Giedre Gefenaite

Predictors of seasonal influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in hospitals: a descriptive meta-analysis

Objective Vaccinating healthcare workers (HCWs) against influenza is one of the most important methods of decreasing influenza transmission among at-risk patients in healthcare facilities. However, despite recommendations, the rate of uptake of influenza vaccine among HCWs remains low. The objective of this meta-analysis was to determine the most important predictors of seasonal influenza vaccine acceptance among HCWs in hospitals. Method A literature search of PubMed and Embase resulted in 4586 hits. Screening of the titles, abstracts and full text identified 13 studies eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Based on the crude data, pooled risk ratios (Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios, mhRR) and their 95% CIs were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel analysis to estimate the associations of predictors with influenza vaccination status. Results and conclusion Knowing that the vaccine is effective (mhRR 2.22; 95% CI 1.93 to 2.54), being willing to prevent influenza transmission (mhRR 2.31; 95% CI 1.97 to 2.70), believing that influenza is highly contagious (RR 2.25; 95% CI 1.66 to 3.05), believing that influenza prevention is important (mhRR 3.63; 95% CI 2.87 to 4.59) and having a family that is usually vaccinated (RR 2.32; 95% CI 1.64 to 3.28) were statistically significantly associated with a twofold higher vaccine uptake. We therefore recommend targeting these predictors when developing new influenza vaccination implementation strategies for hospital HCWs.

After adjusting for bias in meta-analysis seasonal influenza vaccine remains effective in community-dwelling elderly *

OBJECTIVE To compare the performance of the bias-adjusted meta-analysis to the conventional meta-analysis assessing seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness among community-dwelling elderly aged 60 years and older. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Systematic literature search revealed 14 cohort studies that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Laboratory-confirmed influenza, influenza-like illness, hospitalization from influenza and/or pneumonia, and all-cause mortality were study outcomes. Potential biases were identified using bias checklists. The magnitude and uncertainty of biases were assessed by expert opinion. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using random effects model. RESULTS After incorporating biases, overall effect estimates regressed slightly toward no effect, with the largest relative difference between conventional and bias-adjusted ORs for laboratory-confirmed influenza (OR, 0.18; 95% CI: 0.01, 3.00 vs. OR, 0.23; 95% CI: 0.03, 2.04). In most of the studies, CIs widened reflecting uncertainties about the biases. The between-study heterogeneity reduced considerably with the largest reduction for all-cause mortality (I(2) = 4%, P = 0.39 vs. I(2) = 91%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION This case study showed that after addressing potential biases influenza vaccine was still estimated effective in preventing hospitalization from influenza and/or pneumonia and all-cause mortality. Increasing the number of assessors and incorporating empirical evidence might improve the new bias-adjustment method.

2012/13 influenza vaccine effectiveness against hospitalised influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B: estimates from a European network of hospitals

While influenza vaccines aim to decrease the incidence of severe influenza among high-risk groups, evidence of influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) among the influenza vaccine target population is sparse. We conducted a multicentre test-negative case-control study to estimate IVE against hospitalised laboratory-confirmed influenza in the target population in 18 hospitals in France, Italy, Lithuania and the Navarre and Valencia regions in Spain. All hospitalised patients aged ≥18 years, belonging to the target population presenting with influenza-like illness symptom onset within seven days were swabbed. Patients positive by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for influenza virus were cases and those negative were controls. Using logistic regression, we calculated IVE for each influenza virus subtype and adjusted it for month of symptom onset, study site, age and chronic conditions. Of the 1,972 patients included, 116 were positive for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 58 for A(H3N2) and 232 for influenza B. Adjusted IVE was 21.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): -25.2 to 50.6; n=1,628), 61.8% (95% CI: 26.8 to 80.0; n=557) and 43.1% (95% CI: 21.2 to 58.9; n=1,526) against influenza A(H1N1) pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively. Our results suggest that the 2012/13 IVE was moderate against influenza A(H3N2) and B and low against influenza A(H1N1) pdm09.

Comparatively low attendance during Human Papillomavirus catch-up vaccination among teenage girls in the Netherlands: Insights from a behavioral survey among parents

BackgroundThe Dutch Human Papillomavirus (HPV) catch-up vaccination program in 2009 appeared less successful than expected. We aimed to identify the most important determinants of refusing the vaccination.MethodsTwo thousand parents of girls born in 1996 targeted for HPV vaccination received an invitation letter to participate in a questionnaire study. Two study groups were defined: the first group consisted of parents of girls who had accepted the vaccine and already received the first dose of HPV vaccination. The second group consisted of parents whose daughters were not vaccinated. The questionnaire consisted of a broad spectrum of possible determinants that were revealed after literature search and discussions with the stakeholders.ResultsFour hundred sixty nine questionnaires (24%) were returned, 307 (31%) from those who accepted and 162 (16%) from those who declined the vaccine. The decision not to accept the vaccine was largely determined by: (i) perception that the information provided by the government about the vaccine was limited or biased (OR 13.27); (ii) limited trust, that the government would stop the vaccination program if there were serious side effects (OR 9.95); (iii) lack of knowledge about the effectiveness of the vaccine (OR 7.67); (iv) concerns about the side effects of the vaccine (OR 4.94); (v) lack of conviction that HPV can be extremely harmful (OR 3.78); (vi) perception that the government is strongly influenced by vaccine producers (OR 3.54); and (vii) religious convictions (OR 2.18).ConclusionsThis study revealed several determinants for HPV vaccination uptake after implementation of the HPV vaccine for adolescent girls. These determinants should be taken into consideration in order to successfully implement HPV vaccination into National Immunization Programs.

Effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccination in community-dwelling elderly people: an individual participant data meta-analysis of test-negative design case-control studies

BACKGROUND Several aggregate data meta-analyses have provided estimates of the effectiveness of influenza vaccination in community-dwelling elderly people. However, these studies ignored the effects of patient-level confounders such as sex, age, and chronic diseases that could bias effectiveness estimates. We aimed to assess the confounder-adjusted effectiveness of influenza vaccines on laboratory-confirmed influenza among elderly people by conducting a global individual participant data meta-analysis. METHODS In this individual participant data meta-analysis, we considered studies included in a previously conducted aggregate data meta-analysis that included test-negative design case-control studies published up to July 13, 2014. We contacted all authors of the included studies on Dec 1, 2014, to request individual participant data. Patients were excluded if their unique identifier was missing, their vaccination status was unknown, their outcome status was unknown, or they had had suspected influenza infection more than once in the same influenza season. Cases were patients with influenza-like illness symptoms who tested positive for at least one of A H1N1, A H1N1 pdm09, A H3N2, or B viruses; controls were patients with influenza-like illness symptoms who tested negative for these virus types or subtypes. Influenza vaccine effectiveness against overall and subtype-specific laboratory-confirmed influenza were the primary and secondary outcomes. We used a generalised linear mixed model to calculate adjusted vaccine effectiveness according to vaccine match to the circulating strains of influenza virus and intensity of the virus activity (epidemic or non-epidemic). Vaccine effectiveness was defined as the relative reduction in risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza in vaccinated patients compared with unvaccinated patients. We did subgroup analyses to estimate vaccine effectiveness according to hemisphere, age category, and health status. FINDINGS We received 23 of the 53 datasets included in the aggregate data meta-analysis. Furthermore, six additional datasets were provided by data collaborators, which resulted in individual participant data for a total of 5210 participants. A total of 4975 patients had the required data for analysis. Of these, 3146 (63%) were controls and 1829 (37%) were cases. Influenza vaccination was significantly effective during epidemic seasons irrespective of vaccine match status (matched adjusted vaccine effectiveness 44·38%, 95% CI 22·63-60·01; mismatched adjusted vaccine effectiveness 20·00%, 95% CI 3·46-33·68; analyses in the imputed dataset). Seasonal influenza vaccination did not show significant effectiveness during non-epidemic seasons. We found substantial variation in vaccine effectiveness across virus types and subtypes, with the highest estimate for A H1N1 pdm09 (53·19%, 10·25-75·58) and the lowest estimate for B virus types (-1·52%, -39·58 to 26·16). Although we observed no significant differences between subgroups in each category (hemisphere, age, and health status), influenza vaccination showed a protective effect among elderly people with cardiovascular disease, lung disease, or aged 75 years and younger. INTERPRETATION Influenza vaccination is moderately effective against laboratory-confirmed influenza in elderly people during epidemic seasons. More research is needed to investigate factors affecting vaccine protection (eg, brand-specific or type-specific vaccine effectiveness and repeated annual vaccination) in elderly people. FUNDING University Medical Center Groningen.

Seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness against influenza in 2012-2013: a hospital-based case-control study in Lithuania.

BACKGROUND Due to scarce information on seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness (SIVE) against severe clinical influenza outcomes in risk populations, we conducted a case-control study to assess its effects against laboratory-confirmed influenza in hospitalized patients during the 2012-2013 influenza season. METHODS We conducted a test-negative case-control study among ≥18 years old patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) hospitalized in two Lithuanian hospitals. Cases were influenza A(H1N1), A(H3) or influenza B positive by RT-PCR, and controls were influenza negative. Additional demographic and clinical data to assess the role of confounding were collected. SIVE and its confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated by using multivariate logistic regression as (1-OR)×100%. RESULTS The sample consisted of 185 subjects. Seasonal influenza vaccine uptake was 5%. Among 111 (60%) influenza positive cases, 24.3% were A(H1N1), 10.8% were A(H3) and 24.3% were influenza B cases. Unadjusted SIVE was 79% (95% CI -6% to 96%) and after the adjustment it increased to 86% (95% CI 19% to 97%). CONCLUSIONS Seasonal influenza vaccination in 2012-2013 was associated with reduced occurrence of laboratory-confirmed influenza, but due to low sample size the estimate of SIVE is imprecise. Given high prevalence of influenza in hospitalized ILI cases and low influenza vaccination coverage, there is a need to increase influenza vaccination rates.

Did introduction of pneumococcal vaccines in the Netherlands decrease the need for respiratory antibiotics in children? Analysis of 2002 to 2013 data

To estimate the effect of the introduction of the 7- and 10-valentpneumococcal vaccines in 2006 and 2011, respectively in the Netherlands, we assessed respiratory antibiotic use in one to nine year-old children between 2002 and 2013. Seasonal autoregressive integrated moving-average models were applied to estimate the percentage reduction in respiratory antibiotic use. When compared with the pre-vaccination period, the proportion of respiratory antibiotic prescriptions fell by 4.94% (95% CI: 4.63 to 5.26) and 9.02% (95% CI: 2.83 to 14.82) after the introduction of the 7-valent vaccine in children aged three and four years, respectively. After the introduction of the 10-valent vaccine, we observed a reduction of 13.04% (95% CI: 2.76 to 22.23), 20.31% (95% CI: 13.50 to 26.58), 16.92% (95% CI: 3.07 to 28.80), 22.34% (95% CI: 3.73 to 37.35), 23.75% (95% CI: 2.37 to 40.44) in two, three, four, six and seven year-old children, respectively. Thus, our results indicate a reduction in respiratory antibiotic prescriptions in young children after introduction of the pneumococcal vaccines. As only children in our study population aged one and two years born after March 2011 had received the 10-valent vaccine, the effects of the 10-valent vaccine in children aged three to nine years likely reflect the effects of the 7-valent vaccine and herd immunity.

Effectiveness of A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza vaccine in adults recommended for annual influenza vaccination.

Introduction Because of variability in published A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza vaccine effectiveness estimates, we conducted a study in the adults belonging to the risk groups to assess the A(H1N1)pdm09 MF59-adjuvanted influenza vaccine effectiveness. Methods VE against influenza and/or pneumonia was assessed in the cohort study (n>25000), and vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza was assessed in a matched case-control study (16 pairs). Odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated by using multivariate logistic regression; vaccine effectiveness was estimated as (1-odds ratio)*100%. Results Vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza and influenza and/or pneumonia was 98% (84–100%) and 33% (2–54%) respectively. The vaccine did not prevent influenza and/or pneumonia in 18–59 years old subjects, and was 49% (16–69%) effective in 60 years and older subjects. Conclusions Even though we cannot entirely rule out that selection bias, residual confounding and/or cross-protection has played a role, the present results indicate that the MF59-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza vaccine has been effective in preventing laboratory-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza and influenza and/or pneumonia, the latter notably in 60 years and older subjects.

2015/16 seasonal vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B among elderly people in Europe: results from the I-MOVE+ project

We conducted a multicentre test-negative case–control study in 27 hospitals of 11 European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalised influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B among people aged ≥ 65 years. Patients swabbed within 7 days after onset of symptoms compatible with severe acute respiratory infection were included. Information on demographics, vaccination and underlying conditions was collected. Using logistic regression, we measured IVE adjusted for potential confounders. We included 355 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 cases, 110 influenza B cases, and 1,274 controls. Adjusted IVE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI): 22 to 57). It was 59% (95% CI: 23 to 78), 48% (95% CI: 5 to 71), 43% (95% CI: 8 to 65) and 39% (95% CI: 7 to 60) in patients with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung and heart disease, respectively. Adjusted IVE against influenza B was 52% (95% CI: 24 to 70). It was 62% (95% CI: 5 to 85), 60% (95% CI: 18 to 80) and 36% (95% CI: -23 to 67) in patients with diabetes mellitus, lung and heart disease, respectively. 2015/16 IVE estimates against hospitalised influenza in elderly people was moderate against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B, including among those with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung or heart diseases.

Predictors of influenza in the adult population during seasonal and A(H1N1)pdm09 pandemic influenza periods.

We aimed to assess whether the characteristics of influenza-like illness (ILI) cases in the general population were similar during the seasonal and pandemic A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza periods. We conducted a study using a general population database, which included demographic (sex, age) and clinical (underlying medical conditions, influenza vaccination status) information on more than 80 000 subjects. We assessed the most important predictors of ILI during each season by using multiple logistic regression. We descriptively compared whether they were similar during different seasons. The model, including all demographic and clinical characteristics, showed that age ⩾60 years decreased the odds for ILI by 52% and 81% during the seasonal and A(H1N1)pdm09 pandemic periods, respectively. Being vaccinated decreased the odds of ILI for seasonal influenza by 32%, while suffering from the comorbidities other than lung or cardiovascular diseases doubled the odds of ILI during the A(H1N1)pdm09 pandemic.