A prospective cohort study assessing the reactogenicity of pertussis and influenza vaccines administered during pregnancy |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Communicable Disease Control Directorate, Western Australia Department of Health, Shenton Park, Western Australia 6008, Australia;2. School of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6008, Australia;3. Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines & Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Subiaco, Western Australia 6008, Australia;4. School of Paediatrics and Child Health, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6008, Australia;5. Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, Subiaco, Western Australia 6008, Australia;1. Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, 3800 N. Interstate Ave., Portland, OR 97227, USA;2. Division of Research, Northern California Kaiser Permanente, 2000 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612, USA;3. Abt Associates, 55 Wheeler Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA;4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd., Atlanta, GA 30333, USA;1. School of Pediatrics and Reproductive Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, SA, Australia;2. Joanna Briggs Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, SA, Australia;3. Women''s and Children''s Hospital, 72 King William Road, North Adelaide 5006, SA, Australia;4. Vaccinology and Immunology Research Trials Unit (VIRTU), Women''s and Children''s Hospital and School of Pediatrics and Reproductive Health & Robinson Institute, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, SA, Australia;1. Pharmacy Department, Rotunda Hospital, Dublin 1, Ireland;2. School of Pharmacy, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin 2, Ireland;3. Pharmacy Department, Coombe Women and Infants University Hospital, Dublin 8, Ireland;4. Rotunda Hospital, Dublin 1, Ireland;5. Discipline of Paediatrics, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland;6. National Maternity Hospital, Dublin 2, Ireland;7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland;1. HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, United States;2. Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yale University, New Haven, United States;3. Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, United States;4. Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, United States;5. Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, United States;6. Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado and Department of Ambulatory Care Services, Denver Health, Denver, United States;7. Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute & Lee Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States;8. Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, United States;9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, United States;1. Department of Preventive Medicine and Epidemiology, Hospital Clínic – Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain;2. ISGlobal, Hospital Clínic – Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain;3. Department of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, BCNatal – Barcelona Center of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, Hospital Clínic and Hospital Sant Joan de Déu, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain;4. Department of Microbiology, Hospital Clinic-IDIBAPS, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain |
| |
| Abstract: | ![]()
BackgroundPertussis vaccination during pregnancy can prevent 91% of infant infections. In 2015, antenatal pertussis vaccination programs were introduced across Australia.MethodsTo monitor the safety of this program, pregnant women who received trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) and/or diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccine (dTpa) were surveyed by text message seven days post-vaccination about possible adverse events following immunization (AEFI). Univariate logistic regression models were used to calculate the odds of reporting an AEFI following dTpa compared to TIV. Similar analyses were used to compare AEFI reported by women who received a previous dose of dTpa in 2011/2012 as part of a state-wide cocooning program.ResultsOf 5155 women, 4347 (84.3%) replied; 10.8% indicated they experienced an AEFI. There was no difference in the proportion of women who reported any reaction by vaccine; however, women who received dTpa were more likely to report a local reaction than women who received TIV (7.1% and 3.2%, respectively; OR: 2.29; 95% CI: 1.61–3.26). There was evidence suggesting local reactions were more common among women with a previous dose of dTpa (11.4%) compared to women with no previous dose (6.0%; OR: 2.00; 95% CI: 0.95–4.25); 11 (0.3%) women reported attending a hospital emergency department. Subsequent follow-up indicated symptoms resolved and mother and infant were healthy. There was no difference in the proportion of women attending hospital by vaccine (p > 0.05).DiscussionData on systemic and local reactions following receipt of TIV and dTpa during pregnancy support the safety of antenatal vaccination. |
| |
| Keywords: | Pregnancy Seasonal influenza vaccine Pertussis vaccine Safety Adverse events |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
