Rotavirus (RV) Vaccine Coverage and Intervention Strategies

Rotavirus (RV) Vaccine Coverage and Intervention Strategies

Data indicates that the global coverage of full-dose RV vaccination among children has been increasing annually, reaching 55% in 20231.Countries that have included the RV vaccine in their national immunization programs (NIPs) have higher vaccination coverage rates than the global average. In 2023, the average coverage for the first dose was 90.6%, while the coverage for the full dose was 83.6%1,2.

Figure 8.1. Global RV Vaccine Completed Dose Coverage among Children1

Regional data shows that the Americas have maintained a vaccination rate of over 70% since 2010, while the Western Pacific region has the lowest rate, at only 7% in 20231. Barriers such as the lack of data and research on the efficacy and safety of the RV vaccine, insufficient understanding of the risk-benefit about RV vaccination, and funding challenges for large-scale vaccination programs hindered the successful implementation of RV vaccination in Asia and the Pacific region3. Notably, since 2020, the full-dose vaccination rate for RV in children in Southeast Asia has significantly increased, reaching 68% by 20231. This increasing trend may be closely related to policy change in high density population countries in the region, such as Vietnam and Thailand, which included the RV vaccine in their NIPs or launched in pilot regions, starting in 20204,5.

Figure 8.2. Full-Dose RV Vaccination Coverage in Children by Region1
(Data source: WHO Immunization Data portal)

Current Status of RV Vaccination in China

Currently, there is a lack of publicly available statistical data on RV vaccination in China. Research indicates that the vaccination coverage rate among Chinese children is generally low, particularly for full-dose coverage. A cross-sectional study conducted from August 5 to October 16, 2019, across 10 provinces (Beijing, Chongqing, Gansu, Guangdong, Henan, Jiangxi, Jilin, Shandong, Shanghai, and Yunnan) found that the first-dose vaccination rate for RV among children aged 6 months to 5 years was 20.3%, while the third-dose coverage was only 1.8% – significantly lower than the global average6. Similar coverage levels have been observed in other studies. For example, a stratified cluster random sampling survey of 8,400 children born between January 2008 and October 2012 in Guangzhou found that only 2,122 children (approximately 25.3%) had received at least one dose of the Lanzhou lamb RV (LLR) vaccine. Among these children, 1,904 (89.7%) had received only one dose, while 208 (9.8%) and 10 (0.5%) had completed two or three doses, respectively7. In Shenzhen’s Bao’an District, a study found that 32.3% of children born between 2014 and 2016 had received at least one dose of the domestic-produced (LLR) vaccine, with only 1.4% completing all three doses 8.

Research shows that since the introduction of the pentavalent RV vaccine (RV5, RotaTeq) in 2018, the LLR vaccination rate in Beijing and Shanghai has declined. The RV5 vaccination rates have been increasing annually and now far exceed those of LLR. In Beijing, the first-dose vaccination rate for RV5 in 2022 was 47.48%, compared to 6.74% for LLR; the third dose for RV5 was 44.12%, while only 0.03% for LLR9. In Shanghai’s Minhang District, the LLR vaccination rate had been increasing annually before 2018, with a first-dose rate of 66.0% and a third-dose rate of 43.2% in 2018. However, by 2020, the first-dose rate for LLR had dropped to 11.8%, with no third-dose vaccinations, while the first-dose rate for RV5 and the third-dose rate reached 42.3% and 29.8%10. Limited studies were conducted in other less developed regions. Further investigation is needed to map the RV vaccine coverage status.

Additionally, inequities in RV vaccination persists. A study conducted across 6 provinces in China from 2008 to 2012 found significant disparities in the first-dose LLR vaccination rate among families in different income levels: the vaccination rates were 45.0%, 37.7%, and 15.5% in high-, middle-, and low-income areas, respectively9. A study conducted in 2022 in Zhejiang and Henan on the vaccination status of migrant and left-behind children found that their RV vaccination rates were lower than those of local children. The vaccination rate for local urban children was 63.3%, with 43.5% for migrant children, 27.5% for non-left-behind children, and only 16.9% for left-behind children12. Expert consensus indicates that regions with relatively high RV vaccination rates are primarily located in economically developed areas or cities13.

Lot Release of RV Vaccine in China

The lot release data showed that the domestic-produced LLR are predominant in the market. The LLR vaccine, produced by the Lanzhou Institute of Biological Products, has been in use for many years, estimated 5 to 7 million doses per year. The pentavalent RV vaccine produced by Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) gained approval in April 2018 and received lot release in September of the same year. By 2020, 3.99 million doses had been distributed, slightly lower than the 2019 level, accounting for approximately 37% of the market 15. According to incomplete statistics from the National Institutes for Food and Drug Control, the distribution of monovalent and pentavalent RV vaccines in China is shown in Figure 8.3 (data on trivalent domestic vaccines are not yet available).

Figure 8.3 Historical Distribution of RV Vaccines in China
(Data source: the National Institutes for Food and Drug Control)

Macro-Level Policy Interventions

Vaccine Supply and Local Vaccine Development

Countries with high birth rates, such as China, Vietnam, and Indonesia, often begin large-scale promotion of new vaccines only when domestically produced vaccines are ready and supply is sufficient. Increased availability of locally produced RV vaccines may expand and sustain coverage in these countries16. For example, the Indian government began introducing the RV vaccine in phases since 2016, with partial support from Gavi, achieving nationwide coverage by 2019. The development, clinical testing, and licensing of two locally produced vaccines—Rotavac® and Rotasiil®—were key factors in this successful introduction17.

Domestic research has used the Delphi method to establish an indicator evaluation system for prioritizing vaccines for inclusion in the NIP, with vaccine supply capacity being a critical factor considered by experts. “At least three domestic manufacturers” is one of the criteria for selecting vaccines for inclusion in the NIP18. However, China lacks research providing timely forecasts of supply and demand for non-NIP vaccines. Most provinces estimate future vaccine demand based on historical record of demand, leading to imbalances in vaccine supply and demand19.

Local Pilot Programs for RV Vaccine Introduction

Before nationwide introduction, small-scale pilot programs in specific regions can provide valuable experience for expanding the program later on. For example, in Pakistan, the introduction of the RV vaccine was initiated by the Punjab provincial government. With strong political leadership, the province used its own funds to pilot the vaccine in six districts starting in 2016. After Pakistan received Gavi support for nationwide rollout, the vaccine was introduced in other parts of Punjab province in 2017. This phased approach provided time for other regions to expand cold chain capacity and prepare for the vaccine’s introduction, contributing to the successful nationwide rollout17.

In China, whether non-NIP vaccines are included in provincial immunization programs is also an important consideration when introducing new vaccines18. However, no pilot programs have yet been implemented to include the RV vaccine in local immunization programs. In terms of financing, 14 provinces have included the RV vaccine and three other non-NIP vaccines (pneumococcal vaccine, human papillomavirus vaccine, and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine) in the reimbursement scope of urban employee medical insurance personal accounts. Most of these provinces have established family pooling accounts, allowing insured individuals and their family members to use these accounts to pay for non-NIP vaccines20. Provincial-level coverage has been achieved in Fujian, Zhejiang, Guizhou, Guangxi, Tibet, Chongqing, and Yunnan, while Jiangsu (Nanjing, Suzhou, Yangzhou, Taizhou, and Xuzhou), Guangdong (Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Guangzhou, Foshan, Huizhou, and Meizhou), Henan (Zhengzhou), Shaanxi (Xi’an), Hunan (Changsha), Shandong (Qingdao), and Liaoning (Shenyang), only implemented the policy in selected cities.

Interventions Targeting Healthcare Providers

Training and Education for Healthcare Providers

The underestimation of the severity of RV by public health sector is a global norm, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Research suggests that educational programs targeting healthcare providers and caregivers should be promoted as a primary intervention to increase RV vaccination rates, with medical professional associations and public health authorities facilitating the education campaign for caregivers and physicians21. However, significant gaps remain in studies of healthcare providers’ education intervention.

Improving Communication During Vaccination

Globally, changing the way clinicians communicate about vaccines has been shown to effectively increase vaccination rates. For example, providing more detailed vaccine information and using a “presumptive” communication style, such as asking, “Your child has some vaccines due today,” rather than, “What vaccines would you like today?”22.

In China, a study found that implementing a vaccination notification system significantly increased vaccination rates at the vaccination clinics in Changchun. The notification methods included clearly informing vaccine recipients or their caregivers of the vaccine’s name, manufacturer, administration process, price, indications, contraindications, immunization schedule, potential adverse reactions, and how to deal with the reactions. Additionally, caregivers were required to read and sign an informed consent form, confirming they fully understand the information given and providing their signature 23. In another randomized controlled trial, healthcare providers in the intervention group used shared decision-making (SDM) and patient decision aids (PDAs) to provide comprehensive information on RV, its clinical manifestations, vaccine knowledge, vaccination timing, benefits, efficacy, side effects, and costs. The control group used traditional methods. The intervention group’s vaccination rate was 16.7% higher than the control groups, demonstrating that SDM combined with PDAs, by providing richer information, helps families make more informed decisions, thereby effectively increasing RV vaccination uptakes24.

Interventions Targeting Vaccine Recipients

Vaccination Reminders

Although global research on the effectiveness of using reminder to increase the RV vaccination rate is limited, interventions providing vaccine information to parents through websites and social media (e.g., text messages, phone calls, emails) have been shown to effective in improving childhood immunization rate 22. Specifically, studies suggest that centralized reminders or recall systems for early childhood vaccinations are more cost-effective than traditional reminders from healthcare providers, especially when the reminders include the child’s name25,26.

Similarly, domestic studies on interventions for other non-NIP vaccines suggest that app-based reminders sent to parents via web and mobile devices can also improve non-NIP vaccination rates. An experimental study in Chongqing showed that sending vaccine knowledge, real-time inventory, post-vaccination adverse reaction management, and vaccination reminders to caregivers via an app positively improved migrant children’s caregivers’ vaccine knowledge, attitudes, and vaccination willingness27. Though another study found no significant difference in vaccination rate increases between reminders sent by village doctors via smartphone apps and the traditional text message reminders, the introduction of intelligent information systems helps village doctors manage children’s vaccination status and their parents’ information28.

Prenatal Health Education

Both domestic and international studies have shown that prenatal health education for pregnant women positively impacts infant vaccination rates and maternal vaccine knowledge. A study in Japan provided comprehensive vaccine-related health guidance to women in the third trimester and 3 to 6 days postpartum, covering vaccine types, disease prevention, vaccine efficacy, side effects, and vaccination schedules. The intervention significantly increased infant vaccination rates within three months (34.3% in the intervention group vs. 8.3% in the control group). However, there was no significant difference between prenatal and postpartum intervention groups29.

In a study in Zhejiang, China, pregnant women over 12 weeks’ gestation received prenatal vaccine education, while the control group did not. The intervention group showed significantly improved vaccine knowledge, and their children were more likely to take vaccines, complete the full-course vaccination, and have better timeliness in vaccination compared to the control group30. What’s more, considering the high coverage of prenatal care in China, implementing prenatal education can better ensure the dissemination of vaccine health education and equip parents with the necessary knowledge before newborn vaccination. This study recommends that vaccine education should start during pregnancy30.

Content Editor: Menglu Jiang, Ziqi Liu

Page Editor: Ziqi Liu


References

  1. World Health Organization. RV immunization coverage. World Health Organization. Retrieved from https://immunizationdata.who.int/global/wiise-detail-page/RV-vaccination-coverage?CODE=Global&ANTIGEN=ROTAC&YEAR=
  2. World Health Organization. Indicator metadata registry: RV vaccination coverage. Retrieved November 3, 2024, from https://www.who.int/data/gho/indicator-metadata-registry/imr-details/4758
  3. Buchy, P., Chen, J., Zhang, X. H., Benninghoff, B., Lee, C., & Bibera, G. L. (2021). A review of RV vaccine use in Asia and the Pacific regions: challenges and future prospects. Expert Review of Vaccines, 20(12), 1499–1514. https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2020.1853532
  4. Charoenwat, B., Suwannaying, K., Paibool, W. et al. The impact of RV vaccination on acute diarrhea in Thai children under 5 years of age in the first year of universal implementation of RV vaccines in the National Immunization Program (NIP) in Thailand: a 6-year analysis. BMC Public Health 23, 2109 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-16958-0
  5. Le LK, Pham TP, Mai LT, Nguyen QT, Tran MP, Ho TH, Pham HH, Le SV, Hoang HN, Lai AT, Huong NT. Intussusception and Other Adverse Event Surveillance after Pilot Introduction of RV Vaccine in Nam Dinh and Thua Thien Hue Provinces—Vietnam, 2017–2021. Vaccines. 2024 Feb 7;12(2):170. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12020170
  6. Zhang H, Lai X, Mak J, Sriudomporn S, Zhang H, Fang H, Patenaude B. Coverage and Equity of Childhood Vaccines in China. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(12):e2246005. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.46005
  7. He Q, Wang M, Xu J, Zhang C, Wang H, Zhu W, Fu C. RV vaccination coverage among children aged 2-59 months: a report from Guangzhou, China. PloS one. 2013 Jun 28;8(6):e68169. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068169
  8. Tang G, Chen Y, Li Y, et al. Investigation on the utilization of domestic RV vaccine in Bao’an District, Shenzhen. International Journal of Virology,2020,27(05) : 417-417. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-4092.2020.05.015
  9. Yuan Q, Cao Z, Ji W, Yu R, Miao L, Wen X, … & Suo L. (2024). Analysis of RV vaccination status among children born in Beijing from 2017 to 2022. Modern Preventive Medicine (15),2770-2773.doi:10.20043/j.cnki.MPM.202403255.
  10. Lu J, Guan B, Zhang L, Mei K, Lu X, & Lu Y. (2021). RV vaccination coverage among children born in 2013-2020 in Minhang District, Shanghai. Chinese Journal of Vaccines and Immunization (06),695-699.doi:10.19914/j.CJVI.2021127.
  11. Liu Y, Yue C, Li Y, et al. Analysis of the vaccination status of LLR strain live attenuated RV vaccine among children in six provinces of China. Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine,2018,52(3) : 282-282. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-9624.2018.03.012
  12. Zhou Y, Li D, Cao Y, Lai F, Wang Y, Long Q, Zhang Z, An C, Xu X. Immunization coverage, knowledge, satisfaction, and associated factors of non-National Immunization Program vaccines among migrant and left-behind families in China: evidence from Zhejiang and Henan provinces. Infectious Diseases of Poverty. 2023 Oct 10;12(05):69-80. https://mednexus.org/doi/full/10.1186/s40249-023-01145-5
  13. Expert Consensus Writing Group on RV Gastroenteritis. Expert consensus on immunoprophylaxis of RV gastroenteritis in children (2024 edition). Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2024,58(00):1-33. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn112150-20231220-00472
  14. Li L, Liu N, Huang R, et al. Analysis of domestic RV vaccination in Chengdu. International Journal of Virology,2020,27(04) : 313-313. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-4092.2020.04.012
  15. Ping An Securities. (2021, February 5). Review of key vaccine batch release data: Total volume increases, structural upgrades significant.https://pdf.dfcfw.com/pdf/H3_AP202102051459184106_1.pdf?1612539184000.pdf
  16. Deen J, Lopez AL, Kanungo S, Wang XY, Anh DD, Tapia M, Grais RF. Improving RV vaccine coverage: Can newer-generation and locally produced vaccines help? Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2018 Feb 1;14(2):495-499. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2017.1403705. Epub 2017 Dec 21. PMID: 29135339; PMCID: PMC5806648.
  17. Rota Council: RV VACCINE INTRODUCTION AND COVERAGE https://publichealth.jhu.edu/sites/default/files/2024-02/rota-brief1-introduction2022-1ax.pdf
  18. Ma, C.; Li, J.; Wang, N.; Wang, Y.; Song, Y.; Zeng, X.; Zheng, C.; An, Z.; Rodewald, L.; Yin, Z. Prioritization of Vaccines for Inclusion into China’s Expanded Program on Immunization: Evidence from Experts’ Knowledge and Opinions. Vaccines 2022, 10, 1010.
  19. Peixi Dai, Qing Wang, Mengmeng Jia, Zhiwei Leng, Shuyun Xie, Luzhao Feng & Weizhong Yang (2023) Driving more WHO-recommended vaccines in the National Immunization Program: Issues and challenges in China, Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, 19:1, DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2023.2194190
  20. Zhong G, Wang M, Ge J, et al. Analysis of the implementation of payment policies for four non-National Immunization Program vaccines in China. Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine,2023,57(11):1843-1847. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn112150-20230118-00043.
  21. Vecchio AL, Liguoro I, Dias JA, Berkley JA, Boey C, Cohen MB, Cruchet S, Salazar-Lindo E, Podder S, Sandhu B, Sherman PM. RV immunization: Global coverage and local barriers for implementation. Vaccine. 2017 Mar 14;35(12):1637-44.
  22. Cataldi J, Kerns M, O’Leary S. Evidence-based strategies to increase vaccination uptake: a review. Current Opinion in Pediatrics. 2020; 32 (1): 151-159. doi: 10.1097/MOP.0000000000000843.
  23. Tao Y, Zheng T, Tao Y. Analysis of oral RV vaccine coverage and vaccine awareness before and after the implementation of the vaccination notification system in Changchun. Chinese Journal of Biologicals,2020,33(7):845-848.
  24. Lin SC, Tam KW, Yen JY, Lu MC, Chen EY, Kuo YT, Lin WC, Chen SH, Loh EW, Chen SY. The impact of shared decision making with patient decision aids on the RV vaccination rate in children: A randomized controlled trial. Preventive Medicine. 2020 Dec 1;141:106244.
  25. Kempe, A., Saville, A. W., Beaty, B., Dickinson, L. M., Gurfinkel, D., Eisert, S.,& Herlihy, R. (2017). Centralized reminder/recall to increase immunization rates in young children: how much bang for the buck?. Academic pediatrics, 17(3), 330-338.
  26. Kempe, A., Saville, A. W., Dickinson, L. M., Beaty, B., Eisert, S., Gurfinkel, D., … & Herlihy, R. (2015). Collaborative centralized reminder/recall notification to increase immunization rates among young children: a comparative effectiveness trial. JAMA pediatrics, 169(4), 365-373. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.3670
  27. Jiawei Xu, Wenge Tang, Wei Qiu, Yuan Yao, Ning Yao, Jianghong Zhong, Xiang Zhu & Qing Wang (2022) Effects of mobile APP for immunization on vaccination compliance of migrant children in southwest China: A community trial study, Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, 18:7, DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2022.2135853
  28. Chen L, Du X, Zhang L, van Velthoven MH, Wu Q, Yang R, Cao Y, Wang W, Xie L, Rao X, Zhang Y, Koepsell JC. Effectiveness of a smartphone app on improving immunization of children in rural Sichuan Province, China: a cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2016 Aug 31;16(1):909. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3549-0. PMID: 27581655; PMCID: PMC5006404.
  29. Saitoh, A., Nagata, S., Saitoh, A., Tsukahara, Y., Vaida, F., Sonobe, T., … & Murashima, S. (2013). Perinatal immunization education improves immunization rates and knowledge: a randomized controlled trial. Preventive medicine, 56(6), 398-405.
  30. Hu Y, Chen Y, Wang Y, Song Q, Li Q. Prenatal vaccination education intervention improves both the mothers’ knowledge and children’s vaccination coverage: Evidence from randomized controlled trial from eastern China. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2017 Jun 3;13(6):1-8. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2017.1285476. Epub 2017 Feb 21. PMID: 28319453; PMCID: PMC5489276.

代表性地区的基本情况、接种政策及效果、宣传推动情况

(1) 成都市

 

基本情况

成都市2022年度GDP为20817.5亿元,排名全国城市第七。成都市出台了《健康城市建设推动健康中国行动创新模式成都市宫颈癌综合防控试点工作方案》等一系列相关政策推动适龄女孩HPV疫苗接种工作。

接种政策及效果

目标人群为13-14岁在校且无HPV疫苗接种史女生。免疫程序为国产二价0-6二剂次、进口二价0-1-6三剂次、进口四价0-2-6三剂次。资助政策为国产二价疫苗(沃泽惠)免费,其它疫苗补贴600元/人,并自付20元/剂接种费。疫苗接种按照属地化管理原则,由学校所在地预防接种单位负责。截至2022年1月,目标人群首针接种率达90.04%[14]。

宣传推动

成都市开展多形式、多载体的健康教育宣传。形式包括讲座、知晓日、义诊咨询、专题课程、专题活动等,载体包括宣传册、宣传栏、展板、电视、微信、视频号、抖音平台等,覆盖相关医疗机构300余、社区300余个、和公众场所90余个。面向适龄女孩及监护人、适龄女性及全体市民开展广泛宣教,宣传材料发放至近9万名群众,讲座活动覆盖近2万名群众。宣教内容包括HPV疫苗接种、两癌防控、其它女性常见疾病防控等。

(2) 济南市

 

基本情况

济南市2022年度GDP为12027.5亿元,位列全国城市排名20。2021年,济南市出台《健康城市建设推动健康中国行动创新模式试点一济南市宫颈癌综合防治工作方案(2021—2025年)》等一系列相关政策推动适龄女孩HPV疫苗接种工作。

接种政策及效果

目标人群为≤14周岁且无HPV疫苗接种史的在校七年级女生。免疫程序为国产二价0-6二剂次。资助政策免费接种。疫苗接种按照属地化管理原则,安排分班级分时段前往学校所在地的预防接种单位进行接种。截至2022年11月,目标人群首针接种率达
94.4%[15].

宣传推动

济南市开展多形式、多载体的健康教育宣传。形式包括采访、线上线下专题活动,载体包括网络媒体、纸媒、科普展板、宣传手册、子宫颈癌与HPV疫苗知识读本、济南HPV疫苗接种手册,宣教人群广泛涵盖全体市民,宣教内容包括HPV疫苗接种、两癌防控等知识。

(3) 鄂尔多斯市

 

基本情况

鄂尔多斯市2022年度GDP为5613.44亿元,全国地级市第45位。2021年,鄂尔多斯市出台了《健康城市建设推动健康鄂尔多斯行动创新模式工作方案》等一系列相关政策推动适龄女孩HPV疫苗接种工作。

接种政策及效果

2020年8月,鄂尔多斯市在准格尔旗率先开展HPV疫苗免费接种项目。目标人群为全市当年13-18岁在校且无HPV疫苗接种史女生。免疫程序为进口二价0-1-6三剂次,

2023年起调整为13-14岁女孩0-6二剂次。资助政策为疫苗免费,自付20元/剂接种费。组织方式为疫苗接种服务中心根据任务安排联系学校,有规划的通知适龄女孩前来完成HPV疫苗接种。截至2022年11月,目标人群首针接种率接近70%[16]。

2022年8月,启动准格尔旗和达拉特旗高三女生接种四价和九价HPV疫苗的试点工作,利用暑假时间展开接种,力争在2023年年底达成90%的接种目标[17]。自鄂尔多斯之后,由政府主导的HPV疫苗惠民行动在多地等涌现。值得注意的是,近年来多主体参与到HPV疫苗支持项目,如慈善总会、医院、妇联等为主体单位牵头组织开展了一些公益活动。

宣传推动

鄂尔多斯市开展多形式、多载体的健康教育宣传。形式包括讲座、知晓日、义诊咨询、专题课程、专题活动等,载体包括宣传册、宣传栏、展板、电视、微信、视频号、抖音平台等,宣教人群广泛涵盖在校女孩及监护人,适龄女性及全体市民。宣教内容包括HPV疫苗接种、两癌防控、其它女性常见疾病防控等。

(4) 西安市

 

基本情况

西安市2022年度GDP为11486.51亿元,排名全国第22位。2021年,西安市出台了《西安市健康城市建设推动健康中国行动创新模式试点宫颈癌综合防治工作方案》等一系列相关政策推动适龄女孩HPV疫苗接种工作。

接种政策及效果

目标人群为全市年龄满13周岁(初中)在校女生。免疫程序为国产二价0-6二剂次,进口二价0-1-6三剂次,进口四价和进口九价0-2-6三剂次。接种政策为自愿自费。各区(县)合理设立HPV疫苗专项疫苗接种门诊承担接种任务,并及时将接种信息统一录入儿童免疫规划信息平台。

宣传推动

西安市出台了《西安市宫颈癌综合防治宣传方案》(市健办发〔2022〕12号)。通过媒体宣传、社区活动、义诊等形式,宣传册、宣传栏、展板、电视、微信公众号、报纸等载体普及宫颈癌防治相关知识。

(5) 西藏自治区

 

基本情况

西藏自治区2022年度GDP为2132.64亿元,经济总量整体规模相对其他省份较小,人均GDP处于全国中等偏下水平。2022年出台《西藏自治区妇女“两癌”综合防治工作实施方案》等系列政策推动适龄女孩HPV疫苗接种。

接种政策及效果

目标人群为13-14岁在校女生。免疫程序为国产二价0-6二剂次。资助政策为免费。由学校组织,接种者在商定接种时间携带个人身份证明材料与法定监护人一同前往定点接种单位接种。

宣传推动

充分利用网络、电视、广播、报刊等媒介,以群众喜闻乐见的宣传方式,对适龄在校女生HPV疫苗接种工作的意义及内容进行广泛宣传。

近年来各地HPV疫苗惠民项目信息

“疾病负担”指标解读

疾病负担(burden of disease, BOD)是指疾病造成的失能(伤残)、生活质量下降和过早死亡对健康和社会造成的总损失,包括疾病的流行病学负担和经济负担两个方面。

 

在疾病的流行病学方面,衡量疾病负担的常用指标包括传统指标和综合指标。

 

传统指标

传统疾病负担的衡量指标包括:用于描述和反映健康状况与水平的常规指标,如死亡人数、伤残人数和患病人数等绝对数指标;以及用来比较不同特征人群疾病分布差异的指标,如发病率、伤残率、患病率、死亡率、门诊和住院率等相对数指标。

 

上述传统疾病负担的衡量指标基本上只考虑了人口的生存数量,而忽略了生存质量,不够全面;但优势在于资料相对计算方便,结果直观,可用于各种疾病的一般性描述。

 

综合指标

疾病负担不等同于死亡人数,综合指标弥补了传统指标的单一性,且可以让各种不同疾病造成的负担之间相互比较。

 

潜在寿命损失年(YPLL):通过疾病造成的寿命损失来估计疾病负担的大小。但忽略了疾病造成的失能对生存质量的影响。

 

伤残调整寿命年(DALYs):将死亡和失能相结合,用一个指标来描述疾病的这两方面的负担。它包括因早死造成健康生命年的损失(YLL)和因伤残造成健康生命年的损失(YLD),即DALY=YLL+YLD。目前,DALY是国内外一致公认的最具代表性、运用最多的疾病负担评价指标。

 

健康期望寿命(HALE):指具有良好健康状态的生命年以及个体在比较舒适的状态下生活的平均预期时间,综合考虑生命的质量和数量两方面。

 

 

随着疾病负担研究的深入,其测量范围从流行病学负担扩大到经济负担。

 

疾病经济负担是由于发病、伤残(失能)和过早死亡给患者本人、家庭以及社会带来的经济损失,和由于预防治疗疾病所消耗的经济资源。

详细见:疾病的“经济负担”怎么计算?

 

参考资料:

陈文. 卫生经济学 [M]. 人民卫生出版社. 2017.

李茜瑶,周莹,黄辉等.疾病负担研究进展[J].中国公共卫生,2018,34(05):777-780.

什么是“年龄标化”?

在流行病学研究中,年龄是多种疾病的危险因素。以发病率为例,该指标反映了一定时期内,特定人群中癌症新发病例的情况。由于年龄是癌症发生的一个重要影响因素,年龄越大,发病率就越高。

 

如果两个国家的人群年龄结构相差很大,例如A市老年人口比例更大,B市年轻人口占比更高,直接比较两地癌症发病率的高低,我们不能确定发病率较高的市,是因为年龄构成不同还是因为其他影响因素(如饮食习惯、环境等)所导致。因此,需要用“年龄标化”的统计学方法,进一步处理数据,排除年龄影响因素的干扰,再来比较两地的发病率数据。

 

以发病率为例,即把原始数据套到一个“标准年龄结构人群里”,计算出”年龄标化发病率“,这样人群结构不同的A市和B市,就能在同一个指标尺度下进行“发病率”比较。年龄标化通常有“中标率”,即我国各地基于某一年份的中国人口年龄结构构成作为标准计算,国内不同地区的疾病数据比较采用的是“中标率”;另一种是“世标率”,即用世界标准人口构成机型标化计算,适用于国与国之间的指标比较。

 

同样地,以死亡率为例,应特别注意各之间地人口构成的差异。用标准化死亡率进行比较才能得出正确结论。如甲、乙两地在未标化前的肺癌死亡率相同,但实际上乙地人群的肺癌死亡率要明显地高于甲地,其原因在于甲地男性老年人口居多,而肺癌的死亡率又与年龄和性别有关,所以用未标化率进行比较时,就会得出甲乙两地肺癌死亡率相同的错误结论。

 

参考资料:

 

张科宏教授:年龄标化的患病率 – 丁香公开课 (dxy.cn)

科学网—癌症(粗)发病率与标化发病率的区别 – 杨雷的博文 (sciencenet.cn)

WHO年龄标化死亡率定义及计算方法

沈洪兵,齐秀英. 流行病学 [M]. 人民卫生出版社. 2015.

疾病的“经济负担”怎么计算?

疾病经济负担是由于发病、伤残(失能)和过早死亡给患者本人、家庭以及社会带来的经济损失,和由于预防治疗疾病的费用。通过计算疾病的经济负担,可以从经济层面上研究或比较不同疾病对人群健康的影响。

总疾病经济负担包括直接疾病经济负担、间接疾病经济负担和无形疾病经济负担。

直接经济负担:指直接用于预防和治疗疾病的总费用,包括直接医疗经济负担和直接非医疗经济负担两部分。直接医疗经济负担是指在医药保健部门购买卫生服务的花费,主要包括门诊费(如挂号费、检查费、处置费、诊断费、急救费等)、住院费(如手术费、治疗费等)和药费等。直接非医疗经济负担包括和疾病有关的营养费、交通费、住宿费、膳食费、陪护费和财产损失等。

间接经济负担:指由于发病、伤残(失能)和过早死亡给患者本人和社会带来的有效劳动力损失而导致的经济损失。具体包括:劳动工作时间损失、个人工作能力和效率降低造成的损失、陪护病人时损失的劳动工作时间、精神损失等。

无形经济负担:指患者及亲友因疾病在心理、精神和生活上遭受的痛苦、悲哀、不便等生活质量下降而产生的无形损失。

 

参考资料:

陈文. 卫生经济学 [M]. 人民卫生出版社. 2017.

李茜瑶,周莹,黄辉等.疾病负担研究进展[J].中国公共卫生,2018,34(05):777-780.