Immunisation Status and Safety of Vaccines in Italian MS Patients

Internationally Adopted Children (IAC) often show suboptimal immunisation coverage, but available data are discordant. Data at the first evaluation of 2073 IAC (median age: 6 years) referred to the Meyer Children’s University Hospital (Florence, Italy) in 2009–2019 were analysed in order to evaluate their immunisation status against diphtheria, tetanus, and hepatitis B. Negative antibody titres were observed in 11.5% of the IAC for diphtheria, 18.6% for tetanus, and 39.0% for hepatitis B. At multivariate analysis, originating from Africa was an independent risk factor for seronegativity for the three diseases (p < 0.001), while age below four years was an independent factor associated with protective immunity, only considering hepatitis B (p < 0.001). Vaccine documentation was an additional factor independently associated with protective immunity. However, a discrepancy between documentation (indicating previous vaccinations) and serology (showing negative antibody titres) was evidenced in 3.8% of the children for diphtheria, 12.6% for tetanus, and 29.6% for hepatitis B. This finding suggests that although vaccine documentation may reflect the presence of protective antibody titres, it should not be accepted as absolute evidence of protective immunity, underlining the importance of a complete assessment of immunisation status in IAC, particularly in those originating from Africa and aged over four years.

Download Full-text

External Environment, Enabling Factors and Predisposing Characteristics of Fully Immunised Children in Nepal

Journal of Nepal Paediatric Society ◽

10.3126/jnps.v39i2.26287 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 39 (2) ◽

pp. 79-86

Author(s):

Kanchan Thapa ◽

Bhim Raj Suwal ◽

Pratik Adhikary

Keyword(s):

External Environment ◽

Public Health Intervention ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Enabling Factors ◽

Working Mother ◽

Child Morbidity ◽

Full Immunisation ◽

Effective Public Health ◽

Immunisation Status

Introduction: Immunisation is a cost-effective public health intervention worldwide responsible for the reduction of infant and child morbidity and mortality. Full immunisation is a state of obtaining all vaccination according to the Immunisation schedule of Nepal. Methods: The secondary data of Nepal was downloaded from the DHS Program. A total of 1709 children aged 16-23 months were analysed for descriptive statistics. All the analyses were weighted by its sampling weight. The full immunisation status indicates those who completed 1 dose of BCG, 3 doses of Polio, 3 doses of DPT and 1 dose of Measles. The independent variables are further subdivided into enabling, predisposing and external environmental factors. Results: Over half of children (52.6%) were from Terai, nearly a quarter (23.0%) from province 2. More males (53.5%) and the majority of (86.1%) children with birth order one to three were immunised. Mother aged < 20 years (62%), working father (96.1%), working mother (59.7%), educated father (87.3%) and educated mother (70.7%) had children with complete immunisation. Non-smoker mother (94.6%) had fully immunised children. Nearly three quarters (73.5%) from a middle and rich family, those with PNC within 3 days (35.9%), delivered at a health facility (64.2%), and had PNC check from the skilled provider (12.1%) had completely immunised their children. Conclusions: Significant differences based on external environment, enabling factors and predisposing factors for full immunisation status was observed. Specific interventions based on these factors are recommended.

Download Full-text

Immunisation status amongst children attending special schools

Ambulatory Child Health ◽

10.1046/j.1467-0658.2001.00132.x ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 7 (3-4) ◽

pp. 213-217 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Catherine Tuffrey ◽

Fiona Finlay

Keyword(s):

Special Schools ◽

Immunisation Status

Download Full-text

‘Presumptively Initiating Vaccines and Optimizing Talk with Motivational Interviewing’ (PIVOT with MI) trial: a protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of a clinician vaccine communication intervention

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039299 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (8) ◽

pp. e039299

Author(s):

Douglas J Opel ◽

Jeffrey D Robinson ◽

Heather Spielvogle ◽

Christine Spina ◽

Kathleen Garrett ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Motivational Interviewing ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Communication Strategy ◽

Institutional Review Board ◽

Cluster Randomised ◽

Institutional Review ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Immunisation Status

IntroductionA key contributor to underimmunisation is parental refusal or delay of vaccines due to vaccine concerns. Many clinicians lack confidence in communicating with vaccine-hesitant parents (VHP) and perceive that their discussions will do little to change parents’ minds. Improving clinician communication with VHPs is critical to increasing childhood vaccine uptake.Methods and analysisWe describe the protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial to test the impact of a novel, multifaceted clinician vaccine communication strategy on child immunisation status. The trial will be conducted in 24 primary care practices in two US states (Washington and Colorado). The strategy is called Presumptively Initiating Vaccines and Optimizing Talk with Motivational Interviewing (PIVOT with MI), and involves clinicians initiating the vaccine conversation with all parents of young children using the presumptive format, and among those parents who resist vaccines, pivoting to using MI. Our primary outcome is the immunisation status of children of VHPs at 19 months, 0 day of age expressed as the percentage of days underimmunised from birth to 19 months for 22 doses of eight vaccines recommended during this interval. Secondary outcomes include clinician experience communicating with VHPs, parent visit experience and clinician adherence to the PIVOT with MI communication strategy.Ethics and disseminationThis study is approved by the following institutional review boards: Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board, Washington State Institutional Review Board and Swedish Health Services Institutional Review Board. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed manuscripts and conference presentations.Trial registration numberNCT03885232.

Download Full-text