Pivoting From Influenza to COVID-19 Vaccinations: How a Minnesota Vaccination Program Reduced Barriers for Refugee, Immigrant, and Migrant Communities Accessing Vaccines During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The Minnesota Immunization Networking Initiative (MINI) led by Fairview Health Services has addressed barriers to accessing immunizations through partnerships with community organizations to provide free influenza vaccinations to historically underserved communities, especially refugee, immigrant, and migrant communities. Once the COVID-19 vaccine was available, MINI quickly pivoted operations to distribute the vaccine and provide technical assistance to community partners amidst rapidly evolving guidance. With infrastructure and a vaccination team in place, MINI responded to new and emerging needs, eg, implementing a more accessible and low-tech scheduling system, increasing staffing to meet growing needs, and expanding partnerships with community organizations and leaders. From February 2021 to September 2023, MINI organized 1120 community-based vaccine clinics and administered 43,123 COVID-19 vaccinations. Of those vaccine recipients, 88% identified as Black, Indigenous, and other people of color, and for preferred language, over half stated that they preferred a language other than English. These demographics are similar to those of the earlier influenza clinics, even as average annual clinics have tripled and average total vaccinations have quadrupled since the pivot to COVID-19 vaccination clinics. Some keys to success were: (1) consistent, bidirectional communication and shared decision-making with community partners; (2) prioritizing sustainable staffing models with the support of administrative leadership and resources; and (3) having a community-informed approach supported by the practice of hiring staff from communities served. Because of the effectiveness of this model, MINI is primed to respond to planned and unplanned emergent public health crises.

Seasonal Influenza Prevention and Control Progress in Latin America and the Caribbean in the Context of the Global Influenza Strategy and the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Each year in Latin America and the Caribbean, seasonal influenza is associated with an estimated 36,500 respiratory deaths and 400,000 hospitalizations. Since the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic, the Region has made significant advances in the prevention and control of seasonal influenza, including improved surveillance systems, burden estimates, and vaccination of at-risk groups. The Global Influenza Strategy 2019-2030 provides a framework to strengthen these advances. Against the backdrop of this new framework, the University of Colorado convened in October 2020 its Immunization Advisory Group of Experts to review and discuss current surveillance, prevention, and control strategies for seasonal influenza in Latin America and the Caribbean, also in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This review identified five areas for action and made recommendations specific to each area. The Region should continue its efforts to strengthen surveillance and impact evaluations. Existing data on disease burden, seasonality patterns, and vaccination effectiveness should be used to inform decision-making at the country level as well as advocacy efforts for programmatic resources. Regional and country strategic plans should be prepared and include specific targets for 2030. Existing investments in influenza prevention and control, including for immunization programs, should be optimized. Finally, regional partnerships, such as the regional networks for syndromic surveillance and vaccine effectiveness evaluation (SARInet and REVELAC-i), should continue to play a critical role in continuous learning and standardization by sharing experiences and best practices among countries.

Investigating the procurement system for understanding seasonal influenza vaccine brand availability in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Timely knowledge of which influenza vaccine brands are procured and where is of interest to inform site-selection for brand-specific influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies. Vaccine procurement is a key determinant of brand availability. We therefore sought to understand how the procurement for seasonal influenza vaccine in Europe is organized, how this drives brand availability and how procurement data could enable to determine brand availability pre-season. METHODS: Structured telephone interviews were conducted with 15 experts in 16 European countries between 2017 and 2019 to collect information on the influenza vaccine procurement systems. Sources of (brand-specific) procurement data were identified and assessed on public accessibility. Vaccine type and brand availability and timelines were determined for the 2019-20 season to understand how procurement systems drive brand availability and diversity. RESULTS: Four main types of procurement systems for seasonal influenza vaccination campaigns were identified: national public tenders (Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Scotland, Slovenia), regional public tenders (Italy, Spain, Sweden), direct purchase of vaccines by GPs (England, Wales) or pharmacies (Belgium, France, Germany, Greece) from manufacturers or wholesalers. National public tender outcomes are publicly available and timely; brand availability at clinic level can generally be deduced or narrowed down to two brands. Regional tender outcomes are more difficult to find, known very late or not available. In Italian and Spanish regions tenders may be awarded only a few weeks before the seasonal campaign. No public procurement information is available for countries with direct purchase. CONCLUSION: At the country-level, brand diversity is generally lower for countries with national public tenders than for countries with regional public tenders or direct purchase. In only a few countries, procurement data at the brand level is both publicly available and timely. Therefore the usefulness of procurement data for prospective site-selection for brand-specific VE studies is limited.

Priority allocation of pandemic influenza vaccines in Australia - Recommendations of 3 community juries.

BACKGROUND: Pandemic planning has historically been oriented to respond to an influenza virus, with vaccination strategy being a key focus. As the current COVID-19 pandemic plays out, the Australian government is closely monitoring progress towards development of SARS-CoV2 vaccines as a definitive intervention. However, as in any pandemic, initial supply will likely be exceeded by demand due to limited manufacturing output. METHODS: We convened community juries in three Australian locations in 2019 to assess public acceptability and perceived legitimacy of influenza pandemic vaccination distribution strategies. Preparatory work included literature reviews on pandemic vaccine allocation strategies and on vaccine allocation ethics, and simulation modelling studies. We assumed vaccine would be provided to predefined priority groups. Jurors were then asked to recommend one of two strategies for distributing remaining early doses of vaccine: directly vaccinate people at higher risk of adverse outcomes from influenza; or indirectly protect the general population by vaccinating primary school students, who are most likely to spread infection. RESULTS: Thirty-four participants of diverse backgrounds and ages were recruited through random digit dialling and topic-blinded social media advertising. Juries heard evidence and arguments supporting different vaccine distribution strategies, and questioned expert presenters. All three community juries supported prioritising school children for influenza vaccination (aiming for indirect protection), one by 10-2 majority and two by consensus. Justifications included that indirect protection benefits more people and is likely to be more publicly acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of an influenza pandemic, informed citizens were not opposed to prioritising groups at higher risks of adverse outcomes, but if resources and epidemiological conditions allow, achieving population benefits should be a strategic priority. These insights may inform future SARS-CoV-2 vaccination strategies.

Global production capacity of seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines in 2019.

Vaccines will be an important element in mitigating the impact of an influenza pandemic. While research towards developing universal influenza vaccines is ongoing, the current strategy for vaccine supply in a pandemic relies on seasonal influenza vaccine production to be switched over to pandemic vaccines. Understanding how much vaccine could be produced, in which regions of the world and in what timeframe is critical to informing influenza pandemic preparedness. Through the Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines, 2006-2016, WHO promoted an increase in vaccine production capacity and monitors the landscape through periodically surveying influenza vaccine manufacturers. This study compares global capacity for production of influenza vaccines in 2019 with estimates from previous surveys; provides an overview of countries with established production facilities; presents vaccine production by type and manufacturing process; and discusses limitations to these estimates. Results of the current survey show that estimated annual seasonal influenza vaccine production capacity changed little since 2015 increasing from 1.47 billion to 1.48 billion doses with potential maximum annual influenza pandemic vaccine production capacity increasing from 6.37 billion to 8.31 billion doses. However, this figure should be interpreted with caution as it presents a best-case scenario with several assumptions which may impact supply. Further, pandemic vaccines would not be immediately available and could take four to six months for first supplies with several more months needed to reach maximum capacity. A moderate-case scenario is also presented of 4.15 billion doses of pandemic vaccine in 12 months. It is important to note that two doses of pandemic vaccine are likely to be required to elicit an adequate immune response. Continued efforts are needed to ensure the sustainability of this production and to conduct research for vaccines that are faster to produce and more broadly protective taking into account lessons learned from COVID-19 vaccine development.

An inventory-location optimization model for equitable influenza vaccine distribution in developing countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The addition of other respiratory illnesses such as flu could cripple the healthcare system during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. An annual seasonal influenza vaccine is the best way to help protect against flu. Fears of coronavirus have intensified the shortage of influenza shots in developing countries that hope to vaccinate many populations to reduce stress on their health services. We present an inventory-location mixed-integer linear programming model for equitable influenza vaccine distribution in developing countries during the pandemic. The proposed model utilizes an equitable objective function to distribute vaccines to critical healthcare providers and first responders, elderly, pregnant women, and those with underlying health conditions. We present a case study in a developing country to exhibit efficacy and demonstrate the optimization model's applicability.

Seasonal influenza vaccination during a pandemic.

In the Northern Hemisphere, the persistence or reemergence of coronavirus circulation into the 2020-2021 influenza season threatens to overwhelm health-care resources and systems and increase mortality and morbidity. Data from Australia show that stay-at-home policies have reduced both influenza and coronavirus cases early in the season, thus "flattening the curve." However, influenza vaccination is critical to ensure the reduction in co-infection. Several policies, such as vaccination strategies to accommodate physical distancing measures, change population recommendations, and timing and location of vaccination have been implemented to increase influenza vaccine uptake during the pandemic. This commentary explores those policies.

Prioritising access to pandemic influenza vaccine: a review of the ethics literature.

BACKGROUND: The world is threatened by future pandemics. Vaccines can play a key role in preventing harm, but there will inevitably be shortages because there is no possibility of advance stockpiling. We therefore need some method of prioritising access. MAIN TEXT: This paper reports a critical interpretative review of the published literature that discusses ethical arguments used to justify how we could prioritise vaccine during an influenza pandemic. We found that the focus of the literature was often on proposing different groups as priorities (e.g. those with pre-existing health conditions, the young, the old, health care workers etc.). Different reasons were often suggested as a means of justifying such priority groupings (e.g. appeal to best overall outcomes, fairness, belonging to a vulnerable or 'at risk' group etc.). We suggest that much of the literature, wrongly, assumes that we are able to plan priority groups prior to the time of a particular pandemic and development of a particular vaccine. We also point out the surprising absence of various issues from the literature (e.g. how vaccines fit within overall pandemic planning, a lack of specificity about place, issues of global justice etc.). CONCLUSIONS: The literature proposes a wide range of ways to prioritise vaccines, focusing on different groups and 'principles'. Any plan to use pandemic vaccine must provide justifications for its prioritisation. The focus of this review was influenza pandemic vaccines, but lessons can be learnt for future allocations of coronavirus vaccine, if one becomes available.

[Vaccination in Mexico: imprecise coverages and deficiency in the follow-up of children with incomplete immunization]. / Vacunación en México: coberturas imprecisas y deficiencia en el seguimiento de los niños que no completan el esquema.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the validity of the official vaccination figures according to the available information and to identify opportunities for improvement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We estimated vaccination coverage and dropout rates (for multi-dose vaccines) for one-year-old children, based on public information from the dynamic cubes of the Ministry of Health, for the years 2015 to 2017. R. RESULTS: We observed variations in the vaccination monthly reports, which indicate low rates of vaccination, as well as high dropout rates when comparing first and third doses applied. For children 1 year of age, the national complete coverage was estimated at 48.9. CONCLUSIONS: There is no reliable information to estimate the actual vaccination coverage. Government documents report a constant overestimation of vaccination coverage that creates a "false sense of security". This has become a barrier for the critical analysis of the Universal Vaccination Program.

OBJETIVO: Analizar la veracidad de las cifras oficiales de acuerdo con la información disponible e identificar oportunidades de mejora. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estimamos las coberturas de vacunación y tasas de deserción (para las vacunas administradas en multidosis) del esquema básico para niños menores de un año de edad, con base en la información de cubos dinámicos de la Secretaría de Salud de 2015 a 2017. RESULTADOS: Observamos variaciones en los reportes mensuales de vacunación que indican bajas tasas de vacunación, así como índices altos de deserción al comparar primeras y terceras dosis aplicadas. La cobertura nacional de esquema completo se estimó en 48.9 por ciento. CONCLUSIONES: No se cuenta con información confiable que permita estimar las coberturas reales de vacunación. En los reportes oficiales hay una constante sobrestimación de las coberturas que ha creado a una "falsa sensación de seguridad". Esto se ha constituido en una barrera que impide el análisis crítico del Programa Universal de Vacunación.

Vacunación en México: coberturas imprecisas y deficiencia en el seguimiento de los niños que no completan el esquema / Vaccination in Mexico: imprecise coverages and deficiency in the follow-up of children with incomplete immunization

Resumen: Objetivo: Analizar la veracidad de las cifras oficiales de acuerdo con la información disponible e identificar oportunidades de mejora. Material y métodos: Estimamos las coberturas de vacunación y tasas de deserción (para las vacunas administradas en multidosis) del esquema básico para niños menores de un año de edad, con base en la información de cubos dinámicos de la Secretaría de Salud de 2015 a 2017. Resultados: Observamos variaciones en los reportes mensuales de vacunación que indican bajas tasas de vacunación, así como índices altos de deserción al comparar primeras y terceras dosis aplicadas. La cobertura nacional de esquema completo se estimó en 48.9 por ciento. Conclusión: No se cuenta con información confiable que permita estimar las coberturas reales de vacunación. En los reportes oficiales hay una constante sobrestimación de las coberturas que ha creado a una "falsa sensación de seguridad". Esto se ha constituido en una barrera que impide el análisis crítico del Programa Universal de Vacunación.

Abstract: Objective: To analyze the validity of the official vaccination figures according to the available information and to identify opportunities for improvement. Materials and methods: We estimated vaccination coverage and dropout rates (for multi-dose vaccines) for one-year-old children, based on public information from the dynamic cubes of the Ministry of Health, for the years 2015 to 2017. Results: We observed variations in the vaccination monthly reports, which indicate low rates of vaccination, as well as high dropout rates when comparing first and third doses applied. For children 1 year of age, the national complete coverage was estimated at 48.9%. Conclusion: There is no reliable information to estimate the actual vaccination coverage. Government documents report a constant overestimation of vaccination coverage that creates a "false sense of security". This has become a barrier for the critical analysis of the Universal Vaccination Program.

The impact of vaccine procurement methods on public health in selected European countries.

Introduction: Across Europe, immunization programs have brought immense benefits to the prevention of infectious diseases. The vaccines used are procured through a variety of models such as tenders and Pricing & Reimbursement. However, to date, the impact of the procurement method on the performance and sustainability of vaccination programs and on public health has received little attention.Areas covered: Drawing on a review of the academic and policy literature, complemented by an interview program with stakeholders involved in the procurement of vaccines, the authors have documented the relationship between procurement method dynamics and the level of protection against vaccine-preventable diseases in Germany, Italy, Spain and Romania for, measles-containing vaccines, hexavalent and influenza vaccines.Expert opinion: Price-based tenders can contribute to vaccine supply issues, discourage the provision of value-added services supporting vaccination coverage and disincentives future R&D. Although it is observed that price-based tenders can intensify competition in the short term, there can be unintended consequences such as damage to long-term competition. As European countries are committed to strengthen their immunization programs, they should consider the implications of current vaccine procurement models on the vaccine ecosystem and on public health.

Virological and Epidemiological Situation in the Influenza Epidemic Seasons 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 in Poland.

The World Health Organization estimates that influenza virus infects 3-5 million people worldwide every year, of whom 290,000 to 650,000 die. In the 2016/2017 epidemic season in Poland, the incidence of influenza was 1,692 per 100,000 population. The influenza A virus, subtype A/H3N2/, was the predominant one in that season. However, in the most recent 2017/2018 epidemic season, the incidence exceeded 1,782 per 100,000 already by August of 2018. In this season, influenza B virus predominated, while the A/H1N1/pdm09 strain was most frequent among the influenza A subtypes. The peak incidence, based on the number of clinical specimens tested, was in weeks 4-5 of 2017 and week 8 of 2018 in the 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 epidemic seasons, respectively. As of the 2017/2018 season, a quadrivalent vaccine, consisting of two antigens of influenza A subtypes and another two of influenza B virus, was available in Poland. Nonetheless, the vaccination rate remained at one of the lowest level in Europe, fluctuating between 3% and 4% of the general Polish population.

Influenza pandemic preparedness in the World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Region.

BACKGROUND: Preparedness is key to controlling influenza pandemics and epidemics. AIMS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted to analyse the response and preparedness to influenza pandemics in the World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Region (WHO/EMR). METHODS: Published and grey literatures were searched in PubMed, Scopus, and Google scholar, and the WHO/EMR online databases. International and national plans were searched via official websites of the relevant ministries of the countries. RESULTS: We found that the response from EMR countries was minimal and scientific papers published were limited. Moreover, most of those papers studied the preparedness plan partially by focusing on one or more elements such as infection control measures and vaccines, or were directed to certain populations such as health workers. Continuous active surveillance is ignored in most of the countries although it was the most important lesson learned from the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The national preparedness plans should be updated, taking guidance from the findings in the present report, to address any emerging pandemic virus as well as attending to surges of seasonal influenza cases.

The PanVax Tool to Improve Pandemic Influenza Emergency Vaccination Program Readiness and Partnership.

Objectives. To show how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Pandemic Vaccine Campaign Planning Tool (PanVax Tool) can help state and local public health emergency planners demonstrate and quantify how partnerships with community vaccine providers can improve their overall pandemic vaccination program readiness.Methods. The PanVax Tool helps planners compare different strategies to vaccinate their jurisdiction's population in a severe pandemic by allowing users to customize the underlying model inputs in real time, including their jurisdiction's size, community vaccine provider types, and how they allocate vaccine to these providers. In this report, we used a case study with hypothetical data to illustrate how jurisdictions can utilize the PanVax Tool for preparedness planning.Results. By using the tool, planners are able to understand the impact of engaging with different vaccine providers in a vaccination campaign.Conclusions. The PanVax Tool is a useful tool to help demonstrate the impact of community vaccine provider partnerships on pandemic vaccination readiness and identify areas for improved partnerships for pandemic response.