Entity

Time filter

Source Type

Baltimore Highlands, MD, United States

Phadke V.K.,Emory University | Bednarczyk R.A.,Emory University | Salmon D.A.,Institute for Vaccine Safety | Omer S.B.,Emory University
JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association | Year: 2016

IMPORTANCE Parents hesitant to vaccinate their children may delay routine immunizations or seek exemptions from state vaccine mandates. Recent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases in the United States have drawn attention to this phenomenon. Improved understanding of the association between vaccine refusal and the epidemiology of these diseases is needed. OBJECTIVE To review the published literature to evaluate the association between vaccine delay, refusal, or exemption and the epidemiology of measles and pertussis, 2 vaccine-preventable diseases with recent US outbreaks. EVIDENCE REVIEW Search of PubMed through November 30, 2015, for reports of US measles outbreaks that have occurred since measles was declared eliminated in the United States (after January 1, 2000), endemic and epidemic pertussis since the lowest point in US pertussis incidence (after January 1, 1977), and for studies that assessed disease risk in the context of vaccine delay or exemption. FINDINGS We identified 18 published measles studies (9 annual summaries and 9 outbreak reports), which described 1416 measles cases (individual age range, 2 weeks-84 years; 178 cases younger than 12 months) and more than half (56.8%) had no history of measles vaccination. Of the 970 measles cases with detailed vaccination data, 574 cases were unvaccinated despite being vaccine eligible and 405 (70.6%) of these had nonmedical exemptions (eg, exemptions for religious or philosophical reasons, as opposed to medical contraindications; 41.8%of total). Among 32 reports of pertussis outbreaks, which included 10 609 individuals for whom vaccination status was reported (age range, 10 days-87 years), the 5 largest statewide epidemics had substantial proportions (range, 24%-45%) of unvaccinated or undervaccinated individuals. However, several pertussis outbreaks also occurred in highly vaccinated populations, indicating waning immunity. Nine reports (describing 12 outbreaks) provided detailed vaccination data on unimmunized cases; among 8 of these outbreaks from 59%through 93%of unvaccinated individuals were intentionally unvaccinated. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A substantial proportion of the US measles cases in the era after elimination were intentionally unvaccinated. The phenomenon of vaccine refusal was associated with an increased risk for measles among people who refuse vaccines and among fully vaccinated individuals. Although pertussis resurgence has been attributed to waning immunity and other factors, vaccine refusal was still associated with an increased risk for pertussis in some populations. Copyright 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Source


Halsey N.A.,Institute for Vaccine Safety | Edwards K.M.,Vanderbilt University | Dekker C.L.,Stanford University | Klein N.P.,Kaiser Permanente | And 5 more authors.
Vaccine | Year: 2012

Assessing individual reports of adverse events following immunizations (AEFI) can be challenging. Most published reviews are based on expert opinions, but the methods and logic used to arrive at these opinions are neither well described nor understood by many health care providers and scientists. We developed a standardized algorithm to assist in collecting and interpreting data, and to help assess causality after individual AEFI. Key questions that should be asked during the assessment of AEFI include: Is the diagnosis of the AEFI correct? Does clinical or laboratory evidence exist that supports possible causes for the AEFI other than the vaccine in the affected individual? Is there a known causal association between the AEFI and the vaccine? Is there strong evidence against a causal association? Is there a specific laboratory test implicating the vaccine in the pathogenesis? An algorithm can assist with addressing these questions in a standardized, transparent manner which can be tracked and reassessed if additional information becomes available. Examples in this document illustrate the process of using the algorithm to determine causality. As new epidemiologic and clinical data become available, the algorithm and guidelines will need to be modified. Feedback from users of the algorithm will be invaluable in this process. We hope that this algorithm approach can assist with educational efforts to improve the collection of key information on AEFI and provide a platform for teaching about causality assessment. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. Source


Tozzi A.E.,Multifactorial Diseases and Complex Phenotypes | Balakrishnan M.R.,World Health Organization | Halsey N.A.,Institute for Vaccine Safety | Law B.,Public Health Agency of Canada | Zuber P.L.F.,World Health Organization
Vaccine | Year: 2013

Serious illnesses or even deaths may rarely occur after childhood vaccinations. Public health programs are faced with great challenges to establish if the events presenting after the administration of a vaccine are due to other conditions, and hence a coincidental presentation, rather than caused by the administered vaccines. Given its priority, the Global Advisory Committee for Vaccine Safety (GACVS) commissioned a group of experts to review the previously published World Health Organization (WHO) Adverse Event Following Immunization (AEFI) causality assessment methodology and aide-memoire, and to develop a standardized and user friendly tool to assist health care personnel in the processing and interpretation of data on individual events, and to assess the causality after AEFIs. We describe a tool developed for causality assessment of individual AEFIs that includes: (a) an eligibility component for the assessment that reviews the diagnosis associated with the event and identifies the administered vaccines; (b) a checklist that systematically guides users to gather available information to feed a decision algorithm; and (c) a decision support algorithm that assists the assessors to come to a classification of the individual AEFI. Final classification generated by the process includes four categories in which the event is either: (1) consistent; (2) inconsistent; or (3) indeterminate with respect of causal association; or (4) unclassifiable. Subcategories are identified to assist assessors in resulting public health decisions that can be used for action. This proposed tool should support the classification of AEFI cases in a standardized, transparent manner and to collect essential information during AEFI investigation. The algorithm should provide countries and health officials at the global level with an instrument to respond to vaccine safety alerts, and support the education, research and policy decisions on immunization safety. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. Source


Griffioen M.,University of Maryland, Baltimore | Halsey N.,Institute for Vaccine Safety
Public Health Nursing | Year: 2014

Objective: To examine published studies of immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHS) following vaccination and to determine whether women are at an increased risk of developing IHS after vaccination. Design and Sample: PubMed was reviewed for vaccine articles reporting IHS by gender through June 2012. Data were abstracted on type of study, vaccine, hypersensitivity reaction, and statistic reported. Measures: Articles were included if they described experimental, quasi-experimental, correlational or descriptive studies and IHS was reported by gender. Results: Of 847 articles found in PubMed, 11 met the inclusion criteria. In eight studies, more women than men reported IHS, in two studies more men than women reported IHS and in one study the count was even. Conclusion: Limited data from these studies suggest that women may have higher rates of IHS reactions following vaccination than men. Limitations to the available data include the lack of denominator data and that the definition of IHS was not consistent across the studies. Large-scale population-based studies are indicated to determine if there are differences in rates by gender and biologic basis for these differences. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Source


Salmon D.A.,Institute for Vaccine Safety | Dudley M.Z.,Institute for Vaccine Safety | Glanz J.M.,Kaiser Permanente | Omer S.B.,Emory University
American Journal of Preventive Medicine | Year: 2015

Vaccine hesitancy reflects concerns about the decision to vaccinate oneself or one's children. There is a broad range of factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy, including the compulsory nature of vaccines, their coincidental temporal relationships to adverse health outcomes, unfamiliarity with vaccine-preventable diseases, and lack of trust in corporations and public health agencies. Although vaccination is a norm in the U.S. and the majority of parents vaccinate their children, many do so amid concerns. The proportion of parents claiming non-medical exemptions to school immunization requirements has been increasing over the past decade. Vaccine refusal has been associated with outbreaks of invasive Haemophilus influenzae type b disease, varicella, pneumococcal disease, measles, and pertussis, resulting in the unnecessary suffering of young children and waste of limited public health resources. Vaccine hesitancy is an extremely important issue that needs to be addressed because effective control of vaccine-preventable diseases generally requires indefinite maintenance of extremely high rates of timely vaccination. The multifactorial and complex causes of vaccine hesitancy require a broad range of approaches on the individual, provider, health system, and national levels. These include standardized measurement tools to quantify and locate clustering of vaccine hesitancy and better understand issues of trust; rapid, independent, and transparent review of an enhanced and appropriately funded vaccine safety system; adequate reimbursement for vaccine risk communication in doctors' offices; and individually tailored messages for parents who have vaccine concerns, especially first-time pregnant women. The potential of vaccines to prevent illness and save lives has never been greater. Yet, that potential is directly dependent on parental acceptance of vaccines, which requires confidence in vaccines, healthcare providers who recommend and administer vaccines, and the systems to make sure vaccines are safe. © 2015 by American Journal of Preventive Medicine and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Source

Discover hidden collaborations