Use of a comprehensive program to review religious and personal seasonal influenza vaccination exemption requests by healthcare personnel.

OBJECTIVE: Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) requires that all faculty and staff receive the seasonal influenza vaccine annually or receive an approved vaccine exemption, either for a medical or deeply held religious or personal belief. We sought to understand the underlying principles behind these exemption requests and their interaction with a multidisciplinary exemption review process. DESIGN: All of the personal and religious exemption requests at VUMC for 3 consecutive influenza seasons from 2015 to 2018 were analyzed, categorizing these requests by 1 of 12 standardized employee categories and 1 of 18 unique reasons for vaccine exemption. SETTING: Tertiary-care academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare personnel (HCP). RESULTS: Among the 3 influenza seasons, 1.1%-2.1% of all VUMC HCP requested religious or personal exemption from vaccination. The frequency of religious and personal exemption approval increased annually from 296 of 452 (65.5%) to 196 of 248 (80.2%) to 283 of 323 (87.6%) over the 3 seasons, representing a statistically significant increase each year. Of the 5 most common reasons against vaccination, 4 were explicitly religious in nature; the most common reason was that the "body is a temple or sacred." Nonclinical staff submitted the most religious and personal exemption requests of any job category, submitting approximately one-third of all requests every year. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate how detailed the personal or religious convictions behind vaccine avoidance can be among HCP and how vaccine avoidance stems from much more than simple misinformation regarding vaccination. The intersection between misinformation and personal or religious beliefs provides a unique opportunity to address HCP opinions toward vaccination in an exemption and appeals process like the one described here.

Comparative effectiveness of propranolol and botulinum for the treatment of essential voice tremor.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To assess the comparative effectiveness of botulinum toxin and propranolol in patients with essential vocal tremor (EVT). STUDY DESIGN: Individual prospective cohort study. METHODS: Study patients were recruited at the Emory Voice Center from patients seeking treatment for EVT. Exclusion criteria included current ß-blocker treatment, spasmodic dysphonia, or other disease that prevented the use of propranolol therapy. A 10-week washout period from prior botulinum toxin treatment occurred before enrollment. Patients were assessed via the Voice-Related Quality-Of-Life (VRQOL) questionnaire, Quality of life in Essential Tremor questionnaire, and blinded perceptual voice assessment. These assessments were made at baseline voice 2 weeks after propranolol therapy and 4 weeks after botulinum toxin injection. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were enrolled. After 2 to 4 weeks of propranolol therapy (with a maximum dosage of 60 mg to 90 mg per day), patients report an average ΔVRQOL of 9.31. Six patients report significant VRQOL improvement >10, with the rest reporting changes between -7.5 and 7.5. Fifteen patients were followed for at least 4 weeks after botulinum toxin injection, reporting an average improvement in scaled VRQOL of 22.00. Blinded perceptual voice assessment demonstrates an improvement in overall severity of tremor with botulinum toxin. CONCLUSIONS: In some patients with EVT, propranolol led to significant vocal improvement with no major side effects. Although botulinum toxin remains the gold-standard therapy for patients with EVT, propranolol represents a possible alternative or adjuvant therapy for certain patients.