Vaccination Journal

8/7/2019 Vaccination Journal

1/10

L

j o o TO

FAMILYPRACTICE

Addressing immunizationbarriers, benefits, and risks

SANFORD R , K I M M E L , MD ; ILENE TIMKO B URN S, MD, MPH; ROBERT M , W O L F E , MD;

AND RICHARD K E N T ZIMMERMAN, MD, MPH

Vaccines have been highly effective in elimina ting or significant ly decreasing the occurrence ofmany once-common diseases. Barriers to immuni zation are a significant factor in the rising

incidence rates of some vaccine-preventable diseases. Cost, reduced accessibility to immuniza-t ions, increasingly complex childhood and adolescent/adult immunization schedules, andincreasing focus on the potential adverse effects of vaccines all contribu te to diffi culty in meet-in g the 2010 immuni zation goals. Physicians must not only be knowledgeable about vaccinesbu t they must incorporate systems in their offices to record, remind, and recall patients for vac-cinations.They must also clearly communica te vaccine benefits and risks whi le understandingthose factors that affect an indi vidual 's acceptance and perception of those benefits and risks.

Vaccines have almost eliminated or significantly

reduced the incidence of many diseases, but tensof thousands of children and adults in the United

States continue to develop vaccine-preventable dis-

eases. Reported cases of pertussis have increased from

a low of 1010 cases in 1976' to 25,827 in 2004,' with

the majority of these cases occurring in adolescents

and adults. Potential reasons for this include genetic

changes in Bordetella pertussis (which make vaccines

less effective), decreased potency of pertussis vaccines,

greater awareness of pertussis, and improved diagnos-

tic tests.* However, many of these cases are believed to

be caused by waning immunity or inadequate immu-nization. In 2005, only 76.1% of US children aged 19

to 35 months had received all of the recommended

doses of DTaP, Hib, hepatitis B, MMR, polio, and vari-

cella vaccines, although rates of those who received

most individual vaccines were higher.'' A Healthy

People 2010 goal is to immunize 90% of young chil-

dren and adolescents with age-appropriate vaccines.'

Barriers to immunization are grouped as systems

barriers (eg, those involving the organization of the

health care system and economics), health care

provider barriers (eg, inadequate clinician knowledge

about vaccines and contraindications to their use), and

related adverse events).' These barriers affect immu-

nization rates and increase the burden of preventabledisease in our society.

Systems Barriers to ImmunizationFactors affecting the supply and distribution of vaccines

are among the most noticeable systems barriers. The

supply of influenza, conjugate pneumococcal, and,

most recently, tetravalent conjugate meningococcal

(MCV4) vaccines have been inadequate due to a lack of

manufacturing capacity.' A misdistribution of vaccines

has also occurred. Uninsured and Medicaid-insured

children may qualify to receive vaccines through theVaccines for Children program (VFC), but VFC does

not provide funding to reimburse providers for the

costs of administering those vaccines. Uninsured adults

represent another major systems problem.

Provider Barriers to ImmunizationProviders may lack knowledge about the indications

for and contraindications to immunization.

Expanded uses for current vaccines such as hepatitis

A vaccine for children aged 12 months or older and

new vaccines against rotavirus and zoster make it

difficult for health care providers to stay current


2/10

A D D R E S S I N G I M M U N I Z A T I O N B A R R I E R S , B E N E F I T S ,

practices found that knowledge deficits regardingimmunization schedules, vaccine contraindications,and vaccine side effects were present among physi-cians and nonphysician office staff."

One early study indicated that almost one half ofnurses (as reported by physicians) were resistant togiving children 3 or more injections and that parentsand physicians were also uncomfortable about this.'However, a later study at an inner-city pediatric clin-ic indicated that parents overwhelmingly compliedwith physicians' recommendations for immuniza-tions.'" Thus, the attitude the physician transmits tohis or her staff about the importance of immuniza-tions is crucial. Combination vaccines that decreasethe number of shots administered at a single visitalso enhance compliance.

Logistical barriers faced by health care providersinclude the cost of immunizations, vaccine storageor capacity, and lack of access to patients' prior immu-nization rec ords. Vaccines with stringent storagerequirements, such as varicella vaccine or live attenuat-ed influenza vaccine, may present a challenge.Fragmentation of patient care makes it more likely thatproviders will not have complete imm unization recordsfor patients currently in their care. This can lead toincomplete immunization and overimmunization.

Missed visits and missed opportunities for immu-nization when necessary vaccines are not administeredat a visit are also notable barriers to timely completionof immunization requirements. When health careproviders have routinely assessed a patient's immu-nization status and notified patients and parents aboutvaccinations that were due (reminders) or overdue(recalls), immunization rates have improved.Reminder/recall systems can be time-consuming andcost-intensive, and they are used infrequently." Greateruse of electronic medical record systems should make

reminder/recall systems more efficient.Immunization registries are computerized databases

that consolidate vaccination data from multiple healthcare providers within a defined geographic area andcan generate reminder and recall notices. Currently,4 8 % of children younger than 6 years old participatein an immunization registry.'^ One national healthobjective calls for a participation rate of95 % of chil-dren younger than 6 years old by the year 2010.'

Patient and ParentBarriers to ImmunizationPatients or their parents or guardians may lack

cine safety, or lack transportation. They may beunaware of the threat of vaccine-preventable dis-eases or that safe and effective vaccines are availableagainst these diseases. Complicated immunizationschedules, fragmented care records, inconvenientclinic hours, long wait times for immunizations,transportation problems, and cost are other exam-ples of logistical barriers to immunization. Onestudy found that mothers in rural West Virginia weremore likely to have fully immunized children if theyfelt that the clinic they attended was "supportive,"which included variables such as staff who wouldclarify im mu nization schedules, convenient officehours, and limited wait time for immunizations. '

The VFC program has funded imm unizations for

uninsured and Medicaid-insured children since itsinception in 1994, but not all underinsured childrencan visit their usual source of health care and receivethese vaccines at no cost. Even low-income parentsof children who qualify for immunizations through aVFC program at their usual source of care may notbe aware of this program, and these parents contin-ue to cite cost as a barrier to immunization.'^Families who might qualify for free vaccinationsmay face other barriers such as transportation prob-lems. To limit additional patient trips to health care

provid ers, all eligible physicians should become V FCproviders so that immunizations can be given at thechild's medical "home." However, children who havehealth insurance that does not cover immunizationsmust continue to receive their vaccinations at publicor federally funded health clinics.

Solutions

Despite the many barriers described above, researchhas shown that some interventions canand doimprove immunization rates (TABLE 1). In diverse

adult populations, one of the strongest predictors ofinfluenza immunization is a physician's recommenda-tion to receive the vaccine.'""' In low -incom e pedia tricpopulations, enrollment in the Special SupplementalNutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children(WIC)which offers programs to educate parentsabout the importance of immunizationsimprovesimmunization rates among both urban and nonurbanpediatric populations.'^-'"

Educational resources for parents who declinevaccination because of antivaccine misinformationcan be found both in print and on the Internet.Providers should tell parents about Web sites that


3/10

A D D R E S S I N G I M M U N I Z A T I O N B A R R I E R S , B E N E F I T S , A

TflBIF 1 ,

Barriers

Knowledge deficits

Patients and families

Providers

Fragmented care

Vaccine shortages

Missed visits, missed opportunities

AAFP = American Academy of Family PhysSupplemental Nutrition Program for Wome

Barr ie r s and so lu t ions to vacc ina t ion

Solutions

Education through WIC, community outreach, provider recommendation. Web sites

Recognized sources of informatio n/guid elines (AAFP, AAP, and CDC Web site s, AAPR e dBook,

Shots software from vi/ww.lmmunizationEd.org)

Immunization registries

Improved vaccine infrastruc ture

Fair reimburseme nt for vaccines

Reminder/recall systems

Fair reimburseme nt for vacc ination

Standing orders

Shared responsibility for identifying needed vaccines with nursing personnel

during vital signs or through smart electronic records

Combination vaccines to decrease number of shots required at a visiticians; AAP = American Academy of Pediatrics; CDC = Centers for Disease Con trol and Prevention; WIC = Specialn, Infants and Children.

risks and benefits of vaccination as well as links toother sou rces. Among these Web sites are the following:

Am erican Asso ciation of Pediatrics (AAP):www.aap.org

US Cen ters for Disease Cont rol and Pre-vention (CDC): www.cdc.gov/nip

Society of Teachers of Family M edicine'sGroup on Immunization Education (GIE):www.Immunizat ionEd.org

Vaccine Information C enter at the Children'sHospital of Philadelphia: www.chop.edu

Immunizat ion Action Coali t ion (IAC):www.vaccineinformation.org

Parents opposed to immunizations are often dis-trustful of "official" sou rces but m ay be more willingto accept information from their personal physicianwho takes time to listen to their concerns and

respond in a thoughtful manner.Immunization registries are being developed in all

states and in the District of Co lum bia.' ' In 2002 , 4 3 %of all US children had at least 2 immunizations record-ed in a registry. However, about 40% of children in theregistries had incomplete or missing data on adminis-tered doses of vaccine.'' Lack of time or staff to enterdata as well as possible transcription errors may makesome physicians hesitant to use these systems; howev-er, they save time when immunization records arerequested for school or camp forms and improveimmunization rates." Another study also showed thatcomplete computerization of paper immunization

The Task Force on Community PreventiveServices recommended or strongly recommendedimplementat ion of the fol lowing measures toincrease immunization rates'^":

Rem inder/recall systems for patie nts, families,and providers

Requ ireme nt of vaccination as a prerequisitefor enrollment in school and childcare

Decreases in out-of-pocket costs for patien ts/families

Assessm ent ofand collection of feedbackregardingimmunization rates for individualproviders

Issuance of standing orders for adult immunization Provision of imm unization services in homes

and WIC settings Implementation of multicomp onent interven-

tions that expand access to services and provideeducation to target populations.

Interventions tailored to the culture of aprovider's practice and its patients should increaseimm unization rates. A study of tailored standingorders, reminders, and express vaccination servicesin inner-city clinics found that these measures led toan increase in influenza immunization

Communicating the Benefitsand Risks of VaccinesThe benefits of immunization are often obvious tohealth care providers; however, patients, parents, and


4/10


As knowledge of the devastation caused by manyvaccine-preventable diseases fades from public mem-ory, attention shifts to the occasionally seriousadverse events that may follow immunization. Thedissemination of (mis)information and anecdotal

repor ts of alleged vaccine reactions by the media, theInternet, and antivaccine groups causes parents,patients, and even some health care providers toquestion the justification for immunizations.^^ Somephysicians may be reluctant to administer immuniza-tions because of liability concerns. An Ohio studydemonstrated that liability concerns influenced thedecisions of 9% of family physicians and 23% ofpediatricians in their choice of polio vaccines."Consequently, vaccines have become victims of theirown success. If a loss of confidence in the vaccinedevelops, then an outbreak of disease may ensue,resulting in resumption of vaccine use."

Public Perceptions of Vaccine SafetyParents of incompletely immunized British childrenwere likely to report that immunization was riskier fortheir child than w as nonimmun ization due to concernsabout vaccine-related side effects, the belief that theirchild was not at risk for the disease, or the belief thatthe disease was not s eriou s." In the United States, con-

cerns about vaccine safety are more common amongparents of underimmunized children, but many par-ents of fully immunized children have also expressedsuch concerns." Most family physicians and almost allpediatricians reported at least 1 vaccine refusal fromparents during the year 2000. "^ A Canad ian studyfound that most mothers would accept a1:100,000 to1:1,000,000 risk for a severe vaccine side effect; how-ever, 14% would not tolerate any serious risk."

Common MisconceptionsAbout VaccinesMost parents support immunizations for their chil-dren, but misconceptions do exist. Some parentsbelieve that the administration of too many immu-nizations will weaken their child's immune system^'or cause chronic diseases such as asthma, autism,diabetes mellitus (DM), or multiple sclerosis (MS).^'Some believe that vaccine-preventable diseases hadalready begun to disappear prior to the use of vac-cines or that there are "hot lots" of vaccines thathave a greater frequency and/or severity of adverseevents.^' Others believe that vaccines are not "natu-r a l " and thus prefer disease-induced immunity.

tics to simplify complex decisions and judgments."'Parents who are nonvaccinators may believe theycan control their child's susceptibility to disease,have doubts about the reliability of vaccine informa-tion, prefer errors of omission over errors of com-

mission, or rely on herd immunity to protect theirchild. ' TABLE 2 summ arizes heuristic factors tha taffect vaccine-related risk perception.

Multiple Vaccines and the Immune SystemAlmost 25% of parents believe that "children getmore immunizations than are good for them."^*However, most parents and many providers may notrealize that the actual number of antigens in thesevaccines has decreased. For example, the olderwhole-cell pertussis vaccine had approximately 3000antigens compared with 1 to 7 for newer acellularpertussis vaccines.-"^ Rather than weakening theimmune system, vaccines may prevent infections thatpredispose individuals to serious diseases. For exam-p l e , varicella is often complicated by necrotizinggroup A beta-hemolytic streptococcal fasciitis inchildren or by pneumonia in adults.^^

Explaining Vaccine Benefits and RisksPhysicians serve as the primary source of immuniza-

tion information for most parents and patients. Inone national survey, 84% of respondents indicatedthat they received immunization information from adoctor.^* Physicians must accurately portray the ben-efits of immunization while acknowledging that vac-cines are not always effective andin rare casesmay be accompanied by serious adverse events.Providers should inform patients that vaccines arebiologic agents intended to stimulate immunity andcommonly cause local reactions such as redness,swelling, and soreness at the injection site.

Physicians or other providers must provide thecurrent Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) eachtime they administer a vaccine covered under theNational Vaccine Injury Compensation Program(www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/table.htm) orpurchased through a CDC g rant." They must record ineach patient's medical record the date of administra-tion, the vaccine manufacturer, the lot number, and thename and business address of the provider, along withthe edition of the VIS that was given to the patient andthe date on which the vaccine was administered.^^Copies of each VIS can be obtained from the CDC atwww.cdc.gov/nip/publications/vis or the Immunization


5/10

A D D R E S S I N G I M M U N I Z A T I O N B A R R I E R S , B E N E F I T S , A N

T f l R I F ) .

Fac tors o r heur i s t i c p rocesses th a t a ffec t vacc ine accep ta nce

Factors or Processes That May Decrease Vaccine Acceptance

Factor

Compression

1 Omission (not taking action) bias

versus commission (action) bias

Ambiguity aversion

Voiuntary, controllable risi


6/10

A D D R E S S I N G I M M U N I Z A T I O N B A R R I E R S , B E N E F I T S ,A N D R I S K S

6 times more likely to develop pertussis than werevaccinated children.^^

Common Vaccine RisksPain, swelling, and redness at the injection site are

common local reactions following immunization.Sterile abscesses occasionally occur after injection ofinactivated vaccines.^^ Fever and irritability are com-mo n systemic reactions that m ay be attenuated by giv-ing acetaminophen. More reports of fever, redness,swelling, and pain at the injection site have been madeafter the fourth dose than the first dose of each of thelicensed DTaP vaccines. Swelling of the entire thigh orupper arm that lasts for a mean of 4 days has occurredin 2% to 3% of children after their fourth or fifthdose of the same DTaP.'*^ However, local reactions tovaccines or their components usually are not consid-ered contraindications for vaccine administration.

Unc om mo n Vaccine RisksAllergic reactions occur infrequently after immu-nizations. For example, the rate of anaphylaxis afterhepatitis B vaccine is 1 in 600,000.^^ Yeast proteinsmay cause this reaction." Gelatin, a vaccine stabiliz-er, is used in the production of the MMR and vari-cella vaccines. However, persons with a history of

food allergy to gelatin rarely develop anaphylaxisafter vaccine administration.^^ The MMR vaccinebut not the influenza vaccinemay be given to per-sons with egg allergy. Neomycin is used in the pro-duction of the MMR, varicel la , inact ivatedpoliovirus vaccines, and some combination vaccines(eg, HAV/HBV and DTaP/IPV/HBV) and may causea delayed-type local hypersensitivity reaction 48 to96 hours after administration.^^

Febrile seizures, persistent crying that lasts 3hours or mo re, and hypotonic-hypo responsiveepisodes have been reported very rarely after DTaP.^"

TABLES 3 AND 4 compare the risks for wildmeasles, mu mp s, rubella, and varicella disease with therisks for adverse events reported after administrationof the MMR and varicella vaccines.""'" The temporalrelation of adverse events to vaccine administrationdoes not prove causation. TABLES 3 AND 4 also citethe efficacy of the vaccines in preventing disease.

Controversial and Unproven RisksChronic diseases such as autism often are attributed tovaccines because immunizations are given at a time inchildren's lives when the signs and symptoms of those

standably frustrated by the lack of an identifiablecause of their child's autism and, in their search foranswers, may allege that vaccines caused their child'sillness because of the temporal relationship betweenimmunization and disease manifestation.

Well-controlled studies have not documented acausal relat ion between administrat ion of theMMR vaccine and development of autism. A studyby Wakefield et al of 12 children w ith g astr oint esti-nal diseases and developmental regression hypoth-esized that such a causal relation might exist."However, Taylor et al conducted a study thatincluded 498 autistic children in the North Thameshealth district of the United Kingdom and found nocausal association between MMR vaccine andautism." Patja et al did not identify any cases ofautism associated with almost 3 million doses ofMMR vaccine given to 1.8 million individuals inFinland over 14 years.' ' ' ' Madsen et al compared therecords of more than 400,000 Danish children whoreceived MMR vaccine with those of more than90,0 00 unvaccinated ch ildren. ' '' The inv estigatorsdid not find any increase in the relative risk forautistic disorder in vaccinated children over thatfor unvaccinated children.^''

Allegations also have been made that hepatitis B

vaccine causes chronic fatigue syndrome, MS, orother autoimmune d isorders ." The Nurses ' HealthStudy in the United States evaluated more than200,000 women and did not find an associationbetween hepa titis B vaccine and M S ." A Europ eanstudy found that administration of the tetanus,hep atitis B, or influenza vaccines did no t increasethe risk for short-term relapse in MS patients."

Vaccines have not been shown to increase therisk for type 1 DM .^'-" A Swedish study found tha tvaccination against tuberculosis, smallpox, tetanus,pertussis, rubella, or mumps did not increase therisk for type 1 DM.*" A Vaccine Safety Da talin kproject of the CDC did not find an increased risk fortype 1 DM with any of the routinely recommendedchildhood vaccines, including those for DTaP, hepa-titis B, Hi b, MM R, and varicella." A Danish studydid not find any significant association of type 1DM with Hib, DTaP, MMR, or oral polio vaccines.'^"

Concern also has been expressed that thimerosal,an ethyl mercury-containing vaccine preservative,might lead to greater mercury exposure in infantsreceiving multiple thimerosal-containing vaccines.However, multiple epidemiologic studies have not


7/10

A D D R E S S I N G I M M U N I Z A T I O N B A R R I E R S , B E N E F I T S , A

I. Risks and Se quelae

Risk of acquiring disease

i Highest numberof US cases

1

1

1 Recent number' of US cases

! Transmission routei

Rate of transmission toj susceptible household, contacts

Risk of sequelae

j Case -fatality rate

: Encephalitis

1 Subacute sclerosing

; panencephaiitis

1 Pneumonia

Thrombocytopenia

j Orchitis

' Anaphylaxis

1 Vaccine efficacy

Meas les , mumps , and rube l la d i sease and vacc ine fac t shee t

Measles Disease

894,134 in 1941'

66 in 200?

Droplet spray

9 0 % '

1-3 dea ths/I 000

measles ca ses'''

1-2 cases/1000

measles cases'

8.5 cases/1 million

measles cases"

1%-6%=

Copyright 2005, Society of Teachers of Faniily Medicine'Maldonado Y. In: Behrman ct alMMW R M orh Mortal Wkly RepAmerican Academy of Pediatrics;

e d s . Nelson Textbook of2006:5S;883-903; 'Picke

Mumps Disease

152,209 in 1968'

314 in 2005'

Direct contact.airborne droplets.and fomites'

1.6-3.8 per

10,000 cases'

2 % fatality if

patient develops

encephalitis'

2.5 cases per 1000

mumps cases'

14%-35%

adolescent

and adult men'

Used with permission.Pediatrics. Philadelphia,

Rubella Disease

12 million in 1964-1965':57,686 in 1969 (20,000cases of congenital rubellain 1964-1965)'

11in2005''"(1 case of congenitalrubella in 2005F

Direct contact.nasopharyngeal dropletcontact, or transplacental

50%-60% of susceptiblefamily members andalmost 100% inclosed populations'

1 death per 30,000 cases

due to 20% fatality from

encephalitis'

1/5000-1/6000 rubella

cases'*

20 total cases of progressive

rubella panencephalitis

since 1974'

1/3000 rubella cases'^

Measles, Mumps, Rubella Vaccine

No cases of congenital rubellareported after immunization ofpregnant women, but the theoreticalmaximum risk is 2% vs at least 30%risk after wild rubella infection infirst trimester*

1 death not attributed to vaccine."

Fatal measles pneumonitis in one

21-year-old man with advanced H IV


8/10


TABLE 4 i = r r - ' =

1 Risks and Sequelae

Risk of acquiring disease

Average number of US cases/yearRate of transmission tosusceptible contactsTransmission route

Risk of sequelae

Localized rash

Generalized varicella-like rash

; Invasive group A streptococc al disease

Anaphylaxis

Herpes zoster (children


9/10

A D D R E S S I N G I M M U N I Z A T I O N B A R R I E R S , B E N E F I T S ,A N D R I S K S

R e f e r e n c e s1. G;nrers for Disease Conrrol and Prevention. SLimmary of notifiable diseasesUnited

States, 2002. April 30,2004 forMMWR Morb Mortal WklyRef). 2002;51;5,10,76,

2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Notice to readers: final 20 04 reports of noti-fiable diseases,MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.2005;54:770.

3. Cherry JD. The science and fiaion of the "resurgence" of pertussis.Pediatrics.2003;n2:405-406.

4. Centers for Disease Gjiitrol and Prevention. National, state, and urb an area vaccinationcoverage among children aged 19-35 monthsUnited States, 2005,MMWR MorbMortal WkhyReff. 2006;55;988-993.

5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Immunization and Infectious D iseases. InUS Department of Health and Human Services.HealtlTy People 2010, 2nd ed.Understanding and Improving Health and Objectives for Improving Health, 2 vols.Washington, DC: US Crtivemment Printing Office: Noveinlier 2000:14-1,14-59,

6. Core P, Madhavan S, Curry D, et al. Predictors of childhood immunization completionin a rural population.Sa c Sci Med. 1999;48:1011-1027,

7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Notice to readers: liinited supply ofmeningococcal conjugate vaccine, recommendation to defer vaccination of persons agedn - 1 2 y e ar s . MMW R Mortal Wkly Rep. 2006;55:567-568. Available at:h t tp : / /www.cdc .gov/mi i iwr /prev iew/mmwrhtml /mm5520aI 1.htm. AccessedJanuary 11 ,2007 .

8. Prislin R, Sawyer MH , Nader PR, Goerlitz M, De Guire M, H o S, Provider-staff discrep-ancies in reported immunization knowledge and praaices,Prev Med. 2002;34:554-561.

9. Madlon-K ay D, Harper PC. Too many shots? Parent, nurse, and physician attitudestoward multiple simultaneous childhood vaccinations.Arc!} FamMe d 1994;3:61O-613.

10. Melman ST, Nguyen TT, Ehrlich E, Schorr M, Anbar RD. Parental compliance with mul-tiple imiTiunizatlon injeaions.ArcJj Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999; 153:1289-1291,

11 . Tiemey CD, Yusuf H, M cMahon SR, etal. Adoption of reminder and recall messagesfor immunizations by pediatricians and public health clinics.Pediatrics.2003;l 1 2:1076-1082.

12, Schaffer SJ, Humiston SC, ShoneLP, Averhoff FM, Szilagyi PC. Adolescent immuniza-tion practices: a national survey of US physicians.Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.2001;I55:566-571.

13, Brenner RA, Simons-Morton BG, Bhaskar B, Das A, Clemens JD; NIH-DC InitiativeImmunization Working Gr oup. Prevalence and predictors of immunization among inner-city infants: a birth cohort study.Pediatrics. 2001;108:661-670.

14. ZiiTunerman RK , Santiban ez TA, Jano sky JE, et al. Wh at affects Influenza vaccina tionrates among older patients? An analysis from inner-city, suburban, rural, and VeteransAffaire practices.AmJ Med.2003;l 14:31-38.

15. Smailbegovic MS, Laing GJ, Bedford H. W hy do parents decide against immunization?The effect of health beliefs and health professionals.O)ild Care Health Dev.2003;29:303-311,

16, Prislin R, DyerJ A, Blakely CH , JohnsonCD. Immunization status and sociodemograph-ic characteristics: the tTiediating role of beliefe, attitudes, and perceived control.A m JPuhlic Health.'[9n;H8:\S2\-\826.

17, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Immunization registry progressUnitedStates, January-December 2002.MMW R Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.2004;53:431-433.

18, Adams WC, ConnersWP, Mann AM, PalfreyS. Immunization entry at the point of serv-ice improves quality, saves time, and is well-accepted.Pediatrics. 2000;l 06:489-492.

19, Clazner JE, Beaty BI^ Pearson KA, Lowery NE, Berman S. Using an imm unization reg-istry: effect on practice costs and time.AmbulPediatr. 2004;4:34-40,

20, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vaccine-preventable diseases: improvingvaccination coverage in children, adolescents and adults, A report on recommendationsof the Task Force on Community Preventive Services,MMWR Recomm Ref ) .1999;48(RR-8}:1-I5,

21 , Zimmerm an RK, Nowalk MP, Raymund M , et al. Tailored interventions to increaseinfluenza vaccination in neigliborhood health centers serving the disadvantaged.A m JPublic Health. 2003;93:I699-l705,

22. Wolfe R M, Sharp LK, Lipsky MS, Content and design attributes of antivaccination websnes.jAMA.2002^87:3245-3248.

23, Kimmel SR, Puczynski S, McCoy RC, Puczynski MS, Practices of family physicians andpediatricians in administering poliovirus vaccine ./Fam Pract. 1999;48:594-600.

24, Chen RT, Hibbs B. Vaccine safety: current and future challenges.Pediatr Ann.l998;27:445-455.

25, Gust DA, StrineTW, MaLirice E, et a!. Underimmunization among children: effects ofvac-cine safety concerns on im munization status.Pediatrics. 2004; 11 4:el6-e22.

26. Freed G L, Clark SJ, HibbsBF, Santoli JM . Parental vaccine safety concerns. The experi-ences of pediatricians and family physicians.Am J Prev Med.20O4;26:11 -14.

27. Freeman TR, Bass MJ. Determinants of maternal tolerance of vaccine-related risks,fa mPract. 1992;9:36-4!,

28. Gellin BG, Maibach EW, Marcuse EK. Do parents understand immunizations?A nation-al telephone survey.Pediatrics. 2000;l06;1097-l 102,

29, ZimmenTian RK, Wolfc KM, FoxDE, et al. Vaccine criticism on the world wideweh.J MedInternet Res. 2005;7:e17 Available at: www,jmir.oti;;/2005/2/e17/, Accessed July 1 2,200 5,

30. Ball LK, Evans G, Bostrom A, Risky business: challenges in vaccine risk commun ication.Pediatrics. 1998;10l:453-458,

31 . Meszaros JR, Asch DA, Baron J, Hershey JC, Kun reuthcr H , Schwartz-Buzaglo j .Cognitive processes and the decisions of some parents to forego pertussis vaccination fortheir children./ Qin Epidetniot. I996;49:697-7O3.

32. Offit PA, Quarles J, Cerber MA, etal. Addressing parents' concerns: do multiple vaccinesoverwhelm or weaken the infant's immune system?Pediatrics. 2002; 109:124-129,

33. Pickering LD, cd. Re d Book: 2003 Report of tbe Com m ittee onInfectious Diseases. 26thed Elk Grove Village 111:American Academy of Pediatrics; 2003:4 737 53 318 336

34. Davis TG, Fredrickson DD , Arnold C L, et al. Childh ood vaccine risk/benefitcommunication in private practice office settings: a national survey.Pediatrics.2001;107:E17 ,

35. Feikin DR, Lezotte DC, H amm an RJ-, Salmon DA, Chen RT, HoffmanRE . Individualand community risks of measles and pertussis associated with persona! e.xemptions toimmunization. } A M / \ . 2 0 0 0 ; 2 8 4 : 3 I 4 5 - 3 1 5 0 .

36 . Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Use of diphtheria toxoid-tetanus tox-oid-acellular pertussis vaccineas a five-dose series. Supplemental recom mendations of theAdvisory Committee on Immunization Practices {ACIP), MMWRRecomm Rep .2000;49(RR-13):l-8.

37. Zimmerman RK, RubenFL, Ahwesh ER. H epatitisB virus infection, hepatitisB vaccine,and hepatitis B immune globulin./Fam Pract. 1997;45:295-318,

38. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Pertussis vaccination: use of acellu-lar pertussis vaccines among infants and young children. Recommendations of theAdvisory Committee on Immunization Praaices (ACIP).MMWR Recomm Rep .1997;46(RR-7):l-25.

39. Mald onado Y. Measles, In: Behrman RE, Kliegman RM , Jenson HB, eds.NelsonTextbook of Pe diatrics.17th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co ; 2004:1 026-103 1.

40. Maldonado Y. Mumps. In: Behrman RE, KliegiTian RM, Jenson HB, eds.NelsonTextbook of Pe diatrics.17th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 2004:1035-1036.

41 . Maidonado Y. Rubella, In: Behrman RE, Kliegman RM, Jenson HB, eds.NelsonTexthook of Pe diatrics.17th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 2004:1032-1034.

42. Centere for Disease Control and Prevention, Table 2. Reported cases of notifiable dis-eases, by geographic division and areaUnited States, 2005.MMW R M orb Mortal

Wkly Rep.2006;55:883-903,43. Cershon A. Rubella virus. In: Mandell GL, BennettJ F; Dolin R, eds. Principles an d

Practice of Infectious Diseases.5th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Churchill Livingstone;2000:1708-1714,

44. Patja A, Davidkin I, KurkiT, Kallio MJT, Valle M, P eltola H , Serious adverse events aftermeasles-mumps-rubella vaccination during a fourteen-year prospeaive follow-up,Pediatr InfectDis J. 2000; 19:1127-1134,

45. Baum SG, Litman N. Mumps virus. In: Mandell GL, BennettJE, Dolin R,eds. Principlesan d Practice of Infectious Diseases.5th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Churchill Livingstone;2000:1776-1781,

46. Markoviitz LE, Katz SL. Measles vaccine. In: PlotkinAS, Mortimer FL\, Ji; eds. Vaccines.2nd ed, Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1994:229-276,

47. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Prevention of varicella: recommenda-tions of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).MM WR Re commRep. 1996;45(RR-ll): l-36,

48. Wise RP, Salive ME , Braun M M , ct al. Postlicensure safety surveillance for varicella vac-dne./AMA. 2000;284:l271-1279.

49. Laupland KB, Davies HD,Um DE, Schwartz B, Green K, Tlie Onta rio G roup AStreptococcal Study Group, McGeer A. Invasive group A streptococcal disease in chil-dren an d association with varicella-zoster virus infeaion.Pediatrics. 2000;105:e60.

50. Myers MG , Stanberry LR, Seward JE Varicella-zoster virus. In: Behniian RE, KliegmanRM, Jenson HB, eds.Nelson Textbook of Pediatrics.17th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WBSaunders Co; 2004:1057-1 062.

51 . Whiteley RJ, Varicella-zoster virus. In: Mandell CL, Bennett JE, Dolin R, eds.Principlesan d Practice of Infectious Diseases.5th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Churchill Livingstone;2000:1580-1586.

52. Wakefield AJ, Murch SH, Anthony A, ct al. Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet.1998;351;637-641,

53. Taylor B, Miller E, Earrington CP, et al. Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine:no epidemiological evidence for a causal association,iMncct. 1999:353:2026-2029.

54. Madsen KM , Hviid A, Vestergaard M , et al. A population-based study of measles,mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism,N Englj Med.2002;347:1477-l482.

55. Fisher BL, ed. Hepatitis B vaccine: the untold story.Tbe Vaccine Reaction. Vienna, Va:National Vaccine Information Center; 1998:1-15.

56. Ascherio A, Zhang SM, Heman MA, et al. HepatitisB vaccination and the risk of mul-tiple sclerosis,N EnglJ Med 2001;344:327-332,

57. Gonfavreux G, Suissa S, Saddier P, BourdesV, Vukusic S, Vaccinations and the risk ofrelapse in multiple sclerosis.N Englj Med 2001 ;344:319-326.

58. The Institute for Vaccine Safety Diabetes Workshop Panel. Ghildhood immunizationsand type 1 diabetes: summary of an Institute for Vaccine Safety Worksh op,Pediatr InfectDisJ. 1999; 18:217-222.

59. Hviid A, Stellfeld M, W ohlfahrt J, Melhye M, Ch ildhood vaccination an d type1 diabetes.N Englj Med.2004;350:1398-!404.

60. Blom L, Nystrom U Dahlquist G. The Swedish childhcxxJ diabetes study: vaccinationand infections as risk determinants for diabetes in childhood,Diabctologia.1991:34:176-181,

61 . DeStefano F, Mullooly JP, Okoro CA, etnl. Childhood vaccinations, vaccination timing,and risk of type I diabetes mellitus.Pediatrics. 2001;l08:ei 12.

62. Hviid A, Stellfeld M , Wohlfahrt J, Mclbye M, Association between thimero sak'onta in-ing vaccine and autism./AM A. 2003;290;1763-1766,

63. Stehr-Green P,Tull P, Stellfeld M, MortensonPB, Simpson D. Autism and thimerosal-con-taining vaccines. Lack of consistent evidence for an association.Am j Prev Med.2003;25:101-106.

64. Institute of Medicine Immunization Safety Review Com mittee, McCormick MC (Chair).Imm unization Safety Revieiv: Vaccines and AutismWashington DC: National


10/10

Documents

Vaccination Journal