Pneumococcal and influenza vaccine uptake in adults with inflammatory bowel disease in France: Results from a web-based study

BackgroundDespite specific immunization guidelines for immunocompromised patients, there is a dearth of studies on inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) population in France.AimsTo estimate the prevalence and predictors of influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates in a sample of French IBD adults.MethodsAn anonymous online survey was submitted to members of several French immunocompromised patients’ associations during the winter 2016.ResultsOverall, there were 199/1625 (12%) participants with an IBD. Among these, 32% were <30 years old, 85% were male, and 62% were treated with immunosuppressive therapy. Self-reported influenza vaccine uptake was 34% (95% CI [28–41]) and 38% (95% CI [31–44]) for pneumococcal vaccines. Healthcare provider’s (HCP) recommendation for vaccination (adjusted OR 12.7 95% CI [5.6–28.8]), immunosuppressive therapy (aOR 2.3 [1.1–5.3]), better knowledge of vaccination (aOR 3.2 [1.1–9.2]) and favorable attitudes towards vaccination (aOR 3.4 [1.2–9.5]) were positively associated with influenza vaccine uptake. Vaccine recommendation by HCPs was the only independently associated factor with pneumococcal vaccines uptake (OR 187.7 [24.8–1422.5]).ConclusionImmunization rates in our sample do not reach recommended levels. Factors associated with vaccination included high knowledge, favorable attitudes towards vaccination and recommendation for vaccination. This underlines the role of health care providers in contact with IBD patients.     

Vaccinations and inflammatory bowel disease – a systematic review

IntroductionPatients with inflammatory bowel disease(IBD) are at risk of infections, many of which are preventable with vaccinations. We performed a systematic review on various aspects of vaccination in IBD.MethodsWe searched PubMed, and EMBASE databases, through 31 January 2021. Primary outcomes included vaccination rates, predictors of vaccination, reasons of vaccination hesitancy and acceptance, and outcomes of intervention. Findings were presented with medians, ranges, and narrative synthesis.ResultsWe included 33 observational studies comprising 146,918 patients and 681 physicians. The median vaccination rates of influenza, pneumococcal pneumonia, and hepatitis B vaccines were 42%(IQR, 28%–61.5%), 20%(IQR, 9%–38.5%), and 48%(IQR, 29%–53%), respectively. Uses of immunosuppressant, older age and physician recommendations have positive influence on vaccination rate. Lack of vaccine-related knowledge and awareness of need for vaccination are main reasons of vaccine hesitancy among patients and physicians. There was disagreement between gastroenterologists and primary-care physicians on whose responsibility to offer vaccination. Education was the sole intervention identified, with variable success.ConclusionThis systematic review demonstrates that the vaccination rates of IBD patients, similar to other chronic diseases, are suboptimal. Lack of vaccine-related knowledge and awareness of the need for vaccination are main reasons of vaccine hesitancy amongst patients and physicians. Education, though effective, was the only available intervention identified. Gastroenterologist could take the lead in educating, and initiating vaccination among IBD patients.     

Reasons for failure to receive pneumococcal and influenza vaccinations among immunosuppressed patients with systemic lupus erythematosus

ObjectiveTo better understand why immunosuppressed individuals with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) fail to receive influenza and pneumococcal vaccines.MethodsThese cross-sectional data were derived from the 2009 cycle of the Lupus Outcomes Study (LOS), an annual longitudinal telephone survey of individuals with confirmed SLE. Respondents were included in the analysis if they had taken immunosuppressive medications in the past year. We assessed any prior receipt of pneumococcal vaccine and influenza vaccine in the past year, and then elicited reasons for not receiving vaccination. We used bivariate statistics and multivariate logistic regression to assess frequency and predictors of reported reasons for not obtaining influenza or pneumococcal vaccines.ResultsAmong 508 respondents who received immunosuppressants, 485 reported whether they had received vaccines. Among the 175 respondents who did not receive an influenza vaccine, the most common reason was lack of doctor recommendation (55%), followed by efficacy or safety concerns (21%), and lack of time (19%). Reasons for not receiving pneumococcal vaccine (N = 159) were similar: lack of recommendation (87%), lack of time (7%), and efficacy or safety concerns (4%). Younger, less-educated, non-white patients with shorter disease duration, as well as those immunosuppressed with steroids alone, were at the greatest risk for not receiving indicated vaccine recommendations.ConclusionsThe most common reason why individuals with SLE did not receive pneumococcal and influenza vaccines was that physicians failed to recommend them. Data suggest that increasing vaccination rates in SLE will require improved process quality at the provider level, as well as addressing patient concerns and barriers.     

Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination in the emergency department

Objective: To assess the numbers of high-risk adult patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) who have not been vaccinated against influenza or pneumococcal disease and whether emergency physicians are willing or able to routinely provide vaccination. Design: A survey of patients in the ED considered to be at high risk for morbidity and mortality from influenza or pneumococcal disease; an anonymous, mail-back survey of emergency physicians. Setting: The ED of a university-affiliated hospital with an annual census of 50,000 patient visits. Participants: A convenience sample of adult patients visiting the ED for any complaint who fulfilled the American Thoracic Society and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention requirements as a highrisk patient requiring vaccination with influenza or pneumococcal vaccine. The physicians surveyed were identified from the membership role of the state chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians. Measurements: 1) Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates for high-risk patients presenting to an ED during influenza season; 2) reasons for lack of immunization; 3) patient willingness to be vaccinated in the ED; 4) vaccination practice patterns for ED physicians; and 5) reasons why ED physicians are unwilling to give these vaccines. Results: 212 high-risk patients were surveyed. 57% and 75% of these patients reported not having received the influenza vaccine and the pneumococcal vaccine, respectively. The main reasons for not being immunized included not being informed they needed it, a prior adverse reaction, and procrastination. Of the unvaccinated patients, 54% were willing to be vaccinated in the ED. Of the surveyed ED physicians, 89% and 93% never or rarely gave influenza and pneumococcal vaccines, respectively. 51% of the ED physicians were willing to give the vaccine. Unwillingness stemmed mainly from: 1) the perception that ED physicians are not primary care providers, 2) inadequate time or personnel; and 3) concerns about adverse reactions or medicolegal liability. Only 5% of the physicians reported organized case-finding mechanisms in their EDs. Conclusion: Significant numbers of high-risk patients who are unimmunized against influenza and pneumococcal pneumonia present to the ED. There is hesitancy among ED physicians about assuming the primary care task of providing such immunizations. Any attempt to institute a large-scale vaccination program in an ED setting needs to be carefully planned in a way to involve primary care providers and to decrease ED physician concerns and reluctance. Received from the Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee.     

Knowledge and attitudes among patients with asthma and parents and physicians towards influenza vaccination

BackgroundInfluenza is an infectious disease, dangerous for all people, especially for some risk groups such as patients with chronic diseases and health care workers. But most of the people under the risk of influenza, including health care workers are not immunised because of misinformation. In this study, we aimed to determine the knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma and parents of such children related to influenza vaccination. Attitudes and beliefs of physicians treating these patients about influenza vaccination were also investigated.MethodsTwo different questionnaires consisting of various items related to influenza vaccine were distributed to physicians and patients and parents of children with asthma and allergic disease.ResultsThe physicians group consisted of 189 physicians from various branches. About one third of physicians from various branches reported that they did not believe the vaccine's effectiveness. Most of the participating physicians did not immunise themselves with influenza vaccination despite the fact that any patient of theirs had died due to influenza infection.Although nearly half of the 183 patients had been vaccinated with influenza vaccine, only 27% of adults and 11.7% of children had been vaccinated annually.ConclusionsAsthmatic patients are not immunised regularly with influenza vaccine due to misperceptions about vaccine effectiveness and fear of adverse effects. Another important reason of this is that most the physicians caring for these patients neither immunise themselves nor recommend the vaccine to their patients.     

Immunogenicity and mechanisms impairing the response to vaccines in inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease(IBD) is an immunological disorder that is usually treated with immunosuppressive therapy,potentially leading to increases in vulnerability to infections. Although many infections can be pre-vented by vaccination,vaccination coverage in these patients in clinical practice is insufficient. Therefore,the seroprotection condition should be verified,even for routine vaccines,such as hepatitis B or pneu-mococcus. Response to vaccines in IBD patients is thought to be impaired due to the immunological alterations generated by the disease and to the immunomodulatory treatments. The immunogenicity of hepatitis B,influenza,and pneumococcal vaccines is impaired in IBD patients,whereas the response to papillomavirus vaccine seems similar to that observed in the healthy population. On the other hand,data on the immunogenicity of tetanus vaccine in IBD patients are conflicting. Studies assessing the response to measles-mumps-rubella,varicella,and herpes zoster vaccines in IBD patients are scarce. The cellular and molecular mechanisms responsible for the impairment of the response to vaccination in IBD patients are poorly understood. Studies aiming to assess the response to vaccines in IBD patients and to identify the mechanisms involved in their immunogenicity are warranted. A better understanding of the immune response,specifically to vaccines,in patients with immune-mediated diseases(such as IBD),is crucial when developing vaccines that trigger more potent immunologic responses.     

Vaccines and recommendations for their use in inflammatory bowel disease

The patient with inflammatory bowel disease will be predisposed to numerous infections due their immune status. It is therefore important to understand the immune and serologic status at diagnosis and to put the patient into an adapted vaccination program. This program would be applied differently according to two patient groups: the immunocompromised and the non-immunocom-promised. In general, the first group would avoid the use of live-virus vaccines, and in all cases, inflammatory bowel disease treatment would take precedence over vaccine risk. It is important to individualize vaccination schedules according to the type of patient, the treatment used and the disease pattern.In addition, patient with inflammatory bowel disease should be considered for the following vaccines: varicella vaccine, human papilloma virus, influenza, pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine and hepatitis B vaccine.     

Barriers to pneumococcal and influenza vaccination in older community-dwelling adults (2000-2001)

OBJECTIVES: To identify facilitators of and barriers to vaccination in patients from a range of socioeconomic levels. DESIGN: A survey was conducted in 2001 using computer-assisted telephone interviewing. SETTING: Patients from inner-city health centers and suburban practices were interviewed. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria were aged 66 and older and an office visit after September 30, 1998. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported influenza and pneumococcal vaccination status and facilitating conditions, attitudes, social influences, and perceived consequences from the Triandis model were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 557 interviews were completed with 775 eligible patients (72%). Patients who reported having received pneumococcal vaccine more frequently believed that their physicians recommended the vaccine than did the unvaccinated (97% vs 49%; P=.001). This was also true for influenza vaccine (99% vs 80%; P<.001). More unvaccinated patients than vaccinated patients felt that obtaining either vaccine was more trouble than it is worth (pneumococcal 19% vs 1%; P=.04, influenza 20% vs 1%; P=.004). The vaccinated were more likely to be willing to obtain the influenza and pneumococcal vaccines at the same time (pneumococcal 91% vs 59%; P=.002, influenza 91% vs 55%; P=.014). CONCLUSION: Physicians should take every opportunity to recommend vaccination to their eligible adult patients. Offering influenza and pneumococcal vaccines at the same visit is an acceptable means to ensure that adults are fully vaccinated.     

Factors influencing the uptake of influenza vaccination in African American patients with heart failure: Findings from a large urban public hospital

BackgroundEvidence suggests that annual influenza vaccination may prevent acute heart failure exacerbation episodes and improve survival.ObjectiveDetermine the influenza vaccination rate among African American patients with heart failure and identify predictors of uptake.MethodsAfrican American patients with heart failure were recruited at Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta GA between October 1, 2017 and April 28, 2018 (N = 281). All participants completed a questionnaire.ResultsMean age of the sample was 50.5 ± 11.5 years (58% male). The influenza vaccination rate among the patients was 46% (n = 129/281). Patients who received vaccination information and recommendation from their physician, especially cardiologists, were significantly more likely to be vaccinated than those who did not (P<0.05). Major reasons for declining vaccination included fear of getting sick from influenza vaccine and distrust of the pharmaceutical companies that produce vaccines.ConclusionsRecommendation of influenza vaccines by physicians during medical consultations and cardiology visits may improve uptake rates in heart failure patients.     

A randomised,clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of hospital and community-based reminder systems for increasing uptake of influenza and pneumococcal vaccine in hospitalised patients aged 65 years and over

Hospitalisation represents an opportunity to identify unimmunised people at risk for the complications of influenza and pneumococcal disease. We conducted a randomised controlled trial of two strategies to increase uptake of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines in eligible, hospitalised subjects aged 65 years or more, admitted between May and September 1998 to a Melbourne hospital. Unvaccinated participants were allocated randomly to alert systems for hospital staff or community general practitioners (GPs). Follow-up occurred at 1 and 3 months. The baseline vaccination rates were 70% for influenza (426/606) and 41% (248/606) for pneumococcal disease. For unvaccinated subjects, the hospital alert resulted in 67% uptake compared to 55% following a GP alert for pneumococcal vaccine; and 63% in hospital compared to 53% following a GP alert for influenza vaccine. Although there was a trend toward a higher uptake in hospital, neither of these differences was statistically significant. The majority (75%) of vaccinations following a GP alert occurred within 1 month of discharge. Despite hospital and community-based reminder systems, there are still significant missed opportunities for vaccination. We did not demonstrate significant differences between hospital and GP reminder systems, but there was a trend towards higher uptake with opportunistic vaccination in hospital.     

Immune responses following administration of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines to patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving adalimumab

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the immunogenicity of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving adalimumab or placebo. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, multicenter study, patients received adalimumab or placebo on Days 1, 15, and 29. Pneumococcal and influenza vaccines were administered on Day 8 (vaccine baseline). Vaccine response (> or = 2-fold titer increase from baseline in > or = 3 of 5 pneumococcal antigens and > or = 4-fold titer increase from baseline in > or = 2 of 3 influenza antigens) and protective antibody titers (> or = 1.6 microg/ml pneumococcal antibody concentration to > or = 3 of 5 antigens and > or = 1:40 influenza antibody titer to > or = 2 of 3 antigens) were analyzed 4 weeks' postvaccination. RESULTS: Following pneumococcal vaccination, percentages of patients achieving a vaccine response were similar in the adalimumab and placebo groups [37.4% and 40.4%, respectively; 95% CI (confidence interval) -16.2%, 10.3%]. Percentages of patients with protective antibody titers were similar in both treatment groups (adalimumab: 85.9%, placebo: 81.7%). Following influenza vaccination, percentages of patients achieving a vaccine response were lower with adalimumab than placebo (51.5% and 63.3%, respectively; 95% CI -25.2%, 1.6%)--a result explained by the subgroup of patients with preexisting protective antibody titers at baseline. For patients without protective antibody titers at baseline, response rates were similar in the 2 groups (adalimumab: 73.3%, placebo: 73.9%). Percentages of patients with protective antibody titers were similar in both treatment groups (adalimumab: 98%, placebo: 94.5%). CONCLUSION: Patients with RA treated with adalimumab can be effectively and safely immunized with pneumococcal and influenza vaccines.     

Knowledge and beliefs about influenza,pneumococcal disease,and immunizations among older people

OBJECTIVES: Despite the burden of disease caused by influenza and pneumococcus, immunization rates are moderate and have not reached national goals set for 2010. This study's objective was to identify patient knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs that serve as facilitators of and barriers to influenza and pneumococcal vaccination. DESIGN: A survey conducted in 2000 by computer-assisted telephone interviewing. SETTING: To encounter a broad spectrum of patients and healthcare systems, we sampled patients at inner-city health centers, Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinics, and rural and suburban practices. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria were patients aged 66 and older and an office visit after September 30, 1998. MEASUREMENTS: Responses to questionnaire. RESULTS: Overall, 1,007 (82%) interviews were completed among 1,234 people contacted by phone. Vaccination against pneumococcal disease was significantly related to being able to accurately describe one or more classic symptoms of pneumonia (P =.05). Vaccination against influenza and pneumococcal disease was significantly related to belief that vaccination was the best way to prevent these diseases (P <.001). The unvaccinated reported that they felt they were not likely to contract influenza and that they did not know they needed the pneumococcal vaccine. Access was not related to vaccination status. CONCLUSIONS: Educational campaigns to increase vaccination rates among older adults should focus on symptoms of, risk for, and severity of influenza and pneumococcal diseases and encouraging physicians to recommend the vaccines to their patients.     

HIV-infected children vaccination coverage and safety in a Western European cohort: a retrospective study

Since the implementation of highly active antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected children, response to scheduled vaccines may determinate future morbidity and mortality. The aims of this study have been to describe the current vaccine coverage, vaccine safety and concordance with vaccine recommendations of the 68 HIV-infected children and adolescents followed up in our Unit. Forty-four percent of the children received at least one dose of the oral polio vaccine (OPV). Only 9.1% needed and received a second set of hepatitis B virus immunization because of low vaccine response. Only 14.7% were vaccinated against varicella. Coverages of 82.3% and 100% have been reached with the 23-valent and the 7-valent pneumococcal vaccines, respectively. Meningococcal conjugated vaccine uptake was moderate (80.8%). Influenza annual vaccination coverage was poor: only 22.7% had well-documented yearly vaccines. In our experience, vaccine coverage is lower in those vaccines administered in primary care centres compared with the immunizations given at the hospital. OPV administration did not cause any adverse effect in the children or in their families. Vaccine coverage in HIV-infected children was suboptimal.     

Influenza season triggers pneumococcal vaccination

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency with which influenza and pneumococcal vaccines are administered alone and together. DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Marshall University internal medicine practice, Huntington, West Virginia. PARTICIPANTS: All patients aged 65 and older seen in the practice from 1999 through 2005 who received pneumococcal or influenza vaccine. MEASUREMENTS: Billing records were reviewed for administration of pneumococcal and influenza vaccines to Medicare beneficiaries, and rates of administration of these vaccines given alone and together were calculated. RESULTS: Nine hundred sixty-nine doses of pneumococcal vaccine were administered. Of these, 796 (82%) were administered during the fall and winter. Three hundred fifty-six (45%) pneumococcal vaccinees received it together with influenza vaccine. During 2001 and 2005, when influenza vaccine supply was limited, the rate of pneumococcal vaccine administered together with influenza vaccine declined sharply. Nonetheless, the rate of pneumococcal vaccination remained relatively stable because of an increase in the rate of vaccine administered alone. CONCLUSION: Four-fifths of pneumococcal vaccine was administered in the fall and winter, and approximately half was given together with influenza vaccine. When influenza vaccine was in limited supply, physicians continued to vaccinate with pneumococcal vaccine alone. These findings suggest that the imminent influenza season provides the trigger for physicians to prescribe pneumococcal vaccine. Physicians should be reminded that pneumococcal vaccine can be administered any time of year.     

Audit of influenza and pneumococcal vaccination uptake in diabetic patients attending secondary care in the Northern Region.

AIMS: To document uptake of influenza and pneumococcal vaccination in diabetic patients attending secondary care in the Northern Region, and to explore influencing factors. METHODS: Diabetic patients attending out-patients in Middlesbrough, Gateshead and Newcastle were questioned from October 1999 to March 2000. Physicians inquired about influenza and pneumococcal vaccination status using a standardized questionnaire. Data collected included age, year of diagnosis, duration of diabetes, type of diabetes, and the presence of other recognized indications for vaccination. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-eight diabetic patients, 42% (113/268) with Type 1 diabetes, 34% (91/268) with ischaemic heart disease, 10% (26/268) with chronic pulmonary disease (CPD) and 10% (27/268) with chronic renal disease, were questioned. Thirty-five percent (93/268) of patients received both influenza and pneumococcal vaccines, 24% (64/268) received only influenza vaccine, and none received pneumococcus vaccine alone. Most vaccinees received advice about influenza and pneumococcal vaccination from their general practitioner (90% (142/157) and 87% (81/93), respectively). A large number of non-vaccinees were unaware of the need for influenza and pneumococcal vaccination (69% (76/111) and 91% (159/175), respectively). Using multiple logistic regression co-existing CPD increased the odds of receiving influenza (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)) = 1.99 (1.07-14.12)) or pneumococcal (OR = 3.77 (1.69-21.76)) vaccination. Furthermore, each 1-year increase in age increased the chance of receiving influenza or pneumococcal vaccination by 22% (OR = 1.22 (1.09-1.67) and 29% (OR = 1.29 (1.07-1.72)), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination rates in these diabetic patients are unsatisfactory. Secondary care health professionals might increase rates by raising the topic in consultations. Diabet. Med. 18, 599-603 (2001)     

Factors associated with influenza and pneumococcal vaccination behavior among high-risk adults

OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional survey assessed factors associated with influenza and pneumococcal vaccination behaviors among high-risk patients exposed to highly organized vaccination programs. INTERVENTIONS: Self-administered questionnaires were mailed to 700 patients randomly selected from the outpatient roster of the medical center. Questions were asked about patient demographic and health characteristics in addition to their knowledge and attitudes regarding influenza and pneumococcal diseases and vaccines. MAIN RESULTS: After three mailings, the response rate was 68%, and 80% of these respondents were in a high-risk group. Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates for high-risk respondents were 74.4% and 62.5%, respectively. Factors independently associated with both influenza and pneumococcal vaccination behaviors included health care providers’ recommendations and having positive attitudes toward immunization. In addition, for influenza vaccination, willingness to comply with the provider’s recommendation was also associated with receipt of the vaccine while cigarette smoking was associated with failure to receive the vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Emphasis on provider recommendations and the knowledge and attitudes of patients may enhance influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates, even in the context of organized vaccination programs.     

Immunization Needs of Chronic Liver Disease Patients Seen in Primary Care Versus Specialist Settings

Chronic liver disease patients may benefit from certain vaccines, but their immunization coverage levels have not been widely studied. We examined the serologic and vaccination status of 693 chronic liver disease patients from 37 primary care and specialist centers. Patients in primary care had more often received influenza (47 versus 32%; P < .001) and pneumococcal (39 versus 19%; P < .001) vaccines. Among patients without documented prior exposure, those seeing specialists had more often completed hepatitis A (28 versus 5%; P < .001) and hepatitis B (29 versus 14%; P < .001) vaccination. Coverage was higher in centers with a policy of vaccinating on-site, among non-Hispanic whites, and among patients with hepatitis C and cirrhosis. In summary, most patients were unprotected against one or more vaccine preventable diseases. The higher coverage rates evident in centers vaccinating on-site suggests a breakdown may occur when patients are referred to alternative vaccination venues.     

Hip fracture incidence in the elderly in Austria: An epidemiological study covering the years 1994 to 2006

Background

Previous studies have shown influenza vaccine uptake in UK nursing home residents to be low. Very little information exists regarding the uptake of pneumococcal vaccine in this population. The formulation of policies relating to the vaccination of residents has been proposed as a simple step that may help improve vaccine uptake in care homes.

Methods

A postal questionnaire was sent to matrons of all care homes with nursing within the Greater Nottingham area in January 2006. Non respondents were followed up with up to 3 phone calls.

Results

30% (16/53) of respondents reported having a policy addressing influenza vaccination and 15% (8/53) had a policy addressing pneumococcal vaccination. Seasonal influenza vaccine coverage in care homes with a vaccination policy was 87% compared with 84% in care homes without a policy (p = 0.47). The uptake of pneumococcal vaccination was found to be low, particularly in care homes with no vaccination policy. Coverage was 60% and 32% in care homes with and without a vaccination policy respectively (p = 0.06). This result was found to be statistically significant on multivariate analysis (p = 0.03, R = 0.46)

Conclusion

The uptake of influenza vaccine among care home residents in the Nottingham region is relatively high, although pneumococcal vaccine uptake is low. This study shows that there is an association between pneumococcal vaccine uptake and the existence of a vaccination policy in care homes, and highlights that few care homes have vaccination policies in place.     

Low tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine coverage among healthcare workers in a quaternary university hospital in São Paulo,Brazil: need for continuous surveillance and implementation of active strategies

IntroductionVaccination with tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) has been recommended for healthcare workers (HCWs) by Brazilian Ministry of Health since November 2014.ObjectiveTo describe the strategies implemented to improve Tdap uptake, cumulative vaccine coverage after each intervention, variables associated to Tdap vaccination, and reasons for non-vaccination among HCWs of the main building of a quaternary hospital attached to the Sao Paulo University Medical School.MethodsA list of HCWs eligible for pertussis vaccination was generated. From April to December 2015, the following interventions were implemented: note on intern journal reminding the importance of pertussis vaccination; email to the head nurses strengthening vaccine recommendations; lectures on pertussis and Tdap for physicians of Obstetrics and Neonatology Clinics; on-site vaccination by mobile teams at the Obstetrics, Neonatology, and Anesthesiology Clinics. Vaccine coverage was accessed at the end of each month. Multivariate Poisson regression model with a robust error variance was used to evaluate variables associated with Tdap vaccination. Reasons for non-vaccination were evaluated from January to May 2017 through phone calls for HCWs who had not received Tdap.ResultsThe study included 456 HCWs. After the interventions, Tdap coverage raised from 2.8% to 41.2%. In the multivariate analysis, occupation (physician), working place (obstetrics or anesthesiology) and influenza vaccination in 2015 were independently associated to Tdap vaccination. The main reason for non-vaccination was unawareness of Tdap recommendations.ConclusionsTdap uptake among HCWs was low in our hospital. Providing vaccination at convenient places/times for HCW seems to be the most efficient strategy to increase vaccine uptake.     

Additive preventive effect of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines in elderly persons.

In 1999, all individuals > or = 65 yrs of age (n=258,754) in Stockholm County, Sweden, were offered influenza and pneumococcal vaccination in a prospective study on the effectiveness of these vaccines in reducing the need for hospital treatment and death due to influenza, pneumonia and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD). Data on hospitalisation and mortality during 1 yr were obtained from the administrative database in Stockholm County Council. Vaccination was performed in 124,702 (48%) subjects; 72,107 had both vaccines, 29,346 only had the influenza vaccine and 23,249 only had the pneumococcal vaccine. Compared with the unvaccinated cohort, a lower incidence of hospitalisation for all endpoint diagnoses was seen in vaccinated persons. An additive effectiveness of vaccination was seen when both vaccines were given, with a reduction of hospital admissions for influenza (37%), pneumonia (29%) and IPD (44%). In-hospital mortality for pneumonia was significantly lower in those who received both vaccines, than in unvaccinated persons. To conclude, vaccination with influenza and pneumococcal vaccines together was effective in reducing the need for hospital admission for influenza and pneumonia. There was a strong indication that pneumococcal vaccination alone, was effective not only in the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease, but also of pneumonia overall, although to a low degree.