Influenza Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA.
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Aug 2;73(3):386-392. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa407.
Demonstration of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalized illness in addition to milder outpatient illness may strengthen vaccination messaging. Our objective was to compare patient characteristics and VE between United States (US) inpatient and outpatient VE networks.
We tested adults with acute respiratory illness (ARI) for influenza within 1 outpatient-based and 1 hospital-based VE network from 2015 through 2018. We compared age, sex, and high-risk conditions. The test-negative design was used to compare vaccination odds in influenza-positive cases vs influenza-negative controls. We estimated VE using logistic regression adjusting for site, age, sex, race/ethnicity, peak influenza activity, time to testing from, season (overall VE), and underlying conditions. VE differences (ΔVE) were assessed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) determined through bootstrapping with significance defined as excluding the null.
The networks enrolled 14 573 (4144 influenza-positive) outpatients and 6769 (1452 influenza-positive) inpatients. Inpatients were older (median, 62 years vs 49 years) and had more high-risk conditions (median, 4 vs 1). Overall VE across seasons was 31% (95% CI, 26%-37%) among outpatients and 36% (95% CI, 27%-44%) among inpatients. Strain-specific VE (95% CI) among outpatients vs inpatients was 37% (25%-47%) vs 53% (37%-64%) against H1N1pdm09; 19% (9%-27%) vs 23% (8%-35%) against H3N2; and 46% (38%-53%) vs 46% (31%-58%) against B viruses. ΔVE was not significant for any comparison across all sites.
Inpatients and outpatients with ARI represent distinct populations. Despite comparatively poor health among inpatients, influenza vaccination was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations.
除了轻症门诊疾病外,流感疫苗对住院疾病的有效性(VE)的证明可能会加强疫苗接种信息传递。我们的目的是比较美国(US)门诊和住院 VE 网络中患者的特征和 VE。
我们在 2015 年至 2018 年期间,在 1 个基于门诊的和 1 个基于医院的 VE 网络中,对患有急性呼吸道疾病(ARI)的成年人进行了流感检测。我们比较了年龄、性别和高危情况。采用病例对照研究设计比较了流感阳性病例与流感阴性对照的疫苗接种几率。我们使用逻辑回归估计 VE,调整了地点、年龄、性别、种族/民族、流感活动高峰期、检测时间、季节(总体 VE)和基础疾病。通过自举法确定 95%置信区间(CI)来评估 VE 差异(ΔVE),并通过排除零假设来确定差异的显著性。
这两个网络共纳入了 14573 名(4144 例流感阳性)门诊患者和 6769 名(1452 例流感阳性)住院患者。住院患者年龄较大(中位数 62 岁 vs 49 岁),高危情况更多(中位数 4 种 vs 1 种)。各季节门诊患者的总体 VE 为 31%(95%CI,26%-37%),住院患者的总体 VE 为 36%(95%CI,27%-44%)。门诊患者与住院患者的流感疫苗针对不同毒株的特异性 VE(95%CI)为 H1N1pdm09 型 37%(25%-47%)vs 53%(37%-64%);H3N2 型 19%(9%-27%)vs 23%(8%-35%);B 型病毒 46%(38%-53%)vs 46%(31%-58%)。在所有地点,各项比较的 VE 差异均无统计学意义。
患有 ARI 的门诊患者和住院患者代表了不同的人群。尽管住院患者的健康状况相对较差,但流感疫苗接种对预防流感相关住院治疗仍然有效。