Increasing The Influenza Vaccination Rate

Mandatory Influenza Vaccinations for healthcare providers can be a controversial topic for some and may propose a challenge to some provider’s ethical values and beliefs. The topic of mandatory vaccination for influenza (“flu”) has been widely studied and debated among professionals over several years. It is apparent that there is some movement towards a mandatory vaccination for influenza by healthcare institutions as the benefit out weighs the risk on several fronts. “Influenza infection is associated with 36,000 excess deaths and > 200,000 hospitalizations in the United States annually. It is the leading cause of vaccine-preventable death in the United States every year” (Babcock, Geminhart, Jones, Dunagan, & Woeltje, 2010, p. 459).

In the past, Americans did not have much say in their own health care. In today’s time, with the advent of new health-care bills and peaked interest in personal well being, Americans are now anxious to determine for themselves what they need to maintain their own and their loved ones’ health. However, there are still government-regulated requirements for people of all ages in regards to keeping the general public healthy. Vaccinations have always been a topic of contention in regards to younger children, but have been a staple of health for older adults. In fact, college requirements for vaccinations are mandatory, and failure to get the proper vaccines before college starts could result in holds on college students’ accounts or delays in

When people see or hear advertisements, whether it be in a magazine or on television, many do not stop to consider or analyze the techniques that go into making the advertisement effective. For instance, the Center for Disease Control has a campaign that has the purpose of promoting the influenza vaccination. If you examine the campaign closely, it becomes clear that the advertising campaign targets a diverse audience of all ages, genders, and races who could all benefit from getting an influenza vaccination. In this advertisement campaign, the Center for Disease Control effectively promotes the benefits of getting an influenza vaccination to a targeted audience using numerous persuasive techniques such as association and universal appeal.

Every year, millions of people start talking about the influenza virus and getting their vaccines as the flu season approaches, which starts around the October-November period and reaches its peak between December and March. Therefore, public health officials around the world- and in the U.S in particular- are constantly challenged by properly preparing for the annual influenza dilemma, given that this viruses, and other respiratory viruses, are a serious health threat to the U.S population and the world as a whole. Furthermore, what makes the influenza virus even more challenging to control is that it can mutate rapidly and reassort to form new strains, having the ability to reside in multiple animal hosts. In fact, many scientists and researchers have been doing in-depth intensive research so as to understand the mechanism behind this unique characteristic of the virus, try to find new ways to control it, and explore different areas of protection and vaccination.

The CDC's ad campaign promoting influenza vaccinations has a widespread appeal to many audiences due to its use of several proven persuasive techniques. Through the use of association, flattery, and universal appeal, as well as a variety of strategies, the ad campaign is highly convincing and is able to reach many audiences.

While supporting the voluntary immunization for children and defending the right to have information regarding the risk involved with vaccines, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) oppose the elimination of or possible barriers of entry to obtain Non-Medical Exemptions. In an effort to reduce vaccine related injuries and/or death and support those who do not want to receive vaccines due to personal, spiritual, or religious beliefs, the NVIC supports the right to Non-Medical Exemptions. The primary purpose of this paper is to analyze the safety, efficacy, and economic burden of vaccines, as well as the right to choice in regards to Non-Medical Exemptions.

As a result, the burden placed on the health care system is significantly reduced. Therefore, people at a high risk of contracting influenza should seriously consider being vaccinated. Evidence suggests that educating high-risk people about the influenza vaccine is worthwhile. For example, during the influenza season of 2000-2001, 70% of adults 65 years of age and older received the flu shot. This suggests

With influenza vaccination rates remaining low in the HCP population, there has recently been an increased emphasis on improving vaccination rates among HCPs. Low influenza vaccination rates have caused many healthcare facilities to initiate and mandate employees to receive the influenza vaccine. Research has proven to reduce morbidity and mortality among patients in healthcare facilities as well as decrease illness and absenteeism among HCPs (Sickbert & Weber, 2013). For these reasons multiple professional organizations are recommending an annual influenza vaccine for all HCPs, if medically suitable for this vaccination. Requiring a physician waiver for non-suitable HCP, all non-suitable HCP are expected or required to wear a mask in direct patient care areas.

The influenza vaccination in not only beneficial to recipients but also those that come in contact with the individuals exposed to or at risk for contracting influenza. Health care workers are at a constant risk of exposure to various diseases and illness including influenza. An emergency such as a vaccination shortage for influenza will not only affect at risk individuals but spread rapidly to all those exposed without knowledge or a-symptomatic at time of encounter. Health care workers will be exposed in physician offices, hospitals, emergency care or urgent care centers with heightened possibility of spreading the illness (CDC, 2015). Health care workers are not limited to the obvious: physicians or nurses but also, therapists, EMS,

Everywhere you look you see ads on the tv, at the store, on the highway, even in school you will sometimes see some sort of advertising one ad you will see more frequently during flu season are ads put out by the center for disease control but what makes an add effective to a certain audience? In America alone an average of between 5 and 20 percent of americans will be infected with the influenza virus per year. The CDC has been effectively running their flu vaccination for many years now but the question is what makes these adds effective or ineffective? The three adds benefits of vaccination, quiz add, and travel ad each have a certain techniques they use to promote vaccination.

Due to the attention the anti-vaccination movement has received, many researchers have attempted to determine who is participating in the anti-vaccination movement. I am not the first to call for distinctions in children who were not fully-up-to-date (FUTD) on vaccines from those who are. Previous research on vaccination status has considered the children of “non vaccinators” as two distinct groups: undervaccinated and unvaccinated. Unlike selectively-vaccinated children, who intentionally were spared a particular vaccine, in much of this research undervaccinated children are identified as those who have inconsistent access to medical care (Reich 2014). Undervaccinated children are more likely to share particular demographic characteristics such as being below the poverty line, having a mother who is younger, unmarried, and has not attended college (Reich 2014; Smith 2004). This group is perceived to be unable, in most circumstances, to obtain the recommended vaccinations due to a wide variety of external factors. Undervaccinated children, in this sense, have been of particular interest to public health officials as they have attempted to implement programs to remove the cost of vaccines to increase availability (Smith et al. 2008). Undervaccination, like discussed earlier, has been reduced with the enactment of the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program by the United States government (Whitney et al. 2014).

The anti-vaccination sentiment exists worldwide, with activists arguing that vaccines are ineffective with a high risk of side effects, encouraging people to forgo immunization, including the influenza inoculation. Conversely, I wonder if these same activists would promote anti-immunization and anti-influenza inoculation to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for health care providers and medical personnel, especially countries with high infectious disease rates and high risk assessment of influenza with pandemic potential. Moreover, would these activists be willing to promote these individuals rights to perform their specialties in the United States without proper vaccinations? The answer to the question is not by any means. Nevertheless, a person deciding whether to be

According to the CDC, the flu is “a highly contagious viral infection of the respiratory passages causing fever, severe aching, and catarrh, and often occurring in epidemics.” The flu causes a large number of hospitalizations and excess death per year, and there have been continuous debates over in the U.S. over the necessity of flu immunization and the financial burden of providing health services such as the flu vaccine. Every year vaccinations are made available, but are considered optional. However, a study conducted by Quian Gu, and Neraj Sood, observed the association between the dangers of the flu infection and the likelihood of getting immunized. The study concluded that those with socio-economic disadvantages and unhealthy lifestyles were less likely to get immunized, and by collecting scientific data nationally, the study found that flu immunizations were consistent with the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) “High Priority” model of vaccination—those participating in the study who were labeled as a high priority for influenza vaccinations were more likely to receive them than others.

Salmon, Dudley, Glanz, and Omer (2015) assert in their article Vaccine Hesitancy: Causes, Consequences, and a Call to Action that the delay or refusal of vaccines, or vaccine hesitancy, is a complex and vitally important healthcare issue in the United States. Many factors contribute to vaccine hesitancy by parents, including timing of vaccines and adverse health outcomes, a distrust in governmental and pharmaceutical agencies, the number of vaccines given at one time, and lack of individual control.

Colds, disease caused by the virus is easily transmitted, and usually is spread through coughing or sneezing of an infected person. There are about 200 kinds of flu viruses that can attack us.