Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 132
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Gen Intern Med ; 38(4): 986-993, 2023 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35794307

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Herpes zoster vaccination rates remain low despite longstanding national recommendations to vaccinate immunocompetent adults aged ≥ 50 years. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice (ACIP) updated its recommendations for recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in October 2021 to include immunocompromised adults aged ≥19 years. OBJECTIVE: To assess practices, attitudes, and knowledge about RZV, barriers to recommending RZV, and likelihood of recommending RZV to patients with various immunocompromising conditions. DESIGN: Mail and internet-based survey conducted from May through July 2020. PARTICIPANTS: General internists and family physicians throughout the USA. MAIN MEASURES: Survey responses. KEY RESULTS: The response rate was 66% (632/955). Many physicians were already recommending RZV to immunocompromised populations, including adults ≥50 years with HIV (67% of respondents) and on recombinant human immune modulator therapy (56%). Forty-seven percent of respondents both stocked/administered RZV and referred patients elsewhere, frequently a pharmacy, for vaccination; 42% did not stock RZV and only referred patients. The majority agreed pharmacies do not inform them when RZV has been given (64%). Physicians were generally knowledgeable about RZV; however, 25% incorrectly thought experiencing side effects from the first dose of RZV that interfere with normal activities was a reason to not receive the second dose. The top reported barrier to recommending RZV was experience with patients declining RZV due to cost concerns (67%). Most physicians reported they would be likely to recommend RZV to immunocompromised patients. CONCLUSION: Most primary care physicians welcome updated ACIP RZV recommendations for immunocompromised adults. Knowledge gaps, communication issues, and financial barriers need to be addressed to optimize vaccination delivery.


Assuntos
Vacina contra Herpes Zoster , Herpes Zoster , Médicos , Adulto , Humanos , Vacina contra Herpes Zoster/efeitos adversos , Herpes Zoster/prevenção & controle , Herpes Zoster/induzido quimicamente , Herpes Zoster/tratamento farmacológico , Vacinas Sintéticas/efeitos adversos , Inquéritos e Questionários
2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 72(36): 979-984, 2023 Sep 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37676840

RESUMO

Despite the availability of effective vaccines against pneumococcal disease, pneumococcus is a common bacterial cause of pneumonia, causing approximately 100,000 hospitalizations among U.S. adults per year. In addition, approximately 30,000 invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) cases and 3,000 IPD deaths occur among U.S. adults each year. Previous health care provider surveys identified gaps in provider knowledge about and understanding of the adult pneumococcal vaccine recommendations, and pneumococcal vaccine coverage remains suboptimal. To assess the feasibility and acceptability domains of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Evidence to Recommendations (EtR) framework, a health care provider knowledge and attitudes survey was conducted during September 28-October 10, 2022, by the Healthcare and Public Perceptions of Immunizations Survey Collaborative before the October 2022 ACIP meeting. Among 751 provider respondents, two thirds agreed or strongly agreed with the policy option under consideration to expand the recommendations for the new 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) to adults who had only received the previously recommended 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13). Gaps in providers' knowledge and perceived challenges to implementing recommendations were identified and were included in ACIP's EtR framework discussions in late October 2022 when ACIP updated the recommendations for PCV20 use in adults. Currently, use of PCV20 is recommended for certain adults who have previously received PCV13, in addition to those who have never received a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. The survey findings indicate a need to increase provider awareness and implementation of pneumococcal vaccination recommendations and to provide tools to assist with patient-specific vaccination guidance. Resources available to address the challenges to implementing pneumococcal vaccination recommendations include the PneumoRecs VaxAdvisor mobile app and other CDC-developed tools, including summary documents and overviews of vaccination schedules and CDC's strategic framework to increase confidence in vaccines and reduce vaccine-preventable diseases, Vaccinate with Confidence.


Assuntos
Infecções Pneumocócicas , Vacinas Pneumocócicas , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto , Humanos , Vacinas Conjugadas , Pessoal de Saúde , Infecções Pneumocócicas/prevenção & controle , Atitude
3.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 72(45): 1244-1247, 2023 Nov 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37943698

RESUMO

Health care personnel (HCP) are recommended to receive annual vaccination against influenza to reduce influenza-related morbidity and mortality. Every year, acute care hospitals report receipt of influenza vaccination among HCP to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). This analysis used NHSN data to describe changes in influenza vaccination coverage among HCP in acute care hospitals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Influenza vaccination among HCP increased during the prepandemic period from 88.6% during 2017-18 to 90.7% during 2019-20. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the percentage of HCP vaccinated against influenza decreased to 85.9% in 2020-21 and 81.1% in 2022-23. Additional efforts are needed to implement evidence-based strategies to increase vaccination coverage among HCP and to identify factors associated with recent declines in influenza vaccination coverage.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Cobertura Vacinal , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Pandemias , Estações do Ano , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Pessoal de Saúde , Vacinação , Hospitais , Atenção à Saúde
4.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 72(45): 1237-1243, 2023 Nov 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37943704

RESUMO

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends that health care personnel (HCP) receive an annual influenza vaccine and that everyone aged ≥6 months stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccination. Health care facilities report vaccination of HCP against influenza and COVID-19 to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). During January-June 2023, NHSN defined up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination as receipt of a bivalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose or completion of a primary series within the preceding 2 months. This analysis describes influenza and up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination coverage among HCP working in acute care hospitals and nursing homes during the 2022-23 influenza season (October 1, 2022-March 31, 2023). Influenza vaccination coverage was 81.0% among HCP at acute care hospitals and 47.1% among those working at nursing homes. Up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination coverage was 17.2% among HCP working at acute care hospitals and 22.8% among those working at nursing homes. There is a need to promote evidence-based strategies to improve vaccination coverage among HCP. Tailored strategies might also be useful to reach all HCP with recommended vaccines and protect them and their patients from vaccine-preventable respiratory diseases.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Cobertura Vacinal , Estações do Ano , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Pessoal de Saúde , Vacinação , Casas de Saúde
5.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 72(51): 1371-1376, 2023 Dec 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38127673

RESUMO

Nursing home residents are at risk for becoming infected with and experiencing severe complications from respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). Fall 2023 is the first season during which vaccines are simultaneously available to protect older adults in the United States against all three of these respiratory viruses. Nursing homes are required to report COVID-19 vaccination coverage and can voluntarily report influenza and RSV vaccination coverage among residents to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network. The purpose of this study was to assess COVID-19, influenza, and RSV vaccination coverage among nursing home residents during the current 2023-24 respiratory virus season. As of December 10, 2023, 33.1% of nursing home residents were up to date with vaccination against COVID-19. Among residents at 20.2% and 19.4% of facilities that elected to report, coverage with influenza and RSV vaccines was 72.0% and 9.8%, respectively. Vaccination varied by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services region, social vulnerability index level, and facility size. There is an urgent need to protect nursing home residents against severe outcomes of respiratory illnesses by continuing efforts to increase vaccination against COVID-19 and influenza and discussing vaccination against RSV with eligible residents during the ongoing 2023-24 respiratory virus season.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Vírus Sincicial Respiratório Humano , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Idoso , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Casas de Saúde , Vacinação , Atenção à Saúde
6.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 20: E06, 2023 02 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36757854

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has caused more than 100.2 million infections and more than 1 million deaths in the US as of November 2022, yet information on the economic burden associated with post-COVID-19 conditions is lacking. We estimated the possible economic burden associated with post-COVID-19 conditions by comparing direct medical costs among patients younger than 65 years with and without COVID-19 in the postacute period. METHODS: Commercially insured children and adults with a COVID-19 diagnosis (cases) during April-August 2020 were matched to those without COVID-19 (controls) on a 1:4 ratio. Direct medical costs represented 1-, 3-, and 6-month total expenditures per person starting 31 days after the diagnosis date. We used a 2-part model to evaluate cost differences among individuals with and without COVID-19, adjusted for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Costs were higher among cases compared with controls. Direct medical costs among child cases were 1.82, 1.72, and 1.70 times higher than controls over 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Direct medical costs among adult cases were 1.69, 1.54, and 1.46 times higher than costs among controls over 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Relative differences in costs were highest among adults aged 50 to 64 years. In a subset of people with COVID-19, costs were higher among hospitalized cases compared with nonhospitalized cases. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a considerable economic burden of COVID-19 even after the resolution of acute illness, highlighting the importance of prevention and mitigation measures to reduce the economic impact of COVID-19 on the US health care system.


Assuntos
Teste para COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Criança , COVID-19/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Gastos em Saúde , Seguro Saúde , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde
7.
Am J Public Health ; 112(5): 719-723, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35324263

RESUMO

New York City (NYC) introduced a universal prekindergarten program in 2014 that mandated influenza vaccination for enrollment. We conducted a difference-in-difference-in-differences study to evaluate the program using 2012 to 2019 MarketScan claims data. After the introduction of the program, influenza vaccine uptake among four-year-old children in NYC during the subsequent seasons increased by 6.3 to 9.8 percentage points compared with the rest of New York State. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(5):719-723. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306765).


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Humanos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Cidade de Nova Iorque , Instituições Acadêmicas , Estações do Ano , Vacinação
8.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(23): 757-763, 2022 Jun 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35679179

RESUMO

Some racial and ethnic minority groups have experienced disproportionately higher rates of COVID-19-related illness and mortality (1,2). Vaccination is highly effective in preventing severe COVID-19 illness and death (3), and equitable vaccination can reduce COVID-19-related disparities. CDC analyzed data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM), a random-digit-dialed cellular telephone survey of adults aged ≥18 years, to assess disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage by race and ethnicity among U.S. adults during December 2020-November 2021. Asian and non-Hispanic White (White) adults had the highest ≥1-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage by the end of April 2021 (69.6% and 59.0%, respectively); ≥1-dose coverage was lower among Hispanic (47.3%), non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) (46.3%), Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NH/OPI) (45.9%), multiple or other race (42.6%), and American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) (38.7%) adults. By the end of November 2021, national ≥1-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage was similar for Black (78.2%), Hispanic (81.3%), NH/OPI (75.7%), and White adults (78.7%); however, coverage remained lower for AI/AN (61.8%) and multiple or other race (68.0%) adults. Booster doses of COVID-19 vaccine are now recommended for all adults (4), but disparities in booster dose coverage among the fully vaccinated have become apparent (5). Tailored efforts including community partnerships and trusted sources of information could be used to increase vaccination coverage among the groups with identified persistent disparities and can help achieve vaccination equity and prevent new disparities by race and ethnicity in booster dose coverage.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Etnicidade , Adolescente , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Humanos , Grupos Minoritários , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação , Cobertura Vacinal
9.
Prev Med ; 159: 107019, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35283162

RESUMO

Human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination for adolescents aged 11-12 years and cervical cancer screening for women aged 21-65 years are recommended to help prevent cervical cancer. The purpose of this study was to describe 2018 National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS®) data for the United States on HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening from 275 commercial preferred provider organizations (PPOs), 219 commercial health maintenance organizations (HMOs), and 204 Medicaid HMOs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and NCQA analyzed the data in 2021. The HEDIS® measure for HPV vaccination was the percentage of male and female adolescents aged 13 years who completed HPV immunization (2- or 3-dose series) on or before their 13th birthday. The measure for cervical cancer screening was the percentage of women screened either with cervical cytology within the last 3 years for women aged 21-64 years or with cervical cytology/HPV co-testing within the last 5 years for women aged 30-64 years. Nationally, the mean rate for HPV vaccination in 2018 was 37.8% in Medicaid HMOs, 30.3% in commercial HMOs, and 24.9% in commercial PPOs. The mean rate for cervical cancer screening was 75.9% in commercial HMOs, 72.6% in commercial PPOs, and 60.3% among Medicaid HMOs. Medicaid HMOs reported higher HPV vaccination rates but lower cervical cancer screening rates than commercial plans. These differences raise questions about explanatory factors and how to improve prevention performance by plan category.


Assuntos
Infecções por Papillomavirus , Vacinas contra Papillomavirus , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero , Adolescente , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Sistemas Pré-Pagos de Saúde , Humanos , Imunização , Masculino , Papillomaviridae , Infecções por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Papillomavirus/prevenção & controle , Estados Unidos , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/prevenção & controle , Vacinação
10.
J Pediatr ; 239: 81-88.e2, 2021 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34453916

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To assess pediatricians' mumps knowledge and testing practices, to identify physician and practice characteristics associated with mumps testing practices, and to assess reporting and outbreak response knowledge and practices. STUDY DESIGN: Between January and April 2020, we surveyed a nationally representative network of pediatricians. Descriptive statistics were generated for all items. The χ2 test, t tests, and Poisson regression were used to compare physician and practice characteristics between respondents who would rarely or never versus sometimes or often/always test for mumps in a vaccinated 17-year-old with parotitis in a non-outbreak setting. RESULTS: The response rate was 67% (297 of 444). For knowledge, more than one-half of the pediatricians responded incorrectly or "don't know" for 6 of the 9 true/false statements about mumps epidemiology, diagnosis, and prevention, and more than one-half reported needing additional guidance on mumps buccal swab testing. For testing practices, 59% of respondents reported they would sometimes (35%) or often/always (24%) test for mumps in a vaccinated 17-year-old with parotitis in a non-outbreak setting; older physicians, rural physicians, and physicians from the Northeast or Midwest were more likely to test for mumps. Thirty-six percent of the pediatricians reported they would often/always report a patient with suspected mumps to public health authorities. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatricians report mumps knowledge gaps and practices that do not align with public health recommendations. These gaps may lead to underdiagnosis and underreporting of mumps cases, delaying public health response measures and contributing to ongoing disease transmission.


Assuntos
Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Caxumba/diagnóstico , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Vacina contra Caxumba/administração & dosagem , Vacina contra Caxumba/imunologia , Pediatria/normas , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos
11.
J Pediatr ; 234: 149-157.e3, 2021 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33689710

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate among pediatricians and family physicians human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination recommendation practices for 11- to 12-year-old youth; report parental refusal/deferral of HPV vaccination; and report barriers to HPV vaccination changed over time. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed nationally representative networks of pediatricians and family physicians in 2008, 2010, 2013-2014, and 2018. Male vaccination questions were not asked in 2008; barriers and parental vaccine refusal questions were not asked in 2010. RESULTS: Response rates were 80% in 2008 (680/848), 72% in 2010 (609/842), 70% in 2013-2014 (582/829), and 65% in 2018 (588/908). The proportion of physicians strongly recommending HPV vaccination for 11- to 12-year-old patients increased from 53% in 2008 to 79% in 2018 for female patients and from 48% in 2014 to 76% in 2018 for male patients (both P < .0001). The proportion of physicians indicating ≥50% of parents refused/deferred HPV vaccination remained steady for female patients (24% in 2008 vs 22% in 2018, P = .40) and decreased for male patients (42% in 2014 vs 28% in 2018, P < .001). Physician barriers to providing HPV vaccination were rare and decreased over time. Increasing numbers of physicians reported perceived parental barriers of vaccine safety concerns (5% "major barrier" in 2008 vs 35% in 2018, P < .0001) and moral/religious concerns (5% in 2008 vs 25% in 2018, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Between 2008 and 2018, more primary care physicians reported recommending HPV vaccination for adolescents, fewer reported barriers, and more physicians reported parents who had vaccine safety or moral/religious concerns.


Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Pediatria/estatística & dados numéricos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Recusa de Vacinação/psicologia , Vacinação/psicologia , Adolescente , Criança , Feminino , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , Masculino , Infecções por Papillomavirus/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra Papillomavirus/imunologia , Pais/psicologia , Inquéritos e Questionários , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Recusa de Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos
12.
J Gen Intern Med ; 36(7): 2030-2038, 2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33483822

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Several different types of influenza vaccine are licensed for use in adults in the USA including high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV) and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV). HD-IIV is licensed for use in adults ≥ 65 years, and recommendations for use of LAIV have changed several times in recent years. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine family physicians' (FPs) and general internal medicine physicians' (GIMs) perceptions, knowledge, and practices for use of HD-IIV and LAIV during the 2016-2017 and 2018-2019 influenza seasons. DESIGN: E-mail and mail surveys conducted February-March 2017, January-February 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Nationally representative samples of FPs and GIMs. MAIN MEASURES: Surveys assessed HD-IIV practices (2017), knowledge and perceptions (2019), and LAIV knowledge and practices (2017, 2019). KEY RESULTS: Response rates were 67% (620/930) in 2017 and 69% (642/926) in 2019. Many physicians believed HD-IIV is more effective than standard dose IIV in patients ≥ 65 years (76%) and reported their patients ≥ 65 years believe they need HD-IIV (67%). Most respondents incorrectly thought ACIP preferentially recommends HD-IIV for adults ≥ 65 years (88%); 65% "almost always/always" recommended HD-IIV for adults ≥ 65 years. Some physicians incorrectly thought ACIP preferentially recommends HD-IIV for adults < 65 years with cardiopulmonary disease (38%) or immunosuppression (48%); some respondents recommended HD-IIV for these groups (25% and 28% respectively). In 2017, 88% of respondents knew that ACIP recommended against using LAIV during the 2016-2017 influenza season, and 4% recommended LAIV to patients. In 2019, 63% knew that ACIP recommended that LAIV could be used during the 2018-2019 influenza season, and 8% recommended LAIV. CONCLUSIONS: Many physicians incorrectly thought ACIP had preferential recommendations for HD-IIV. Physicians should be encouraged to use any available age-appropriate influenza vaccine to optimize influenza vaccination particularly among older adults and patients with chronic conditions who are more vulnerable to severe influenza disease.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Médicos de Atenção Primária , Idoso , Humanos , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinas Atenuadas , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados
13.
J Gen Intern Med ; 36(8): 2283-2291, 2021 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33528783

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) incorporated the terminology "shared clinical decision-making" (SDM) into recommendations for two adult vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To assess among general internal medicine physicians (GIMs) and family physicians (FPs) nationally (1) attitudes about and experience with ACIP SDM recommendations, (2) knowledge of insurance reimbursement for vaccines with SDM recommendations, (3) how SDM recommendations are incorporated into vaccine forecasting software, and (4) physician and practice characteristics associated with not knowing how to implement SDM. DESIGN: Survey conducted in October 2019-January 2020 by mail or internet based on preference. PARTICIPANTS: Networks of GIMs and FPs recruited from American College of Physicians (ACP) and American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) who practice ≥ 50% in primary care. Post-stratification quota sampling performed to ensure networks similar to ACP and AAFP memberships. MAIN MEASURES: Responses on 4-point Likert scales (attitudes/experiences), true/false options (knowledge), and categorical response options (forecasting). Multivariable modeling with outcome of "not knowing how to implement SDM" conducted. KEY RESULTS: Response rate was 64% (617/968). Most physicians strongly/somewhat agreed SDM requires more time than routine recommendations (90%FP; 95%GIM, p = 0.02) and that they need specific talking points to guide SDM discussions (79%FP; 84%GIM, p = NS). There was both support for SDM recommendations for certain vaccines (81%FP; 75%GIM, p = 0.06) and agreement that SDM creates confusion (64%FP; 76%GIM, p = 0.001). Only 41%FP and 43%GIM knew vaccines recommended for SDM would be covered by most health insurance. Overall, 38% reported SDM recommendations are displayed as "recommended" and 23% that they did not result in any recommendation in forecasting software. In adjusted multivariable models, GIMs [risk ratio 1.44 (1.15-1.81)] and females [1.28 (1.02-1.60)] were significantly associated with not knowing how to implement SDM recommendations CONCLUSIONS: To be successful in a primary care setting, SDM for adult vaccination will require thoughtful implementation with decision-making support for patients and physicians.


Assuntos
Clínicos Gerais , Vacinas , Adulto , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Feminino , Humanos , Imunização , Vacinação
14.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(7): 245-249, 2021 Feb 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33600384

RESUMO

On March 13, 2020, the United States declared a national emergency concerning the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak (1). In response, many state and local governments issued shelter-in-place or stay-at-home orders, restricting nonessential activities outside residents' homes (2). CDC initially issued guidance recommending postponing routine adult vaccinations, which was later revised to recommend continuing to administer routine adult vaccines (3). In addition, factors such as disrupted operations of health care facilities and safety concerns regarding exposure to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, resulted in delay or avoidance of routine medical care (4), likely further affecting delivery of routine adult vaccinations. Medicare enrollment and claims data of Parts A (hospital insurance), B (medical insurance), and D (prescription drug insurance) were examined to assess the change in receipt of routine adult vaccines during the pandemic. Weekly receipt of four vaccines (13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine [PCV13], 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine [PPSV23], tetanus-diphtheria or tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine [Td/Tdap], and recombinant zoster vaccine [RZV]) by Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years during January 5-July 18, 2020, was compared with that during January 6-July 20, 2019, for the total study sample and by race and ethnicity. Overall, weekly administration rates of the four examined vaccines declined by up to 89% after the national emergency declaration in mid-March (1) compared with those during the corresponding period in 2019. During the first week following the national emergency declaration, the weekly vaccination rates were 25%-62% lower than those during the corresponding week in 2019. After reaching their nadirs of 70%-89% below 2019 rates in the second to third week of April 2020, weekly vaccination rates gradually began to recover through mid-July, but by the last study week were still lower than were those during the corresponding period in 2019, with the exception of PPSV23. Vaccination declined sharply for all vaccines studied, overall and across all racial and ethnic groups. While the pandemic continues, vaccination providers should emphasize to patients the importance of continuing to receive routine vaccinations and provide reassurance by explaining the procedures in place to ensure patient safety (3).


Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , Medicare/estatística & dados numéricos , Pandemias , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinas/administração & dosagem , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
15.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(6): 217-222, 2021 Feb 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33571174

RESUMO

As of February 8, 2021, 59.3 million doses of vaccines to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had been distributed in the United States, and 31.6 million persons had received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (1). However, national polls conducted before vaccine distribution began suggested that many persons were hesitant to receive COVID-19 vaccination (2). To examine perceptions toward COVID-19 vaccine and intentions to be vaccinated, in September and December 2020, CDC conducted household panel surveys among a representative sample of U.S. adults. From September to December, vaccination intent (defined as being absolutely certain or very likely to be vaccinated) increased overall (from 39.4% to 49.1%); the largest increase occurred among adults aged ≥65 years. If defined as being absolutely certain, very likely, or somewhat likely to be vaccinated, vaccination intent increased overall from September (61.9%) to December (68.0%). Vaccination nonintent (defined as not intending to receive a COVID-19 vaccination) decreased among all adults (from 38.1% to 32.1%) and among most sociodemographic groups. Younger adults, women, non-Hispanic Black (Black) persons, adults living in nonmetropolitan areas, and adults with lower educational attainment, with lower income, and without health insurance were most likely to report lack of intent to receive COVID-19 vaccine. Intent to receive COVID-19 vaccine increased among adults aged ≥65 years by 17.1 percentage points (from 49.1% to 66.2%), among essential workers by 8.8 points (from 37.1% to 45.9%), and among adults aged 18-64 years with underlying medical conditions by 5.3 points (from 36.5% to 41.8%). Although confidence in COVID-19 vaccines increased during September-December 2020 in the United States, additional efforts to tailor messages and implement strategies to further increase the public's confidence, overall and within specific subpopulations, are needed. Ensuring high and equitable vaccination coverage across all populations is important to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and mitigate the impact of the pandemic.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Intenção , Vacinação/psicologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
16.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(28): 997-1003, 2021 Jul 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34264908

RESUMO

On May 10, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expanded its Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents aged 12-15 years; this authorization was followed by interim recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for the vaccine among this age group (1). Using data from nonprobability-based Internet panel surveys administered by the Healthcare and Public Perceptions of Immunizations (HaPPI) Survey Collaborative, the acceptability of adolescent COVID-19 vaccination and self-reported factors increasing vaccination intent were assessed among independently recruited samples of 985 adolescents aged 13-17 years and 1,022 parents and guardians (parents) of adolescents aged 12-17 years during April 15-April 23, 2021, prior to vaccine authorization for this age group. Approximately one quarter (27.6%) of parents whose adolescents were already vaccine-eligible (i.e., aged 16-17 years) reported their adolescent had received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose, similar to the proportion reported by vaccine-eligible adolescents aged 16-17 years (26.1%). However, vaccine receipt reported by parents of adolescents differed across demographic groups; parents identifying as female or Hispanic, or who had an education lower than a bachelor's degree reported the lowest adolescent COVID-19 vaccination receipt. Among parents of unvaccinated adolescents aged 12-17 years, 55.5% reported they would "definitely" or "probably" have their adolescent receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Among unvaccinated adolescents aged 13-17 years, 51.7% reported they would "definitely" or "probably" receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Obtaining more information about adolescent COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy, as well as school COVID-19 vaccination requirements, were the most commonly reported factors that would increase vaccination intentions among both parents and adolescents. Federal, state, and local health officials and primary care professionals were the most trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information among both groups. Efforts focusing on clearly communicating to the public the benefits and safety of COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents, particularly by health care professionals, could help increase confidence in adolescent COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination coverage.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Pais/psicologia , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/psicologia , Vacinação/psicologia , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Criança , Informação de Saúde ao Consumidor , Feminino , Humanos , Intenção , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
17.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(30): 1036-1039, 2021 Jul 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34324478

RESUMO

Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and health care personnel (HCP) working in these facilities are at high risk for COVID-19-associated mortality. As of March 2021, deaths among LTCF residents and HCP have accounted for almost one third (approximately 182,000) of COVID-19-associated deaths in the United States (1). Accordingly, LTCF residents and HCP were prioritized for early receipt of COVID-19 vaccination and were targeted for on-site vaccination through the federal Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program (2). In December 2020, CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) launched COVID-19 vaccination modules, which allow U.S. LTCFs to voluntarily submit weekly facility-level COVID-19 vaccination data.* CDC analyzed data submitted during March 1-April 4, 2021, to describe COVID-19 vaccination coverage among a convenience sample of HCP working in LTCFs, by job category, and compare HCP vaccination coverage rates with social vulnerability metrics of the surrounding community using zip code tabulation area (zip code area) estimates. Through April 4, 2021, a total of 300 LTCFs nationwide, representing approximately 1.8% of LTCFs enrolled in NHSN, reported that 22,825 (56.8%) of 40,212 HCP completed COVID-19 vaccination.† Vaccination coverage was highest among physicians and advanced practice providers (75.1%) and lowest among nurses (56.7%) and aides (45.6%). Among aides (including certified nursing assistants, nurse aides, medication aides, and medication assistants), coverage was lower in facilities located in zip code areas with higher social vulnerability (social and structural factors associated with adverse health outcomes), corresponding to vaccination disparities present in the wider community (3). Additional efforts are needed to improve LTCF immunization policies and practices, build confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and promote COVID-19 vaccination. CDC and partners have prepared education and training resources to help educate HCP and promote COVID-19 vaccination coverage among LTCF staff members.§.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde , Ocupações/estatística & dados numéricos , Instituições Residenciais , Cobertura Vacinal/estatística & dados numéricos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
18.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(39): 1391-1397, 2020 Oct 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33001873

RESUMO

Vaccination of pregnant women with influenza vaccine and tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) can decrease the risk for influenza and pertussis among pregnant women and their infants. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that all women who are or might be pregnant during the influenza season receive influenza vaccine, which can be administered at any time during pregnancy (1). ACIP also recommends that women receive Tdap during each pregnancy, preferably during the early part of gestational weeks 27-36 (2,3). Despite these recommendations, vaccination coverage among pregnant women has been found to be suboptimal with racial/ethnic disparities persisting (4-6). To assess influenza and Tdap vaccination coverage among women pregnant during the 2019-20 influenza season, CDC analyzed data from an Internet panel survey conducted during April 2020. Among 1,841 survey respondents who were pregnant anytime during October 2019-January 2020, 61.2% reported receiving influenza vaccine before or during their pregnancy, an increase of 7.5 percentage points compared with the rate during the 2018-19 season. Among 463 respondents who had a live birth by their survey date, 56.6% reported receiving Tdap during pregnancy, similar to the 2018-19 season (4). Vaccination coverage was highest among women who reported receiving a provider offer or referral for vaccination (influenza = 75.2%; Tdap = 72.7%). Compared with the 2018-19 season, increases in influenza vaccination coverage were observed during the 2019-20 season for non-Hispanic Black (Black) women (14.7 percentage points, to 52.7%), Hispanic women (9.9 percentage points, to 67.2%), and women of other non-Hispanic (other) races (7.9 percentage points, to 69.6%), and did not change for non-Hispanic White (White) women (60.6%). As in the 2018-19 season, Hispanic and Black women had the lowest Tdap vaccination coverage (35.8% and 38.8%, respectively), compared with White women (65.5%) and women of other races (54.0%); in addition, a decrease in Tdap vaccination coverage was observed among Hispanic women in 2019-20 compared with the previous season. Racial/ethnic disparities in influenza vaccination coverage decreased but persisted, even among women who received a provider offer or referral for vaccination. Consistent provider offers or referrals, in combination with conversations culturally and linguistically tailored for patients of all races/ethnicities, could increase vaccination coverage among pregnant women in all racial/ethnic groups and reduce disparities in coverage.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Difteria, Tétano e Coqueluche Acelular/administração & dosagem , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde/etnologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Gestantes/etnologia , Cobertura Vacinal/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Etnicidade/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Gravidez , Grupos Raciais/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos , Adulto Jovem
19.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(19): 591-593, 2020 May 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32407298

RESUMO

On March 13, 2020, the president of the United States declared a national emergency in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (1). With reports of laboratory-confirmed cases in all 50 states by that time (2), disruptions were anticipated in the U.S. health care system's ability to continue providing routine preventive and other nonemergency care. In addition, many states and localities issued shelter-in-place or stay-at-home orders to reduce the spread of COVID-19, limiting movement outside the home to essential activities (3). On March 24, CDC posted guidance emphasizing the importance of routine well child care and immunization, particularly for children aged ≤24 months, when many childhood vaccines are recommended.


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Pediatria/organização & administração , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Vacinas/administração & dosagem , Adolescente , COVID-19 , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
20.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 26(2): 139-147, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31490854

RESUMO

CONTEXT: Federally funded Community, Migrant, and Homeless Health Centers provide health services to the most vulnerable communities in the United States. However, little is known about their capabilities and processes for providing vaccinations to adults. PROGRAM: We conducted the first national survey of health centers assessing their inventory, workflow, capacity for, and barriers to provision of routinely recommended adult vaccines. In addition, we asked health center leaders' perceptions regarding best practices and policy recommendations for adult vaccinations. IMPLEMENTATION: A survey was developed on the basis of domains elicited from advisory panels and focus groups and was sent electronically to leaders of 762 health centers throughout the United States and its territories; data were collected and analyzed in 2018. EVALUATION: A total of 319 survey responses (42%) were obtained. Health centers reported stocking most routinely recommended vaccines for adults; zoster vaccines were not stocked regularly due to supply and storage issues. Respondents most commonly reported adequate reimbursement for vaccination services from private insurance and Medicaid. Most vaccinations were provided during primary care encounters; less than half of health centers reported providing vaccines during specialist visits. Vaccines administered at the health center were most commonly documented in an open field of the electronic health record (96%) or in an immunization information system (72%). Recommendations for best practices related to better documentation of vaccinations and communication with immunization information systems were provided. DISCUSSION: Health centers provide most adult vaccines to their patients despite financial and technological barriers to optimal provisioning. Further studies at point of care could help identify mechanisms for system improvements.


Assuntos
Pessoas Mal Alojadas/estatística & dados numéricos , Saúde Pública/estatística & dados numéricos , Migrantes/estatística & dados numéricos , Cobertura Vacinal/normas , Adulto , Feminino , Grupos Focais/métodos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Saúde Pública/normas , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos , Cobertura Vacinal/estatística & dados numéricos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA