4.5 Article

Effectiveness of repeated influenza vaccination among the elderly population with high annual vaccine uptake rates during the three consecutive A/H3N2 epidemics

期刊

VACCINE
卷 38, 期 2, 页码 318-322

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.10.012

关键词

Influenza; Vaccination; Effectiveness; Antigenic determinants; Pneumonia; Hospitalization

资金

  1. Korea Healthcare Technology R&D Project of the Ministry of Health & Welfare of the Republic of Korea [A103001]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korean Government [NRF-2016R1A5A1010148]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Annually, about 80% of the Korean elderly aged >= 65 years receive influenza vaccination. Repeated annual vaccination has been suggested as an important factor of poor influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE), though reported conflicting results. Methods: During the consecutive A/H3N2-dominant influenza seasons between 2012 and 2015, we comparatively evaluated the VE (repeated vs. current season only) against laboratory-confirmed influenza, pneumonia and hospitalization in the elderly aged >= 65 years with influenza-like illness (ILI). Clinical and demographic data were collected prospectively, and vaccination status of prior and current seasons was verified using the immunization registry data of Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Results: During the first A/H3N2-dominant season in 2012-2013, influenza vaccine showed statistically significant effectiveness against influenza A infection only and when vaccinated in the current season only (VE 53%, 95% CI 15-77). In the latter two seasons (2013-2015 years), the adjusted VE for influenza A was indistinguishable between repeated vaccination and vaccination in the current season only. Conclusion: During consecutive influenza A/H3N2 epidemics, poor influenza vaccine effectiveness may be more pronounced among the elderly population with a high annual vaccine uptake rate. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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