Many hospitals are moving towards creating mandatory influenza vaccination policies as a condition of employment. Such mandates are causing surefire responses on both sides of the fence. What is the push behind the movement, and what is causing the pushback?
Updated:
First, let me just go over some of the symptoms of the flu, and then we will get down to business on the controversy surrounding the push to create mandatory flu vaccines for healthcare workers:
I can't think of anyone who wants any of these symptoms, or to come down with the flu, can you?
Influenza vaccination research has clearly documented the benefits of receiving the flu vaccine (Google it - you will find a plethora of information...however, I will list some links at the end of this article for your information). However, even though there is sufficient evidence to prove the benefits of receiving the flu vaccine, vaccination rates among healthcare workers are pitifully low. In 2013, only 55% of nurses in the frontlines were vaccinated.
Organizations such as The Joint Commission, the American Nurses Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Centers for Disease Control, Healthy People 2020, etc., etc., have stated their position on recommending the flu vaccine for healthcare workers in order to decrease the risk of exposure and reduce deaths. Due to this recommendation, many healthcare facilities are now creating mandatory flu vaccine policies as a condition of employment.
Employers who create mandatory policies will have exemptions, of course. Exemptions are made for medical and religious exceptions. For places that do not have a mandatory flu vaccine, they may "strongly recommend" the vaccination and may have a declination form for employees to submit if they refuse the vaccine. Additionally, some employers will enforce refusers to wear a mask during flu season while they are at work in order to protect the patients and the employee.
Evidence has shown that there are more than 36,000 deaths in the US each year related to influenza, and more than 200,000 hospitalizations. Influenza is the 6th leading cause of death. Healthcare workers are the leading cause of influenza outbreaks in the healthcare system. up to 50% of people who are infected by the flu virus do not fill ill for several days and can spread the virus to people at risk of complications and death from the flu. Additionally, evidence shows vaccination decreases mortality by 40%, decreases the spread of nosocomial infections by 43%, and decreases absenteeism by 20-30%.
Additionally, there is the ethics to consider. As healthcare workers, we have all taken an oath to "do no harm". As a nurse caring for patients who are not in their most physically healthy state, do we take the vaccination in order to prevent spreading the flu to our vulnerable patients, in order to "do no harm"? We must consider this when we make our decision to take or refuse the vaccination.
I have the names of a few hospitals, and this is by no means a comprehensive list. This is based on a ListServe survey of hospitals and these are the responses received:
Refusal may be largely due to misconceptions related to the vaccine. Fears that the immune system will cause them to get the flu, beliefs that hygiene and better nutrition are more helpful than the vaccine, fear of needles, beliefs that the vaccine does not work, and fear of side effects. Others believe that they have a constitutional right to refuse the vaccine and that mandatory policies are violating these rights.
(taken from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health outline of flu vaccine talking points for managers)
The flu shot does not give people the flu. It uses inactivated ("dead") virus. People may still catch a cold or other virus that the vaccine is not designed match.
Studies have shown that flu vaccination prevents flu in 70% to 90% of healthy adults younger than 65 years old.
You need a new vaccine every year - the virus changes over time.
Serious adverse reactions are very rare. They are explained on the CDC's Vaccine Information Statement, which is distributed when the vaccine is administered.
Local short-term reactions - such soreness at the vaccination site, slight fever, achy feeling - may occur but usually do not last long. Over the counter medicines are helpful. Even short-term reactions are much less bothersome than catching the flu and feeling very sick for days.
Your patients are at-risk, and possibly some friends and family members. You can be infected with the flu virus but not feel ill - and can still transmit flu to at-risk patients.
Inactivated influenza vaccine is effective in preventing transmission and reducing complications of the flu. In years when there is a close match between the vaccine and circulating virus strains, the vaccine prevents illness among approximately 70%--90% of healthy adults under 65 years of age. Vaccinating healthy adults also has been proven to lead to decreased work absenteeism and use of health-care resources, including use of antibiotics. Strong protection is also expected when the vaccine is not a close match with circulating strains, with 50%--77% effectiveness in these instances. In addition, effectiveness against influenza-related hospitalization for healthy adults from inactivated vaccine is estimated at 90%.
All healthcare facilities will be facing the choice of creating a mandatory influenza vaccination in the near future, if they have not already. In order to make an informed decision on the topic, we must have information. Knowledge is power. Before you make a blanket statement on pros or cons, have the information you need, know the research, and make an educated decision.
Please respond to this article by answering the following questions:
References
American Association of Family Practitioners. (2011). AAFP supports mandatory flu vaccinations for healthcare personnel. Retrieved from: AAFP Supports Mandatory Flu Vaccinations for Health Care Personnel
ATrain. (2014). To accept or refuse the flu vaccine. Retrieved from: ZZZ_133_Influenza: Module 7
CDC. (2014). Vaccination: Who should do it, who should not and who should take precautions. Retrieved from: Vaccination: Who Should Do It, Who Should Not and Who Should Take Precautions | Seasonal Influenza (Flu) | CDC
Influenza Action Coalition. (2015). Influenza vaccination honor roll. Retrieved from: Honor Roll: Mandatory Influenza Vaccination Policies for Healthcare Personnel
Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. (2014). Talking points for managers. Retrieved from: http://tinyurl.com/p6nbg2u
National adult and influenza immunization summit. (2015). Vaccinating healthcare personnel. Retrieved from: Vaccinating Healthcare Personnel - National Adult and Influenza Immunization Summit
NursingTimes. (2014). Why do health workers decline flu vaccination? Retrieved from: http://www.nursingtimes.net/Journals/2014/11/28/y/k/x/031214-Why-do-health-workers-decline-flu-vaccination.pdf
TJC. (2012). R3 Report: Requirement, rationale, reference. Retrieved from: http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/R3_Report_Issue_3_5_18_12_final.pdf
Well, that's disapppointing. At least I won't have to pay off my school loans.
Don't be so certain. Sallie Mae can hit up your estate.
Or you can subscribe to another conspiracy theory - maybe the loan company will have the hospital morgue remove some of your organs and sell them to pay off the loans.
Sorry. Some of these threads are making me a little punchy lately.
Or you can subscribe to another conspiracy theory - maybe the loan company will have the hospital morgue remove some of your organs and sell them to pay off the loans.Sorry. Some of these threads are making me a little punchy lately.
I AM an organ donor. Is the morgue allowed to legally sell organs? I could probably get a better price on the black market.
I AM an organ donor. Is the morgue allowed to legally sell organs? I could probably get a better price on the black market.
I wonder if craigslist has a section for that.
Nah, I was going off one of the crazy myths people believe about a hospital not trying to save a person who is an organ donor. Which has never made sense, but whatever.
I guess there are black markets for organs, though? I would have no idea about how that works.
I was kinda just poking fun at conspiracy theorists.
I wonder if craigslist has a section for that.Nah, I was going off one of the crazy myths people believe about a hospital not trying to save a person who is an organ donor. Which has never made sense, but whatever.
I guess there are black markets for organs, though? I would have no idea about how that works.
I was kinda just poking fun at conspiracy theorists.
When I was 16 and getting my license, my father didn't want me to be an organ donor for that reason.
Ah, the black market. You just have to know the right people. You could probably post it on Craiglist, as well. They have the oddest things for sale...
Returning to the topic of this thread-- mandatory flu shots:
Regarding clinical trials for new flu vaccines, "fake" placebo would be using another vaccine, while "real" placebo would be saline (salt water solution).
Then, it could be shown with "evidence based studies", whether a flu shot is actually more effective, or less effective, or equally effective, as a placebo is.
Returning to the topic of this thread-- mandatory flu shots:
Regarding clinical trials for new flu vaccines, "fake" placebo would be using another vaccine, while "real" placebo would be saline (salt water solution).
Then, it could be shown with "evidence based studies", whether a flu shot is actually more effective, or less effective, or equally effective, as a placebo is.
Build the business case for funding this "research". Why & who?
Returning to the topic of this thread-- mandatory flu shots:
Regarding clinical trials for new flu vaccines, "fake" placebo would be using another vaccine, while "real" placebo would be saline (salt water solution).
Then, it could be shown with "evidence based studies", whether a flu shot is actually more effective, or less effective, or equally effective, as a placebo is.
Why on earth would somebody use another vaccine in a study testing efficacy of the flu shot? What would be the point? Call me stunned but this makes no sense whatsoever.
Returning to the topic of this thread-- mandatory flu shots:
Regarding clinical trials for new flu vaccines, "fake" placebo would be using another vaccine, while "real" placebo would be saline (salt water solution).
Then, it could be shown with "evidence based studies", whether a flu shot is actually more effective, or less effective, or equally effective, as a placebo is.
Barrett, P. N., Berezuk, G., Fritsch, S., Aichinger, G., Hart, M. K., El-Amin, W., ... & Ehrlich, H. J. (2011). Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of a Vero-cell-culture-derived trivalent influenza vaccine: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet, 377(9767), 751-759.
Why on earth would somebody use another vaccine in a study testing efficacy of the flu shot? What would be the point? Call me stunned but this makes no sense whatsoever.
For the flu shot, placebo is used, they are placebo-controlled trials.
There have been studies that use an established effective and safe vaccine as a control to test a new vaccine for the same disease (e.g, HiB). This is obviously done because it would not be ethical to use a placebo; these are active-controlled trials not placebo-controlled trials.
Active-controlled trials are necessary to protect the safey of the test subjects: think of afib studies, you couldn't ethically give have your study placebo, so novel anticoag studies are done as active-controlled studies vs coumadin.
For the flu shot, placebo is used, they are placebo-controlled trials.There have been studies that use an established effective and safe vaccine as a control to test a new vaccine for the same disease (e.g, HiB). This is obviously done because it would not be ethical to use a placebo; these are active-controlled trials not placebo-controlled trials.
Active-controlled trials are necessary to protect the safey of the test subjects: think of afib studies, you couldn't ethically give have your study placebo, so novel anticoag studies are done as active-controlled studies vs coumadin.
Oh I know this BFNP (I work with infectious disease patients):)
I'm just getting tired of inane posts from people who do not understand the research process at all.
JustBeachyNurse, LPN
13,957 Posts
Don't be so certain. Sallie Mae can hit up your estate.