varying confounder in the model, where appropriate.Ethics and disseminationThe study received the approval from the National ethics committee for clinical trials of public research bodies and other national public institutions (PRE BIO CE n.0036723, 23/09/2022). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and reports in accordance with the publication policies of the Italian National Institute of Health and of the Italian Medicines Agency.
Project description:To assess influenza vaccine uptake during the 2020/2021 flu season and compare it with that of the 2019/2020 flu season among respondents to the second phase of the web-based EPICOVID-19 survey, we performed an observational web-based nationwide online survey (January-February 2021) in which respondents to the first survey (April-June 2020) were contacted and asked to complete a second questionnaire. Factors associated with vaccine uptake in the 2020/2021 flu season were assessed by applying a multivariable multinomial logistic regression model. Out of the 198,822 respondents to the first survey, 41,473 (20.9%) agreed to fill out the follow-up questionnaire; of these, 8339 (20.1%) were vaccinated only during the 2020/2021 season, 8828 (21.3%) were vaccinated during both seasons and 22,710 (54.8%) were vaccinated in neither season. Educational level (medium (aOR 1.33 95%CI 1.13-1.56) and high (aOR 1.69 95%CI 1.44-1.97) vs. low) and socio-economic deprivation according to SES scoring (1 point aOR 0.83 (95%CI 0.78-0.89), 2 aOR 0.68 (95%CI 0.60-0.77) points or ≥3 points aOR 0.42 (95%CI 0.28-0.45) vs. 0 points) were found to be associated with flu vaccine uptake. Our study shows that social determinants seemed to affect flu vaccination uptake and identifies specific categories of the population to target during future influenza vaccination campaigns.
Project description:The aim of this work is to evaluate the attitudes, behaviours, and knowledge of health workers employed at an Italian University Hospital on the topic of vaccinations and in regard to flu vaccination. To this end, the study provided for the articulation of a computerised questionnaire on the digital platform EUSurvey which was administered online via e-mail to a sample of 457 health workers, in the period between November 2018 and March 2019. The data were subjected to descriptive and inferential statistical analysis. In particular, a logistic regression analysis was carried out in order to evaluate the relationship between the variables collected and the dichotomous outcome (vaccinated/unvaccinated subjects in the 2018-2019 season). The results, in line with what has been reported by the literature, highlighted that vaccine hesitancy is prevalent also among health workers. Furthermore, according to our study, only 30.6% of the health care workers had the flu vaccination. The survey points out the need to plan educational and informative interventions aimed at changing the attitudes, behaviours, and knowledge of health workers in the field of flu vaccination, for the purpose of protecting the health of healthcare personnel and their patients.
Project description:In the United States, influenza vaccines are an important part of public health efforts to blunt the effects of seasonal influenza epidemics. This in turn emphasizes the importance of understanding the spatial distribution of influenza vaccination coverage. Despite this, high quality data at a fine spatial scale and spanning a multitude of recent flu seasons are not readily available. To address this gap, we develop county-level counts of vaccination across five recent, consecutive flu seasons and fit a series of regression models to these data that account for bias. We find that the spatial distribution of our bias-corrected vaccination coverage estimates is generally consistent from season to season, with the highest coverage in the Northeast and Midwest but is spatially heterogeneous within states. We also observe a negative relationship between a county's vaccination coverage and social vulnerability. Our findings stress the importance of quantifying flu vaccination coverage at a fine spatial scale, as relying on state or region-level estimates misses key heterogeneities.
Project description:We analyze the effects of a vaccination program providing free flu vaccine to individuals aged 65 or more on take-up behavior and hospitalization. Using both administrative and survey data, we implement a regression discontinuity design around the threshold at age 65, and find that the effect of the program on take-up ranges between 70% and 90% of the average vaccination rate for individuals aged less than 65. We show that this effect is not entirely driven by an income channel, but also depends on the expected benefits of vaccination. The results on health outcomes provide suggestive evidence that the program reduces the likelihood of emergency hospitalization.
Project description:Flu vaccination is effective for preventing infection, but coverage levels in the USA remain low-especially among racial/ethnic minorities. This study examines factors associated with flu vaccination in a predominantly Hispanic community in Manhattan, New York.Households were recruited during the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 flu seasons. Primary household respondents were interviewed to determine knowledge of flu transmission/treatment and vaccination status and demographic information for all household members.Vaccination coverage was 47.3% among children <5, 39.3% among 5-17-year-olds, 15.3% among 18-49-year-olds, 31.0% among 50-64-year-olds and 37.1% among adults ?65 in year 1; and 53.1% among children <5, 43.6% among 5-17-year-olds, 19.5% among 18-49-year-olds, 34.1% among 50-64-year-olds and 34.3% among adults ?65 in year 2. For children, younger age, having a chronic respiratory condition (eg, asthma), and greater primary respondent knowledge of flu were positively associated with vaccination. Among adults, female gender, older age, higher education, greater primary respondent knowledge of flu, having been born in the USA and having a chronic respiratory condition were positively associated with vaccination. The most common reasons cited for not being vaccinated were the beliefs that flu vaccination was unnecessary or ineffective.Possible methods for increasing vaccination levels in urban Hispanic communities include improving health literacy, making low-cost vaccination available and encouraging providers to use other office visits as opportunities to mention vaccination to patients.This study is registered at http://ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00448981).
Project description:BackgroundSurveys of older adults' knowledge relative to flu immunization have highlighted its relevance in the improvement of vaccination coverage. The purpose of this study was to estimate the proportion of older persons who have ever been immunized against seasonal flu in the municipality of Vračar (Belgrade, Serbia), assess their knowledge related to flu and flu vaccination, and to determine factors associated with flu immunization.MethodsIn the period November 2012-January 2013, 480 persons aged above 65 years were recruited at the Community Health Center, of which 354 persons were finally included in the study. Data were collected using a questionnaire. To assess the level of knowledge, correct answers were awarded 1 point. The total knowledge score ranged from 0 to 17 and was divided into three levels: poor (0-4 points), moderate (5-8 points), good (9-13 points), and excellent (14-17 points).ResultsThe proportion of ever vaccinated older persons was 47.7%. Of those, one third (29.1%) had been immunized regularly. Most seniors (61.9%) demonstrated good, whereas one third (29.8%) demonstrated excellent level of knowledge. In terms of reasons for non-compliance, the highest proportion of older persons declined vaccination because "they were in good health" (33.5%) and because "they did not believe that vaccine protects from flu" (31.5%). Independent predictors of being ever immunized against seasonal flu were having higher level of education, being more knowledgeable relative to flu vaccination, and taking more medications.ConclusionsOur results indicate that health care sector requires well-coordinated promotion campaigns to enhance acceptance of flu vaccination. Organized immunization counseling could provide accurate, evidence-based information in order to transform misbeliefs, prejudice, and negative attitude towards vaccination.