Safety of human papillomavirus vaccines: A review

Introduction: Between 2006 and 2009, two different human papillomavirus virus (HPV) vaccines were licensed for use: a quadrivalent (qHPVv) and a bivalent (bHPVv) vaccine. Since 2008, HPV vaccination programmes have been implemented in the majority of the industrialized countries. Since 2013, HPV vaccination has been part of the national programs of 66 countries including almost all countries in North America and Western Europe. Despite all the efforts made by individual countries, coverage rates are lower than expected. Vaccine safety represents one of the main concerns associated with the lack of acceptance of HPV vaccination both in the European Union/European Economic Area and elsewhere.Areas covered: Safety data published on bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines, both in pre-licensure and post-licensure phase, are reviewed.Expert opinion: Based on the latest scientific evidence, both HPV vaccines seem to be safe. Nevertheless, public concern and rumors about adverse events (AE) represent an important barrier to overcome in order to increase vaccine coverage. Passive surveillance of AEs is an important tool for detecting safety signals, but it should be complemented by activities aimed at assessing the real cause of all suspect AEs. Improved vaccine safety surveillance is the first step for effective communication based on scientific evidence

Imported malaria in a cosmopolitan European city: A mirror image of the world epidemiological situation

© 2008 Millet et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Immunisation of migrants in EU/EEA countries: Policies and practices

In recent years various EU/EEA countries have experienced an influx of migrants from low and middle-income countries. In 2018, the “Vaccine European New Integrated Collaboration Effort (VENICE)” survey group conducted a survey among 30 EU/EEA countries to investigate immunisation policies and practices targeting irregular migrants, refugees and asylum seekers (later called “migrants” in this report). Twenty-nine countries participated in the survey. Twenty-eight countries reported having national policies targeting children/adolescent and adult migrants, however vaccinations offered to adult migrants are limited to specific conditions in seven countries. All the vaccinations included in the National Immunisation Programme (NIP) are offered to children/adolescents in 27/28 countries and to adults in 13/28 countries. In the 15 countries offering only certain vaccinations to adults, priority is given to diphtheria-tetanus, measles-mumps-rubella and polio vaccinations. Information about the vaccines given to child/adolescent migrants is recorded in 22 countries and to adult migrants in 19 countries with a large variation in recording methods found across countries. Individual and aggregated data are reportedly not shared with other centres/institutions in 13 and 15 countries, respectively. Twenty countries reported not collecting data on vaccination uptake among migrants; only three countries have these data at the national level. Procedures to guarantee migrants’ access to vaccinations at the community level are available in 13 countries. In conclusion, although diversified, strategies for migrant vaccination are in place in all countries except for one, and the strategies are generally in line with international recommendations. Efforts are needed to strengthen partnerships and implement initiatives across countries of origin, transit and destination to develop and better share documentation in order to guarantee a completion of vaccination series and to avoid unnecessary re-vaccination. Development of migrant-friendly strategies to facilitate migrants' access to vaccination and collection of vaccination uptake data among migrants is needed to meet existing gaps

Effectiveness of organizational interventions to reduce emergency department utilization: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) utilization has dramatically increased in developed countries over the last twenty years. Because it has been associated with adverse outcomes, increased costs, and an overload on the hospital organization, several policies have tried to curb this growing trend. The aim of this study is to systematically review the effectiveness of organizational interventions designed to reduce ED utilization. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We conducted electronic searches using free text and Medical Subject Headings on PubMed and The Cochrane Library to identify studies of ED visits, re-visits and mortality. We performed complementary searches of grey literature, manual searches and direct contacts with experts. We included studies that investigated the effectiveness of interventions designed to reduce ED visits and the following study designs: time series, cross-sectional, repeated cross-sectional, longitudinal, quasi-experimental studies, and randomized trial. We excluded studies on specific conditions, children and with no relevant outcomes (ED visits, re-visits or adverse events). From 2,348 potentially useful references, 48 satisfied the inclusion criteria. We classified the interventions in mutually exclusive categories: 1) Interventions addressing the supply and accessibility of services: 25 studies examined efforts to increase primary care physicians, centers, or hours of service; 2) Interventions addressing the demand for services: 6 studies examined educational interventions and 17 examined barrier interventions (gatekeeping or cost). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The evidence suggests that interventions aimed at increasing primary care accessibility and ED cost-sharing are effective in reducing ED use. However, the rest of the interventions aimed at decreasing ED utilization showed contradictory results. Changes in health care policies require rigorous evaluation before being implemented since these can have a high impact on individual health and use of health care resources. Systematic review registration: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO. Identifier: CRD420111253

Seroprevalence and susceptibility to hepatitis A in the European Union and European Economic Area: a systematic review

Most of the European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) is considered a region of very low hepatitis A virus (HAV) endemicity; however, geographical differences exist. We did a systematic review with the aim of describing seroprevalence and susceptibility in the general population or special groups in the EU and EEA. We searched databases and public health national institutes websites for HAV seroprevalence records published between Jan 1, 1975, and June 30, 2014, with no language restrictions. An updated search was done on Aug 10, 2016. We defined seroprevalence profiles (very low, low, and intermediate) as the proportion of the population with age-specific anti-HAV antibodies at age 15 and 30 years, and susceptibility profiles (low, moderate, high, and very high) as the proportion of susceptible individuals at age 30 and 50 years. We included 228 studies from 28 of 31 EU and EEA countries. For the period 2000-14, 24 countries had a very low seroprevalence profile, compared with five in 1975-89. The susceptibility among adults ranged between low and very high and had a geographical gradient, with three countries in the low susceptibility category. Since 1975, EU and EEA countries have shown decreasing seropositivity; however, considerable regional variability exists. The main limitations of this study are that the studies retrieved for analysis might not be representative of all EU and EEA publications about HAV and might have poor national representativeness. A large proportion of EU and EEA residents are now susceptible to HAV infection. Our Review supports the need to reconsider specific prevention and control measures, to further decrease HAV circulation while providing protection against the infection in the EU and EEA, and could be used to inform susceptible travellers visiting EU and EEA countries with different HAV endemicity levels

Flow of articles through the literature review process.

<p>Flow of articles through the literature review process.</p