Thomas R E, Jefferson T, Demicheli V, Rivetti D
University of Calgary, Department of Medicine, UCMC, #1707-1632 14th Avenue, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2M 1N7.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19(3):CD005187. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005187.pub2.
Healthcare workers (HCW) (nurses, doctors, other health professionals, cleaners and porters), have substantial rates of clinical and sub-clinical influenza during influenza seasons and may transmit influenza to those in their care, especially the vulnerable elderly.
To identify and summarise comparative studies assessing the effects of vaccinating healthcare workers (HCW) on the incidence of influenza, influenza-like-illness (ILI) and its complications on elderly residents in long-term facilities.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the NHS Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2006); MEDLINE (January 1966 to Week 1, February 2006); EMBASE (1974 to March 2006); Biological Abstracts (1969 to December 2004); and Science Citation Index-Expanded (1974 to March 2006).
Comparative randomised and non-randomised studies reporting the effects of influenza vaccines on the incidence of viral infections in institutions for the elderly of any type, in any schedule of vaccination given to HCW caring for elderly residents of long-term facilities aged 60 years or older.
Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality using criteria from the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (for non-randomised studies).
We included two cluster randomised controlled trials (C-RCT) and one cohort study. Staff vaccination appears to have significant effect against ILI (absolute vaccine efficacy (VE) 86%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 40% to 97%) only when patients are vaccinated too; if patients are not vaccinated, staff immunisation shows no effect (based on one C-RCT). Based on a small number of observations from two C-RCTs, the vaccines have no efficacy against influenza (odds ratio (OR) 0.86, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.68) or lower respiratory tract infections (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.20) but were effective against deaths from pneumonia (VE 39%, 95% CI 2% to 62%) and deaths from all causes (VE 40%, 95% CI 27% to 50%). All findings must be interpreted with caution given the presence of selection bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that there is no credible evidence that vaccination of healthy people under the age of 60, who are HCWs caring for the elderly, affects influenza complications in those cared for. However, as vaccinating the elderly in institutions reduces the complications of influenza and vaccinating healthy persons under 60 reduces cases of influenza, those with the responsibility of caring for the elderly in institutions may want to increase vaccine coverage and assess its effects in well-designed studies.
医护人员(护士、医生、其他卫生专业人员、清洁工和搬运工)在流感季节临床和亚临床流感感染率较高,可能会将流感传播给他们所护理的人群,尤其是脆弱的老年人。
识别并总结比较研究,评估为医护人员接种疫苗对长期护理机构中老年居民流感、流感样疾病(ILI)及其并发症发病率的影响。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、Cochrane系统评价数据库以及英国国家卫生服务系统有效性评价摘要数据库(DARE)(Cochrane图书馆2006年第1期);MEDLINE(1966年1月至2006年2月第1周);EMBASE(1974年至2006年3月);生物学文摘数据库(1969年至2004年12月);以及科学引文索引扩展版(1974年至2006年3月)。
比较随机和非随机研究,报告流感疫苗对任何类型老年机构中病毒感染发病率的影响,以及为长期护理机构中60岁及以上老年居民提供护理的医护人员的任何疫苗接种方案。
两位作者独立提取数据,并使用Cochrane评价员手册和纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(用于非随机研究)中的标准评估方法学质量。
我们纳入了两项整群随机对照试验(C-RCT)和一项队列研究。仅当患者也接种疫苗时,工作人员接种疫苗似乎对ILI有显著效果(绝对疫苗效力(VE)86%,95%置信区间(CI)40%至97%);如果患者未接种疫苗,工作人员免疫则无效果(基于一项C-RCT)。基于两项C-RCT的少量观察结果,疫苗对流感(优势比(OR)0.86,95%CI 0.44至1.68)或下呼吸道感染(OR 0.70,95%CI 0.41至1.20)无效果,但对肺炎死亡(VE 39%,95%CI 2%至6日)和全因死亡(VE 40%,95%CI 27%至50%)有效。鉴于存在选择偏倚,所有结果都必须谨慎解读。
我们得出结论,没有可靠证据表明,护理老年人的60岁以下健康医护人员接种疫苗会影响其所护理人群的流感并发症。然而,由于在机构中为老年人接种疫苗可减少流感并发症,而60岁以下健康人群接种疫苗可减少流感病例,负责在机构中护理老年人的人员可能希望提高疫苗接种覆盖率,并在设计良好的研究中评估其效果。