Genital human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States. An estimated 14 million persons are newly infected with HPV each year; approximately half of new HPV infections occur among persons aged 15-24 years. Although the majority of HPV infections are asymptomatic and resolve, persistent infections can cause disease, including cancers. No cure exists for HPV infection; treatments can be directed only at HPV-associated lesions (e.g., warts, precancerous lesions, and cancers). Annual costs of cervical cancer screening and treatment of HPV-associated health outcomes have been estimated at $8 billion (in 2010 U.S. dollars). Almost all cervical cancers and many vaginal, vulvar, anal, penile, and oropharyngeal cancers are attributable to persistent, oncogenic HPV infections. In 2009, approximately 35,000 HPV-associated cancers were reported in the United States. Of these, 39% occurred in males.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine coverage among girls is low. We used data reported by parents of 4103 girls, 13 to 17 years old, to assess associations with, and reasons for, delaying or refusing HPV vaccination. Sixty-nine percent of parents neither delayed nor refused vaccination, 11% delayed only, 17% refused only, and 3% both delayed and refused. Eighty-three percent of girls who delayed only, 19% who refused only, and 46% who both delayed and refused went on to initiate the vaccine series or intended to initiate it within the next 12 months. A significantly higher proportion of parents of girls who were non-Hispanic white, lived in households with higher incomes, and had mothers with higher education levels, delayed and/or refused vaccination. The most common reasons for nonvaccination were concerns about lasting health problems from the vaccine, wondering about the vaccine's effectiveness, and believing the vaccine is not needed.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is recommended to protect against HPV-related diseases. OBJECTIVE: To estimate HPV vaccine coverage and assess factors associated with vaccine awareness, initiation and receipt of 3 doses among women age 18-30 years. METHODS: Data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey were analyzed to assess associations of HPV vaccination among women age 18-26 (n=1866) and 27-30 years (n=1028) with previous HPV exposure, cervical cancer screening and selected demographic, health care and behavioral characteristics using bivariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 23.2% of women age 18-26 and 6.7% of women age 27-30 years reported receiving at least 1 dose of HPV vaccine. In multivariable analyses among women age 18-26 years, not being married, having a regular physician, seeing a physician or obstetrician/gynecologist in the past year, influenza vaccination in the past year, and receipt of other recommended vaccines were associated with HPV vaccination. One-third of unvaccinated women age 18-26 years (n=490) were interested in receiving HPV vaccine. Among women who were not interested in receiving HPV vaccine (n=920), the main reasons reported included: not needing the vaccine (41.3%); concerns about safety of the vaccine (12.5%); not knowing enough about the vaccine (11.9%); not being sexually active (8.2%); a doctor not recommending the vaccine (7.6%); and already having HPV (2.7%). Among women with health insurance, 10 or more physician contacts within the past year and no contraindications, 74.5% reported not receiving HPV vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: HPV vaccination coverage among women age 18-26 years remains low. Opportunities to vaccinate are missed. Healthcare providers can play an important role in educating young women about HPV and encouraging vaccination. Successful public health and educational interventions will need to address physician attitudes and practice patterns and other factors that influence vaccination behaviors.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine was licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use in men/boys aged 9-26 years. In 2009, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) provided a permissive recommendation allowing HPV vaccine administration to this group. PURPOSE: To assess HPV vaccination initiation and coverage, evaluate awareness of HPV and HPV vaccine, and identify factors independently associated with such awareness among men aged 18-26 years. METHODS: Data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey were analyzed in 2011. RESULTS: In 2010, HPV vaccination initiation among men aged 18-26 years was 1.1%. Among the 1741 men interviewed in this age group, nearly half had heard of HPV (51.8%). Overall, about one third of these men had heard of the HPV vaccine (34.8%). Factors independently associated with a higher likelihood of awareness of both HPV and HPV vaccine among men aged 18-26 years included having non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity; a higher education level; a U.S. birthplace; more physician contacts; private health insurance; received other vaccines; and reported risk behaviors related to sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. CONCLUSIONS: HPV vaccination initiation among men aged 18-26 years in 2010 was low. HPV and HPV vaccine awareness were also low, and messages in this area directed to men are needed. Since ACIP published a recommendation for routine use of HPV4 among men/boys in December 2011, continued monitoring of HPV vaccination uptake among men aged 18-26 years is useful for evaluating the vaccination campaigns, and planning and implementing strategies to increase coverage.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to describe factors that influence parental decisions to vaccinate their adolescents. METHODS: Data from the July to December 2010 National Immunization Survey-Teen Parental Concerns Module were analyzed to determine factors that influence parental decisions to vaccinate their adolescents. RESULTS: Parents reported that their adolescent's health care provider recommended tetanus toxoid/tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Td/Tdap; 74.4%), meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY; 60.3%), and human papillomavirus (HPV; 71.3%). Vaccination coverage estimates were significantly higher among parents who reported receiving a provider recommendation: 85.2% versus 76.7% (Td/Tdap), 77.3% versus 49.7% (MenACWY), and 62.2% versus 21.5% (HPV). Compared with Td/Tdap and MenACWY, fewer HPV vaccination conversations included recommendations for vaccination. Other than health care providers, school requirements (46.1%), news coverage (31.2%), and family (31.0%) were most frequently reported influences on parental vaccination decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Many factors influence parental decisions to vaccinate their adolescents; one of the most important factors is the provider recommendation. Missed opportunities for vaccination persist when strong vaccination recommendations are not given or are delayed.

BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) collaborate annually to provide updates on cancer incidence and death rates and trends in these outcomes for the United States. This year's report includes incidence trends for human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cancers and HPV vaccination (recommended for adolescents aged 11-12 years). METHODS: Data on cancer incidence were obtained from the CDC, NCI, and NAACCR, and data on mortality were obtained from the CDC. Long- (1975/1992-2009) and short-term (2000-2009) trends in age-standardized incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancers among men and among women were examined by joinpoint analysis. Prevalence of HPV vaccination coverage during 2008 and 2010 and of Papanicolaou (Pap) testing during 2010 were obtained from national surveys. RESULTS: Death rates continued to decline for all cancers combined for men and women of all major racial and ethnic groups and for most major cancer sites; rates for both sexes combined decreased by 1.5% per year from 2000 to 2009. Overall incidence rates decreased in men but stabilized in women. Incidence rates increased for two HPV-associated cancers (oropharynx, anus) and some cancers not associated with HPV (eg, liver, kidney, thyroid). Nationally, 32.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 30.3% to 33.6%) of girls aged 13 to 17 years in 2010 had received three doses of the HPV vaccine, and coverage was statistically significantly lower among the uninsured (14.1%, 95% CI = 9.4% to 20.6%) and in some Southern states (eg, 20.0% in Alabama [95% CI = 13.9% to 27.9%] and Mississippi [95% CI = 13.8% to 28.2%]), where cervical cancer rates were highest and recent Pap testing prevalence was the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: The overall trends in declining cancer death rates continue. However, increases in incidence rates for some HPV-associated cancers and low vaccination coverage among adolescents underscore the need for additional prevention efforts for HPV-associated cancers, including efforts to increase vaccination coverage.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if middle school vaccination requirements are associated with higher coverage for adolescent vaccines. METHODS: School entry requirements for receipt of vaccination for school entry or education of parents for 3 vaccines recommended for adolescents: tetanus/diphtheria-containing (Td) or tetanus/diphtheria/acellular pertussis (TdaP), meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY), and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines in place for the 2008-2009 school year were reviewed for the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Vaccination coverage levels for adolescents 13 to 17 years of age by state requirement status and change in coverage from 2008 to 2009 were assessed by using the 2008-2009 National Immunization Survey-Teen. RESULTS: For the 2008-2009 school year, 32 states had requirements for Td/TdaP (14 specifically requiring TdaP) and none required education; 3 states required MenACWY vaccine and 10 others required education; and 1 state required HPV vaccine and 5 required education. Compared with states with no requirements, vaccination requirements were associated with significantly higher coverage for MenACWY (71% vs 53%, P < .001) and Td/TdaP (80% vs 70%, P < .001) vaccines. No association was found between education-only requirements and coverage levels for MenACWY and HPV vaccines. States with new 2008-2009 vaccination requirements (n = 6, P = .04) and states with preexisting vaccination requirements (n = 26, P = .02) for Td/TdaP experienced a significant increase in TdaP coverage over states with no requirements. CONCLUSIONS: Middle school vaccination requirements are associated with higher coverage for Td/TdaP and MenACWY vaccines, whereas education-only requirements do not appear to increase coverage levels for MenACWY or HPV vaccines. The impact on coverage should continue to be monitored as more states adopt requirements.

OBJECTIVE: To compare parent and provider reported influenza vaccination status among adolescents. METHODS: Data from the 2009 National Immunization Survey-Teen (NIS-Teen) were analyzed. The NIS-Teen is a nationally representative random-digit-dialed telephone survey of households with adolescents 13-17years at the time of interview, followed by a mail survey to the adolescent's vaccination providers to obtain provider-reported vaccination histories. During the interview a parent or guardian was asked if the adolescent had received an influenza vaccination and whether their response was based upon recall only or from consulting a parent-held vaccination record (i.e., shot card) with recall of additional vaccinations not recorded on the shot card. Parent-reported influenza vaccination status was compared with provider-reported vaccination status by calculating various validity measures (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], negative predictive value [NPV], and kappa), overall and stratified by several demographic characteristics. In the main analysis, provider-reported vaccinations were considered the gold standard. To evaluate the completeness of provider-reporting, we conducted additional analysis that also considered vaccinations reported by parents from the shot card or reported received in a non-medical setting as "true" vaccinations. RESULTS: During the 2008-2009 season, influenza vaccination coverage among adolescents based on provider report was 11.3%. Based on parent report, influenza vaccination coverage was 21.7%. Twenty-two percent of parents retrieved and referred to a shot card during the interview. In the shot card group, provider versus parent reported coverage was 12.5% versus 18.2% while among the recall only group coverage was 10.9% versus 22.7%, respectively. Overall, compared to provider report as the gold standard, parental report of influenza vaccination had a sensitivity of 86.7%, a specificity of 86.2%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 43.1%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.0%. Among the shot card group, of vaccinations reported either by provider or by parent reading vaccination off shot card, only 66% were reported by providers. In the shot card group, the "true" vaccination level (16-17%) was closer to the parent reported coverage when it was assumed that vaccinations read by the parent from a shot card but not reported by a provider were considered true vaccinations. Overall, assuming that providers reported 64% of "true" vaccinations, sensitivity increased to 91%, specificity to 93%, and PPV to 71%. CONCLUSIONS: Overall estimated influenza vaccination coverage was more than ten percentage points higher based on parental report than on provider report, with the difference between provider and parent report greater among the recall only group. The two estimates are closer for those with shot cards, but few parents utilized shot cards in our study and most national surveys do not ask parents to consult shot cards when responding about their adolescent's vaccination. The actual vaccination coverage of adolescents studied is likely between coverage estimates obtained from parent report and provider report.

OBJECTIVE: Hepatitis A infection causes severe disease among adolescents and adults. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices instituted incremental recommendations for hepatitis A vaccination (HepA) at 2 years of age based on risk (1996), in selected states (1999), and universally at 1 year of age, with vaccination through 18 years of age based on risk or desire for protection (2006). We assessed adolescent HepA coverage in the United States and factors independently associated with vaccination. METHODS: Data from the 2009 National Immunization Survey-Teen (n = 20 066) were analyzed to determine ≥1- and ≥2-dose HepA coverage among adolescents 13 to 17 years of age. We used bivariate and multivariable analyses to test associations between HepA initiation and sociodemographic characteristics stratified by state groups: group 1, universal child vaccination since 1999; group 2, consideration for child vaccination since 1999; group 3, universal child vaccination at 1 year of age since 2006. RESULTS: In 2009, national 1-dose HepA coverage among adolescents was 42.0%. Seventy percent of vaccinees completed the 2-dose series. One-dose coverage was 74.3% among group 1 states, 54.0% for group 2 states, and 27.8% for group 3 states. The adjusted prevalence ratios of vaccination initiation were highest for states with a vaccination requirement and for adolescents whose providers recommended HepA. CONCLUSIONS: HepA coverage was low among most adolescents in the United States in 2009 leaving a large population susceptible to hepatitis A infection maturing into adulthood.

Data from the 2008 and 2009 National Immunization Survey-Teen were analyzed to determine age at initiation of the human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) series among females 13-17 years (n=7594) and assess compliance with the recommended HPV dosing intervals. Among females who initiated the HPV series, 56.7% of females <13 years at the time of the HPV vaccine recommendation publication did so by age 13; while the majority of females 13-14 and 15-17 years at the time of the recommendation publication did so at ages 14 (44.4%) and 16 (46.7%), respectively. Forty-six percent of females who received three doses completed the vaccination series in a period longer than the recommended time interval. Series completion at an earlier age to ensure protection before sexual debut is optimal. Improved provider communication of the need for three doses for long-term protection and implementing clinical practice guidelines to use reminder-recall systems may increase HPV completion.

BACKGROUND: From 2005 through 2007, 3 vaccines were added to the adolescent vaccination schedule: tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (TdaP); meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY); and human papillomavirus (HPV) for girls. OBJECTIVE: To assess implementation of new adolescent vaccination recommendations. METHODS: Data from the 2006-2009 National Immunization Survey-Teen, an annual provider-verified random-digit-dial survey of vaccination coverage in US adolescents aged 13 to 17 years, were analyzed. Main outcome measures included percentage of adolescents who received each vaccine according to survey year; potential coverage if all vaccines were administered during the same vaccination visit; and, among unvaccinated adolescents, the reasons for not receiving vaccine. RESULTS: Between 2006 and 2009, ≥1 TdaP and ≥1 MenACWY coverage increased from 11% to 56% and 12% to 54%, respectively. Between 2007 and 2009, ≥1 HPV coverage among girls increased from 25% to 44%; between 2008 and 2009, ≥3 HPV coverage increased from 18% to 27%. In 2009, vaccination coverage could have been >80% for Td/TdaP and MenACWY and as high as 74% for the first HPV dose if providers had administered all recommended vaccines during the same vaccination visit. For all years, the top reported reasons for not vaccinating were no knowledge about the vaccine, provider did not recommend, and vaccine is not needed/necessary (for TdaP and MenACWY) and adolescent is not sexually active, no knowledge about the vaccine, and vaccine is not needed/necessary (for HPV). CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent vaccination coverage is increasing but could be improved. Strategies are needed to increase parental knowledge about adolescent vaccines and improve provider recommendation and administration of all vaccines during the same visit.

Limited health care access and missed opportunities for HIV and other sexually transmitted infection (STI) education and testing in health care settings may contribute to risk of HIV infection. In 2008, we conducted a case-control study of African American men who have sex with men (MSM) in a southeastern city (Jackson, Mississippi) with an increase in numbers of newly reported HIV cases. Our aims were to evaluate associations between health care and HIV infection and to identify missed opportunities for HIV/STI testing. We queried 40 potential HIV-infected cases and 936 potential HIV-uninfected controls for participation in this study. Study enrollees included HIV-infected cases (n=30) and HIV-uninfected controls (n=95) who consented to participate and responded to a self-administered computerized survey about sexual risk behaviors and health care utilization. We used bivariate analysis and logistic regression to test for associations between potential risk factors and HIV infection. Cases were more likely than controls to lack health insurance (odds ratio [OR]=2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.1-5.7), lack a primary care provider (OR=6.3; CI=2.3-16.8), and to not have received advice about HIV or STI testing or prevention (OR=5.4; CI=1.3-21.5) or disclose their sexual identity (OR=7.0; CI=1.6-29.2) to a health care provider. In multivariate analysis, lacking a primary health care provider (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=4.5; CI=1.4-14.7) and not disclosing sexual identity to a health care provider (AOR=8.6; CI=1.8-40.0) were independent risk factors for HIV infection among African American MSM. HIV prevention interventions for African American MSM should address access to primary health care providers for HIV/STI prevention and testing services and the need for increased discussions about sexual health, sexual identity, and sexual behaviors between providers and patients in an effort to reduce HIV incidence and HIV-related health disparities.

OBJECTIVES: To identify parent-reported reasons for non-receipt of adolescent vaccinations by provider recommendation status. METHODS: Parental reasons for non-receipt of adolescent vaccines were analyzed among adolescents 13-17 years using data from the 2009 National Immunization Survey-Teen (n=20,066). RESULTS: Among unvaccinated adolescents, 87.9% (Td/Tdap), 90.9% (MenACWY), and 66.0% (HPV) of parents reported that they did not receive a healthcare provider recommendation for their adolescent to receive the vaccine. Among those without a provider recommendation, the most common reasons for not receiving the vaccines were 'vaccine not recommended' [Td/Tdap, MenACWY] and 'not needed' [HPV]. Among those with a recommendation, the most common parental reasons were 'lack of knowledge' [Td/Tdap], 'vaccine not needed' [MenACWY], and 'lack of knowledge' [HPV]. CONCLUSIONS: Non-receipt of provider recommendations was a main parent-reported reason for not getting vaccinated. Increasing parental knowledge and vaccination coverage through increased provider-parent communication about disease risk and vaccine benefits is needed.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the association between parents' beliefs about vaccines, their decision to delay or refuse vaccines for their children, and vaccination coverage of children at aged 24 months. METHODS: We used data from 11,206 parents of children aged 24-35 months at the time of the 2009 National Immunization Survey interview and determined their vaccination status at aged 24 months. Data included parents' reports of delay and/or refusal of vaccine doses, psychosocial factors suggested by the Health Belief Model, and provider-reported up-to-date vaccination status. RESULTS: In 2009, approximately 60.2% of parents with children aged 24-35 months neither delayed nor refused vaccines, 25.8% only delayed, 8.2% only refused, and 5.8% both delayed and refused vaccines. Compared with parents who neither delayed nor refused vaccines, parents who delayed and refused vaccines were significantly less likely to believe that vaccines are necessary to protect the health of children (70.1% vs. 96.2%), that their child might get a disease if they aren't vaccinated (71.0% vs. 90.0%), and that vaccines are safe (50.4% vs. 84.9%). Children of parents who delayed and refused also had significantly lower vaccination coverage for nine of the 10 recommended childhood vaccines including diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (65.3% vs. 85.2%), polio (76.9% vs. 93.8%), and measles-mumps-rubella (68.4% vs. 92.5%). After adjusting for sociodemographic differences, we found that parents who were less likely to agree that vaccines are necessary to protect the health of children, to believe that their child might get a disease if they aren't vaccinated, or to believe that vaccines are safe had significantly lower coverage for all 10 childhood vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: Parents who delayed and refused vaccine doses were more likely to have vaccine safety concerns and perceive fewer benefits associated with vaccines. Guidelines published by the American Academy of Pediatrics may assist providers in responding to parents who may delay or refuse vaccines.

OBJECTIVE: The validity of parent-reported adolescent vaccination histories has not been assessed. This study evaluated the validity of parent-reported adolescent vaccination histories by a combination of immunization card and recall, and by recall only, compared with medical provider records. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2008 National Immunization Survey-Teen. Parents of adolescents aged 13-17 years reported their child's vaccination history either by immunization card and recall (n = 3,661) or by recall only (n = 12,822) for the hepatitis B (Hep B), measles-mumps-rubella (MMR), varicella (VAR), tetanus-diphtheria/tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Td/ Tdap), meningococcal conjugate (MCV4), and quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV4) (for girls only) vaccines. We validated parental report with medical records. RESULTS: Among the immunization card/recall group, vaccines with > 20% false-positive reports included MMR (32.3%) and Td/Tdap (36.9%); vaccines with > 20% false-negative reports included VAR (35.2%), MCV4 (36.0%), and Tdap (41.9%). Net bias ranged from -25.0 to -0.1 percentage points. Kappa values ranged from 0.22 to 0.92. Among the recall-only group, vaccines with > 20% false-positive reports included Hep B (33.9%), MMR (61.4%), VAR (26.2%), and Td/Tdap (60.6%); vaccines with > 20% false-negative reports included Hep B (58.9%), MMR (33.7%), VAR (51.6%), Td/Tdap (25.5%), Tdap (50.3%) MCV4 (63.0%), and HPV4 (20.5%). Net bias ranged from -46.0 to 0.5 percentage points. Kappa values ranged from 0.03 to 0.76. CONCLUSIONS: Validity of parent-reported vaccination histories varies by type of report and vaccine. For recently recommended vaccines, false-negative rates were substantial and higher than false-positive rates, resulting in net underreporting of vaccination rates by both the immunization card/recall and recall-only groups. Provider validation of parent-reported vaccinations is needed for valid surveillance of adolescent vaccination coverage.

BACKGROUND: Since 2006, the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been routinely recommended for preadolescent and adolescent girls in the United States. Depending on uptake patterns, HPV vaccine could reduce existing disparities in cervical cancer. METHODS: HPV vaccination status and reasons for not vaccinating were assessed using data from the 2008 National Health Interview Survey. Households with a girl aged 9-17 years were included (N = 2205). Sociodemographic factors and health behaviors associated with vaccine uptake were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 2.8% of 9- to 10-year-olds, 14.7% of 11- to 12-year-olds, and 25.4% of 13- to 17-year-olds received at least 1 dose of HPV vaccine; 5.5% of 11- to 12-year-olds and 10.7% of 13- to 17-year-olds received all 3 doses. Factors associated with higher uptake in multivariate analysis included less than high school parental education, well-child check and influenza shot in the past year, and parental familiarity with HPV vaccine. Parents' primary reasons for not vaccinating were beliefs that their daughters did not need vaccination, that their daughters were not sexually active, or had insufficient vaccine knowledge. More parents with private insurance (58.0%) than public (39.8%) or no insurance (39.5%) would pay $360-$500 to vaccinate their daughters. CONCLUSIONS: Less than one quarter of girls aged 9-17 years had initiated HPV vaccination by the end of 2008. Efforts to increase HPV uptake should focus on girls in the target age group, encourage providers to educate parents, and promote access to reduced-cost vaccines. Cancer 2011;. (c) 2011 American Cancer Society.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a case-control study in the Jackson, Mississippi, area to identify factors associated with HIV infection among young African American men who have sex with men (MSM). METHODS: During February to April 2008, we used surveillance records to identify young (16-25 years old) African American MSM diagnosed with HIV between 2006 and 2008 (case participants) and recruited young African American MSM who did not have HIV (controls). Logistic regression analysis was used to assess factors associated with HIV infection. RESULTS: In a multivariable analysis of 25 case participants and 85 controls, having older male partners (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=5.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.8, 17.3), engaging in unprotected anal intercourse with casual male partners (adjusted OR=6.3; 95% CI=1.8, 22.3), and being likely to give in to a partner who wanted to have unprotected sex (adjusted OR=5.0; 95% CI=1.2, 20.6) were associated with HIV infection. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high prevalence of risk behaviors among the young African American MSM in our study, HIV prevention efforts must begin before or during early adolescence and need to focus on improving negotiation and communication regarding sex. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print November 18, 2010: e1-e7. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.185850).

In recent years, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has recommended three newly licensed vaccines: meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MCV4; 1 dose); tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap; 1 dose); and (for girls) quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV4; 3 doses). ACIP also recommends that adolescents receive recommended vaccinations that were missed during childhood: measles, mumps, rubella vaccine (MMR; 2 doses); hepatitis B vaccine (HepB; 3 doses); and varicella vaccine (VAR; 2 doses). Since 2006, CDC has conducted the National Immunization Survey-Teen (NIS-Teen) to estimate vaccination coverage from a national sample of adolescents aged 13-17 years. This report summarizes results from the 2008 NIS-Teen and, for the first time, includes estimates for each of the 50 states and selected local areas. Nationally, vaccination coverage for the three most recently recommended adolescent vaccinations and one childhood vaccination increased from 2007 to 2008: MCV4 (from 32.4% to 41.8%), Tdap (from 30.4% to 40.8%), ≥1 dose of HPV4 (from 25.1% to 37.2%), and ≥2 doses of VAR among those without disease history (from 18.8% to 34.1%). However, substantial variability in vaccination coverage was observed in 2008 among state and local areas and by race/ethnicity and poverty status. For the first time, the Healthy People 2010 target of 90% coverage among adolescents aged 13-15 years was met for MMR and HepB. Public health agencies should continue annual monitoring of adolescent vaccination coverage levels to identify trends and differences by geographic area, race/ethnicity, and poverty status.