Diabetes affects millions of people worldwide, making them more vulnerable to infections, including seasonal influenza. It is therefore particularly important for those suffering from diabetes to be vaccinated against influenza each year. However, influenza vaccination coverage remains low in this population. This review primarily aims to identify the determinants of influenza vaccination in people with diabetes (T1D or T2D). Secondly, it aims to assess main recommendations for influenza vaccination, vaccine effectiveness, vaccination coverage, and how education and pharmacists can encourage uptake of the vaccine in the diabetic population.
A scoping review was conducted in January 2022 to systematically review evidence on influenza vaccination in people with diabetes using data from PubMed, Science Direct, and EM Premium with terms such as \"Diabetes mellitus,\" \"Immunization Programs,\" \"Vaccination,\" and \"Influenza Vaccines.\" Quality assessment and data extraction were independently conducted by two authors. Disagreements between the authors were resolved through discussion and consensus, and if necessary, by consulting a third author.
Of the 333 records identified, 55 studies met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review. Influenza vaccination was recommended for people ≥6 months. Despite effectiveness evidence showing a reduction in mortality and hospitalizations in people with diabetes vaccinated vs. non-vaccinated ones, very few studies reported a coverage rate ≥ 75%, which is WHO\'s target objective. Determinants such as advanced age, presence of comorbidities and healthcare givers\' advice were associated with increased vaccination uptake. On the contrary, fear of adverse reactions and concerns about vaccine effectiveness were significant barriers. Finally, education and pharmacists\' intervention played a key role in promoting vaccination and increasing vaccination uptake.
Influenza vaccination coverage in people with diabetes remains low despite recommendations and evidence on vaccine effectiveness. Motivators and barriers as well as several socio-demographic and clinical factors have been identified to explain this trend. Efforts are now needed to increase the number of diabetics vaccinated against influenza, mainly through education and the involvement of healthcare givers.

The spleen is responsible for blood filtration and mounting an immune response against pathogens. In some people the spleen must be surgically removed because of traumatic events or oncological and hematological conditions. These patients are at higher risk of developing diseases caused by encapsulated bacteria throughout their lives. Thus, immunisations are advised for splenectomised persons to prevent infection caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, Neisseria meningitidis and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib). This study assessed vaccination coverage (VC) among Norwegian patients with surgical asplenia. Using the Nomesco Classification of Surgical Procedures codes, patient information (age, sex, date of initial diagnosis and date of surgery) was acquired from the Norwegian Patient Registry. The National Immunization Register provided information on vaccination status and data of any subsequent invasive bacterial infections were obtained from the Norwegian Surveillance System for Communicable Diseases. From the total population of Norway, 3155 patients who had undergone complete splenectomy were identified. Of these, 914 (29.0%) had received at least one dose of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV), 1324 (42.0%) at least one dose of pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine and 589 (18.7%) had received both. Only 4.2% of the patients had received two doses of a meningococcal ACWY conjugate vaccine, while 8.0% of 1467 patients splenectomised after 2014 had received at least two doses of a serogroup B meningococcal vaccine. The VC for Hib was 18.7%. Nearly all splenectomised children under the age of 10 were vaccinated with Hib and PCV as these vaccines are included in the childhood immunisation program. For all vaccines, VC decreased with age. Twenty-nine invasive bacterial infections were registered post-splenectomy in 25 patients. Vaccination according to national recommendations could have prevented at least 8 (28%) of these infections. Our study showed that efforts are required to increase VC of splenectomised individuals in Norway.

BACKGROUND: The development of vaccines has been a significant factor in eliminating the pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). However, the primary series vaccination rate still falls short of our expectations, with an even lower rate of uptake for booster shots. This study examined demographic patterns of COVID-19 vaccination compliance by assessing patterns in the timing of the vaccine series start and vaccination completion and characterizing people by compliance with vaccination recommendations.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted online in August 2022. Participants answered questions about the COVID-19 vaccine and questions related to their personal backgrounds. We assessed the impact of demographic factors on COVID-19 vaccination using multivariable regression modeling.
RESULTS: Among 700 eligible participants, 61% (389) were highly adherent (i.e., started by late 2020 and received a booster dose), 22% (184) were moderately adherent (i.e., started later than June 2021, and/or did not receive the booster dose), and 17% (127) were unvaccinated. Compliance was relatively low among non-Hispanic Black Americans, those with no religious affiliation, and among Independents and Republicans.
CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination compliance varies across demographic groups. Race/ethnicity, religion, and political affiliation are highly associated with vaccination compliance. To promote vaccination compliance and decrease vaccine hesitancy, the government and healthcare institutions should establish a positive image to obtain public trust and adopt effective vaccine education and intervention.

暂无摘要。

The American Cancer Society (ACS) presents an adaptation of the current Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations for human papillomavirus (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 vaccinated. 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 recommended 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 clinicians, and the lack of sufficient guidance on the selection of individuals who might benefit.

BACKGROUND: This Dutch travel Vaccination Study (DiVeST) aimed to study adherence or compliance to Dutch travel health guidelines in travelling families and to identify risk groups to provide better advice and protection for international travellers.
METHODS: Between 2016 and 2018, family members who travelled to Eastern Europe or outside Europe during the preceding year were recruited via Dutch secondary schools. The vaccination status of the travellers was assessed using questionnaires and vaccination records and hepatitis A virus antibody concentrations in dried blood spot (DBS) eluates. Subgroups of travellers with lower adherence to guidelines were identified.
RESULTS: Of the 246 travellers that participated in this study, 155 (63%) travelled to destinations for which the HAV vaccination was recommended. Of these 155 travellers, 56 (36%) said they visited a pre-travel clinic, and 64 of them (41%) showed a valid HAV vaccination in their vaccination records. Of the 145 travellers with available DBS eluates, anti-HAV antibodies were detected in 98 (68%) of them.
CONCLUSIONS: We found that adherence to travel health guidelines, in terms of HAV vaccination, was suboptimal. According to our results, specific attention should be paid to children, persons visiting friends and relatives and those who travel relatively short distances.

METHODS: Cross-sectional survey.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the annual influenza vaccination coverage rate (IVCR) among community-dwelling individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI).
METHODS: SCI community in Switzerland.
METHODS: Participants were responders to the influenza vaccination question (n = 492) in the 2012 community survey of the Swiss Spinal Cord Injury (SwiSCI) cohort study. IVCR of SwiSCI participants were compared to the normative Swiss population, sampled in the Swiss Health Survey of 2012 using direct standardization, logistic regression standardization, and a genetic matching approach to control for differences in age, sex, and quarterly period of survey response.
RESULTS: Individuals with SCI showed higher crude (26%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 22-30%) and age- and sex-standardized (24%, CI: 23-24%) IVCR than observed in the general population (15% CI, 14-15%). The adjustment for age and sex as well as quarterly period of survey response showed that the standardized IVCR of individuals with SCI (17%; CI: 12-23%) approached that of the general population. Low IVCR of about 10% were found among individuals with SCI younger than 45 years. IVCR were similar between men and women and between individuals with incomplete and complete paraplegia and tetraplegia.
CONCLUSIONS: The IVCR in individuals with chronic SCI was not higher than in the general population and much lower than guidelines recommend. The improvement of the IVCR is an important target of health policy in SCI in Switzerland as to reduce the evidenced excess burden in respiratory-disease related morbidity and mortality.

Systematic reviews have become increasingly important for informing clinical practice and policy; however, little is known about the reporting characteristics and quality of SRs of interventions to improve immunization coverage in different settings. The aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of systematic reviews of interventions aimed at improving vaccination coverage using the recommended Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guideline.PubMed and Cochrane Library were searched to identify SRs of interventions to improve immunization coverage, indexed up to May 2016. Two authors independently screened the search output, assessed study eligibility, and extracted data from eligible SRs using a 27-item data collection form derived from PRISMA. Discrepancies in reviews assessments were resolved by discussion and consensus.A total of 57 reviews were included in this study with a mean percentage of applicable PRISMA items that were met across all studies of 66% (range 19-100%) and median compliance of 70%. 39 out of the 57 reviews were published after the release of the PRISMA statement in 2009. Highest compliance was observed in items related to the \"description of rational\", \"description of eligibility criteria\", \"synthesis of results\" and \"provision of a general interpretation of the results\" (items #3, #6, #14 and #26, respectively). Compliance was poorest in the items \"describing summary of evidence\" (item 24, 19%), \"describing indication of review protocol and registration\" (item 5, 26%) and \"describing results of risk of bias across studies (item 22, 33%).The overall reporting quality of systematic reviews of interventions to improve vaccination coverage requires significant improvement. There remains a need for additional research targeted at addressing potential barriers to compliance and strategies to improve compliance with PRISMA guideline.