Recent review of the polio vaccines (live attenuated oral poliovirus vaccine [OPV] and enhanced inactivated poliovirus vaccine [eIPV]) for children has generated much debate between infectious disease experts and public health officials.
Poliomyelitis was a common medical condition in the 1940s and 1950s, and the success of OPV in eradicating poliomyelitis from the United States and even the Western hemisphere cannot be disputed.
However, the adverse condition of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) has been reported in eight to nine cases per year as a result of exclusively using OPV in the United States.
The dilemma has been how to continue the elimination of wild-type poliovirus paralytic poliomyelitis in the United States and worldwide while minimizing the occurrence of VAPP.
Clinical trials have supported that eIPV and OPV provide similar protection for humoral immunity.
However, OPV provides superior gastrointestinal immunity, which is a public health benefit for vulnerable populations.
Recommendations among experts have concluded that the sequential eIPV/OPV is the preferred schedule, with eIPV only or OPV only as alternative equally acceptable schedules.
Therefore, factors such as cost, compliance, and access to health care must be considered by parents and providers when selecting a polio vaccine regimen, especially among underserved populations.
Mots-clés Pascal : Vaccination, Immunoprotection, Poliovirus, Enterovirus, Picornaviridae, Virus, Vaccin, Inactivation, Atténuation, Forme orale, Prévention, Etude comparative, Efficacité, Risque, Enfant, Homme
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Vaccination, Immunoprotection, Poliovirus, Enterovirus, Picornaviridae, Virus, Vaccine, Inactivation, Attenuation, Oral form, Prevention, Comparative study, Efficiency, Risk, Child, Human
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 98-0073541
Code Inist : 002B05A02. Création : 14/05/1998.