Pandemic influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 improves vaccination routine in subsequent years: A cohort study from 2009 to 2011

Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Electronic address: .
Vaccine (Impact Factor: 3.62). 12/2012; 31(6). DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.12.002
Source: PubMed


BACKGROUND: In 2009 the pandemic influenza virus A(H1N1)pdm09 emerged with guidance that people at risk should be vaccinated. It is unclear how this event affected the underlying seasonal vaccination rate in subsequent years. PURPOSE: To investigate the association of pandemic influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and seasonal flu vaccination status in 2009 with vaccination rates in 2010 and 2011. METHODS: Data were collected in 40 Dutch family practices on patients at risk for influenza during 2009-2011; data analysis was conducted in 2012. RESULTS: A multilevel logistic regression model (n=41,843 patients) adjusted for practice and patient characteristics (age and gender, as well as those patient groups at risk), showed that people who were vaccinated against A(H1N1)pdm09 in 2009 were more likely to have been vaccinated in 2010 (OR 6.02; 95%CI 5.62-6.45, p<.0001). This likelihood was even more for people who were vaccinated against seasonal flu in 2009 (OR 13.83; 95%CI 12.93-14.78, p<.0001). A second analysis on the uptake rate in 2011 (n=39,468 patients) showed that the influence of the vaccination state in 2009 declined after two years, but the diminishing effect was smaller for people vaccinated against A(H1N1)pdm09 than for seasonal flu (OR 5.50; 95%CI 5.13-5.90, p<.0001; OR 10.98; 95%CI 10.26-11.75, p<.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Being vaccinated against A(H1N1)pdm09 and seasonal influenza in the pandemic year 2009 enhanced the probability of vaccination in the next year and this was still effective in 2011. This suggests that peoples' vaccination routines were not changed by the rumor around the outbreak of A(H1N1)pdm09, but rather confirmed underlying behavior.

Download full-text


Available from: Margot Tacken, Mar 27, 2015
1 Follower
14 Reads
  • Source
    • "(6) We do not explicitly consider human travel in our simulations [20,21,47], but we apply a very small “external” infection rate which is present throughout the year. (7) Individuals who were vaccinated against A(H1N1) pdm09 in 2009 were more likely to be revaccinated in 2010 with an odds ratio (OR) of 6.02 in The Netherlands [69], yet in our simulations, the OR of revaccination ranges from 2.2 to 6.5 (for details, see Appendix 5). If the reported OR is also representative for non-pandemic years in Germany, too few individuals are revaccinated in our simulations and, thus, the effects of vaccinations may be overestimated. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Influenza vaccines contain Influenza A and B antigens and are adjusted annually to match the characteristics of circulating viruses. In Germany, Influenza B viruses belonged to the B/Yamagata lineage, but since 2001, the antigenically distinct B/Victoria lineage has been co-circulating. Trivalent influenza vaccines (TIV) contain antigens of the two A subtypes A(H3N2) and A(H1N1), yet of only one B lineage, resulting in frequent vaccine mismatches. Since 2012, the WHO has been recommending vaccine strains from both B lineages, paving the way for quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIV). Methods Using an individual-based simulation tool, we simulate the concomitant transmission of four influenza strains, and compare the effects of TIV and QIV on the infection incidence. Individuals are connected in a dynamically evolving age-dependent contact network based on the POLYMOD matrix; their age-distribution reproduces German demographic data and predictions. The model considers maternal protection, boosting of existing immunity, loss of immunity, and cross-immunizing events between the B lineages. Calibration to the observed annual infection incidence of 10.6% among young adults yielded a basic reproduction number of 1.575. Vaccinations are performed annually in October and November, whereby coverage depends on the vaccinees’ age, their risk status and previous vaccination status. New drift variants are introduced at random time points, leading to a sudden loss of protective immunity for part of the population and occasionally to reduced vaccine efficacy. Simulations run for 50 years, the first 30 of which are used for initialization. During the final 20 years, individuals receive TIV or QIV, using a mirrored simulation approach. Results Using QIV, the mean annual infection incidence can be reduced from 8,943,000 to 8,548,000, i.e. by 395,000 infections, preventing 11.2% of all Influenza B infections which still occur with TIV (95% CI: 10.7-11.8%). Using a lower B lineage cross protection than the baseline 60%, the number of Influenza B infections increases and the number additionally prevented by QIV can be 5.5 times as high. Conclusions Vaccination with TIV substantially reduces the Influenza incidence compared to no vaccination. Depending on the assumed degree of B lineage cross protection, QIV further reduces Influenza B incidence by 11-33%.
    BMC Infectious Diseases 07/2014; 14(1):365. DOI:10.1186/1471-2334-14-365 · 2.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Because of variability in published A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza vaccine effectiveness estimates, we conducted a study in the adults belonging to the risk groups to assess the A(H1N1)pdm09 MF59-adjuvanted influenza vaccine effectiveness. VE against influenza and/or pneumonia was assessed in the cohort study (n>25000), and vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza was assessed in a matched case-control study (16 pairs). Odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated by using multivariate logistic regression; vaccine effectiveness was estimated as (1-odds ratio)*100%. Vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza and influenza and/or pneumonia was 98% (84-100%) and 33% (2-54%) respectively. The vaccine did not prevent influenza and/or pneumonia in 18-59 years old subjects, and was 49% (16-69%) effective in 60 years and older subjects. Even though we cannot entirely rule out that selection bias, residual confounding and/or cross-protection has played a role, the present results indicate that the MF59-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza vaccine has been effective in preventing laboratory-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza and influenza and/or pneumonia, the latter notably in 60 years and older subjects.
    PLoS ONE 06/2013; 8(6):e66125. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0066125 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A decrease in seasonal influenza vaccine uptake was observed after the influenza A(H1N1) pandemic in 2009. The goal of our study was to assess seasonal influenza vaccine uptake in 2011-2012, 2 years after the influenza A(H1N1) pandemic mass immunization campaign and to identify the main reasons for having or not having received the vaccine. A telephone survey using random-digit dialing methodology was conducted. Case-weights were assigned to adjust for disproportionate sampling and for nonresponse bias. Descriptive statistics were generated for all variables. Seasonal influenza vaccine uptake was 57% among adults aged ≥60 years, 35% among adults with chronic medical conditions, and 44% among health care workers. The main reasons given for having been vaccinated were to be protected from influenza and a high perceived susceptibility to influenza, whereas low perceived susceptibility to influenza and low perceived severity of influenza were the main reasons for not having been vaccinated. An increase in seasonal influenza vaccine uptake was observed 2 years after the influenza A(H1N1) pandemic. However, vaccine coverage is still below the target level of 80%. More efforts are needed to develop effective strategies to increase seasonal influenza vaccine uptake.
    American journal of infection control 05/2014; 42(5):e55-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ajic.2014.01.006 · 2.21 Impact Factor