Randomised active programs on healthcareworkers' flu vaccination in geriatric health care settings in France: The VESTA study

Abstract

In geriatric health care centres in France, an active multicenter program giving personal satisfaction and taking into account the profile of non-vaccinated HCWs was more effective in promoting flu vaccination than a scientifically factual information program. HCW involvement is required in program implementation in order to avoid rejection of top-down information.

Interventions to increase seasonal influenza vaccine coverage in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis

“…Publication years ranged from 1992 to 2015. Most studies were BnA without a control group, [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][38][39][40][42][43][44][45][46]48 43,56 Five studies 35,41,54,58,71 evaluated separately more than one intervention on the same population or using the same controls, and 2 studies 27,28 were also performed on the same population. In two studies, 34,42 the same intervention was evaluated in independent populations or settings.…”

“…Regarding the risk of bias, out of the 11 RCTs or cRCTs, in 7 the method of randomization was unclear, 26,34,35,51,53,58,64 and one study employed a factorial design with partial randomization. 41 Allocation concealment in the 2 RCTs was unclear, 35,53 5 studies did not report vaccination coverage at baseline for the intervention and control groups, 34,35,37,47,53 and 9 studies (including the 3 controlled BnA studies) did not sufficiently report on potential baseline imbalances.…”

“…41 Allocation concealment in the 2 RCTs was unclear, 35,53 5 studies did not report vaccination coverage at baseline for the intervention and control groups, 34,35,37,47,53 and 9 studies (including the 3 controlled BnA studies) did not sufficiently report on potential baseline imbalances. 34 26,41,47,49,58 and in 3 of them the response rate was low enough to potentially bias the results. 41,47,58 Most studies offered vaccination in-house and could objectively ascertain vaccine coverage 26,35,36,49,53,64,68,71 ; one study used an external occupational health service, 37 another used general practitioner claim forms, 34 3 studies used self-report via quesionnaires to ascertain vaccination, 41,47,58 and one study did not report the method of ascertainment.…”

“…34 26,41,47,49,58 and in 3 of them the response rate was low enough to potentially bias the results. 41,47,58 Most studies offered vaccination in-house and could objectively ascertain vaccine coverage 26,35,36,49,53,64,68,71 ; one study used an external occupational health service, 37 another used general practitioner claim forms, 34 3 studies used self-report via quesionnaires to ascertain vaccination, 41,47,58 and one study did not report the method of ascertainment. 51 Of the uncontrolled BnA studies, none described particular concurrent events that could influence the post-intervention vaccination coverage, except in the 2 studies that reported a vaccine shortage during the previous year 43,56 ; although in these the comparison was made with the second-to-last year, the shortage might still have biased the post-intervention vaccination coverage.…”

A rapid evidence appraisal of influenza vaccination in health workers: An important policy in an area of imperfect evidence

“…Several randomised trials [85] have successfully used a pre-intervention survey as a basis for subsequent intervention mapping [25] , [86] in the development of multi-faceted interventions. This is particularly important as the reasons for vaccine hesitancy are complex and heterogeneous [52] , making local, social, cultural, institutional and logistical factors all relevant to the development of educational or knowledge-based interventions.…”