ABSTRACT
The immunization schedule recommended by the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) provides a structure for how 10 different vaccine series should be administered to children in the first 18 months of life. Progress toward US early childhood immunization goals has largely focused on measuring vaccination coverage at age 24 months. However, standard vaccination coverage measures do not reflect whether children received vaccine doses by recommended ages, or whether vaccines were given concomitantly, per the schedule. In this paper, we describe innovations in population-level measurement of immunization schedule adherence through quantifying vaccination timeliness and undervaccination patterns. Measuring vaccination timeliness involves comparing when children received vaccine doses relative to ACIP age recommendations. To assess undervaccination patterns, children's vaccination histories are analyzed to determine whether they were vaccinated consistent with the ACIP schedule. Some patterns, such as spreading out vaccines across visits, are indicative of parental hesitancy. Other patterns, such as starting all recommended series but missing doses, are largely indicative of other immunization services delivery challenges. Since 2003, at least 12 studies have used National Immunization Survey-Child, immunization information system, or integrated health plan data to measure vaccination timeliness or undervaccination patterns at national or state levels. Moving forward, these novel measures can be leveraged for population-based surveillance of vaccine confidence, and for distinguishing undervaccination due to parental vaccine hesitancy from undervaccination due to other causes. Broader adoption of these measures can facilitate identification of targeted strategies for improving timely and routine early childhood vaccination uptake across the United States.
Subject(s)
Vaccination Coverage , Vaccines , Humans , Child, Preschool , United States , Infant , Immunization Schedule , Vaccines/therapeutic use , Vaccination , Immunization ProgramsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Evidence indicates that mRNA COVID-19 vaccination is associated with risk of myocarditis and possibly pericarditis, especially in young males. It is not clear if risk differs between mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2. We assessed if risk differs using comprehensive health records on a diverse population. METHODS: Members 18-39 years of age at eight integrated healthcare-delivery systems were monitored using data updated weekly and supplemented with medical record review of myocarditis and pericarditis cases. Incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis events that occurred among vaccine recipients 0 to 7 days after either dose 1 or 2 of a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was compared with that of vaccinated concurrent comparators who, on the same calendar day, had received their most recent dose 22 to 42 days earlier. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by conditional Poisson regression, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, health plan, and calendar day. Head-to-head comparison directly assessed risk following mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 during 0-7 days post-vaccination. RESULTS: From December 14, 2020 - January 15, 2022 there were 41 cases after 2,891,498 doses of BNT162b2 and 38 cases after 1,803,267 doses of mRNA-1273. Cases had similar demographic and clinical characteristics. Most were hospitalized for ≤1 day; none required intensive care. During days 0-7 after dose 2 of BNT162b2, the incidence was 14.3 (CI: 6.5-34.9) times higher than the comparison interval, amounting to 22.4 excess cases per million doses; after mRNA-1273 the incidence was 18.8 (CI: 6.7-64.9) times higher than the comparison interval, amounting to 31.2 excess cases per million doses. In head-to-head comparisons 0-7 days after either dose, risk was moderately higher after mRNA-1273 than after BNT162b2 (RR: 1.61, CI 1.02-2.54). CONCLUSIONS: Both vaccines were associated with increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in 18-39-year-olds. Risk estimates were modestly higher after mRNA-1273 than after BNT162b2.
Subject(s)
2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Myocarditis , Pericarditis , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273/adverse effects , BNT162 Vaccine/adverse effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Male , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Myocarditis/etiology , Pericarditis/epidemiology , Pericarditis/etiology , RNA, Messenger , Vaccination/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Importance: Postauthorization monitoring of vaccines in a large population may detect rare adverse events not identified in clinical trials such as Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), which has a background rate of 1 to 2 per 100â¯000 person-years. Objective: To describe cases and incidence of GBS following COVID-19 vaccination and assess the risk of GBS after vaccination for Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen) and mRNA vaccines. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used surveillance data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink at 8 participating integrated health care systems in the United States. There were 10â¯158â¯003 participants aged at least 12 years. Data analysis was performed from November 2021 to February 2022. Exposures: Ad.26.COV2.S, BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine, including mRNA vaccine doses 1 and 2, December 13, 2020, to November 13, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: GBS with symptom onset in the 1 to 84 days after vaccination, confirmed by medical record review and adjudication. Descriptive characteristics of confirmed cases, GBS incidence rates during postvaccination risk intervals after each type of vaccine compared with the background rate, rate ratios (RRs) comparing GBS incidence in the 1 to 21 vs 22 to 42 days postvaccination, and RRs directly comparing risk of GBS after Ad.26.COV2.S vs mRNA vaccination, using Poisson regression adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, site, and calendar day. Results: From December 13, 2020, through November 13, 2021, 15â¯120â¯073 doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered to 7â¯894â¯989 individuals (mean [SE] age, 46.5 [0.02] years; 8â¯138â¯318 doses received [53.8%] by female individuals; 3â¯671â¯199 doses received [24.3%] by Hispanic or Latino individuals, 2â¯215â¯064 doses received [14.7%] by Asian individuals, 6â¯266â¯424 doses received [41.4%] by White individuals), including 483â¯053 Ad.26.COV2.S doses, 8â¯806â¯595 BNT162b2 doses, and 5â¯830â¯425 mRNA-1273 doses. Eleven cases of GBS after Ad.26.COV2.S were confirmed. The unadjusted incidence rate of GBS per 100â¯000 person-years in the 1 to 21 days after Ad.26.COV2.S was 32.4 (95% CI, 14.8-61.5), significantly higher than the background rate, and the adjusted RR in the 1 to 21 vs 22 to 42 days following Ad.26.COV2.S was 6.03 (95% CI, 0.79-147.79). Thirty-six cases of GBS after mRNA vaccines were confirmed. The unadjusted incidence rate per 100â¯000 person-years in the 1 to 21 days after mRNA vaccines was 1.3 (95% CI, 0.7-2.4) and the adjusted RR in the 1 to 21 vs 22 to 42 days following mRNA vaccines was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.21-1.48). In a head-to-head comparison of Ad.26.COV2.S vs mRNA vaccines, the adjusted RR was 20.56 (95% CI, 6.94-64.66). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of COVID-19 vaccines, the incidence of GBS was elevated after receiving the Ad.26.COV2.S vaccine. Surveillance is ongoing.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Guillain-Barre Syndrome , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Cohort Studies , Female , Guillain-Barre Syndrome/epidemiology , Guillain-Barre Syndrome/etiology , Humans , Incidence , Middle Aged , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA VaccinesABSTRACT
By September 21, 2021, an estimated 182 million persons in the United States were fully vaccinated against COVID-19.* Clinical trials indicate that Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson; Ad.26.COV2.S) vaccines are effective and generally well tolerated (1-3). However, daily vaccination rates have declined approximately 78% since April 13, 2021; vaccine safety concerns have contributed to vaccine hesitancy (4). A cohort study of 19,625 nursing home residents found that those who received an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) had lower all-cause mortality than did unvaccinated residents (5), but no studies comparing mortality rates within the general population of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons have been conducted. To assess mortality not associated with COVID-19 (non-COVID-19 mortality) after COVID-19 vaccination in a general population setting, a cohort study was conducted during December 2020-July 2021 among approximately 11 million persons enrolled in seven Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) sites.§ After standardizing mortality rates by age and sex, this study found that COVID-19 vaccine recipients had lower non-COVID-19 mortality than did unvaccinated persons. After adjusting for demographic characteristics and VSD site, this study found that adjusted relative risk (aRR) of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38-0.44) after dose 1 and 0.34 (95% CI = 0.33-0.36) after dose 2. The aRRs of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Moderna vaccine were 0.34 (95% CI = 0.32-0.37) after dose 1 and 0.31 (95% CI = 0.30-0.33) after dose 2. The aRR after receipt of the Janssen vaccine was 0.54 (95% CI = 0.49-0.59). There is no increased risk for mortality among COVID-19 vaccine recipients. This finding reinforces the safety profile of currently approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United States.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Mortality/trends , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
COVID-19 vaccination is critical to ending the COVID-19 pandemic. Members of minority racial and ethnic groups have experienced disproportionate COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality (1); however, COVID-19 vaccination coverage is lower in these groups (2). CDC used data from CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)* to assess disparities in vaccination coverage among persons aged ≥16 years by race and ethnicity during December 14, 2020-May 15, 2021. Measures of coverage included receipt of ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose (i.e., receipt of the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines or 1 dose of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine [Johnson & Johnson]) and full vaccination (receipt of 2 doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines or 1 dose of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine). Among 9.6 million persons aged ≥16 years enrolled in VSD during December 14, 2020-May 15, 2021, ≥1-dose coverage was 48.3%, and 38.3% were fully vaccinated. As of May 15, 2021, coverage with ≥1 dose was lower among non-Hispanic Black (Black) and Hispanic persons (40.7% and 41.1%, respectively) than it was among non-Hispanic White (White) persons (54.6%). Coverage was highest among non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) persons (57.4%). Coverage with ≥1 dose was higher among persons with certain medical conditions that place them at higher risk for severe COVID-19 (high-risk conditions) (63.8%) than it was among persons without such conditions (41.5%) and was higher among persons who had not had COVID-19 (48.8%) than it was among those who had (42.4%). Persons aged 18-24 years had the lowest ≥1-dose coverage (28.7%) among all age groups. Continued monitoring of vaccination coverage and efforts to improve equity in coverage are critical, especially among populations disproportionately affected by COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/ethnology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Racial Groups/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: As the rates of vaccination decline in children with logistical barriers to vaccination, new strategies to increase vaccination are needed. The goal of this study was to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of the Vaccines For Babies (VFB) intervention, an automated reminder system with online resources to address logistical barriers to vaccination in caregivers of children enrolled in an integrated healthcare system. Effectiveness was evaluated in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with parents of children less than two years old to identify logistical barriers to vaccination that were used to develop the VFB intervention. VFB included automated reminders to schedule the 6- and 12-month vaccine visit linking caregivers to resources to address logistic barriers, sent to the preferred mode of outreach (text, email, and/or phone). Parents of children between 3 and 10 months of age with indicators of logistical barriers to vaccination were randomized to receive VFB or usual well child care (UC). The primary outcome was percentage of days undervaccinated at 2 years of life. A difference in differences analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Qualitative interviews with 6 parents of children less than 2 years of age identified transportation, scheduling challenges, and knowledge of vaccine timing as logistical barriers to vaccination. We enrolled 250 participants in the trial, 45% were loss to follow-up. There were no significant differences in vaccination uptake between those enrolled in UC or the VFB intervention (0.51%, p = 0.86). In Medicaid enrolled participants, there was a modest decrease in percentage of days undervaccinated in the VFB intervention compared to UC (6.3%, p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Automated Reminders and with links to heath system resources was not shown to increase infant vaccination uptake demonstrating additional resources are needed to address the needs of caregivers experiencing logistical barriers to vaccination.
Subject(s)
Reminder Systems , Text Messaging , Humans , Infant , Motivation , Parents , VaccinationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing guidelines recommend reducing or discontinuing opioids for chronic pain if harms of opioid treatment outweigh benefits. As opioid discontinuation becomes more prevalent, it is important to understand whether opioid discontinuation is associated with heroin use. In this study, we sought to assess the association between opioid discontinuation and heroin use documented in the medical record. METHODS: A matched nested case-control study was conducted in an integrated health plan and delivery system in Colorado. Patients receiving opioid therapy in the study period (January 2006-June 2018) were included. Opioid discontinuation was defined as ≥45 days with no opioids dispensed after initiating opioid therapy. The heroin use onset date represented the index date. Case patients were matched to up to 20 randomly selected patients without heroin use (control patients) by age, sex, calendar time, and time between initiating opioid therapy and the index date. Conditional logistic regression models estimated matched odds ratios (mOR) for the association between an opioid discontinuation prior to the index date and heroin use. RESULTS: Among 22,962 patients prescribed opioid therapy, 125 patients (0.54%) used heroin after initiating opioid therapy, of which 74 met criteria for inclusion in the analysis. The odds of opioid discontinuation were approximately two times higher in case patients (n = 74) than control patients (n = 1045; mOR = 2.19; 95% CI 1.27-3.78). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients prescribed chronic opioid therapy, the observed increased risk for heroin use associated with opioid discontinuation should be balanced with potential benefits.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/adverse effects , Chronic Pain/drug therapy , Chronic Pain/epidemiology , Heroin Dependence/epidemiology , Heroin/adverse effects , Withholding Treatment/trends , Adult , Aged , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Case-Control Studies , Chronic Pain/psychology , Cohort Studies , Colorado/epidemiology , Female , Heroin Dependence/diagnosis , Heroin Dependence/psychology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To develop a validated instrument that measures knowledge about prescription opioid overdose. METHODS: Within an integrated health care system, we adapted, piloted, and tested the reliability and predictive validity of a modified Opioid Overdose Knowledge Scale (OOKS) instrument specific to prescription opioids (Rx-OOKS) with a patient population prescribed long-term opioid therapy and potentially at risk of opioid overdose. We used an interdisciplinary team approach and patient interviews to adapt the instrument. We then piloted the survey on a patient sample and assessed it using Cronbach's alpha and logistic regression. RESULTS: Rx-OOKS (N = 56) resulted in a three-construct, 25-item instrument. Internal consistency was acceptable for the following constructs: "signs of an overdose" (10 items) at α = 0.851, "action to take with opioid overdose" (seven items) at α = 0.692, and "naloxone use knowledge" (eight items) at α = 0.729. One construct, "risks of an overdose" (three items), had an α of 0.365 and was subsequently eliminated from analysis due to poor performance. We conducted logistic regression to determine if any of the constructs was strongly associated with future naloxone receipt. Higher scores on "actions to take in an overdose" had nine times the odds of receiving naloxone (odds ratio [OR] = 9.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.42-57.12); higher "naloxone use knowledge" scores were 15.8 times more likely to receive naloxone than those with lower scores (OR = 15.83, 95% CI = 1.68-149.17). CONCLUSIONS: The Rx-OOKS survey instrument can reliably measure knowledge about prescription opioid overdose recognition and naloxone use. Further, knowledge about actions to take during an opioid overdose and naloxone use were associated with future receipt of naloxone.
Subject(s)
Drug Overdose , Opiate Overdose , Opioid-Related Disorders , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Drug Overdose/drug therapy , Drug Overdose/prevention & control , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Naloxone/therapeutic use , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/prevention & control , Pilot Projects , Prescriptions , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women in the United States is suboptimal. We surveyed women who were pregnant during the 2016-17 influenza season to assess knowledge and attitudes regarding influenza vaccination. METHODS: We identified and sampled pregnant women to include approximately equal numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated women from strata defined by vaccination status and trimester from four integrated health systems in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Potential participants were contacted via mail and telephone to complete a standardized survey. Characteristics and responses of women vaccinated and unvaccinated during pregnancy were compared. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 510 (48%) of 1062 contacted women; 500 were included in the analysis. Vaccine receipt while pregnant was associated with primigravida status (p = 0.02), college degree (p = 0.01), employment in health care (p < 0.01), and history of routine annual influenza vaccination (p < 0.01). Among 330 vaccinated women, the primary reasons for vaccination included protection of self and baby from influenza (n = 233, 71%), and medical professional recommendation (n = 46, 14%). Multiple reasons were given for nonvaccination, but concern about 'negative effects' was cited most often (n = 44, 29%). Vaccinated women were significantly more likely to believe that influenza vaccines are safe and effective, and to recognize the potential for harm from influenza infection. Nearly all women reported receiving at least one influenza vaccination recommendation from a healthcare provider. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccinated pregnant women were more likely to receive routine annual influenza vaccine compared to those not vaccinated. Recommendations by obstetric providers should be supplemented with efforts to encourage women of childbearing age to receive annual vaccination.
Subject(s)
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , Influenza, Human , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Pregnant Women/psychology , Adult , Female , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/prevention & control , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States , Vaccination/psychologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) and influenza vaccines are recommended for pregnant women in each pregnancy, yet uptake is suboptimal. This study tested the efficacy of an online vaccine resource in increasing uptake of Tdap and influenza vaccines among pregnant women. STUDY DESIGN: RCT. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: This study was conducted among women in the third trimester of pregnancy in an integrated healthcare system in Colorado in September 2013-July 2016, with data analysis in 2017-2018. INTERVENTION: Women were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 arms: website with vaccine information and interactive social media components, website with vaccine information only, or usual care. Participants in the website with vaccine information and interactive social media components and website with vaccine information only arms had access to the same base vaccine content. The website with vaccine information and interactive social media components also included a blog, discussion forum, and "Ask a Question" portal. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Tdap and influenza vaccination. These outcomes were analyzed separately. RESULTS: For influenza (n=289), women in both the website with vaccine information and interactive social media components (OR=2.19, 95% CI=1.06, 4.53) and website with vaccine information only (OR=2.20, 95% CI=1.03, 4.69) arms had higher vaccine uptake than the usual care arm. The proportions of women receiving the influenza vaccine were 57%, 55%, and 36% in the website with vaccine information and interactive social media components, website with vaccine information only, and usual care arms, respectively. For Tdap (n=173), there were no significant differences in vaccine uptake between study arms. The proportions of women receiving Tdap were 71%, 69%, and 68% in the website with vaccine information and interactive social media components, website with vaccine information only, and usual care arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Web-based vaccination information sent to pregnant women can positively influence maternal influenza vaccine uptake. Because of potential scalability, the impact of robust vaccination information websites should be studied in other settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01873040.
Subject(s)
Internet-Based Intervention , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Social Media , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Colorado , Decision Making , Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular Pertussis Vaccines/administration & dosage , Female , Humans , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , Logistic Models , PregnancyABSTRACT
Importance: Attempts to discontinue opioid therapy to reduce the risk of overdose and adhere to prescribing guidelines may lead patients to be exposed to variability in opioid dosing. Such dose variability may increase the risk of opioid overdose even if therapy discontinuation is associated with a reduction in risk. Objective: To examine the association between opioid dose variability and opioid overdose. Design, Setting, and Participants: A nested case-control study was conducted in a large Colorado integrated health plan and delivery system from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2018. Cohort members were individuals prescribed long-term opioid therapy. Exposures: Dose variability was defined as the SD of the milligrams of morphine equivalents across each patient's follow-up and categorized based on the quintile distribution of the SD in the cohort (0-5.3, 5.4-9.1, 9.2-14.6, 14.7-27.2, and >27.2 mg of morphine equivalents). Main Outcomes and Measures: Opioid overdose cases were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes. Each case patient with overdose was matched to up to 20 control patients using risk set sampling. Conditional logistic regression models were used to generate matched odds ratios and 95% CIs, adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, drug or alcohol use disorder, tobacco use, benzodiazepine dispensings, medical comorbidities, mental health disorder, opioid dose, and opioid formulation. Results: In a cohort of 14â¯898 patients (mean [SD] age, 56.3 [16.0] years; 8988 [60.3%] female) prescribed long-term opioid therapy, 228 case patients with incident opioid overdose were matched to 3547 control patients. The mean (SD) duration of opioid therapy was 36.7 (33.7) months in case patients and 33.0 (30.9) months in control patients. High-dose variability (SD >27.2 mg of morphine equivalents) was associated with a significantly increased risk of overdose compared with low-dose variability (matched odds ratio, 3.32; 95% CI, 1.63-6.77) independent of opioid dose. Conclusions and Relevance: Variability in opioid dose may be a risk factor for opioid overdose, suggesting that practitioners should seek to minimize dose variability when managing long-term opioid therapy.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Benzodiazepines/administration & dosage , Drug Overdose/etiology , Morphine/administration & dosage , Adult , Case-Control Studies , Cohort Studies , Colorado , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Dosage Calculations , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Risk Factors , Withholding TreatmentABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Successful strategies are needed to address parental vaccine hesitancy, a significant public health issue. The study objective was to assess whether an Internet-based platform with vaccine information and interactive social media components improved parents' vaccine-related attitudes. STUDY DESIGN: A three-arm RCT. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: The study was conducted in a large Colorado integrated healthcare organization. Parents were enrolled during September 2013 through October 2015 and followed through November 2016; data were analyzed in 2017. Parents, recruited during pregnancy, were given a survey about vaccine-related attitudes at enrollment (i.e., baseline) and when their child was aged 3-5 months and 12-15 months (Timepoints 1 and 2, respectively). Parental vaccine hesitancy was assessed at baseline. INTERVENTION: Study participants were randomized to the following: a study website with vaccine information and social media components (VSM arm); a website with vaccine information only (VI); or usual care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in parental vaccine attitudes over time by baseline degree of vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: Among 1,093 study participants, 945 (86.5%) completed all three surveys. Comparing baseline with Timepoint 1 among vaccine-hesitant parents, the VSM and VI arms were associated with significant improvements in attitudes regarding vaccination benefits compared to usual care (VSM mean change 0.23 on a 5-point scale, 95% CI=0.05, 0.40, VI mean change 0.22, 95% CI=0.04, 0.40). Comparing baseline with Timepoint 2 among hesitant parents, the VSM and VI arms were also associated with significant reductions in parental concerns about vaccination risks compared to usual care (VSM mean change -0.37, 95% CI= -0.60, -0.14, VI mean change -0.31, 95% CI= -0.55, -0.07). Self-efficacy around vaccine decision making also improved among vaccine-hesitant parents. No intervention effect was observed among parents not vaccine-hesitant at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Among vaccine-hesitant parents, an Internet-based intervention improved parents' attitudes about vaccines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01873040.
Subject(s)
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Mothers/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Social Media , Adult , Colorado , Decision Making , Female , Humans , Infant , Internet , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccines/administration & dosageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Naloxone is a life-saving opioid antagonist. Chronic pain guidelines recommend that physicians co-prescribe naloxone to patients at high risk for opioid overdose. However, clinical tools to efficiently identify patients who could benefit from naloxone are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an overdose predictive model which could be used in primary care settings to assess the need for naloxone. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Derivation site was an integrated health system in Colorado; validation site was a safety-net health system in Colorado. PARTICIPANTS: We developed a predictive model in a cohort of 42,828 patients taking chronic opioid therapy and externally validated the model in 10,708 patients. MAIN MEASURES: Potential predictors and outcomes (nonfatal pharmaceutical and heroin overdoses) were extracted from electronic health records. Fatal overdose outcomes were identified from state vital records. To match the approximate shelf-life of naloxone, we used Cox proportional hazards regression to model the 2-year risk of overdose. Calibration and discrimination were assessed. KEY RESULTS: A five-variable predictive model showed good calibration and discrimination (bootstrap-corrected c-statistic = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.78) in the derivation site, with sensitivity of 66.1% and specificity of 66.6%. In the validation site, the model showed good discrimination (c-statistic = 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.80) and less than ideal calibration, with sensitivity and specificity of 82.2% and 49.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients on chronic opioid therapy, the predictive model identified 66-82% of all subsequent opioid overdoses. This model is an efficient screening tool to identify patients who could benefit from naloxone to prevent overdose deaths. Population differences across the two sites limited calibration in the validation site.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/adverse effects , Drug Overdose/etiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Chronic Pain/drug therapy , Chronic Pain/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Colorado/epidemiology , Drug Administration Schedule , Drug Overdose/epidemiology , Drug Overdose/prevention & control , Electronic Health Records , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Statistical , Naloxone/therapeutic use , Narcotic Antagonists , Primary Health Care/methods , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors , Substance-Related Disorders/complications , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in children 2 through 17 years of age. METHODS: The study was conducted in 6 large integrated health care organizations participating in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Trivalent LAIV safety was assessed in children who received LAIV between September 1, 2003 and March 31, 2013. Eighteen pre-specified adverse event groups were studied, including allergic, autoimmune, neurologic, respiratory, and infectious conditions. Incident rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated for each adverse event, using self-controlled case series analyses. For adverse events with a statistically significant increase in risk, or an IRR > 2.0 regardless of statistical significance, manual medical record review was performed to confirm case status. RESULTS: During the study period, 396 173 children received 590 018 doses of LAIV. For 13 adverse event groups, there was no significant increased risk of adverse events following LAIV. Five adverse event groups (anaphylaxis, syncope, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, adverse effect of drug, and respiratory failure) met criteria for manual medical record review. After review to confirm cases, 2 adverse event groups remained significantly associated with LAIV: anaphylaxis and syncope. One confirmed case of anaphylaxis was observed following LAIV, a rate of 1.7 per million LAIV doses. Five confirmed cases of syncope were observed, a rate of 8.5 per million doses. CONCLUSIONS: In a study of trivalent LAIV safety in a large cohort of children, few serious adverse events were detected. Anaphylaxis and syncope occurred following LAIV, although rarely. These data provide reassurance regarding continued LAIV use.
Subject(s)
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/statistics & numerical data , Anaphylaxis/epidemiology , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Influenza Vaccines/adverse effects , Syncope/epidemiology , Adolescent , Anaphylaxis/chemically induced , Child , Child, Preschool , Drug Hypersensitivity/etiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Male , Product Surveillance, Postmarketing/statistics & numerical data , Prospective Studies , Seasons , Syncope/chemically induced , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccination/methods , Vaccines, Attenuated/administration & dosage , Vaccines, Attenuated/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Population-based estimates of influenza-associated outpatient visits including both pandemic and interpandemic seasons are uncommon. Comparisons of such estimates with laboratory-confirmed rates of outpatient influenza are rare. OBJECTIVE: To estimate influenza-associated outpatient visits in 6 US integrated healthcare delivery organizations enrolling ~7.7 million persons. METHODS: Using negative binomial regression methods, we modeled rates of influenza-associated visits with ICD-9-CM-coded pneumonia or acute respiratory outpatient visits during 2001-10. These estimated counts were added to visits coded specifically for influenza to derive estimated rates. We compared these rates with those observed in 2 contemporaneous studies recording RT-PCR-confirmed influenza outpatient visits. RESULTS: Outpatient rates estimated with pneumonia visits were 39 (95% confidence interval [CI], 30-70) and 203 (95% CI, 180-240) per 10 000 person-years, respectively, for interpandemic and pandemic seasons. Corresponding rates estimated with respiratory visits were 185 (95% CI, 161-255) and 542 (95% CI, 441-823) per 10 000 person-years. During the pandemic, children aged 2-17 years had the largest increase in rates (when estimated with pneumonia visits, from 64 [95% CI, 50-121] to 381 [95% CI, 366-481]). Rates estimated with pneumonia visits were consistent with rates of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza visits during 4 of 5 seasons in 1 comparison study. In another, rates estimated with pneumonia visits during the pandemic for children and adults were consistent in timing, peak, and magnitude. CONCLUSIONS: Estimated rates of influenza-associated outpatient visits were higher in children than adults during pre-pandemic and pandemic seasons. Rates estimated with pneumonia visits plus influenza-coded visits were similar to rates from studies using RT-PCR-confirmed influenza.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/statistics & numerical data , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Ambulatory Care , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Outpatients , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pneumonia poses a significant burden to the U.S. health-care system. However, there are few data focusing on severe pneumonia, particularly cases of pneumonia associated with specialized care in intensive care units (ICU). METHODS: We used administrative and electronic medical record data from six integrated health care systems to estimate rates of pneumonia hospitalizations with ICU admissions among adults during 2006 through 2010. Pneumonia hospitalization was defined as either a primary discharge diagnosis of pneumonia or a primary discharge diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure with a secondary diagnosis of pneumonia in administrative data. ICU admissions were collected from internal electronic medical records from each system. Comorbidities were identified by ICD-9-CM codes coded during the current pneumonia hospitalization, as well as during medical visits that occurred during the year prior to the date of admission. RESULTS: We identified 119,537 adult hospitalizations meeting our definition for pneumonia. Approximately 19% of adult pneumonia hospitalizations had an ICU admission. The rate of pneumonia hospitalizations requiring ICU admission during the study period was 76 per 100,000 population/year; rates increased for each age-group with the highest rates among adults aged ≥85 years. Having a co-morbidity approximately doubled the risk of ICU admission in all age-groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates a significant burden of pneumonia hospitalizations with an ICU admission among adults in our cohort during 2006 through 2010, especially older age-groups and persons with underlying medical conditions. These findings reinforce current strategies aimed to prevent pneumonia among adults.
Subject(s)
Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Electronic Health Records , Female , Humans , International Classification of Diseases , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Risk Factors , Sex Distribution , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although current rotavirus vaccines were not associated with an increased risk of intussusception in large trials before licensure, recent postlicensure data from international settings suggest the possibility of a small increase in risk of intussusception after monovalent rotavirus vaccination. We examined this risk in a population in the United States. METHODS: Participants were infants between the ages of 4 and 34 weeks who were enrolled in six integrated health care organizations in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) project. We reviewed medical records and visits for intussusception within 7 days after monovalent rotavirus vaccination from April 2008 through March 2013. Using sequential analyses, we then compared the risk of intussusception among children receiving monovalent rotavirus vaccine with historical background rates. We further compared the risk after monovalent rotavirus vaccination with the risk in a concurrent cohort of infants who received the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine. RESULTS: During the study period, 207,955 doses of monovalent rotavirus vaccine (including 115,908 first doses and 92,047 second doses) were administered in the VSD population. We identified 6 cases of intussusception within 7 days after the administration of either dose of vaccine. For the two doses combined, the expected number of intussusception cases was 0.72, resulting in a significant relative risk of 8.4. For the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine, 1,301,810 doses were administered during the study period, with 8 observed intussusception cases (7.11 expected), for a nonsignificant relative risk of 1.1. The relative risk of chart-confirmed intussusception within 7 days after monovalent rotavirus vaccination, as compared with the risk after pentavalent rotavirus vaccination, was 9.4 (95% confidence interval, 1.4 to 103.8). The attributable risk of intussusception after the administration of two doses of monovalent rotavirus vaccine was estimated to be 5.3 per 100,000 infants vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective postlicensure study of more than 200,000 doses of monovalent rotavirus vaccine, we observed a significant increase in the rate of intussusception after vaccination, a risk that must be weighed against the benefits of preventing rotavirus-associated illness. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).