Abstract

BackgroundManaging emerging vaccine safety signals during an influenza pandemic is challenging. Federal regulators must balance vaccine risks against benefits while maintaining public confidence in the public health system.MethodsWe developed a multi-criteria decision analysis model to explore regulatory decision-making in the context of emerging vaccine safety signals during a pandemic. We simulated vaccine safety surveillance system capabilities and used an age-structured compartmental model to develop potential pandemic scenarios. We used an expert-derived multi-attribute utility function to evaluate potential regulatory responses by combining four outcome measures into a single measure of interest: 1) expected vaccination benefit from averted influenza; 2) expected vaccination risk from vaccine-associated febrile seizures; 3) expected vaccination risk from vaccine-associated Guillain-Barre Syndrome; and 4) expected change in vaccine-seeking behavior in future influenza seasons.ResultsOver multiple scenarios, risk communication, with or without suspension of vaccination of high-risk persons, were the consistently preferred regulatory responses over no action or general suspension when safety signals were detected during a pandemic influenza. On average, the expert panel valued near-term vaccine-related outcomes relative to long-term projected outcomes by 3∶1. However, when decision-makers had minimal ability to influence near-term outcomes, the response was selected primarily by projected impacts on future vaccine-seeking behavior.ConclusionsThe selected regulatory response depends on how quickly a vaccine safety signal is identified relative to the peak of the pandemic and the initiation of vaccination. Our analysis suggested two areas for future investment: efforts to improve the size and timeliness of the surveillance system and behavioral research to understand changes in vaccine-seeking behavior.

Highlights

  • Responding to influenza vaccine safety signals experienced during a pandemic is a scientific and public policy challenge

  • We developed a multi-criteria decision analysis model to explore regulatory decision-making in the context of emerging vaccine safety signals during a pandemic

  • None have considered regulatory responses to vaccine safety signals emerging during the course of a mass vaccination program. We addressed this gap using a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) that explored regulatory decision-making in the context of emerging vaccine safety signals experienced during pandemic influenza

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Responding to influenza vaccine safety signals experienced during a pandemic is a scientific and public policy challenge. In 1976, after initiating a National Influenza Immunization Program in response to a localized swine flu outbreak, federal authorities suspended vaccination after ten weeks because preliminary surveillance suggested that the incidence of Guillain-Barre Syndrome was approximately seven-fold greater among vaccinees [1]. Given that this particular swine flu virus was never isolated outside of Fort Dix [2], the benefit-risk calculus appears simple in hindsight. Methods: We developed a multi-criteria decision analysis model to explore regulatory decision-making in the context of emerging vaccine safety signals during a pandemic. When decision-makers had minimal ability to influence near-term outcomes, the response was selected primarily by projected impacts on future vaccine-seeking behavior

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call