Rivetti D, Jefferson T, Thomas R, Rudin M, Rivetti A, Di Pietrantonj C, Demicheli V
Servizio di Igiene e Sanita' Pubblica, Public Health Department, ASL 19 Asti, C. so Dante 202, Asti, Italy 14100.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19(3):CD004876. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004876.pub2.
Influenza vaccination of elderly individuals is recommended worldwide and has been targeted toward the elderly and those at serious risk of complications.
Our aim was to review the evidence of efficacy, effectiveness and safety of influenza vaccines in individuals aged 65 years or older.
We searched the following databases on The Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (Issue 1, 2006); MEDLINE (January 1966 to March Week 3 2006); EMBASE (Dialog 1974 to 1979; SilverPlatter 1980 to December 2005); Biological Abstracts (SilverPlatter 1969 to December 2004); and Science Citation Index (Web of Science 1974 to December 2004).
We considered randomised, quasi-randomised, cohort and case-control studies assessing efficacy against influenza (laboratory-confirmed cases) or effectiveness against influenza-like illness (ILI) or safety. Any influenza vaccine given independently, in any dose, preparation or time schedule, compared with placebo or with no intervention was considered.
We grouped reports first according to the setting of the study (community or long-term care facilities) and then by level of viral circulation and vaccine matching. We further stratified by co-administration of pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV) and by different types of influenza vaccines. We analysed the following outcomes: influenza, influenza-like illness, hospital admissions, complications and deaths.
Sixty-four studies were included in the efficacy / effectiveness assessment, resulting in 96 data sets. In homes for elderly individuals (with good vaccine match and high viral circulation) the effectiveness of vaccines against ILI was 23% (6% to 36%) and non-significant against influenza (RR 1.04: 95% CI 0.43 to 2.51). We found no correlation between vaccine coverage and ILI attack rate. Well matched vaccines prevented pneumonia (VE 46%; 30% to 58%), hospital admission (VE 45%; 16% to 64%) and deaths from influenza or pneumonia (VE 42%, 17% to 59%). In elderly individuals living in the community, vaccines were not significantly effective against influenza (RR 0.19; 95% CI 0.02 to 2.01), ILI (RR 1.05: 95% CI 0.58 to 1.89), or pneumonia (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.20). Well matched vaccines prevented hospital admission for influenza and pneumonia (VE 26%; 12% to 38%) and all-cause mortality (VE 42%; 24% to 55%). After adjustment for confounders, vaccine performance was improved for admissions to hospital for influenza or pneumonia (VE* 27%; 21% to 33%), respiratory diseases (VE* 22%; 15% to 28%) and cardiac disease (VE* 24%; 18% to 30%); and for all-cause mortality (VE* 47%; 39% to 54%). The public health safety profiles of the vaccines appear to be acceptable.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In long-term care facilities, where vaccination is most effective against complications, the aims of the vaccination campaign are fulfilled, at least in part. However, according to reliable evidence the usefulness of vaccines in the community is modest. The apparent high effectiveness of the vaccines in preventing death from all causes may reflect a baseline imbalance in health status and other systematic differences in the two groups of participants.
全球都建议对老年人进行流感疫苗接种,且接种对象主要是老年人及有严重并发症风险的人群。
我们的目的是回顾65岁及以上人群流感疫苗的有效性、实际效果和安全性的证据。
我们检索了以下数据库:考克兰图书馆、考克兰对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、考克兰系统评价数据库以及循证医学数据库(2006年第1期);医学索引数据库(1966年1月至2006年3月第3周);荷兰医学文摘数据库(Dialog,1974年至1979年;SilverPlatter,1980年至2005年12月);生物学文摘数据库(SilverPlatter,1969年至2004年12月);以及科学引文索引数据库(科学网,1974年至2004年12月)。
我们纳入了评估流感疫苗对流感(实验室确诊病例)的有效性、对流感样疾病(ILI)的实际效果或安全性的随机、半随机、队列和病例对照研究。任何独立给予的流感疫苗,无论剂量、制剂或接种时间表如何,与安慰剂或无干预措施相比,均在考虑范围内。
我们首先根据研究背景(社区或长期护理机构)对报告进行分组,然后按病毒传播水平和疫苗匹配度进行分组。我们还根据肺炎球菌多糖疫苗(PPV)的联合接种情况以及不同类型的流感疫苗进行了进一步分层。我们分析了以下结果:流感、流感样疾病、住院、并发症和死亡。
64项研究纳入了有效性/实际效果评估,产生了96个数据集。在老年护理机构(疫苗匹配良好且病毒传播水平高)中,疫苗对ILI的实际效果为23%(6%至36%),对流感无显著效果(RR 1.04:95% CI 0.43至2.51)。我们发现疫苗接种覆盖率与ILI发病率之间无相关性。匹配良好的疫苗可预防肺炎(疫苗效力46%;30%至58%)、住院(疫苗效力45%;16%至64%)以及流感或肺炎导致的死亡(疫苗效力42%,17%至59%)。在社区居住的老年人中,疫苗对流感(RR 0.19;95% CI 0.02至2.01)、ILI(RR 1.05:95% CI 0.58至1.89)或肺炎(RR 0.88;95% CI 0.64至1.20)均无显著效果。匹配良好的疫苗可预防因流感和肺炎住院(疫苗效力26%;12%至38%)以及全因死亡率(疫苗效力42%;24%至55%)。在对混杂因素进行调整后,疫苗对流感或肺炎住院(调整后疫苗效力* 27%;21%至33%)、呼吸道疾病(调整后疫苗效力* 22%;15%至28%)和心脏病(调整后疫苗效力* 24%;18%至3