Explore the vast range of titles available.

Improved understanding of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), within households could aid control measures. However, few studies have systematically characterized the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in U.S. households (1). Previously reported transmission rates vary widely, and data on transmission rates from children are limited. To assess household transmission, a case-ascertained study was conducted in Nashville, Tennessee, and Marshfield, Wisconsin, commencing in April 2020. In this study, index patients were defined as the first household members with COVID-19-compatible symptoms who received a positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test result, and who lived with at least one other household member. After enrollment, index patients and household members were trained remotely by study staff members to complete symptom diaries and obtain self-collected specimens, nasal swabs only or nasal swabs and saliva samples, daily for 14 days. For this analysis, specimens from the first 7 days were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using CDC RT-PCR protocols. A total of 191 enrolled household contacts of 101 index patients reported having no symptoms on the day of the associated index patient's illness onset, and among these 191 contacts, 102 had SARS-CoV-2 detected in either nasal or saliva specimens during follow-up, for a secondary infection rate of 53% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 46%-60%). Among fourteen households in which the index patient was aged <18 years, the secondary infection rate from index patients aged <12 years was 53% (95% CI = 31%-74%) and from index patients aged 12-17 years was 38% (95% CI = 23%-56%). Approximately 75% of secondary infections were identified within 5 days of the index patient's illness onset, and substantial transmission occurred whether the index patient was an adult or a child. Because household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is common and can occur rapidly after the index patient's illness onset, persons should self-isolate immediately at the onset of COVID-like symptoms, at the time of testing as a result of a high risk exposure, or at the time of a positive test result, whichever comes first. Concurrent to isolation, all members of the household should wear a mask when in shared spaces in the household. .

Background The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is recommended for all adolescents age 11–12 years. HPV vaccine coverage remains suboptimal in the United States though, particularly in rural areas. We surveyed adolescent immunization providers in two Midwestern states to assess rural vs. urban differences in HPV vaccine resources, practices, and attitudes. Methods A cross-sectional survey was sent to all licensed adolescent care providers in a subset of urban and rural counties in Minnesota and Wisconsin during 2019. Multivariable regression was used to identify attitudes and practices that differentiated rural vs. urban providers. Results There were 437 survey respondents (31% rural). Significantly fewer rural providers had evening/weekend adolescent vaccination appointments available (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.21 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.12, 0.36]), had prior experience with adolescent vaccine quality improvement projects (aOR = 0.52 [95% CI: 0.28, 0.98]), and routinely recommended HPV vaccine during urgent/acute care visits (aOR = 0.37 [95% CI: 0.18, 0.79]). Significantly more rural providers had standing orders to administer all recommended adolescent vaccines (aOR = 2.81 [95% CI: 1.61, 4.91]) and reported giving HPV vaccine information to their patients/families before it is due (aOR = 3.10 [95% CI: 1.68, 5.71]). Conclusions Rural vs. urban differences in provider practices were mixed in that rural providers do not implement some practices that may promote HPV vaccination, but do implement other practices that promote HPV vaccination. It remains unclear how the observed differences would affect HPV vaccine attitudes or adolescent vaccination decisions for parents in rural areas.

In the United States, 2022-23 influenza activity began earlier than usual, increasing in October 2022, and has been associated with high rates of hospitalizations among children* (1). Influenza A(H3N2) represented most influenza viruses detected and subtyped during this period, but A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses cocirculated as well. Most viruses characterized were in the same genetic subclade as and antigenically similar to the viruses included in the 2022-23 Northern Hemisphere influenza vaccine (1,2). Effectiveness of influenza vaccine varies by season, influenza virus subtype, and antigenic match with circulating viruses. This interim report used data from two concurrent studies conducted at Marshfield Clinic Health System (MCHS) in Wisconsin during October 23, 2022-February 10, 2023, to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). Overall, VE was 54% against medically attended outpatient acute respiratory illness (ARI) associated with laboratory-confirmed influenza A among patients aged 6 months-64 years. In a community cohort of children and adolescents aged <18 years, VE was 71% against symptomatic laboratory-confirmed influenza A virus infection. These interim analyses indicate that influenza vaccination substantially reduced the risk for medically attended influenza among persons aged <65 years and for symptomatic influenza in children and adolescents. Annual influenza vaccination is the best strategy for preventing influenza and its complications. CDC recommends that health care providers continue to administer annual influenza vaccine to persons aged ≥6 months as long as influenza viruses are circulating (2).

Using multiple years of a robust national survey, NIS-Teen, we assessed changes over time in parental human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination intentions and reasons for hesitancy as well as differences by teen sex (males vs females) and HPV vaccination status (unvaccinated vs undervaccinated). Abstract Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination uptake remains lower than other recommended adolescent vaccines in the United States. Parental attitudes are important predictors of vaccine uptake, yet little is known about how they have changed over time. Methods Participants included US residents aged 13-17 years with documented vaccination status who had received <3 doses of HPV vaccine whose parents responded to the National Immunization Survey-Teen, 2010-2015. Results Of the 76971 participants, 63.0% were male, 58.8% were non-Hispanic white, and 14.4 years was the median age. The percentage of unvaccinated teens decreased from 2010 to 2015, yet, annually, parents of unvaccinated teens of both sexes most often reported that they were \"not likely at all\" to vaccinate their teen. The percentage decreased significantly from 41.5% to 31.2% (P < .001) for parents of unvaccinated females from 2010 to 2015 but did not change among parents of males from 2012 to 2015. Conversely, parents of undervaccinated teens of both sexes reported higher and increasing vaccination intent over time. In 2015, nearly one-third of parents of unvaccinated teens reported that the vaccine was \"not needed/necessary.\" Concerns about vaccine safety and side effects declined among parents of unvaccinated females but increased among parents of males (7.3% to 14.8%; P < .001). Conclusions Although parental vaccination intent and knowledge improved over time, intent remains low and many parents still have significant concerns about HPV vaccination, even after series initiation. Multiple strategies are needed to improve series initiation and completion in the United States.

Evidence indicates that mRNA COVID-19 vaccination is associated with risk of myocarditis and possibly pericarditis, especially in young males. It is not clear if risk differs between mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2. We assessed if risk differs using comprehensive health records on a diverse population. Members 18–39 years of age at eight integrated healthcare-delivery systems were monitored using data updated weekly and supplemented with medical record review of myocarditis and pericarditis cases. Incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis events that occurred among vaccine recipients 0 to 7 days after either dose 1 or 2 of a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was compared with that of vaccinated concurrent comparators who, on the same calendar day, had received their most recent dose 22 to 42 days earlier. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by conditional Poisson regression, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, health plan, and calendar day. Head-to-head comparison directly assessed risk following mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 during 0–7 days post-vaccination. From December 14, 2020 – January 15, 2022 there were 41 cases after 2,891,498 doses of BNT162b2 and 38 cases after 1,803,267 doses of mRNA-1273. Cases had similar demographic and clinical characteristics. Most were hospitalized for ≤1 day; none required intensive care. During days 0–7 after dose 2 of BNT162b2, the incidence was 14.3 (CI: 6.5–34.9) times higher than the comparison interval, amounting to 22.4 excess cases per million doses; after mRNA-1273 the incidence was 18.8 (CI: 6.7–64.9) times higher than the comparison interval, amounting to 31.2 excess cases per million doses. In head-to-head comparisons 0–7 days after either dose, risk was moderately higher after mRNA-1273 than after BNT162b2 (RR: 1.61, CI 1.02–2.54). Both vaccines were associated with increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in 18–39-year-olds. Risk estimates were modestly higher after mRNA-1273 than after BNT162b2.

Postauthorization monitoring of vaccines in a large population may detect rare adverse events not identified in clinical trials such as Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), which has a background rate of 1 to 2 per 100 000 person-years. To describe cases and incidence of GBS following COVID-19 vaccination and assess the risk of GBS after vaccination for Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen) and mRNA vaccines. This cohort study used surveillance data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink at 8 participating integrated health care systems in the United States. There were 10 158 003 participants aged at least 12 years. Data analysis was performed from November 2021 to February 2022. Ad.26.COV2.S, BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine, including mRNA vaccine doses 1 and 2, December 13, 2020, to November 13, 2021. GBS with symptom onset in the 1 to 84 days after vaccination, confirmed by medical record review and adjudication. Descriptive characteristics of confirmed cases, GBS incidence rates during postvaccination risk intervals after each type of vaccine compared with the background rate, rate ratios (RRs) comparing GBS incidence in the 1 to 21 vs 22 to 42 days postvaccination, and RRs directly comparing risk of GBS after Ad.26.COV2.S vs mRNA vaccination, using Poisson regression adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, site, and calendar day. From December 13, 2020, through November 13, 2021, 15 120 073 doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered to 7 894 989 individuals (mean [SE] age, 46.5 [0.02] years; 8 138 318 doses received [53.8%] by female individuals; 3 671 199 doses received [24.3%] by Hispanic or Latino individuals, 2 215 064 doses received [14.7%] by Asian individuals, 6 266 424 doses received [41.4%] by White individuals), including 483 053 Ad.26.COV2.S doses, 8 806 595 BNT162b2 doses, and 5 830 425 mRNA-1273 doses. Eleven cases of GBS after Ad.26.COV2.S were confirmed. The unadjusted incidence rate of GBS per 100 000 person-years in the 1 to 21 days after Ad.26.COV2.S was 32.4 (95% CI, 14.8-61.5), significantly higher than the background rate, and the adjusted RR in the 1 to 21 vs 22 to 42 days following Ad.26.COV2.S was 6.03 (95% CI, 0.79-147.79). Thirty-six cases of GBS after mRNA vaccines were confirmed. The unadjusted incidence rate per 100 000 person-years in the 1 to 21 days after mRNA vaccines was 1.3 (95% CI, 0.7-2.4) and the adjusted RR in the 1 to 21 vs 22 to 42 days following mRNA vaccines was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.21-1.48). In a head-to-head comparison of Ad.26.COV2.S vs mRNA vaccines, the adjusted RR was 20.56 (95% CI, 6.94-64.66). In this cohort study of COVID-19 vaccines, the incidence of GBS was elevated after receiving the Ad.26.COV2.S vaccine. Surveillance is ongoing.

Safety data on simultaneous vaccination (SV) with primary series monovalent COVID-19 vaccines and other vaccines are limited. We describe SV with primary series COVID-19 vaccines and assess 23 pre-specified health outcomes following SV among persons aged ≥5 years in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). We utilized VSD’s COVID-19 vaccine surveillance data from December 11, 2020-May 21, 2022. Analyses assessed frequency of SV. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by Poisson regression when the number of outcomes was ≥5 across both doses, comparing outcome rates between COVID-19 vaccinees receiving SV and COVID-19 vaccinees receiving no SV in the 1–21 days following COVID-19 vaccine dose 1 and 1–42 days following dose 2 by SV type received (“All SV”, “Influenza SV”, “Non-influenza SV”). SV with COVID-19 vaccines was not common practice (dose 1: 0.7 % of 8,455,037 persons, dose 2: 0.3 % of 7,787,013 persons). The most frequent simultaneous vaccines were influenza, HPV, Tdap, and meningococcal. Outcomes following SV with COVID-19 vaccines were rare (total of 56 outcomes observed after dose 1 and dose 2). Overall rate of outcomes among COVID-19 vaccinees who received SV was not statistically significantly different than the rate among those who did not receive SV (6.5 vs. 6.8 per 10,000 persons). Statistically significant elevated RRs were observed for appendicitis (2.09; 95 % CI, 1.06–4.13) and convulsions/seizures (2.78; 95 % CI, 1.10–7.06) in the “All SV” group following dose 1, and for Bell’s palsy (2.82; 95 % CI, 1.14–6.97) in the “Influenza SV” group following dose 2. Combined pre-specified health outcomes observed among persons who received SV with COVID-19 vaccine were rare and not statistically significantly different compared to persons who did not receive SV with COVID-19 vaccine. Statistically significant adjusted rate ratios were observed for some individual outcomes, but the number of outcomes was small and there was no adjustment for multiple testing.

•Spontaneous abortion was not associated with influenza vaccination.•No association seen regardless of whether women were vaccinated in previous season.•No association in any season or any risk window.•Findings lend support to recommendations for influenza vaccination during pregnancy. A recent study reported an association between inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) and spontaneous abortion (SAB), but only among women who had also been vaccinated in the previous influenza season. We sought to estimate the association between IIV administered in three recent influenza seasons and SAB among women who were and were not vaccinated in the previous influenza season. We conducted a case-control study over three influenza seasons (2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15) in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Cases (women with SAB) and controls (women with live births) were matched on VSD site, date of last menstrual period, age group, and influenza vaccination status in the previous influenza season. Of 1908 presumptive cases identified from the electronic record, 1236 were included in the main analysis. Administration of IIV was documented in several risk windows, including 1–28, 29–56, and >56 days before the SAB date. Among 627 matched pairs vaccinated in the previous season, no association was found between vaccination in the 1–28 day risk window and SAB (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6–1.5). The season-specific aOR ranged from 0.5 to 1.7 with all CIs including the null value of 1.0. Similarly, no association was found among women who were not vaccinated in the previous season; the season-specific aOR in the 1–28 day risk window ranged from 0.6 to 0.7 and the 95% CI included 1.0 in each season. There was no association found between SAB and influenza vaccination in the other risk windows, or when vaccine receipt was analyzed relative to date of conception. During these seasons we found no association between IIV and SAB, including among women vaccinated in the previous season. These findings lend support to current recommendations for influenza vaccination at any time during pregnancy, including the first trimester.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized use of mRNA COVID-19 bivalent booster vaccines on August 31, 2022. Currently, CDC’s clinical guidance states that COVID-19 and other vaccines may be administered simultaneously. At time of authorization and recommendations, limited data existed describing simultaneous administration of COVID-19 bivalent booster and other vaccines. We describe simultaneous influenza and mRNA COVID-19 bivalent booster vaccine administration between August 31–December 31, 2022, among persons aged ≥6 months in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) by COVID-19 bivalent booster vaccine type, influenza vaccine type, age group, sex, and race and ethnicity. Of 2,301,876 persons who received a COVID-19 bivalent booster vaccine, 737,992 (32.1%) received simultaneous influenza vaccine, majority were female (53.1%), aged ≥18 years (91.4%), and non-Hispanic White (55.7%). These findings can inform future VSD studies on simultaneous influenza and COVID-19 bivalent booster vaccine safety and coverage, which may have implications for immunization service delivery.

•The Vaccine Safety Datalink created a COVID-19 vaccine dashboard to facilitate timely analysis and effective dissemination of vaccine safety results. The Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) conducts active surveillance and vaccine safety research studies. Since the start of the U.S. COVID-19 vaccination program, the VSD has conducted near real-time safety surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines using Rapid Cycle Analysis. VSD investigators developed an internal dashboard to facilitate visualization and rapid reviews of large weekly automated vaccine safety surveillance data. Dashboard development and maintenance was informed by vaccine surveillance data users and vaccine safety partners. Key metrics include population demographics, vaccine uptake, pre-specified safety outcomes, sequential analyses results, and descriptive data on potential vaccine safety signals. Dashboard visualizations are used to provide situational awareness on dynamic vaccination coverage and the status of multiple safety analyses conducted among the VSD population. This report describes the development and implementation of the internal VSD COVID-19 Vaccine Dashboard, including metrics used to develop the dashboard, which may have application across various other public health settings.