4.5 Article

Influenza vaccination responses: Evaluating impact of repeat vaccination among health care workers

期刊

VACCINE
卷 35, 期 19, 页码 2558-2568

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.03.063

关键词

Influenza vaccine; Antibody; Immunogenicity; Healthcare worker; Hemagglutination inhibition assay; Focus reduction assay

资金

  1. Australian Government Department of Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To compare the antibody response to influenza between health care workers (HCWs) who have received multiple vaccinations (high vaccination group) and those who have received fewer vaccinations (low vaccination group). Design: Prospective serosurvey. Setting: Tertiary referral hospital. Participants: Healthcare workers. Methods: Healthcare workers were vaccinated with the 2015 southern hemisphere trivalent influenza vaccine. Influenza antibody titres were measured pre-vaccination, 21-28 days post-vaccination and 6 months post-vaccination. Antibody titres were measured using the haemagglutination inhibition assay. Levels of seropositivity and estimated geometric mean titres were calculated. Results: Of the 202 HCWs enrolled, 182 completed the study (143 high vaccination and 39 low vaccination). Both vaccination groups demonstrated increases in post-vaccination geometric mean titres, with greater gains in the low vaccination group. Seropositivity remained high in both high and low vaccination groups post-vaccination. The highest fold rise was observed among HCWs in the low vaccination group against the H3N2 component of the vaccine. Conclusions: Both high and low vaccination groups in our study demonstrated protective antibody titres post-vaccination. The findings from the current study are suggestive of decreased serological response among highly vaccinated HCWs. More studies with larger sample sizes and a greater number of people in the vaccine-naive and once-vaccinated groups are required to confirm or refute these findings before making any policy changes. (C) 2017 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