Literature DB >> 35100525

Usability, acceptability, and feasibility of a High-Density Microarray Patch (HD-MAP) applicator as a delivery method for vaccination in clinical settings.

Cristyn Davies1,2, Melody Taba1,2, Lucy Deng1,3, Ceylan Karatas1,4, Shopna Bag5,6, Charles Ross7, Angus Forster7, Robert Booy1,2, S Rachel Skinner1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: High-density microarray patch (HD-MAP) vaccines may increase vaccine acceptance and use. We aimed to ascertain whether professional immunizers (PIs) and other healthcare workers (HCWs) in Australia, a High-Income Country (HIC), found the HD-MAP applicator usable and acceptable for vaccine delivery.
METHODS: This feasibility study recruited PIs and HCWs to administer/receive simulated HD-MAP administration, including via self-administration. We assessed usability against essential and desirable criteria. Participants completed a survey, rating their agreement to statements about HD-MAP administration. A subset also participated in an interview or focus group. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and interviews were transcribed and subject to thematic analysis.
RESULTS: We recruited 61 participants: 23 PIs and 38 HCWs. Findings indicated high usability and acceptability of HD-MAP use across both groups by a healthcare professional or trained user and for self-administration with safety measures in place. Most administrations met essential criteria, but PIs, on average, applied the HD-MAP for slightly less time than the required 10-seconds, which the HCWs achieved. PIs perceived safety concerns about home administration but found layperson self-administration acceptable in an emergency, pandemic, and rural or remote settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Participants found HD-MAP administration usable and acceptable. Usability and acceptability are likely to be improved through end-user education and training.

Entities:  

Keywords:  High-Density Microarray Patch (HD-MAP); Microarray patch; acceptability; self-administration; usability; vaccination patch

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35100525      PMCID: PMC9196792          DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2021.2018863

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother        ISSN: 2164-5515            Impact factor:   4.526


  24 in total

Review 1.  Ecological models revisited: their uses and evolution in health promotion over two decades.

Authors:  Lucie Richard; Lise Gauvin; Kim Raine
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 21.981

2.  Opportunities and challenges in delivering influenza vaccine by microneedle patch.

Authors:  Erica Jacoby; Courtney Jarrahian; Harry F Hull; Darin Zehrung
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.641

Review 3.  Microneedle Systems for Vaccine Delivery: the story so far.

Authors:  Md Kamal Hossain; Taksim Ahmed; Prabhat Bhusal; Robhash Kusam Subedi; Iman Salahshoori; M Soltani; Majid Hassanzadeganroudsari
Journal:  Expert Rev Vaccines       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 5.217

Review 4.  The state of vaccine safety science: systematic reviews of the evidence.

Authors:  Matthew Z Dudley; Neal A Halsey; Saad B Omer; Walter A Orenstein; Sean T O'Leary; Rupali J Limaye; Daniel A Salmon
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 25.071

5.  Safety, acceptability and tolerability of uncoated and excipient-coated high density silicon micro-projection array patches in human subjects.

Authors:  Paul Griffin; Suzanne Elliott; Kenia Krauer; Cristyn Davies; S Rachel Skinner; Christopher D Anderson; Angus Forster
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2017-10-23       Impact factor: 3.641

6.  Qualitative methods to ensure acceptability of behavioral and social interventions to the target population.

Authors:  Guadalupe X Ayala; John P Elder
Journal:  J Public Health Dent       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.821

7.  Safety, tolerability, acceptability and immunogenicity of an influenza vaccine delivered to human skin by a novel high-density microprojection array patch (Nanopatch™).

Authors:  Germain J P Fernando; Julian Hickling; Cesar M Jayashi Flores; Paul Griffin; Christopher D Anderson; S Rachel Skinner; Cristyn Davies; Katey Witham; Melinda Pryor; Jesse Bodle; Steve Rockman; Ian H Frazer; Angus H Forster
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.641

8.  Acceptability of an inactivated influenza vaccine delivered by microneedle patch: Results from a phase I clinical trial of safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity.

Authors:  Paula M Frew; Michele Bennett Paine; Nadine Rouphael; Jay Schamel; Yunmi Chung; Mark J Mulligan; Mark R Prausnitz
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2020-08-10       Impact factor: 3.641

9.  Microneedle patches: usability and acceptability for self-vaccination against influenza.

Authors:  James J Norman; Jaya M Arya; Maxine A McClain; Paula M Frew; Martin I Meltzer; Mark R Prausnitz
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 3.641

10.  Effect of a School-Based Educational Intervention About the Human Papillomavirus Vaccine on Psychosocial Outcomes Among Adolescents: Analysis of Secondary Outcomes of a Cluster Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Cristyn Davies; Helen S Marshall; Gregory Zimet; Kirsten McCaffery; Julia M L Brotherton; Melissa Kang; Suzanne Garland; John Kaldor; Kevin McGeechan; S Rachel Skinner
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-11-01
View more
  2 in total

1.  Opportunities and challenges for commercializing microarray patches for vaccination from a MAP developer's perspective.

Authors:  Angus Forster; Michael Junger
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 4.526

2.  Local Response and Barrier Recovery in Elderly Skin Following the Application of High-Density Microarray Patches.

Authors:  Fredrik Iredahl; David A Muller; Totte Togö; Hanna Jonasson; Ben Baker; Chris D Anderson; Joakim Henricson
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-10
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.