• 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.

J Am Coll Health . Intramuscular versus intradermal administration for influenza vaccination in college students: A pilot study

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Am Coll Health


. 2021 Dec 6;1-4.
doi: 10.1080/07448481.2021.1996371. Online ahead of print.
Intramuscular versus intradermal administration for influenza vaccination in college students: A pilot study


Carrie Ann Hall[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Christy Skelly[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Nancy Marc[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Judy Risko[SUP] 1 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

College student populations are considered at greater risk of contracting influenza due to their close living conditions. Despite this increased risk, college students are reluctant to obtain annual vaccination. This pilot study sought to determine perceptions of students on a college campus who received the annual influenza vaccination via an intradermal route. Participants and methods: Forty-nine college students participated in the IRB approved study. After receiving the intradermal influenza vaccination, participants completed a demographic survey and vaccination perceptions questionnaire. Results: Participants were more likely to want to have an intradermal injection in the future and reported less pain with the intradermal injection. Additionally, individuals who reported greater pain with the intramuscular injection in the past were significantly more likely to want to receive an intradermal injection in the future (p < 0.019). Conclusions: Results suggest that intradermal route of vaccination may be more appealing to the college population.

Keywords: College health; influenza vaccination; intradermal vaccination; preventative care; vaccination routes.
 
Back
Top Bottom