Jump to comment:
- Page navigation anchor for Shared decision making and influenza vaccineShared decision making and influenza vaccine
The authors, conclude that an item of new advice should be included in all patient information material. Namely, that “The available evidence is of poor quality and provides no guidance regarding the safety, efficacy, or effectiveness of influenza vaccines for people aged 65 years or older“.
This will come as no surprise to anyone who is aware of the Cochrane Collaboration conclusions on influenza vaccine.
It rarely has any beneficial effect, Cochrane concludes.1
Last year vaccination had a negative effect, in the over 65s.2In the next few months, UK GP practices will be paid for vaccinating patients. Most practices go to considerable efforts to maximise uptake of the offer of influenza vaccination.
Is their enthusiasm a measure of concern to maximise health benefits for their patients, despite the lack of evidence that any benefit accrues? Or does it reflect a concern to maximise practice income from the vaccine?
Unless the financial interest of a practice, in maximising vaccine uptake, is made clear to patients, is shared decision making a suitable term, when the patient’s consent is requested?
Furthermore, unless patients are told that the vaccine contains aluminium (a neurotoxin) and formaldehyde (a carcinogen), and that no safety studies have been done to ascertain
that annual injections over ten or twenty years cause no ill effects, any consent...Competing Interests: None declared.