Who receives influenza vaccinations at the Pharmacy? An analysis of the Texas Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

IntroductionVaccination helps to prevent influenza infection and reduce associated costs but the influenza vaccination rate in Texas for adults between the ages of 18 to 64 years old is the lowest in the US. Pharmacies and alternative locations have been shown to help increase vaccination rates but many adults still go unvaccinated.ObjectiveThis research aims to determine the factors associated with obtaining influenza vaccination at the pharmacy compared to non-pharmacy locations in Texas.MethodThis study used pooled Texas Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System datasets (2014 to 2018) for this assessment. The main outcome variable was categorized into pharmacy and non-pharmacy vaccination locations and analyzed using a logistic regression analysis. Further statistical analysis was done using a multinomial logistic regression after re-categorizing the outcome variable into pharmacy, doctor office, and other locations.ResultBlacks were 63% (AOR 0.37, C.I. 0.26, 0.50) and Hispanics were 38% (AOR 0.62, C.I. 0.48, 0.80) less likely to receive influenza vaccinations at the pharmacy respectively when compared to Whites. Furthermore, those who did not live in a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) were 33% (AOR 0.67, C.I 0.53, 0.84) less likely to receive influenza vaccinations at the pharmacy compared to those who lived in an MSA. While there was no observed difference in the likelihood of receiving influenza vaccination, the unemployed population were 40% (AOR 1.40, C.I 1.15, 1.71) more likely to be vaccinated in the pharmacy compared to the employed population.ConclusionThere is potential for increased utilization of pharmacies as a source of influenza vaccination in Texas. Racial differences exist both for receiving influenza vaccinations and being vaccinated in the pharmacy. Influenza vaccination advocacy and education efforts may be necessary to improve pharmacy-based vaccination in Texas, especially for minorities and rural-dwelling Texans.     

Childhood immunization during the COVID-19 pandemic in Texas

In 2020, the state of Texas implemented coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) social distancing guidelines in order to prevent surges at Texas hospital emergency rooms and in intensive care units. As noted in other states, an unintended consequence of these activities was significant declines in childhood immunizations. After analyzing state-wide immunization register data for Texas, we observed a 47% relative decline in immunization rates between 2019 and 2020 among 5-month-olds and a 58% decline among 16-month-olds. We observed a small decline (5%) among 24-month-olds, and no decline in vaccines received at birth (Hepatitis B). Declines were larger in rural counties compared to urban. These declines are superimposed on increases in state vaccine exemptions over the last five years due to an aggressive anti-vaccine movement in Texas. There are concerns that continued declines in childhood immunization coverage due to COVID-19 could lead to co-endemics of measles and other vaccine preventable diseases.     

The Story of the Texas Pain Society: Formation and Function of a Regional Pain Society

Abstract: The idea of forming a Texas Pain Society came to the Founders in 1987 due to disparity and deficiencies in the practice of pain management in the United States and, in particular, the State of Texas. The Founders considered very carefully the implication of forming such a society. They diligently mapped out the mission and goals of the Texas Pain Society in those early formative years. This report is the history of Texas Pain Society as the activities unfolded from 1989 to 2011. The reader may question why there is a need to tell such a story. We believe strongly that, with disparities of standards of practice in pain medicine and poor recognition of advances in pain management, this scenario is quite common in many states and countries. The practitioners of pain management in these regions certainly must have considered getting together and forming a consensus on the standards of practice in their communities. This historical report of the Texas Pain Society provides the relevant information necessary and the efforts to be made for a society’s mission to achieve its goals and have an ongoing impact in its own region. We hope that we have shed some light on a process for the formation of a regional pain society such as ours. ?     

Does Tweeting Improve Citations? One-Year Results From the TSSMN Prospective Randomized Trial

1. Download : Download high-res image (181KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Clinical Benefit-Risk Profile of Lenalidomide in Patients With Lower-risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes Without del(5q): Results of a Phase III Trial

BackgroundIn the phase III MDS-005 study of patients with lower-risk, non-del(5q) myelodysplastic syndromes, lenalidomide was associated with a higher rate of ≥ 8 weeks red blood cell transfusion independence (RBC-TI) compared with placebo, but also with a higher risk of hematologic adverse events (AEs).Patients and MethodsThis analysis evaluated the ratio of clinical benefit-risk in patients treated with lenalidomide or placebo, and assessed the effect of lenalidomide dose reductions on response. Clinical benefit was a composite endpoint defined as RBC-TI, transfusion reduction ≥ 4 units packed red blood cells, hemoglobin increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL, or cytogenetic response.ResultsThe rate of clinical benefit was higher with lenalidomide than with placebo (31.9% vs. 3.8%). The ratio of response (RBC-TI and clinical benefit) to risk (hematologic AEs) favored lenalidomide over placebo. Patients who underwent ≥ 1 lenalidomide dose reduction had a longer duration of treatment, received a higher cumulative dose, and were more likely to experience clinical benefit versus patients without dose reductions.ConclusionDespite the occurrence of hematologic AEs, the overall benefit-risk profile supported lenalidomide treatment. Appropriate management of hematologic AEs by dose reductions may help patients with myelodysplastic syndromes to remain on treatment and achieve clinical benefit.