Skip to main content

Why shingles vaccine is important for people in their 70s

Much of the discussion about vaccination is on Covid-19 and flu vaccines or vaccines for children. But there are also other important vaccines for adults – such as for shingles - where there is scope to increase uptake and improve health outcomes for older people and the immunocompromised. 

Shingles is caused by the reactivation of latent varicella zoster virus (VZV); sometimes decades after the primary chickenpox infection. For some people – particularly the elderly and the immunocompromised – shingles can be a very unpleasant illness with significant complications.

In the UK, two vaccines are licensed for shingles:

  • Zostavax which contains live, attenuated virus and which is given as a single dose.
  • Shingrix which is a recombinant vaccine and which his given in two doses. 

The main target group for shingles vaccination in the UK is people aged 70-79 years. Most people in this group will receive the Zostavax vaccine. People in this age group who are immunocompromised should receive the Shingrix vaccine. The rationale for vaccinating the elderly is because complication rates are much higher in this group. For example, hospital admission rates for shingles (zoster) are around 20 times higher in people aged 75 and over than those aged 15-59. 

When people turn 70, they should receive an invitation for shingles vaccination from their GP. If they didn’t take up the offer of a vaccination at that time, they can still get a shingles vaccination until they are 79. Once they turn 80, you will no longer be eligible for shingles vaccination. Shingles is a disease that has many complications in the elderly. It can result in considerable pain and discomfort and reduce your mobility. In more severe cases, it may require hospital treatment as an outpatient or inpatient. Vaccination reduces these risks substantially.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

MPH Student Presentations on the NHS Care.Data Programme

As part of a session on primary care data in the Health Informatics module on the Imperial Master of Public Health Programme, I asked students to work in two groups to present arguments for and against the NHS Care.Data programme. Care.Data is an NHS programme that will extract data from the medical records held by general practitioners (GPs) in England. The Care.Data programme takes advantage of the very high level of use of electronic medical records by GPs in England. After extraction, data will be uploaded to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The data will then be used for functions such as health care planning, monitoring disease patterns and research. The programme has been controversial with proponents arguing that the programme will bring many benefits for the NHS and the population of England; and opponents arguing it is a major breach of privacy. You can view the two presentations to help inform you further about these arguments: Arguments fo...
5 comments
Read more

What makes a good doctor – and who gets to decide?

What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine . It is a key question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity. It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work. As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms. A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a f...
Post a Comment
Read more