Blog
About

  • Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Article: found
Is Open Access

Coverage of the 2011 Q Fever Vaccination Campaign in the Netherlands, Using Retrospective Population-Based Prevalence Estimation of Cardiovascular Risk-Conditions for Chronic Q Fever

Read this article at

Bookmark
      There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

      Abstract

      Background

      In 2011, a unique Q fever vaccination campaign targeted people at risk for chronic Q fever in the southeast of the Netherlands. General practitioners referred patients with defined cardiovascular risk-conditions (age >15 years). Prevalence rates of those risk-conditions were lacking, standing in the way of adequate planning and coverage estimation. We aimed to obtain prevalence rates retrospectively in order to estimate coverage of the Q fever vaccination campaign.

      Methods

      With broad search terms for these predefined risk-conditions, we extracted patient-records from a large longitudinal general-practice research-database in the Netherlands (IPCI-database). After validation of these records, obtained prevalence rates (stratified for age and sex) extrapolated to the Q fever high-incidence area population, gave an approximation of the size of the targeted patient-group. Coverage calculation addressed people actually screened by a pre-vaccination Q fever skin test and serology (coverage) and patients referred by their general practitioners (adjusted-coverage) in the 2011 campaign.

      Results

      Our prevalence estimate of any risk-condition was 3.1% (lower-upper limits 2.9-3.3%). For heart valve defects, aorta aneurysm/prosthesis, congenital anomalies and endocarditis, prevalence was 2.4%, 0.6%, 0.4% and 0.1%, respectively. Estimated number of eligible people in the Q fever high-incidence area was 11,724 (10,965-12,532). With 1330 people screened for vaccination, coverage of the vaccination campaign was 11%. For referred people, the adjusted coverage was 18%. Coverage was lowest among the very-old and highest for people aged 50–70 years.

      Conclusion

      The estimated coverage of the vaccination campaign was limited. This should be interpreted in the light of the complexity of this target-group with much co-morbidity, and of the vaccine that required invasive pre-vaccination screening. Calculation of prevalence rates of risk-conditions based on the IPCI-database was feasible. This procedure proved an efficient tool for future use, when prevalence estimates for policy, implementation or surveillance of subgroup-vaccination or other health-care interventions are needed.

      Related collections

      Most cited references 49

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

      Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September, 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles.18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies.A detailed explanation and elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the websites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies
        Bookmark
        • Record: found
        • Abstract: found
        • Article: not found

        Burden of valvular heart diseases: a population-based study.

        Valvular heart diseases are not usually regarded as a major public-health problem. Our aim was to assess their prevalence and effect on overall survival in the general population. We pooled population-based studies to obtain data for 11 911 randomly selected adults from the general population who had been assessed prospectively with echocardiography. We also analysed data from a community study of 16 501 adults who had been assessed by clinically indicated echocardiography. In the general population group, moderate or severe valve disease was identified in 615 adults. There was no difference in the frequency of such diseases between men and women (p=0.90). Prevalence increased with age, from 0.7% (95% CI 0.5-1.0) in 18-44 year olds to 13.3% (11.7-15.0) in the 75 years and older group (p<0.0001). The national prevalence of valve disease, corrected for age and sex distribution from the US 2000 population, is 2.5% (2.2-2.7). In the community group, valve disease was diagnosed in 1505 (1.8% adjusted) adults and frequency increased considerably with age, from 0.3% (0.2-0.3) of the 18-44 year olds to 11.7% (11.0-12.5) of those aged 75 years and older, but was diagnosed less often in women than in men (odds ratio 0.90, 0.81-1.01; p=0.07). The adjusted mortality risk ratio associated with valve disease was 1.36 (1.15-1.62; p=0.0005) in the population and 1.75 (1.61-1.90; p<0.0001) in the community. Moderate or severe valvular diseases are notably common in this population and increase with age. In the community, women are less often diagnosed than are men, which could indicate an important imbalance in view of the associated lower survival. Valve diseases thus represent an important public-health problem.
          Bookmark
          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Birth prevalence of congenital heart disease worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

          Congenital heart disease (CHD) accounts for nearly one-third of all major congenital anomalies. CHD birth prevalence worldwide and over time is suggested to vary; however, a complete overview is missing. This systematic review included 114 papers, comprising a total study population of 24,091,867 live births with CHD identified in 164,396 individuals. Birth prevalence of total CHD and the 8 most common subtypes were pooled in 5-year time periods since 1930 and in continent and income groups since 1970 using the inverse variance method. Reported total CHD birth prevalence increased substantially over time, from 0.6 per 1,000 live births (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.4 to 0.8) in 1930 to 1934 to 9.1 per 1,000 live births (95% CI: 9.0 to 9.2) after 1995. Over the last 15 years, stabilization occurred, corresponding to 1.35 million newborns with CHD every year. Significant geographical differences were found. Asia reported the highest CHD birth prevalence, with 9.3 per 1,000 live births (95% CI: 8.9 to 9.7), with relatively more pulmonary outflow obstructions and fewer left ventricular outflow tract obstructions. Reported total CHD birth prevalence in Europe was significantly higher than in North America (8.2 per 1,000 live births [95% CI: 8.1 to 8.3] vs. 6.9 per 1,000 live births [95% CI: 6.7 to 7.1]; p < 0.001). Access to health care is still limited in many parts of the world, as are diagnostic facilities, probably accounting for differences in reported birth prevalence between high- and low-income countries. Observed differences may also be of genetic, environmental, socioeconomical, or ethnic origin, and there needs to be further investigation to tailor the management of this global health problem. Copyright © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Affiliations
            [1 ]Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
            [2 ]Department of Internal Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
            [3 ]Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
            Texas A&M Health Science Center, UNITED STATES
            Author notes

            Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

            Conceived and designed the experiments: PEVdB TS. Performed the experiments: PEVdB TS AV. Analyzed the data: PEVdB TS AV. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: PEVdB TS AV. Wrote the paper: PEVdB TS AV LI MvD MS AT. Designed the software used in analysis: AV PEVdB TS.

            Contributors
            Role: Academic Editor
            Journal
            PLoS One
            PLoS ONE
            plos
            plosone
            PLoS ONE
            Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
            1932-6203
            24 April 2015
            2015
            : 10
            : 4
            25909712 4409345 10.1371/journal.pone.0123570 PONE-D-14-56147

            This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

            Counts
            Figures: 6, Tables: 5, Pages: 16
            Product
            Funding
            The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development ( http://www.zonmw.nl/en/), grant number 205520002: TS. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. No other authors received any funding for this work.
            Categories
            Research Article
            Custom metadata
            Raw data are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.t2f47.

            Uncategorized

            Comments

            Comment on this article