{"meta":{"status":200,"messages":[],"pagination":{"max":1,"offset":0,"count":1,"total":1,"pageNum":1,"totalPages":1,"sort":null,"currentUrl":"https://api.digitalmedia.hhs.gov/api/v2/resources/media.json?offset=0&max=1&ignoreHiddenMedia=1&format=json&id=15287&newUrlBase=http://www.cdc.gov/flu/fluvaxview","nextUrl":null,"previousUrl":null}},"results":[{"content":"
\nAuthors: Megan C. Lindley, MPH; Jun Zhang, MD; Gary L. Euler, DrPH. Immunization Services Division, NCIRD
\n* Physicians and dentists
\nIt is important for health care personnel (HCP) to get the influenza vaccination so they do not get sick with influenza or give influenza to their patients. Influenza vaccination has been shown to lower the number of sick days taken by HCP due to influenza (1-2), and can help HCP stay healthy so they can take care of patients when there are outbreaks of influenza. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that all HCP get an influenza vaccine every year (3). However, even though levels of influenza vaccination among HCP have risen slowly over the past ten years, less than 50% of HCP each year got the influenza vaccination until the 2009-10 season, when an estimated 62% of HCP got a seasonal influenza vaccination and an additional 2% of HCP got only the H1N1 influenza vaccination (4). Last year, in the 2010-11 season, 63.5% of HCP reported influenza vaccination (5). The national Healthy People 2020 objective for HCP influenza vaccination is 90% (6). It is important to measure influenza vaccination of HCP every season to track progress toward this objective and to make sure that HCP and their patients are protected from influenza.
\n \nPopulation | \nUnweighted sample size* | \n Weighted n | \nCoverage % (95% CI) | \n
---|---|---|---|
Overall | \n2,442 | \n13,337,764 | \n63.4 (60.7, 66.1) | \n
Occupation: | \n\n | \n | \n |
Physician/dentist | \n469 | \n626,136 | \n77.6 (73.7, 81.5) | \n
Nurse practitioner/ physician assistant | \n126 | \n153,151 | \n76.8 (69.5, 84.1) | \n
Nurse | \n398 | \n2,814,843 | \n75.7 (71.1, 80.4) | \n
Other\u2020 | \n1,449 | \n9,743,634 | \n58.7 (55.3, 62.0) | \n
* Seven respondents who did not provide their influenza vaccination status are excluded from this table.
\n\u2020 \u201cOther\u201d includes allied health professionals, technicians/assistants and aides, and administrative and non-clinical support staff.
\n\n Top of Page
\n\n Top of Page
\n* \u201dOther\u201d includes settings other than hospitals, physician\u2019s offices, or long-term care facilities.
\n\n Top of Page
\n\n Top of Page
\n\n Top of Page
\n* Although 765 respondents reported not yet having received the influenza vaccine as of November 18, 2011, this question was restricted to the 226 of those respondents who stated they \u201cwill definitely not\u201d get the influenza vaccine this season.
\n\n Top of Page
\nThe data in this report were collected from two pre-existing web-based panels from November 1 \u2013 18, 2011. Clinical personnel were recruited from the membership of Medscape, a web portal managed by WebMD Professional Services, and non-clinical personnel were recruited from Survey Spot (SSI), a general population Internet panel. There were 2,528 health care personnel who completed the screening questions and 2,449 who completed the survey. These panels were designed to recruit a sample with at least 200 participants from each of the six occupational categories, 200 participants in each of three main health care settings and 200 participants in each of three race/ethnicity groups. Survey items included self-reported vaccination during the current influenza season and vaccination history and knowledge, attitudes and beliefs concerning influenza and vaccination.
\nWeighted estimates were calculated based on each occupational group by age, gender, race/ethnicity, health care setting, and census region to be generalizable to the U.S. population of health care personnel. Computation of the variance of the estimates and confidence intervals assumed with-replacement sampling with unequal probability of selection for the sampling design. The post-stratification weights were used to compute the variance and confidence intervals.
\n \nThese results are preliminary and should be interpreted with caution. The follow-up survey in April 2012 will allow for assessment of influenza vaccination coverage at the end of the influenza season. Additional subgroup comparisons (e.g. vaccination coverage by race/ethnicity) adjusted for respondent characteristics will be presented using data from the April 2012 HCP internet panel survey. These internet panel survey results for HCP will be compared later to estimates from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS).
\nThe findings in the report are subject to several limitations. First, the sample is not necessarily representative of all HCP in the United States, because the survey was conducted among a volunteer panel of HCP rather than a randomly-selected sample. Second, all results are based on self-report and are not verified by employment records or employer interviews. Third, the survey might be subject to selection bias, if participation in the survey is correlated with receipt of vaccination or certain beliefs about influenza vaccination. Fourth, the definition of HCP used in this survey might vary slightly from definitions used in previously published surveys of vaccination coverage. Finally, estimates might not be directly comparable to those made for previous influenza seasons, because different panels were surveyed in each year. Despite these limitations, Internet panel surveys are a useful surveillance tool for timely midseason and postseason evaluation of influenza vaccination coverage and knowledge, attitude, practice, and barrier data not provided by other sources of HCP data.
\n \n\n Top of Page
\n\n Top of Page
\n