Vaccination against the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) among healthcare workers in the major teaching hospital of Sicily (Italy)

The aim of the study was to investigate factors involved in vaccination acceptance among healthcare workers (HCWs) and adverse reactions rates associated with pandemic influenza vaccination. The study was carried out in the major teaching hospital of Sicily from November 2009 to February 2010 on 2267 HCWs. A total of 407 (18%) HCWs were vaccinated against the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1). A logistic regression analysis indicates an increased risk of non-vaccination against pandemic influenza in females (OR = 1.6; 95% CI = 1.3-2.1) compared to males, in nurses/technicians/administrative workers (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.3-2.2) compared to doctors/biologists, and in HCWs who were non-vaccinated against seasonal influenza in 2008-2009 (OR = 4.9; 95% CI = 3.7-6.5) compared to vaccinated HCWs. Overall, 302 (74.2%) out of 407 questionnaires distributed to vaccinated HCWs were returned within the observation period. One hundred fifty-two workers (50.3%) experienced at least one adverse reaction (30.1%, local reactions; 6.6% systemic reactions and 13.6% both of them). The most frequent side effect of vaccination was pain at the injection site (43.4%). Twelve (3.9%) out of 302 HCWs stated they experienced influenza-like illness episodes during the follow-up period. The use of an adjuvanted vaccine against pandemic influenza A (H1N1) appears to be an effective and safe preventive strategy, showing a prevalence of both local and systemic adverse reactions not very different from that seen after vaccination with non-adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine. Despite this finding, vaccination coverage among HCWs remains very low, suggesting the need to implement educational campaigns directed to groups with lower coverage rates.     

Immunogenicity of inactivated 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine in pediatric liver transplant recipients

To assess the safety and immunogenicity of 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccination, 13 pediatric liver transplant recipients and 31 immunocompetent controls received inactivated influenza vaccine without adjuvant according to Japanese guidelines. Serious adverse events and acute allograft rejections were not observed in participants. Seroprotection rates (hemagglutinin-inhibition (HI) antibody titer ≥ 1:40) were 53.8% among recipients and 58.1% among controls (p = 0.797). Seroconversion rates (4-fold or more HI antibody rise) were 46.2% for the recipient group and 51.6% for the control group (p = 0.741). Geometric mean titers were elevated after vaccination in both groups. In comparison with the seasonal influenza vaccination, the seroconversion rate for 2009 H1N1 appeared to be higher than that for seasonal influenza antigens, and the seroprotection rate for 2009 H1N1 clearly increased after vaccination. These findings suggest that pediatric liver transplant patients may respond safely to inactivated 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines in a manner similar to immunocompetent children.     

Vaccination against pandemic influenza A/H1N1 among healthcare workers and reasons for refusing vaccination in Istanbul in last pandemic alert phase

Coverage of the HCWs as target population is one of the important determinants for the impact of vaccination. To determine the vaccination against the pandemic influenza A/H1N1 among HCWs, we conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey in a public hospital in Istanbul from December 7 to December 22, 2009. Out of total 941 HCWs 718 (76.3%) completed the questionnaires. Nearly one-fourth (23.1%) of the participants were vaccinated against pandemic influenza A/H1N1. Occupation (being a doctor), receiving seasonal influenza vaccine in 2009, agreement with safety of pandemic influenza A/H1N1 vaccine and being comprehend that HCWs have a professional responsibility for getting vaccinated was the strongest independent predictive factor for accepting the pandemic influenza A/H1N1 vaccine (p < .0001). The most frequent reasons for refusing pandemic vaccine were fear of side effects and doubts about vaccine efficacy. Among HCWs 59.6% were recommending pandemic influenza vaccination to a patient even if indicated. In conclusion vaccination against pandemic influenza A/H1N1 is insufficient among HCWs. Misinformed or inadequately informed HCWs are important barrier to pandemic influenza vaccine coverage of the general public also. Educational campaigns concerning HCWs should include evidence based and comprehensible information about possible adverse effects and their incidence besides the advantages of vaccine.     

Influenza vaccination among healthcare personnel after pandemic influenza H1N1

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the coverage rates for influenza vaccination among health-care personnel (HCP), and if the reasons for accepting influenza vaccine by HCP and the frequency of vaccine-related adverse events (AEs) in 2010-2011 were different compared to 2009-2010. The AEs were detected by telephoning the worker one week after the vaccination. The coverage for seasonal vaccination in 2009-2010 was 31.0%, whereas that for 2009 pandemic influenza (H1NI) was 22.2% and 24.4% (p < 0.05) in 2010-2011. The most frequent reason for being vaccinated during the three campaigns was to “protect my health”. Over 80.5% of the HCP reported 2009 pandemic influenza (H1N1) vaccine-related AEs compared to the 25.3% and 25.4% reporting seasonal vaccine-related AEs in 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 respectively (p < 0.05). None of the AEs were severe. Specific measures should be implemented in our country to recover and improve poor vaccination coverage.     

Workplace efforts to promote influenza vaccination among healthcare personnel and their association with uptake during the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1)

Background

Survey data suggest that, in a typical year, less than half U.S. healthcare personnel (HCP) are vaccinated for influenza. We measured workplace efforts to promote influenza vaccination among HCP in the U.S. and their association with seasonal and pandemic vaccination during the 2009-10 influenza season.

Methods

Self-reported survey data collected in June 2010 from eligible HCP (n = 1714) participating in a nationally representative, online research panel. HCP eligible for participation in the survey were those reporting as patient care providers and/or working in a healthcare setting. The survey measured workplace exposure to vaccination recommendations, vaccination requirements, on-site vaccination, reminders, and/or rewards, and being vaccinated for seasonal or H1N1 influenza.

Results

At least two-thirds of HCP were offered worksite influenza vaccination; about one half received reminders; and 10% were required to be vaccinated. Compared to HCP in other work settings, hospital employees were most (p < 0.001) likely to be the subject to efforts to promote vaccination. Vaccination requirements were associated with increases in seasonal and pandemic vaccination rates of between 31 and 49% points (p < 0.005). On-site vaccination was associated with increases in seasonal and pandemic vaccination of between 13 and 29% points (p < 0.05). Reminders and incentives were not associated with vaccination.

Conclusions

Our findings provide empirical support for vaccination requirements as a strategy for increasing influenza vaccination among HCP. Our findings also suggest that making influenza vaccination available to HCP at work could increase uptake and highlight the need to reach beyond hospitals in promoting vaccination among HCP.     

Acceptance of the 2009 A(H1N1) influenza vaccine among hospital workers in two French cancer centers

The aim of the study was to determine predictive factors influencing the acceptance of the 2009 A(H1N1) influenza vaccination among hospital workers (HW) in two French cancer centers. A standardized, anonymous, self-administered questionnaire was sent to HW of two cancer centers. The survey response rate was 26.2% (n = 506). Main reasons for A(H1N1) vaccination acceptance were “to protect my relatives” (30.3%), “to protect myself” (30.3%). Main reasons for A(H1N1) vaccination refusal were the fear of side effects (43.1%), doubt about the vaccine's efficacy (25.8%). Vaccinated HW were more influenced by the institutional campaign (p < 0.001) or colleagues’ advice (p < 0.001) whereas non-vaccinated HW were influenced by their family physician's advice (p = 0.03), personal conviction (p < 0.001) or the media (p < 0.001). A multivariate analysis revealed age (>35 vs ≤35), prior seasonal influenza vaccination, professional category and source of information to be predictive factors of vaccination. Future vaccination campaigns will need to focus on young HW (≤35-year old), with no prior influenza vaccination and HW who are in contact with patients and who reported low seasonal influenza vaccination rates.     

Predictors of acceptance of H1N1 influenza vaccination by FDNY firefighters and EMS workers

Background

There is a widely recognized need for vaccination of health care workers (HCWs). We undertook this study to assess the 2009-2010 H1N1 vaccination rates in ∼14,000 firefighters and emergency medical service (EMS) workers at the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) and to determine predictors of H1N1 vaccine acceptance.

Methods

After 9/11/01, FDNY developed a bio-preparedness drill where units are dispatched to FDNY-BIOPOD (biologic points of distributions) for rapid distribution of medications/vaccines in the event of a biological disaster. Since 2005, FDNY offers free, voluntary seasonal influenza vaccination during routine medical monitoring/treatment examinations and at FDNY-BIOPOD. In 2009, FDNY-BIOPOD instead offered the H1N1 vaccine. We report on FDNY H1N1 vaccination rates and on predictors of acceptance using bivariate and multivariable techniques.

Results

Overall, 10,612 (77%) FDNY workers were offered H1N1 vaccination, of whom 5831 (55%) accepted. Acceptance was 57.2% during FDNY-BIOPOD compared with 34.4% during medical monitoring/treatment exams (p = 0.0001). Workers who accepted prior seasonal influenza vaccinations were 4 times more likely to accept H1N1 vaccination (AOR = 4.4, CI₉₅ = 4.0-4.8).

Conclusion

FDNY offered H1N1 vaccination to 77% of its workforce during the 2009-2010 season. Prior seasonal vaccine acceptance and vaccination in a group setting such as FDNY-BIOPOD dramatically increased acceptance of the H1N1 vaccine. However, within a voluntary program, additional strategies are needed to further increase vaccine acceptance in first responders and other HCWs.     

High vaccination rates for seasonal and pandemic (A/H1N1) influenza among healthcare workers in Dutch general practice

In previous years, the influenza vaccination rate among Dutch general practitioners (GPs) was low (36% during the 2007/2008 season). Since 2008, yearly influenza vaccination has been actively recommended for GPs in The Netherlands. Moreover, in 2009 the Dutch government urged healthcare workers to receive additional vaccination against the pandemic influenza (A/H1N1). The effects of these recommendations are unknown. In February 2010, a questionnaire was mailed to random samples of GPs (n = 810) and GP-trainees (n = 300). Vaccination rates were determined and motives and barriers for vaccination were assessed. The response rates for GPs and GP-trainees were 83% and 90%, respectively. In total, 63% of the GPs were vaccinated against seasonal influenza and 85% against pandemic (A/H1N1) influenza. For GP-trainees, these percentages were 47% and 77%, respectively. With regard to the medical staff working in the respondents’ practices, 60% received the seasonal and 76% the pandemic (A/H1N1) influenza vaccine. Reducing the risk of transmitting the virus to vulnerable patients and the individual's personal protection were the most frequently reported motives for vaccination. Having no medical indication for influenza vaccination and the conviction of being protected against influenza because of frequent professional exposure to the virus were the most frequently mentioned reasons for not being vaccinated. In conclusion, the seasonal influenza vaccination rate among Dutch GPs has risen considerably since the previous survey and the vaccination rate against pandemic (A/H1N1) influenza was very high. Moreover, Dutch GPs were convinced that influenza vaccination will reduce the risk of transmitting the virus to their patients.     

Pandemic influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 improves vaccination routine in subsequent years: A cohort study from 2009 to 2011

Background

In 2009 the pandemic influenza virus A(H1N1)pdm09 emerged with guidance that people at risk should be vaccinated. It is unclear how this event affected the underlying seasonal vaccination rate in subsequent years.

Purpose

To investigate the association of pandemic influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and seasonal flu vaccination status in 2009 with vaccination rates in 2010 and 2011.

Methods

Data were collected in 40 Dutch family practices on patients at risk for influenza during 2009–2011; data analysis was conducted in 2012.

Results

A multilevel logistic regression model (n = 41,843 patients) adjusted for practice and patient characteristics (age and gender, as well as those patient groups at risk), showed that people who were vaccinated against A(H1N1)pdm09 in 2009 were more likely to have been vaccinated in 2010 (OR 6.02; 95%CI 5.62–6.45, p < .0001). This likelihood was even more for people who were vaccinated against seasonal flu in 2009 (OR 13.83; 95%CI 12.93–14.78, p < .0001). A second analysis on the uptake rate in 2011 (n = 39,468 patients) showed that the influence of the vaccination state in 2009 declined after two years, but the diminishing effect was smaller for people vaccinated against A(H1N1)pdm09 than for seasonal flu (OR 5.50; 95%CI 5.13–5.90, p < .0001; OR 10.98; 95%CI 10.26–11.75, p < .0001, respectively).

Conclusion

Being vaccinated against A(H1N1)pdm09 and seasonal influenza in the pandemic year 2009 enhanced the probability of vaccination in the next year and this was still effective in 2011. This suggests that peoples’ vaccination routines were not changed by the rumor around the outbreak of A(H1N1)pdm09, but rather confirmed underlying behavior.     

Durability of antibody responses after receipt of the monovalent 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) vaccine among HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected adults

Background

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected persons are at risk for severe influenza infections. Although vaccination against the H1N1 pandemic influenza strain is recommended, currently there are no data on the durability of post-vaccination antibody responses in this population.

Methods

HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected adults (18-50 years old) received a single dose of monovalent 2009 influenza A (H1N1) vaccine (strain A/California/7/2009H1N1). Antibody levels to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic strain were determined at day 0, day 28, and 6 months by hemagglutination-inhibition assay. A seroprotective response was a post-vaccination titer of ≥1:40 among those with a pre-vaccination level of ≤1:10. Geometric mean titers (GMT) and factors associated with higher levels were also evaluated.

Results

We studied 127 participants with a median age of 35 (interquartile range (IQR) 28, 42) years. Among the HIV-infected arm (n = 63), the median CD4 count was 595 (IQR 476, 819) cells/mm³ and 83% were receiving HAART. Thirty-five percent of all participants had a pre-vaccination level of >1:10. HIV-infected compared to HIV-uninfected adults were less likely to generate a seroprotective response at day 28 (54% vs. 75%, adjusted OR 0.23, p = 0.021) or have a durable response at 6 months post-vaccination (28% vs. 56%, adjusted OR 0.19, p = 0.005). Additionally, although pre-vaccination GMT were similar in both arms (median 7 vs. 8, p = 0.11), the GMT at 6 months was significantly lower among HIV-infected versus HIV-uninfected adults (median 20 vs. 113, p = 0.003). Among HIV-infected persons, younger age (p = 0.035) and receipt of HAART (p = 0.028) were associated with higher GMTs at 6 months.

Conclusions

Despite vaccination, most HIV-infected adults do not generate durable seroprotective antibody responses to the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus, and hence may remain vulnerable to infection. In addition to HAART use, more immunogenic vaccines are likely needed for improving protection against influenza in this population.     

Sustained high influenza vaccination rates and decreased safety concerns among pregnant women during the 2010–2011 influenza season

Objective

Intense efforts to vaccinate pregnant women against 2009 H1N1 influenza resulted in much higher vaccine uptake than previously reported. We surveyed postpartum women to determine whether high vaccination rates were sustained during the 2010–11 influenza season.

Methods

We performed cross-sectional surveys of postpartum women delivering at our institution during February–April 2010 and February–March 2011. The surveys ascertained maternal characteristics, history of influenza vaccination, and reasons for lack of vaccination.

Results

During the 2010–11 season, 165 (55%) of 300 women surveyed reported receiving influenza vaccination, compared to 191 of 307 (62%) during 2009–10 (p = 0.08). Vaccination by an obstetrical provider was common, but decreased compared to 2009–10 (60% vs. 71%, p = 0.04). While most women (76%) in 2010–11 reported that their provider recommended influenza vaccination, significantly more reported lack of discussion about vaccination (24% vs. 11%, p < 0.01) compared to 2009–10. Vaccine safety concerns were cited by most (66%) women declining vaccination during 2009–10 but only 27% of women who declined in 2010–11.

Conclusion

The vaccination rate among pregnant women at our institution was relatively sustained, although fewer providers appear to be discussing influenza vaccination in pregnancy. Concern about vaccine safety, the primary barrier during 2009–10, was much less prominent.     

Knowledge,attitudes and vaccination coverage of healthcare workers regarding occupational vaccinations

Objectives

Immunization of healthcare workers (HCWs) is a major issue for infection control in healthcare facilities. The aim of this study was to evaluate knowledge regarding occupational vaccinations, HBV, varicella and influenza vaccination rates and attitudes towards influenza vaccine among HCWs.

Design and setting

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in two wards (Medicine and Paediatrics) of a 1182-bed teaching hospital in Paris, France.

Methods

A standardized, anonymous, self-administered questionnaire was used.

Results

Of 580 HCWs, 395 (68%) completed the questionnaire. Knowledge about the occupational vaccinations of HCWs was low. HBV (69%), tuberculosis (54%) and influenza (52%) were the most cited vaccinations. Paediatric staff was more aware of influenza and pertussis immunizations (p < .05). HBV vaccination rate was 93%, among whom 65% were aware of their immune status. Influenza vaccination rate for 2006–2007 was 30% overall, ranging from 50% among physicians to 20% among paramedical staff (p < .05). Physicians based their refusal on doubts about vaccine efficacy, although paramedics feared side effects. Influenza vaccination was associated with knowledge of vaccine recommendations [OR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.13–2.57] and contact with patients [OR = 3.05, 95% CI: 1.50–5.91].

Conclusions

Knowledge of recommended occupational vaccinations is insufficient in HCWs, except for HBV and influenza. Although the HBV vaccine coverage of HCWs is satisfactory, a large proportion of them is unaware of immune status. Influenza vaccine coverage remains low, especially among paramedical staff because of fear of side effects. As vaccine coverage is associated with knowledge, educational campaigns should be strengthened to increase the adhesion of HCWs to vaccinations.     

Immunogenicity and tolerability of an inactivated and adjuvanted pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine, in HIV-1-infected patients

We evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of a single dose of the split virion AS03-adjuvanted pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine (A/California/7/2009) in 84 HIV-1 infected individuals. Antibody titers were determined by hemagglutination inhibition assay and by microneutralization. Vaccine was well tolerated. At 21 days post vaccination, 56 (67%) patients had seroconverted. There was no correlation between baseline CD4 cell count (p = 0.539) or HIV viral load (p = 0.381) and immune response. Other vaccine strategies should be evaluated in this HIV population, to improve response rates.     

Efficacy of dual vaccination of pandemic H1N1 2009 influenza and seasonal influenza on institutionalized elderly: a one-year prospective cohort study

Background

The influenza A (H1N1) 2009 pandemic was declared by the WHO in April 2009. In Hong Kong, the vaccination program began in December 2009 in addition to the annual seasonal trivalent influenza vaccination program. The clinical efficacy of dual vaccination was unknown.

Method

From December 2009 to November 2010, a prospective 12-month cohort study on institutionalized elderly of nine nursing homes was conducted. Elderly persons who were followed up by the Hong Kong West Community Geriatric Assessment Team and had been vaccinated by the Department of Health were included. Outcome measures included all cause mortality, all cause hospitalization, hospitalization for fever on admission and hospitalization for pneumonia based on ICD-9-CM.

Results

711 elderly persons were included. 274 received both seasonal influenza vaccine and (H1N1) 2009 vaccine (H1N1-TIV), 368 received seasonal influenza vaccine only (TIV alone) and 69 received no vaccination (unvaccinated). Baseline characteristics were well matched between the groups, except there were fewer females in the TIV alone. The 12-month mortality rates of the H1N1-TIV, TIV alone and unvaccinated were 10.6%, 19.8% and 29%, respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that dual vaccination in the institutionalized elderly significantly reduced all cause mortality by 54% (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.72; p < 0.001) and 74% (HR 0.26; CI 0.13-0.49; p < 0.001), compared with vaccination of seasonal vaccination alone and no vaccination, respectively. Dual vaccination also reduced all cause hospitalization, hospitalization for fever on admission and hospitalization for pneumonia compared with seasonal vaccination alone and the unvaccinated group.

Conclusion

Dual vaccination with both H1N1 and seasonal vaccinations provided additional protection to institutionalized elderly in reducing mortality and hospitalization.     

Negative trends from 2008/9 to 2011/12 seasons in influenza vaccination coverages among high risk subjects and health care workers in Spain

Objectives

We aim to describe influenza vaccination coverage for the Spanish population across four consecutive campaigns (2008/2009 to 2011/2012). The data was analyzed by high risk groups and health care workers (HCWs). Also, coverage trends were analyzed to assess uptake in post-pandemic seasons.

Methods

We used data from two nation-wide representative health surveys namely the 2009/10 European Health Interview Survey for Spain (N = 22,188) and the 2011–12 Spanish National Health Survey (N = 21,007) Influenza vaccination status was self-reported. We analyzed influenza vaccine coverage by age, sex, number of chronic conditions, being a heath care worker (HCWs) and nationality. Time trends for campaigns among high risk groups were estimated by a multivariate logistic regression model.

Results

We analyzed data from 43,072 subjects aged ≥16 years. As a whole, coverage decreased by 3.31% (22.57–19.26%) between the 2008/2009 and 2011/2012 campaigns with a significant decreasing trend (OR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.90–0.94).Coverage in people under 60 years with a chronic disease decreased significantly (OR 0.92: 95% CI: 0.85–0.99) during the analyzed period from 21.02% in 2008/2009 to 17.40% in 2011/2012. Among HCWs, the highest influenza vaccination coverage was achieved in 2009/2010 (31.08%) in the latest campaign coverage has almost halved (17.88%). For the 2011/2012 season and for all age groups the variables associated with a higher probability of having received the influenza vaccine were older age and presence of associated chronic conditions. Among those aged ≥60 years, immigrants had lower uptake (OR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.32–0.99).

Conclusions

Seasonal influenza vaccine uptake rates in the recommended target groups in Spain are unacceptably low and seem to be decreasing in the post pandemic seasons. Further studies are necessary to precisely identify reasons for non-compliance and barriers to influenza vaccination. Meanwhile urgent strategies to improve seasonal vaccination uptake must be discussed and implemented.     

Seasonal and Pandemic A (H1N1) 2009 influenza vaccination coverage and attitudes among health-care workers in a Spanish University Hospital

Influenza vaccination coverage among health-care workers (HCWs) remains the lowest compared with other priority groups for immunization. Little is known about the acceptability and compliance with the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza vaccine among HCWs during the current campaign. Between 23 December 2009 and 13 January 2010, once the workplace vaccination program was over, we conducted a cross-sectional, questionnaire-based survey at the University Hospital 12 de Octubre (Madrid, Spain). Five hundred twenty-seven HCWs were asked about their influenza immunization history during the 2009–2010 season, as well as the reasons for accepting or declining either the seasonal or pandemic vaccines. Multiple logistic-regression analysis was preformed to identify variables associated with immunization acceptance. A total of 262 HCWs (49.7%) reported having received the seasonal vaccine, while only 87 (16.5%) affirmed having received the pandemic influenza (H1N1) 2009 vaccine. “Self-protection” and “protection of the patient” were the most frequently adduced reasons for acceptance of the pandemic vaccination, whereas the existence of “doubts about vaccine efficacy” and “fear of adverse reactions” were the main arguments for refusal. Simultaneous receipt of the seasonal vaccine (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.14–0.52) and being a staff (OR: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.04–0.19) or a resident physician (OR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.05–0.50) emerged as independent predictors for pandemic vaccine acceptance, whereas self-reported membership of a priority group was associated with refusal (OR: 5.98; 95% CI: 1.35–26.5). The pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza vaccination coverage among the HCWs in our institution was very low (16.5%), suggesting the role of specific attitudinal barriers and misconceptions about immunization in a global pandemic scenario.     

Are medical residents a "core group" for future improvement of influenza vaccination coverage in health-care workers? A study among medical residents at the University Hospital of Palermo (Sicily)

Despite international recommendations, vaccination coverage among European healthcare workers, including physicians, is widely recognized as unsatisfactory. In order to plan tailored vaccination campaigns and increase future coverage, we investigated reasons for refusing vaccination and determinants associated with influenza vaccine uptake among young health care workers.A survey was carried out during September and October 2010 on medical residents attending post-graduate Schools of the Medical Faculty at the University of Palermo (Italy). Each participant completed an anonymous web-based questionnaire including items on demographic and occupational characteristics, knowledge, attitudes and behaviours with regard to influenza and influenza vaccination, and main sources of information.A total of 202 (66.9%) out of 302 medical residents participated in the survey. During the 2009-2010 influenza vaccine campaign, 44 residents (21.8%) were vaccinated against seasonal influenza and 84 (41.6%) against pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009. For the impending 2010-2011 influenza season, 45 (22.3%) stated their intention to get vaccinated against seasonal influenza, 40 (19.8%) were uncertain and 117 (57.9%) were opposed. Considering themselves to be a high risk group for developing influenza was significantly associated with vaccination against both 2009-2010 seasonal (adj-OR = 1.46; 95% CI = 1.05-2.04) and pandemic A (H1N1) influenza (adj-OR 1.38; 95% CI = 1.08-1.75). Intention to get vaccinated against 2010-2011 seasonal influenza was significantly more frequent in participants who had a high perception of efficacy/safety (adj-OR = 1.49; 95% CI = 1.05-2.12). After adjusting for confounding, vaccinations against seasonal 2009-2010 influenza, pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 and seasonal 2010-2011 influenza were significantly more frequent in residents who were vaccinated against influenza at least once in the previous five influenza seasons.Influenza vaccination among medical residents appears to be habitual, with little comprehension of the rationale and logic for vaccination, including the need to be vaccinated to protect patients from nosocomial influenza infection. Our study suggests the importance of prioritizing residents for vaccination campaigns, as they represent “the future” and include a core group that habitually accepts vaccination.     

Factors in association with acceptability of A/H1N1 vaccination during the influenza A/H1N1 pandemic phase in the Hong Kong general population

A random population-based telephone survey (n = 301) was conducted among the Hong Kong general population in July 2009. Past history of seasonal influenza vaccination (OR = 2.59–3.13) was associated with intention to take up A/H1N1 vaccination under three hypothetical scenarios (provided at <HK$100, HK$100–200 and >HK$200). Adjusting background variables, other significant factors were identified by stepwise models: perceived side effects (OR = 0.33), family members’ recommendations and friends’ acceptability toward the vaccine (OR = 2.80–4.74). In contrast to other studies on seasonal influenza and A/H1N1 vaccination, perceived susceptibility and perceived severity related to influenza A/H1N1 were non-significant. Cultural differences may therefore exist.     

Willingness of healthcare workers to accept voluntary stockpiled H5N1 vaccine in advance of pandemic activity

Healthcare workers may be at risk during the next influenza pandemic. Priming with stockpiled vaccine may protect staff and reduce nosocomial transmission. Despite campaigns to increase seasonal influenza vaccine coverage, uptake among healthcare workers is generally low; creating uncertainty whether they would participate in pre-pandemic vaccine programmes. We conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of healthcare workers in a UK hospital during, and 6 months after, a period of media reporting of an H5N1 outbreak at a commercial UK poultry farm. A total of 520 questionnaires were returned, representing 20% of frontline workforce. More respondents indicated willingness to accept stockpiled H5N1 vaccine during the period of media attention than after (166/262, 63.4% vs. 134/258, 51.9%; p = 0.009). Following multivariate analysis, factors associated with willingness to accept H5N1 vaccine included: previous seasonal vaccine (OR 6.2, 95% CI 3.0–12.8, p < 0.0001), awareness of occupational seasonal vaccine campaigns (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4–3.5, p = 0.001), belief that seasonal vaccine benefits themselves (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.6–4.0, p < 0.0001) or the hospital (OR 3.6, 95% CI 2.3–5.8, p < 0.0001), belief that pandemic risk is high/moderate (OR 14.1, 95% CI 7.6–26.1, p < 0.0001) and would threaten healthcare workers (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.8–4.5, p < 0.0001). Those who would not accept vaccine (220 respondents, 42.7%) if offered before the pandemic do not perceive pandemic influenza as a serious threat, and have concerns regarding vaccine safety. A majority of healthcare workers are amenable to accept stockpiled H5N1 vaccine if offered in advance of pandemic activity.     

Short and long-term effects of pandemic unadjuvanted influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine on clinical manifestations and autoantibody profile in primary Sjögren's syndrome

Despite WHO recommendations about the A/California/7/2009/H1N1-like virus vaccination, studies evaluating its possible influence on clinical manifestations and autoantibody profile in primary Sjögren's syndrome (SS) are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the possible influence of the unadjuvanted A/California/7/2009/H1N1-like virus vaccination on clinical manifestations and autoantibody profile in SS in the short/long-term. Thirty-six SS patients (The American-European Consensus Group Criteria, 2002) and 36 healthy controls with comparable mean age and gender were evaluated before and 21-days after this vaccination regarding seroprotection/seroconversion, factor increase in geometric mean titer (FI-GMT) and side effects. New onset of disease flares and autoantibody profile [antinuclear antibodies, anti-dsDNA, anti-Ro(SSA)/La(SSB), anti-RNP/anti-Sm, rheumatoid factor, anti-alpha-fodrin, anticardiolipin and anti-beta2-glycoprotein-I] were assessed before, 21-days and 1-year after vaccination. Patients and controls had similar rates of seroconversion (77.8 vs. 69.4%, p = 0.42), seroprotection (83.3 vs. 72.2%, p = 0.26) and FI-GMT (p = 0.85). Disease duration, prednisone (2.1 ± 4.9 mg/day), methotrexate and azathioprine did not affect seroconversion (p > 0.05). Regarding short-term, no change in the frequency or levels of autoantibodies was observed (p > 0.05) and only mild side effects were reported in comparable rates to controls (p > 0.05). During 1-year follow-up, the frequency of new disease flares was similar to the previous year (11 vs. 19%, p = 0.51), and four patients developed positivity to one of the following specificities: anti-Ro(SSA)/anti-La/(SSB), anti-alpha-fodrin, or IgM anticardiolipin. None developed specific lupus autoantibodies. Of note, a significant increase in the mean levels of anti-Ro/SSA (p = 0.0001) and anti-La/SSB (p = 0.002) was detected after 1-year with no change in the other autoantibodies. This is the first study indicating that influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine induces long-term changes in autoantibody profile restricted to SS spectrum without a deleterious effect in disease course.