4.1 Article

HPV vaccination of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men in sexual health and HIV clinics in England: vaccination uptake and attendances during the pilot phase

期刊

SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED INFECTIONS
卷 95, 期 8, 页码 608-613

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/sextrans-2018-053923

关键词

human papillomavirus; men who have sex with men; vaccination; evaluation; sexual health; surveillance

资金

  1. Public Health England (PHE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) aged up to 45 years attending sexual health clinics (SHC) and HIV clinics began in England as a pilot in June 2016, with national roll-out from April 2018. The recommended course is three doses of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine over one to 2years. We present the methodology and results of monitoring vaccination uptake (initiation and completion), and attendance patterns, during the pilot phase. Methods Total numbers of eligible GBMSM receiving HPV vaccine doses were extracted from routine datasets from pilot start to end of March 2018. Numbers of attendances since January 2009 were extracted and tested for trends before and after introduction of HPV vaccination. Results Overall, first dose uptake was 49.1 % (23 619/48 095), with clinics with highest data completeness achieving close to 90% uptake during the pilot period. Refusals were very low (3.5%). There was no evidence of increases in the number of GBMSM attendances at pilot SHC. Conclusions HPV vaccination has not caused important deviations to expected attendance patterns of GBMSM at SHC throughout the pilot phase. Overall, recorded initiation has been encouraging given known issues with data recording, as is current status of second and third dose completion. Attendances, vaccination initiation and completion will continue to be monitored alongside surveillance of anogenital warts diagnoses and of rectal HPV prevalence.

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

4.1
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