Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Source
    • Language
362 result(s) for "Vaccination Coverage - organization "
Sort by:
Human Papillomavirus Vaccination 2020 Guideline Update: American Cancer Society Guideline Adaptation
The American Cancer Society (ACS) presents an adaptation of the current Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations for human papillo-mavirus (HPV) vaccination. The ACS recommends routine HPV vaccination between ages 9 and 12 years to achieve higher on-time vaccination rates, which will lead to increased numbers of cancers prevented. Health care providers are encouraged to start offering the HPV vaccine series at age 9 or 10 years. Catch-up HPV vaccination is recommended for all persons through age 26 years who are not adequately vac-cinated. Providers should inform individuals aged 22 to 26 years who have not been previously vaccinated or who have not completed the series that vaccination at older ages is less effective in lowering cancer risk. Catch-up HPV vaccination is not recom-mended for adults aged older than 26 years. The ACS does not endorse the 2019 Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendation for shared clinical decision making for some adults aged 27 through 45 years who are not adequately vaccinated because of the low effectiveness and low cancer prevention potential of vaccination in this age group, the burden of decision making on patients and clini-cians, and the lack of sufficient guidance on the selection of individuals who might benefit.
Countdown to 2030: eliminating hepatitis B disease, China
Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a major public health problem worldwide. China has the world's largest burden of HBV infection and will be a major contributor towards the global elimination of hepatitis B disease by 2030. The country has made good progress in reducing incidence of HBV infection in the past three decades. The achievements are mainly due to high vaccination coverages among children and high coverage of timely birth-dose vaccine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HBV (both > 95%). However, China still faces challenges in achieving its target of 65% reduction in mortality from hepatitis B by 2030. Based on targets of the World Health Organization's , we highlight further priorities for action towards HBV elimination in China. To achieve the impact target of reduced mortality we suggest that the service coverage targets of diagnosis and treatment should be prioritized. First, improvements are needed in the diagnostic and treatment abilities of medical institutions and health workers. Second, the government needs to reduce the financial burden of health care on patients. Third, better coordination is needed across existing national programmes and resources to establish an integrated prevention and control system that covers prevention, screening, diagnosis and treatment of HBV infection across the life cycle. In this way, progress can be made towards achieving the target of eliminating hepatitis B in China by 2030.
Non-pharmaceutical interventions, vaccination, and the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant in England: a mathematical modelling study
England's COVID-19 roadmap out of lockdown policy set out the timeline and conditions for the stepwise lifting of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) as vaccination roll-out continued, with step one starting on March 8, 2021. In this study, we assess the roadmap, the impact of the delta (B.1.617.2) variant of SARS-CoV-2, and potential future epidemic trajectories. This mathematical modelling study was done to assess the UK Government's four-step process to easing lockdown restrictions in England, UK. We extended a previously described model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to incorporate vaccination and multi-strain dynamics to explicitly capture the emergence of the delta variant. We calibrated the model to English surveillance data, including hospital admissions, hospital occupancy, seroprevalence data, and population-level PCR testing data using a Bayesian evidence synthesis framework, then modelled the potential trajectory of the epidemic for a range of different schedules for relaxing NPIs. We estimated the resulting number of daily infections and hospital admissions, and daily and cumulative deaths. Three scenarios spanning a range of optimistic to pessimistic vaccine effectiveness, waning natural immunity, and cross-protection from previous infections were investigated. We also considered three levels of mixing after the lifting of restrictions. The roadmap policy was successful in offsetting the increased transmission resulting from lifting NPIs starting on March 8, 2021, with increasing population immunity through vaccination. However, because of the emergence of the delta variant, with an estimated transmission advantage of 76% (95% credible interval [95% CrI] 69–83) over alpha, fully lifting NPIs on June 21, 2021, as originally planned might have led to 3900 (95% CrI 1500–5700) peak daily hospital admissions under our central parameter scenario. Delaying until July 19, 2021, reduced peak hospital admissions by three fold to 1400 (95% CrI 700–1700) per day. There was substantial uncertainty in the epidemic trajectory, with particular sensitivity to the transmissibility of delta, level of mixing, and estimates of vaccine effectiveness. Our findings show that the risk of a large wave of COVID-19 hospital admissions resulting from lifting NPIs can be substantially mitigated if the timing of NPI relaxation is carefully balanced against vaccination coverage. However, with the delta variant, it might not be possible to fully lift NPIs without a third wave of hospital admissions and deaths, even if vaccination coverage is high. Variants of concern, their transmissibility, vaccine uptake, and vaccine effectiveness must be carefully monitored as countries relax pandemic control measures. National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, and UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.
Distemper, extinction, and vaccination of the Amur tiger
Canine distemper virus (CDV) has recently emerged as an extinction threat for the endangered Amur tiger (Panthera tigris altaica). CDV is vaccine-preventable, and control strategies could require vaccination of domestic dogs and/or wildlife populations. However, vaccination of endangered wildlife remains controversial, which has led to a focus on interventions in domestic dogs, often assumed to be the source of infection. Effective decision making requires an understanding of the true reservoir dynamics, which poses substantial challenges in remote areas with diverse host communities. We carried out serological, demographic, and phylogenetic studies of dog and wildlife populations in the Russian Far East to show that a number of wildlife species are more important than dogs, both in maintaining CDV and as sources of infection for tigers. Critically, therefore, because CDV circulates among multiple wildlife sources, dog vaccination alone would not be effective at protecting tigers. We show, however, that low-coverage vaccination of tigers themselves is feasible and would produce substantive reductions in extinction risks. Vaccination of endangered wildlife provides a valuable component of conservation strategies for endangered species.
COVID-19 vaccination beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours among health and social care workers in the UK: A mixed-methods study
The UK began delivering its COVID-19 vaccination programme on 8 December 2020, with health and social care workers (H&SCWs) given high priority for vaccination. Despite well-documented occupational exposure risks, however, there is evidence of lower uptake among some H&SCW groups. We used a mixed-methods approach-involving an online cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews-to gain insight into COVID-19 vaccination beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours amongst H&SCWs in the UK by socio-demographic and employment variables. 1917 people were surveyed- 1656 healthcare workers (HCWs) and 261 social care workers (SCWs). Twenty participants were interviewed. Workplace factors contributed to vaccination access and uptake. SCWs were more likely to not be offered COVID-19 vaccination than HCWs (OR:1.453, 95%CI: 1.244-1.696). SCWs specifically reported uncertainties around how to access COVID-19 vaccination. Participants who indicated stronger agreement with the statement 'I would recommend my organisation as a place to work' were more likely to have been offered COVID-19 vaccination (OR:1.285, 95%CI: 1.056-1.563). Those who agreed more strongly with the statement 'I feel/felt under pressure from my employer to get a COVID-19 vaccine' were more likely to have declined vaccination (OR:1.751, 95%CI: 1.271-2.413). Interviewees that experienced employer pressure to get vaccinated felt this exacerbated their vaccine concerns and increased distrust. In comparison to White British and White Irish participants, Black African and Mixed Black African participants were more likely to not be offered (OR:2.011, 95%CI: 1.026-3.943) and more likely to have declined COVID-19 vaccination (OR:5.550, 95%CI: 2.294-13.428). Reasons for declining vaccination among Black African participants included distrust in COVID-19 vaccination, healthcare providers, and policymakers. H&SCW employers are in a pivotal position to facilitate COVID-19 vaccination access, by ensuring staff are aware of how to get vaccinated and promoting a workplace environment in which vaccination decisions are informed and voluntary.
Barriers to effective uptake and provision of immunization in a rural district in Uganda
Hoima, one of the largest districts in mid- western Uganda, has persistently performed poorly with low immunization coverage, high immunization drop outs rates and repeated outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases especially measles. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the state of immunization services and to identify the gaps in immunization health systems that contribute to low uptake and completion of immunization schedules in Hoima District. This was a cross sectional mixed methods study, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative approaches. A situation analysis of the immunization services was carried out using in-depth interviews with vaccinators, focus group discussions and key informant interviews with ethno-videography. Secondary data was sourced from records at headquarters and vaccination centres within Hoima District. The quantitative component utilized cluster random sampling with sample size estimated using the World Health Organization's 30 cluster sampling technique. A total of 311 caretaker/child pairs were included in the study. Immunization completion among children of age at least 12 months was 95% for BCG, 96% for OPV0, 93% for DPT1, 84.5% for DPT2, 81% for DPT3 and 65.5% for measles vaccines. Access to immunization centres is difficult due to poor road terrain, which affects effectiveness of outreach program, support supervision, mentorship and timely delivery of immunization program support supplies especially refrigerator gas and vaccines. Some facilities are under-equipped to effectively support the program. Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) identification, reporting and management is poorly understood. Immunization services in Hoima District require urgent improvement in the following areas: vaccine supply, expanding service delivery points, more health workers, transport and tailored mechanisms to ensure adequate communication between health workers and caretakers.
Factors and considerations for establishing and improving seasonal influenza vaccination of health workers: Report from a WHO meeting, January 16–17, Berlin, Germany
Health workers represent an important target group for seasonal influenza vaccination because of their increased risk of infection as well as the risk of transmitting infection to vulnerable patients in the health care setting. Moreover, seasonal vaccination of health workers contributes to pandemic preparedness. However, many countries, especially in Africa and Asia, do not have policies for health worker influenza vaccination. In countries where such policies exist, vaccination coverage is often low. The World Health Organization (WHO) is developing a manual to guide the introduction of seasonal influenza vaccination of health workers. An Independent External Advisory Group (IEAG) that is advising WHO on the content of the manual met to discuss issues that are relevant and often unique to health worker vaccination. This meeting report summarizes the main issues that were discussed and the outcomes of the discussion. The issues include policy considerations, including the evidence in support of health worker vaccination; categorization and prioritization of health workers; the choice of vaccination strategy; its integration into broader health worker vaccination and occupational health policies; planning and management of vaccination, particularly the approaches for communication and demand generation; and the challenges with monitoring and evaluation of health worker vaccination, especially in low and middle-income countries.
Association of Simulated COVID-19 Vaccination and Nonpharmaceutical Interventions With Infections, Hospitalizations, and Mortality
Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to significantly reduce transmission and COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. The relative importance of vaccination strategies and nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is not well understood. To assess the association of simulated COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and coverage scenarios with and without NPIs with infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. An established agent-based decision analytical model was used to simulate COVID-19 transmission and progression from March 24, 2020, to September 23, 2021. The model simulated COVID-19 spread in North Carolina, a US state of 10.5 million people. A network of 1 017 720 agents was constructed from US Census data to represent the statewide population. Scenarios of vaccine efficacy (50% and 90%), vaccine coverage (25%, 50%, and 75% at the end of a 6-month distribution period), and NPIs (reduced mobility, school closings, and use of face masks) maintained and removed during vaccine distribution. Risks of infection from the start of vaccine distribution and risk differences comparing scenarios. Outcome means and SDs were calculated across replications. In the worst-case vaccination scenario (50% efficacy, 25% coverage), a mean (SD) of 2 231 134 (117 867) new infections occurred after vaccination began with NPIs removed, and a mean (SD) of 799 949 (60 279) new infections occurred with NPIs maintained during 11 months. In contrast, in the best-case scenario (90% efficacy, 75% coverage), a mean (SD) of 527 409 (40 637) new infections occurred with NPIs removed and a mean (SD) of 450 575 (32 716) new infections occurred with NPIs maintained. With NPIs removed, lower efficacy (50%) and higher coverage (75%) reduced infection risk by a greater magnitude than higher efficacy (90%) and lower coverage (25%) compared with the worst-case scenario (mean [SD] absolute risk reduction, 13% [1%] and 8% [1%], respectively). Simulation outcomes suggest that removing NPIs while vaccines are distributed may result in substantial increases in infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, as NPIs are removed, higher vaccination coverage with less efficacious vaccines can contribute to a larger reduction in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with more efficacious vaccines at lower coverage. These findings highlight the need for well-resourced and coordinated efforts to achieve high vaccine coverage and continued adherence to NPIs before many prepandemic activities can be resumed.
The impact of a prolonged ebola outbreak on measles elimination activities in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, 2014-2015
Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia have attained significant reduction in measles incidence between 2004 and 2013. The Ebola outbreak in 2014-2015 in West Africa caused significant disruption of the health service delivery in the three worst affected countries. The magnitude of the impact on the immunization program has not been well documented. We reviewed national routine immunization administrative coverage data as well as measles surveillance performance and measles epidemiology in the years before, during and after the EVD outbreak in Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone. Both Liberia and Guinea experienced a sharp decline of more than 25% in the monthly number of children vaccinated against measles in 2014 and 2015 as compared to the previous years, while there was no reported decline in Sierra Leone. Guinea and Liberia experienced a decline in measles surveillance activity and performance indicators in 2014 and 2015. During this period, there was an increase in measles incidence and a decline in the mean age of measles cases reported in Liberia and Sierra Leone. Guinea started reporting high measles incidence in 2016. All three countries organized measles supplemental immunization activities by June 2015. Liberia achieved 99% administrative coverage, while Guinea and Sierra Leone attained 90.6% and 97.2% coverage respectively. There were no severe adverse events reported during these mass vaccination activities. The disruptive effect of the Ebola outbreak on immunization services was especially evident in Guinea and Liberia. Our review of the reported administrative vaccination coverage at national level does not show significant decline in measles first dose vaccination coverage in Sierra Leone as compared to other reports. This may be due to inaccuracies in coverage monitoring and data quality problems. The increases in measles transmission and incidence in these three countries can be explained by the rapid accumulation of susceptible children. Despite the organization of mass vaccination activities, measles incidence through 2017 has remained higher than the pre-Ebola period in all three countries. The Ebola outbreak in West Africa significantly affected measles vaccination coverage rates in two of the three worst affected countries, and led to persistent gaps in coverage, along with high measles incidence that was documented until two years after the end of the Ebola outbreak. Liberia and Sierra Leone have demonstrated coverage improvements after the end of the Ebola outbreak.