2025–2026 ACIP Vaccine Recommendations: What to Know Before Respiratory Virus Season
Each year, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) reviews data and issues recommendations that guide vaccine use in the United States. At its June 2025 meeting, ACIP updated its guidance on influenza, RSV prevention in infants and older adults, and the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines. In this Consultant360 Multidisciplinary Roundtable, William Schaffner, MD; Tina Q. Tan, MD, FIDSA, FPIDS, FAAP; and Jennifer Walsh, DNP, CPNP, CNE, discuss key takeaways for clinicians and offer strategies for communicating vaccine updates to patients and families.
2025–2026 Vaccine Guideline Updates: Clinical Practice Summary for Primary Care
- ACIP Structural Changes and Concerns
- Long-standing ACIP structure disrupted in June 2025: 17 members discharged, secretariat removed, 7 new members appointed (several with anti-vaccine positions).
- Lack of transparency in appointments; standard vetting and working group processes bypassed.
- Professional societies express concern over loss of harmonization, credibility, and scientific rigor.
- Risk of erosion of trust among clinicians and the public.
- Thimerosal in Influenza Vaccines
- ACIP recommended thimerosal-free flu vaccines when possible, especially for children and pregnant patients.
- Evidence: thimerosal (ethyl mercury) in multi-dose vials is safe; not linked to harm; never part of MMR vaccine.
- Practical impact:
- Multi-dose vials (5–6% of flu vaccines) are cost-effective, widely used in Medicaid, nursing homes, mobile clinics, and mass vaccination settings.
- Recommendation may reduce vaccine access in underserved communities and increase costs.
- Insurance coverage implications unclear.
- Communication: clarify safety, emphasize that most flu vaccines already thimerosal-free, direct families to AAP, IDSA, NFID, and NAPNAP for science-based resources.
- RSV Prevention: Maternal Vaccination and Monoclonal Antibodies
- Two effective prevention strategies in infancy:
- Maternal RSV vaccination during pregnancy.
- Infant administration of nirsevimab (monoclonal antibody) shortly after birth.
- Both approaches reduce RSV-related hospitalizations, office visits, and mortality.
- Duration of immunity for newer antibody formulations (e.g., clesrovimab) less well-established.
- Clinical message: “When in doubt, vaccinate”—take every opportunity to protect infants.
- Older adults (≥65 years or ≥50 with comorbidities) should also receive RSV vaccination; covered under Medicare Part D, often delivered in pharmacies.
- Two effective prevention strategies in infancy:
- Influenza Vaccination 2025–2026
- Universal recommendation: all individuals ≥6 months should receive annual influenza vaccination.
- Pediatric impact: most children who die from influenza are previously healthy and unvaccinated.
- Adults ≥65: preferred formulations include high-dose, adjuvanted, or recombinant vaccines (currently ~70% uptake among older adults).
- FluMist (live attenuated, intranasal): approved for ages 2–49; expected availability for self-/caregiver-administration beginning in 2026.
- Advantage: less invasive, potentially higher acceptance in vaccine-hesitant children.
- Education needed on contraindications (eg, immunocompromised contacts, congestion at administration).
- FluBlok (recombinant): expanded use option; useful when live or egg-based vaccines contraindicated.
- Note: egg allergy is not a contraindication to influenza vaccination.
- Limited availability; should not delay vaccination.
- Communicating With Patients
- Emphasize: diseases still circulate; absence of cases reflects vaccine success.
- Strategies:
- Provide factual evidence quickly, then reinforce with reassurance and social norms (e.g., “my family is vaccinated”).
- Use trusted sources: AAP, IDSA, NFID, NAPNAP, Vaccine Integrity Project.
- Build trust through partnership, listening, and addressing social media misinformation.
- Key Takeaways for Clinicians
- Despite confusion from ACIP structural changes, safe and effective vaccines remain available.
- Prioritize patient and community health—vaccinate against influenza, RSV, and other preventable diseases.
- Address misinformation proactively with evidence-based communication.
- Maintain trust: providers remain the most important source of vaccine guidance.
Additional Resource:
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ACIP meeting agenda, June 25–26, 2025. CDC. Accessed August 1, 2025. https://www.cdc.gov/acip/downloads/agendas/Final-posted-2025-06-24-508.pdf
TRANSCRIPTION
Consultant360: Hello, and thank you so much for joining us today for Consultant360's Multidisciplinary Roundtable on the 2025–2026 Vaccine Guideline Updates from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP. We're thrilled to have an incredible panel with us today. Joining us are Dr William Schaffner, professor of Preventive Medicine and Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center; Dr Tina Tan, professor of pediatrics at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and President of the Infectious Diseases Society of America; and Dr Jennifer Walsh, assistant professor of nursing at the George Washington University and Certified Pediatric Nurse Practitioner in Primary Care.
To start us off, I would love for you to walk us through some of the key changes from the June ‘25 ACIP meeting. Dr Schaffner, could you begin by giving us a high-level overview of the most important takeaways from ACIP's recommendations?
William Schaffner, MD: Well, before we get to the recommendations, Miranda, perhaps we ought to talk just briefly about the structure of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. It's now in its 61st year. It's an external group of experts to the CDC’s director, and it's charged with creating recommendations as to who ought to get vaccines when and under what circumstances in the United States.
It has done so over that long period of time in collaboration with the input from any number of professional organizations, and this ensures harmonization. That is, the professional organizations' recommendations coincide with what the ACIP recommendations are.
The ACIP recommendations are highly regarded. They become, in effect, the standard of care. And insurance companies, very importantly, both the public insurance structure and private, use the recommendations for their coverage of vaccines.
So the ACIP has had a long and respected history in providing very solid recommendations for how vaccines are used in the United States.
It has had 15 and now recently 17 members. These are vaccine experts drawn from public health, pediatrics, internal medicine, immunology, etc., people who are genuinely expert.
The ACIP meets three times a year, February, June, and October, and between then it has vaccine work groups. Think of them as subcommittees, devoted to individual vaccine areas, and they meet between the times working on a variety of issues related to recommendations and the changes that have to be made. So that's the general structure.
I would also say very quickly two things. One is that the people who are on the committee are vetted carefully so that during their time on the committee—it's a four-year appointment with partial rotations every year—they’re carefully vetted so they do not have any conflicts of interest.
Incidentally, we will also talk about liaison representatives who are there participating in the discussions but don't vote. They're there on behalf of professional societies. They're also vetted for conflicts of interest.
And then the last thing is that the full meetings, the February, June, and October meetings, are wonderfully transparent. They're open to any single person in the United States who would like to tune in on their computers. You can see the entire discussion going on. You can see the slide presentations of the data, and you can appreciate how the discussion goes on, which is often very, very critical of the information.
As much information as is presented, the ACIP members almost always want more. You never have enough information. But nonetheless, decisions have to be made. And you can see how they struggle with that. And you can see the rigorous structure with which the data are evaluated and evidence-to-recommendations structure goes through each and every time. And we can talk about those details if you like.
Now, with that background, what happened late this spring is that, you know, the 17 members of the ACIP were discharged by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. In fact, they were fired. Furthermore, the CDC structure that runs the ACIP—you’ll think of them as the secretariat, they make sure everything works and that everything is done according to the federal governmental rules of order and such—they were also discharged. They were pushed aside and a brand new team was put in.
And then initially eight, but then one member withdrew, seven new members to the ACIP were appointed, and that was the occasion of the June meeting.
So that's kind of the background and I have to tell you nothing like this has happened in the entire 60-plus year history of the ACIP. And it sent a shock through the public health, the infectious disease, and the vaccine communities.
And so it was in that context that this new ACIP meeting took place.
Tina Q. Tan, MD, FIDSA, FPIDS, FAAP: I think the major problem is that there was absolutely no transparency. And the protocol by which individuals are vetted and chosen was not followed. And so when these people were placed on the committee, they're not experts. They're all known to be vaccine skeptics, anti-vaccine, and many of them are anti-science. So there was no scientific evaluation of the data, and the recommendations that they put out really are not what practitioners should be following.
Dr Schaffner: So Tina, would you accept a friendly amendment to your statement?
Dr Tan: Absolutely.
Dr Schaffner: I would like to suggest that six of those people were a big surprise because the vaccine community was not familiar with them. But there was one person who was put in, and let me mention his name, Dr Cody Meissner.
Dr Tan: No, I know Cody, 'cause I served on the Red Book Committee with Cody.
Dr Schaffner: Right.
Dr Tan: However, Cody does—yeah, Cody has issues with the way vaccines are used. And I can just say that during the Red Book Committee meetings, he would argue with all the other members about the way vaccines are used.
Dr Schaffner: Cody is an independent thinker, but I'm gonna give him a gold star because he's been on the ACIP before. He, as you said, has worked with the pediatric community on vaccines, and he is deeply knowledgeable and committed to vaccines. He's an independent thinker, there's no doubt about it, but as I saw the committee's work this June, he was trying to keep it stabilized and on track. And so I hope he stands steadfast, but I think he's outnumbered six to one.
Dr Tan: Well, he's outnumbered, and as you said, he's an independent thinker. So some of the things that he puts out really is not scientifically based unfortunately.
Dr Schaffner: Well, I don’t always agree with Cody, but I guess I'm saying I'm glad he's there.
Jennifer Walsh, DNP, CPNP, CNE: And I think what you all expertly highlighted is that lack of transparency that really diminishes trust that we've had as healthcare providers our entire careers. That has been the go-to organization, the ACIP, that we look to to help lead us and help give us evidence-based recommendations.
It really is the go-to. So that lack of transparency has really made, I believe, all of us, me in particular, very hesitant about what's going to happen going forward. And it's adding to an already skeptical public when it comes to healthcare providers and vaccinations. So I think it's adding fuel to the fire that we definitely do not need.
Dr Schaffner: You know the ACIP has worked with professional organizations for these many years in order to, as we say, harmonize vaccine recommendations. The organizations have a buy-in because they participate both in the working group and in the full meetings. They don't vote, but they can participate in the discussion. And this has been so important, and we've already started to see an erosion of that harmonization, because there are a couple of areas, and if you like, we can get into them, where individual organizations are already providing recommendations that are not identical to those of the ACIP and the CDC. And I'm really concerned that there will be more of that going forward.
Dr Tan: Well, there'll be more of it because the recommendations that the current ACIP is putting out is not scientifically sound and really does not take into consideration the health of the individuals that should be vaccinated.
Dr Schaffner: Well, I certainly agree with you that the normal procedures were not followed. For example, just for our viewers, it is the usual process for every issue that comes up to the main committee to go through the process of a working group. That working group is where the sausage is made. All the data are reviewed very carefully and very critically, and you get the input of all the relevant professional and medical organizations.
We had two major presentations. One was about the use of thimerosal in multi-dose vials for influenza vaccine, and the other was a discussion, presentation on measles, mumps, rubella, varicella vaccine.
Dr Tan: Yeah.
Dr Schaffner: Neither of those had gone through the usual working group process. They were just presented by members of the committee or a guest at that time to the committee. And I agree with you, Tina, they were not balanced scientifically at all. In fact, I thought one of the recommendations actually obfuscated some of the data, and that was the thimerosal presentation.
Dr Walsh: And not all of them were true either. One was actually fabricated by AI.
Dr Tan: Correct. And basically it's been proven by the CDC that thimerosal in multi-dose influenza vials is not harmful.
Dr Schaffner: It is not harmful. I agree completely. And as you'll remember, just to bring up our mutual friend Cody, he was very adamant about that. He said, "Yes, this is safe." And we've had a long experience in doing that, but he was outvoted six to one.
C360: Well, let's talk about thimerosal-free vaccines. Let's talk about that recommendation that ACIP made. Dr Tan, they voted to recommend thimerosal-free flu vaccines when possible, especially for children and pregnant people. What do you make of this recommendation? And does it change anything for most providers?
Dr Tan: Well, only the multi-dose vials of influenza vaccine contain trace amounts of thimerosal. All the single-dose vials do not contain any thimerosal. And the community that is going to be the most impacted is going to be people that are on Medicaid or the public health communities, because they are able to vaccinate more individuals if they can use a multi-dose vial. Single-dose vials are definitely much more expensive. So you're going to have a decrease in vaccine access for certain communities.
Dr Schaffner: Yeah, I think it will simply cost more in those circumstances where multi-dose vials are being used. Another area, it is my understanding, is in nursing homes where people can go quickly from person to person and can vaccinate less expensively using multi-dose vials. They do that safely and effectively. That will simply cost more.
And just to reinforce what Tina said, multi-dose vials account for about five to six percent only of the influenza vaccine that's used. So most of the time when any of us receive influenza vaccine, it's from a single-dose presentation which does not contain thimerosal.
It's very interesting. So here are some of the uncertain ramifications. Will insurance companies pay for the use of multi-dose vials now? And that's kind of uncertain. Be mindful also that this decision was made at the June meeting. Most of the vaccine that's ordered by clinics, hospitals, nursing homes, has already been ordered—in February and March. And so I'm not entirely clear what's going to happen this vaccination season. And it's the sort of thing where the ACIP decision has created confusion rather than clarity.
Dr Walsh: Yes, I agree. And, you know, the flu vaccine, as you all know, needs to be stored at a certain temperature, needs cold storage. So it really limits the ability of certain clinics that don't have the storage, maybe mobile vans. We also think about mass vaccination clinics that need to vaccinate a lot of people, especially if it's quickly. If we have an outbreak, we need to vaccinate very quickly. Those multi-dose vials are invaluable to us. They're cost-effective and they are able to get more shots into arms, so to speak, very quickly.
And also, we think about how the US vaccination recommendations impact global vaccinations as well. So, thinking not just about our own country, but the entire global community and the risk of these vaccine-preventable illnesses.
C360: Dr Schaffner, I would love for you to expand on something that you said. You mentioned that this doesn't add clarity, but rather confusion.
Dr Schaffner: Well, we had one presentation from a guest presenter. Material related to the long history of thimerosal's use, safe use, not just in the United States but around the world, was not presented. I thought there was fudging between the two kinds of mercury, ethyl and methyl—one serious, the other not—and that's associated with thimerosal.
I thought that most of the data were cited without presentation of the data, basic studies in the laboratory, and it avoided all mention of the millions of doses of thimerosal-containing vaccine that have been administered around the world safely for decades.
And so I thought it was a not only incomplete, biased, but scientifically incorrect presentation. And if I may say so, I was appalled at the last sentence of that presentation, which invoked a political slogan. And I've had a very long association with the ACIP, first as a member and then as a liaison representative—that has never happened before. And the person was not taken to account by either the chair or the CDC executive secretary. And that was beyond my understanding.
And it really is the sort of thing that undercuts the objective scientific presentation of data and the standing of the ACIP, which is now at hazard, I think.
C360: I'd love to bring this to how you can communicate these changes to patients and families. Dr Walsh, when you're speaking with families, what concerns, if any, still come up around thimerosal? How do you typically respond and how do you anticipate those conversations going now with these recommendations?
Dr Walsh: Yes, the questions definitely come up. Our population is very savvy on social media, and that's where a lot of this communication is given. So I really focus on the evidence. I focus on the studies, I focus on the safety, I focus on the truth. And I welcome any questions that they may have. It's really a partnership. I want them to be—their experts on their children. I want them to feel that they're making the best decision for their children. So I'm happy to direct them to organizations if they need more information.
I do have to say I'm hesitant to direct them to the CDC sometimes lately, as it used to be a given that it was a very reputable organization, and now things are being pulled and other things are being put up, that makes me a little hesitant about that. I do thankfully have the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Academy of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners that are evidence-based, science-first, children-first, that I can direct them to.
Dr Schaffner: Yeah. Let me get in a plug for the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases also, with which I still am associated, because they're right down the middle and just present good information and they have a good website.
Dr Tan: I mean I just think that people need to know that thimerosal is safe and is only used in the multi-dose vials, and the single-dose vials do not contain thimerosal.
Dr Walsh: And thimerosal—the ethyl mercury that's the preservative in there—is not the mercury that causes any harm.
Dr Tan: Yes.
Dr Schaffner: And the last thing is, because you can see this in social media, thimerosal was never, ever part of the MMR vaccine.
Dr Tan: Agreed.
Dr Schaffner: Right?
Dr Walsh: Agreed.
Dr Tan: Agreed.
Dr Schaffner: Nowhere in the world was it ever part of our vaccine.
C360: So let's move on to the recommendations around RSV. Dr Tan, what do you think clinicians need to know about the new recommendations for clesrovimab? And what questions are you’re hearing? What's your guidance on how to prepare?
Dr Tan: So basically we have the most information on nirsevimab. This new antibody, it's nice because it increases access, but there's still some data that is not available on the duration of immunity with this new antibody. So people can use it, but it might not protect their infants as well as nirsevimab, because we know what the duration of nirsevimab is.
C360: And to sort of expand on that, Dr Schaffner, how should clinicians approach the relationship between, say, maternal RSV vaccination and infant prophylaxis? What are the considerations in choosing or combining them?
Dr Schaffner: Gee, I wish you hadn’t asked me that question, Miranda. Because we now have two ways of preventing in infancy this infection, which is the leading cause of hospitalization of infants and very young children in the United States. And both are effective. One way is to immunize the mother with RSV vaccine. The other, as Dr Tan has just said, is to provide the newborn infant with nirsevimab now, which is an option. And both are very, very effective. And I don't know exactly how the obstetrical and pediatric communities are working this out. I'd love for Tina and Jennifer to talk about this a little bit, because I would think locally there must be some conversations going on between the OBs and the pediatricians and family doctors and nurse practitioners.
Dr Tan: Right. So basically here at Northwestern, if the mom doesn't receive a vaccine—of which only one of the RSV vaccines can be given to pregnant women—then the community physicians will give a dose of a monoclonal antibody to the baby during the first week of life.
Dr Schaffner: And the data show already that there has been a precipitous drop in hospitalizations due to RSV in babies who have been treated, who have been protected, whether through maternal immunization or nirsevimab.
Dr Tan: Yeah, we know that whether the mom is vaccinated or whether the baby gets a monoclonal antibody, it is very effective.
Dr Walsh: It's extremely effective in reducing office visits, in reducing hospitalizations, and reducing deaths. There's no doubt about it.
When I have pregnant moms with their other children and they ask about it, my recommendation that I say is always take advantage of opportunities to vaccinate. We never know what the future holds. So I wouldn't turn down a chance to protect your baby if you're able to. And if you're not able to, we've got ones that we can give the baby once they're born.
Dr Schaffner: Jennifer, I like that. That's right in front of you. When in doubt, vaccinate.
Dr Walsh: When in doubt, vaccinate. You never know what the future holds.
Dr Tan: I think this is more up Bill's alley, but, you know, older individuals really should get RSV vaccine because we know that they suffer from a very high level of hospitalization and death.
Dr Schaffner: You know, when RSV vaccine first became available, now it's 3 years ago, many general practitioners and internists had to be educated about RSV because when I went to medical school, we learned about RSV, oh, it was that pediatric infection, you didn't have to worry about that.
The data have accumulated strongly over the last 20 years that RSV rivals influenza in the kind of illness it produces, particularly in older adults and those with underlying chronic pulmonary or heart disease. And so RSV, we had to do a big educational campaign.
Now, RSV vaccine—not to get into the weeds too much—is being covered under Medicare under Part D. Now, Part D was originally designed as the prescription drug benefit. And it's set up so that it's most easily administered in pharmacies. And there are a lot of physicians' offices that still do not vaccinate under Part D. So the majority of RSV vaccine in older persons has been given in pharmacies. And at the moment, we have one dose recommended. We don't have the revaccination schedule down yet. We're waiting for more data. We're waiting for those data to be presented to the ACIP and we'll see what they do.
And so at the moment, if you haven't been vaccinated against RSV and you're in one of those high-risk conditions, 65 and older, or younger than that if you have an underlying chronic illness and you're over 50, you should get your RSV vaccine.
C360: Moving on to influenza. Dr Schaffner, I'll start with you again. What changes around flu vaccination do you think will have the biggest impact this season or next? And is there anything here in particular that you feel clinicians should be aware of?
Dr Schaffner: Well, although we've expressed a lot of concern about the current ACIP, they voted to provide recommendations for this fall's use of influenza vaccine, and there are basically no changes. So 6 months of age and older, the recommendations are universal. Everyone should take advantage of the influenza vaccine. We know it's not a perfect vaccine, but it is a good vaccine. It helps keep you out of the hospital, intensive care unit, and it helps prevent you from dying.
My colleagues Tina and Jennifer can talk more about this, but of the children who die each year, half of them at least are normal children.
Dr Walsh: Absolutely.
Dr Schaffner: And the majority of children who die of influenza each year are unvaccinated. And in addition to that being a tragedy for a child, that's something parents are going to have to deal with for years later—the question, could some of that illness have been prevented?
Dr Tan: Oh, yes, absolutely. Yeah, it really is. The vast majority of the pediatric deaths are in healthy infants and children with no underlying disease.
Dr Walsh: Influenza can affect anyone. It's been proven time and again. And we've got the best protection against it—the flu vaccine. And as you both mentioned, it's not perfect, but it does reduce the risk of disease burden, it reduces the risk of hospitalization, and it reduces the risk of death. So it's two thumbs up in our view, to say the least.
Dr Schaffner: So just a quick light note: a few years ago when I was still doing a patient practice, one of my patients, I'll call him Charlie, who had been vaccinated against influenza but nonetheless got influenza, came back of course, and he was complaining. And I said, "Charlie, I'm so glad you're here to complain because the vaccine kept you out of the hospital."
Dr Walsh: Right.
Dr Schaffner: "You notice you didn't die of your influenza." And at that moment, he just kind of stopped and then he laughed. And I said, "You're going to get influenza vaccine this fall also." And he said, "You're right."
Dr Tan: Well, I mean, the other thing too is that there is the recommendation for individuals 65 years of age and older specifically to get high-dose influenza vaccination.
Dr Schaffner: Exactly, those vaccines, high-dose, adjuvanted vaccine, recombinant vaccine, those are the preferred. And the last time we looked of the people aged 65 and older who got any influenza vaccine, 70% are getting one of the preferred vaccines, that works better in that population. So we're doing better in that regard and can do even better.
FluMist, which can be given, help me now Tina—age 2, is that the start?
Dr Tan: Two through 49, yes.
Dr Schaffner: Two through 49, will be available in a way that you can pick it up at the pharmacy yourself and either administer it to yourself or you will be administering it to someone else. And the studies have shown that that actually will work. And that process, it is my understanding, will be available not this year, but next influenza season, 2026.
Dr Tan: Right, 2026.
Dr Schaffner: Right. So we'll see whether that enhances the acceptance of influenza vaccine in that age group, 2 through 49.
C360: Dr Walsh, how do you see patients and caregivers responding to options like self- or caregiver-administered vaccines? Are there any educational challenges that clinicians should prepare for?
Dr Walsh: I think definitely, since the FluMist is a live attenuated vaccine, there is a concern about family members or the individual that has a weakened immune system. So I think making sure that they're educated about that. And, you know, what to do if the child's congested? Do we wait? If they sneeze right after, what happens? I think it requires a lot of education.
But it can be an excellent, I think an excellent choice for especially some of those vaccine-hesitant children that are just really upset and traumatized about the vaccine. And so it can be a great option, a less invasive option that we have. So I'm excited to see what the future holds.
Dr Schaffner: Yeah, and Jennifer, is it also true that the parents often like to see a vaccine administered through a nasal spray because that spares an injection for the child.
Dr Walsh: Yeah.
Dr Schaffner: Antsy about having their little Susie or Tommy inoculated.
Dr Walsh: You are absolutely correct. I honestly think sometimes the injections cause more harm to the parents than they do to the child. They're much more distressed than the child.
C360: So to touch on the expanded use of FluBlok as well. Dr Tan, what are your thoughts on that expanded use and its potential role in broadening coverage, particularly among pediatric patients who can't receive egg-based or live vaccines?
Dr Tan: Well, just remember that egg-based—people that have basically quote egg allergies—that is not a contraindication to receive a flu vaccine. So that's something that's important to know because you can still receive any age-appropriate flu vaccine if you have an egg allergy.
So yeah, I mean, if you can't get a live vaccine, yeah, FluBlok is basically another option, but it's not the only option. I mean, I think that's the thing that people need to remember.
Dr Schaffner: I think that's very important. And the other thing I've discovered is that FluBlok may not be available everywhere—certainly not in a pediatrician or family doctor's office.
Dr Walsh: Absolutely.
Dr Schaffner: So don't forego influenza vaccination simply because you can't get FluBlok.
Dr Walsh: Correct. Absolutely.
C360: So let's zoom out a bit. Dr Walsh, how can clinicians communicate all these updates, these new options, changes in recommendations, in ways that are clear, respectful, and equitable?
Dr Walsh: I think there's lots of different ways. Obviously, person-to-person, provider to patient. There are also things on the website they can direct them to. Just giving them the education, I think, is very clear. They often look to the provider to help guide that. And so helping them reach that.
I think what makes vaccines different is it's much easier to buy into an antibiotic if you've got an ear infection or a cellulitis or conjunctivitis, but many of the vaccines that we give in general haven't been seen in a very long time. So it's immunizing against something that's unseen. So there's a lot of hesitation about that. And we've seen that with many vaccines and many vaccine-preventable infections that are coming back to be part of our everyday.
So that's something that we need to educate about—the risk of it. And even if they haven't seen it, that's because the vaccines work so well. That's why they haven't seen it. So just education, education, education.
Dr Tan: I mean, it's really important to educate individuals that these diseases still circulate in the community. But as Jennifer said, vaccines work so well that people are protected. But we're seeing it now with measles and with pertussis that as the rates of immunization go down, the amount of visible disease in the community goes up.
Dr Schaffner: Yeah, I think that providing information, listening to the patient, responding to what their questions are. We in medicine are so data-driven. We are well advised to listen to our behavioral psychologists because they tell us that information is absolutely essential. It's the foundation. But it's rarely sufficient to change behavior. Information goes to the brain. What they say is we have to change what the patient's attitude is. That is how they feel, and that goes to your heart.
And so in these discussions that I have with patients, I give them the factual answer as quickly as possible. And then I transition to something that tries to make them feel comfortable and reassured. I tell them, my family's vaccinated, my grandchildren are vaccinated. I ask them to look out when they go into the waiting room. We try to provide this vaccination protection for everyone. In other words, I'm saying, it's the social norm here to get vaccinated. It's not unusual. So trying to make people feel good about vaccination is something we all need to get better at.
Dr Walsh: Absolutely.
C360: And to really jump off of that and circle back to where we started this conversation, given the structural changes at ACIP this year, do you feel that patient trust in the guidelines around vaccines has been weakened? And how do you feel you can help strengthen that and really communicate around these changes?
Dr Tan: I think it's more confusion, because they're not sure who to believe. And really, as Jennifer brought up, it really is the primary healthcare provider's trust and relationship that's been built that really should provide the correct information to their patients.
Dr Schaffner: And we hope the providers are not confused too much themselves, right?
Dr Tan: Agreed. Agreed.
C360: Are there any particular resources you would point providers to if they do feel confused amidst all of these changes?
Dr Tan: Well, as Jennifer brought up, you can go to the American Academy of Pediatrics site. You can go to IDSA, we have some sites. As Bill brought up, you can go to that site. You can also go to, you know, the Vaccine Integrity Project site.
C360: So finally, just as we wrap up here, I'll ask to hear from each of you one final takeaway. What do you want frontline clinicians to keep in mind as they head into this respiratory season?
Dr Schaffner: Tina, you start.
Dr Tan: So basically, safe and effective vaccines are available and are out there. And regardless of what the confusing recommendations have been put out, they really need to take their condition into consideration and do what's best for them by vaccinating them against all these different diseases.
Dr Schaffner: Jennifer?
Dr Walsh: Well, great question. So for clinicians, I would say if you're confused, reach out to colleagues, to these leading organizations, to help answer your questions so that you feel prepared when it comes to patients. I think just being present and there as a trusted individual, and just emphasizing how safe and how effective vaccination is. It's been one of the most important things that we've had in healthcare in centuries, and hopefully will continue to be.
Dr Schaffner: Well, wise words from both of my colleagues. I will just end simply: disease bad, vaccines good. When in doubt, vaccinate. Vaccinate. Vaccinate.
C360:
Thank you so much to our panel for sharing their time and expertise with us, and thank you to our viewers for joining us in this conversation. We hope this roundtable gave you the clarity and confidence you need to navigate this year's vaccine updates. For more conversations like this, stay with us at Consultant360.