Effects of campaign for postpartum vaccination on seronegative rate against rubella among Japanese women

BMC Infectious Diseases

Hisanori Minakami⁶  Shigeki Matsubara³  Nobuya Unno¹  Shigeru Saito⁴  Akihito Nakai⁵  Takahiko Kubo²  Mika Ito⁴  Akihide Ohkuchi³  Eriko Hashimoto⁵  Masachi Hanaoka¹  Junko Mochizuki²  Takahiro Yamada⁶ 

[1] Department of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan;Department of Obstetric and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Kitasato University, Sagamihara, Japan;Department of Obstetric and Gynecology, Jichi Medical University School of Medicine, Shimotsuke, Japan;Graduate School of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Science, University of Toyama, Sugitani, Japan;Department of Obstetric and Gynecology, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan;Department of Obstetrics, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, N15W7, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8638, Japan

关键词: Vaccine;    Outbreak;    Congenital rubella syndrome;   

Others  :  1134303
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2334-14-152

 received in 2013-11-21, accepted in 2014-03-18,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Japan experienced two rubella outbreaks in the past decade (2004 and 2012 – 2013), resulting in 10 and 20 infants with congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), respectively. This study was performed to determine whether the seronegative rate was lower in multiparous women than in primiparous women in Japan.

Methods

Hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test results during pregnancy were analyzed retrospectively in 11048 primiparous and 9315 multiparous women who gave birth at six hospitals in northern Japan in the 5-year study period (January 2008 through December 2012). Women with HI titer <  1:8 were defined as susceptible to rubella.

Results

The seronegative rate was significantly lower in multiparous than primiparous women aged 30 – 31 years (2.3% [22/967] vs. 4.5% [66/1454], P  =  0.0036), 36 – 37 years (3.4% [55/1601] vs. 5.7% [79/1389], P  =  0.0030), and overall women (3.8% [350/9315] aged 34.7  ±  5.2 vs. 5.4% [597/11048] for 33.2  ±  5.9, P  <  0.001). The susceptible fraction size did not differ largely according to hospital, ranging from 3.5% to 6.3%. Those for each year did not change markedly; 4.5% [150/3369], 5.2% [221/4268], 4.4% [195/4412], 4.6% [186/4056], and 4.6% [195/4258] for 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012, respectively. Those for teenagers were consistently high: 22.7% [5/22], 20.7% [6/29], 20.6% [7/34], 13.0% [3/23], and 23.5% [4/17] for 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012, respectively.

Conclusions

The seronegative rate was significantly lower in multiparous than primiparous women. However, Japanese rubella vaccination programs were insufficient to eliminate CRS.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Yamada et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Minakami H, Kubo T, Unno N: Causes of a nationwide rubella outbreak in Japan, 2012 – 2013. J Infect 2013, 14(1):152.
• [2]Minakami H, Hiramatsu Y, Koresawa M, Fujii T, Hamada H, Iitsuka Y, Ikeda T, Ishikawa H, Ishimoto H, Itoh H, Kanayama N, Kasuga Y, Kawabata M, Konishi I, Matsubara S, Matsuda H, Murakoshi T, Ohkuchi A, Okai T, Saito S, Sakai M, Satoh S, Sekizawa A, Suzuki M, Takahashi T, Tokunaga A, Tsukahara Y, Yoshikawa H: Guidelines for obstetrical practice in Japan: Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (JSOG) and Japan Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (JAOG) 2011 edition. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2011, 37:1174-1197.
• [3]Yamada T, Kubo T, Mochizuki J, Hashimoto E, Ohkuchi A, Ito M, Hanaoka M, Nakai A, Saito S, Unnno N, Matsubara S, Minakami H: Immune status among Japanese during nationwide rubella outbreak in Japan 2012 – 2013. J Infect 2013, S0163-4453(13):00360-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2013.11.008
• [4]National Institute of Infectious Diseases (Japan): Cumulative number of rubella cases by week, 2009–2013 (week1-38). Cited in 15 February 2014 from URL: http://www0.nih.go.jp/niid/idsc/idwr/diseases/rubella/rubella2013/rube13-38.pdf webcite
• [5]National Institute of Infectious Diseases (Japan): Correlation between hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test results and EIA method for rubella immunity. Infectious Agents Surveillance Report 2013, 34:107-108.
• [6]Bloom SA, Trepka MJ, Nobles RE, Becerra MA, Reef S, Zhang G: Low postpartum rubella vaccination rates in high- risk women, Miami, Florida, 2001. Am J Prev Med 2006, 30:119-124.
• [7]National Institute of Infectious Diseases (Japan): Rubella immunity status according to ages in 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, and 2008. Cited in 3 October 2013 from URL: http://www.nih.go.jp/niid/ja/y-graphs/1911-rubella-yosoku-serum2012.html webcite, http://www.nih.go.jp/niid/ja/y-graphs/1911-rubella-yosoku-serum2011.html webcite, http://www.nih.go.jp/niid/ja/y-graphs/1912-rubella-yosoku-serum2010.html webcite, http://www.nih.go.jp/niid/ja/y-graphs/1914-rubella-yosoku-serum2009.html webcite, and http://www.nih.go.jp/niid/ja/y-graphs/1915-rubella-yosoku-serum2008.html webcite, respectively
• [8]Yamada T, Cho K, Endo T, Hanatani K, Minakami H: Pregnancy outcome in women with no antenatal care in Hokkaido, Japan 2008. Journal of Japan Society of Perinatal and Neonatal Medicine 2009, 45:1448-1455.
• [9]Galazka A: Rubella in Europe. Epidemiol Infect 1991, 107:43-54.
• [10]Macdonald A, Petaski K: Outbreak of rubella originating among high-school students –Selkirk, Manitoba. Can Commun Dis Rep 1997, 23:97-101.
• [11]Panagiotopoulos T, Antoniadou I, Valassi-Adam E: Increase in congenital rubella occurrence after immunization in Greece: retrospective survey and systematic review. BMJ 1999, 319:1462-1467.
• [12]Mongua-Rodriguez N, Díaz-Ortega JL, García-García L, Pina-Pozas M, Ferreira-Guerrero E, Delgado-Sánchez G, Ferreyra-Reyes L, Cruz-Hervert LP, Baez-Saldaña R, Campos-Montero R: A systematic review of rubella vaccination strategies implemented in the Americas: impact on the incidence and seroprevalence rates of rubella and congenital rubella syndrome. Vaccine 2013, 31:2145-2151.
• [13]Castillo-Solorzano C, Carrasco P, Tambini G, Reef S, Brana M, de Quadros CA: New horizons in the control of rubella and prevention of congenital rubella syndrome in the Americas. J Infect Dis 2003, 187(Suppl 1):S146-S152.
• [14]Samuel R, John TJ: Prevention of rubella. Lancet 1996, 348:267-268.
• [15]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Elimination of rubella and congenital rubella syndrome—United States, 1969–2004. MMWR 2005, 54(11):279-282.
• [16]Muscat M, Zimmerman L, Bacci S, Bang H, Glismann S, Mølbak K, and the EUVAC.NET group: Toward rubella elimination in Europe: an epidemiological assessment. Vaccine 2012, 30:1999-2007.
• [17]Babigumira JB, Morgan I, Levin A: Health economics of rubella: a systematic review to assess the value of rubella vaccination. BMC Public Health 2013, 13:406-417. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]Okuda M, Yamanaka M, Takahashi T, Ishikawa H, Endoh M, Hirahara F: Positive rates for rubella antibody in pregnant women and benefit of post-partum vaccination in a Japanese perinatal center. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2008, 34:168-73.