Article

Observational methods in epidemiologic assessment of vaccine effectiveness.

National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance of Vaccine Preventable Diseases, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW.
Communicable diseases intelligence 02/2002; 26(3):451-7.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Observational methods are important in the measurement of vaccine effectiveness (VE) as experimental designs cannot be used for measurement of vaccines already on the vaccination schedule. Furthermore, efficacy measured in clinical trials under ideal conditions may differ to effectiveness in the field under non-ideal conditions and in different populations. In addition to post-licensure surveillance, observational VE studies are particularly important when disease incidence does not predictably decrease with increased vaccine coverage, when high proportions of vaccine failure among reported cases suggest a problem with the vaccine or when issues arise that were not predicted in pre-licensure evaluations. Commonly used study types for evaluating VE include cohort studies, household contact studies, case-control studies, the screening method and case-cohort studies. There are many potential biases in all observational VE studies which should be considered in the study design and analysis stage. Of the five observational study types reviewed, cohort studies undertaken during an outbreak investigation offer the simplest means of VE estimation and is the preferred study design where the situation permits. Where this is not possible the screening method is the most economical and rapid method. It is essential that the effectiveness of all vaccination programs be evaluated. As new vaccines are introduced to the schedule, booster doses are added and the timing of doses changed, the role of observational methods in the evaluation of VE will become even more important. To date, few observational VE studies have been undertaken in Australia, suggesting the under-utilisation of these methods.

2 Bookmarks
 · 
132 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Is there a role for the screening method in estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE)? The answer is yes, but the simplicity of the method used has raised concerns about its validity, and several cautions should be noted. The screening method provides an approximation of influenza VE by comparing the proportion of cases vaccinated (PCV) with the proportion of persons vaccinated (PPV) in the general population. This method has an important disadvantage: VE estimation could be inaccurate if the values for PCV and PPV are drawn from different populations, but it has an important strength, compared with other observational studies, in providing an early indication of VE in the field. Thus, when an infrastructure, such as routine surveillance, is in place to collect robust PCV values, and PPV can be obtained from routine vaccine uptake monitoring systems, the screening method can provide early estimates of influenza VE in target groups.
    Expert Review of Vaccines 06/2014; DOI:10.1586/14760584.2014.930666 · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to evaluate vaccine efficacy of a commercial vaccine (Startvac, Hipra Spain) aimed at reducing intramammary infections (IMI) with Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci under field conditions. During the 21-mo duration of the study, 1,156 lactations from 809 cows were enrolled in 2 herds. During the first phase of the trial, all cows that were due to calve were vaccinated until approximately 50% of cows in the milking herd were vaccinated (at ∼6 mo). At that point, when 50% vaccination coverage was reached, cows that were due to calve were randomly assigned to be vaccinated or left as negative controls. Cure rate, rate of new infection, prevalence, and duration of infections were analyzed. Vaccination resulted in a moderate reduction in incidence of new staphylococcal IMI and a more pronounced reduction in duration of IMI associated with reduction of the basic reproduction ratio of Staph. aureus by approximately 45% and of coagulase-negative staphylococci by approximately 35%. The utilization of vaccine in combination with other infection-control procedures, such as excellent milking procedures, treatment, segregation, and culling of known infected cattle, will result in an important reduction in incidence and duration of intramammary staphylococcal infections.
    Journal of Dairy Science 05/2014; 97(8). DOI:10.3168/jds.2014-8008 · 2.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: In 2009, national guidelines for hepatitis A control in Australia changed to recommend hepatitis A vaccine (HAV), instead of normal human immune globulin (NHIG), for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Aims: (1) Determine whether the uptake of PEP among contacts of hepatitis A cases changed after the introduction of the new guidelines, and (2) assess the field effectiveness of the HAV used as PEP in preventing infection among contacts of hepatitis A cases. Methods: A retrospective cohort of contacts from hepatitis A cases reported to metropolitan Public Health Units in Sydney, Australia, between October 2008 and June 2010, was identified. Contacts were analysed by time period, age, PEP type, and susceptibility to hepatitis A. The relative risk (RR) of hepatitis A infection among susceptible contacts who received HAV, compared with susceptible contacts who had not received HAV, was calculated to estimate the effectiveness of the HAV when used as PEP. Results: The uptake of PEP by susceptible contacts increased from 76% (n = 133) to 89% (n = 127) after the introduction of the new guidelines. Before the change in guidelines, no one who received PEP was later reported with hepatitis A. After the change in guidelines, one of the 123 contacts who received HAV as PEP was subsequently reported with hepatitis A. However, this case was likely to have been co-exposed with a primary case. Conservatively, assuming this was a secondary case, the vaccine effectiveness of HAV was 95.6% (66.1%-99.4%). Nine of 10 incident cases of hepatitis A were contacts who did not receive any PEP. Conclusion: The improved uptake of PEP and the high estimate of the effectiveness of HAV provides support for using HAV for PEP. The very high occurrence of hepatitis A among contacts who did not receive any PEP further highlights the importance of PEP in preventing hepatitis A infection.
    Vaccine 08/2014; 32(42). DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.07.048 · 3.49 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
117 Downloads
Available from
May 30, 2014