scholarly journals The Comparison of the Adverse Events of Pentavalent Vaccine and DPT Vaccine in 2–6 Months Infants in Iran: A National Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zaher Khazaei ◽  
Ghobad Moradi ◽  
Seyed Mohsen Zahraei ◽  
Mohammad Mehdi Gouya ◽  
Elham Goodarzi ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ghobad Moradi ◽  
Zaher Khazaei ◽  
Seyed Mohsen Zahraei ◽  
Fateme Yaghini ◽  
Mohiadin Amjadian ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Vaccination is the most remarkable intervention in public health and is an effective strategy in order to control infectious diseases among infants. This study attempted to compare the adverse events of Pentavalent and DPT vaccines together. Methods This is a cross sectional (analytical-descriptive) study in which the 2-6 months healthy infants, having received DPT in 2013 and Pentavalent in 2015, were studied for their experienced adverse events related to these vaccines. Percentage, mean, standard deviation and chi-square tests were used to describe and analyze the data. Results The results showed that 10464 and 17561 adverse events, which are associated with DPT and Pentavalent respectively, were recorded in the infants who received these vaccines throughout Iran. Mazandaran, Qazvin and Golestan provinces reported the highest number of adverse events, respectively (15.74%, 11.25%, and 9.12%). Moreover, Pentavalent seemed to have more recorded adverse events compared to DPT, high fever had the highest record rate for DPT (47.4%) and mild localized complications was the highest for Pentavalent (31.68%). There was a significant relationship between the kind of vaccine and the type of reaction, adverse event categorization, the country produced the vaccine and the infants' place of residence (p<0.05). Conclusion Severe localized adverse events including high fever, vomiting, diarrhea and restlessness seemed to be less in Pentavalent compared to DPT vaccine. Therefore, substituting Pentavalent for DPT in infants seems to reduce the adverse events among them.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 82
Author(s):  
Sharad Bansal

Background: Immunizations currently save 3 million lives per year throughout the world and is one of the most cost-effective health interventions. The Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations (GAVI) and WHO recommended the use of pentavalent to replace the DPT vaccine in developing countries. Vaccines related most side effects are mild and non-serious. Surveillance of adverse events following immunization will enable us to monitor the safety of immunization programs and thereby contribute to validating the immunization program. The main aim of this study is to analyze all suspected adverse events in children reported for pentavalent vaccination.Methods:A prospective, observational epidemiological study was conducted in the department of Paediatrics OPD at tertiary care teaching institute during October 2016 to December 2016. The study was conducted amongst 190 children attending the department of Paediatrics OPD for the second or third dose of pentavalent vaccine.Results: The study shows the following adverse effects after pentavalent injection  127 (66.8%) children had pain at the site of injection, 103(54.2%) mild fever, Swelling at injection site 84(44.2%) and 55(28.9%) children held their leg back due to pain. In majority 85 (44.7%) of children antipyretic and in 65 (34.2%) children analgesic was given was given to relieve the symptoms. The parents were very positive for completing their children’s immunization schedule even though they have faced few symptoms.Conclusions:It can be concluded that all the adverse events reported were mild and could be managed easily without any complications. 


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisca Agda Alexandre Porto ◽  
Allan Raniere Santos Silva ◽  
Lívia Maia Pascoal ◽  
Ismália Cassandra Costa Maia Dias ◽  
Leonardo Hunaldo Dos Santos ◽  
...  

Aim:  To  evaluate  the  knowledge  of  mothers  regarding  adverse consequences from the pentavalent vaccination before and after they participated in an educative  intervention.  Method:  This is  a  quasi-experimental  study,  with  a  before-and-after analysis, of a single group of 100 mothers of breastfeeding babies, from September to October 2014, in an outpatient clinic of a public maternity hospital in the municipality of  Imperatriz,  Brazil.  Results:  Following  the  intervention, a  significant  increase  in understanding  was  observed  among  the  study  participants  in  all  questions  (p<0.05) regarding adverse events after the pentavalent vaccine. After the intervention, there was a significant increase of right answers to the questions: who to seek advice from after an adverse  event  due  to  the  vaccine  (p=0.004)  and  which  adverse  events  from  the pentavalent vaccine are known to mothers (p=0.04). Conclusion: The results indicate a positive change in the  level  of  understanding  of  mothers regarding the  adverse  events after the  pentavalent vaccination.  The  study  provides  a  basis  for the  adoption  of long-term intervention strategies for nurses.


2009 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 408-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Aranaz-Andres ◽  
C. Aibar-Remon ◽  
J. Vitaller-Burillo ◽  
J. Requena-Puche ◽  
E. Terol-Garcia ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e035238
Author(s):  
Fátima Jiménez-Pericás ◽  
María Teresa Gea Velázquez de Castro ◽  
María Pastor-Valero ◽  
Carlos Aibar Remón ◽  
Juan José Miralles ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo determine whether isolated patients admitted to hospital have a higher incidence of adverse events (AEs), to identify their nature, impact and preventability.DesignProspective cohort study with isolated and non-isolated patients.SettingOne public university hospital in the Valencian Community (southeast Spain).ParticipantsWe consecutively collected 400 patients, 200 isolated and 200 non-isolated, age ≥18 years old, to match according to date of entry, admission department, sex, age (±5 years) and disease severity from April 2017 to October 2018. Exclusion criteria: patients age <18 years old and/or reverse isolation patients.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome as the AE, defined according to the National Study of Adverse Effects linked to Hospitalisation (Estudio Nacional Sobre los Efectos Adversos) criteria. Cumulative incidence rates and AE incidence density rates were calculated.ResultsThe incidence of isolated patients with AEs 16.5% (95% CI 11.4% to 21.6%) compared with 9.5% (95% CI 5.4% to 13.6%) in non-isolated (p<0.03). The incidence density of patients with AEs among isolated patients was 11.8 per 1000 days/patient (95% CI 7.8 to 15.9) compared with 4.3 per 1000 days/patient (95% CI 2.4 to 6.3) among non-isolated patients (p<0.001). The incidence of AEs among isolated patients was 18.5% compared with 11% for non-isolated patients (p<0.09). Among the 37 AEs detected in 33 isolated patients, and the 22 AEs detected in 19 non-isolated patients, most corresponded to healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) for both isolated and non-isolated patients (48.6% vs 45.4%). There were significant differences with respect to the preventability of AEs, (67.6% among isolated patients compared with 52.6% among non-isolated patients).ConclusionsAEs were significantly higher in isolated patients compared with non-isolated patients, more than half being preventable and with HAIs as the primary cause. It is essential to improve training and the safety culture of healthcare professionals relating to the care provided to this type of patient.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 873-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Biondi ◽  
Martin Schrappe ◽  
Paola Di Lorenzo ◽  
Anders Castor ◽  
Giovanna Lucchini ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 873 Background. Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) ALL accounts for 3–5% of pediatric ALL. An international survey on 640 children diagnosed between 1995 and 2005 and treated with chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation (SCT) without the use of tyrosin kinase inhibitors (TKI) recently reported an overall 7-year event free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) of 31.2% and 44.2%, respectively. In those years, only limited experience was accumulated on the use of Imatinib (IM) for children with Ph+ leukemia. The EsPhALL study was designed as an intergroup, open-label, randomized Phase II/III study, within the I-BFM-SG network, to assess the safety and efficacy of IM in association with chemotherapy. Ten national study groups participated in the study: AIEOP, BFM-G/CH, COALL, FRALLE, NOPHO, MRC, DCOG, CPH, PINDA and HONG KONG. Methods. Patients 1 to 18 years of age diagnosed with Ph+ ALL were eligible to the study. After the induction phase according to national treatment protocol, patients were classified as Good Risk (GR) or Poor Risk (PR) according to their response to treatment. GR patients were those who achieved both the early response (i.e. blast cell count <1000/ml in peripheral blood after 7 days of prednisone and a single dose of intrathecal methotrexate or M1/M2 bone marrow at day 15 or M1 at day 21) and the complete remission after the frontline Induction course (1st complete remission, CR1). They were randomized to receive IM in combination with chemotherapy (GR-IM) or chemotherapy alone (GR-noIM). PR patients (those who did not achieved early response or CR1 or both) received IM in combination with chemotherapy. Due to the availability of external evidence, the randomization in GR was stopped in 2009 and an amended trial started, with all patients receiving IM continuously. The chemotherapy regimen was modeled upon a BFM high risk backbone and IM was delivered at the dose of 300 mg/m2/day. SCT in CR1 was recommended for all PR patients (any donor) and for GR patients if a genotype-matched donor (9/10 or 10/10 alleles) was available. The primary analysis for the randomized question (ITT) was on disease-free survival (DFS) in GR and EFS in PR patients, not censoring for SCT in CR1, with comparison based on the log-rank test. Results. Between 01-Jan-2004 and 31-Dec-2009, 178 patients (age 1.5–17.9 years) were enrolled and stratified as GR (108; 61%) or PR (70; 39%). Ninety GR patients were randomized (18 excluded for parental refusal or clinical decision); of these, 77% underwent SCT in CR1. Out of 35 PR patients who were resistant to Induction, 80% achieved CR1 after consolidation (Phase IB). 84% of PR patients received SCT in CR1. Relapse was the first event in 23 (33%), 12 (27%) and 10 (22%) of PR, GR-noIM and GR-IM patients, respectively. The most common site was the bone marrow (74%, 92% and 60% in PR, GR-noIM and GR-IM patients, respectively). Deaths in CR1 were 8, 4 and 2 in PR, GR-noIM and GR-IM patients respectively, none being related to IM. The 4-year DFS was 73% (95% CI: 56% – 84%) in the GR-IM arm and 62% (95% CI: 45% – 75%) in the GR-noIM arm (p=0.24), with a 4-year OS of 85% (95% CI: 70% – 93%) and 73% (95% CI: 54% – 85%), respectively (p= 0.37). A secondary ‘as treated' analysis was performed accounting for 13 patients who switched from GR-noIM to GR-IM, with 4-year DFS of 56% (95% CI: 36% – 72%) and 75% (95% CI: 61% – 85%), respectively (p=0.06). The EFS in PR patients was 54% (95% CI: 40% – 65%) at 2-years and remained constant through 3 and 4 years, with a 4-year OS of 64% (95% CI: 50% – 74%).The most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) across the treatment arms were decreased leukocytes, platelets and granulocyte counts, decreased hemoglobin, and infections. There was no significant difference in the overall frequency of AEs across all 3 patients' groups. Severe adverse events rate was 28% in GR-IM group, 32% in GR-noIM and 34% in PR group. Conclusions. Results suggest that the addition of IM to intensive BFM-type chemotherapy regimens was associated with an approximate 10% advantage in long-term DFS in GR patients which, however, the study was not powered to detect. The PR group treated with IM had improved EFS and OS as compared to historical controls. IM was generally well tolerated on top of intensive chemotherapy with a reassuring safety profile. Disclosures: Biondi: BMS, Novartis, Micromed: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Manoochehr Karami ◽  
Pegah Ameri ◽  
Jalal Bathaei ◽  
Zeinab Berangi ◽  
Tahereh Pashaei ◽  
...  

Medical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura C. Pinheiro ◽  
Evgeniya Reshetnyak ◽  
Monika M. Safford ◽  
Lisa M. Kern

2019 ◽  
Vol 61 (6) ◽  
pp. 830-838
Author(s):  
Åshild M Bose ◽  
Ida R Khan Bukholm ◽  
Geir Bukholm ◽  
Jonn Terje Geitung

Background Rapid technological developments, increased complexity, and increased demand have made patient safety a challenge in radiology. Purpose To uncover the causes and consequences behind patient injury compensation claims in the use of MRI, CT, and conventional X-ray examinations, and to determine the system factors that need to be focused on in order to prevent these events. Material and Methods This descriptive cross-sectional study uses data acquired from The Norwegian System of Patient Injury Compensation. A total of 240 cases from 2012–2016 were included. Results According to our study, the main factors contributing to patient injury compensation claims in radiology were false-negative findings (48.7%), misinterpretation (13.1%), and “satisfaction of search” (12%). Another source of error was routines (8.7%), mainly where the patient should have been (further) examined using another modality. Other causes were related to communication (7.6%), procedures (2.9%), technical factors (2.5%), organizational and management factors (1.5%), competence (0.7%), location of the lesion (0.7%), patient factors (0.7%), false-positive findings (0.4%), and work environment (0.4%). These events led to delayed diagnosis and/or treatment in the range of 0–3650 days. Conclusion Errors of perception (false negative and “satisfaction of search”) and cognitive errors (misinterpretation) were the main reasons behind patient injury compensation claims in radiology. We suggest that a combination of double-reading, specialization, increased collaboration between professionals, as well as a reduction of unnecessary examinations should be considered to reduce adverse events in radiology.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document