Rubella, rubeola, and mumps in pregnant women: Susceptibilities and strategies for testing and vaccinating

David Haas, Coy A. Flowers, Christine L. Congdon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To estimate rubella, rubeola, and mumps (MMR) susceptibilities in pregnant women and determine the percentage not immune to rubeola or mumps, depending on rubella immunity status. A secondary objective was to assess costs of vaccination and testing programs aimed at eliminating these viral susceptibilities to determine an optimal strategy. Methods: This was an observational study of women presenting for prenatal care. All women had MMR antibody titers measured. Viral susceptibilities were compared by age, gravidity, parity, and recall of vaccine booster. A logistic regression was performed to assess for predictors of MMR immunity. A cost comparison of different screening and vaccination strategies was performed. Results: Overall, 91 (9.4%) women were susceptible to rubella, 161 (16.5%) to rubeola, and 159 (16.3%) to mumps. Three hundred seventeen (32.6%) were susceptible to at least 1 virus, whereas only 17 (1.7%) were susceptible to all 3. Of the women who were immune to rubella, a large percentage were not immune to either rubeola or mumps (n = 226, 25.6%). Only 74.2% of women who knew they had a booster vaccine were immune to all components of the MMR vaccine. Receiving a booster was predictive of immunity to all 3 viruses. A cost analysis demonstrated that broader screening strategies are more comprehensive and more expensive. Conclusion: The current screening and vaccine program has left many reproductive-aged women susceptible to rubella, rubeola, and mumps infections. Perhaps a more comprehensive viral screening program is needed to ensure immunity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)295-300
Number of pages6
JournalObstetrics and Gynecology
Volume106
Issue number2
StatePublished - Aug 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Mumps
Rubella
Measles
Pregnant Women
Immunity
Vaccines
Costs and Cost Analysis
Vaccination
Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine
Gravidity
Viruses
Prenatal Care
Parity
Observational Studies
Logistic Models
Antibodies
Infection

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Rubella, rubeola, and mumps in pregnant women : Susceptibilities and strategies for testing and vaccinating. / Haas, David; Flowers, Coy A.; Congdon, Christine L.

In: Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 106, No. 2, 08.2005, p. 295-300.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5fb1eb48b42f44e09b5257562f0f6c1d,
title = "Rubella, rubeola, and mumps in pregnant women: Susceptibilities and strategies for testing and vaccinating",
abstract = "Objective: To estimate rubella, rubeola, and mumps (MMR) susceptibilities in pregnant women and determine the percentage not immune to rubeola or mumps, depending on rubella immunity status. A secondary objective was to assess costs of vaccination and testing programs aimed at eliminating these viral susceptibilities to determine an optimal strategy. Methods: This was an observational study of women presenting for prenatal care. All women had MMR antibody titers measured. Viral susceptibilities were compared by age, gravidity, parity, and recall of vaccine booster. A logistic regression was performed to assess for predictors of MMR immunity. A cost comparison of different screening and vaccination strategies was performed. Results: Overall, 91 (9.4{\%}) women were susceptible to rubella, 161 (16.5{\%}) to rubeola, and 159 (16.3{\%}) to mumps. Three hundred seventeen (32.6{\%}) were susceptible to at least 1 virus, whereas only 17 (1.7{\%}) were susceptible to all 3. Of the women who were immune to rubella, a large percentage were not immune to either rubeola or mumps (n = 226, 25.6{\%}). Only 74.2{\%} of women who knew they had a booster vaccine were immune to all components of the MMR vaccine. Receiving a booster was predictive of immunity to all 3 viruses. A cost analysis demonstrated that broader screening strategies are more comprehensive and more expensive. Conclusion: The current screening and vaccine program has left many reproductive-aged women susceptible to rubella, rubeola, and mumps infections. Perhaps a more comprehensive viral screening program is needed to ensure immunity.",
author = "David Haas and Flowers, {Coy A.} and Congdon, {Christine L.}",
year = "2005",
month = "8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "106",
pages = "295--300",
journal = "Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0029-7844",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rubella, rubeola, and mumps in pregnant women

T2 - Susceptibilities and strategies for testing and vaccinating

AU - Haas, David

AU - Flowers, Coy A.

AU - Congdon, Christine L.

PY - 2005/8

Y1 - 2005/8

N2 - Objective: To estimate rubella, rubeola, and mumps (MMR) susceptibilities in pregnant women and determine the percentage not immune to rubeola or mumps, depending on rubella immunity status. A secondary objective was to assess costs of vaccination and testing programs aimed at eliminating these viral susceptibilities to determine an optimal strategy. Methods: This was an observational study of women presenting for prenatal care. All women had MMR antibody titers measured. Viral susceptibilities were compared by age, gravidity, parity, and recall of vaccine booster. A logistic regression was performed to assess for predictors of MMR immunity. A cost comparison of different screening and vaccination strategies was performed. Results: Overall, 91 (9.4%) women were susceptible to rubella, 161 (16.5%) to rubeola, and 159 (16.3%) to mumps. Three hundred seventeen (32.6%) were susceptible to at least 1 virus, whereas only 17 (1.7%) were susceptible to all 3. Of the women who were immune to rubella, a large percentage were not immune to either rubeola or mumps (n = 226, 25.6%). Only 74.2% of women who knew they had a booster vaccine were immune to all components of the MMR vaccine. Receiving a booster was predictive of immunity to all 3 viruses. A cost analysis demonstrated that broader screening strategies are more comprehensive and more expensive. Conclusion: The current screening and vaccine program has left many reproductive-aged women susceptible to rubella, rubeola, and mumps infections. Perhaps a more comprehensive viral screening program is needed to ensure immunity.

AB - Objective: To estimate rubella, rubeola, and mumps (MMR) susceptibilities in pregnant women and determine the percentage not immune to rubeola or mumps, depending on rubella immunity status. A secondary objective was to assess costs of vaccination and testing programs aimed at eliminating these viral susceptibilities to determine an optimal strategy. Methods: This was an observational study of women presenting for prenatal care. All women had MMR antibody titers measured. Viral susceptibilities were compared by age, gravidity, parity, and recall of vaccine booster. A logistic regression was performed to assess for predictors of MMR immunity. A cost comparison of different screening and vaccination strategies was performed. Results: Overall, 91 (9.4%) women were susceptible to rubella, 161 (16.5%) to rubeola, and 159 (16.3%) to mumps. Three hundred seventeen (32.6%) were susceptible to at least 1 virus, whereas only 17 (1.7%) were susceptible to all 3. Of the women who were immune to rubella, a large percentage were not immune to either rubeola or mumps (n = 226, 25.6%). Only 74.2% of women who knew they had a booster vaccine were immune to all components of the MMR vaccine. Receiving a booster was predictive of immunity to all 3 viruses. A cost analysis demonstrated that broader screening strategies are more comprehensive and more expensive. Conclusion: The current screening and vaccine program has left many reproductive-aged women susceptible to rubella, rubeola, and mumps infections. Perhaps a more comprehensive viral screening program is needed to ensure immunity.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=22544470860&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=22544470860&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 16055578

AN - SCOPUS:22544470860

VL - 106

SP - 295

EP - 300

JO - Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0029-7844

IS - 2

ER -