4.5 Article

Overview of the influenza vaccination activities and legal frameworks in 26 Swiss cantons during the influenza season 2019/20

Journal

VACCINE
Volume 40, Issue 12, Pages 1702-1706

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.02.009

Keywords

Influenza; Vaccination; Switzerland; Policy; Pharmacy

Funding

  1. Federal Office of Public Health and pharmaSuisse
  2. Swiss Pharmacists' Association

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study evaluated the activities and legal frameworks for influenza vaccination across all 26 Swiss cantons during the 2019/20 season, revealing significant variations in activities and legal authorizations among the cantons.
Background: In Switzerland, the implementation of national health and prevention strategies is regulated at the cantonal level. To date, no in-depth inventory outlining the cantonal health activities and legal frameworks for influenza vaccination exists. Objective: To assess the activities and legal frameworks for influenza vaccination during the 2019/20 season across all 26 Swiss cantons. Method: Survey using a structured closed-ended questionnaire. Results: The activities' range across the cantons is broad from 11 activities in the canton Vaud to one in cantons Grisons and Jura. French/Italian-speaking cantons conduct 1.5 times more influenza vaccination activities on average than the German-speaking cantons. 23 of 26 cantons authorize influenza vaccination by pharmacists. All cantons allow nurses to vaccinate under the responsibility of a doctor. Conclusion: Influenza vaccination activities and vaccination-specific legal frameworks vary by canton and linguistic regions. Future vaccination strategies should consider concerted approaches to optimize their successful implementation. (c) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

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