Displaying all 10 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Flaherty GT
    J Travel Med, 2019 Jan 01;26(1).
    PMID: 30590731 DOI: 10.1093/jtm/tay158
    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use*
  2. Norhayati MN, Ho JJ, Azman MY
    PMID: 25803008 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010089.pub2
    BACKGROUND: Acute otitis media (AOM) is one of the most common infectious diseases in children. It has been reported that 64% of infants have an episode of AOM by the age of six months and 86% by one year. Although most cases of AOM are due to bacterial infection, it is commonly triggered by a viral infection. In most children it is self limiting, but it does carry a risk of complications. Since antibiotic treatment increases the risk of antibiotic resistance, influenza vaccines might be an effective way of reducing this risk by preventing the development of AOM.

    OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of influenza vaccine in reducing the occurrence of acute otitis media (AOM) in infants and children.

    SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1946 to July week 1, 2014), EMBASE (2010 to July 2014), CINAHL (1981 to July 2014), LILACS (1982 to July 2014), Web of Science (1955 to July 2014) and reference lists of articles to July 2014.

    SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing influenza vaccine with placebo or no treatment in infants and children aged younger than six years old. We included children of either sex and of any ethnicity, with or without a history of recurrent AOM.

    DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened studies, assessed trial quality and extracted data. We performed statistical analyses using the random-effects and fixed-effect models and expressed the results as risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

    MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 trials (six trials in high-income countries and four multicentre trials in high-, middle- and low-income countries) involving 16,707 children aged six months to six years. Eight trials recruited participants from a healthcare setting. Nine trials (and all five trials that contributed to the primary outcome) declared funding from vaccine manufacturers. Four trials reported adequate allocation concealment and nine trials reported adequate blinding of participants and personnel. Attrition was low for all trials included in the analysis.The primary outcome showed a small reduction in at least one episode of AOM over at least six months of follow-up (five trials, 4736 participants: RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.96; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.07 to -0.02; NNTB 25, 95% CI 15 to 50).The subgroup analyses (i.e. number of courses, settings, seasons or types of vaccine administered) showed no differences.There was a reduction in the use of antibiotics in vaccinated children (two trials, 1223 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.83; RD -0.15, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.00).There was no significant difference in the utilisation of health care for the one trial that provided sufficient information to be included. The use of influenza vaccine resulted in a significant increase in fever (six trials, 10,199 participants: RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.24; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.05) and rhinorrhoea (six trials, 10,563 children: RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.29; RD 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.16) but no difference in pharyngitis. No major adverse events were reported.Compared to the protocol, the review included a subgroup analysis of AOM episodes by season, and changed the types of influenza vaccine from a secondary outcome to a subgroup analysis.

    AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccine results in a small reduction in AOM. The observed reduction with the use of antibiotics needs to be considered in the light of current recommended practices aimed at avoiding antibiotic overuse. Safety data from these trials are limited. The benefits may not justify the use of influenza vaccine without taking into account the vaccine efficacy in reducing influenza and safety data. The quality of the evidence was high to moderate. Additional research is needed.

    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use*
  3. Norhayati MN, Ho JJ, Azman MY
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2017 Oct 17;10(10):CD010089.
    PMID: 29039160 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010089.pub3
    BACKGROUND: Acute otitis media (AOM) is one of the most common infectious diseases in children. It has been reported that 64% of infants have an episode of AOM by the age of six months and 86% by one year. Although most cases of AOM are due to bacterial infection, it is commonly triggered by a viral infection. In most children AOM is self limiting, but it does carry a risk of complications. Since antibiotic treatment increases the risk of antibiotic resistance, influenza vaccines might be an effective way of reducing this risk by preventing the development of AOM.

    OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of influenza vaccine in reducing the occurrence of acute otitis media in infants and children.

    SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov (15 February 2017). We also searched the reference lists of included studies to identify any additional trials.

    SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing influenza vaccine with placebo or no treatment in infants and children aged younger than six years. We included children of either sex and of any ethnicity, with or without a history of recurrent AOM.

    DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened studies, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We performed statistical analyses using the random-effects and fixed-effect models and expressed the results as risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

    MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 trials (6 trials in high-income countries and 5 multicentre trials in high-, middle-, and low-income countries) involving 17,123 children aged 6 months to 6 years. Eight trials recruited participants from a healthcare setting. Ten trials (and all four trials that contributed to the primary outcome) declared funding from vaccine manufacturers. Four trials reported adequate allocation concealment, and 10 trials reported adequate blinding of participants and personnel. Attrition was low for eight trials included in the analysis.The primary outcome showed a small reduction in at least one episode of AOM over at least six months of follow-up (4 trials, 3134 children; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.02; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.00; NNTB 25, 95% CI 12.5 to 100; low-quality evidence).The subgroup analyses (i.e. number of courses and types of vaccine administered) showed no differences.There was a reduction in the use of antibiotics in vaccinated children (2 trials, 1223 children; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.83; RD -0.11, 95% CI -0.16 to -0.06; moderate-quality evidence).We were unable to demonstrate whether there was any difference in the utilisation of health care. The use of influenza vaccine resulted in a significant increase in fever (7 trials, 10,615 children; RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.24; RD 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.04; low-quality evidence), rhinorrhoea (6 trials, 10,563 children; RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.29; RD 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.16; low-quality evidence), but no difference in pharyngitis. No major adverse events were reported.Differing from the protocol, the original publication of the review included a subgroup analysis of AOM episodes by season, and the secondary outcome 'types of influenza vaccine' was changed to a subgroup analysis. For this update, we removed the subgroup analyses for trial setting, season, and utilisation of health care due to the small number of trials involved. We removed Belshe 2000 from primary and secondary outcomes (courses of vaccine and types of vaccine) because it reported episodes of AOM per person. We did not perform a subgroup analysis by type of adverse event. We have reported each type of adverse event as a separate analysis.

    AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccine results in a small reduction in AOM. The observed reduction in the use of antibiotics needs to be considered in light of current recommended practices aimed at avoiding antibiotic overuse. Safety data from these trials were limited. The benefits may not justify the use of influenza vaccine without taking into account the vaccine efficacy in reducing influenza and safety data. We judged the quality of the evidence to be low to moderate. Additional research is needed.

    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use*
  4. Hasan H, Deris ZZ, Sulaiman SA, Abdul Wahab MS, Naing NN, Ab Rahman Z, et al.
    J Immigr Minor Health, 2015 Aug;17(4):1114-9.
    PMID: 24946936 DOI: 10.1007/s10903-014-0059-y
    Respiratory illness were a major problem and caused high hospital admission during hajj seasons. One of the contributing cause to this illness is infection. Various measures had been implemented to reduce respiratory infections. The aim on the study is to determine the effect of influenza vaccination against acute respiratory illness among Malaysian Hajj pilgrims. This is an observational cohort study. Influenza vaccination was given to pilgrims at least 2 weeks prior to departure. The occurrence of symptoms for respiratory illness such as cough, fever, sore throat and runny nose was monitored daily for 6 weeks during pilgrimage using a health diary. A total of 65 vaccinated hajj pilgrims and 41 controls were analyzed. There was no significant difference in pattern of occurrence of symptoms of respiratory illness by duration of pilgrimage as well as the number of symptoms between both groups. Hajj pilgrims have frequent respiratory symptoms. We were unable to document benefit from influenza vaccination, but our study was limited by a small sample size and lack of laboratory testing for influenza.
    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use*
  5. Win MK, Chow A, Chen M, Lau YF, Ooi EE, Leo YS
    Ann Acad Med Singap, 2010 Jun;39(6):448-52.
    PMID: 20625620
    INTRODUCTION: Outbreaks of acute respiratory illness occur commonly in long-term care facilities (LTCF), due to the close proximity of residents. Most influenza outbreak reports have been from temperate countries. This study reports an outbreak of influenza B among a highly immunised resident population in a welfare home in tropical Singapore, and discusses vaccine efficacy and the role of acute respiratory illness surveillance for outbreak prevention and control.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the period from 16 to 21 March 2007, outbreak investigations and active case finding were carried out among residents and nursing staff at the welfare home. Interviews and medical notes review were conducted to obtain epidemiological and clinical data. Hospitalised patients were tested for respiratory pathogens. Further genetic studies were also carried out on positive respiratory samples.

    RESULTS: The overall clinical attack rate was 9.4% (17/180) in residents and 6.7% (2/30) in staff. All infected residents and staff had received influenza immunisation. Fifteen residents were hospitalised, with 2 developing severe complications. Genetic sequencing revealed that the outbreak strain had an 8.2% amino acid difference from B/Malaysia/2506/2004, the 2006 southern hemisphere influenza vaccine strain, which the residents and staff had earlier received.

    CONCLUSIONS: A mismatch between the vaccine and circulating influenza virus strains can result in an outbreak in a highly immunised LTCF resident population. Active surveillance for acute respiratory illness in LTCFs could be implemented for rapid detection of antigenic drift. Enhanced infection control and other preventive measures can then be deployed in a timely manner to mitigate the effect of any outbreaks.

    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use
  6. Naing C, Tan RY, Soon WC, Parakh J, Sanggi SS
    J Infect Public Health, 2012 Dec;5(6):412-9.
    PMID: 23287612 DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2012.07.005
    PURPOSE: (i) To determine knowledge of, and self-protecting preventive behaviours towards influenza A(H1N1) and (ii) to identify the factors influencing intention to take influenza A(H1N1) vaccination among the study population.
    MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional survey carried out in Mantin Town, a semi-urban area of Malaysia. A structured questionnaire consisted of sociodemographic characteristics, knowledge of pandemic influenza symptoms, mode of transmission, self-protecting preventive behaviours, and intention to receive the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine was used for face-to-face interviews with the household members.
    RESULTS: Of 230 who heard about pandemic influenza A(H1N1), 86% had misconception about mode of transmission of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, and 52% had sufficient self-protecting behaviours. A majority (58.3%; 134/230) had intended to receive the vaccine. In the multivariate analysis, the intention to get vaccinated was significantly higher among 'those who trusted in efficacy of vaccine for prevention of influenza A(H1N1)' (p<0.001), 'those who were equipped with higher education level' (p=0.015) and 'those who worry about themselves contracting illness' (p=0.008).
    CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the need to scale up the community's knowledge regarding influenza A(H1N1). Recognizing the factors affecting the acceptance of vaccination documented in this study will allow decision makers to devise effective and efficient vaccination strategies.
    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use*
  7. Isahak I, Mahayiddin AA, Ismail R
    PMID: 18041300
    The aims of the study were to determine the attack rate of influenza-like illness among inhabitants of five old folk homes nationwide using influenza vaccine as a probe and the effectiveness of influenza vaccination in prevention of influenza-like illness. We conducted a nonrandomized, single-blind placebo control study from June 2003 to February 2004. VAXIGRIP(R) 2003 Southern hemisphere formulation was used. Among 527 subjects, the attack rates of influenza-like illness in the influenza vaccine group were 6.4, 4.6 and 2.4% during the first, second and third 2-month periods, respectively. The attack rates of influenza-like illness in the placebo group were 17.7, 13.8 and 10.1%. Influenza vaccination reduced the risk of contracting influenza-like illness by between 14, and 45%. The vaccine effectiveness in reducing the occurrence of influenza-like illness ranged from 55 to 76%, during the 6-month study followup. The presence of cerebrovascular diseases significantly increased the risk of influenza-like illness (p < 0.005). Vaccine recipients had fewer episodes of fever, cough, muscle aches, runny nose (p < 0.001) and experience fewer sick days due to respiratory illness. Subjects who received influenza vaccination had clinically and statistically significant reductions in the attack rate of influenza-like illness. Our data support influenza vaccination of persons with chronic diseases and >50 year olds living in institutions.
    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use*
  8. Rashid ZZ, Jasme H, Liang HJ, Yusof MM, Sharani ZZ, Mohamad M, et al.
    PMID: 26513924
    Annual influenza vaccination is the most important preventive strategy against influenza illness in healthcare workers (HCWs), who could acquire influenza from and transmit influenza to patients and other HCWs. Despite the well established benefits and strong recommendations for influenza vaccination for all HCWs, influenza vaccination uptake at the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC) for the past 3 years has been low and is decreasing. We aimed to determine the factors associated with influenza vaccination uptake among HCWs at UKMMC. We conducted a cross sectional study via questionnaire among 211 randomly selected HCWs, consisting of 106 HCWs who were vaccinated in 2011 and 105 HCWs who were not vaccinated in 2010 or 2011. We had a 100% response rate. Influenza vaccination uptake was significantly associated with age and previous vaccination history, with older HCWs being more likely to be vaccinated (adjusted OR = 12.494; 95% CI:6.278-24.863; p < 0.001) and HCWs with previous vaccination history being more likely to be vaccinated (adjusted OR = 1.038; 95% CI:1.001-1.077; p = 0.045). Influenza vaccination uptake was not associated with gender (p = 0.926) or job category (p = 0.220). Publicity at the workplace was the main source of information about the vaccine (51.2% of respondents), followed by colleagues (29.9%). Despite the low uptake, 85.3% of respondents believed influenza vaccination was important for disease prevention. The most common reason given for vaccination was protection against influenza infection (73.6%). The most common reason for not having the vaccine was time constraints (56.2%). An evidenced-based strategy needs to be developed to improve vaccine uptake or having mandatory vaccination.
    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use*
  9. Hasan NH, Ignjatovic J, Peaston A, Hemmatzadeh F
    Viral Immunol, 2016 05;29(4):198-211.
    PMID: 26900835 DOI: 10.1089/vim.2015.0127
    Vaccination is becoming a more acceptable option in the effort to eradicate avian influenza viruses (AIV) from commercial poultry, especially in countries where AIV is endemic. The main concern surrounding this option has been the inability of the conventional serological tests to differentiate antibodies produced due to vaccination from antibodies produced in response to virus infection. In attempts to address this issue, at least six strategies have been formulated, aiming to differentiate infected from vaccinated animals (DIVA), namely (i) sentinel birds, (ii) subunit vaccine, (iii) heterologous neuraminidase (NA), (iv) nonstructural 1 (NS1) protein, (v) matrix 2 ectodomain (M2e) protein, and (vi) haemagglutinin subunit 2 (HA2) glycoprotein. This short review briefly discusses the strengths and limitations of these DIVA strategies, together with the feasibility and practicality of the options as a part of the surveillance program directed toward the eventual eradication of AIV from poultry in countries where highly pathogenic avian influenza is endemic.
    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use
  10. Lim KL, Jazayeri SD, Yeap SK, Mohamed Alitheen NB, Bejo MH, Ideris A, et al.
    Res Vet Sci, 2013 Dec;95(3):1224-34.
    PMID: 23948357 DOI: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2013.07.013
    We had examined the immunogenicity of a series of plasmid DNAs which include neuraminidase (NA) and nucleoprotein (NP) genes from avian influenza virus (AIV). The interleukin-15 (IL-15) and interleukin-18 (IL-18) as genetic adjuvants were used for immunization in combination with the N1 and NP AIV genes. In the first trial, 8 groups of chickens were established with 10 specific-pathogen-free (SPF) chickens per group while, in the second trial 7 SPF chickens per group were used. The overall N1 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) titer in chickens immunized with the pDis/N1+pDis/IL-15 was higher compared to the chickens immunized with the pDis/N1 and this suggesting that chicken IL-15 could play a role in enhancing the humoral immune response. Besides that, the chickens that were immunized at 14-day-old (Trial 2) showed a higher N1 antibody titer compared to the chickens that were immunized at 1-day-old (Trial 1). Despite the delayed in NP antibody responses, the chickens co-administrated with IL-15 were able to induce earlier and higher antibody response compared to the pDis/NP and pDis/NP+pDis/IL-18 inoculated groups. The pDis/N1+pDis/IL-15 inoculated chickens also induced higher CD8+ T cells increase than the pDis/N1 group in both trials (P<0.05). The flow cytometry results from both trials demonstrated that the pDis/N1+pDis/IL-18 groups were able to induce CD4+ T cells higher than the pDis/N1 group (P<0.05). Meanwhile, pDis/N1+pDis/IL-18 group was able to induce CD8+ T cells higher than the pDis/N1 group (P<0.05) in Trial 2 only. In the present study, pDis/NP was not significant (P>0.05) in inducing CD4+ and CD8+ T cells when co-administered with the pDis/IL-18 in both trials in comparison to the pDis/NP. Our data suggest that the pDis/N1+pDis/IL-15 combination has the potential to be used as a DNA vaccine against AIV in chickens.
    Matched MeSH terms: Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use*
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links