Search

The passive surveillance system is an important tool in pharmacovigilance of vaccines. However, reporting of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) post-marketing has limitations regarding under-reporting, biased reports and lack of exposure data resulting in imprecise estimates. New mobile application technology may provide an opportunity for an enhanced surveillance. A pre-requisite for the use of new app-based technology is to identify practical challenges and end users' preferences for design of app-features. The objectives were (i) to investigate the recruitment and feasibility of an app-based study in Germany, (ii) to assess individuals' motivation to participate in such a study and (iii) to identify app-features for reporting AEFI. We conducted a cross-sectional study among employees of a financial institution who attended the occupational health office during the seasonal influenza vaccination in November 2017. Participants tested feasibility and assessed an app prototype for AEFI reporting by using a case vignette and a questionnaire. Of the 153 attending employees, 65 (42%) agreed to participate and returned the questionnaire. Twenty-three (63%) rated the experience of reporting AEFI with the app prototype to be positive. Among three features offered for gamification, collecting points was most frequently chosen (n=22, 34%). The main reason for declining participation was the apprehension about data protection (n=28, 43%). Results suggest that the app-based technology was well accepted and is a suitable supplement for AEFI reporting and in our study. A convincing data protection concept is likely to enhance acceptability of such a system.

Lyme borreliosis (LB) and tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) are the most common tick-borne diseases in Germany. While for LB only non-specific prevention strategies exist, TBE can be additionally prevented by vaccination. It is unclear to which extent non-specific prevention strategies are applied by individuals living in non-endemic areas for TBE in Germany, and whether TBE vaccination status affects their implementation. Participants of the HaBIDS panel (Hygiene and Behavior Infectious Diseases Study) from four counties of Lower Saxony were invited to fill out a questionnaire on their TBE vaccination status, their LB diagnoses as well as their knowledge, attitudes, and practice related to prevention measures for tick-borne diseases. Based on self-reported data we estimated cumulative lifetime incidence (CUM) and incidence of LB as well as TBE vaccination coverage. One year later, participants received a supplementary questionnaire focusing on reasons for vaccination against TBE and compliance with the vaccination schedule. 1,573 (74.2% of those invited) panel members aged 18-69 years participated in this study. Of these, 22.8% reported to have ever been vaccinated against TBE. The estimated CUM of LB was 5.1% (95%-CI: 4.1%-6.4%), and the incidence was 1.09 per 1,000 person years (95%-CI: 0.87-1.36). 98% of participants knew that LB is transmitted by the bite of an infected tick, but about 50% didn't know that TBE vaccination does not protect against LB. Even though about 80% of study participants were convinced that recommended non-specific prevention strategies were indeed protective, a much lower proportion implemented them. TBE-vaccinated participants were better informed about tick-borne diseases compared to non-vaccinated participants, whereby being vaccinated did not negatively affect implementation of non-specific prevention strategies. Based on data from the supplementary questionnaire, traveling to endemic areas (75.3%) was the main reason for TBE vaccination; 33.0% of those vaccinated had a complete vaccination schedule with three doses. Our study in a TBE non-endemic area revealed deficits in knowledge about which pathogens are covered by TBE vaccination, and a lack in the implementation of non-specific prevention measures. TBE vaccination was not associated with a reduced uptake of non-specific prevention measures., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.)

Background: Until now, herpes zoster (HZ)-related disease burden in Germany has been estimated based on health insurance data and clinical findings. However, the validity of self-reported HZ is unclear. This study investigated the validity of self-reported herpes zoster (HZ) and its complication postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) using data from the pretest studies of the German National Cohort (GNC) in comparison with estimates based on health insurance data., Methods: Data of 4751 participants aged between 20 and 69 years from two pretest studies of the GNC carried out in 2011 and 2012 were used. Based on self-reports of physician-diagnosed HZ and PHN, age- and sex-specific HZ incidence rates and PHN proportions were estimated. For comparison, estimates based on statutory health insurance data from the German population were considered., Results: Eleven percent (95%-CI, 10.4 to 12.3, n = 539) of the participants reported at least one HZ episode in their lifetime. Our estimated age-specific HZ incidence rates were lower than previous estimates based on statutory health insurance data. The PHN proportion in participants older than 50 years was 5.9% (1.9 to 13.9%), which was in line with estimates based on health insurance data., Conclusion: As age- and sex-specific patterns were comparable with that in health insurance data, self-reported diagnosis of HZ seems to be a valid instrument for overall disease trends. Possible reasons for observed differences in incidence rates are recall bias in self-reported data or overestimation in health insurance data.