RESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIM: Influenza vaccination is strongly recommended every year for aged care staff to protect themselves and minimise risk of transmission to residents. This study aimed to determine the factors associated with repeated annual influenza vaccine uptake among Australian aged care staff from 2017 to 2019. METHODS: Demographic, medical and vaccination data collected from the staff, who participated in an observational study from nine aged care facilities under a single provider in Sydney Australia, were analysed retrospectively. Based on the pattern of repeated influenza vaccination from 2017 to 2019, three groups were identified: (1) unvaccinated all three years; (2) vaccinated occasionally(once or twice) over three years; and (3)vaccinated all threeyears. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was performed to better understand the factors associated with the pattern of repeated influenza vaccination. RESULTS: From a total of 138 staff, between 2017 and 2019, 28.9 % (n = 40) never had a vaccination, while 44.2 % (n = 61) had vaccination occasionally and 26.8 % (n = 37) had vaccination all three years. In the multinomial logistic regression model, those who were<40 years old (OR = 0.57, 95 % CI: 0.19-0.90, p < 0.05) and those who were current smokers (OR = 0.20; 95 % CI: 0.03-0.76, p < 0.05) were less likely to have repeated vaccination for all three years compared to the unvaccinated group. Those who were<40 years old (OR = 0.61; 95 % CI: 0.22-0.68, p < 0.05) and those who were born overseas (OR = 0.50; 95 % CI:0.27-0.69, p < 0.05) were more likely to be vaccinated occasionally compared to the unvaccinated group. CONCLUSION: The significant predictors of repeated vaccine uptake across the three-year study period among aged care staff were age, smoking status and country of birth (Other vs Australia). Targeted interventions towards the younger age group (<40 years old), smokers and those who were born overseas could improve repeated influenza vaccination uptake in the aged care workforce.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Idoso , Adulto , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , Austrália , VacinaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Events such as the COVID-19 pandemic remind us of the heightened risk that healthcare workers (HCWs) have from acquiring infectious diseases at work. Reducing the risk requires a multimodal approach, ensuring that staff have the opportunity to undertake occupational infection prevention and control (OIPC) training. While studies have been done within countries to look at availability and delivery of OIPC training opportunities for HCWs, there has been less focus given to whether their infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines adhere to recommended best practices. OBJECTIVES: To examine national IPC guidelines for the inclusion of key recommendations on OIPC training for HCWs to protect them from infectious diseases at work and to report on areas of inconsistencies and gaps. METHODS: We applied a scoping review method and reviewed guidelines published in the last twenty years (2000-2020) including the IPC guidelines of World Health Organization and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. These two guidelines were used as a baseline to compare the inclusion of key elements related to OIPC training with IPC guidelines of four high-income countries /regions i.e., Gulf Cooperation Council, Australia, Canada, United Kingdom and four low-, and middle-income countries (LMIC) i.e. India, Indonesia, Pakistan and, Philippines. RESULTS: Except for the Filipino IPC guideline, all the other guidelines were developed in the last five years. Only two guidelines discussed the need for delivery of OIPC training at undergraduate and/or post graduate level and at workplace induction. Only two acknowledged that training should be based on adult learning principles. None of the LMIC guidelines included recommendations about evaluating training programs. Lastly the mode of delivery and curriculum differed across the guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Developing a culture of learning in healthcare organizations by incorporating and evaluating OIPC training at different stages of HCWs career path, along with incorporating adult learning principles into national IPC guidelines may help standardize guidance for the development of OIPC training programs. Sustainability of this discourse could be achieved by first updating the national IPC guidelines. Further work is needed to ensure that all relevant healthcare organisations are delivering a package of OIPC training that includes the identified best practice elements.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Doenças Transmissíveis , Adulto , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Controle de Infecções/métodos , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Due to high rates of multiple birth and preterm birth following fertility treatment, the rates of mortality and morbidity among births following fertility treatment were higher than those conceived spontaneously. However, it is unclear whether the rates of adverse neonatal outcomes remain higher for very preterm (<32 weeks gestational age) singletons born after fertility treatment. This study aims to compare adverse neonatal outcomes among very preterm singletons born after fertility treatment including assisted reproductive technology (ART) hyper-ovulution (HO) and artificial insemination (AI) to those following spontaneous conception. METHODS: The population cohort study included 24069 liveborn very preterm singletons who were admitted to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) in Australia and New Zealand from 2000 to 2010. The in-hospital neonatal mortality and morbidity among 21753 liveborn very preterm singletons were compared by maternal mode of conceptions: spontaneous conception, HO, ART and AI. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between mode of conception and various outcome factors. Odds ratio (OR) and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: The rate of small for gestational age was significantly higher in HO group (AOR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02-2.67) and AI group (AOR 2.98, 95% CI 1.53-5.81) than spontaneous group. The rate of birth defect was significantly higher in ART group (AOR 1.71, 95% CI 1.36-2.16) and AI group (AOR 3.01, 95% CI 1.47-6.19) compared to spontaneous group. Singletons following ART had 43% increased odds of necrotizing enterocolitis (AOR 1.43, 95% CI 1.04-1.97) and 71% increased odds of major surgery (AOR 1.71, 95% CI 1.37-2.13) compared to singletons conceived spontaneously. Other birth and NICU outcomes were not different among the comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the spontaneous conception group, risk of congenital abnormality significantly increases after ART and AI; the risk of morbidities increases after ART, HO and AI. Preconception planning should include comprehensive information about the benefits and risks of fertility treatment on the neonatal outcomes.