Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Robert Ball

Publications and source records attributed to Robert Ball.

25 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Surveillance for safety after immunization: Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)--United States, 1991-2001.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Vaccines are usually administered to healthy persons who have substantial expectations for the safety of the vaccines. Adverse events after vaccinations occur but are generally rare. Some adverse events are unlikely to be detected in prelicensure clinical trials because of their low frequency, the limited numbers of enrolled subjects, and other study limitations. Therefore, postmarketing monitoring of adverse events after vaccinations is essential. The cornerstone of monitoring safety is review and analysis of spontaneously reported adverse events. REPORTING PERIOD COVERED: This report summarizes the adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from January 1, 1991, through December 31, 2001. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEMS: VAERS was established in 1990 under the joint administration of CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to accept reports of suspected adverse events after administration of any vaccine licensed in the United States. VAERS is a passive surveillance system: reports of events are voluntarily submitted by those who experience them, their caregivers, or others. Passive surveillance systems (e.g., VAERS) are subject to multiple limitations, including underreporting, reporting of temporal associations or unconfirmed diagnoses, and lack of denominator data and unbiased comparison groups. Because of these limitations, determining causal associations between vaccines and adverse events from VAERS reports is usually not possible. Vaccine safety concerns identified through adverse event monitoring nearly always require confirmation using an epidemiologic or other (e.g., laboratory) study. Reports may be submitted by anyone suspecting that an adverse event might have been caused by vaccination and are usually submitted by mail or fax. A web-based electronic reporting system has recently become available. Information from the reports is entered into the VAERS database, and new reports are analyzed weekly. VAERS data stripped of personal identifiers can be reviewed by the public by accessing http://www.vaers.org. The objectives of VAERS are to 1) detect new, unusual, or rare vaccine adverse events; 2) monitor increases in known adverse events; 3) determine patient risk factors for particular types of adverse events; 4) identify vaccine lots with increased numbers or types of reported adverse events; and 5) assess the safety of newly licensed vaccines. RESULTS: During 1991-2001, VAERS received 128,717 reports, whereas >1.9 billion net doses of human vaccines were distributed. The overall dose-based reporting rate for the 27 frequently reported vaccine types was 11.4 reports per 100,000 net doses distributed. The proportions of reports in the age groups <1 year, 1-6 years, 7-17 years, 18-64 years, and >/= years were 18.1%, 26.7%, 8.0%, 32.6%, and 4.9%, respectively. In all of the adult age groups, a predominance among the number of women reporting was observed, but the difference in sex was minimal among children. Overall, the most commonly reported adverse event was fever, which appeared in 25.8% of all reports, followed by injection-site hypersensitivity (15.8%), rash (unspecified) (11.0%), injection-site edema (10.8%), and vasodilatation (10.8%). A total of 14.2% of all reports described serious adverse events, which by regulatory definition include death, life-threatening illness, hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, or permanent disability. Examples of the uses of VAERS data for vaccine safety surveillance are included in this report. INTERPRETATION: As a national public health surveillance system, VAERS is a key component in ensuring the safety of vaccines. VAERS data are used by CDC, FDA, and other organizations to monitor and study vaccine safety. CDC and FDA use VAERS data to respond to public inquiries regarding vaccine safety, and both organizations have published and presented vaccine safety studies based on VAERS data. VAERS data are also used by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee to evaluate possible adverse events after vaccinations and to develop recommendations for precautions and contraindications to vaccinations. Reviews of VAERS reports and the studies based on VAERS reports during 1991-2001 have demonstrated that vaccines are usually safe and that serious adverse events occur but are rare. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: Through continued reporting of adverse events after vaccination to VAERS by health-care providers, public health professionals, and the public and monitoring of reported events by the VAERS working group, the public health system will continue to be able to detect rare but potentially serious consequences of vaccination. This knowledge facilitates improvement in the safety of vaccines and the vaccination process.

Adolescent↗

Adverse event reports following vaccination for Lyme disease: December 1998-July 2000.

CONTEXT: The vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) monitors vaccine safety post-licensure. Although events reported to VAERS are not necessarily causally associated with vaccination, VAERS reports can be used to identify possible safety concerns that occur at too low a rate to have been identified prior to licensure. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate adverse events following Lyme disease vaccination reported to VAERS during the first 19 months of the vaccine's licensure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Analysis of all VAERS reports of adverse events following vaccination for Lyme disease in the US from 28 December 1998 to 31 July 2000. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: We evaluated reported adverse events for unexpected patterns in age, gender, time to onset, dose number, and clinical characteristics and compared them to adverse events observed in clinical trials of this vaccine. RESULTS: Over 1,400,000 doses were distributed and 905 adverse events were reported to VAERS, 440 in men and 404 in women, with ages ranging from 10 to 82 years. The majority (56%) of adverse events occurred after administration of the first dose. The most frequently reported adverse events were arthralgia (250), myalgia (195), and pain (157). There were 59 reports coded as arthritis, 34 as arthrosis, 9 as rheumatoid arthritis, and 12 as facial paralysis. Sixty-six (7.4%) events were classified as serious, involving life-threatening illness, hospitalization, prolongation of hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or death. Twenty-two hypersensitivity reactions were reported. CONCLUSION: Based on reporting to VAERS, we did not detect unexpected or unusual patterns of reported adverse events following Lyme disease vaccine administration, other than hypersensitivity reactions, compared with adverse events observed in clinical trials.

Adolescent↗

Development of case definitions for acute encephalopathy, encephalitis, and multiple sclerosis reports to the vaccine: Adverse Event Reporting System.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), administered by the FDA and CDC, is the U.S. system for surveillance of vaccine adverse events (AE). Acute encephalopathy age <18 months (EO < 18), age > or =18 months (EO > or = 18), encephalitis (EI), and multiple sclerosis (MS) after vaccination have been reported to VAERS, but reports often contain insufficient information to validate diagnoses. Standardized case definitions would enhance the utility of VAERS reports for AE surveillance. We developed practical case definitions for classification of VAERS reports, and three neurologists independently applied the definitions to reports submitted in 1993. Inter-observer agreement was assessed, and non-concordant classifications were reviewed in a follow-up conference call. Reports of EO < 18 (n = 8), EO > or = 18 (n = 20), EI (n = 15), and MS (n = 16) were classified as "definite" in 7% to 30% of the cases, while 26% to 51% of reports were thought to have insufficient information to make a classification. Agreement among reviewers was good to excellent, (kappa: 0.65 to 0.85) except for EO < 18 m for which it was marginal (kappa: 0.37). It is possible to develop reproducible case definitions for acute encephalopathy, encephalitis, and multiple sclerosis using a standardized approach. Application of standardized case definitions to VAERS reports documents the limited information in many reports, specifies data for supplemental collection, and indicates that VAERS reports should be cautiously interpreted. Development and application of case definitions for other adverse events reported after vaccination should enhance the value of vaccine safety databases. Published by Elsevier Science Inc.

Acute Disease↗

Zidovudine and perinatal human immunodeficiency virus type 1 transmission: a population-based approach.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the impact of the full 3-arm zidovudine regimen on the perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) using population-based data. METHODS: We retrospectively ascertained information on zidovudine prescription and other characteristics of HIV-infected pregnant women and children for birth cohort years 1993, 1995, 1996, and 1997 using HIV/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome registry data from a state health department supplemented by medical record reviews. RESULTS: The transmission rate decreased from 12.5% in 1993 to 4.6% in 1997. The proportions of HIV-1-infected mothers and children who were prescribed all 3 arms of zidovudine increased from 68% in 1995 to 93% in 1997. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios for the relationship between the prescription of 3 arms of zidovudine and the infants' HIV status were 0.19 (95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.84) and 0.15 (95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.96), respectively. CONCLUSION: Perinatal HIV-1 transmission rates have decreased over time. This study demonstrates the effectiveness of the rapid implementation of the United States Public Health Service recommendations for the comprehensive use of zidovudine among HIV-1-infected pregnant women in a predominantly rural state.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗

Methods of ensuring vaccine safety.

With a decreasing disease burden from vaccine-preventable diseases in developed countries, ensuring the safety of vaccines is critically important for maintaining public confidence in vaccination programs and continuing low levels of disease. This will require investment in resources to identify true adverse effects, understand their pathophysiology, and design and manufacture safer vaccines.

Animals↗

Kinetic and dynamic models of diving gases in decompression sickness prevention.

Decompression sickness is a complex phenomenon involving gas exchange, bubble dynamics and tissue response. Relatively simple deterministic compartmental models using empirically derived parameters have been the mainstay of the practice for preventing decompression sickness since the early 1900s. Decades of research have improved our understanding of decompression physiology, and the insights incorporated in decompression models have allowed people to dive deeper into the ocean. However, these efforts have not yet, and are unlikely in the near future, to result in a 'universal' deterministic model that can predict when decompression sickness will occur. Divers using current recreational dive computers need to be aware of their limitations. Probabilistic models based on the estimation of parameters using modern statistical methods from large databases of dives offer a new approach and can provide a means of standardisation of deterministic models. Future improvements in decompression practice will depend on continued improvement in understanding the kinetics and dynamics of gas exchange, bubble evolution and tissue response, and the incorporation of this knowledge in risk models whose parameters can be estimated from large databases of human and animal data.

Decompression Sickness↗

Correlates of public health workforce acceptance of smallpox immunization in Virginia.

OBJECTIVE: By October 24, 2003, 38,577 of 500,000 targeted civilians received smallpox vaccine in the Pre-Event Smallpox Vaccination Campaign, Phase I. We investigated reasons for the low vaccination uptake. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey, conducted in May 2004. SAMPLE: We surveyed 225 health care personnel, potential members of smallpox response teams in Virginia, who were offered vaccination. We assessed respondents' acceptance of vaccination and its association with factors potentially influencing vaccination: perceptions of vaccine safety, contraindications, concerns about bioterrorism, and workplace influences. RESULTS: Among nonvaccinees (n=44), 70% had a contraindication to the vaccine compared with 8% among vaccinees (n=132). The desire to prepare America for potential bioterrorist attack was associated with acceptance of smallpox vaccination (odds ratio [OR]: 17.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.6-85.9). Among respondents with contraindications, vaccinees reported more often than nonvaccinees having been asked by their supervisors to be vaccinated (OR: 5; 95% CI: 1.1-22.1) and to have been concerned that their vaccination choice would affect positively their job evaluation (OR: 11; 95% CI: 1.6-81.1). CONCLUSION: Concerns about bioterrorism and willingness to help in the preparedness effort were motivations for vaccination. Continued vigilance to avoid vaccination of those with contraindications is needed.

Adult↗