A postmarket safety comparison of 2 vaccination strategies for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella in Italy

意大利两种麻疹、腮腺炎、风疹和水痘疫苗接种策略的上市后安全性比较

阅读:1

Abstract

It is strategically important to monitor the safety profile of vaccination schedules in order to achieve and maintain high levels of coverage. We analyzed the cohort of individuals actively invited for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (MMRV) vaccination in the Veneto region (north-east Italy) from 8/1/2013 to 7/31/2014, assessing the onset of adverse events (AE) relating to 2 different vaccination strategies for MMRV (MMR+V vs MMRV). During the vaccination session at 14 months old, parents were given a form for recording local and systemic reactions to vaccinations for 4 weeks afterwards. Overall, 12,288 forms were returned, and 84.6% of them were included in this analysis (5,130 relating to MMR+V and 5,265 to MMRV); 37.3% of the sample reported no AEs, with no difference between the 2 groups. Local reactions were more common in the MMR+V group (9.6% vs 2.9%; RR 3.33; 95% CI 2.79-3.98), while there was no difference in general reactions between the 2 groups (50% MMR+V vs 52% MMRV). The events most often reported were "fever <39.5°C," which was more frequently associated with the MMRV strategy (p<0.001), and "skin blotches and marks," which occurred more often in the MMR+V group (p<0.001). Reports of "fever ≥39.5°C" were equally distributed between the 2 groups. Sixteen cases of febrile seizures were reported (0.14% in the MMR+V group and 0.17% in the MMRV group). Similar safety profiles were identified for the 2 vaccination strategies. Although the method used to record reactions to vaccination demanded considerable resources, it enabled important information to be collected on parents' perception of the AEs occurring in response to their child's vaccination.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。