Search

A systematic review and meta-analysis are undertaken to evaluate estimates of adherence to antiretroviral therapy in sub-Saharan Africa and North America. Findings indicate that favorable levels of adherence to therapy, mostly assessed through a patient self-report, can be achieved in sub-Saharan Africa, but adherence remains inadequate in North America.

Importance: There is limited comparative epidemiological evidence on outcomes associated with COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy; monitoring pregnancy outcomes in large populations is required.Objective: To evaluate peripartum outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy.Design, Setting, and Participants: Population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, using a birth registry linked with the provincial COVID-19 immunization database. All births between December 14, 2020, and September 30, 2021, were included.Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, COVID-19 vaccination after pregnancy, and no vaccination.Main Outcomes and Measures: Postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, cesarean delivery (overall and emergency cesarean delivery), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and low newborn 5-minute Apgar score (<7). Linear and robust Poisson regression was used to generate adjusted risk differences (aRDs) and risk ratios (aRRs), respectively, comparing cumulative incidence of outcomes in those who received COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy with those vaccinated after pregnancy and those with no record of COVID-19 vaccination at any point. Inverse probability of treatment weights were used to adjust for confounding.Results: Among 97 590 individuals (mean [SD] age, 31.9 [4.9] years), 22 660 (23%) received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy (63.6% received dose 1 in the third trimester; 99.8% received an mRNA vaccine). Comparing those vaccinated during vs after pregnancy (n = 44 815), there were no significantly increased risks of postpartum hemorrhage (incidence: 3.0% vs 3.0%; aRD, -0.28 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -0.59 to 0.03]; aRR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]), chorioamnionitis (0.5% vs 0.5%; aRD, -0.04 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -0.17 to 0.09]; aRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.70-1.21]), cesarean delivery (30.8% vs 32.2%; aRD, -2.73 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -3.59 to -1.88]; aRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.89-0.95]), NICU admission (11.0% vs 13.3%; aRD, -1.89 per 100 newborns [95% CI, -2.49 to -1.30]; aRR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.80-0.90]), or low Apgar score (1.8% vs 2.0%; aRD, -0.31 per 100 newborns [95% CI, -0.56 to -0.06]; aRR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.73-0.97]). Findings were qualitatively similar when compared with individuals who did not receive COVID-19 vaccination at any point (n = 30 115).Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada, COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, compared with vaccination after pregnancy and with no vaccination, was not significantly associated with increased risk of adverse peripartum outcomes. Study interpretation should consider that the vaccinations received during pregnancy were primarily mRNA vaccines administered in the second and third trimester. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnancy can reduce influenza illness among pregnant women and newborns. Evidence is limited on whether seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnancy is associated with adverse childhood health outcomes.Objective: To assess the association between maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy and early childhood health outcomes.Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study, using a birth registry linked with health administrative data. All live births in Nova Scotia, Canada, between October 1, 2010, and March 31, 2014, were included, with follow-up until March 31, 2016. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals were estimated while controlling for maternal medical history and other potential confounders using inverse probability of treatment weighting.Exposures: Seasonal influenza vaccination during pregnancy.Main Outcomes and Measures: Childhood outcomes studied were immune-related (eg, asthma, infections), non-immune-related (eg, neoplasms, sensory impairment), and nonspecific (eg, urgent or inpatient health care utilization), measured from emergency department and hospitalization databases.Results: Among 28 255 children (49% female, 92% born at ≥37 weeks' gestation), 10 227 (36.2%) were born to women who received seasonal influenza vaccination during pregnancy. During a mean follow-up of 3.6 years, there was no significant association between maternal influenza vaccination and childhood asthma (incidence rate, 3.0 vs 2.5 per 1000 person-years; difference, 0.53 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, -0.15 to 1.21]; adjusted HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.94 to 1.59]), neoplasms (0.32 vs 0.26 per 1000 person-years; difference, 0.06 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, -0.16 to 0.28]; adjusted HR, 1.26 [95% CI, 0.57 to 2.78]), or sensory impairment (0.80 vs 0.97 per 1000 person-years; difference, -0.17 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, -0.54 to 0.21]; adjusted HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.49 to 1.37]). Maternal influenza vaccination in pregnancy was not significantly associated with infections in early childhood (incidence rate, 184.6 vs 179.1 per 1000 person-years; difference, 5.44 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 0.01 to 10.9]; adjusted IRR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.15]) or with urgent and inpatient health services utilization (511.7 vs 477.8 per 1000 person-years; difference, 33.9 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 24.9 to 42.9]; adjusted IRR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.16]).Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study with mean follow-up duration of 3.6 years, maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy was not significantly associated with an increased risk of adverse early childhood health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Transfusion services have used various techniques to reduce blood product utilization. Given the potential adverse effects of transfusions and the resources consumed in implementing strategies to reduce transfusions, there is a need to understand their effectiveness. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of the literature to examine the effectiveness of behavioral interventions to reduce blood product utilization. Methods We identified all relevant articles through the use of electronic searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE, as well as hand searches of review articles and personal files. The electronic searches included articles published between January 1966 and May 2003. The searches included the terms blood transfusion, plasma exchange, guidelines, education, practice patterns, and professional practice. The outcomes of interest were the number of units transfused and the proportion of patients who received transfusions. Results Nineteen studies examining the effectiveness of single (guidelines, prospective audits, retrospective audits, and reminders) or multifaceted interventions in reducing red blood cell, platelet, plasma, cryoprecipitate, and albumin transfusions met the inclusion criteria. Eighteen studies demonstrated a relative reduction in the number of units given (range, 9%-77%) or the proportion of patients receiving transfusions (range, 17%-79%). The reported reductions were qualitatively similar for the different blood products studied. No particular intervention or combination of interventions appeared more effective in reducing utilization. Conclusions Behavioral interventions, including simple interventions, appear to be effective in changing physician transfusion practices and reducing blood utilization. Appropriately designed clinical trials are still needed to determine the relative effectiveness of different interventions to change practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A research letter to the editor is presented on the Internet social networking website YouTube as a source of information on immunization.

This Viewpoint discusses personal health information on social media and other sites and ways in which this information can and should be protected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a reply to a letter to the editor discussing the article "YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis," published in 2007 in a previous issue.