ReviewGMS hygiene and infection control2026
Hepatitis B vaccination and post-exposure prophylaxis in healthcare workers - a comparative analysis of national and supranational recommendations.
Review in GMS hygiene and infection control, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Needlestick injuries (NSIs) among healthcare workers (HCWs) remain common, with approximately 50,000 cases reported annually in Germany alone. Assessment of hepatitis B immune status is essential for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) following occupational exposure. However, hepatitis B vaccination coverage among HCWs in Europe is incompletely documented and varies substantially between countries. Objective: This review compares national and supranational recommendations regarding hepatitis B vaccination of HCWs, focusing on immune status monitoring and post-exposure prophylaxis after occupational exposure. Methods: A structured search of PubMed was conducted alongside a targeted review of official websites of national health authorities and professional societies in 16 European and Anglo-American countries, as well as recommendations issued by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). National guidelines addressing occupational hepatitis B vaccination and PEP were identified and systematically compared. Results: Substantial differences exist between recommendations, particularly regarding the protective anti-HBs threshold, the definition and management of "non-responders", and PEP strategies. Mandatory hepatitis B vaccination for exposed HCWs is in place in France and Belgium, as well as in selected states of the USA and Australia. While most countries closely follow the recommendations of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Germany, Austria, and Switzerland occupy a special position due to either a time-based criterion (10 years) or a tenfold higher protective threshold (anti-HBs ≥100 IU/L). Notable differences are also observed in PEP strategies, even among previously successfully vaccinated individuals. Conclusions: Although national recommendations share the common goal of preventing occupational HBV infection, considerable international variation persists. Given the favourable epidemiological trends and extensive experience with hepatitis B vaccination, harmonization of vaccination policies and post-exposure prophylaxis strategies would be desirable to improve clarity and strengthen occupational infection prevention across healthcare systems.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.