4.5 Article

Microneedle patches: Usability and acceptability for self-vaccination against influenza

期刊

VACCINE
卷 32, 期 16, 页码 1856-1862

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.01.076

关键词

Microneedle, Human study; Usability; Acceptability; Influenza

资金

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [U01 EB012495] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While therapeutic drugs are routinely self-administered by patients, there is little precedent for self-vaccination. Convenient self-vaccination may expand vaccination coverage and reduce administration costs. Microneedle patches are in development for many vaccines, but no reports exist on usability or acceptability. We hypothesized that naive patients could apply patches and that self-administered patches would improve stated intent to receive an influenza vaccine. We conducted a randomized, repeated measures study with 91 venue-recruited adults. To simulate vaccination, subjects received placebo microneedle patches given three times by self-administration and once by the investigator, as well as an intramuscular injection of saline. Seventy participants inserted patches with thumb pressure alone and the remainder used snap-based devices that closed shut at a certain force. Usability was assessed by skin staining and acceptability was measured with an adaptive-choice analysis. The best usability was seen with the snap device, with users inserting a median value of 93-96% of microneedles over three repetitions. When a self-administered microneedle patch was offered, intent to vaccinate increased from 44% to 65% (CI: 55-74%). The majority of those intending vaccination would prefer to self-vaccinate: 64% (CI: 51-75%). There were no serious adverse events associated with use of microneedle patches. The findings from this initial study indicate that microneedle patches for self-vaccination against influenza are usable and may lead to improved vaccination coverage. (c) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据