|LETTER TO EDITOR
|Year : 2021 | Volume
| Issue : 8 | Page : 3163-3164
Clinical inertia in elderly for vaccination
Ajay Kumar Shukla, Saurav Misra
Department of Pharmacology, AIIMS, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India
|Date of Submission||18-Feb-2021|
|Date of Acceptance||14-May-2021|
|Date of Web Publication||27-Aug-2021|
Dr. Saurav Misra
Department of Pharmacology, AIIMS, Bhopal - 462 020, Madhya Pradesh
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
|How to cite this article:|
Shukla AK, Misra S. Clinical inertia in elderly for vaccination. J Family Med Prim Care 2021;10:3163-4
I read the informative research article “An example of clinical inertia in geriatrics” by Belice T, Ubay M, Gozubuyuk FO, Yilmaz RS, Yuksel A with great interest. While appreciating their efforts, I wish to make elucidate some important observations.
1. Age-wise assessment: This could have been more informative and more conclusive. As in the study done by Weinmayr LM et al., age-wise assessment of the elderly population was done. The only vaccination that increased with patient age was the vaccination against influenza. Vaccination coverage among 60–69-year-olds was 64%.
2. Collection of Data: In this study phenomenological design was performed and asked the participants their vaccination status but in a study done by Weinmayr LM et al. They analysed the data concerning vaccination status (vaccination certificate), patients attitudes and reasons against vaccination in routine primary care settings. This was one of the limitations of this study, as results may be biased when relying on self-reported vaccination status.
3. Exclusion criteria: Patients suffering from autoimmune disease, immunodeficiency state like HIV and organ transplantation and cognitive impairment must have been included as this this can affect vaccination as included in a study done by Weinmayr LM et al.
4. Patients attitude: Patients attitude towards vaccination must also be included in this study. In a study done by Weinmayr LM et al., respondents were strongly in favor (”very positive” and “positive”) regarding influenza (72.9%) and pneumococcal (56.9%) vaccines. There are studies that seem to support the theory that there is a correlation between the physician's attitude towards vaccination and the likelihood that a patient is vaccinated.
5. Benefits of vaccination in elderly: Another intangible benefit of vaccination, which is not mentioned in this study is that increased vaccination in the elderly may reduce the use of antibiotics and thus diminish the growing problems caused by the development of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Belice T, Ubay M, Gozubuyuk FO, Yilmaz RS, Yuksel A. An example of clinical inertia in geriatrics. J Family Med Prim Care 2020;9:5695-8. [Full text]
Weinberger B. Vaccines for the elderly: Current use and future challenges. Immun Ageing 2018;15:3. doi: 10.1186/s12979-017-0107-2.
Poethko-Müller C, Schmitz R. [Vaccination coverage in German adults. Results of the German health interview and examination survey for adults (DEGS1)]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2013;56:845-57.
Paterson P, Meurice F, Stanberry LR, Glismann S, Rosenthal SL, Larson HJ. Vaccine hesitancy and healthcare providers. Vaccine 2016;34:6700-6.
Doherty TM, Connolly MP, Del Giudice G, Flamaing J, Goronzy JJ, Grubeck-Loebenstein B, et al
. Vaccination programs for older adults in an era of demographic change. Eur Geriatr Med 2018;9:289-300.