Differences between influenza and pertussis vaccination uptake in pregnancy: a multi-center survey study in Italy.

BACKGROUND: A suboptimal maternal vaccination coverage in 2017-18 has been reported in Italy. The study aims were to (i) assess changes in maternal influenza and tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis vaccination coverage during 2018-19 influenza season compared to the previous season (ii) estimate influenza vaccine coverage among maternal care providers (MCPs) and (iii) explore the characteristics of vaccine delivery to pregnant women. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among pregnant women and MCPs about influenza and pertussis immunization during pregnancy. We also collected information regarding prenatal care characteristics and vaccine delivery among four centers in Italy. RESULTS: We recruited 483 pregnant women and 452 MCPs. The influenza and pertussis vaccine uptake among pregnant women for the season 2018-19 was 14.9% and 60.9%, respectively. MCPs' influenza vaccine uptake was 33.6%. Knowing that the flu vaccine was safe for mothers and their infants and being vaccinated in the previous influenza season were associated with higher vaccine uptake. Regarding pertussis, being a housewife was associated to lower vaccine uptake, while knowing the vaccine is effective and safe for mothers and newborns were associated with higher pertussis vaccine uptake. The single most important factor associated to higher coverage of both influenza and pertussis vaccines was receiving a health-care provider's vaccine advice. Most pregnant women (69.4%) stated that they preferred to be vaccinated in their same prenatal care setting. CONCLUSIONS: Receiving a health-care provider's vaccine advice and the availability of vaccines during prenatal care visits might improve vaccination coverage among pregnant women.

Prenatal diagnosis versus first-trimester screening of trisomy 21 among pregnant women aged 35 or more.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the policy of prenatal diagnosis versus first trimester screening of trisomy 21 among pregnant women of advanced age. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients aged ≥35 divided in two groups: patients who requested first trimester combined test and only in case of screen-positive result underwent invasive testing (group A); patients undergoing chorionic villous sampling or amniocentesis as first investigation (group B). The following outcome variables were compared: antenatal detection of trisomy 21, occurrence of trisomy 21 at birth, miscarriage rate, hospitals' costs. RESULTS: 4527 women were included. Of these, 534 (11.80%) underwent T21 screening whereas 3993 (88.20%) requested primary invasive testing. In group A, 64 combined test were positive (11.99%) and 8 trisomy 21 cases were diagnosed (1.50%); the loss of euploid fetuses after invasive procedure was 4.55% (2/44). No false-negative case was observed. In group B 57 cases of trisomy 21 were diagnosed (1.43%), and pregnancy loss rate of chromosomally normal fetuses was 0.45% (17/3806). The estimated cost was, respectively, 67.720€ for the primary screening versus 1.996.500€ for direct prenatal diagnosis. CONCLUSION: First trimester screening of trisomy 21 is highly accurate and cost saving among women ≥35.