AŞI UYGULAMALARINDA İKİNCİL KAZANIMLAR

Aşı programları, aşı ile önlenebilir hedef bulaşıcı hastalığı önlemek ve bu hastalığa bağlı oluşabilecek komplikasyon ve ölümleriengellemeyi amaçlar. Bununla beraber, aşı uygulamalarının yaygınlaşması ile toplumda hedef patojeni bulaştırma potansiyeli olanbireylerin sayısı azalır, böylece aşılanmamış bireylerin hastalık etkeni ile teması azalır ve bu bireylerde dolaylı yoldan korunmuş olur.Ayrıca aşıların, toplumdaki genel morbidite ve ölüm oranları üzerine hedef hastalığın önlenmesi ile açıklanamayacak olan ikincil olumluetkileride bulunmaktadır. Aşı uygulamalarına bağlı oluşan ikincil etkiler son yıllarda araştırmacıların daha fazla ilgisini çekmeyebaşlamıştır. Aşı uygulamalarına dair ikincil etkileri belirleyebilmek için doğru, açık ve standart gözlem metotları uygulanmalıdır.Epidemiyolojik sürveyans, hastalığın yükünün belirlenmesi, hedef grupların ortaya çıkarılması ve bağışıklama programlarının etkisininbelirlenmesi için dikkatle yürütülmelidir. Bu sayede bir ülkenin ulusal bağışıklama programı belirlenirken basit ve kanıta dayalı bilgilerlehareket edilebilir.

Indirect Benefits of Vaccines

Vaccination programs aim to prevent the target infectious disease and also prevent complications and mortality related to this disease. However, with the widespread use of vaccines, the number of individuals with the potential to infect the pathogen in the community decreases, so that the contact of the non-vaccinated individuals with the pathogen decreases, and these individuals are protected indirectly. In addition, vaccines have secondary positive effects on overall morbidity and mortality rates in the community, which cannot be explained by the prevention of target disease. Secondary effects due to vaccine applications have attracted more attention from researchers in recent years. Accurate, clear, and standard observation methods should be applied to identify secondary effects on vaccine applications. Epidemiological surveillance should be carried out carefully to determine the burden of the disease, to reveal target groups and to determine the effect of immunization programs. In this way, it is possible to act with simple and evidence-based information when determining a national immunization program.

PDF

___

1. Argüt N, Yetim A, Gökçay G. Aşı kabulünü etkileyen faktörler. Çocuk Dergisi. 2016;16(1-2):16-24.
2. Aaby P, Kollmann TR, Benn CS. Nonspecific effects of neonatal and infant vaccination: public health, immunological and conceptual challenges. Nat Immunol. 2014;15(10):895-99.
3. Fine P, Eames K, Heymann DL. “Herd immunity”: a rough guide. Clin İnfect Dis. 2011;52:911-6.
4. Doherty M, Buchy P, Standaert B, Giacuinto C, Prado-Cohrs D. Vaccine impact: Benefits for human health. Vaccine. 2016;34:6707-6714.
5. Fine PE. Herd Immunity: history, theory, practice. Epidemiol Rev. 1993;15:265-302.
6. Scarbrough Lefebvre CD, Terlinden A, Standaert B. Dissecting the indirect effects caused by vaccines into the basic elements. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2015;11(9):2142-2156.
7. Panagiotopoulos T, Antoniadou I, Valassi-Adam E. Increase in congenital rubella occurrence after immunization in Greece: retrospective survey and systematic review. Bmj. 1999;319:1462-7.
8. Dagan R, Leventhal A, Anis E, Slater P, Ashur Y, Shouval D. Incidence of hepatitis A in Israel following universal immunization of toddlers. Jama. 2005; 294:202-210.
9. Eichner M, Schwehm M, Eichner L, Gerlier L. Direct and indirect effects of influenza vaccination. BMC Infect Dis. 2017;17(1):308.
10. Grizas AP, Camenga D, Vazquez M. Cocooning: a concept to protect young children from infectious diseases. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2012;24(1):92-7.
11. Brillo E, Tosto V, Giardina I, Buonomo E. Maternal tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) and influenza vaccination: an overview. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019; 1-30. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2019.1680633.
12. Shiri T, Datta S, Madan J, Tsertsvadze A, Royle P, Keeling MJ et al. Indirect effects of childhood pneumococcal conjugate vaccination on invasive pneumococcal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5:51-59
13. Kleinnijenhuis J, Quintin J, Preijers F, Joosten LA, Ifrim DC, Saeed S et al. Bacille Calmette- Guerin induces NOD2- dependent nonspecific protection from reinfection via epigenetic reprogramming of monocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109(43):17537-42.
14. Steenhuis TJ, van Aalderen VM, Bloksma N, Nijkamp FP, van der Laag J, van Loveren H. Bacille Calmette-Guerin vaccination and the development of allergic disease in children: a randomized, prospective, single-blind study. Clin Exp Allergy. 2008;38(1):79-85.
15. Linehan MF, Nurmatov U, Frank TL, Nimen RM, Baxter DN, Sheikh A. Does BCG vaccination protect against childhoos asthma? Final results from the Manchester Community Asthma Study retrospective cohort study and updated systematic review and meta-analysis. J Allergy Clin İmmunol. 2014;133(3):688-95.
16. Mina MJ. Measles, immune suppression and vaccination: direct and indirect nonspecific vaccine benefits. J İnfect. 2017;74:10-17.
17. Paulke-Korinek M, Kundi M, Rendi-Wagner P, de Martin A, Eder G, Schmidle-Loss B et al. Herd immunity after two years of mass vaccination program against rotavirus gastroenteritis in Austria. Vaccine. 2011;29:2791-6.
18. Rogers MAM, Basu T, Kim C. Lower Incidence Rate of Type 1 Diabetes after Receipt of the Rotavirus Vaccine in the Unites States,2001-2017. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):7727.