Literature DB >> 26529074

Differences in efficiency, satisfaction and adverse events between self-administered intradermal and nurse-administered intramuscular influenza vaccines in hospital workers.

Brenda L Coleman1, Shelly A McNeil2, Joanne M Langley3, Scott A Halperin4, Allison J McGeer5.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Vaccinating healthcare workers against influenza takes tens of thousands of hours of work annually. This study was undertaken to determine the acceptability, success rate, and time to vaccinate healthcare workers in nurse-led groups that self-vaccinated with intradermal influenza vaccine compared with nurse-administered intramuscular vaccine.
METHODS: Volunteer hospital workers were randomly assigned to groups that either self-administered intradermal influenza vaccine (Intanza(®)) in a nurse-led group or received nurse-administered intramuscular vaccine (Vaxigrip(®)). Research assistants timed vaccination procedures; pre- and post-injection questionnaires assessed acceptability and reactogenicity.
RESULTS: 810 adults, 21-69 years of age, from two study sites were vaccinated: 401 self-administered the intradermal vaccine while 409 received their intramuscular vaccine from a nurse. Of those who self-administered for the first time, 98.5% were successful on their first attempt with an additional 1.5% on their second attempt. Acceptability was high: 96% were very or somewhat certain that they administered the vaccine correctly, 83% would choose intradermal influenza vaccine again and of those, 75% would choose self-administration again, if given the choice. It took 51.3-72.6s per person for the nurses to guide the groups through the self-administration process, which was significantly less time than it took to individually administer the intramuscular vaccines (93.6s).
CONCLUSION: Self-administration of intradermal influenza vaccine by people working in healthcare settings is a possible alternative to nurse administered vaccinations, with nurse-led group sessions a good way of teaching the technique while being available to respond to unanticipated problems (NCT01665807).
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Campaign; Influenza vaccines; Intradermal; Intramuscular; Vaccination

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26529074     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.10.095

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


  5 in total

Review 1.  Immunogenicity, safety and tolerability of intradermal influenza vaccines.

Authors:  Ivan F N Hung; Kwok-Yung Yuen
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2017-07-06       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 2.  Fluzone® intra-dermal (Intanza®/Istivac® Intra-dermal): An updated overview.

Authors:  Nicola Luigi Bragazzi; Andrea Orsi; Filippo Ansaldi; Roberto Gasparini; Giancarlo Icardi
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 3.  Is There an Optimal Formulation and Delivery Strategy for Subunit Vaccines?

Authors:  Sharan Bobbala; Sarah Hook
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 4.580

4.  Uptake rates, knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward seasonal influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in Lebanon.

Authors:  Malak Alame; Malak Kaddoura; Samer Kharroubi; Fatima Ezzeddine; Ghadir Hassan; Marwa Diab El-Harakeh; Lubna Al Ariqi; Abdinasir Abubaker; Hassan Zaraket
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2021-07-22       Impact factor: 4.526

Review 5.  Influenza Vaccination and Guillain-Barré Syndrome: Reality or Fear.

Authors:  Arefeh Babazadeh; Zeinab Mohseni Afshar; Mostafa Javanian; Mousa Mohammadnia-Afrouzi; Ahmad Karkhah; Jila Masrour-Roudsari; Parisa Sabbagh; Veerendra Koppolu; Veneela KrishnaRekha Vasigala; Soheil Ebrahimpour
Journal:  J Transl Int Med       Date:  2019-12-31
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.