Donna MacDougall

Seasonal influenza vaccination campaigns for health care personnel: systematic review

Background: In Canada, vaccination coverage for seasonal influenza among health care personnel remains below 50%. The objective of this review was to determine which seasonal influenza vaccination campaign or campaign components in health care settings were significantly associated with increases in influenza vaccination among staff. Methods: We identified articles in eight electronic databases and included randomized controlled trials, controlled before-and-after studies and studies with interrupted time series designs in our review. Two reviewers independently abstracted the data and assessed the risk of biases. We calculated risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals for randomized controlled trials and controlled before-and-after studies and described interrupted time series studies. Results: We identified 99 studies evaluating influenza vaccination campaigns for health care workers, but only 12 of the studies were eligible for review. In nonhospital health care settings, including long-term care facilities, campaigns with a greater variety of components (including education or promotion, better access to vaccines, legislation or regulation and/or role models) were associated with higher risk ratios (i.e, favouring the intervention group). Within hospital settings, the results reported for various types of campaigns were mixed. Many of the criteria for assessing risk of bias were not reported. Interpretation: Campaigns involving only education or promotion resulted in minimal changes in vaccination rates. Further studies are needed to determine the appropriate components and combinations of components in influenza vaccination campaigns for health care personnel.

The challenge of vaccinating adults: attitudes and beliefs of the Canadian public and healthcare providers.

Objectives Vaccine coverage for recommended vaccines is low among adults. The objective of this study was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of adults and healthcare providers related to four vaccine-preventable diseases and vaccines (diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, zoster, pneumococcus and influenza). Design We undertook a survey and focus groups of Canadian adults and healthcare providers (doctors, nurses, pharmacists). A total of 4023 adults completed the survey and 62 participated in the focus groups; 1167 providers completed the survey and 45 participated in the focus groups. Results Only 46.3% of adults thought they were up-to-date on their vaccines; 30% did not know. In contrast, 75.6% of providers reported being up-to-date. Only 57.5% of adults thought it was important to receive all recommended vaccines (compared to 87.1–91.5% of providers). Positive attitudes towards vaccines paralleled concern about the burden of illness and confidence in the vaccines, with providers being more aware of disease burden and confident in vaccine effectiveness than the public. Between 55.0% and 59.7% of adults reported willingness to be vaccinated if recommended by their healthcare provider. However, such recommendations were variable; while 77.4% of the public reported being offered and 52.8% reported being recommended the influenza vaccine by their provider, only 10.8% were offered and 5.6% recommended pertussis vaccine. Barriers and facilitators to improved vaccine coverage in adults, such as trust-mistrust of health authorities, pharmaceutical companies and national recommendations, autonomy versus the public good and logistical issues (such as insufficient time and lack of vaccination status tracking), were identified by both the public and providers. Conclusions Despite guidelines for adult vaccination, there are substantial gaps in knowledge and attitudes and beliefs among both the public and healthcare providers that lead to low vaccine coverage. A systematic approach that involves education, elimination of barriers and establishing and improving infrastructure for adult immunisation is required.

Improving rates of maternal immunization: Challenges and opportunities

ABSTRACT Objectives: An increasing number of vaccines are recommended or are being developed for use during pregnancy to protect women, fetuses, and/or newborns. For vaccines that are already recommended, vaccine uptake is variable and well below desired target. We reviewed the literature related to factors that affect a healthcare provider’s recommendation and a woman’s willingness to be vaccinated during pregnancy. Design: A scoping review of published literature from 2005 to 2015 was undertaken and all relevant articles were abstracted, summarized, and organized thematically. Results: Barriers and facilitators were identified that either decreased or increased the likelihood of a healthcare provider offering and a pregnant woman accepting vaccination during pregnancy. Concern about the safety of vaccines given during pregnancy was the most often cited barrier among both the public and healthcare providers. Other barriers included doubt about the effectiveness of the vaccine, lack of knowledge about the burden of disease, and not feeling oneself to be at risk of the infection. Major facilitators for maternal immunization included specific safety information about the vaccine in pregnant women, strong national recommendations, and healthcare providers who both recommended and provided the vaccine to their patients. Systems barriers such as inadequate facilities and staffing, vaccine purchase and storage, and reimbursement for vaccination were also cited. Evidence-based interventions were few, and included text messaging reminders, chart reminders, and standing orders. Conclusions: In order to have an effective vaccination program, improvements in the uptake of recommended vaccines during pregnancy are needed. A maternal immunization platform is required that normalizes vaccination practice among obstetrical care providers and is supported by basic and continuing education, communication strategy, and a broad range of research.

Rapid surveillance for health events following a mass meningococcal B vaccine program in a university setting: A Canadian Immunization Research Network study.

An outbreak of Neisseria meningitidis serotype B infection occurred at a small residential university; public health announced an organizational vaccination program with the 4-component Meningococcal B (4CMenB) vaccine (Bexsero(TM), Novartis/GlaxoSmithKline Inc.) several days later. Since there were limited published data on reactogenicity of 4CMenB in persons over 17years of age, this study sought to conduct rapid surveillance of health events in vaccinees and controls using an online survey. Vaccine uptake was 84.7% for dose 1 (2967/3500) and 70% (2456/3500) for dose 2; the survey response rates were 33.0% (987/2967) and 18.7% (459/2456) in dose 1 and dose 1 recipients respectively, and 12% in unvaccinated individuals (63/533). Most students were 20-29years of age (vaccinees, 64.0%; controls, 74.0). A new health problem or worsening of an existing health problem was reported by 30.0% and 30.3% of vaccine recipients after doses 1 and 2 respectively; and by 15.9% of controls. These health problems interfered with the ability to perform normal activities in most vaccinees reporting these events (74.7% post dose 1; 62.6% post dose 2), and in 60% of controls. The health problems led to a health care provider visit (including emergency room) in 12.8% and 14.4% of vaccinees post doses 1 and 2, respectively and in 40% of controls. The most common reactions in vaccinees were injection site reactions (20.6% post dose 1, 16.1% post dose 20 and non-specific systemic complaints (22.6% post dose 1, 17.6% post dose 2). No hospitalizations were reported. An online surveillance program during an emergency meningococcal B vaccine program was successfully implemented, and detected higher rates of health events in vaccinees compared to controls, and high rates of both vaccinees and controls seeking medical attention. The types of adverse events reported by young adult vaccinees were consistent with those previously.

Impact of pharmacists as immunizers on influenza vaccination coverage in Nova Scotia, Canada

ABSTRACT Immunization coverage in Canada has continued to fall below national goals. The addition of pharmacists as immunizers may increase immunization coverage. This study aimed to compare estimated influenza vaccine coverage before and after pharmacists began administering publicly funded influenza immunizations in Nova Scotia, Canada. Vaccination coverage rates and recipient demographics for the influenza vaccination seasons 2010-2011 to 2012-2013 were compared with the 2013-2014 season, the first year pharmacists provided immunizations. In 2013-2014, the vaccination coverage rate for those ≥5 years of age increased 6%, from 36% in 2012-2013 to 42% (p<0.001). Pharmacists administered over 78,000 influenza vaccinations, nearly 9% of the provinces population over the age of five. Influenza vaccine coverage rates for those ≥65 increased by 9.8% (p<0.001) in 2013-2014 compared to 2012-2013. Influenza vaccination coverage in Nova Scotia increased in 2013-2014 compared to previous years with a universal influenza program. Various factors may have contributed to the increased coverage, including the addition of pharmacists as immunizers and media coverage of influenza related fatalities. Future research will be necessary to fully determine the impact of pharmacists as immunizers.

Universal tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination of adults: What Canadian health care providers know and need to know

The tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) is recommended for all adults in both Canada and the United States. There are few data on the proportion of Canadian adults vaccinated with Tdap; however, anecdotal reports indicate that uptake is low. This study aimed to explore the knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors of Canadian health care providers (HCPs) in an attempt to identify potential barriers and facilitators to Tdap uptake. HCPs were surveyed and a geographic and practice representative sample was obtained (N =1,167). In addition, 8 focus groups and 4 interviews were conducted nationwide. Results from the survey indicate that less than half (47.5%) of all respondents reported being immunized with Tdap themselves, while 58.5% routinely offer Tdap to their adult patients. Knowledge scores were relatively low (63.2% correct answers). The best predictor of following the adult Tdap immunization guidelines was awareness of and agreement with those recommendations. Respondents who were aware of the recommendations were more likely to think that Tdap is safe and effective, that their patients are at significant risk of getting pertussis, and to feel that they have sufficient information (p < 0.0001 for each statement). Focus group data supported the survey results and indicated that there are substantial gaps in knowledge of pertussis and Tdap among Canadian HCPs. Lack of public knowledge about adult immunization, lack of immunization registries, a costing differential between Td and Tdap, workload required to deliver the vaccine, and vaccine hesitancy were identified as barriers to compliance with the national recommendations for universal adult immunization, and suggestions were provided to better translate recommendations to front-line practitioners.

A New Approach to Improving Healthcare Personnel Influenza Immunization Programs: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background Healthcare personnel influenza immunization rates remain sub-optimal. Following multiple studies and expert consultations, the “Successful Influenza Immunization Programs for Healthcare Personnel: A Guide for Program Planners” was produced. This trial assessed the impact of the Guide with facilitation in improving healthcare personnel influenza immunization rates in Canadian healthcare organizations. Methods A sample of 26 healthcare organizations across six Canadian provinces (ON, MB, NS, BC, SK, NL) was randomized to Intervention (n=13) or Control groups (n=13). Baseline influenza immunization rates were obtained for 2008–2009; the study groups were followed over two subsequent influenza seasons. The Intervention group received the Guide, facilitation support through workshops for managers and ongoing support. The Control groups conducted programs as usual. The Groups were compared using their reported influenza healthcare personnel influenza immunization rates and scores from a program assessment questionnaire. Findings Twenty-six organizations agreed to participate. 35% (9/26) of sites were acute care hospitals, 19% (5/26) continuing care, long-term care organizations or nursing homes, and 46% (12/26) were mixed acute care hospitals and long-term care or regional health authorities. The median rate of influenza immunization among healthcare personnel for the Intervention group was 43%, 44%, and 51% at three points in time respectively, and in the Control group: 62%, 57%, and 55% respectively. No significant differences were observed between the groups at the three points in time. However, there was a 7% increase in the median rates between the Baseline Year and Year Two in the Intervention group, and a 6% decrease in the Control group over the same time period, which was statistically significant (0.071 versus -0.058, p < 0.001). Interpretation This pragmatic randomized trial of the Guide with facilitation of its implementation improved healthcare personnel immunization rates, but these rates continued to be sub-optimal and below rates achievable in programs requiring personnel to be immunized. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01207518

Parental perceptions of school-based influenza immunisation in Ontario, Canada: a qualitative study

Objective To understand the perspectives of Ontario parents regarding the advantages and disadvantages of adding influenza immunisation to the currently existing Ontario school-based immunisation programmes. Design Descriptive qualitative study. Participants Parents of school-age children in Ontario, Canada, who were recruited using a variety of electronic strategies (social media, emails and media releases), and identified as eligible (Ontario resident, parent of one or more school-age children, able to read/write English) on the basis of a screening questionnaire. We used stratified purposeful sampling to obtain maximum variation in two groups: parents who had ever immunised at least one child against influenza or who had never done so. We conducted focus groups (teleconference or internet forum) and individual interviews to collect data. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Setting Ontario, Canada. Results Of the 55 participants, 16 took part in four teleconference focus groups, 35 in 6 internet forum focus groups and four in individual interviews conducted between October 2012 and February 2013. Participants who stated that a school-based influenza immunisation programme would be worthwhile for their child valued its convenience and its potential to reduce influenza transmission without interfering with the family routine. However, most thought that for a programme to be acceptable, it would need to be well designed and voluntary, with adequate parental control and transparent communication between the key stakeholder groups of public health, schools and parents. Conclusions These results will benefit decision-makers in the public health and education sectors as they consider the advantages and disadvantages of immunising children in schools as part of a system-wide influenza prevention approach. Further research is needed to assess the perceptions of school board and public health stakeholders.

Climate change projections and public health systems: Building evidence-informed connections

a School of Nursing, St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, Canada b Climate & Atmospheric Sciences Institute, St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, Canada c Department of Earth Sciences, St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, Canada d Centre pour l’étude et la simulation du climat à l’échelle régionale (ESCER), Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada e Canadian Center for Vaccinology, Dalhousie University, IWK Health Center, & Nova Scotia Health Authority, Canada f Health PEI, Canada