57 research outputs found

    Vaccination and allergy: EAACI position paper, practical aspects

    Get PDF
    Immunization is highly effective in preventing infectious diseases and therefore an indispensable public health measure. Allergic patients deserve access to the same publicly recommended immunizations as non-allergic patients unless risks associated with vaccination outweigh the gains. Whereas the number of reported possible allergic reactions to vaccines is high, confirmed vaccine-triggered allergic reactions are rare. Anaphylaxis following vaccination is rare, affecting <1/100 000, but can occur in any patient. Some patient groups, notably those with a previous allergic reaction to a vaccine or its components, are at heightened risk of allergic reaction and require special precautions. Allergic reactions, however, may occur in patients without known risk factors and cannot be predicted by currently available tools. Unwarranted fear and uncertainty can result in incomplete vaccination coverage for children and adults with or without allergy. In addition to concerns about an allergic reaction to the vaccine itself, there is fear that routine childhood immunization may promote the development of allergic sensitization and disease. Thus, although there is no evidence that routine childhood immunization increases the risk of allergy development, such risks need to be discussed

    'Communicate to vaccinate' (COMMVAC). building evidence for improving communication about childhood vaccinations in low- and middle-income countries: protocol for a programme of research

    Get PDF
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Effective provider-parent communication can improve childhood vaccination uptake and strengthen immunisation services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Building capacity to improve communication strategies has been neglected. Rigorous research exists but is not readily found or applicable to LMICs, making it difficult for policy makers to use it to inform vaccination policies and practice. The aim of this project is to build research knowledge and capacity to use evidence-based strategies for improving communication about childhood vaccinations with parents and communities in LMICs. Methods and design This project is a mixed methods study with six sub-studies. In sub-study one, we will develop a systematic map of provider-parent communication interventions for childhood vaccinations by screening and extracting data from relevant literature. This map will inform sub-study two, in which we will develop a taxonomy of interventions to improve provider-parent communication around childhood vaccination. In sub-study three, the taxonomy will be populated with trial citations to create an evidence map, which will also identify how evidence is linked to communication barriers regarding vaccination. In the project's fourth sub-study, we will present the interventions map, taxonomy, and evidence map to international stakeholders to identify high-priority topics for systematic reviews of interventions to improve parent-provider communication for childhood vaccination. We will produce systematic reviews of the effects of high-priority interventions in the fifth sub-study. In the sixth and final sub-study of the project, evidence from the systematic reviews will be translated into accessible formats and messages for dissemination to LMICs. DISCUSSION: This project combines evidence mapping, conceptual and taxonomy development, priority setting, systematic reviews, and knowledge transfer. It will build and share concepts, terms, evidence, and resources to aid the development of communication strategies for effective vaccination programmes in LMIC

    Systematic Review of Potential Health Risks Posed by Pharmaceutical, Occupational and Consumer Exposures to Metallic and Nanoscale Aluminum, Aluminum Oxides, Aluminum Hydroxide and Its Soluble Salts

    Get PDF
    Aluminum (Al) is a ubiquitous substance encountered both naturally (as the third most abundant element) and intentionally (used in water, foods, pharmaceuticals, and vaccines); it is also present in ambient and occupational airborne particulates. Existing data underscore the importance of Al physical and chemical forms in relation to its uptake, accumulation, and systemic bioavailability. The present review represents a systematic examination of the peer-reviewed literature on the adverse health effects of Al materials published since a previous critical evaluation compiled by Krewski et al. (2007). Challenges encountered in carrying out the present review reflected the experimental use of different physical and chemical Al forms, different routes of administration, and different target organs in relation to the magnitude, frequency, and duration of exposure. Wide variations in diet can result in Al intakes that are often higher than the World Health Organization provisional tolerable weekly intake (PTWI), which is based on studies with Al citrate. Comparing daily dietary Al exposures on the basis of “total Al”assumes that gastrointestinal bioavailability for all dietary Al forms is equivalent to that for Al citrate, an approach that requires validation. Current occupational exposure limits (OELs) for identical Al substances vary as much as 15-fold. The toxicity of different Al forms depends in large measure on their physical behavior and relative solubility in water. The toxicity of soluble Al forms depends upon the delivered dose of Al+ 3 to target tissues. Trivalent Al reacts with water to produce bidentate superoxide coordination spheres [Al(O2)(H2O4)+ 2 and Al(H2O)6 + 3] that after complexation with O2‱−, generate Al superoxides [Al(O2‱)](H2O5)]+ 2. Semireduced AlO2‱ radicals deplete mitochondrial Fe and promote generation of H2O2, O2 ‱ − and OH‱. Thus, it is the Al+ 3-induced formation of oxygen radicals that accounts for the oxidative damage that leads to intrinsic apoptosis. In contrast, the toxicity of the insoluble Al oxides depends primarily on their behavior as particulates. Aluminum has been held responsible for human morbidity and mortality, but there is no consistent and convincing evidence to associate the Al found in food and drinking water at the doses and chemical forms presently consumed by people living in North America and Western Europe with increased risk for Alzheimer\u27s disease (AD). Neither is there clear evidence to show use of Al-containing underarm antiperspirants or cosmetics increases the risk of AD or breast cancer. Metallic Al, its oxides, and common Al salts have not been shown to be either genotoxic or carcinogenic. Aluminum exposures during neonatal and pediatric parenteral nutrition (PN) can impair bone mineralization and delay neurological development. Adverse effects to vaccines with Al adjuvants have occurred; however, recent controlled trials found that the immunologic response to certain vaccines with Al adjuvants was no greater, and in some cases less than, that after identical vaccination without Al adjuvants. The scientific literature on the adverse health effects of Al is extensive. Health risk assessments for Al must take into account individual co-factors (e.g., age, renal function, diet, gastric pH). Conclusions from the current review point to the need for refinement of the PTWI, reduction of Al contamination in PN solutions, justification for routine addition of Al to vaccines, and harmonization of OELs for Al substances

    Healthcare providers' knowledge, experience and challenges of reporting adverse events following immunisation: a qualitative study

    Get PDF
    Background: Healthcare provider spontaneous reporting of suspected adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) is central to monitoring post-licensure vaccine safety, but little is known about how healthcare professionals recognise and report to surveillance systems. The aim of this study was explore the knowledge, experience and attitudes of medical and nursing professionals towards detecting and reporting AEFI. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study, using semi-structured, face to face interviews with 13 Paediatric Emergency Department consultants from a tertiary paediatric hospital, 10 General Practitioners, 2 local council immunisation and 4 General Practice nurses, recruited using purposive sampling in Adelaide, South Australia, between December 2010 and September 2011. We identified emergent themes related to previous experience of an AEFI in practice, awareness and experience of AEFI reporting, factors that would facilitate or impede reporting and previous training in vaccine safety. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Results: AEFI reporting was infrequent across all groups, despite most participants having reviewed an AEFI. We found confusion about how to report an AEFI and variability, according to the provider group, as to the type of events that would constitute a reportable AEFI. Participants’ interpretation of a “serious” or “unexpected” AEFI varied across the three groups. Common barriers to reporting included time constraints and unsatisfactory reporting processes. Nurses were more likely to have received formal training in vaccine safety and reporting than medical practitioners. Conclusions: This study provides an overview of experience and beliefs of three healthcare professional groups in relation to identifying and reporting AEFI. The qualitative assessment reveals differences in experience and awareness of AEFI reporting across the three professional groups. Most participants appreciated the importance of their role in AEFI surveillance and monitoring the ongoing safety of vaccines. Future initiatives to improve education, such as increased training to health care providers, particularly, medical professionals, are required and should be included in both undergraduate curricula and ongoing, professional development.Adriana Parrella, Annette Braunack-Mayer, Michael Gold, Helen Marshall and Peter Baghurs

    Adverse Reactions after Vaccination and Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy: Contact Allergy to Aluminium and Itching Nodules

    No full text
    The aim of the work presented in this thesis was to investigate two different types of adverse reactions, persistent itching nodules and contact allergy to aluminium, after immunization with aluminium-containing vaccines and aluminium-containing allergen extracts used for allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASIT). The first paper describes active parental reporting of adverse events (AEFIs) after a booster dose of diphtheria-tetanus vaccine (DT). A parental questionnaire elicited reports of AEFIs within seven days of vaccination. A follow-up phone call was made in all cases of positive response. Active surveillance by parental reports was shown to be a useful complement to passive surveillance of childhood immunization. The proportion of late local reactions after immunization with a fourth dose of DT vaccines containing different aluminium compounds as adjuvant was investigated in the second study, in which a prospective cluster-randomized, active surveillance study was performed in 25,232 10-year-olds. Parental reports were collected 6 months after vaccination. 3-6 children per 10,000 had a persistent itching nodule. Contact allergy to aluminium was not detected. These findings support the continued use of the vaccine presently offered in the Swedish vaccination programme. However, continued surveillance is warranted. The study described in the third paper examined retrospectively whether ASIT could induce contact allergy to aluminium, and investigated a possible association between persistent subcutaneous nodules and aluminium allergy. The study consisted of a non-clinical part based on a questionnaire, and a clinical part involving a physical examination, self-assessment of itching, and patch testing. A statistically significant association was found between contact allergy to aluminium and persistent subcutaneous nodules in children given ASIT. Contact allergy was found in eight of the participants, all given ASIT. The fourth paper presents the results of a prospective study on whether ASIT with allergen preparations containing aluminium hydroxide induces contact allergy to aluminium. The association between contact allergy to aluminium and persistent itching nodules was also studied. Three groups undergoing ASIT were patch tested with aluminium chloride hexahydrate before and during ASIT. A control group was included (untreated). At the end of the study all groups were patch tested. A high rate of contact allergy to aluminium was found. The study did not confirm or refute ASIT as a risk factor. Allergy to aluminium and itching nodules after ASIT seemed to be more common among children, and among those suffering from atopic dermatitis

    Aluminum-Allergen of the Year 2022

    No full text
    Exposure to elemental aluminum and its salts is unavoidable. Aluminum as a metal is present in transport, construction, packaging, and electronic equipment. Aluminum salts are present in consumer products, food items and drinking water, vaccines, drugs, and antiperspirants. Aluminum in vaccines and preparations for allergen-specific immunotherapy are the major sensitization sources. The predominent clinical manifestations of aluminum allergy are pruritic subcutaneous nodules and eczematous dermatitis. Patch testing shall be performed with aluminum chloride hexahydrate (ACH) in petrolatum. The preparation with ACH 10% detects substantially more aluminum allergy than ACH 2%. A patch test with elemental aluminum, for example, an empty Finn Chamber, is only positive when there is a strong aluminum allergy. A patch test reading should be performed 1 week after the application so as not to miss 15% to 20% of aluminum allergy. Aluminum should be included in any baseline patch test series for children and investigated for a possible inclusion in baseline series for adults. Aluminum test chambers can interfere with the testing resulting in both false-negative and false-positive patch test reactions to nonaluminum contact sensitizers

    Surveillance of Vaccine Safety: Comparison of parental reports with routine surveillance and a clinical trial

    No full text
    One way to maintain confidence in vaccination programmes is to improve monitoring of immunisation safety. We studied active parental reporting of adverse events after a booster dose of diphtheria-tetanus toxoid (DT). 7193 children received the vaccine. Questionnaires were submitted by 84.2% of the parents, who reported reactions for 9.2% of the children. Four percent of events were classified as moderate/severe by interviews. Relative risk of redness and swelling reported was 0.24 (95% CI. 0.13-0.42) compared to a clinical trial, while it was 71.0 (44-114) compared to passive surveillance. Active surveillance by parental reports is a useful complement to passive surveillance of childhood immunisations to generate hypotheses for evaluation in controlled studies. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
    • 

    corecore