Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Selective Vaccination Strategy with BCG: Are We Identifying All Eligible Newborns?

Authors: Abdula, Zulmira K.; Alexandre, Susana; Constante, Ana Rita; Carreira, Raquel; Sousa, Alcina; Preto, Luísa; Gomes, Catarina;

Selective Vaccination Strategy with BCG: Are We Identifying All Eligible Newborns?

Abstract

Introduction: In Portugal, a selective BCG vaccination strategy was adopted in January 2017. The efficacy of this strategy relies on the precise identification of high-risk groups. We designed a study to evaluate the implementation of the Portuguese guideline on BCG vaccination in the area of our hospital. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of a sample of children born in our hospital from January 2017 to June 2018. Data was collected through a telephone questionnaire. Results: There were 233 children included in the study. Of them, 46 (19.7%) were eligible for BCG immunization, most (82.6%) because they had a parent, cohabitant or frequent contact from a high-risk country. Of these eligible children, 21 (45.7%) had not been identified and were therefore unvaccinated. From the total sample, there were 38 vaccinated children, of which 47.4% were referred during the first month of age (age range of 0-20 months). Discussion: We identified 45.7% of unreferred high-risk children, a quarter of which with risk factors not often enquired - close contacts with substance abuse or HIV infection. About half of the parents denied or didn´t recall being asked about the criteria in our maternity or in further routine health consultations. Conclusions: The risk identification must be improved because a significant number of unreferred children was found. There is still a failure to reassess the risk in all routine visits and probably not all the risk criteria are excluded.

Portuguese Journal of Pediatrics, Vol. 52 No. 4 (2021)

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!