Immunization guarantees the well-being of the population in the long run, and it is critical for healthcare facilities. However, it cannot be recommended in the case if there are specific conditions that explain the dubious safety of this measure. Therefore, each individual case of the patients who are supposed to benefit from this procedure should be carefully analyzed in order to avoid significant problems in the future.
92-year-old Hispanic female with PMH
The situation of the first woman is worsened by the presence of critical issues, which do not allow suggesting some types of immunization. Over the past year, she was successfully vaccinated against influenza, pneumonia, hepatitis A, and hepatitis B. Meanwhile, the missing interventions include getting the tetanus-diphtheria vaccine, which is critical for the patient’s case (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021).
As can be seen from the examined medical history, she is reported to have increasing coughing, which indicates a higher risk of complications in this regard (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). This immunization was inappropriate due to hospitalization after the car accident and the corresponding decline. At present, it should be encouraged since this issue is the reason for the possibility of a further worsening of her situation, and the introduction of this measure complies with the considerations of safety.
86-year-old Hispanic female with PMH
In the case of this patient, the main challenges are related to the presence of anemia and hypothyroidism. Therefore, the only performed vaccinations were against influenza and pneumonia. They were appropriate at that time, and these measures were the only safe options for women (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). As for any other interventions of this nature, they were not suggested even in the hospital setting.
First, the response of an anemic person to immunization with the tetanus-diphtheria vaccine could be negative (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). In this situation, it would worsen the degeneration of the brain and the deriving issues. Second, using hepatitis A or hepatitis B vaccines could adversely affect the patient’s condition with the reported thyroid disease (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). Thus, from the perspective of safety, the required solutions were applied, and no other alternatives should be encouraged.
83-year-old Hispanic female with PMH
For this patient, the main issues connected to immunization against different diseases are presented by asthma and arthritis. These two problems determined the selection of vaccines for the woman over the past two years, and they were intended to eliminate the risks of influenza and pneumonia. The former’s possible outcome could have been especially negative for the well-being of an individual with this clinical diagnosis and, consequently, was addressed in the first place (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). In turn, the confirmed arthritis explained the refusal of vaccination against hepatitis as, in this case, the possibility of complications of this problem is much higher (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). Since the conditions preventing them from implementing these methods of ensuring one’s health are permanent, no other interventions should be encouraged by the hospital employees.
57-year-old Hispanic male with PMH
According to the man’s medical history, the principal circumstances, which determined the selection of vaccines, were a previous cardiac arrest, heart failure, and anoxic brain injury. Thus, the introduced interventions were those against influenza and pneumonia, whereas immunization against hepatitis A and hepatitis B was not performed. These decisions were appropriate and correspond to the current condition of the patient since the presence of a heart disease correlates with higher risks of flu-related complications (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). Also, brain injury does not allow considering the majority of vaccines since they might evoke a negative response (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). From this point of view, further suggestions for this patient do not involve any changes, and the location at home prevents providing timely assistance in the case of complications.
82-year-old Hispanic with PMH
The reported cardiomyopathy, alongside the history of pancreatic cancer and pancreatitis in the past, which are still present in the patient, do not allow considering vaccination against specific diseases. Thus, the person received only vaccines against pneumonia and tetanus-diphtheria, whereas those against hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and influenza were missing. These decisions were appropriate and conditional upon higher risks for individuals with heart problems (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021).
Moreover, pancreatic cancer led to disruptions of the immune system. Nevertheless, immunization against influenza should be performed once the situation is not critical because it can negatively affect the overall condition (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). Therefore, the patient should be encouraged to accept these measures since they comply with the considerations of safety in the long run.
In conclusion, the above analysis of patient scenarios shows that the selection of vaccines should be performed with regard to the existing health issues. Meanwhile, it is critical to distinguish between permanent and temporary challenges in this respect. Thus, the former can prevent hospital employees from suggesting specific interventions, whereas the latter is advisable but only when the situations are not critical, and they are reasonable from the perspective of safety.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). Adult immunization schedule by vaccine and age group. Web.