Literature DB >> 26092310

Assessment of preparation time with fully-liquid versus non-fully liquid paediatric hexavalent vaccines. A time and motion study.

Ilse De Coster1, Xavier Fournie2, Céline Faure2, Eddy Ziani3, Laurence Nicolas3, Benoit Soubeyrand3, Pierre Van Damme4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Simplified vaccine preparation steps would save time and reduce potential immunisation errors. The aim of the study was to assess vaccine preparation time with fully-liquid hexavalent vaccine (DTaP-IPV-HB-PRP-T, Sanofi Pasteur MSD) versus non-fully liquid hexavalent vaccine that needs reconstitution (DTPa-HBV-IPV/Hib, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals).
METHODS: Ninety-six Health Care Professionals (HCPs) participated in a randomised, cross-over, open-label, time and motion study in Belgium (2014). HCPs prepared each vaccine in a cross-over manner with a wash-out period of 3-5min. An independent nurse assessed preparation time and immunisation errors by systematic review of the videos. HCPs satisfaction and preference were evaluated by a self-administered questionnaire.
RESULTS: Average preparation time was 36s for the fully-liquid vaccine and 70.5s for the non-fully liquid vaccine. The time saved using the fully-liquid vaccine was 34.5s (p≤0.001). On 192 preparations, 57 immunisation errors occurred: 47 in the non-fully liquid vaccine group (including one missing reconstitution of Hib component), 10 in the fully-liquid vaccine group. 71.9% of HCPs were very or somewhat satisfied with the ease of handling of both vaccines; 66.7% and 67.7% were very or somewhat satisfied with speed of preparation in the fully-liquid vaccine and the non-fully liquid vaccine groups, respectively. Almost all HCPs (97.6%) stated they would prefer the use of the fully-liquid vaccine in their daily practice.
CONCLUSIONS: Preparation of a fully-liquid hexavalent vaccine can be completed in half the time necessary to prepare a non-fully liquid vaccine. The simplicity of the fully-liquid hexavalent vaccine preparation helps optimise reduction of immunisation errors.
Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Childhood vaccination; Hexavalent vaccine; Immunisation errors; Time–motion study

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26092310     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.06.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vaccine        ISSN: 0264-410X            Impact factor:   3.641


  13 in total

1.  Knowledge and practices regarding infant vaccination: results of a survey of French physicians.

Authors:  Pierre Bakhache; Brigitte Virey; Christina Bienenfeld
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 3.183

2.  Hexavalent vaccines: characteristics of available products and practical considerations from a panel of Italian experts.

Authors:  A Orsi; C Azzari; E Bozzola; G Chiamenti; G Chirico; S Esposito; F Francia; P Lopalco; R Prato; R Russo; A Villani; E Franco
Journal:  J Prev Med Hyg       Date:  2018-06-01

Review 3.  DTaP5-HB-IPV-Hib Vaccine (Vaxelis®): A Review of its Use in Primary and Booster Vaccination.

Authors:  Yahiya Y Syed
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.022

4.  Preferences of healthcare professionals regarding hexavalent pediatric vaccines in Italy: a survey of attitudes and expectations.

Authors:  Giancarlo Icardi; Andrea Orsi; Giovanni Vitali Rosati; Alessia Tognetto; Giovanni Checcucci Lisi; Salvatore Parisi
Journal:  J Prev Med Hyg       Date:  2020-10-06

5.  Time-and-motion tool for the assessment of working time in tuberculosis laboratories: a multicentre study.

Authors:  V Mathys; E Roycroft; P Raftery; R Groenheit; D B Folkvardsen; D Homorodean; E Vasiliauskiene; L Vasiliauskaite; C Kodmon; M J van der Werf; F Drobniewski; V Nikolayevskyy
Journal:  Int J Tuberc Lung Dis       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Rational design of heat stable lyophilized rotavirus vaccine formulations.

Authors:  Madhu Madan; Deepa Sikriwal; Gaurav Sharma; Nidhi Shukla; Ashwani Kumar Mandyal; Sachin Kale; Davinder Gill
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 7.  DTaP-IPV-HepB-Hib Vaccine (Hexyon®): An Updated Review of its Use in Primary and Booster Vaccination.

Authors:  Yahiya Y Syed
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.930

8.  Valuing the cost of improving Chilean primary vaccination: a cost minimization analysis of a hexavalent vaccine.

Authors:  Ignacio Olivera; Carlos Grau; Hugo Dibarboure; Juan Pablo Torres; Gustavo Mieres; Luis Lazarov; Fabián P Alvarez; Juan Guillermo López Yescas
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Vaccine-Related Errors in Reconstitution in South Korea: A National Physicians' and Nurses' Survey.

Authors:  Young Hwa Lee; Rebecca C Harris; Hong Won Oh; Yongho Oh; Juan C Vargas-Zambrano; Young June Choe
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-02

Review 10.  What are the preferences of health care professionals in Germany regarding fully liquid, ready-to-use hexavalent pediatric vaccine versus hexavalent pediatric vaccine that needs reconstitution?

Authors:  Andrew J Lloyd; Beenish Nafees; Eddy Ziani; Laurence Nicolas; Beth Alice Fordham; Benoit Soubeyrand; Christoph Bornhöft
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 2.711

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.