Use of an Electronic Monitoring System for Self-Reporting Smallpox Vaccine Reactions

Published in: Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science, v. 3, no. 3, Sep. 2005, p. 198-206

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2005

by Stuart S. Olmsted, John Grabenstein, Arvind Jain, William Comerford, Pamela Giambo, Pamela Johnson, Judie Mopsik, S. Rebecca Zimmerman, Nicole Lurie

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.liebertonline.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVES: Tracking vaccine reactions and adverse events during a large-scale vaccination program such as the recent smallpox program or a pandemic flu outbreak will be a challenge. The authors report on vaccine reaction data collected using a novel telephone- and web-based electronic reporting system. The system was used to monitor vaccinees during the U.S. Army's smallpox vaccination campaign, which was part of the national program to prepare against biological attack. In addition, we report on the time course of events after smallpox vaccination based on the self-reported data and evaluate the validity and reliability of self-reported take information after smallpox vaccination. METHODS: A prospective cohort of subjects receiving the smallpox vaccination volunteered to use an electronic monitoring system to track and report their vaccination reactions. RESULTS: Users made 6.8 +/- 6.2 (mean +/- SD) reports using the electronic monitoring system. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of self-reported takes were high, 98.8% and 99.6%, respectively. The vaccination-site reactions progressed faster for revaccinees than first-time vaccinees. CONCLUSIONS: Simple-to-use telephone/Internet-based technology allowed detailed self-recording of response to smallpox vaccination among outpatients. Self-reports on site appearance were sufficient to determine vaccine takes in most vaccinees. During a mass vaccination event, an electronic monitoring system could facilitate tracking of vaccine reactions, including providing an early warning system for adverse events, and might reduce the burden associated with follow-up visits with healthcare professionals.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.