RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency of side effects following influenza vaccination in healthy participants aged 65-74 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial was performed in general practices in central Liverpool on 729 healthy individuals (341 females and 388 males) aged 65-74 (median age 68.9) years, of whom 552 received influenza vaccine and 177 received placebo. The main outcome measures were analysed from adverse reactions reported by the subjects on a postal questionnaire 3 days after vaccination. RESULTS: 724 (99.3%) questionnaires were returned. 62 (11.3%) participants who received influenza vaccination complained of local symptoms compared with 9 (5.1%) participants who received placebo (difference 6.2%; 95% CI 1.3 to 10.0%; p = 0.02). 192 (35.1%) individuals who received influenza vaccine complained of one or more systemic side effects compared with 75 (42.4%) who received placebo (difference -7.3%; 95% CI -15.6 to 0.9%; p = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Healthy people belonging to this age group can be reassured that, when compared with placebo, influenza vaccination causes few, if any, systemic side effects and only a low incidence of local side effects.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la Influenza/efectos adversos , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Intervalos de Confianza , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Vacunas contra la Influenza/economía , Masculino , Probabilidad , Valores de Referencia , Medición de Riesgo , Distribución por Sexo , Factores Sexuales , Método Simple Ciego , Reino Unido , Vacunación/economía , Vacunación/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To explore the ways that persons with long standing chronic low back pain respond to the problem of medical doubt about the presence of organic pathology. METHOD: Qualitative analysis of accounts provided by 12 persons attending a back pain rehabilitation clinic in NW England. RESULTS: Subjects rejected the notion that they were culpable for their pain. They were not culpable for the onset of their pain. They argued that despite their cooperation, no sensible explanation of their pain was forthcoming from health professionals. Finally, they asserted that medical scepticism had been damaging and dispiriting. CONCLUSION: Patients dealt with clinical doubt by stressing their own expertise. They constituted their beliefs about the cause and trajectory of their pain and disability as accurate accounts of their disability. They resisted the suggestion that there might be psychological factors involved in their ill-health by locating culpability among clinicians, who were confused or uncertain about diagnosis and treatment.