skip to page content
Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Services Research & Development

Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Cluster-randomized Trial of Adjuvanted Versus Nonadjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in 823 US Nursing Homes.

McConeghy KW, Davidson HE, Canaday DH, Han L, Saade E, Mor V, Gravenstein S. Cluster-randomized Trial of Adjuvanted Versus Nonadjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in 823 US Nursing Homes. Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2021 Dec 6; 73(11):e4237-e4243.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.
   Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions


BACKGROUND: Influenza leads in preventable infection-related hospitalization in nursing home (NH) residents. The adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) is more immunogenic than similarly dosed nonadjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV), and observational studies suggest aTIV better prevents hospitalizations in older adults. We prospectively tested this in an NH setting. METHODS: NHs with = 50 long-stay residents aged = 65 years were randomized to offer aTIV or TIV for residents for the 2016-2017 influenza season. Using intent-to-treat resident-level analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for clustering by facility and a priori baseline covariates (eg, age, heart failure, and facility-level characteristics), we assessed relative aTIV:TIV effectiveness for hospitalization (ie, all-cause, respiratory, and pneumonia and influenza [PandI]). RESULTS: We randomized 823 NHs, housing 50 012 eligible residents, to aTIV or TIV. Residents were similar between groups by age (mean, ~79 years), heart failure, lung disease, and influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake, except aTIV homes housed fewer Black residents (14.5 vs 18.9%). Staff vaccine uptake was similar (~55%). PandI and all-cause resident hospitalization rates were lower (adjusted HR [aHR], .80 [95% CI, .66-.98; P = .03] and .94 [.89-.99; P = .02], respectively) for aTIV versus TIV, while the respiratory hospitalization rate was similar, in a season where vaccine effectiveness was considered poor. CONCLUSIONS: aTIV was more effective than TIV in preventing all-cause and PandI hospitalization from NHs during an A/H3N2-predominant season when TIV was relatively ineffective. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02882100.

Questions about the HSR&D website? Email the Web Team

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.