Parental acceptance of an intranasal vaccine: Example of influenza vaccine

Marien, A.-G.; Hochart, A.; Lagrée, Marion; Diallo, D.; Martinot, Alain; Dubos, Francois

Document type :

Article dans une revue scientifique: Article original

DOI :

10.1016/j.arcped.2018.11.002

Permalink :

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12210/58301

Title :

Parental acceptance of an intranasal vaccine: Example of influenza vaccine

Author(s) :

Marien, A.-G. [Auteur]
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [CHU Lille] [CHRU Lille]
Hochart, A. [Auteur]
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [CHU Lille] [CHRU Lille]
Lagrée, Marion [Auteur]
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [CHU Lille] [CHRU Lille]
Diallo, D. [Auteur]
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [CHU Lille] [CHRU Lille]
Martinot, Alain [Auteur]

Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Dubos, Francois [Auteur]

Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]

Journal title :

Archives de pediatrie . organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie

Abbreviated title :

Archives de Pédiatrie

Volume number :

Pages :

71-74

Publisher :

Elsevier

Publication date :

2019-02

ISSN :

0929-693X

HAL domain(s) :

Sciences du Vivant [q-bio]

English abstract : [en]

Background Influenza vaccination coverage of children with chronic disease is insufficient in France, although a nasal live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) has been approved. Objective We aimed to evaluate the ...
Show more >Background Influenza vaccination coverage of children with chronic disease is insufficient in France, although a nasal live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) has been approved. Objective We aimed to evaluate the acceptance of nasally administered vaccines by parents of children with chronic illness, by comparing LAIV vs. injectable inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) acceptance. Methods We performed a retrospective, observational study (December 2014 to April 2015) including parents of all children vaccinated with the LAIV during the 2013–2014 influenza vaccination campaign at our university hospital. It was an opinion survey on the tolerance and acceptance of the LAIV. Results A standardized evaluation form was completed by 67/79 parents of all children who received the LAIV (mean age: 113 ± 56 months; 64% with a chronic respiratory disease). The parents responded that vaccines in general were important (99%) but only 58% of them accepted the injectable route of administration. Of the 48 parents of children who had received both LAIV and IIV in the past, global opinion (P < 0.0001) and tolerance (P < 0.0001) were better for LAIV. For the future, 81% of parents would prefer LAIV, mainly because of needle absence and/or less painful character, and 18% IIV, mainly because of easier administration or habit. Conclusion The better acceptance of a nasally administrated vaccine could increase vaccination coverage in the future for nasal vaccines.Show less >

Language :

Anglais

Audience :

Internationale

Popular science :

Non

Administrative institution(s) :

CHU Lille
Université de Lille

Collections :

METRICS : Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694

Submission date :

2021-12-08T09:53:11Z
2024-04-09T07:51:03Z

Annexes

document
Open access
Source du fichier principal
Access the document

Version	Link	Modification date
2	20.500.12210/58301*	2024-04-09T07:32:45Z
1	20.500.12210/58301.1	2021-12-08T09:53:11Z

Parental acceptance of an intranasal ...

BibTeX

CSV

Excel

RIS

Annexes

Version history

Parental acceptance of an intranasal ... BibTeX CSV Excel RIS

Annexes

Version history

Parental acceptance of an intranasal ...

BibTeX

CSV

Excel

RIS