Meera V Sreenivasan1, Hua H He2, Sarah Y Park2. 1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Epidemic Intelligence Service, Atlanta, GA ; Current affiliation: Kaiser Permanente Hawaii Medical Group, Honolulu, HI. 2. Hawaii Department of Health, Disease Outbreak Control Division, Honolulu, HI.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We determined whether the administration time differed between seasonal intranasal live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) and seasonal injectable trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) during Hawaii's 2009 school-located influenza vaccination clinics. This information is useful for public health response and allows further investigation into possible differences between the two vaccines. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in 15 public schools to determine mean times to administer LAIV and TIV to students. We performed group analyses to control for various clinic characteristics and conducted a stratified, weighted analysis. RESULTS: A total of 4,701 students were enrolled in the study, and administration time was obtained for 3,869 (82%) students (1,492 [39%] LAIV and 2,377 [61%] TIV). The mean administration time for LAIV was 62 seconds and for TIV was 90 seconds, a difference of 28 seconds (p<0.01). This finding remained significant in the stratified analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although results indicated that both LAIV and TIV can be administered rapidly among school-aged populations, LAIV was faster to administer. This finding, in addition to the greater immunogenicity of LAIV compared with TIV among children, may be an important consideration for public health administrators in planning school-located mass vaccination clinics and encouraging patient acceptance of this vaccine.
OBJECTIVES: We determined whether the administration time differed between seasonal intranasal live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) and seasonal injectable trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) during Hawaii's 2009 school-located influenza vaccination clinics. This information is useful for public health response and allows further investigation into possible differences between the two vaccines. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in 15 public schools to determine mean times to administer LAIV and TIV to students. We performed group analyses to control for various clinic characteristics and conducted a stratified, weighted analysis. RESULTS: A total of 4,701 students were enrolled in the study, and administration time was obtained for 3,869 (82%) students (1,492 [39%] LAIV and 2,377 [61%] TIV). The mean administration time for LAIV was 62 seconds and for TIV was 90 seconds, a difference of 28 seconds (p<0.01). This finding remained significant in the stratified analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although results indicated that both LAIV and TIV can be administered rapidly among school-aged populations, LAIV was faster to administer. This finding, in addition to the greater immunogenicity of LAIV compared with TIV among children, may be an important consideration for public health administrators in planning school-located mass vaccination clinics and encouraging patient acceptance of this vaccine.
Authors: Derek Weycker; John Edelsberg; M Elizabeth Halloran; Ira M Longini; Azhar Nizam; Vincent Ciuryla; Gerry Oster Journal: Vaccine Date: 2005-01-26 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Xing Cheng; James R Zengel; Amorsolo L Suguitan; Qi Xu; Weijia Wang; Jim Lin; Hong Jin Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2013-05-08 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Nicole E Basta; Dennis L Chao; M Elizabeth Halloran; Laura Matrajt; Ira M Longini Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2009-08-13 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Laetitia Gerlier; Mark Lamotte; Sofia Dos Santos Mendes; Oliver Damm; Markus Schwehm; Martin Eichner Journal: Paediatr Drugs Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 3.022