4.6 Article

Immunization and Bell's Palsy in Children: A Case-Centered Analysis

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 175, Issue 9, Pages 878-885

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kws011

Keywords

Bell's palsy; child; immunization; vaccines

Funding

  1. Vaccine Safety Datalink Project
  2. Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment Network from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [200-2002-00732]
  3. Merck Company
  4. Pfizer
  5. Sanofi-Pasteur
  6. Novartis Vaccines
  7. GlaxoSmithKline
  8. MedImmune

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bell's palsy (BP) is an acute and idiopathic paralysis of the facial nerve, with an estimated incidence ranging from 11.5 per 100,000 person-years to 53.3 per 100,000 person-years in different populations. BP has been reported following immunization with inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccine. Epidemiologic studies examining this association among children are lacking. From 2001 through 2006, all children aged <= 18 years diagnosed with BP within the Kaiser Permanente Northern California population were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, code 351.0. All electronically identified cases were reviewed and adjudicated by an otolaryngologist (n = 233). Using a case-centered approach, the authors examined the risk of BP during 3 risk intervals. Immunization with TIV (odds ratio (OR) = 0.7, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.2, 2.8), HBV vaccine (OR = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.2, 2.4), or any vaccine (treating all vaccines combined; OR = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.6, 1.4) was not associated with increased risk of BP 1-28 days after immunization. Similarly, no association was found between vaccines and BP during the periods 1-14 and 29-56 days following immunization. Results of this study suggest that there is no association between immunization and BP in children.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available