English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objectives: One dose of Sabin-strains inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) was introduced into the Chinese immunization program on 1 May 2016. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of Sabin-strains IPV and provide a comparison with conventional Salk-strains IPV. Methods: Adverse events following immunization (AEFI) records associated with Sabin-strains IPV and Salk-strains IPV were extracted from the national AEFI surveillance system (NAEFISS) from 1 May 2016 to 31 December 2020. The vaccination information on Sabin-strains IPV and Salk-strains IPV during the same period was obtained from the Zhejiang provincial immunization information system. Reporting rates of AEFI were calculated by age, city, severity of AEFI, categories of AEFI, and reaction categories and were compared between Sabin-strains IPV and Salk-strains IPV. Results: In total, 3,861,758 doses of Sabin-strains IPV and 1,018,604 doses of Salk-strains IPV were administered during the study period. The overall AEFI reporting rate for Sabin-strains IPV (3.96/10,000 doses) was significantly lower than that for Salk-strains IPV (5.03/10,000 doses) due to the reporting rate of the minor vaccine product-related reaction following Sabin-strains IPV was significantly lower than that for Salk-strains IPV (2.76/10,000 doses vs. 3.83/10,000 doses). The most frequently reported symptoms/signs were fever, induration/swelling, and rash/urticaria. The most frequently reported serious AEFI with a causal relationship was febrile convulsion, with the reporting rates of 0.10/10,000 doses for Sabin-strains IPV and 0.08/10,000 doses for Salk-strains IPV. No significant difference was found in the reporting rates of the other serious AEFI between the two types of IPV. Conclusion: Most of the AEFI following Sabin-strains IPV and Salk-strains IPV were mild and common adverse reactions. The reporting rate of serious AEFI was not significantly different between Sabin-strains IPV and Salk-strains IPV. Sabin-strains IPV had a favorable safety profile and could be widely used.

vaccines

A Comparison with Adverse Events Following Immunization Associated with Sabin-Strains and Salk-Strains Inactivated Polio Vaccines in Zhejiang Province, China