4.5 Review

Recent progress and concerns regarding the Japanese immunization program: Addressing the vaccine gap

Journal

VACCINE
Volume 32, Issue 34, Pages 4253-4258

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.06.022

Keywords

Immunization program; Japan; Vaccine gap; Rubella; Congenital rubella syndrome; Human papilloma virus vaccine; Conversion disorder

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent progress in the Japanese immunization program has partially closed the vaccine gap, i.e., the deficiencies in that program relative to immunization programs in other developed countries. During the last several years, seven new vaccines (12 new products, excluding influenza vaccines) have been introduced in Japan. Five of these new vaccines are produced outside Japan and four are now included as routine vaccines in the National Immunization Program, which is a new development in the licensing and financial support of imported vaccines. However, along with this progress, important concerns have arisen regarding the Japanese immunization program. A rubella epidemic among adults, in 2012-2013, resulted in more than 40 cases of congenital rubella syndrome as of March 2014. In addition, the temporary withdrawal of the active governmental recommendation for human papilloma virus vaccines, in 2013-2014, highlighted challenges in the current Japanese immunization system. Furthermore, some important vaccines - including vaccines for hepatitis B virus, mumps, varicella, and rotavirus - are still not included in the National Immunization Program and have been categorized as voluntary vaccines since their introduction. The possibility of their inclusion in the National Immunization Program remains a matter for discussion. We hope that future initiatives will further address the vaccine gap and protect Japanese children from vaccine-preventable diseases. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available