Gulam Khandaker, Frank H Beard, Aditi Dey, Chris Coulter, Alexandra J Hendry, Kristine K Macartney
{"title":"Evaluation of bacille Calmette-Guérin immunisation programs in Australia.","authors":"Gulam Khandaker, Frank H Beard, Aditi Dey, Chris Coulter, Alexandra J Hendry, Kristine K Macartney","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) immunisation programs in Australia are funded and operated by the individual states and territories. In recent years BCG vaccine shortages have required use of unregistered products. We aimed to evaluate BCG immunisation programs in Australia, with particular reference to program implementation and national consistency.\u2029 Methods: Between September and November 2015, 12 key stakeholders, representing Australian states and territories, completed surveys. We analysed BCG vaccination coverage data from the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register (ACIR), and data on adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) with BCG vaccine from the Therapeutic Goods Administration's Adverse Drug Reactions System, for 2001 to 2014.\u2029 Results: Access to BCG vaccination varies between jurisdictions, with some states providing this only in major city locations. Analysis of ACIR data suggests significant differences in vaccine delivery between jurisdictions, but varying levels of under-reporting to the ACIR were also acknowledged. The rate of BCG AEFI appeared to increase between 2011 and 2014; however, these data need to be interpreted with caution due to small numbers, likely under-reporting of both numerator (AEFI) and denominator (vaccine doses administered), and the general increase in reporting of AEFI related to other vaccines in children over this period.\u2029 Conclusions: BCG immunisation programs aim to prevent severe forms of tuberculosis in young children who live in or travel to high burden settings. A range of factors, particularly inconsistent vaccine supply are leading to low, variable and inequitable vaccine delivery across Australian jurisdictions. Improved BCG vaccination uptake and AEFI data quality are required for accurate monitoring of program delivery and vaccine safety - this is particularly important given the current need to use unregistered vaccines. Improved and consistent access to BCG vaccine is suggested to optimise equity for at-risk children Australia-wide.</p>","PeriodicalId":51669,"journal":{"name":"Communicable Diseases Intelligence","volume":"41 1","pages":"E33-E48"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communicable Diseases Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) immunisation programs in Australia are funded and operated by the individual states and territories. In recent years BCG vaccine shortages have required use of unregistered products. We aimed to evaluate BCG immunisation programs in Australia, with particular reference to program implementation and national consistency. Methods: Between September and November 2015, 12 key stakeholders, representing Australian states and territories, completed surveys. We analysed BCG vaccination coverage data from the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register (ACIR), and data on adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) with BCG vaccine from the Therapeutic Goods Administration's Adverse Drug Reactions System, for 2001 to 2014. Results: Access to BCG vaccination varies between jurisdictions, with some states providing this only in major city locations. Analysis of ACIR data suggests significant differences in vaccine delivery between jurisdictions, but varying levels of under-reporting to the ACIR were also acknowledged. The rate of BCG AEFI appeared to increase between 2011 and 2014; however, these data need to be interpreted with caution due to small numbers, likely under-reporting of both numerator (AEFI) and denominator (vaccine doses administered), and the general increase in reporting of AEFI related to other vaccines in children over this period. Conclusions: BCG immunisation programs aim to prevent severe forms of tuberculosis in young children who live in or travel to high burden settings. A range of factors, particularly inconsistent vaccine supply are leading to low, variable and inequitable vaccine delivery across Australian jurisdictions. Improved BCG vaccination uptake and AEFI data quality are required for accurate monitoring of program delivery and vaccine safety - this is particularly important given the current need to use unregistered vaccines. Improved and consistent access to BCG vaccine is suggested to optimise equity for at-risk children Australia-wide.