1. Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: summary of a systematic review and meta‐analysis
- Author
-
Mobasher Butt, Gemma S Morgan, Elizabeth Orton, Arina Zanuzdana, Julia Rosser, Jonathan Roberts, Girija Dabke, Robert Howard, Ahmed Hashim, Laura Béchard-Evans, Charles R. Beck, Siobhan Farmer, Rachel Isba, Paul Fisher, Liz Lingard, Rebecca Harris, Charlotte Stevenson, Sarah Theaker, Mary O'Brien, David A. Ishola, Glenda Augustine, Helene Denness, Caroline Hird, Vivienne Parish, Julie O'Boyle, Felix Greaves, Jose Figureroa, Sophie Haroon, Rachel Weston, Dean Wallace, Munib Haroon, Hiroshi Horiuchi, Jonathan S. Nguyen-Van-Tam, Richard Puleston, Sophie Kim, Yana Vinogradova, Neil Wigglesworth, Javier Peñalver, Marko Kerac, Bruce C. McKenzie, Lauren Ahyow, Joanne E. Enstone, Mitsuru Mukaigawara, and Gabriel Agboado
- Subjects
Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Epidemiology ,MEDLINE ,Antibodies, Viral ,1117 Public Health and Health Services ,Immunocompromised Host ,Stream 4: Review Summary ,systematic review ,Virology ,Influenza, Human ,Health care ,Humans ,Medicine ,Adverse effect ,Intensive care medicine ,Immunocompromised ,Science & Technology ,business.industry ,Vaccination ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,1103 Clinical Sciences ,EFFICACY ,meta-analysis ,Study heterogeneity ,Infectious Diseases ,Data extraction ,meta‐analysis ,Influenza Vaccines ,Meta-analysis ,Immunology ,Etiology ,influenza ,business ,Life Sciences & Biomedicine - Abstract
Vaccination of immunocompromised patients is recommended in many national guidelines to protect against severe or complicated influenza infection. However, due to uncertainties over the evidence base, implementation is frequently patchy and dependent on individual clinical discretion. We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to assess the evidence for influenza vaccination in this patient group. Healthcare databases and grey literature were searched and screened for eligibility. Data extraction and assessments of risk of bias were undertaken in duplicate, and results were synthesised narratively and using meta‐analysis where possible. Our data show that whilst the serological response following vaccination of immunocompromised patients is less vigorous than in healthy controls, clinical protection is still meaningful, with only mild variation in adverse events between aetiological groups. Although we encountered significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity in many of our meta‐analyses, we advocate that immunocompromised patients should be targeted for influenza vaccination.
- Published
- 2013
- Full Text
- View/download PDF