Influenza Vaccine Uptake Rate Research Articles

Influenza Vaccination Rates Among Parents and Health Care Personnel in a German Neonatology Department.

The influenza vaccination is recommended for all German pregnant women and health care personnel (HCP). We are the first to publish vaccination rates of mothers of hospitalized newborns and HCP in neonatal units. Between September 2016 and March 2017, data were collected in our level-III neonatology department in this descriptive multidisciplinary study, using an anonymous questionnaire. As a result, 513 persons were asked to participate, including 330 parents and 183 HCP. We received an 80.3% (412/513) response rate, 87.3% (288/330), and 67.8% (124/183) from parents and HCP, respectively. Ten percent (16/160) of mothers and 4.7% (6/127) of fathers had been vaccinated in 2016–2017 and 54.4% (87/160) mothers and 52.2% (66/127) fathers ever in their lifetime. In 2016–2017, 51.2% (21/41) of physicians had been vaccinated, 25.5% (14/55) of nurses, and 50.0% (14/28) of other staff members. When comparing those who had more than five influenza vaccinations in their life time, physicians were at 43.9% (18/41) versus nurses at 10.9% (6/55) (p < 0.01), and other HCP at 7.4% (2/27) (p < 0.01). The influenza vaccine uptake rate of 10% in mothers of hospitalized neonates is disappointingly low, resulting in 90% of hospitalized neonates being potentially vulnerable to influenza infection at a time where the risk for influenza-related complication can be severe.

An assessment of healthcare professionals\u2019 knowledge about and attitude towards influenza vaccination in Freetown Sierra Leone: a cross-sectional study

BackgroundVaccinating healthcare professionals against influenza is considered an effective infection control measure. However, there is a low uptake of influenza vaccine among healthcare professionals around the globe. Currently, it is unknown whether healthcare professionals in Sierra Leone are aware of, and have been vaccinated against influenza. Also, there is a paucity of research evidence on their level of knowledge and attitude toward influenza vaccination. This study assessed healthcare professionals’ current influenza vaccine uptake rate, reasons for not getting vaccinated as well as their awareness, knowledge of, and attitude towards influenza vaccination in Freetown Sierra Leone.MethodA cross-sectional study was conducted between February and April 2016 among healthcare providers working in four public and two private health facilities in Freetown Sierra Leone. Linear regression analysis, one-way ANOVA and independent t-test were employed for data analysis.ResultsAmong 706 respondents that participated in the study more than half were females 378 (53.6%), nurses 425 (60.4%), and the majority were between the age group of 20-39 years 600 (85.3%). Only 46 (6.5%) were vaccinated against influenza. Key reasons for not vaccinated against influenza were less awareness about influenza vaccination among HCPs 580 (82.73%) with (β = 0.154; CI 0.058–0.163), the high cost of influenza vaccines and therefore not normally purchased 392 (55.92%) having (β = 0.150; CI 0.063–0.186). More than half believed that HCPs are less susceptible to influenza infections than other people. Also, majority 585 (84.3%) of HCPs thought that influenza disease could be transmitted after symptoms appear. In addition, 579 (83.2%) of HCPs felt that symptoms usually appear 8–10 days after exposure. Close to half 321 (46.0%) of HCPs were not aware of the influenza immunisation guidelines published by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and Centre for Disease Control.ConclusionInfluenza vaccine coverage among healthcare professionals in Freetown Sierra Leone was low. High cost, inadequate knowledge about influenza and its vaccine as well as the lack of awareness of vaccine availability were key barriers. Increasing access to influenza vaccine and the use of appropriate educational interventions to increase knowledge and awareness are required to improve influenza vaccination coverage among HCPs.

Impact of patient education on influenza vaccine uptake among community-dwelling elderly: a randomized controlled trial.

This randomized controlled trial aimed to test the effectiveness of brief face-to-face patient education in increasing influenza vaccination rate among elderly in the community. Recruitment and intervention were conducted at two general outpatient clinics in Hong Kong. 529 eligible patients were randomly assigned to intervention or control group with 1:1 allocation ratio. Patients in the intervention group received 3-min one-on-one verbal education by medical students and a pamphlet regarding influenza vaccination. Neither verbal health education nor pamphlet was given to the control group. Intention-to-treat analysis showed significantly higher vaccination rate in the intervention group compared with the control group (33.6 versus 25.0%) and the adjusted relative risk was 1.34 (95% CI 1.04-1.72; P = 0.021). Hence, brief face-to-face patient education was effective in increasing influenza vaccine uptake rate of community-dwelling elderly patients. Participants who were undecided whether to receive vaccination seemed to demonstrate larger beneficial effect (RR = 7.84; 95% CI 1.06-57.76) compared with patients who were certain of either receiving (RR = 1.16; 95% CI 0.90-1.48) or not receiving (RR = 2.18; 95% CI 0.68-6.99) the vaccine. The study also revealed that patients' intention for vaccination may not translate into action, reasons for which should be explored in future research.

Student-centered interventions the key to student health care worker influenza vaccination

Abstract Objectives To investigate influenza vaccination uptake rates, attitudes and motivations towards influenza vaccination among student health care workers (HCWs). Material and methods Self-reported influenza vaccination uptake among student HCWs at The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia (UNDAF) was surveyed before and after implementation of a peer-led, student-centered campaign to raise awareness of, and improve access to, influenza vaccination. Data were weighted and analysed using logistic regression. Results Pre-campaign influenza vaccination uptake was 36.3% (95% CI = 31.8%–40.8%), with students identifying lack of awareness of both the Australian Government's recommendations and university policy, cost, and inconvenience of vaccine access as key barriers. Post-campaign vaccination coverage increased significantly to 55.9% (95% CI = 52.2%–59.6%). Multivariate logistic regression, controlled for statistically insignificant confounders of age and gender, showed that being a student HCW in 2014 (campaign year) was significantly and independently associated with influenza vaccination (OR 2.2, 95% CI = 1.7–2.9, P Conclusions Student HCWs' influenza vaccination uptake improved significantly following a low-cost, peer-led promotional campaign. This approach can be adapted to other settings.

Influenza vaccination coverages among high risk subjects and health care workers in Spain. Results of two consecutive National Health Surveys (2011–2014)

ObjectivesWe aim to describe influenza vaccination coverage for the Spanish population using data from two consecutive nation-wide representative health surveys. The data was analysed by high risk groups, health care workers (HCWs) and immigrants. Also, coverage trends were analysed. Material and methodsThe 2011/12 Spanish National Health Survey (N=21,007) and the 2014 European Health Interview Survey for Spain (N=22,842) were analysed. Influenza vaccination status was self-reported. Time trends for were estimated by a multivariate logistic regression model. ResultsOverall vaccination uptake was similar in 2011/12 and 2014, 19.1% and 18.9%, respectively, (p>0.05). 47% of the subjects surveyed were in the groups for which vaccination was recommended with coverages of 41.1% in 2011/12 and 40% in 2014 (p>0.05).In both surveys, uptake among subjects with a chronic disease was three times higher than uptake in subjects who did not have these diseases.In 2011/12 and 2014, 20% and 27.6% of health workers were vaccinated. Subjects born outside Spain were vaccinated less frequently than Spanish-born subjects (9.3% vs 20.4% and 8.9% vs 20%).Within the diseases studied, the best uptake was for patients with heart disease (52.5% in 2011/12 and 51.1% in 2014) and patients with diabetes (50.5% and 51.8%).Multivariate analysis showed that older age, having a chronic disease or being a HCW increases the possibility of being vaccinated whereas being born outside Spain decreased it. ConclusionsSeasonal influenza vaccine uptake rates in the recommended target groups, patients with chronic conditions and health care workers, in Spain are unacceptably low and seem to be stable in the post pandemic seasons. This finding should alert health authorities to the need to work directly with health care providers on the indications for this vaccine and to study strategies that make it possible to increase vaccination uptake.

Disparities in influenza vaccination across the United States: Variability by minority group, Asian sub-populations, socio-economic status, and health insurance coverage

ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to examine the effects of ethnicity, disaggregating Asian Indian from other Asians, health insurance coverage, and nativity on influenza vaccination rates in the United States. Study designNational Health Interview Survey data (2013), collected by the National Center for Health Statistics, were analysed. MethodsMultivariable regression models were used to compute estimates and 95% confidence intervals. ResultsAsian Indians had higher proportions of college graduate rates (mean = 0.85; CI = [0.80, 0.90]) and above-average income (mean = 0.56, CI = [0.48, 0.64]) than both Whites (mean = 0.406; CI = [0.39, 0.42]) and other Asian sub-groups, such as Chinese (mean = 0.544; CI = [0.47, 0.62]) and Filipino Americans (mean = 0.419; CI = [0.35, 0.48]). However, this higher socio-economic status did not uniformly translated into higher vaccine uptake rates. Asian Indian influenza vaccine uptake rate (mean = 0.403; CI = [0.33, 0.47]), while higher than Whites (mean = 0.366; CI = [0.36, 0.38]), were lower than Chinese (mean = 0.435; CI = [0.35, 0.52]) and Filipino Americans (mean = 0.431; CI = [0.37. 0.49]). In regression models, although Asian Indians were significantly more likely to receive the influenza vaccine than White Americans before controlling for health insurance status (OR = 1.38; CI = [1.004, 1.899]), when coverage was included, effects of race and ethnicity were eliminated (OR = 1.24; CI = [0.897, 1.705]). ConclusionHealth disparities research often analyses Asians as a homogenous mass; however, the availability of disaggregated data allows researchers to parse effects leading to nuanced findings which highlight behavioural diversity within groups. Findings may inform the development of targeted interventions by public health practitioners and adjustments to polices designed to improve health insurance coverage in racial and ethnic minorities, regardless of citizenship status, leading to enhanced population health.

Voluntary Influenza Vaccination Uptake Rates and Reasons for Refusal

Voluntary Influenza Vaccination Uptake Rates and Reasons for Refusal

Strategies to Improve Influenza Vaccination Uptake Rates Among Healthcare Workers in a Malaysian Tertiary Hospital

Strategies to Improve Influenza Vaccination Uptake Rates Among Healthcare Workers in a Malaysian Tertiary Hospital

Parents’ decision making regarding influenza vaccination among children with chronic medical conditions

Background: Children with chronic medical conditions are at risk of developing influenza infection. Evidence has suggested that targeting high-risk children for influenza vaccination will result in reduction in complications associated with influenza, school absenteeism, parental work loss, and health care costs. Despite the recommendations, influenza vaccination uptake among children remains low. Objective: The study was to examine the parents’ decision making process regarding seasonal influenza vaccination for their children with chronic medical conditions. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted. The Chinese version of the questionnaire developed by Daley et al. (2006) based on the Health Belief Model was used to examine the parents’ perceived susceptibility of their children to influenza, perceived severity of influenza, and perceived risks, benefits of and barriers to vaccination. Results: A convenience sample of 623 parents with children aged below 18 years and had chronic medical conditions such as respiratory, heart, metabolic or kidney diseases were recruited from the paediatric wards and specialty outpatient departments in two acute hospitals in Hong Kong. The mean age of the parents was 40.1 (SD = 8.1) years. The seasonal influenza vaccine uptake rate was 33% in the past 12 months. Thirty-nine percent of the parents indicated that their children were susceptible to influenza. Based on the Health Belief Model, multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that the uptake was significantly correlated with the parents’ perceived susceptibility of their child to influenza, and perceived risks, benefits of, and barriers to vaccination. Discussion: The seasonal influenza vaccine uptake rate among children with chronic medical conditions was low. The health belief in particular the perceived benefits of vaccination is an important factor influencing parental decisions regarding vaccination. Conclusion: The findings could inform the development of theory-based community-based interventions to promote the uptake of influenza vaccination among children with chronic conditions.

Negative trends from 2008/9 to 2011/12 seasons in influenza vaccination coverages among high risk subjects and health care workers in Spain

ObjectivesWe aim to describe influenza vaccination coverage for the Spanish population across four consecutive campaigns (2008/2009 to 2011/2012). The data was analyzed by high risk groups and health care workers (HCWs). Also, coverage trends were analyzed to assess uptake in post-pandemic seasons. MethodsWe used data from two nation-wide representative health surveys namely the 2009/10 European Health Interview Survey for Spain (N=22,188) and the 2011–12 Spanish National Health Survey (N=21,007) Influenza vaccination status was self-reported. We analyzed influenza vaccine coverage by age, sex, number of chronic conditions, being a heath care worker (HCWs) and nationality. Time trends for campaigns among high risk groups were estimated by a multivariate logistic regression model. ResultsWe analyzed data from 43,072 subjects aged ≥16 years. As a whole, coverage decreased by 3.31% (22.57–19.26%) between the 2008/2009 and 2011/2012 campaigns with a significant decreasing trend (OR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.90–0.94).Coverage in people under 60 years with a chronic disease decreased significantly (OR 0.92: 95% CI: 0.85–0.99) during the analyzed period from 21.02% in 2008/2009 to 17.40% in 2011/2012. Among HCWs, the highest influenza vaccination coverage was achieved in 2009/2010 (31.08%) in the latest campaign coverage has almost halved (17.88%). For the 2011/2012 season and for all age groups the variables associated with a higher probability of having received the influenza vaccine were older age and presence of associated chronic conditions. Among those aged ≥60 years, immigrants had lower uptake (OR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.32–0.99). ConclusionsSeasonal influenza vaccine uptake rates in the recommended target groups in Spain are unacceptably low and seem to be decreasing in the post pandemic seasons. Further studies are necessary to precisely identify reasons for non-compliance and barriers to influenza vaccination. Meanwhile urgent strategies to improve seasonal vaccination uptake must be discussed and implemented.

Oseltamivir Use in Adolescents and Adults: Clinical and Economic Considerations

Influenza remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality, and incurs substantial economic costs (mainly due to hospitalisation) especially for the elderly aged 65 years or more, and among those with high-risk medical conditions. Influenza vaccination is the most effective control measure for both healthy populations and the chronically ill in whom complications of influenza cluster. Unfortunately, vaccination is less effective in the elderly and immunocompromised persons. Additional benefit may accrue from other health care interventions including antiviral therapy. Oseltamivir, a neuraminidase inhibitor, has become a drug of public health importance since it was included in influenza pandemic management plans. Many systematic reviews and meta-analyses of oseltamivir treatment and prophylaxis trials have been published. We provide a summary of the conclusions and review the various findings of economic analyses. Future randomised controlled trials should focus upon costly outcomes such as hospital admissions and should be conducted in populations at high risk of complications from influenza. Future economic analyses need to address variation in (1) willing-to-pay value, (2) annual attack rate of influenza, and (3) influenza vaccination effectiveness and uptake rates.

Review: interventions to increase influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in hospitals

Please cite this paper as: Hollmeyer et al. (2012) Review: interventions to increase influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in hospitals. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 7(4), 604–621.Annual influenza vaccination rates among hospital healthcare workers (HCW) are almost universally low despite recommendations from WHO and public health authorities in many countries. To assist in the development of successful vaccination programmes, we reviewed studies where interventions aimed to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination among hospital HCW. We searched PUBMED from 1990 up to December 2011 for publications with predetermined search strategies and of pre‐defined criteria for inclusion or exclusion. We evaluated a large number of ‘intervention programmes’ each employing one or more ‘intervention components’ or strategies, such as easy access to vaccine or educational activities, with the goal to raise influenza vaccine uptake rates in hospital HCW during one influenza season. Included studies reported results of intervention programmes and compared the uptake with the season prior to the intervention (historical control) or to another intervention programme within the same season that started from the same set of baseline activities. Twenty‐five studies performed in eight countries met our selection criteria and described 45 distinct intervention programmes. Most studies used their own facility as historical control and evaluated only one season. The following elements were used in intervention programmes that increased vaccine uptake: provision of free vaccine, easy access to the vaccine (e.g. through mobile carts or on‐site vaccination), knowledge and behaviour modification through educational activities and/or reminders and/or incentives, management or organizational changes, such as the assignment of personnel dedicated to the intervention programme, long‐term implementation of the strategy, requiring active declination and mandatory immunization policies. The number of these components applied appeared to be proportional to the increase in uptake. If influenza uptake in hospital HCW is to be increased on sustained basis, hospital managers need to be committed to conduct a well‐designed long‐term intervention programme that includes a variety of co‐ordinated managerial and organizational elements.

Factors associated with uptake of seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccine among clinical risk groups in the UK: An analysis using the General Practice Research Database

Influenza vaccine uptake rates are low compared with uptake rates of many other vaccines. It is unclear how this differs between risk groups in the population and between pandemic and non-pandemic influenza vaccines. This study sought to estimate uptake rates of pandemic and seasonal influenza vaccines among clinical risk groups in the UK during the 2009/2010 influenza season and to identify predictors of vaccine uptake in this cohort. Uptake rates were calculated using data from the UK General Practice Research Database (GPRD). Predictors of vaccination were identified using a modified Poisson regression with robust standard error estimates. Uptake of pandemic influenza vaccine in clinical risk groups was 40.3% and uptake of seasonal influenza vaccine was 61.3%. Factors found to be predictive of seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccination included age and the total number of underlying health conditions an individual had. At risk individuals in those age groups in which universal vaccination of the general population was recommended were more likely to have been vaccinated than individuals in age groups in which only clinical risk groups were recommended for vaccination; hence children in clinical risk groups were more likely to receive pandemic than seasonal influenza vaccine. In older people, having a history of Guillain Barré syndrome was associated with a reduced likelihood of receipt of both seasonal (IRR(adj) 0.83, CI(95) 0.77-0.90) and pandemic influenza vaccines (IRR(adj) 0.82, CI(95) 0.73-0.92). Uptake of pandemic influenza vaccine was lower than that of seasonal influenza vaccine among those at a clinically high risk of influenza related morbidity. This suggests that vaccination strategies may need to be altered during future pandemics. Recommending universal vaccination within age categories in which there is a large proportion of high risk individuals could be considered as this may result in higher uptake among clinical risk groups.

Promotion of seasonal influenza vaccination among staff in residential care homes for elderly in Hong Kong

Annual influenza epidemics continue to cause worldwide morbidity, mortality and societal disruption, especially among the aged residents of residential care homes for the elderly (RCHEs). Vaccination remains the most effective measure to prevent influenza and its associated complications. The seasonal influenza vaccine uptake rates among RCHE staff were much lower than that among residents. In order to increase uptake of influenza vaccination among RCHE staff in Hong Kong, this study developed and evaluated amultimodal vaccine promotion program (VPP) based on identified factors affecting vaccination acceptance or refusal within the Hong Kong Chinese context. Vaccine acceptance was found to be significantly associated with belief in vaccine efficacy, duration of service, staff group and providing direct care to residents. The focus group study revealed that RCHE staff's belief in the efficacy and safety of the vaccine played a major role in vaccine acceptance. VPP effectiveness was evaluated with a cluster randomised controlled trial among RCHEs with staff vaccination rates below 50%. Compared with 2008/09, the 2009/10 mean staff vaccination rates increased significantly in both the intervention (39.4% to 59.6% (P<0.001)) and control groups (36.3% to 47.6% (P=0.008)). RCHE staff in the intervention group had a higher vaccination rate than in the control group (59.6% versus 47.6%, P=0.072). This program reinforces the importance of a comprehensive and culturally sensitive approach to promote influenza vaccination for RCHE staff.

Influenza vaccination uptake among students and clinical staff of a university in Iran

To identify barriers to our occupational health and safety influenza vaccination program for clinical staff at the Shiraz University of Medical Science. Between November 2005 and February 2006, a random stratified sample of 884 healthcare workers (HCWs) from three university teaching hospitals were asked to complete a study questionnaire. The influenza vaccine uptake rate for the current season was 5.2%. The most common reason for uptake was a belief that the nature of their work made them susceptible to influenza (73%). Reasons for not being vaccinated included: vaccine not available (35%), had little information on vaccine safety (16%), influenza is not a serious disease (14%), and immunization was not needed (13%). HCWs who believed they were at risk of influenza (mean 15.3 vs. 11.1, p = 0.007) and that the vaccine is effective against influenza (mean 16.7 vs. 12.4, p = 0.02) had significantly higher knowledge scores compared with others who did not hold these beliefs about their own vulnerability and the efficacy of the vaccine. Males were more likely than females to intend not to be vaccinated next season (OR = 2.9, p = 0.031), and those vaccinated for the current season were more likely to intend to be vaccinated next season (OR = 5.5, p = 0.002). HCWs who recommended the vaccine to family/co-workers and to their patients were also more likely (OR = 9.8, p = 0.000 and OR = 2.4, p = 0.000, respectively) to intend to be vaccinated next season. Convenient and free vaccination programs will increase influenza vaccination rates. To protect our HCWs and their patients, we need extensive and sustained efforts to increase HCW awareness about their vulnerability to influenza and the efficacy of the influenza vaccine.

SURVEY OF INFLUENZA IMMUNISATION UPTAKE IN ‘HIGH RISK’ CHILDREN

24 January 2006 Dear Editor, In Australia, influenza vaccine is recommended for children aged >6 months considered at risk of severe influenza, with (i) chronic cardiac disease; (ii) chronic suppurative lung disease, e.g. cystic fibrosis (CF); (iii) chronic illness; (iv) immune deficiency; and (v) residents of long-term care facilities.1 Two doses of influenza vaccine are recommended for first-time recipients < 10 years old.1 Influenza vaccine uptake rates in Australia for high risk children are unknown. In 2004/2005, we performed a cross-sectional, retrospective survey of 74 high-risk children aged between 6 months to 18 years for whom influenza vaccine is recommended.1 Numbers according to category were as follows: (i) cardiac, n = 14; (ii) cystic fibrosis, n = 20; (iii) chronic illness, n = 20; and (iv) immunodeficiency, including cancer, n = 20. The method of recruitment varied with each group and was tailored to the individual departments. Patients were randomly selected while waiting in the outpatients department for a consultation (chronic medical illness including diabetes, haemoglobinopathy, chronic liver disease, metabolic disease) or on the inpatient ward (cardiac); or were randomly selected from a patient list (oncology, cystic fibrosis) and telephoned at home. The first 20 telephoned who were at home were included in the survey. The recruitment rate of eligible patients was high, with only one parent refusing to participate. Telephone recruitment proved a faster, more effective method of recruitment. Additional information regarding cardiac disease and Schwachman score (for CF) was obtained from medical records. Overall, 31 (42%) of the 74 study children had received influenza vaccine in 2004: 11/20 (55%) immuno-compromised children; 10/20 (50%) children with cystic fibrosis; 5/14 (35%) children with chronic cardiac disease and 5/20 (25%) children with chronic illness were immunised against influenza. These differences were not statistically significant by χ-square analysis. Five of seven children given influenza vaccine for the first time in 2004 were <10 years old, and should have received two doses, but all were given only one dose. Only two families reported adverse events, one fever and one mild upper respiratory symptoms. The reasons that 43 children did not receive the vaccine in 2004 are shown in the Table 1. Of those 31 who did receive the vaccine, 17 (55%) were advised to do so by a treating specialist, 16 of them by subspecialist paediatricians and one by a general paediatrician. Eight were advised to have the vaccination by their GPs, four by a family member, one by ‘other’ and one by no-one. Disease severity did not influence uptake. There was no significant difference in vaccination uptake between children with and without haemodynamically significant cardiac disease, and no difference in the mean Shwachman scores of the vaccinated and unvaccinated children with cystic fibrosis (vaccinated, mean = 79; unvaccinated, mean = 80). Influenza vaccination uptake in high-risk children at this Australian tertiary institution is poor. No child <10 years old who received vaccine for the first time received the recommended two doses. Rates of vaccination have not been studied in children in Australia previously, but are consistent with the uptake rates in high-risk Australian adults.2 We are making every effort to educate our staff and parents about the benefits of influenza immunisation and the dangers of influenza.

Does a population survey provide reliable influenza vaccine uptake rates among high-risk groups? A case-study of The Netherlands

All European countries have recommendations for influenza vaccination among the elderly and chronically ill. However, only a few countries are able to provide data on influenza uptake among these groups. The aim of our study is to investigate whether a population survey is an effective method of obtaining vaccination uptake rates in the different risk groups and to find out what reasons people give as to why they have accepted or refused influenza vaccination and whether this varies among the risk groups. A mail questionnaire was sent out to households in The Netherlands, the response rate was 73%. This resulted in data for 4037 individuals on influenza and influenza vaccination during the 2001–2002 influenza season. The uptake rates and size of different risk groups from the panel survey were comparable with other national representative sources (from the National Information Network of GPs (LINH) and Statistics Netherlands (CBS)). The main reason cited for undergoing vaccination was the existence of a chronic condition. The main reasons for refraining from vaccination were having enough resistance to flu and ignorance about the recommendations. In The Netherlands, the GP is the main administrator of influenza vaccines. We believe that population surveys may be useful for revealing influenza vaccination uptake rates for the groups at risk. When combined with questions about reasons for undergoing vaccination, the results may provide useful policy information and can be used to direct vaccination campaigns at under-vaccinated risk groups or to target the information campaign more effectively.

Does a population survey provide reliable influenza vaccine uptake rates among high-risk groups? A case-study of The Netherlands

All European countries have recommendations for influenza vaccination among the elderly and chronically ill. However, only a few countries are able to provide data on influenza uptake among these groups. The aim of our study is to investigate whether a population survey is an effective method of obtaining vaccination uptake rates in the different risk groups and to find out what reasons people give as to why they have accepted or refused influenza vaccination and whether this varies among the risk groups. A mail questionnaire was sent out to households in The Netherlands, the response rate was 73%. This resulted in data for 4037 individuals on influenza and influenza vaccination during the 2001–2002 influenza season. The uptake rates and size of different risk groups from the panel survey were comparable with other national representative sources (from the National Information Network of GPs (LINH) and Statistics Netherlands (CBS)). The main reason cited for undergoing vaccination was the existence of a chronic condition. The main reasons for refraining from vaccination were having enough resistance to flu and ignorance about the recommendations. In The Netherlands, the GP is the main administrator of influenza vaccines. We believe that population surveys may be useful for revealing influenza vaccination uptake rates for the groups at risk. When combined with questions about reasons for undergoing vaccination, the results may provide useful policy information and can be used to direct vaccination campaigns at under-vaccinated risk groups or to target the information campaign more effectively.