A postmarket safety comparison of 2 vaccination strategies for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella in Italy
It is strategically important to monitor the safety profile of vaccination schedules in order to achieve and maintain high levels of coverage. We analyzed the cohort of individuals actively invited for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (MMRV) vaccination in the Veneto region (north-east Italy) f...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics 2016-03, Vol.12 (3), p.651-654 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | It is strategically important to monitor the safety profile of vaccination schedules in order to achieve and maintain high levels of coverage. We analyzed the cohort of individuals actively invited for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (MMRV) vaccination in the Veneto region (north-east Italy) from 8/1/2013 to 7/31/2014, assessing the onset of adverse events (AE) relating to 2 different vaccination strategies for MMRV (MMR+V vs MMRV).
During the vaccination session at 14 months old, parents were given a form for recording local and systemic reactions to vaccinations for 4 weeks afterwards. Overall, 12,288 forms were returned, and 84.6% of them were included in this analysis (5,130 relating to MMR+V and 5,265 to MMRV); 37.3% of the sample reported no AEs, with no difference between the 2 groups. Local reactions were more common in the MMR+V group (9.6% vs 2.9%; RR 3.33; 95% CI 2.79-3.98), while there was no difference in general reactions between the 2 groups (50% MMR+V vs 52% MMRV). The events most often reported were "fever |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2164-5515 2164-554X |
DOI: | 10.1080/21645515.2015.1101198 |