3 research outputs found
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
Immunisation of migrants in EWEEA 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. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd
Hepatitis C Virus Infection Epidemiology among People Who Inject Drugs in Europe: A Systematic Review of Data for Scaling Up Treatment and Prevention
Background: People who inject drugs (PWID) are a key population affected
by hepatitis C virus (HCV). Treatment options are improving and may
enhance prevention; however access for PWID may be poor. The
availability in the literature of information on seven main topic areas
(incidence, chronicity, genotypes, HIV co-infection, diagnosis and
treatment uptake, and burden of disease) to guide HCV treatment and
prevention scale-up for PWID in the 27 countries of the European Union
is systematically reviewed.
Methods and Findings: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library
for publications between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2012, with a
search strategy of general keywords regarding viral hepatitis, substance
abuse and geographic scope, as well as topic-specific keywords.
Additional articles were found through structured email consultations
with a large European expert network. Data availability was highly
variable and important limitations existed in comparability and
representativeness. Nine of 27 countries had data on HCV incidence among
PWID, which was often high (2.7-66/100 person-years, median 13,
Interquartile range (IQR) 8.7-28). Most common HCV genotypes were G1 and
G3; however, G4 may be increasing, while the proportion of traditionally
‘difficult to treat’ genotypes (G1+G4) showed large variation (median
53,IQR 43-62). Twelve countries reported on HCV chronicity (median 72,
IQR 64-81) and 22 on HIV prevalence in HCV-infected PWID (median 3.9%,
IQR 0.2-28). Undiagnosed infection, assessed in five countries, was high
(median 49%, IQR 38-64), while of those diagnosed, the proportion
entering treatment was low (median 9.5%, IQR 3.5-15). Burden of
disease, where assessed, was high and will rise in the next decade.
Conclusion: Key data on HCV epidemiology, care and disease burden among
PWID in Europe are sparse but suggest many undiagnosed infections and
poor treatment uptake. Stronger efforts are needed to improve data
availability to guide an increase in HCV treatment among PWID