4.5 Review

Multidisciplinary, evidence-based consensus guidelines for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in high-risk populations, Spain, 2016

期刊

EUROSURVEILLANCE
卷 24, 期 7, 页码 7-20

出版社

EUR CENTRE DIS PREVENTION & CONTROL
DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2019.24.7.1700857

关键词

-

资金

  1. Spanish Association of Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy (AEPCC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Although human papillomavirus (HPV) routine vaccination programmes have been implemented around the world and recommendations have been expanded to include other high-risk individuals, current recommendations often differ between countries in Europe, as well as worldwide. Aim: To find and summarise the best available evidence of HPV vaccination in high-risk patients aiding clinicians and public health workers in the day-to-day vaccine decisions relating to HPV in Spain. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the immunogenicity, safety and efficacy/effectiveness of HPV vaccination in high-risk populations between January 2006 and June 2016. HPV vaccination recommendations were established with levels of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Results: A strong recommendation about HPV vaccination was made in the following groups: HIV infected patients aged 9-26 years; men who have sex with men aged 9-26 years; women with precancerous cervical lesions; patients with congenital bone marrow failure syndrome; women who have received a solid organ transplant or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation aged 9-26 years; and patients diagnosed with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis. Conclusions: Data concerning non-routine HPV vaccination in populations with a high risk of HPV infection and associated lesions were scarce. We have developed a document to evaluate and establish evidence-based guidelines on HPV vaccination in high-risk populations in Spain, based on best available scientific evidence.

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