Community Vaccinators in the Workplace

University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Emerging Infectious Diseases (Impact Factor: 6.75). 06/2011; 17(6):1134-5. DOI: 10.3201/eid/1706.101763
Source: PubMed


To the Editor: Adult vaccination rates are low (1), and workplaces are a useful location for increasing vaccination (2). In 2008, only 41% of US workers 50-64 years of age reported vaccination against influenza virus (3). Workplace vaccination is common and increases with employer size (4). Among adults, the workplace is the most common site for influenza vaccination for persons 18-49 years of age and second most common for persons 50-64 years (2). Offering vaccination in the workplace increases vaccination coverage (5).

8 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Influenza vaccination coverage remains unacceptably low among persons aged > or =65 years and younger high-risk adults. This study assessed locations at which US adults receive influenza (flu) vaccinations and the relative roles that traditional and nontraditional vaccination settings play in influenza vaccine delivery. We analyzed data on types of settings at which last flu shot was received, reported by adult respondents to the 1999 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, stratified by age group and medical condition. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with nontraditional vaccination settings. In 1998-1999, reported influenza vaccination coverage was 19% for persons aged 18-49 years, 36% for persons aged 50-64 years, and 67% for persons aged > or =65 years. Seventy percent of flu shots received by persons aged > or =18 years were reportedly administered in doctors' offices and other traditional settings. Vaccination in nontraditional settings (eg, workplace, stores, community centers) was more likely for young, healthy, employed, white, college-educated adults who had not had a recent routine checkup. Physicians should offer vaccination services at every opportunity. Increasing access to vaccination services in nontraditional settings should be considered as another strategy in pursuit of national vaccination coverage objectives.
    American Journal of Infection Control 12/2005; 33(10):563-70. DOI:10.1016/j.ajic.2005.03.016 · 2.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
    International Journal for Quality in Health Care 01/2008; 19(6):349-57. DOI:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 · 1.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of influenza vaccination are well established for persons aged 65 years or older, the benefits for healthy adults younger than 65 years are less clear. To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-benefit of influenza vaccine in preventing influenza-like illness (ILI) and reducing societal costs of ILI among healthy working adults. Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted during 2 influenza seasons. Healthy adults aged 18 to 64 years and employed full-time by a US manufacturing company (for 1997-1998 season, n = 1184; for 1998-1999 season, n = 1191). For each season, participants were randomly assigned to receive either trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (n = 595 in 1997-1998 and n = 587 in 1998-1999) or sterile saline injection (placebo; n = 589 in 1997-1998 and n = 604 in 1998-1999). Participants in 1997-1998 were rerandomized if they participated in 1998-1999. Influenza-like illnesses and associated physician visits and work absenteeism reported in biweekly questionnaires by all participants, and serologically confirmed influenza illness among 23% of participants in each year (n = 275 in 1997-1998; n = 278 in 1998-1999); societal cost of ILI per vaccinated vs unvaccinated person. For 1997-1998 and 1998-1999, respectively, 95% (1130/1184) and 99% (1178/1191) of participants had complete follow-up, and 23% in each year had serologic testing. In 1997-1998, when the vaccine virus differed from the predominant circulating viruses, vaccine efficacy against serologically confirmed influenza illness was 50% (P =.33). In this season, vaccination did not reduce ILI, physician visits, or lost workdays; the net societal cost was $65.59 per person compared with no vaccination. In 1998-1999, the vaccine and predominant circulating viruses were well matched. Vaccine efficacy was 86% (P =.001), and vaccination reduced ILI, physician visits, and lost workdays by 34%, 42%, and 32%, respectively. However, vaccination resulted in a net societal cost of $11.17 per person compared with no vaccination. Influenza vaccination of healthy working adults younger than 65 years can reduce the rates of ILI, lost workdays, and physician visits during years when the vaccine and circulating viruses are similar, but vaccination may not provide overall economic benefits in most years. JAMA. 2000;284:1655-1663.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 11/2000; 284(13):1655-63. DOI:10.1001/jama.284.13.1655 · 35.29 Impact Factor


8 Reads
Available from