SHOULD THE VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION PROGRAM BE EXPANDED TO COVER ADULTS

In 1996, the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) asked for a re view of the pros and cons of including adult influenza and pneumococca l vaccines in the Vaccine injury Compensation Program (VICP). The auth ors, as staff to the subcommittees charged with undertaking this asses sment, looked at the following questions: (a) Would inclusion in VICP of these two vaccines, used primary for adults, increase adult vaccina tion levels! (b) Is this Federal. involvement warranted based on the l iability burden for these vacines? (c) Does the risk of adverse events following vaccinations warrant inclusion of these vaccines! (d) Is th ere a consensus among stakeholders favoring their inclusion! To addres s these questions. the authors reviewed information on adult vaccines, including data on lawsuits filed and reports of injuries, and sought input from interested groups. They found no evidence that the use of i nfluenza and pneumococcal vaccines would increase if they were include d in VICP. They found a low liability burden for these vaccines, char serious adverse events were rare, and that no consensus existed among stakeholders. After considering the staff report, NVAC chose, in 1996, not to advise the Department of Health and Human Services to include adult vaccines in VICP.