ABSTRACT
Introduction As the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic disproportionately affects older adults, future pandemic vaccine response will rely on existing adult immunization infrastructures.
Methods We evaluated the 2018 WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form on Immunization for country reports on adult immunization programs. We described countries with programs and used multivariable regression to identify independent factors associated with having them.
Results Of 194 WHO Member States, 120 (62%) reported having any adult vaccination program. The Americas and Europe had the most adult immunization programs, most commonly Hepatitis B and influenza vaccines (>45% and >90% of countries). Africa and South-East Asia had the fewest adult immunization programs, with <11% of countries reporting any adult immunization programs for influenza or hepatitis vaccines, and none for pneumococcal vaccines. In bivariate analyses, high- or upper-middle income, introduction of new or underused vaccines, having achieved pediatric vaccine coverage goals, and meeting National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups basic functional indicators were significantly associated (p<0.001) with having any adult immunization programs. In multivariable analyses, the factor most strongly associated with adult immunization programs was country income, with high- or upper-middle income countries significantly more likely to report having a program (aOR 19.3, 95% CI 6.5, 57.7).
Discussion That 38% of countries lack functional platforms for adult immunization has major implications for future SARS-CoV-2 vaccine deployment. Systems for vaccine storage and handling, delivery, and waste management for adult immunization do not exist in much of the world. Developing countries should strengthen immunization programs to reach adults with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines when they become available.
INTRODUCTION
The global community is rapidly mobilizing to develop vaccines to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection.1 While the timely development and manufacture of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is a public health imperative, vaccines will have to be deployed rapidly and globally to provide the greatest impact. Health care workers are at high-risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and maintaining essential services is critical during a pandemic. Likewise, older adults and adults with chronic medical conditions are at the greatest risk of severe COVID-19 disease.2 Any global pandemic vaccine response will rely on existing immunization infrastructures to reach adult target groups.3
While the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends several vaccines for use by adults, global immunization efforts have traditionally focused on young children. Since 1974, the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) has been the major platform for vaccine delivery in low-income countries (LICs) and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs).4 Built on the global smallpox eradication infrastructure, EPI originally included four vaccines against six infectious diseases administered in the first year of life.4 Since then, EPI has been expanded to include several additional vaccines, with most vaccines still targeting children in the first two years of life.5 Exceptions include maternal tetanus toxoid vaccination in settings where routine pediatric tetanus immunization is suboptimal and where maternal and neonatal tetanus has not been eliminated6 and human papillomavirus vaccines (HPV) targeting girls aged nine to 14 years.7 WHO also recommends additional vaccines for adults in regions where certain diseases are endemic (such as Japanese encephalitis and yellow fever vaccines), in high-risk populations (such as influenza and rabies vaccines), and under special circumstances (such as in outbreak settings).5
To better understand the status of national immunization programs targeting adults globally, we reviewed 2018 adult immunization data reported by countries through the Joint Reporting Form on Immunization (JRF) to WHO and UNICEF. We chose five routine vaccines licensed for adult immunization: hepatitis B vaccine (HepB), herpes zoster vaccine (HZV), influenza vaccine, pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV), and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) (Table 1). We chose not to review adult programs for booster doses of routine childhood vaccines, vaccines that target regional endemic infections, or those that are used primarily in outbreak settings. Our objectives were to identify countries with relevant adult immunization programs, to determine factors associated with having those programs, and to identify factors that could be addressed in order to strengthen the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic vaccine response.
Summary of WHO Position Statements for Vaccine Use in Adults as of March 2020
METHODS
Primary data source
We collected the most recent available data on national adult immunization programs from the JRF.8 The JRF is a monitoring and evaluation tool that collects national administrative information regarding estimates of immunization coverage, reported cases of vaccine-preventable diseases, immunization schedules, and vaccination campaigns, as well as indicators of immunization system performance and financing.9 The JRF is the only database of its type to include country-level data on immunization programs globally, making the JRF data the only dataset to our knowledge that would permit a global analysis of adult immunization programs. We accessed the 2018 JRF database on February 12, 2020, and collected country data on the presence of adult immunization programs for HepB, HZV, influenza vaccine, PPSV, and PCV. We also identified whether countries had introduced rotavirus vaccine, HPV, or birth dose HepB (in at least part of the country or for high-risk groups). To assess the general strength of routine immunization we classified countries according to whether they had achieved the Global Vaccine Action Plan goals of maternal and neonatal tetanus elimination (less than one case of neonatal tetanus per 1,000 live births in every district of a country),10 and whether they had achieved ≥95% national coverage of the third dose of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis containing vaccine (DTP3) per WHO/UNICEF estimates.11 To evaluate the capacity to make national decisions about vaccination programs, we used WHO data indicating whether countries had achieved WHO-defined process indicators for National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs).10,12 NITAGs achieving these indicators (called “functional NITAGs”) have the following characteristics: 1) legislative or administrative basis for the advisory group; 2) formal written terms of reference; 3) at least five different areas of expertise represented among core members; 4) at least one meeting per year; 5) circulation of the agenda and background documents at least one week prior to meetings, and; 6) mandatory disclosure of any conflict of interest.
Questions in the 2018 JRF asked whether a country had adult programs for influenza vaccine, HepB, and HZV. No specific questions were included for adult PCV or PPSV programs, but there were questions about which groups were targeted for immunization with these vaccines with free-text fields for responses. For PCV or PPSV, when it was clear that adult age groups were targeted by a particular vaccination program (such as when “adults,” “health care workers,” or persons aged “>65 years” were indicated), we considered an adult program to be present. Countries that did not report the presence or absence of an adult immunization program in the JRF, or that did not make clear whether an adult group was targeted for vaccination (such as when “high-risk groups” were indicated), were considered to not have an adult immunization program.
Other data sources
We collected additional information to supplement the JRF data. To the extent possible, all covariate data were also from 2018, the year of the JRF dataset. We sought relevant country immunization program information from websites of WHO Regional Offices, and we requested information from immunization staff in each WHO Regional Office. Regional Office immunization focal points are well-informed about routine immunization programs in their regions, they are a part of the annual JRF data quality review, and we considered their concurrence to country reports to be an important quality check for this project. We also accessed immunization schedules for countries in the European Union from the European Centers for Disease Control (ECDC) website.13 Next, we collected country economic information. As low-resource countries often rely on financial support from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, for new vaccine introduction, we identified 2018 Gavi funding eligibility for all countries.14 For per capita health expenditures, we used World Bank data for 2016, the most recent year available, and we classified country income categories using the 2018 World Bank designations.15,16
Statistical analysis
For statistical analyses, income group was defined as a categorical variable, the presence of adult immunization programs and health system/immunization program indicators were defined as dichotomous variables, and per capita health expenditure was defined as a continuous variable. We used descriptive statistics to describe countries with adult immunization programs. We conducted bivariate analyses to determine whether certain health system/immunization program characteristics were associated with the reported presence of any adult immunization program using χ2 tests for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis tests for comparisons of medians. We calculated p-values for trends using an extension of the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) using multiple logistic regression. All statistical tests were two-sided, and p-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Analyses were conducted in Stata (version 15.1, StataCorp, College Station, Texas). As there was no involvement of human participants or personal identifiable information, institutional review board approval was not required.
RESULTS
Among the 194 WHO Member States, 176/194 (90.7%) reported the presence or absence of a national adult immunization program for at least one of the five vaccines (range by region: 6/11 [54.5%] in South-East Asia to 35/35 [100.0%] in the Americas). Country responses were available for the presence of an adult vaccination program for HepB (83/194 [42.8%]), HZV (38/194 [19.6%]), influenza vaccine (114/194 [58.8%]), PCV (157/194 [80.9%]), and PPSV (59/194 [30.4%]), otherwise country responses were missing (Supplemental Table 1). Globally, WHO Member States reported having adult immunization programs for HepB (71/194 [36.7%]), HZV (15/194 [8.8%]), influenza vaccine (114/194 [58.8%]), PCV (16/194 [8.3%]), and PPSV (35/194 [18.0%]) (Table 2). A total of 120/194 countries (61.9%) reported having any of the five assessed adult immunization programs, while 3/194 (2.5%) reported having programs for each of the five vaccines studied (Greece, Italy, and the United States of America).
WHO Member States Reporting National Adult Immunization Programs in 2018, by WHO Region
By WHO Region, the proportion of countries reporting at least one adult vaccination program ranged from around 10% in South-East Asia (1/11 [9.1%]) and Africa (5/47 [10.6%]) to >90% in the Americas (34/35 [97.1%]) and Europe (50/53 [94.3%]) (Table 2, Figure 1). At least one country in every region reported an adult influenza vaccination program, with proportions ranging from 3/47 (6.4%) in Africa to 50/53 (94.3%) in Europe. In South-East Asia (n=11 countries), Thailand’s influenza vaccination program was the only adult immunization program reported. Excluding South-East Asia, the proportion of countries reporting HepB programs ranged from 3/47 (6.4%) in Africa to 31/35 (88.6%) in the Americas. The three countries reporting influenza vaccination programs in Africa (Algeria, South Africa, and Mauritius) were not the same as the three reporting HepB programs (Eswatini, Kenya, and Mauritius). Adult pneumococcal vaccine and HZV programs were reported in the Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, European, and Western Pacific regions only. The proportion of countries in these regions reporting a PPSV program ranged from 2/21 (9.5%) in the Eastern Mediterranean to 18/53 (34.0%) in Europe. The proportion reporting a PCV program ranged from 1/27 (3.7%) in the Western Pacific to 12/53 (22.6%) in Europe. Only 17 countries worldwide reported an adult HZV program, ranging from 1/21 (4.8%) in the Eastern Mediterranean to 10/53 (18.9%) in Europe.
Note: From 2018 WHO/UNICER Joint Reporting Form.8
Abbreviations: HepB = Hepatitis B vaccine; HZV= Herpes Zoster Vaccine; PCV = pneumococcal conjugate vaccine; PPSV = pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine; HPV= human papillomavirus vaccine
In bivariate analyses, economic indicators were highly associated with having an adult immunization program (Figure 2). Countries classified by the World Bank as high- or upper-middle income were more likely to have any adult immunization program than those classified as low- or lower-middle income (p<0.001), and countries with any adult immunization program had higher median per capita health expenditures compared to those without a program (p<0.001) (Supplemental Tables 2 and 3).
Note: From 2018 WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form.29
Abbreviations: HepB = Hepatitis B vaccine; HZV= Herpes Zoster Vaccine; PCV = pneumococcal conjugate vaccine; PPSV = pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine; HPV= human papilloma virus vaccine
Certain characteristics of the national immunization system were also associated with a reported adult immunization program in the JRF (Table 3). Countries that included the HepB birth dose in their EPI schedule were more likely to report one or more adult vaccination programs compared to those that had not (94/128 [73.4%] vs. (26/66 [39.4%], p<0.001). Similarly, countries that had eliminated maternal and neonatal tetanus were more likely to report an adult vaccination program compared to those that had not (120/180 [66.7%] vs. 0/14 [0.0%], p<0.001), and countries that had achieved national DTP3 coverage ≥95% were more likely to report an adult vaccination program compared to those with DTP3 coverage <95% (66/84 [78.6%] vs. 54/110 [49.1%], p<0.001). Among countries that had introduced HPV, 76/90 (84.4%) reported one or more adult vaccination programs, while only 44/104 (42.3%) of countries that had not introduced HPV reported an adult vaccination program (p<0.001). Having introduced HPV was also associated with having each of the five individual adult vaccination programs (Supplemental Table 4). The introduction of rotavirus vaccine was not associated with the presence of an adult vaccination program (Table 3). Finally, countries with a functional NITAG were more likely to report an adult vaccination program than those with a NITAG that had not achieved WHO-defined process indicators (94/128 [73.4%] vs. 26/66 [39.4%], p<0.001).
Characteristics of WHO Member States in 2018 with and without any Reported Adult Immunization Program
In a multiple logistic regression model including each of the binary national immunization system indicators (≥95% DTP3 coverage, elimination of maternal and neonatal tetanus, presence of a functioning NITAG, HepB birth dose, rotavirus vaccine, and HPV vaccine), and adjusting for income category, LIC/LMIC vs. upper-middle-income country (UMIC)/ high-income country (HIC), the presence of a functional NITAG (aOR 6.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3, 19.7), the use of the HepB birth dose (aOR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2, 8.9), and the use of HPV (aOR 3.5, 95% CI 1.3, 9.4) remained significantly associated with reporting an adult immunization program (Supplemental Table 5A). Country income status was the factor most strongly associated with reporting an adult immunization program (aOR 19.3, 95% CI 6.5, 57.7) for HIC/UMIC countries compared to LIC/LMIC countries. In a model limited to WHO Member States classified as LIC or LMIC, the aOR for any adult immunization program was 10.1 (95% CI 1.9, 53.8) for countries with a functional NITAG compared to those without, and the aOR for any adult immunization program was 4.9 (95% CI 1.2, 20.6) for countries that had included birth dose HepB in the EPI schedule compared to those that had not. Multiple logistic regression models for the individual adult vaccination programs showed similar trends (Supplemental Table 5B).
CONCLUSIONS
In our review of the 2018 JRF, adult vaccination programs were reported by 61.9% of WHO Member States, including countries from all WHO regions and all income categories. The most common adult immunization program was for influenza vaccination, reported by 58.8% of countries, while adult immunization programs for other vaccines were much less common. The number of adult influenza immunization programs has increased from an analysis of the 2014 JRF, when 46% of countries reported programs for adults with chronic disease and 45% reported programs for older adults.9 In that analysis, countries reporting influenza immunization programs were wealthier, and they were more likely to have functional NITAGs, to have introduced new or under-utilized vaccines, and to have stronger immunization systems. Our study documents and quantifies the major limitations to routine adult immunization programs globally and indicates that the trends seen for influenza vaccine are also true for adult immunization in general. That 38.1% of countries worldwide lack functional systems to deliver adult vaccinations has major implications for any future SARS-CoV-2 vaccine deployment.
WHO immunization position papers are permissive toward national immunization programs for the adult vaccines we assessed, indicating that countries may choose to target adults for immunization, but no position paper mandates such programs. A 2017 WHO expert convening acknowledged that there were data gaps hindering adult vaccination program policy-making globally, particularly in LICs and LMICs.3 Investment in studies to better measure disease burden and the potential impact of adult immunization programs are needed to inform the value proposition of adult immunization in low resource settings.
Further, while global vaccine policy has often been driven by estimates of mortality prevention or cost-effectiveness, the full impact of adult vaccine-preventable diseases may be better understood by different metrics.3 The impact on a community when older adults lose independence or functional capacity after a vaccine-preventable illness is difficult to assess, and the value of missed unpaid work in the home or as a child caregiver is seldom measured in economic analyses.17 The presence of favorable global programs for adult immunization is not sufficient to advance vaccination programs if impact estimates undervalue older adults’ lives or their contributions.
While we do not necessarily advocate the expansion of routine adult immunization services into developing country settings, we recognize the benefits such programs would provide to facilitate pandemic vaccine response. In addition to the direct impact of routine immunization, there are additional benefits of strong adult immunization programs. For example, they can provide platforms for the delivery of other preventive interventions and strengthen primary care.18 They also can enhance public health responses during public health emergencies, such as the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. In 2009, having a seasonal influenza vaccination program was significantly associated with the deployment of pandemic influenza vaccines when they were available.19 This was attributed both to infrastructure preparedness as well as individual attitudes regarding vaccination, both of which are enhanced when a country has a functional adult influenza vaccination program.19
Unfortunately, the availability of licensed vaccines is not sufficient to ensure vaccine access, particularly in LMICs. Strengthening countries’ capacities to provide immunization services across the life course should occur concurrently with the development of vaccines targeting adult age groups so delivery systems will be in place once new vaccines become available. Targeting health care workers may be the most logical first step to advancing adult influenza immunization in LICs and LMICs. There are existing platforms to transport, store, and deliver vaccines within health care systems,20 the total population of health care workers is small compared to other influenza risk groups, and sensitizing health care workers to the benefits of vaccination has effects on their advocacy of vaccines to patients.21 A healthy medical workforce is critical to ensuring that essential health care services continue during disease epidemics.
This study should be interpreted in the context of its strengths and limitations. To our knowledge, the JRF is the only global source of national immunization data and is therefore the only dataset that would permit a quantification of global adult immunization policies. The survey is a routine public health instrument that is completed annually by Ministries of Health with extensive quality checks at the regional and global levels. It can be an important platform to monitor adult vaccine policy development over time. However, the JRF relies on national self-reporting, and there may be errors introduced at the country level that would be difficult to identify or correct. Further, the questions regarding the presence of adult immunization programs, particularly for PPSV and PCV, require free-text responses for program target groups. WHO has moved to a web-based application to collect the 2019 JRF data, which will provide opportunities to improve the questionnaire and decrease potential reporting bias. We believe that engaging WHO Regional Office immunization focal points as a data critical quality check was a strength to this study, as they are highly informed about the routine immunization programs within their regions and are likely to know about any adult immunization programs, particularly in low-income regions. Supporting information obtained from WHO Regional websites and Regional Office immunization program officers did not identify any errors in our data. Finally, the presence of a national adult immunization program does not necessarily indicate substantial vaccine use.
If vaccines can be developed for SARS-CoV-2, they will be deployed in many countries without adult immunization infrastructures. Substantial resources will be needed to ensure the equitable distribution of potentially life-saving vaccines. In 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is disproportionately impacting older adults and is a threat to the safety of health care workers,2 yet nearly 30% of countries globally have no immunization infrastructures to provide adult vaccination. Further, as WHO advises the use of influenza vaccine, where feasible, for health care workers, older adults, and pregnant women during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.22 The success of delivering these vaccines is also threatened by lack of sufficient adult immunization infrastructures. Systems for vaccine storage and handling, delivery, and waste management for adult immunization do not exist in much of the world, and they will have to be developed specifically to support the pandemic response. Our study suggests that the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic response should address disparities in public health resources now and strengthen immunization systems to maximize the impact and equity of future pandemic vaccine deployment.
Data Availability
All data are available from the references provided.
http://www.who.int/immunization/monitoring_surveillance/routine/reporting/reporting/en/
https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519
https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=2&series=SH.XPD.GHED.PC.CD
REFERENCES
