Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 79
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
N Engl J Med ; 385(15): 1355-1371, 2021 10 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34496194

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the effectiveness of the vaccines against symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) currently authorized in the United States with respect to hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or ambulatory care in an emergency department or urgent care clinic. METHODS: We conducted a study involving adults (≥50 years of age) with Covid-19-like illness who underwent molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed 41,552 admissions to 187 hospitals and 21,522 visits to 221 emergency departments or urgent care clinics during the period from January 1 through June 22, 2021, in multiple states. The patients' vaccination status was documented in electronic health records and immunization registries. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness by comparing the odds of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated patients with those among unvaccinated patients. Vaccine effectiveness was adjusted with weights based on propensity-for-vaccination scores and according to age, geographic region, calendar time (days from January 1, 2021, to the index date for each medical visit), and local virus circulation. RESULTS: The effectiveness of full messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination (≥14 days after the second dose) was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87 to 91) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization, 90% (95% CI, 86 to 93) against infection leading to an ICU admission, and 91% (95% CI, 89 to 93) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. The effectiveness of full vaccination with respect to a Covid-19-associated hospitalization or emergency department or urgent care clinic visit was similar with the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines and ranged from 81% to 95% among adults 85 years of age or older, persons with chronic medical conditions, and Black or Hispanic adults. The effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was 68% (95% CI, 50 to 79) against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to hospitalization and 73% (95% CI, 59 to 82) against infection leading to an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. CONCLUSIONS: Covid-19 vaccines in the United States were highly effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospitalization, ICU admission, or an emergency department or urgent care clinic visit. This vaccine effectiveness extended to populations that are disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).


Assuntos
Assistência Ambulatorial/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Ad26COVS1 , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Feminino , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
2.
J Infect Dis ; 2023 Sep 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37768170

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Influenza remains an important cause of hospitalizations in the United States. Estimating the number of influenza hospitalizations is vital for public health decision making. Combining existing surveillance systems through capture-recapture methods allows for more comprehensive burden estimations. METHODS: Data from independent surveillance systems were combined using capture-recapture methods to estimate influenza hospitalization rates for children and adults in Middle Tennessee during consecutive influenza seasons from 2016-17 through 2019-20. EIP identified cases through surveillance of laboratory results for hospitalized children and adults. HAIVEN and NVSN recruited hospitalized patients with respiratory symptoms or fever. Population-based influenza rates and the proportion of cases detected by each surveillance system were calculated. RESULTS: Estimated overall influenza hospitalization rates ranged from 23 influenza-related hospitalizations per 10,000 persons in 2016-17 to 40 per 10,000 persons in 2017-18. Adults age ≥65 years had the highest hospitalization rates across seasons and experienced a rate of 170 hospitalizations per 10,000 persons during the 2017-18 season. EIP consistently identified a higher proportion of influenza cases for adults and children compared with HAIVEN and NVSN, respectively. CONCLUSION: Current surveillance systems underestimate the influenza burden. Capture-recapture provides an alternative approach to use data from independent surveillance systems and complement population-based burden estimates.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 76(11): 1980-1988, 2023 06 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36694363

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Current understanding of severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections in adults is limited by clinical underrecognition. We compared the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of RSV infections vs influenza in adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs) in a prospective national surveillance network. METHODS: Hospitalized adults who met a standardized ARI case definition were prospectively enrolled across 3 respiratory seasons from hospitals participating across all sites of the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (2016-2019). All participants were tested for RSV and influenza using real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction assay. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test associations between laboratory-confirmed infection and characteristics and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 10 311 hospitalized adults, 6% tested positive for RSV (n = 622), 18.8% for influenza (n = 1940), and 75.1% negative for RSV and influenza (n = 7749). Congestive heart failure (CHF) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was more frequent with RSV than influenza (CHF: 37.3% vs 28.8%, P < .0001; COPD: 47.6% vs 35.8%, P < .0001). Patients with RSV more frequently had longer admissions (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.80) for stays >1 week) and mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.09-1.93) compared with influenza but not compared with the influenza-negative group (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, .82-1.28 and OR, 1.17; 95% CI, .91-1.49, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of RSV across 3 seasons was considerable. Our findings suggest that those with RSV have worse outcomes compared with influenza and frequently have cardiopulmonary conditions. This study informs future vaccination strategies and underscores a need for RSV surveillance among adults with severe ARI.


Assuntos
Insuficiência Cardíaca , Influenza Humana , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial , Vírus Sincicial Respiratório Humano , Infecções Respiratórias , Humanos , Adulto , Influenza Humana/complicações , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Prevalência , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial/epidemiologia , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial/complicações , Hospitalização , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/complicações , Insuficiência Cardíaca/complicações , Infecções Respiratórias/epidemiologia
4.
MMWR Recomm Rep ; 71(1): 1-28, 2022 08 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36006864

RESUMO

THIS REPORT UPDATES THE 2021-22 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES (ACIP) CONCERNING THE USE OF SEASONAL INFLUENZA VACCINES IN THE UNITED STATES: (MMWR Recomm Rep 2021;70[No. RR-5]:1-24). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. With the exception of vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. All seasonal influenza vaccines expected to be available in the United States for the 2022-23 season are quadrivalent, containing hemagglutinin (HA) derived from one influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, one influenza A(H3N2) virus, one influenza B/Victoria lineage virus, and one influenza B/Yamagata lineage virus. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available. Trivalent influenza vaccines are no longer available, but data that involve these vaccines are included for reference. INFLUENZA VACCINES MIGHT BE AVAILABLE AS EARLY AS JULY OR AUGUST, BUT FOR MOST PERSONS WHO NEED ONLY 1 DOSE OF INFLUENZA VACCINE FOR THE SEASON, VACCINATION SHOULD IDEALLY BE OFFERED DURING SEPTEMBER OR OCTOBER. HOWEVER, VACCINATION SHOULD CONTINUE AFTER OCTOBER AND THROUGHOUT THE SEASON AS LONG AS INFLUENZA VIRUSES ARE CIRCULATING AND UNEXPIRED VACCINE IS AVAILABLE. FOR MOST ADULTS (PARTICULARLY ADULTS AGED ≥65 YEARS) AND FOR PREGNANT PERSONS IN THE FIRST OR SECOND TRIMESTER, VACCINATION DURING JULY AND AUGUST SHOULD BE AVOIDED UNLESS THERE IS CONCERN THAT VACCINATION LATER IN THE SEASON MIGHT NOT BE POSSIBLE. CERTAIN CHILDREN AGED 6 MONTHS THROUGH 8 YEARS NEED 2 DOSES; THESE CHILDREN SHOULD RECEIVE THE FIRST DOSE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER VACCINE IS AVAILABLE, INCLUDING DURING JULY AND AUGUST. VACCINATION DURING JULY AND AUGUST CAN BE CONSIDERED FOR CHILDREN OF ANY AGE WHO NEED ONLY 1 DOSE FOR THE SEASON AND FOR PREGNANT PERSONS WHO ARE IN THE THIRD TRIMESTER IF VACCINE IS AVAILABLE DURING THOSE MONTHS: UPDATES DESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT REFLECT DISCUSSIONS DURING PUBLIC MEETINGS OF ACIP THAT WERE HELD ON OCTOBER 20, 2021; JANUARY 12, 2022; FEBRUARY 23, 2022; AND JUNE 22, 2022. PRIMARY UPDATES TO THIS REPORT INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING THREE TOPICS: 1) THE COMPOSITION OF 2022-23 U.S. SEASONAL INFLUENZA VACCINES; 2) UPDATES TO THE DESCRIPTION OF INFLUENZA VACCINES EXPECTED TO BE AVAILABLE FOR THE 2022-23 SEASON, INCLUDING ONE INFLUENZA VACCINE LABELING CHANGE THAT OCCURRED AFTER THE PUBLICATION OF THE 2021-22 ACIP INFLUENZA RECOMMENDATIONS; AND 3) UPDATES TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING VACCINATION OF ADULTS AGED ≥65 YEARS. FIRST, THE COMPOSITION OF 2022-23 U.S. INFLUENZA VACCINES INCLUDES UPDATES TO THE INFLUENZA A(H3N2) AND INFLUENZA B/VICTORIA LINEAGE COMPONENTS. U.S.-LICENSED INFLUENZA VACCINES WILL CONTAIN HA DERIVED FROM AN INFLUENZA A/VICTORIA/2570/2019 (H1N1)PDM09-LIKE VIRUS (FOR EGG-BASED VACCINES) OR AN INFLUENZA A/WISCONSIN/588/2019 (H1N1)PDM09-LIKE VIRUS (FOR CELL CULTURE-BASED OR RECOMBINANT VACCINES); AN INFLUENZA A/DARWIN/9/2021 (H3N2)-LIKE VIRUS (FOR EGG-BASED VACCINES) OR AN INFLUENZA A/DARWIN/6/2021 (H3N2)-LIKE VIRUS (FOR CELL CULTURE-BASED OR RECOMBINANT VACCINES); AN INFLUENZA B/AUSTRIA/1359417/2021 (VICTORIA LINEAGE)-LIKE VIRUS; AND AN INFLUENZA B/PHUKET/3073/2013 (YAMAGATA LINEAGE)-LIKE VIRUS. SECOND, THE APPROVED AGE INDICATION FOR THE CELL CULTURE-BASED INACTIVATED INFLUENZA VACCINE, FLUCELVAX QUADRIVALENT (CCIIV4), WAS CHANGED IN OCTOBER 2021 FROM ≥2 YEARS TO ≥6 MONTHS. THIRD, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR VACCINATION OF ADULTS AGED ≥65 YEARS HAVE BEEN MODIFIED. ACIP RECOMMENDS THAT ADULTS AGED ≥65 YEARS PREFERENTIALLY RECEIVE ANY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING HIGHER DOSE OR ADJUVANTED INFLUENZA VACCINES: QUADRIVALENT HIGH-DOSE INACTIVATED INFLUENZA VACCINE (HD-IIV4), QUADRIVALENT RECOMBINANT INFLUENZA VACCINE (RIV4), OR QUADRIVALENT ADJUVANTED INACTIVATED INFLUENZA VACCINE (AIIV4). IF NONE OF THESE THREE VACCINES IS AVAILABLE AT AN OPPORTUNITY FOR VACCINE ADMINISTRATION, THEN ANY OTHER AGE-APPROPRIATE INFLUENZA VACCINE SHOULD BE USED: THIS REPORT FOCUSES ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE USE OF VACCINES FOR THE PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF SEASONAL INFLUENZA DURING THE 2022-23 INFLUENZA SEASON IN THE UNITED STATES. A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND A LINK TO THE MOST RECENT BACKGROUND DOCUMENT CONTAINING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ARE AVAILABLE AT: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration-licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC's influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.


Assuntos
Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Adulto , Comitês Consultivos , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Esquemas de Imunização , Lactente , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Vírus da Influenza B , Vacinas contra Influenza/uso terapêutico , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Gravidez , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação , Vacinas Combinadas/uso terapêutico , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados/uso terapêutico
5.
Epidemiology ; 34(3): 345-352, 2023 05 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36807266

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: High-dose, adjuvanted, and recombinant influenza vaccines may offer improved effectiveness among older adults compared with standard-dose, unadjuvanted, inactivated vaccines. However, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) only recently recommended preferential use of these "higher-dose or adjuvanted" vaccines. One concern was that individuals might delay or decline vaccination if a preferred vaccine is not readily available. METHODS: We mathematically model how a recommendation for preferential use of higher-dose or adjuvanted vaccines in adults ≥65 years might impact influenza burden in the United States during exemplar "high-" and "low-"severity seasons. We assume higher-dose or adjuvanted vaccines are more effective than standard vaccines and that such a recommendation would increase uptake of the former but could cause (i) delays in administration of additional higher-dose or adjuvanted vaccines relative to standard vaccines and/or (ii) reductions in overall coverage if individuals only offered standard vaccines forego vaccination. RESULTS: In a best-case scenario, assuming no delay or coverage reduction, a new recommendation could decrease hospitalizations and deaths in adults ≥65 years by 0%-4% compared with current uptake. However, intermediate and worst-case scenarios, with assumed delays of 3 or 6 weeks and/or 10% or 20% reductions in coverage, included projections in which hospitalizations and deaths increased by over 7%. CONCLUSIONS: We estimate that increased use of higher-dose or adjuvanted vaccines could decrease influenza burden in adults ≥65 in the United States provided there is timely and adequate access to these vaccines, and that standard vaccines are administered when they are unavailable.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Idoso , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinação , Estações do Ano , Comitês Consultivos
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): 170-175, 2022 08 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34875035

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) are metrics commonly reported to compare absolute VE (aVE) of 2 vaccine products. METHODS: Estimates of rVE for enhanced influenza vaccines (eIV) vs standard inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) have been assessed across different seasons, influenza-specific endpoints, and nonspecific endpoints (eg, all-cause cardiovascular hospitalizations). To illustrate the challenges of comparability across studies, we conducted a scenario analysis to evaluate the effects of varying absolute VE (aVE) of IIV (ie, as compared with placebo) on the interpretation of rVE of eIV vs IIV. RESULTS: We show that estimates of rVE might not be comparable across studies because additional benefits commensurate with a given estimate of rVE are dependent on the aVE for the comparator vaccine, which can depend on factors such as host response to vaccine, virus type, and clinical endpoint evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have implications for interpretation of rVE across studies and for sample size considerations in future trials.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Hospitalização , Humanos , Estações do Ano , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados
7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(8): 1329-1337, 2022 04 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34320171

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Evidence for vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza-associated pneumonia has varied by season, location, and strain. We estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified influenza-associated pneumonia during 2015-2016 to 2017-2018 seasons in the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN). METHODS: Among adults aged ≥18 years admitted to 10 US hospitals for acute respiratory illness (ARI), clinician-investigators used keywords from reports of chest imaging performed during 3 days around hospital admission to assign a diagnosis of "definite/probable pneumonia." We used a test-negative design to estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia, comparing reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza cases with test-negative subjects. Influenza vaccination status was documented in immunization records or self-reported, including date and location. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for age, site, season, calendar-time, and other factors. RESULTS: Of 4843 adults hospitalized with ARI included in the primary analysis, 266 (5.5%) had "definite/probable pneumonia" and confirmed influenza. Adjusted VE against hospitalization for any radiographically confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia was 38% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17-53%); by type/subtype, it was 74% (95% CI, 52-87%) influenza A (H1N1)pdm09, 25% (95% CI, -15% to 50%) A (H3N2), and 23% (95% CI, -32% to 54%) influenza B. Adjusted VE against intensive care for any influenza was 57% (95% CI, 19-77%). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination was modestly effective among adults in preventing hospitalizations and the need for intensive care associated with influenza pneumonia. VE was significantly higher against A (H1N1)pdm09 and was low against A (H3N2) and B.


Assuntos
Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Pneumonia , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Hospitalização , Humanos , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia/epidemiologia , Pneumonia/prevenção & controle , Estações do Ano , Vacinação , Eficácia de Vacinas
8.
MMWR Recomm Rep ; 70(5): 1-28, 2021 08 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34448800

RESUMO

This report updates the 2020-21 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2020;69[No. RR-8]). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. During the 2021-22 influenza season, the following types of vaccines are expected to be available: inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4).The 2021-22 influenza season is expected to coincide with continued circulation of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Influenza vaccination of persons aged ≥6 months to reduce prevalence of illness caused by influenza will reduce symptoms that might be confused with those of COVID-19. Prevention of and reduction in the severity of influenza illness and reduction of outpatient visits, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions through influenza vaccination also could alleviate stress on the U.S. health care system. Guidance for vaccine planning during the pandemic is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pandemic-guidance/index.html. Recommendations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/covid-19.html, and additional clinical guidance is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/clinical-considerations/covid-19-vaccines-us.html.Updates described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP that were held on October 28, 2020; February 25, 2021; and June 24, 2021. Primary updates to this report include the following six items. First, all seasonal influenza vaccines available in the United States for the 2021-22 season are expected to be quadrivalent. Second, the composition of 2021-22 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza A(H3N2) components. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain hemagglutinin derived from an influenza A/Victoria/2570/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/588/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines), an influenza A/Cambodia/e0826360/2020 (H3N2)-like virus, an influenza B/Washington/02/2019 (Victoria lineage)-like virus, and an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Third, the approved age indication for the cell culture-based inactivated influenza vaccine, Flucelvax Quadrivalent (ccIIV4), has been expanded from ages ≥4 years to ages ≥2 years. Fourth, discussion of administration of influenza vaccines with other vaccines includes considerations for coadministration of influenza vaccines and COVID-19 vaccines. Providers should also consult current ACIP COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and CDC guidance concerning coadministration of these vaccines with influenza vaccines. Vaccines that are given at the same time should be administered in separate anatomic sites. Fifth, guidance concerning timing of influenza vaccination now states that vaccination soon after vaccine becomes available can be considered for pregnant women in the third trimester. As previously recommended, children who need 2 doses (children aged 6 months through 8 years who have never received influenza vaccine or who have not previously received a lifetime total of ≥2 doses) should receive their first dose as soon as possible after vaccine becomes available to allow the second dose (which must be administered ≥4 weeks later) to be received by the end of October. For nonpregnant adults, vaccination in July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that later vaccination might not be possible. Sixth, contraindications and precautions to the use of ccIIV4 and RIV4 have been modified, specifically with regard to persons with a history of severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to an influenza vaccine. A history of a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of any egg-based IIV, LAIV, or RIV of any valency is a precaution to use of ccIIV4. A history of a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of any egg-based IIV, ccIIV, or LAIV of any valency is a precaution to use of RIV4. Use of ccIIV4 and RIV4 in such instances should occur in an inpatient or outpatient medical setting under supervision of a provider who can recognize and manage a severe allergic reaction; providers can also consider consulting with an allergist to help identify the vaccine component responsible for the reaction. For ccIIV4, history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any ccIIV of any valency or any component of ccIIV4 is a contraindication to future use of ccIIV4. For RIV4, history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any RIV of any valency or any component of RIV4 is a contraindication to future use of RIV4. This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2021-22 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration-licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC's influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu); vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.


Assuntos
Imunização/normas , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Adolescente , Adulto , Comitês Consultivos , Idoso , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Esquemas de Imunização , Lactente , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Gravidez , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
9.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(9): 352-358, 2022 Mar 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35239634

RESUMO

The efficacy of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 exceeded 90% in clinical trials that included children and adolescents aged 5-11, 12-15, and 16-17 years (1-3). Limited real-world data on 2-dose mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in persons aged 12-17 years (referred to as adolescents in this report) have also indicated high levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection and COVID-19-associated hospitalization (4-6); however, data on VE against the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and duration of protection are limited. Pfizer-BioNTech VE data are not available for children aged 5-11 years. In partnership with CDC, the VISION Network* examined 39,217 emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) encounters and 1,699 hospitalizations† among persons aged 5-17 years with COVID-19-like illness across 10 states during April 9, 2021-January 29, 2022,§ to estimate VE using a case-control test-negative design. Among children aged 5-11 years, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters 14-67 days after dose 2 (the longest interval after dose 2 in this age group) was 46%. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 83% and 76%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 38% and 46%, respectively. Among adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE increased to 86% ≥7 days after dose 3 (booster dose). VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was substantially lower during the Omicron predominant period than the B.1.617.2 (Delta) predominant period among adolescents aged 12-17 years, with no significant protection ≥150 days after dose 2 during Omicron predominance. However, in adolescents aged 16-17 years, VE during the Omicron predominant period increased to 81% ≥7 days after a third booster dose. During the full study period, including pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron predominant periods, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalization among children aged 5-11 years was 74% 14-67 days after dose 2, with wide CIs that included zero. Among adolescents aged 12-15 and 16-17 years, VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 92% and 94%, respectively; VE ≥150 days after dose 2 was 73% and 88%, respectively. All eligible children and adolescents should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, including a booster dose for those aged 12-17 years.


Assuntos
Vacina BNT162/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Eficácia de Vacinas/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Assistência Ambulatorial/estatística & dados numéricos , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Imunização Secundária , Masculino , Estados Unidos
10.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(7): 255-263, 2022 Feb 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35176007

RESUMO

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after completion of a primary mRNA vaccination series and that immunocompromised persons receive a third primary dose.* Waning of vaccine protection after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine has been observed during the period of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance† (1-5), but little is known about durability of protection after 3 doses during periods of Delta or SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant predominance. A test-negative case-control study design using data from eight VISION Network sites§ examined vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years at various time points after receipt of a second or third vaccine dose during two periods: Delta variant predominance and Omicron variant predominance (i.e., periods when each variant accounted for ≥50% of sequenced isolates).¶ Persons categorized as having received 3 doses included those who received a third dose in a primary series or a booster dose after a 2 dose primary series (including the reduced-dosage Moderna booster). The VISION Network analyzed 241,204 ED/UC encounters** and 93,408 hospitalizations across 10 states during August 26, 2021-January 22, 2022. VE after receipt of both 2 and 3 doses was lower during the Omicron-predominant than during the Delta-predominant period at all time points evaluated. During both periods, VE after receipt of a third dose was higher than that after a second dose; however, VE waned with increasing time since vaccination. During the Omicron period, VE against ED/UC visits was 87% during the first 2 months after a third dose and decreased to 66% among those vaccinated 4-5 months earlier; VE against hospitalizations was 91% during the first 2 months following a third dose and decreased to 78% ≥4 months after a third dose. For both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, VE was generally higher for protection against hospitalizations than against ED/UC visits. All eligible persons should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations to best protect against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and ED/UC visits.


Assuntos
Assistência Ambulatorial/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Eficácia de Vacinas , Vacinas de mRNA/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores de Tempo , Estados Unidos , Adulto Jovem
11.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(13): 495-502, 2022 Apr 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35358170

RESUMO

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥18 years receive a single COVID-19 vaccine booster dose ≥2 months after receipt of an Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) adenovirus vector-based primary series vaccine; a heterologous COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is preferred over a homologous (matching) Janssen vaccine for booster vaccination. This recommendation was made in light of the risks for rare but serious adverse events following receipt of a Janssen vaccine, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome† (1), and clinical trial data indicating similar or higher neutralizing antibody response following heterologous boosting compared with homologous boosting (2). Data on real-world vaccine effectiveness (VE) of different booster strategies following a primary Janssen vaccine dose are limited, particularly during the period of Omicron variant predominance. The VISION Network§ determined real-world VE of 1 Janssen vaccine dose and 2 alternative booster dose strategies: 1) a homologous booster (i.e., 2 Janssen doses) and 2) a heterologous mRNA booster (i.e., 1 Janssen dose/1 mRNA dose). In addition, VE of these booster strategies was compared with VE of a homologous booster following mRNA primary series vaccination (i.e., 3 mRNA doses). The study examined 80,287 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits¶ and 25,244 hospitalizations across 10 states during December 16, 2021-March 7, 2022, when Omicron was the predominant circulating variant.** VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 24% after 1 Janssen dose, 54% after 2 Janssen doses, 79% after 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose, and 83% after 3 mRNA doses. VE for the same vaccination strategies against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were 31%, 67%, 78%, and 90%, respectively. All booster strategies provided higher protection than a single Janssen dose against ED/UC visits and hospitalizations during Omicron variant predominance. Vaccination with 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose provided higher protection than did 2 Janssen doses against COVID-19-associated ED/UC visits and was comparable to protection provided by 3 mRNA doses during the first 120 days after a booster dose. However, 3 mRNA doses provided higher protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations than did other booster strategies during the same time interval since booster dose. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines for their COVID-19 primary series vaccination should receive an mRNA booster dose when eligible. Adults who received a primary Janssen vaccine dose should preferentially receive a heterologous mRNA vaccine booster dose ≥2 months later, or a homologous Janssen vaccine booster dose if mRNA vaccine is contraindicated or unavailable. Further investigation of the durability of protection afforded by different booster strategies is warranted.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Adolescente , Adulto , Assistência Ambulatorial , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Hospitalização , Humanos , Imunização Secundária , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinas Sintéticas , Vacinas de mRNA
12.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(4): 139-145, 2022 Jan 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35085224

RESUMO

Estimates of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) have declined in recent months (1,2) because of waning vaccine induced immunity over time,* possible increased immune evasion by SARS-CoV-2 variants (3), or a combination of these and other factors. CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a third dose (booster) of an mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after receipt of the second mRNA vaccine dose and that immunocompromised individuals receive a third primary dose.† A third dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine increases neutralizing antibody levels (4), and three recent studies from Israel have shown improved effectiveness of a third dose in preventing COVID-19 associated with infections with the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant (5-7). Yet, data are limited on the real-world effectiveness of third doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the United States, especially since the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant became predominant in mid-December 2021. The VISION Network§ examined VE by analyzing 222,772 encounters from 383 emergency departments (EDs) and urgent care (UC) clinics and 87,904 hospitalizations from 259 hospitals among adults aged ≥18 years across 10 states from August 26, 2021¶ to January 5, 2022. Analyses were stratified by the period before and after the Omicron variant became the predominant strain (>50% of sequenced viruses) at each study site. During the period of Delta predominance across study sites in the United States (August-mid-December 2021), VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters was 86% 14-179 days after dose 2, 76% ≥180 days after dose 2, and 94% ≥14 days after dose 3. Estimates of VE for the same intervals after vaccination during Omicron variant predominance were 52%, 38%, and 82%, respectively. During the period of Delta variant predominance, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was 90% 14-179 days after dose 2, 81% ≥180 days after dose 2, and 94% ≥14 days after dose 3. During Omicron variant predominance, VE estimates for the same intervals after vaccination were 81%, 57%, and 90%, respectively. The highest estimates of VE against COVID-19-associated ED and UC encounters or hospitalizations during both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods were among adults who received a third dose of mRNA vaccine. All unvaccinated persons should get vaccinated as soon as possible. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines during their primary COVID-19 vaccination series should receive a third dose when eligible, and eligible persons should stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccinations.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Imunização Secundária , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Eficácia de Vacinas/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinas de mRNA/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Assistência Ambulatorial/estatística & dados numéricos , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
13.
J Infect Dis ; 224(1): 151-163, 2021 07 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33336702

RESUMO

We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations among adults during the 2018-2019 influenza season. Adults admitted with acute respiratory illness to 14 hospitals of the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN) and testing positive for influenza were cases; patients testing negative were controls. VE was estimated using logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting. We analyzed data from 2863 patients with a mean age of 63 years. Adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-associated hospitalization was 51% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25%-68%). Adjusted VE against influenza A(H3N2) virus-associated hospitalization was -2% (95% CI, -65% to 37%) and differed significantly by age, with VE of -130% (95% CI, -374% to -27%) among adults 18 to ≤56 years of age. Although vaccination halved the risk of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-associated hospitalizations, it conferred no protection against influenza A(H3N2)-associated hospitalizations. We observed negative VE for young and middle-aged adults but cannot exclude residual confounding as a potential explanation.


Assuntos
Hospitalização , Vacinas contra Influenza/imunologia , Vacinação , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem
14.
J Infect Dis ; 224(5): 813-820, 2021 09 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33378531

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Influenza causes significant morbidity and mortality and stresses hospital resources during periods of increased circulation. We evaluated the effectiveness of the 2019-2020 influenza vaccine against influenza-associated hospitalization in the United States. METHODS: We included adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness at 14 hospitals and tested for influenza viruses by reserve-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in test-positive influenza cases vs test-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. VE was stratified by age and major circulating influenza types along with A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 3116 participants were included, including 18% (n = 553) influenza-positive cases. Median age was 63 years. Sixty-seven percent (n = 2079) received vaccination. Overall adjusted VE against influenza viruses was 41% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27%-52%). VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses was 40% (95% CI, 24%-53%) and 33% against B viruses (95% CI, 0-56%). Of the 2 major A(H1N1)pdm09 subgroups (representing 90% of sequenced H1N1 viruses), VE against one group (5A + 187A,189E) was 59% (95% CI, 34%-75%) whereas no VE was observed against the other group (5A + 156K) (-1% [95% CI, -61% to 37%]). CONCLUSIONS: In a primarily older population, influenza vaccination was associated with a 41% reduction in risk of hospitalized influenza illness.


Assuntos
Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Eficácia de Vacinas , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Feminino , Humanos , Hospedeiro Imunocomprometido , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1/imunologia , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2/imunologia , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação
15.
J Infect Dis ; 223(12): 2062-2071, 2021 06 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33140094

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 influenza seasons were notable for the high number of hospitalizations for influenza A(H3N2) despite vaccine and circulating strain match. METHODS: We evaluated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization in the test-negative HAIVEN study. Nasal-throat swabs were tested by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for influenza and VE was determined based on odds of vaccination by generalized estimating equations. Vaccine-specific antibody was measured in a subset of enrollees. RESULTS: A total of 6129 adults were enrolled from 10 hospitals. Adjusted VE against A(H3N2) was 22.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3% to 35.0%), pooled across both years and 49.4% (95% CI, 34.3% to 61.1%) against B/Yamagata. In 2017-2018, the A(H3N2) VE point estimate for the cell-based vaccine was 43.0% (95% CI, -36.3% to 76.1%; 56 vaccine recipients) compared to 24.0% (95% CI, 3.9% to 39.9%) for egg-based vaccines. Among 643 with serology data, hemagglutinin antibodies against the egg-based A(H3N2) vaccine strain were increased in influenza-negative individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Low VE for the A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 vaccine virus in both A(H3N2) seasons emphasizes concerns for continued changes in H3N2 antigenic epitopes, including changes that may impact glycosylation and ultimately reduce VE.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Eficácia de Vacinas , Adulto , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Hospitalização , Humanos , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Vírus da Influenza B , Vacinas contra Influenza/imunologia , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Estações do Ano , Vacinação
16.
J Infect Dis ; 224(12): 2035-2042, 2021 12 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34013330

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Test-negative design studies for evaluating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) enroll patients with acute respiratory infection. Enrollment typically occurs before influenza status is determined, resulting in over-enrollment of influenza-negative patients. With availability of rapid and accurate molecular clinical testing, influenza status could be ascertained before enrollment, thus improving study efficiency. We estimate potential biases in VE when using clinical testing. METHODS: We simulate data assuming 60% vaccinated, 25% of those vaccinated are influenza positive, and VE of 50%. We show the effect on VE in 5 scenarios. RESULTS: Vaccine effectiveness is affected only when clinical testing preferentially targets patients based on both vaccination and influenza status. Vaccine effectiveness is overestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 39% of vaccinated influenza-positive patients and 24% of others. VE is also overestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 8% of unvaccinated influenza-positive patients and 27% of others. Vaccine effectiveness is underestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 32% of unvaccinated influenza-negative patients and 18% of others. CONCLUSIONS: Although differential clinical testing by vaccine receipt and influenza positivity may produce errors in estimated VE, bias in testing would have to be substantial and overall proportion of patients tested would have to be small to result in a meaningful difference in VE.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Eficácia de Vacinas , Viés , Humanos , Influenza Humana/diagnóstico , Vacinação
17.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(4): 726-729, 2021 08 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33462610

RESUMO

We observed decreased effectiveness of influenza vaccine with increasing time since vaccination for prevention of influenza A(H3N2), influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, and influenza B/Yamagata-associated hospitalizations among adults. Maximum vaccine effectiveness (VE) was observed shortly after vaccination, followed by an absolute decline in VE of about 8%-9% per month postvaccination.


Assuntos
Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Adulto , Hospitalização , Humanos , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
18.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(11): e4353-e4360, 2021 12 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33388741

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Yearly influenza immunization is recommended for immunocompromised (IC) individuals, although immune responses are lower than that for the nonimmunocompromised and the data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the IC is scarce. We evaluated VE against influenza-associated hospitalization among IC adults. METHODS: We analyzed data from adults ≥ 18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI) during the 2017-2018 influenza season at 10 hospitals in the United States. IC adults were identified using prespecified case definitions using electronic medical record data. VE was evaluated with a test-negative case-control design using multivariable logistic regression with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza as the outcome and vaccination status as the exposure, adjusting for age, enrolling site, illness onset date, race, days from onset to specimen collection, self-reported health, and self-reported hospitalizations. RESULTS: Of 3524 adults hospitalized with ARI, 1210 (34.3%) had an immunocompromising condition. IC adults were more likely to be vaccinated than non-IC (69.5% vs 65.2%) and less likely to have influenza (22% vs 27.8%). The mean age did not differ among IC and non-IC (61.4 vs 60.8 years of age). The overall VE against influenza hospitalization, including immunocompetent adults, was 33% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21-44). VE among IC vs non-IC adults was lower at 5% (95% CI, -29% to 31%) vs 41% (95% CI, 27-52) (P < .05 for interaction term). CONCLUSIONS: VE in 1 influenza season was very low among IC individuals. Future efforts should include evaluation of VE among the different immunocompromising conditions and whether enhanced vaccines improve the suboptimal effectiveness among the immunocompromised.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Adulto , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Hospitalização , Humanos , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Laboratórios , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação
19.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(12): 2240-2247, 2021 12 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34050659

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is frequently compared with influenza. The Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN) conducts studies on the etiology and characteristics of U.S. hospitalized adults with influenza. It began enrolling patients with COVID-19 hospitalizations in March 2020. Patients with influenza were compared with those with COVID-19 in the first months of the U.S. epidemic. METHODS: Adults aged ≥ 18 years admitted to hospitals in 4 sites with acute respiratory illness were tested by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus causing COVID-19. Demographic and illness characteristics were collected for influenza illnesses during 3 seasons 2016-2019. Similar data were collected on COVID-19 cases admitted before June 19, 2020. RESULTS: Age groups hospitalized with COVID-19 (n = 914) were similar to those admitted with influenza (n = 1937); 80% of patients with influenza and 75% of patients with COVID-19 were aged ≥50 years. Deaths from COVID-19 that occurred in younger patients were less often related to underlying conditions. White non-Hispanic persons were overrepresented in influenza (64%) compared with COVID-19 hospitalizations (37%). Greater severity and complications occurred with COVID-19 including more ICU admissions (AOR = 15.3 [95% CI: 11.6, 20.3]), ventilator use (AOR = 15.6 [95% CI: 10.7, 22.8]), 7 additional days of hospital stay in those discharged alive, and death during hospitalization (AOR = 19.8 [95% CI: 12.0, 32.7]). CONCLUSIONS: While COVID-19 can cause a respiratory illness like influenza, it is associated with significantly greater severity of illness, longer hospital stays, and higher in-hospital deaths.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Influenza Humana , Adulto , Demografia , Humanos , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Eficácia de Vacinas
20.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(6): 995-1003, 2021 03 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067049

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality in older adults. High-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV), with increased antigen content compared to standard-dose influenza vaccines (SD-IIV), is licensed for use in people aged ≥65 years. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of HD-IIV and SD-IIV for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with acute respiratory illness were enrolled in an observational vaccine effectiveness study at 8 hospitals in the United States Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network during the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 influenza seasons. Enrolled patients were tested for influenza, and receipt of influenza vaccine by type was recorded. Effectiveness of SD-IIV and HD-IIV was estimated using a test-negative design (comparing odds of influenza among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients). Relative effectiveness of SD-IIV and HD-IIV was estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 1487 enrolled patients aged ≥65 years, 1107 (74%) were vaccinated; 622 (56%) received HD-IIV, and 485 (44%) received SD-IIV. Overall, 277 (19%) tested positive for influenza, including 98 (16%) who received HD-IIV, 87 (18%) who received SD-IIV, and 92 (24%) who were unvaccinated. After adjusting for confounding variables, effectiveness of SD-IIV was 6% (95% confidence interval [CI] -42%, 38%) and that of HD-IIV was 32% (95% CI -3%, 54%), for a relative effectiveness of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV of 27% (95% CI -1%, 48%). CONCLUSIONS: During 2 US influenza seasons, vaccine effectiveness was low to moderate for prevention of influenza hospitalization among adults aged ≥65 years. High-dose vaccine offered greater effectiveness. None of these findings were statistically significant.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Idoso , Hospitalização , Humanos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Padrões de Referência , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA