|
|
|
Home Page - Contatti - La libreria - Link - Cerca nel sito - Pubblicità nel sito - Sostenitori |
Non
funziona l'antinfluenzale sui bimbi: lo dice la Cochrane
Tratto
da Vaccinetwork - www.vaccinetwork.org
La
Cochrane Vaccines Field lo afferma: l'antinfluenzale nei bambini non
funziona. E a pubblicarlo è la prestigiosa rivista scientifica Lancet
nel numero del 26 febbraio 2005. Di seguito il testo dell'abstract e la
url dove lo si può trovare. Questo illustre parere smentisce quanto
sostenuto in precedenza dai Cdc di Atlanta, dall'Accademia Americana di
Pediatria e dalla Public Health canadese che dal 1999 avevano
raccomandato il vaccino antinfluenzale ai bimbi con meno di 2 anni. La
sollecitazione a vaccinare in questo modo destò non poche perplessità
e nel 2002 si poterono leggere alcuni pareri critici su Epicentro (http://www.epicentro.iss.it/focus/influenza/discussione/disc_influ.htm).
Ora la Cochrane Vaccines Field ha revisionato la letteratura
concludendo che non vi sono evidenze di efficacia di una simile
strategia vaccinale.
Vi
riportiamo, tradotta, la parte più interessante delle conclusioni:
Traduzione: L'efficacia
nei bambini piccoli è completamente non provata. Al massimo può
favorire nei bambini più grandi una riduzione della lunghezza delle
assenze scolastiche. I risultati sollevano dubbi sulla saggezza di
affrettarsi in un programma di vaccinazione estesa dei
bambini senza prove adeguate che questa funzioni o sia
interamente sicura. I vaccini antinfluenzali possono essere
efficaci contro le forme di influenza che tipicamente rappresentano
meno del 10% di tutti i casi, ma non vi è modo di predire che questo
sarà il virus predominante nella stagione influenzale in arrivo.
Vi
alleghiamo l'abstract e in fondo la url dove lo trovate.
Autori:
Jefferson T, Smith S, Demicheli V, Harnden A, Rivetti A, Di Pietrantonj
C.
Titolo: Assessment
of the efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines in healthy
children: systematic review.
Lancet 2005; 365:773-80 (26th of February). Contact Tom
Jefferson, MD, toj1@aol.com
BackgroundEach year many people are ill with acute infections of the
airways. Hundreds of different germs cause these infections, but the
symptoms are always the same regardless of which particular germ is
doing the rounds. Real influenza viruses cause—on average—only about
10% of these infections, and the rest are commonly known as "the
flu". All have the same symptoms: fever, chills, cough, stuffy nose
and sometimes ear and chest infections. There is no way to distinguish
real influenza from the flu unless complicated laboratory tests are
carried out.
Scientists and decision makers are worried about the impact that the flu
has on our lives. Recently the USA and Canada have started vaccinating
children, including those aged 6 to 24 months, in the hope of reducing
disease spread; admissions and visits to hospitals; deaths of elderly
relatives; complications, such as ear infections and pneumonia; and
absences from school and parental loss of workdays.
The
review
Given the important nature of the US and Canadian decision, a group of
Cochrane scientists conducted a review of the scientific evidence for
the use of influenza vaccines in children. They looked at the two main
types of available vaccines: those made of killed influenza viruses (inactivated)
and those made out of live but tamed influenza viruses (live attenuated).
The Cochrane authors looked at over a thousand studies and selected 25
high-quality clinical trials in which vaccinated children were compared
with unvaccinated children. For the first time in a review of influenza
vaccines, seven of the included studies came from Russia and were
translated especially for the Cochrane review. The combined results of
these 25 clinical trials were first reported in the British journal, The
Lancet. This summer, an expanded version of this review that includes
information about the safety of vaccines will appear in the Cochrane
Library.
The
findings
The review found that live attenuated vaccines avoided more cases of
real influenza (around 80%) than inactivated vaccines (around 65%). Both
types of vaccines were not very good, however, against the type of flu
that afflicts the overwhelming majority each year. There was no evidence
that either type of vaccine worked in children below the age of two
(and, in any case, live attenuated vaccines are not legal for this age
group), or prevented hospital admissions, deaths or other complications.
A few small studies suggested a possible shortening of the length of
school absences.
The
conclusions
Vaccination of small children is wholly unproven. At best, it may
benefit older children by shortening the length of school absences. The
findings call into question the wisdom of rushing into an expensive
vaccination programme of children without adequate proof that it will
work or that it is entirely safe.
Influenza vaccines may be effective against the type of influenza that
typically accounts for less than 10% of all cases, but there is no way
to accurately predict that it will be the predominant virus in the
upcoming flu season.