• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Influenza vaccination in healthcare workers; comparison of side effects and preferred route of administration of intradermal versus intramuscular admi

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Vaccine. 2017 Feb 10. pii: S0264-410X(17)30145-7. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.01.065. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]Influenza vaccination in healthcare workers; comparison of side effects and preferred route of administration of intradermal versus intramuscular administration.[/h] Meijer WJ[SUP]1[/SUP], Wensing AM[SUP]2[/SUP], Bos AA[SUP]3[/SUP], Kuiphuis JC[SUP]4[/SUP], Hagelen EM[SUP]3[/SUP], Wilschut JC[SUP]4[/SUP], de Vries MJ[SUP]5[/SUP], Riezebos-Brilman A[SUP]4[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] [h=4]OBJECTIVE:[/h] To explore the nature and severity of side effects and future preference of intradermal versus intramuscular influenza vaccination in healthcare workers.
[h=4]DESIGN:[/h] Prospective cohort study.
[h=4]SETTING:[/h] Two University Medical Centers in The Netherlands.
[h=4]PARTICIPANTS:[/h] Healthcare workers receiving an influenza vaccination.
[h=4]METHODS:[/h] Healthcare workers that were vaccinated during the influenza vaccination season of 2012-2013 were approached for participation in a questionnaire study. The questionnaire was divided into two parts. The first part had to be answered directly after vaccination and the second part two weeks after vaccination. The motivation for vaccine uptake, whether or not the HCWs had direct contact with patients and the prevalence and severity of local and systemic side effects of influenza vaccination were explored. In addition, it was assessed how participants experienced the vaccination and which type of administration they preferred for future vaccination.
[h=4]RESULTS:[/h] Side effects of vaccination were more prevalent in the intradermal group versus the intramuscular group (56% versus 26%, p<0.001). Local side effects were perceived as more severe in healthcare workers receiving the intradermal vaccine. Directly after vaccination, healthcare workers preferred the intradermal vaccination. Two weeks after vaccination both types of vaccine were equally appreciated.
[h=4]CONCLUSIONS:[/h] This study shows that there are significant differences in the nature and severity of side effects upon intramuscular and intradermal influenza vaccination. This difference did not result in a preference among the vaccinated subjects for one type of vaccine.
Copyright ? 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.


[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Health care workers; Influenza; Intradermal; Vaccine

PMID: 28196736 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.01.065
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
 
Back
Top Bottom