Search

The first edition of the Red Book was published in 1938. Since then, there have been numerous advances in the fields of infectious diseases and public health that have decreased morbidity and mortality of infants, children, and adolescents. Over the years, emerging pathogens and disease complexes have been described, sophisticated diagnostic techniques developed, advances in antimicrobial therapy have occurred, and immunizations have been implemented to prevent previously deadly diseases. Of the 18 diseases or organisms in the 1938 edition, 13 are now vaccine-preventable. Since inception of the Red Book, the aims of the editors have been to keep pace with these innovations and to continue to inform the medical community. These goals have made the Red Book a fundamental resource for pediatricians and other health care professionals in terms of guiding diagnosis, therapy, and prevention of infectious diseases. The list of 18 diseases or organisms originally described in the 1938 Red Book has expanded to include over 160 diseases or organisms in the 2012 edition. The pace of biomedical discovery, as well as the amount of information available and the number of methods for its delivery, will continue to accelerate in the future. Integration of information into future editions of the Red Book will ensure that practitioners continue to rely on the Red Book in its various electronic formats for clinical guidance and support.

Objectives: This study examined tuberculosis screening among preschool children enrolled in a statewide Medicaid managed care program. Methods: A random sample of 2,000 was selected from 19 to 35 month old children who were continuously enrolled in Rhode Island's Medicaid managed care program for 1 year. Sociodemographic data were obtained from computerized administrative databases. Medical record audits were performed to obtain the dates and results of tuberculosis tests. Results: Data from the medical record audits were available for 1,988 of the study children. For 1,215 of the study children (1,215/1,988=61%) a tuberculin skin test had been performed, but a reading was only documented for 736 children (60% of children who received a tuberculin skin test) and only one child tested positive (0.1%). Conclusions: A majority of preschool children in this population in which the prevalence of risk factors for tuberculosis is likely to be relatively high did have a tuberculosis test performed. However, in many cases the tuberculin skin test was either not read or the results not documented. The low rate of positivity is consistent with current AAP guidelines for selective tuberculin skin testing.

Every year there are approximately 2200 to 3000 cases of invasive meningococcal disease in the United States. Because of its low cost effectiveness and other limitations, routine use of the meningococcal vaccine is not recommended. However, individual choices may differ from public policy considerations. If parents were aware of this option, many might choose to pay for vaccination in order to protect adolescents and young adults from this devastating infection. Parents and patients need information about the availability of all effective vaccines.

The current recommended schedules for the routine immunization of children and adults in the United States are presented in Figure 1 and Table 1. These recommendations were developed and approved by the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP), together with appropriate professional organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American College of Physicians. They are considered to be well-established policies regarding vaccine schedules.

The numbers of reported cases of meningococcal disease in 15- to 24-year-olds and outbreaks of meningococcal serogroup C disease, including outbreaks in schools and other institutions, have increased during the past decade. In response to outbreaks on college campuses, the American College Health Association has taken an increasingly proactive role in alerting college students and their parents to the risk of this disease and informing them about the availability of an effective vaccine. Recent epidemiologic studies have demonstrated an increased risk of disease in college students living in dormitories, particularly among freshmen, compared with similarly aged persons in the general population. At least 60% of these cases are potentially preventable by vaccination with the quadrivalent meningococcal A, C, Y, and W-135 polysaccharide vaccine. These findings support immunization of college students, particularly freshmen living in dormitories. Hence, college students and their parents should be informed by health care professionals at routine prematriculation visits and during college matriculation of the risk of meningococcal disease and potential benefits of immunization. Vaccine should be made available to those requesting immunization. College and university health services also should facilitate implementation of educational programs concerning meningococcal disease and availability of immunization services.

Heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) is recommended for universal use in children 23 months and younger, to be given concurrently with other recommended childhood vaccines at 2, 4, 6, and 12 to 15 months of age. For children 7 to 23 months old who have not received previous doses of PCV7, administration of a reduced number of doses is recommended. Two doses of PCV7 are recommended for children 24 to 59 months old at high risk of invasive pneumococcal infection—including children with functional, anatomic, or congenital asplenia; infection with human immunodeficiency virus; and other predisposing conditions—who have not been immunized previously with PCV7. Recommendations have been made for use of 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide (23PS) vaccine in high-risk children to expand serotype coverage. High-risk children should be given vaccines at the earliest possible opportunity. Use of antibiotic prophylaxis in children younger than 5 years with functional or anatomic asplenia, including children with sickle cell disease, continues to be recommended. Children who have not experienced invasive pneumococcal infection and have received recommended pneumococcal immunizations may discontinue prophylaxis after 5 years of age. The safety and efficacy of PCV7 and 23PS in children 24 months or older at moderate or lower risk of invasive pneumococcal infection remain under investigation. Current US Food and Drug Administration indications are for administration of PCV7 only to children younger than 24 months. Data are insufficient to recommend routine administration of PCV7 for children at moderate risk of pneumococcal invasive infection, including all children 24 to 35 months old, children 36 to 59 months old who attend out-of-home care, and children 36 to 59 months old who are of Native American (American Indian and Alaska Native) or African American descent. However, all children 24 to 59 months old, regardless of whether they are at low or moderate risk, may benefit from the administration of pneumococcal immunizations. Therefore, a single dose of PCV7 or 23PS vaccine may be given to children 24 months or older. The 23PS is an acceptable alternative to PCV7, although an enhanced immune response and probable reduction of nasopharyngeal carriage favor the use of PCV7 whenever possible.

Infection control is an integral part of pediatric practice in outpatient settings as well as in hospitals. All employees should be educated regarding the routes of transmission and techniques used to prevent transmission of infectious agents. Policies for infection control and prevention should be written, readily available, updated annually, and enforced. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention standard precautions for hospitalized patients with modifications from the American Academy of Pediatrics are appropriate for most patient encounters. As employers, pediatricians are required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to take precautions to protect staff likely to be exposed to blood or other potentially infectious materials while on the job. Key principles of infection control include the following: hand-washing before and after every patient contact, separation of infected, contagious children from uninfected children, safe handling and disposal of needles and other sharp medical devices, appropriate use of personal protection equipment such as gloves, appropriate sterilization, disinfection and antisepsis, and judicious use of antibiotics.

There is an increasing threat that chemical and biological weapons will be used on a civilian population in an act of domestic terrorism. Casualties among adults and children could be significant in such an event. Federal, state, and local authorities have begun extensive planning to meet a chemical-biological incident by developing methods of rapid identification of potential agents and protocols for management of victims without injury to health care personnel. Because children would be disproportionately affected by a chemical or biological weapons release, pediatricians must assist in planning for a domestic chemical-biological incident. Government agencies should seek input from pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists to ensure that the situations created by multiple pediatric casualties after a chemical-biological incident are considered. This statement reviews key aspects of chemical-biological agents, the consequences of their use, the potential impact of a chemical-biological attack on children, and issues to consider in disaster planning and management for pediatric patients.

Recommendations for routine varicella vaccination were published by the American Academy of Pediatrics in May 1995, but many eligible children remain unimmunized. This update provides additional information on the varicella disease burden before the availability of varicella vaccine, potential barriers to immunization, efforts to increase the level of coverage, new safety data, and new recommendations for use of the varicella vaccine after exposure and in children with human immunodeficiency virus infections. Pediatricians are strongly encouraged to support public health officials in the development and implementation of varicella immunization requirements for child care and school entry.

Objectives. To evaluate the immunization status of children enrolled in a hospital-based Medicaid managed care practice and to assess the impact of the timing of vaccine administration on measured immunization rates. Design and methods. The medical records of all children between the ages of 19 and 35 months who were continuously enrolled in the Medicaid managed care practice for the last 6 months of 1996 were reviewed. Immunization status was determined for the following vaccines: diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis/diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (4 doses); Haemophilus influenzae type b (3 doses); poliovirus (3 doses); hepatitis B (3 doses); measles-mumps-rubella (1 dose); and overall for the basic series. Two assessment methods were used to determine the immunization status of the study children: (1) a count of all documented vaccines ("count"); and (2) only including vaccines that met minimal age and spacing intervals based on American Academy of Pediatrics and CDC recommendations ("interval assessment"). Results. With the count method vaccine-specific immunization rates ranged from 88 to 95%, with overall coverage of 80% for the basic series. With the interval assessment method vaccine-specific immunization rates ranged from 74 to 92%, with overall coverage of 53% for the basic series. Conclusions. When all documented vaccines were included in the assessment, vaccine-specific immunization rates approached national goals, although overall coverage remained below 90% in this Medicaid managed care practice. The substantially lower immunization rates obtained by the interval assessment method demonstrate the importance of considering the issue of vaccine timing when interpreting immunization rates and the need for policies for revaccinating children who were immunized at less than recommended intervals. The results also have implications for provider education regarding the early administration of vaccines.

Current recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for infection control practices to prevent transmission of blood-borne pathogens, including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in hospitals, other medical settings, schools, and child care facilities, are reviewed and explained. Hand-washing is essential, whether or not gloves are used, and gloves should be used when contact with blood or blood-containing body fluids may occur. In hospitalized children, the 1996 recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) should be implemented as modified in the 1997 Red Book. The generic principles of Standard Precautions in the CDC guidelines generally are applicable to children in all health care settings, schools, child care facilities, and the home. However, gloves are not required for routine changing of diapers or for wiping nasal secretions of children in most circumstances. This AAP recommendation differs from that in the CDC guidelines. Current US Public Health Service guidelines for the management of potential occupational exposures of health care workers to HIV are summarized. As previously recommended by the AAP, HIV-infected children should be admitted without restriction to child care centers and schools and allowed to participate in all activities to the extent that their health and other recommendations for management of contagious diseases permit. Because it is not required that the school be notified of HIV infection, it may be helpful if the pediatrician notify the school that he or she is operating under a policy of nondisclosure of infection with blood-borne pathogens. Thus, it is possible that the pediatrician will not report the presence of such infections on the form. Because HIV infection occurs in persons throughout the United States, these recommendations for prevention of HIV transmission should be applied universally.

The Food and Drug Administration recently approved the use of palivizumab (palē-vizhū-mäb), an intramuscularly administered monoclonal antibody preparation. Recommendations for its use are based on a large, randomized study demonstrating a 55% reduction in the risk of hospitalization attributable to respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections in high-risk pediatric patients. Infants and children with chronic lung disease (CLD), formerly designated bronchopulmonary dysplasia, as well as prematurely born infants without CLD experienced a reduced number of hospitalizations while receiving palivizumab compared with a placebo. Both palivizumab and respiratory syncytial virus immune globulin intravenous (RSV-IGIV) are available for protecting high-risk children against serious complications from RSV infections. Palivizumab is preferred for most high-risk children because of ease of administration (intramuscular), lack of interference with measles–mumps–rubella vaccine and varicella vaccine, and lack of complications associated with intravenous administration of human immune globulin products. RSV-IGIV, however, provides additional protection against other respiratory viral illnesses and may be preferred for selected high-risk children including those receiving replacement intravenous immune globulin because of underlying immune deficiency or human immuno-deficiency virus infection. For premature infants about to be discharged from hospitals during the RSV season, physicians could consider administering RSV-IGIV for the first month of prophylaxis. Most of the guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics for the selection of infants and children to receive RSV-prophylaxis remain unchanged. Palivizumab has been shown to provide benefit for infants who were 32 to 35 weeks of gestation at birth. RSV-IGIV is contraindicated and palivizumab is not recommended for children with cyanotic congenital heart disease. The number of patients with adverse events judged to be related to palivizumab was similar to that of the placebo group (11% vs 10%, respectively); discontinuation of injections for adverse events related to palivizumab was rare.

The purpose of this statement is to inform physicians of a modification in the recommendation of the appropriate age for routine administration of the second dose of measles–mumps–rubella (MMR) vaccine. The implementation of the two-dose measles vaccine schedule has improved the control of measles, but some outbreaks continue to occur in school children, although ≥95% of children in school have received one dose of vaccine. Because most measles vaccine failures are attributable to failure to respond to the first dose, that all children receive two doses of measles-containing vaccine is essential for the control of measles. Routine administration of the second dose of MMR vaccine at school entry (4 to 6 years of age) will help prevent school-based outbreaks. Physicians should continue to review the records of all children 11 to 12 years of age to be certain that they have received two doses of MMR vaccine after their first birthday. Documenting that all school children have received two doses of measles-containing vaccine by the year 2001 will help ensure the elimination of measles in the United States and contribute to the global effort to control and possibly eradicate measles.

The course of severe invasive group A β-hemolytic streptococcal (GABHS) infections is often precipitous, requiring prompt diagnosis and rapid initiation of appropriate therapy. Therefore, physicians must have a high index of suspicion of this disease, particularly in patients at increased risk (eg, those with varicella or diabetes mellitus). Although a relationship between the use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and severe invasive GABHS infections has been suggested, at present data on which to base a clinical decision about the use or restriction of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in children with varicella are insufficient. When necrotizing fasciitis is suspected, prompt surgical drainage, debridement, fasciotomy, or amputation often is necessary. Many experts recommend intravenously administered penicillin G and clindamycin for the treatment of invasive GABHS infections on the basis of animal studies. Some evidence exists that intravenous immunoglobulin given in addition to appropriate antimicrobial and surgical therapy may be beneficial. Although chemoprophylaxis for household contacts of persons with invasive GABHS infections has been considered by some experts, the limited available data indicate that the risk of secondary cases is low (2.9 per 1000) and data about the effectiveness of any drug are insufficient to make recommendations. Because of the low risk of secondary cases of invasive GABHS infections in schools or child care facilities, chemoprophylaxis is not indicated in these settings. Routine immunization of all healthy children against varicella is recommended and is an effective means to decrease the risk of invasive GABHS infections.

Less than 1 year after recommendations for the routine vaccination of infants with the newly licensed 7-valent polysaccharide-protein conjugate pneumococcal vaccine were issued in February 2000, shortages of the 7-valent polysaccharide-protein conjugate pneumococcal vaccine supply began to occur. A national shortage developed in 2001, involving both the public and private sectors, and it resulted in temporary recommendations to conserve vaccine supply for infants and young children at the highest risk for invasive disease. Multiple factors contributed to this vaccine shortage, including demand that exceeded the expectations of the manufacturer and the need for compliance with the Good Manufacturing Practice of the US Food and Drug Administration. Of the possible strategies that might have averted this shortage, establishment of a vaccine stockpile is the most likely solution. However, establishing a stockpile for a newly licensed vaccine, such as 7-valent polysaccharide-protein conjugate pneumococcal vaccine, presents unique challenges. Improved communication with physicians and parents regarding changes in vaccine schedules also will promote better adherence to recommended changes and conservation of limited vaccine supplies during a shortage.

Objective To update recommendations issued by the American Heart Association last published in 1990 for the prevention of bacterial endocarditis in individuals at risk for this disease. Participants An ad hoc writing group appointed by the American Heart Association for their expertise in endocarditis and treatment with liaison members representing the American Dental Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Evidence The recommendations in this article reflect analyses of relevant literature regarding procedure-related endocarditis, in vitro susceptibility data of pathogens causing endocarditis, results of prophylactic studies in animal models of endocarditis, and retrospective analyses of human endocarditis cases in terms of antibiotic prophylaxis usage patterns and apparent prophylaxis failures. MEDLINE database searches from 1936 through 1996 were done using the root words endocarditis, bacteremia, and antibiotic prophylaxis. Recommendations in this document fall into evidence level III of the US Preventive Services Task Force categories of evidence. Consensus Process The recommendations were formulated by the writing group after specific therapeutic regimens were discussed. The consensus statement was subsequently reviewed by outside experts not affiliated with the writing group and by the Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee of the American Heart Association. These guidelines are meant to aid practitioners but are not intended as the standard of care or as a substitute for clinical judgment. Conclusions Major changes in the updated recommendations include the following: (1) emphasis that most cases of endocarditis are not attributable to an invasive procedure; (2) cardiac conditions are stratified into high-, moderate-, and negligible-risk categories based on potential outcome if endocarditis develops; (3) procedures that may cause bacteremia and for which prophylaxis is recommended are more clearly specified; (4) an algorithm was developed to more clearly define when prophylaxis is recommended for patients with mitral valve prolapse; (5) for oral or dental procedures the initial amoxicillin dose is reduced to 2 g, a follow-up antibiotic dose is no longer recommended, erythromycin is no longer recommended for penicillin-allergic individuals, but clindamycin and other alternatives are offered; and (6) for gastrointestinal or genitourinary procedures, the prophylactic regimens have been simplified. These changes were instituted to more clearly define when prophylaxis is or is not recommended, improve practitioner and patient compliance, reduce cost and potential gastrointestinal adverse effects, and approach more uniform worldwide recommendations.

Respiratory syncytial virus immune globulin intravenous (RSV-IGIV) has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in the prevention of severe RSV infections in infants and children younger than 24 months with bronchopulmonary dysplasia or a history of premature birth (≤35 weeks of gestation). RSV-IGIV administered monthly during the RSV season resulted in a 41% to 65% reduction in hospitalization rates in two clinical trials; however, RSV-IGIV is costly, and intravenous administration can be logistically demanding. RSV-IGIV should be considered for infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia who are receiving or have received oxygen therapy in the past 6 months. Infants with gestational ages of 32 weeks or less may also benefit clinically from RSV-IGIV prophylaxis. Immunization with measles-containing vaccines should be delayed for 9 months after the last dose of RSV-IGIV, but no changes need to be made for all other routinely administered vaccines. RSV-IGIV has not been approved for use in children with congenital heart disease, and available data indicate that RSV-IGIV should not be administered to children with cyanotic congenital heart disease because of safety concerns.

In 1992, the Committee on Infectious Diseases and Committee on Fetus and Newborn of the American Academy of Pediatrics provided guidelines for prevention of early-onset group B streptococcal (GBS) disease through intrapartum chemoprophylaxis of selected maternal GBS carriers.1 The guidelines were based on demonstrated efficacy in randomized, controlled clinical trials and selected only women with GBS colonization who had an obstetric risk factor.2 The guidelines were controversial34and their implementation incomplete.5 Since 1992, additional data have become available, and experience with the guidelines has been gained in numerous medical centers. Recently, consensus guidelines were developed by obstetricians, pediatricians, family practitioners, and public health authorities and published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.6 These recommendations are supported by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists7 and the American Academy of Pediatrics. This statement reviews the selection of pregnant women for chemoprophylaxis and provides an algorithm for management of their newborns.

A change in the recommendations for routine immunization of children is indicated because of the reduced risk of exposure to wild-type polio viruses and the continued occurrence of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis after oral polio vaccine (OPV). All children should receive four doses of vaccine before the child enters school. Regimens of sequential inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) and OPV, IPV only, or OPV only are acceptable. Each regimen has advantages and disadvantages. In special circumstances, one of the regimens is preferred or recommended. Because logistical problems with the current childhood immunization schedule may make these new recommendations difficult to implement immediately, their adoption likely will be gradual. Nevertheless, assuming continued progress toward global eradication and the development of new combination products, the routine use of an IPV-only regimen is likely to become desirable and feasible in future years.

In 1991 and 1992, the US Food and Drug Administration approved two acellular pertussis vaccines combined with diphtheria and tetanus toxoids for use as the fourth and fifth doses after the initial three-dose primary series with the standard whole-cell pertussis vaccine administered at 2, 4, and 6 months of age. Recently completed trials of acellular pertussis vaccines conducted in Europe have documented the efficacy of these vaccines when administered as a primary series in infancy. Based on these studies, two acellular pertussis vaccines, Tripedia (Connaught Laboratories, Swiftwater, PA) and ACEL-IMUNE (Wyeth-Lederle Laboratories, Pearl River, NY), were licensed by the Food and Drug Administration for the initial three-dose series. Additional acellular pertussis vaccines are likely to be licensed for use in infants in the future. The recommendations in this statement supplement previous American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines for the use of acellular pertussis vaccines.1-4

This statement provides guidelines for therapy of children with serious infections possibly caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae. Resistance of invasive pneumococcal strains to penicillin, cefotaxime, and ceftriaxone has increased over the past few years. Reports of failures of cefotaxime or ceftriaxone in the treatment of children with meningitis caused by resistant S pneumoniae necessitates a revision of Academy recommendations. For nonmeningeal infections, modifications of the initial therapy need to be considered only for patients who are critically ill and those who have a severe underlying or potentially immunocompromising condition or patients from whom a highly resistant strain is isolated. Because vancomycin is the only antibiotic to which all S pneumoniaestrains are susceptible, its use should be restricted to minimize the emergence of vancomycin-resistant organisms. Patients with probable aseptic (viral) meningitis should not be treated with vancomycin. These recommendations are subject to change as new information becomes available.

Primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever is accomplished by proper identification and adequate antibiotic treatment of group A β-hemolytic streptococcal (GAS) tonsillopharyngitis. Diagnosis of GAS pharyngitis is best accomplished by a throat culture. Penicillin (either oral penicillin V or injectable benzathine penicillin) remains the treatment of choice, because it is cost effective, has a narrow spectrum of activity, has long-standing proven efficacy, and GAS resistant to penicillin have not been documented. Various macrolides, oral cephalosporins, and other β-lactam agents are acceptable alternatives, particularly in penicillin-allergic individuals. The individual who has had an attack of rheumatic fever is at very high risk of developing recurrences after subsequent GAS pharyngitis and needs continuous antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent such recurrences (secondary prevention). The duration of prophylaxis depends on the number of previous attacks, the time lapsed since the last attack, the risk of exposure to streptococcal infections, the age of the patient, and the presence or absence of cardiac involvement. Penicillin is again the agent of choice for secondary prophylaxis, but sulfadiazine or erythromycin are acceptable alternatives in penicillin-allergic individuals. This report is an update of a 1988 statement by this committee. It expands on the previous statement, includes more recent therapeutic modalities, and makes more specific recommendations for the duration of secondary prophylaxis.

Penicillin has been the recommended drug of choice in most cases of group A streptococcus (GAS) pharyngitis for nearly 40 years based on its efficacy in the prevention of acute rheumatic fever. Since trials of other drugs for the prevention of rheumatic fever are no longer feasible in the United States, eradication of GAS pharyngitis has become the surrogate for their evaluation. On the basis of this criterion, specific therapeutic regimens have been recommended, and numerous other drugs have gained approval as alternatives to penicillin. Current therapeutic issues include possible decreased efficacy of penicillin, timing of the initiation of therapy, and drugs of choice for patients whose treatment fails, who are chronic carriers, or who have frequent infections. Criteria for assessment of new drugs include clinical response, likelihood of prevention of rheumatic fever, rates of relapse and recurrent infection, and drug safety. The establishment of uniform guidelines and definitions of response for new drug evaluations by the Infectious Diseases Society of America should aid in the further assessment of new antibacterial agents as therapy for GAS pharyngitis. However, no data yet suggest that any of these drugs should replace penicillin as the drug of choice.

A current debate is whether the immunologic priming of infants with Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines would be protective in the absence of circulating antibody to the capsular polysaccharide (PS). Data from the prevaccine era on the PS antibody responses of older children to Hib meningitis may be informative on this issue.PS antibody was assayed by radioantigen binding in sera taken in the first month postadmission in 47 children ages 2 to 136 months with culture-proved Hib meningitis.Sera obtained on admission had very low antibody concentrations, and the subsequent response during convalescence was age-dependent. The major finding is that some patients, including 10 of 11 children older than 2 years, had substantial antibody elevations within a few days of admission, increases resembling the response to PS vaccine in infants primed with PS-protein conjugate vaccines.In this group of patients with Hib meningitis, natural priming did not prevent infection. Hib may have the ability to invade despite the capacity for a vigorous antibody response.

One hundred forty-one children of 5 to 59 months of age were immunized with a single intramuscular dose of 0.67, 3.3, 17, or 67 μg polyribophosphate (PRP), the capsular antigen ofHemophilus influenzae, type b. The immunizations were well tolerated, particularly at doses of .67 to 17 μg. Antibody activity was measured by radioactive antigen binding, using3H-labelled PRP. Doses of 3.3 and 17 μg produced significant antibody rises in nearly 90% of recipients; 0.67 and 67 μg in approximately half. The geometric mean titers were similar at three and six weeks after immunization and were greater with the middle doses.The net antibody increase in responding children was strongly age dependent, but was not related to the preimmunization antibody concentration. Rises in serum bactericidal activity against H. influenzae type b generally accompanied rises in antibody concentration as measured by the antigen-binding assay.A recently developed Haemophilus influenzae type b capsular polysaccharide vaccine was given to 48 977 children 3 months to 5 years of age; an equal number of children receiving group A meningococcal vaccine served as controls. The protection as well as serum antibody response was strongly age dependent. Among children who had received the H. influenzae type b vaccine when 18 months of age or older, there were no cases of bacteremic disease caused by H. influenzaetype b in the first year after vaccination. At the same time 11 such cases were seen in the control group of the same age, a highly significant difference. In the second year after vaccination two cases occurred in the H. influenzae type b-vaccinated group, five in the meningococcal-group A vaccinated group. No protection was seen among children who had been younger than 18 months when vaccinated, even if they received a booster dose of the vaccine.The serum antibody response to the H. influenzae type b polysaccharide, measured by radioimmunoassay, was poor in children below 18 months of age and good in those above it. No effect of the vaccine could be seen on the nasopharyngeal carriage of H. influenzae type b, which was approximately 6% in this age group. Adverse effects of the vaccine were mild.

The key words relevant to this article are: acellular pertussis vaccines, adolescent immunization, AIDS, anaphylaxis, antibacterial drugs, antibiotics, antifungal drugs, antimicrobial drugs, antimicrobial resistance, antiparasitic drugs, antiviral drugs, bacterial meningitis, bacterial vaccines, bite wounds, Candida albicans , chancroid, chemoprophylaxis, corticosteroids, DTaP vaccine, DTP vaccine, ehrlichiosis, Escherichia coli 0157:H7, Escherichia coli diarrhea, fluoroquinolones, foodborne disease, foreign travel, group A streptococcal infections, group A streptococcal pharyngitis, group B streptococcal infections, hemolytic uremic syndrome, hepatitis A, hepatitis A vaccine, hepatitis B, hepatitis B vaccine, hepatitis C, HIV infection, immune globulins, immunization of preterm infants, immunization recommendations, immunizations, immunoprophylaxis, infection control, intravenous immune globulin (IGIV), Lyme disease, malaria, measles, measles vaccine, MEDWATCH, meningococcal infections, meningococcal vaccination, MMR vaccine, Mycobacterium avium complex, needlestick injuries, nontuberculous mycobacteria, opportunistic infections, pertussis, pertussis vaccines, pneumococcal infections, pneumococcal meningitis, pneumococcal vaccine, Pneumocystis carinii , poliovirus vaccines, rabies, rabies immunoprophylaxis, respiratory syncytial virus infection, respiratory syncytial virus immune globulin (RSV-IGIV), ribavirin, Salmonella infections, school health, sexually transmitted diseases, Streptococcus pneumoniae , sporotrichosis, tetracyclines, tinea, toxoplasmosis, tuberculin skin testing, tuberculosis, tuberculosis drug therapy, typhoid vaccines, vaccine adverse events, vaccine precautions, vaccine contraindications, vaccine injury compensation, vaccines, varicella vaccine, varicella-zoster infections, viral vaccines, bite wounds. The 1997 Red Book: The Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases was recently published by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and gives current recommendations and guidelines for prevention, control, and management of infectious diseases in infants and children.1 These recommendations and guidelines are based on information available through December 1996 and replace those given in the 1994 Red Book .2 To aid physicians and other health care professionals in assimilating these recommendations and information in the care of patients, a summary of major changes is given in the Red Book and also published in Pediatrics . Subsequent AAP recommendations from the Committee …

The U.S. military has a long and illustrious history of involvement with vaccines against infectious diseases. For more than 200 years, the military has been actively engaged in vaccine research and has made many important contributions to the development of these products for use in disease prevention and control. Through the efforts of military researchers, numerous serious threats to the health of American troops and their families have been mitigated.

Between late 2000 and the spring of 2003, the United States experienced shortages of vaccines against 8 of 11 preventable diseases in children. In response, the Department of Health and Human Services requested that the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) make recommendations on strengthening the supply of routinely recommended vaccines. The NVAC appointed a Working Group to identify potential causes of vaccine supply shortages, develop strategies to alleviate or prevent shortages, and enlist stakeholders to consider the applicability and feasibility of these strategies. The NVAC concluded that supply disruptions are likely to continue to occur. Strategies to be implemented in the immediate future include expansion of vaccine stockpiles, increased support for regulatory agencies, maintenance and strengthening of liability protections, improved communication among stakeholders, increased availability of public information, and a campaign to emphasize the benefits of vaccination. Strategies requiring further study include evaluation of appropriate financial incentives to manufacturers and streamlining the regulatory process without compromising safety or efficacy.

Objective. To determine if upper respiratory tract infection (URI) affects the seroconversion rate or quantitative response to each component of a combined measles-mumps-rubella-varicella vaccine. Subjects and methods. One hundred forty-nine children between 15 and 18 months of age were prospectively divided into two groups according to the presence of URI or recent history of URI symptoms within the 4 weeks before vaccination. Once stratified, 74 children in the healthy group and 75 children in the URI group were randomly assigned to receive one of three lots of measles-mumps-rubella varicella vaccine by subcutaneous injection into the deltoid area. Serum was obtained from each child just before vaccination and 4 to 6 weeks later for measuring antibody levels against each virus. Results. Prevaccination antibody levels against each virus in the URI and healthy groups did not differ. Nine children had pre-existing antibodies to varicella and six to mumps; no child had positive serologies for measles or rubella before vaccination. Children with pre-existing antibody were excluded from analysis of seroconversion for that virus. Seroconversion to measles, mumps, and rubella occurred in 100% of children in both groups. Mean antibody levels did not differ between the healthy and URI groups for measles (111 vs 122), mumps (97 vs 108), or rubella (96 vs 102). Three (4%) of 70 children with URIs in whom varicella serologies were available failed to seroconvert to varicella vaccine although none of the 69 healthy children had vaccine failure (P = .24). The mean varicella antibody level was 11.3 ± 1.4 in the healthy children, which did not differ significantly from the level of 9.5 ± 0.9 in the URI group. Conclusions. Seroconversion to measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella was not significantly affected by the presence of a concurrent or recent URI in 15-to 18-month-old children.

The 1994 edition of the Red Book was recently published by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), providing the most recent recommendations and guidelines for prevention, control, and treatment of infectious diseases in infants and children.1 These recommendations and guidelines are based on information available through 1993 and replace those given in the 1991 Red Book. To aid physicians and other health care professionals in assimilating new recommendations and information into their practices, a summary of major changes is given in the Red Book. This summary, with minor changes, is reprinted here. Subsequent recommendations of the AAP are published as Committee statements in AAP News and Pediatrics. In keeping with the current 3-year intervals between editions of the Red Book, the next edition is anticipated no later than 1997. Major changes in recommendations and related information in the 1994 Red Book are summarized as follows: 1. Immunization recommendations. The schedules for routine immunization, including changes in recommendations for Haemophilus influenzae type b, hepatitis B, measles, and oral polio vaccines have been revised. In view of the increasing complexity of the immunization recommendations for infants and children, particular attention should be given to the comments and footnotes in these schedules. In addition, because licensure of new vaccines and revised recommendations after publication of the Red Book will result in continuing changes, the Committee anticipates the publication of an updated immunization schedule each year in the interval before the next edition of the Red Book is published. 2. Guidelines on active immunization.

Rotavirus gastroenteritis continues to cause substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide, despite widespread breastfeeding and use of oral rehydration therapy. This burden of disease indicates that an effective, safe rotavirus vaccine is needed, and in 1998 the first rhesus-human reassortant rotavirus tetravalent vaccine, Rotashield, was licensed in the United States. However, the recommendations for its use were withdrawn in 1999 because of the recognition of an uncommon but serious adverse event, intussusception. A workshop in September 2001 was held to review the subsequent developments and research regarding this association, the proceedings of which are summarized here. Although the pathogenesis of this association remains unknown, epidemiologic evidence supports a causal relationship, with a population attributable risk of ∼1 per 10 000 (range of 1 in 5000 to 1 in 12 000) vaccine recipients. Whether this association will exist with other candidate rotavirus vaccine strains and whether the attributable risk for intussusception would be similar in other populations administered this vaccine are unclear. Because perceptions of vaccine safety derive from the relative disease burdens of the illness prevented and adverse events induced, the acceptance of rare adverse events may vary substantially in different settings. Nevertheless, a continuing consensus on the need for a safe and effective vaccine to prevent rotavirus gastroenteritis, especially for use in developing countries, exists.

Objectives: To measure immunization coverage rates for children enrolled in a statewide Medicaid managed care program and determine the impact of sociodemographic characteristics and the type of primary care provider site on immunization coverage. Study design: A random sample of 2000 was chosen from children between the ages of 19 and 35 months who had been continuously enrolled in the Medicaid managed care program for 1 year. Sociodemographic data and a list of primary care providers for the study children were obtained from administrative databases. Immunization histories were determined by medical record review. Results: Vaccine-specific immunization rates for diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b, hepatitis B, and measles-mumps-rubella ranged from 87% to 94%, with an overall coverage rate of 75%. Overall immunization status varied by primary care provider site as follows: office-based, 72%; community health center, 75%; hospital-based clinic, 79%; and staff model health maintenance organization, 85% (χ 2 test, P =.008). Conclusions: Immunization rates compare favorably with national rates for this low-income group. Sociodemographic characteristics were not important predictors of underimmunization, but rates did vary by the type of primary care provider site. (J Pediatr 2001;139:624–9)

Administration of vaccines is a continuing challenge. In childhood immunizations, many of the goals for national coverage rates by 2000 were achieved and the goal of annual influenza immunization for adults 65 years of age and older was reached. These successes in childhood immunization rates have led to record low numbers of cases of many vaccine-preventable diseases, such as measles and Haemophilus influenzae, type b invasive disease. These diseases will recur, however, as evidenced by the measles epidemic of 1989-1991, if high immunization coverage is not maintained. The development of immunization delivery systems to sustain these high rates in young children is essential to ensure that the 11,000 infants born each day in the United States receive all recommended vaccines, as noted in the recent NVAC report on strategies to sustain success in childhood immunization. For adults, the total economic burden of treating these vaccine-preventable diseases is estimated to exceed $10 billion each year, reflecting in part widespread underuse of vaccines in adults and resulting missed opportunities to prevent diseases such as influenza and pneumococcal infection. The development of standards for immunization practices in children and adults has been an important component in meeting these challenges and ensuring appropriate delivery of vaccines. Periodic review and updating is necessary and revision of the standards for adults by the NCAI and NVAC, pediatric standards, and those of the IDSA currently are undergoing revision. Most importantly, however, standards for immunization practices should be promulgated widely to all health care professionals to ensure that all segments of the population benefit from the availability of highly effective and safe vaccines.