Improving polio vaccination during supplementary campaigns at areas of mass transit in India

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In India, children who are traveling during mass immunization campaigns for polio represent a substantial component of the total target population. These children are not easily accessible to health workers and may thus not receive vaccine. Vaccination activities at mass transit sites (such as major intersections, bus depots and train stations), can increase the proportion of children vaccinated but the effectiveness of these activities, and factors associated with their success, have not been rigorously evaluated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We assessed data from polio vaccination activities in Jyotiba Phule Nagar district, Uttar Pradesh, India, conducted in June 2006. We used trends in the vaccination results from the June activities to plan the timing, locations, and human resource requirements for transit vaccination activities in two out of the seven blocks in the district for the July 2006 supplementary immunization activity (SIA). In July, similar data was collected and for the first time vaccination teams also recorded the proportion of children encountered each day who were vaccinated (a new monitoring system).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In June, out of the 360,937 total children vaccinated, 34,643 (9.6%) received vaccinations at mass transit sites. In the July SIA, after implementation of a number of changes based on the June monitoring data, 36,475 children were vaccinated at transit sites (a 5.3% increase). Transit site vaccinations in July increased in the two intervention blocks from 18,194 to 21,588 (18.7%) and decreased from 16,449 to 14,887 (9.5%) in the five other blocks. The new monitoring system showed the proportion of unvaccinated children at street intersection transit sites in the July campaign decreased from 24% (1,784/7,405) at the start of the campaign to 3% (143/5,057) by the end of the SIA, consistent with findings from the more labor-intensive post-vaccination coverage surveys routinely performed by the program.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Analysis of vaccination data from transit sites can inform program management changes leading to improved outcomes in polio immunization campaigns. The number of vaccinated children encountered should be routinely recorded by transit teams and may provide a useful, inexpensive alternative mechanism to assess program coverage.</p

Sero-survey of rubella IgM antibodies among children in Jos, Nigeria

Sero-survey of rubella IgM antibodies was carried out among children aged 0-10 years in Jos, Nigeria. Blood samples were collected from the subjects and sera extracted. Of the 93(100%) assayed for the rubella IgM antibody, 42(45.2%) were seropositive for rubella IgM antibody while 51(54.8%) were seronegative. A breakdown of the seropositive subjects reveals that 14(15.1%) of the infected children were males while 28(30.1%) were females. Those subjects within the age groups of 1-2, 3-4 and 5-6 years had the highest prevalence of 8(8.6%) followed by those within the age groups of 7-8, 9-10 years with 7(7.5%). Blood transfusion as a risk factor did not show any significant influence on the status of the subjects. The demographic data of the mothers of the subjects were also linked with the seropositivity of the children

The anti-vaccination movement and resistance to allergen-immunotherapy: a guide for clinical allergists

Despite over a century of clinical use and a well-documented record of efficacy and safety, a growing minority in society questions the validity of vaccination and fear that this common public health intervention is the root-cause of severe health problems. This article questions whether growing public anti-vaccine sentiments might have the potential to spill-over into other therapies distinct from vaccination, namely allergen-immunotherapy. Allergen-immunotherapy shares certain medical vernacular with vaccination (e.g., allergy shots, allergy vaccines), and thus may become "guilty by association" due to these similarities. Indeed, this article demonstrates that anti-vaccine websites have begun unduly discrediting this allergy treatment regimen. Following an explanation of the anti-vaccine movement, the article aims to provide guidance on how clinicians can respond to patient fears towards allergen-immunotherapy in the clinical setting. This guide focuses on the provision of reliable information to patients in order to dispel misconceived associations between vaccination and allergen-immunotherapy, and the discussion of the risks and benefits of both therapies in order to assist patients in making autonomous decisions about their choice of allergy treatment