Staff Vaccination Rates Research Articles

The Relationship of Vaccine Uptake and COVID-19 Infections Among Nursing Home Staff and Residents in Missouri: A Measure of Risk by Community Mobility.

As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed across the United States, older adults living in nursing home (NH) facilities were disproportionately affected because of living in communal spaces with close proximity to others, age-related medical conditions, and constant contact with staff who may support multiple clients and facilities. While these populations are particularly at risk, there has been limited research focused on the management of the potential vectors of COVID-19 infection. Data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) COVID-19 reporting system assessing weekly observations of COVID-19 case counts among NH residents and COVID-19 vaccination rates among NH staff and residents in the states of Missouri and Illinois (n = 877) from May 24, 2021, to August 28, 2021, were used. This ecological study, using results from the CMS COVID-19 reporting system, local COVID-19 rates, and NH-level demographic characteristics, conducted a zero inflation mode to determine the association between NH staff vaccine uptake and COVID-19 cases among NH residents. Among the total 11 195 weekly observations within the NH facilities, zero cases of COVID-19 were reported during 10 683 (95%) of those weeks, supporting the use of a zero-inflated model. Results show that staff vaccination rates were significantly associated with a decrease in COVID-19 mortality. This study identified that for every percentage increase in staff vaccine coverage, the rate of COVID-19 among residents decreased by 2%. These findings suggest that NH staff vaccination rates are significantly associated with the rate of COVID-19 outbreaks among NH residents. Community median income was associated with an increased likelihood of infection. Future research that explores associations with employment benefits and staff mobility, particularly in vulnerable populations, should be implemented in future vaccination strategic planning.

Identifying COVID-19 clusters in Tennessee long-term care facilities based on weekly staff vaccination rates

Background: In September 2021, the CMS mandated that long-term care facility (LTCF) healthcare workers be vaccinated for COVID-19 unless medically or religiously exempt. Vaccinating healthcare workers reduces transmission of COVID-19 among patients and workers, reducing the risk of illness among residents and patients. We examined the relationship between COVID-19 clusters and staff vaccination rates in Tennessee LTCFs. Methods: COVID-19 cluster data were collected using REDCap from January 3, 2021, to September 25, 2022, and LTCF vaccination rates were collected from the NHSN. Clusters were identified in facilities with 2 or more cases. The staff vaccination rate 2 weeks prior to the cluster was used, accounting for the lag time between vaccination dose and reaching full immunity. We selected 75% as the critical immunization threshold. The facility case rate was calculated per 100 beds. A test was performed to determine whether reaching the critical vaccination threshold was associated with cluster occurrence. The relationship between vaccination rate and case number was tested using Pearson correlation. Statistical analyses were conducted using SAS version 9.4 software. Results: The average staff vaccination rate when NHSN first required long-term care facilities to report rates rose from 47% in June 2021 to 83% in September 2022. In total, 806 clusters were identified with 20,868 combined weeks from all facilities being reported after merging facilities’ weekly vaccine percentage rates with cluster data. Most weeks from all facilities did not identify a cluster (n = 20,064, 96.15%) and did not meet the critical immunization threshold (n = 11,050, 52.95%). The association between a cluster occurring and a facility meeting the threshold was significant (χ2 = 5.41; df = 1; P 95% CI, .7327–.9740). The Pearson correlation coefficient between vaccination rate and case number was 0.05560 (P = .2894). Conclusions: There was a significant association between facilities not reaching the immunization threshold and presence of a COVID-19 cluster. The facility case rate was not correlated with staff vaccination rate; however, a limitation of this analysis was that resident vaccination was not tested. Another limitation was that medical and religious exemptions could not be differentiated. Healthcare staff should consider getting vaccinated, if able, to reduce the risk of COVID-19 and to keep staff and residents safe from COVID-19.Disclosures: None

Evidence on the Effects of the Federal COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate on Nursing Home Staffing Levels.

To assess the federal COVID-19 vaccine mandate's effects on nursing homes' nurse aide and licensed nurse staffing levels in states both with and without state-level vaccine mandates. Cross-sectional study using data from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Economic Innovation Group. Including nursing home facility fixed effects provides evidence on the intertemporal effects of the federal vaccine mandate within nursing homes. The sample contains 15,031 nursing homes, representing all US nursing homes with available data. On January 13, 2022, the US Supreme Court upheld the federal COVID-19 vaccine mandate for health care workers in Medicare- and Medicaid-eligible facilities, with workers generally required to be vaccinated by March 20, 2022 (ie, the compliance date). We examined actual nursing home staffing levels in 3 time periods: (1) pre-Court decision; (2) precompliance date; and (3) postcompliance date. We separately examined staffing levels for nurse aides and licensed nursing staff. Because 28% of nursing homes were in states with state-imposed vaccine mandates that predated the Supreme Court's ruling, we divided the sample into 2 groups (nursing homes in mandate states vs nonmandate states) and performed all analyses separately. Staff vaccination rates and staffing levels were higher in mandate states than nonmandate states in all 3 time periods. After the Court's decision, staff vaccination rates increased 5% in nonmandate states and 1% in mandate states (on average). We find little evidence that the Court's vaccine mandate ruling materially affected nurse aide and licensed nurse staffing levels, or that nursing homes in mandate states and nonmandate states were differentially affected by the Court's ruling. Staffing levels over time were generally flat, with some evidence of a modestly greater increase for nurse aide staffing in mandate states than nonmandate states, and a modestly smaller decrease for licensed nurse staffing in mandate states than nonmandate states. Finally, regression results suggest that for both nurse aides and licensed nurses, staffing levels were lower in rural and for-profit nursing homes, and higher in Medicare-only, higher quality, and hospital-based nursing homes. Results suggest the federal COVID-19 vaccine mandate has not caused clinically material changes in nursing home's nurse aide and licensed nurse staffing levels, which continue to be primarily associated with factors that are well-known to researchers and practitioners.

Association of COVID-19 Vaccination Rates of Staff and COVID-19 Illness and Death Among Residents and Staff in US Nursing Homes

It is important to understand the association between staff vaccination rates and adverse COVID-19 outcomes in nursing homes. To assess the extent to which staff vaccination was associated with preventing COVID-19 cases and deaths among residents and staff in nursing homes. This longitudinal cohort study used data on COVID-19 outcomes in Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing homes in the US between May 30, 2021, and January 30, 2022. Participants included the residents of 15 042 US nursing homes that reported COVID-19 data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and passed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data quality checks in the National Healthcare Safety Network. Weekly staff vaccination rates. Main outcomes are weekly COVID-19 cases and deaths among residents and weekly COVID-19 cases among staff. The treatment variable is the primary 2-dose staff vaccination rate in each facility each week. In the primary analysis of 15 042 nursing homes before the Omicron variant wave (May 30 to December 5, 2021) using fixed effects of facility and week, increasing weekly staff vaccination rates by 10 percentage points was associated with 0.13 (95% CI, -0.20 to -0.10) fewer weekly COVID-19 cases per 1000 residents, 0.02 (95% CI, -0.03 to -0.01) fewer weekly COVID-19 deaths per 1000 residents, and 0.03 (95% CI, -0.04 to -0.02) fewer weekly COVID-19 staff cases. In the secondary analysis of the Omicron wave (December 5, 2021, to January 30, 2022), increasing staff vaccination rates were not associated with lower rates of adverse COVID-19 outcomes in nursing homes. The findings of this cohort study suggest that before the Omicron variant wave, increasing staff vaccination rates was associated with lower incidence of COVID-19 cases and deaths among residents and staff in US nursing homes. However, as newer, more infectious and transmissible variants of the virus emerged, the original 2-dose regimen of the COVID-19 vaccine as recommended in December 2020 was no longer associated with lower rates of adverse COVID-19 outcomes in nursing homes. Policy makers may want to consider longer-term policy options to increase the uptake of booster doses among staff in nursing homes.

STRATEGIES FOR SUPPORTING NURSING HOMES IN THE PANDEMIC RECOVERY AND BEYOND

Abstract Best practice strategies are needed to address current and ongoing COVID-19 challenges for nursing home (NH) staff, residents, and families, including vaccine-related issues and staff, resident, and family mental health. Saint Louis University and University of Iowa Geriatrics Workforce Enhancement Programs along with Show-Me ECHO have engaged NH, community, and clinician stakeholders to identify and prioritize gaps in education/support needs, target audiences, and delivery methods. We conducted interviews with stakeholders at all levels of NH staff, community professionals, family members, and professional organizations to identify and prioritize needs. Guided by these findings and advisory groups at partner organizations, the collaborative developed outreach and curriculum strategies targeted to prioritized needs. This presentation emphasizes strategies for stakeholder engagement, identifying education/support needs, and outreach to NH workforce and care partners, and experiences and lessons learned in increasing staff vaccination rates will be shared. Implications for future policy and advocacy are highlighted.

Implementing mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for Australian aged care workers.

Implementing mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for Australian aged care workers.

Role of Occupational Health Services in Planning and Implementing of Staff COVID-19 Vaccination Clinic: A Tertiary Hospital Experience in Singapore.

Healthcare workers all over the world were prioritized for vaccination against COVID-19 in view of the high-risk nature of their job scopes when vaccines were first available in late 2020. Vaccine hesitancy was an important problem to tackle in order to achieve a high vaccination rate, especially for vaccines that were developed using mRNA technology. We aimed to use the '3Cs' model to address vaccine hesitancy to ensure maximal uptake of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine among healthcare workers in a tertiary hospital in Singapore. Various measures were used to reduce the confidence, complacency, and convenience barriers. The staff vaccination clinic was on-site and centralized, with appointments given in advance to ensure vaccine availability and to reduce wait time, providing convenience to staff. Direct and repeated communications with the staff via multiple channels were used to address vaccine safety and efficacy so as to promote confidence in the vaccines and overcome complacency barriers. To further encourage staff to get vaccinated, staff were allowed time off for vaccination when at work. Staff with a high risk of exposure to COVID-19 or those caring for immunocompromised patients were prioritized to take the vaccines first. The collection of data on adverse events was via on-site monitoring and consultation at Occupational Health Clinic (OHC). Nearly 80% of staff had completed vaccination when the vaccination exercise ended at the end of March 2021. With the loosening of the contraindications to vaccination over time, staff vaccination rates reached 89.3% in early July and nearly 99.9% by the end of the year. No major or serious vaccine-related medication or administration errors were reported. No staff had anaphylaxis. By using the '3Cs' model to plan out the vaccination exercise, it is possible to achieve a high vaccination rate coupled with effective and customized communications. This multi-disciplinary team approach can be adapted to guide vaccination efforts in various settings in future pandemics.

Racial Disparities in Nursing Home Resident and Staff COVID-19 Vaccination Rates.

To determine whether staff and resident COVID-19 vaccination rates varied by racial heterogeneity of nursing homes, defined as proportion of residents who are White. Cross-sectional study using data from the Medicare COVID-19 Nursing Home Database and LTCFocus.org to examine facility-level resident and staff vaccination status. General linear regression models assessed analyses of variance and tests for trend on proportion of residents and staff fully vaccinated as of June 13, 2021 by proportion of White residents in each facility. Over 12,000 (n=12,278) nursing homes provided resident measures and 8,838 reported staff measures. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) resident vaccination rate of nursing homes in the lowest and highest quantiles of White residents was significantly different at 72.74% (20.59%) and 85.65% (16.70%), respectively. Staff vaccination rates of nursing homes in the lowest and highest quantiles of White residents were not significantly different at 58.34% (25.09%) and 56.06% (19.32%), respectively. A higher proportion of White residents per facility was associated with higher resident COVID-19 vaccination rates reflecting continued disparities in quality of care during the pandemic.

Association of State COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates With Staff Vaccination Coverage and Staffing Shortages in US Nursing Homes

Several states implemented COVID-19 vaccine mandates for nursing home employees, which may have improved vaccine coverage but may have had the unintended consequence of staff departures. To assess whether state vaccine mandates for US nursing home employees are associated with staff vaccination rates and reported staff shortages. This cohort study performed event study analyses using National Healthcare Safety Network data from June 6, 2021, through November 14, 2021. Changes in weekly staff vaccination rates and reported staffing shortages were evaluated for nursing homes in states with mandates after the mandate announcement compared with changes in facilities in nonmandate states. An interaction between the mandates and county political leaning was considered. Data analysis was performed from February to March 2022. Weeks after announcement of a state's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Weekly percentage of all health care staff at a nursing home who received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccine dose, and a weekly indicator of whether a nursing home reported a staffing shortage. Among 38 study-eligible states, 26 had no COVID-19 vaccine mandate for nursing home employees, 4 had a mandate with a test-out option, and 8 had a mandate with no test-out option. Ten weeks or more after mandate announcement, nursing homes in states with a mandate and no test-out option experienced a 6.9 percentage point (pp) increase in staff vaccination coverage (95% CI, -0.1 to 13.9); nursing homes in mandate states with a test-out option experienced a 3.1 pp increase (95% CI, 0.5 to 5.7) compared with facilities in nonmandate states. No significant increases were detected in the frequency of reported staffing shortages after a mandate announcement in mandate states with or without test-out options. Increases in vaccination rates in states with mandates were larger in Republican-leaning counties (14.3 pp if no test-out option; 4.3 pp with option), and there was no evidence of increased staffing shortages. The findings of this cohort study suggest that state-level vaccine mandates were associated with increased staff vaccination coverage without increases in reported staffing shortages. Vaccination increases were largest when mandates had no test-out option and were also larger in Republican-leaning counties, which had lower mean baseline vaccination rates. These findings support the use of state mandates for booster doses for nursing home employees because they may improve vaccine coverage, even in areas with greater vaccine hesitancy.

Influenza vaccination of home health care staff and the impact on patient hospitalizations

BackgroundInfluenza is associated with significant morbidity and mortality for adults aged 65 years and older. Influenza vaccination of health care workers is recommended. There is limited evidence regarding influenza vaccinations among health care workers in the home health care (HHC) setting and their impact on HHC patient outcomes. MethodsA national survey of HHC agencies was conducted in 2018-2019 and linked with patient data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Adjusted logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between hospital transfers due to respiratory infection during a 60 day HHC episode and staff vaccination policies. ResultsOnly 26.2% of HHC agencies had staff vaccination requirements and 71.2% agencies had staff vaccination rates higher than 75%. Agency policies for staff influenza vaccination were associated with reduced hospital transfers due to respiratory infection among HHC patients. DiscussionInfluenza vaccination rates among HHC staff were low during the 2017-2018 influenza season. Policymakers may consider vaccination mandates to improve health care worker vaccination rates and protect patient safety. ConclusionsThis study sheds light on the potential impact of COVID-19 vaccination among HHC workers on patient outcomes. COVID-19 vaccination mandates could prove to be a vital tool in the fight against COVID-19 variants and infection outbreaks.

COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Among Nursing Home Staff via Statewide Policy: The Mississippi Vaccinate or Test Out Policy.

Objectives. To examine whether COVID-19 vaccine mandates that allow a test-out exemption for nursing home staff are associated with increased staff vaccination rates in nursing homes. Methods. Using the National Healthcare Safety Network data, we conducted analyses to test trends over time in statewide staff vaccination rates between June 1, 2021, and August 29, 2021, in Mississippi, 4 adjacent states, and the United States overall. Results. COVID-19 staff vaccination rates increased slowly following Mississippi enacting a vaccinate-or-test-out policy, achieving small, but statistically greater gains than most comparator states. Yet, staff vaccination rates in Mississippi remained well below the national average and similar numerically to surrounding states without mandates. Conclusions. Mississippi's COVID-19 vaccinate-or-test policy was ineffective in meaningfully increasing staff vaccination rates. For COVID-19 nursing home mandates to be effective while still balancing the staff turnover risks, facilities might consider a more stringent or hybrid approach (e.g., test-out option not offered to new staff). Public Health Implications. Statewide COVID-19 vaccine mandates, when given a test-out option, do not appear to be an effective strategy to meaningfully increase nursing home staff COVID-19 vaccination. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(5):762-765. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306800).

Implementation of a Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination Condition of Employment in a Community Nursing Home

The rate of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination uptake by US nursing home staff remains low despite the increased risks of viral transmission and related morbidity and mortality in this setting. This study describes vaccine uptake activities including a COVID-19 vaccination condition of employment (COE) policy in one community nursing home. This case study summarizes the timeline of vaccination uptake activities, staff vaccination rates over time, and stakeholder perspectives around the implementation of a COVID-19 vaccination COE. Organizational data were used to calculate vaccination rates from January 1, 2021 until May 1, 2021 among all nursing home staff. Interviews were held with the executive leadership team, human resources leadership, and nursing home staff to understand the process of implementation. During a 4-month period, nursing home leaders provided 8 written handouts about COVID-19 to all staff, hosted 5 on-site vaccination clinics in partnership with area pharmacies, conducted 2 virtual presentations for staff in addition to individual outreach and internal communications. Fewer than one-half of the staff were vaccinated prior to the decision to pursue a vaccine COE on February 9, 2021. The decision to pursue a COVID-19 vaccination COE was supported by executive leadership and nursing home staff to protect the health and safety of each other and their residents. By May 1, 2021 a total of 221 of the 246 (89.8%) nursing home staff members received a COVID-19 vaccination. The facility reached 100% compliance with the vaccination COE policy with 18 people who chose to resign and 7 people who were exempt or on a leave of absence. In combination with frequent, personalized outreach, a COVID-19 vaccination COE resulted in high staff vaccination rates and minimal staff turnover. This case study provides a detailed summary of vaccination uptake activities within an organizational context to inform efforts at other healthcare facilities.

The state of infection prevention and control at home health agencies in the United States prior to COVID-19: A cross-sectional study

BackgroundHome health care is a rapidly growing healthcare sector worldwide. Home health professionals face unique challenges related to preventing and controlling infections, which are likely to amplify during an infectious disease outbreak (e.g. SARS-CoV-2). Little is known about the current state of infection prevention and control-related policies and outbreak preparedness at U.S. home health agencies. ObjectivesIn this study, we conducted a national survey to assess infection prevention and control-related policies, infrastructure, and procedures prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. DesignCross-sectional study. Setting/ParticipantsUsing a stratified random sample of 1506 U.S. home health agencies, we conducted a 61-item survey (paper and online) from November 9, 2018 to December 31, 2019. MethodsSurvey data were linked to publicly-available data on the quality of patient care, patient satisfaction, and other agency characteristics. Probability weights were developed to account for sample design and nonresponse; Pearson's χ2, Fisher's exact, t-tests or linear regression were used to compare the universe of agencies/respondents and urban/rural agencies. Results35.6% of agencies responded (n = 536). Most home health personnel in charge of infection prevention and control have other responsibilities; one-third have no formal infection prevention and control training. Rural agencies are more likely to not have anyone in charge of infection prevention and control compared to those in urban areas. About 22% of agencies implement recommended guidelines when administering antibiotics. Less than a third (26.4%) report that their staff vaccination rates were higher than 95% during the last flu season. Only 48.1% of agencies accept patients requiring ventilation, and of those, 40.9% located in rural areas do not have specific infection prevention and control policies for ventilated patients, compared to 20.8% in urban areas (p < 0.001). Only 39.7% of agencies provide N95 respirators to their clinical staff; rural agencies are significantly more likely to provide those supplies than urban agencies (50.7% vs. 37.7%, p = 0.004). Lastly, agencies report their greatest challenges with infection prevention and control are collecting/reporting infection data and adherence to/monitoring of nursing bag technique. ConclusionsPrior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, we found that infection prevention and control was suboptimal among U.S. home health care agencies. Consequently, most agencies have limited capacity to respond to infectious disease outbreaks. Staff and personal protective equipment shortages remain major concerns, and agencies will need to quickly adjust their existing infection prevention and control policies and potentially create new ones. In the long-term, agencies also need to improve influenza vaccination coverage among their staff.Tweetable abstract: Infection prevention and control infrastructure, policies and procedures and outbreak preparedness at U.S. home health agencies was found to be suboptimal in nationally-representative survey conducted just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Factors associated with adverse outcomes during influenza outbreaks in aged care facilities

ObjectiveTo explore factors associated with adverse outcomes during influenza outbreaks in residential aged care facilities. MethodsA retrospective cohort study of all outbreaks reported to three Sydney metropolitan Public Health Units during 2017. ResultsA total of 123 outbreaks affected 1,787 residents and 543 staff. Early notification to a Public Health Unit was associated with shorter outbreak duration (p<0.001; B=0.674). Resident attack rates and resident mortality rates were lower in outbreaks notified early, on univariate analysis (p=0.034 and p=0.048 respectively) but not on an adjusted model. Staff attack rates were significantly associated with resident attack rates (p=0.001; B=0.736). Data on staff vaccination rates was incomplete and reported coverage rates were low (median 39%). Resident vaccination coverage ≥95% was associated with shorter outbreak duration in univariate testing but not on an adjusted model. ConclusionsEarly public health notification is associated with improved outbreak parameters; sick staff may pose a risk to residents, yet vaccination rates are low. Resident vaccination may also be valuable. Implications for public healthMeasures that facilitate early PHU involvement in influenza outbreaks should be implemented, such as compulsory reporting requirements and processes that permit easier notification through technology. Actions that enhance staff and resident vaccination coverage should also be undertaken.

Healthcare worker influenza vaccination and sickness absence – an ecological study

Although Influenza vaccination is recommended for healthcare workers, vaccination rates in UK healthcare workers are only around 50%. We investigated the association between NHS sickness absence rates (using data from Health and Social Care Information Centre quarterly reports), staff vaccination rates and influenza vaccine efficacy (from Public Health England), influenza deaths (from the Office of National Statistics) and staff satisfaction (from www.NHSstaffsurveys.com). Data from 223 healthcare trusts covered approximately 800,000 staff in each of four influenza seasons from 2011; overall staff sickness rate was roughly 4.5%. Annual vaccination rates varied between 44% and 54%. Higher NHS trust vaccination rates were associated with reduced sickness absence (β = –0.425 [95% CI –0.658 to –0.192], p<0.001). Thus, a 10% increase in vaccination rate would be associated with a 10% fall in sickness absence rate. Influenza vaccination for NHS staff is associated with reduced sickness absence rates.

Comparative effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccination on numbers of US nursing home residents admitted to hospital: a cluster-randomised trial

Immune responses to influenza vaccines decline with age, reducing clinical effectiveness. We compared the effect of the more immunogenic high-dose trivalent influenza vaccine with a standard-dose vaccine to identify the effect on reducing hospital admissions of nursing home residents in the USA. We did a single-blind, pragmatic, comparative effectiveness, cluster-randomised trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. Medicare-certified nursing homes in the USA located within 50 miles of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention influenza reporting city were recruited, so long as the facilities were not located in a hospital, had more than 50 long-stay residents, had less than 20% of the population aged under 65 years, and were not already planning to administer the high-dose influenza vaccine to residents. Enrolled nursing homes were randomised to a facility-wide standard of care for the residents of either high dose or standard dose as the vaccine for the 2013-14 influenza season and half of each group were randomly allocated to free vaccines for staff. Individual residents were included in the analysis group if they were aged 65 years or older and were long-stay residents (ie, had been in the facility 90 days or more before commencing the influenza vaccination programme). The analysts and investigators with access to the raw data were masked to study group by coding the groups until after the analyses were complete. The primary outcome was hospital admissions related to pulmonary and influenza-like illness between Nov 1, 2013, and May 31, 2014, identified from Medicare hospital claims available for residents who were without private health insurance (ie, those who were considered Medicare fee-for-service). We obtained data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and enrolled facilities. The analyses used marginal Poisson and Cox proportional hazards regression, accounting for clustering of residents within homes, on an intention-to-treat basis, adjusting for facility clustering and prespecified covariates. Safety data were voluntarily reported according to the standard of care. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01815268. 823 facilities were recruited to the study between March and August, 2013, to participate in the trial, of which 409 facilities were randomised for residents to receive high-dose vaccine, and 414 facilities for residents to receive standard-dose vaccine. The facilities housed 92 269, of whom 75 917 were aged 65 years or older and 53 008 were also long-stay residents, and 38 256 were matched to Medicare hospital claims as of Nov 1, 2013. Staff vaccination rates did not differ between groups, so analyses focused on the high-dose versus standard-dose vaccine comparison. On the basis of Medicare fee-for-service claims, the incidence of respiratory-related hospital admissions was significantly lower in facilities where residents received high-dose influenza vaccines than in those that received standard-dose influenza vaccines (0·185 per 1000 resident-days or 3·4% over 6 months vs 0·211 per 1000 resident-days or 3·9% over 6 months; unadjusted relative risk of 0·888, 95% CI 0·785-1·005, 0=0·061, and adjusted relative risk 0·873, 0·776-0·982, p=0·023). When compared with standard-dose vaccine, high-dose influenza vaccine can reduce risk of respiratory-related hospital admissions from nursing home residents aged 65 years and older. Sanofi Pasteur, Swiftwater, PA, USA.

Epidemiology and Management of Seasonal Influenza Outbreaks in Long-Term Care Facilities in the Health Service Executive East Area of Ireland During the 2013-2014 Influenza Season

We describe seasonal influenza-like illness (ILI) outbreaks in long-term care facilities in the Health Service Executive (HSE) East area of Ireland in the 2013/2014 influenza season, risk factors associated with outbreak duration and attack rates, and management challenges. Separate questionnaires were distributed to 28 facilities who reported an outbreak and to public health specialists leading outbreak management, with a 79% response rate. Mean outbreak duration (21 vs 17 days; p=0.046) was longer in facilities with staff vaccination rates of &lt;40%. Facilities with a high attack rate (≥50%) were less likely to have an outbreak plan (p=0.03). Smaller facilities (under 50 residents) had a higher attack rate (50% vs 23%, p=0.003) even when controlled for staff vaccination rate (p=0.01). Prior to the outbreak, resident vaccination rates were high (82%, above the World Health Organization target of 75%) but staff vaccination rates were low (39%). Reported challenges to ILI outbreak management in long term care facilities included visitor restrictions, staff education issues, outbreak notification delays and lack of outbreak lead in facilities. Targeted public health-assisted planning, training and response, comprising of staff vaccination, education, written policies, with early notification and prompt response would facilitate a more co-ordinated approach to the management of outbreaks, and reduction in infection rates and consequent morbidity.

Uptake and attitudes regarding hepatitis A vaccine among childcare centre staff, administrators, and parents

ObjectivesStudy objectives were to assess parents' and childcare agency staff's uptake of and attitudes/beliefs related to hepatitis A vaccine. Study designCross-sectional survey. MethodsQuestionnaires were administered to parents and staff in 23 St. Louis childcare agencies between September and December 2014. Categorical data were compared using Chi-squared test. Multivariate logistic regression, stratified by staff vs parents, was used to find predictors of hepatitis A vaccine uptake. ResultsIn total, 351 staff and parents participated (response rate = 32%). More staff than parents had been offered or recommended to receive hepatitis A vaccine by a healthcare provider (55.4% vs 36.6% and 53.3% vs 28.7%, respectively; P = .001 for both). More staff than parents received hepatitis A vaccine (85.3% vs 67.5%, Chi-squared test = 11.0, P < .001). Predictors of staff vaccine uptake included being aware of CDC vaccination recommendations (OR = 11.2, CI = [1.4–91], P < .05), employer recommendation to get vaccinated (OR = 8.1, CI = [1.8–36.8], P < .01), and having a mandatory staff vaccination policy (OR = 4.8, CI = [1.2–19.7], P < .05). Predictors of parent vaccine uptake included being offered the vaccine by a healthcare provider (OR = 4.3, CI = [1.3–4.9], P < .001), being aware of the CDC vaccination recommendations (OR = 4.0, CI = [2.0–8.0], P < .001), and having received influenza vaccine previously (OR = 2.5, CI = [1.3–4.9], P < .01). ConclusionIn this study population, many childcare agency staff and parents have received hepatitis A vaccine, though staff immunization rates are at the minimum needed to reach herd immunity levels. Having employers encourage vaccination, offer free vaccine, or make vaccine available onsite could increase staff vaccination rates. Public health should partner with childcare agencies to increase staff vaccine uptake, which could result in community herd immunity.

Influenza vaccination rates and beliefs about vaccination among nursing home employees

Recent studies have suggested that vaccination of nursing home staff members may reduce the incidence of influenza among nursing home residents. Current national estimates of employee vaccination rates (around 50%) indicate that residents may be at an unnecessarily high risk of contracting influenza. This article reports on the influenza vaccination rates and attitudes toward the vaccine among employees in 37 nursing homes in 3 states. Nursing home employees were surveyed at nursing homes in Florida, Georgia, and Wisconsin in 2011-2012. Completed surveys were received from a total of 1,965 employees. Approximately 54% of the employees surveyed received the vaccination during the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 influenza seasons. Nursing home-level staff vaccination rates varied widely, from 15%-97%. Black and younger employees were less likely to receive the vaccine. Employee vaccination rates in nursing homes that used incentives were 12 percentage points higher than those that did not use incentives (P = .08). Low vaccination rates among nursing home workers may put residents at increased risk for influenza-related morbidity and mortality. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may consider employee vaccination rates as a quality indicator in addition to resident vaccination rates. Our findings support the use of a trial to test the use of incentives to increase employee vaccination rates.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community.

The effectiveness of interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 and older is uncertain. To assess access, provider, system and societal interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years and older in the community. We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 1950 to May week 3 2014), EMBASE (1980 to June 2014), AgeLine (1978 to 4 June 2014), ERIC (1965 to June 2014) and CINAHL (1982 to June 2014). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase influenza vaccination uptake in people aged 60 and older. Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted influenza vaccine uptake data. This update identified 13 new RCTs; the review now includes a total of 57 RCTs with 896,531 participants. The trials included community-dwelling seniors in high-income countries. Heterogeneity limited meta-analysis. The percentage of trials with low risk of bias for each domain was as follows: randomisation (33%); allocation concealment (11%); blinding (44%); missing data (49%) and selective reporting (100%). Increasing community demand (32 trials, 10 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: three trials (n = 64,200) of letter plus leaflet/postcard compared to letter (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.15); two trials (n = 614) of nurses/pharmacists educating plus vaccinating patients (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.91 to 5.66); single trials of a phone call from a senior (n = 193) (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.79 to 6.22), a telephone invitation versus clinic drop-in (n = 243) (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76), a free groceries lottery (n = 291) (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.76) and nurses educating and vaccinating patients (n = 485) (OR 152.95, 95% CI 9.39 to 2490.67).We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: postcard/letter/pamphlets (16 trials, n = 592,165); tailored communications (16 trials, n = 388,164); customised letter/phone-call (four trials, n = 82,465) and client-based appraisals (three trials, n = 4016), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Enhancing vaccination access (10 trials, six strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2112) of home visits compared to clinic invitation (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61); two trials (n = 2251) of free vaccine (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.82) and one trial (n = 321) of patient group visits (OR 24.85, 95% CI 1.45 to 425.32). One trial (n = 350) of a home visit plus vaccine encouragement compared to a home visit plus safety advice was non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: nurse home visits (two trials, n = 2069) and free vaccine compared to no intervention (two trials, n = 2250). Provider- or system-based interventions (17 trials, 11 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2815) of paying physicians (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.77); one trial (n = 316) of reminding physicians about all their patients (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.99); one trial (n = 8376) of posters plus postcards (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.22); one trial (n = 1360) of chart review/feedback (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.37 to 4.97) and one trial (n = 27,580) of educational outreach/feedback (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.81).Trials of posters plus postcards versus posters (n = 5753), academic detailing (n = 1400) and increasing staff vaccination rates (n = 26,432) were non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: reminding physicians (four trials, n = 202,264) and practice facilitators (three trials, n = 2183), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Interventions at the societal level We identified no RCTs of interventions at the societal level. There are interventions that are effective for increasing community demand for vaccination, enhancing access and improving provider/system response. Heterogeneity limited pooling of trials.