Optimising reporting of adverse events following immunisation by healthcare workers in Ghana: A qualitative study in four regions

Barriers and strategies to improve vaccine adverse events reporting: views from health workers and managers in Northern Ghana

Background

The increasing incidence of novel vaccine-preventable diseases, such as COVID-19, has led to an increase in the development of vaccines globally. Vaccine hesitancy has risen due to fears of vaccines causing harm. African health systems have generally relied on spontaneous reporting of adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs) to monitor vaccine safety.

Objectives

This study explored the views of healthcare professionals and managers regarding barriers and strategies to improve AEFI reporting in northern Ghana.

Methods

This study used a qualitative research design where in-depth interviews were conducted with health professionals and managers in five administrative regions in northern Ghana between March and August 2021. The purposive sampling method was used to select districts and participants. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and coded into themes using QSR NVivo V.12 software before thematic content analysis.

Results

The study found that lack of feedback is the main regulatory-level factor affecting reporting adverse events. Health system-level factors, such as limited knowledge of reporting AEFIs, a lack of training, difficulties in using electronic application software to complete AEFI forms, and fear of punishment, significantly affect AEFI reporting. At the patient/community level, the main factors affecting AEFI reporting are the distance to health facilities and transportation costs. However, participants suggested continuous AEFI education, sensitisation of health workers and patients, timely feedback, and effective stakeholder collaboration among front-line health workers, health managers, and the national pharmacovigilance authority could improve AEFI reporting in Ghana.

Conclusions

Reporting of AEFIs contributes to improving vaccine safety, surveillance systems and prompt case management. However, the study identified multiple key factors at the regulatory, health system, and patient levels affecting AEFI reporting. Thus, improvements in line with these suggestions, including effective stakeholder engagement, are necessary to increase AEFI reporting.

Leveraging COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Monitoring in Ethiopia and Pakistan to Enhance System-Wide Safety Surveillance

The rapid development, introduction, and global uptake of COVID-19 vaccines required countries to have strong pharmacovigilance systems in place to monitor and address adverse events following immunization (AEFIs). These systems provide timely data on vaccine safety that support decisions about the potential risks of vaccine adverse events relative to the benefit of disease prevention. In Ethiopia, the monitoring system was limited by the lack of data being submitted through its passive surveillance system, delays in investigating serious adverse events and conducting causality assessments, and the lack of reporting to the World Health Organization (WHO) global database, VigiBase. In Pakistan, the pharmacovigilance system lacked reporting requirements and guidance documentation, regulatory policies were insufficient, and staff lacked the capacity to evaluate AEFI reports. Several interventions were implemented in both countries to improve pharmacovigilance systems and processes necessary to collect, analyze, and report AEFIs from health care facilities to the national level and facilitate the use of global and national electronic reporting tools. In addition, Pakistan improved the regulatory policy environment and engaged vaccine manufacturers and private sector health facilities in AEFI reporting for the first time in the country. Outcomes include an increased number of COVID-19 vaccine-related AEFIs reported and causality assessments completed, which means that potential safety issues were being analyzed more quickly, comprehensively, and accurately. The number of AEFI reports submitted to VigiBase by Pakistan's regulatory authority more than quintupled from approximately 5,000/quarter in 2021 to 28,555/quarter in 2022. In Ethiopia, by October 2022, 44,000 AEFI reports had been received, and 40 causality assessments completed. In both countries, timely AEFI data review and analysis led to prompt recommendations and regulatory actions, highlighting the far-reaching implications of strengthening the country-level pharmacovigilance systems. These strengthened systems are now in place for use with all vaccines.

Efficacy and feasibility of SMS m-Health for the detection of adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs) in resource-limited setting-The Zimbabwe stimulated telephone assisted rapid safety surveillance (Zm-STARSS) randomised control trial

INTRODUCTION

The mHealth active participant centred (MAPC) adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) surveillance is a promising area for early AEFI detection resulting in risk minimisation. Passive (spontaneous) AEFI surveillance is the backbone for vaccine pharmacovigilance, but has inherent drawbacks of under reporting, and requires strengthening with active surveillance methods.

AIM

The Zimbabwe stimulated telephone assisted rapid safety surveillance (Zm-STARSS) randomised controlled trial (RCT) sought to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of AEFI detection using a short message service (SMS) and computer assisted telephone interview (CATI) approach.

METHOD

A multicentre Zm-STARSS RCT enrolled consented adult vaccinees or parents or guardians of children receiving vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines, at study vaccination clinics. At enrolment study participants were randomised to either SMS-CATI group or control group. SMS prompts were sent on days 0-2 and 14 post-vaccination to SMS-CATI group to ascertain if a medically attendance or attention due to an Adverse event following immunisation (AEFI) had occurred. However, no SMSs were sent to the control group. SMS-CATI group who responded "Yes" to SMS prompts were interviewed by research healthcare workers (RHCWs) who completed a CATI to determine if an AEFI had occurred whilst an AEFI in control group was determined from passive AEFI reporting channels. The primary study outcome was the AEFI detection rate in the SMS-CATI group compared to the control group.

RESULTS

A total of 4560 participants were enrolled after signed informed consent, all were encouraged to report AEFIs and randomised automatically on 1:1 basis into two arms SMS CATI intervention group (n = 2280) and a control passive AEFI surveillance group (n = 2280) on day 0. A total of 704 (31 %) participants responded to the SMS prompts, with 75 % (528/704) indicating "No" and 25 % (176/704) reporting "Yes" to seeking medical attention or attendance post-immunisation. 69 % (121/176) completed a CATI survey but in only 36 % (44/121) was the AEFI confirmed. There were no AEFIs reported in control group participants. The detection rate of a AEFI associated with medically attendance or attention using the SMS-CATI methodology was 2 % (44/2280) on an intention to treat cohort.

CONCLUSION

Despite the low SMS response and CATI completion rate, we demonstrated that Zm-STARSS SMS system improves AEFI detection compared to passive AEFI surveillance. We recommend that this and similar approaches are explored further using cost-effective multi-channel digital approaches for holistic pharmacovigilance to improve AEFI detection in Low Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) for all vaccines.