OBJECTIVE: To explore the role of local public health organisations in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted. Peer-reviewed and grey literature from countries within the organisation for economic co-operation and development was searched between 1999 and 2023 using the concepts of local public health, AMR and AMS. Thematic analysis was performed to identify themes. RESULTS: There were 63 citations illustrating 122 examples of AMS and AMR surveillance activities with local public health involvement. Common AMS activities (n = 105) included healthcare worker education (n = 22), antimicrobial use (AMU) evaluation (n = 21), patient/public education (n = 17), clinical practice guidelines (n = 10), and antibiograms (n = 10). Seventeen citations described local public health activities in AMR surveillance; the majority focussed on communicable diseases (n = 11) and/or AMR organisms (n = 6). CONCLUSIONS: Local public health capabilities should be leveraged to advance high-impact activities to mitigate AMR, particularly in the areas of knowledge translation/mobilisation, optimising surveillance and establishing strategic collaborations. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Future work should focus on better understanding barriers and facilitators, including funding, to local public health participation in these activities.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends annual influenza and COVID-19 vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months, including adults aged ≥18 years. ACIP also recommends a single lifetime dose of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine for adults aged ≥75 years and for those aged 60-74 years who are at increased risk for severe RSV disease. Data from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module, a random-digit-dialed cellular telephone survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years, are used to monitor influenza, COVID-19, and RSV vaccination coverage. By the week ending November 9, 2024, an estimated 34.7% of adults aged ≥18 years reported having received an influenza vaccine, and 17.9% reported having received a COVID-19 vaccine for the 2024-25 respiratory virus season; 39.7% of adults aged ≥75 years, and 31.6% of adults aged 60-74 years at increased risk for severe RSV, had ever received an RSV vaccine. Coverage varied by jurisdiction and demographic characteristics and was lowest among younger adults and those without health insurance. Although early season estimates indicate that many adults are unprotected from respiratory virus infections, many appeared open to vaccination: overall, approximately 35% and 41% of adults aged ≥18 years reported that they definitely or probably will receive or were unsure about receiving influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, respectively, and 40% of adults aged ≥75 years reported that they definitely or probably will receive or were unsure about receiving RSV vaccine. Health care providers and immunization programs still have time to expand outreach activities and promote vaccination to increase coverage in preparation for the height of the respiratory virus season. Using these data can help health care providers and immunization programs identify undervaccinated populations and understand vaccination patterns to guide planning, implementation, and evaluation of vaccination activities.

OBJECTIVE: The Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) experience periodic outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of routine outreach and catch-up campaign strategies for increasing vaccination coverage for the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine among children aged 12 months through 6 years in Chuuk, FSM. METHODS: We used a cost-effectiveness model to assess 4 MMR vaccination strategies from a public health perspective: routine outreach conducted 4 times per year (quarterly routine outreach), routine outreach conducted 2 times per year (biannual routine outreach), catch-up campaigns conducted once per year (annual catch-up campaign), and catch-up campaigns conducted every 2 years with quarterly routine outreach in non-catch-up campaign years (status quo). We calculated costs and outcomes during a 5-year model horizon and summarized results as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. We analyzed the following public health outcomes: additional protected person-month (PPM), doses administered and protected people (ie, a child who completed a 2-dose MMR series). We conducted 1-way sensitivity analyses to evaluate the stability of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and to identify influential model inputs. RESULTS: Among the 4 MMR vaccination strategies, quarterly routine outreach was the most effective and most expensive strategy, and biannual routine outreach was the least expensive and least effective strategy. Quarterly routine outreach (vs status quo) yielded approximately an additional 7001 PPMs and 132 vaccine doses administered, with incremental costs of about $4 per PPM, $193 per dose administered, and $123 per protected person. CONCLUSION: Routine outreach and catch-up campaign vaccination strategies can be important interventions to improve health in Chuuk, FSM. More frequent routine outreach events could improve MMR coverage and reduce the likelihood of outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases such as measles and mumps.

During the 2023-24 respiratory virus season, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends influenza and COVID-19 vaccines for all persons aged ≥6 months, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine is recommended for persons aged ≥60 years (using shared clinical decision-making), and for pregnant persons. Data from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module, a random-digit-dialed cellular telephone survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years, are used to monitor influenza, COVID-19, and RSV vaccination coverage. By December 9, 2023, an estimated 42.2% and 18.3% of adults aged ≥18 years reported receiving an influenza and updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine, respectively; 17.0% of adults aged ≥60 years had received RSV vaccine. Coverage varied by demographic characteristics. Overall, approximately 27% and 41% of adults aged ≥18 years and 53% of adults aged ≥60 years reported that they definitely or probably will be vaccinated or were unsure whether they would be vaccinated against influenza, COVID-19, and RSV, respectively. Strong provider recommendations for and offers of vaccination could increase influenza, COVID-19, and RSV vaccination coverage. Immunization programs and vaccination partners are encouraged to use these data to understand vaccination patterns and attitudes toward vaccination in their jurisdictions to guide planning, implementation, strengthening, and evaluation of vaccination activities.

Pregnant and postpartum women are at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19 compared with nonpregnant women of reproductive age. COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for all persons ≥6 months of age. Health care providers (HCPs) have a unique opportunity to counsel women of reproductive age, including pregnant and postpartum patients, about the importance of receiving COVID-19, influenza, and tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines. Data from the Fall 2022 DocStyles survey were analyzed to examine the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination attitudes and practices among HCPs caring for women of reproductive age, and to determine whether providers recommended and offered or administered COVID-19 vaccines to women of reproductive age, including their pregnant patients. Overall, 82.9% of providers reported recommending COVID-19 vaccination to women of reproductive age, and 54.7% offered or administered the vaccine in their practice. Among HCPs who cared for pregnant patients, obstetrician-gynecologists were more likely to recommend COVID-19 vaccination to pregnant patients (94.2%) than were family practitioners or internists (82.1%) (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 1.1). HCPs were more likely to offer or administer COVID-19 vaccination on-site to pregnant patients if they also offered or administered influenza (aPR = 5.5) and Tdap vaccines (aPR = 2.3). Encouraging HCPs to recommend, offer, and administer the COVID-19 vaccines along with influenza or Tdap vaccines might help reinforce vaccine confidence and increase coverage among women of reproductive age, including pregnant women.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated maternal COVID-19 related experiences during delivery hospitalizations, and whether experiences differed by maternal race and ethnicity. STUDY DESIGN: Data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System among women with live births between April-December 2020 were used. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) estimated associations between maternal race and ethnicity and COVID-19 related delivery experiences. RESULTS: Among 12,879 women, 3.6% reported infant separation and 1.8% reported not being allowed support persons. Compared with non-Hispanic White women, American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) (aPR = 2.7; CI: 1.2-6.2), Hispanic (aPR = 2.2; CI: 1.5-3.1), non-Hispanic Black (aPR = 2.4; CI: 1.7-3.6), and non-Hispanic Asian (aPR = 2.8; CI: 1.6-4.9) women reported more infant separation due to COVID-19. Not being allowed support persons was more common among AI/AN (aPR = 5.2; CI: 1.8-14.8) and non-Hispanic Black (aPR = 2.3; CI: 1.3-4.1) women. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 related delivery hospitalization experiences were unequally distributed among racial and ethnic minorities.

Opioids are a critical component of pain relief strategies for the management of patients with cancer and sickle cell disease. The escalation of opioid addiction and overdose in the United States has led to increased scrutiny of opioid prescribing practices. Multiple reports have revealed that regulatory and coverage policies, intended to curb inappropriate opioid use, have created significant barriers for many patients. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and American Society of Clinical Oncology each publish clinical practice guidelines for the management of chronic pain. A recent JAMA Oncology article highlighted perceived variability in recommendations among these guidelines. In response, leadership from guideline organizations, government representatives, and authors of the original article met to discuss challenges and solutions. The meeting featured remarks by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, presentations on each clinical practice guideline, an overview of the pain management needs of patients with sickle cell disease, an overview of perceived differences among guidelines, and a discussion of differences and commonalities among the guidelines. The meeting revealed that although each guideline varies in the intended patient population, target audience, and methodology, there is no disagreement among recommendations when applied to the appropriate patient and clinical situation. It was determined that clarification and education are needed regarding the intent, patient population, and scope of each clinical practice guideline, rather than harmonization of guideline recommendations. Clinical practice guidelines can serve as a resource for policymakers and payers to inform policy and coverage determinations.

Pregnant women* and their infants are at increased risk for serious influenza, pertussis, and COVID-19-related complications, including preterm birth, low-birth weight, and maternal and fetal death. The advisory committee on immunization practices recommends pregnant women receive tetanus-toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine during pregnancy, and influenza and COVID-19 vaccines before or during pregnancy. Vaccination coverage estimates and factors associated with maternal vaccination are measured by various surveillance systems. The objective of this report is to provide a detailed overview of the following surveillance systems that can be used to assess coverage of vaccines recommended for pregnant women: Internet panel survey, National Health Interview Survey, National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, Vaccine Safety Datalink, and MarketScan. Influenza, Tdap, and COVID-19 vaccination coverage estimates vary by data source, and select estimates are presented. Each surveillance system differs in the population of pregnant women, time period, geographic area for which estimates can be obtained, how vaccination status is determined, and data collected regarding vaccine-related knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and barriers. Thus, multiple systems are useful for a more complete understanding of maternal vaccination. Ongoing surveillance from the various systems to obtain vaccination coverage and information regarding disparities and barriers related to vaccination are needed to guide program and policy improvements.

Pregnant people with COVID-19 are at increased risk for severe illness and adverse pregnancy outcomes. COVID-19 vaccinations are safe and effective, including for pregnant and recently pregnant people. The objective of this analysis was to describe the extent to which primary care physicians across the United States report confidence in talking with female patients of reproductive age about COVID-19 vaccination, recommending COVID-19 vaccinations to pregnant patients, and offering COVID-19 vaccinations at their practices in fall 2021. We analyzed cross-sectional data from the Fall 2021 DocStyles survey, a web-based panel survey of U.S. primary healthcare providers (64% response rate). Family practitioners/internists, obstetrician-gynecologists, and pediatricians were asked about confidence in talking with female patients of reproductive age about COVID-19 vaccination, vaccination practices regarding pregnant patients, and offering COVID-19 vaccinations. We describe results overall and by select physician characteristics. Among 1501 respondents, most were family practitioners/internists (67%), 17% were obstetrician-gynecologists, and 17% were pediatricians. Overall, 63% were very confident talking with female patients of reproductive age about COVID-19 vaccination, 80% recommended pregnant patients get vaccinated as soon as possible, and 50% offered COVID-19 vaccinations at their current practice. Obstetrician-gynecologists were most confident in talking with female patients, but only one-third offered the vaccine at their practices. This analysis found that most physicians felt confident talking about COVID-19 vaccinations and recommended pregnant patients get vaccinated as soon as possible. Provider recommendation for vaccination remains a key strategy for achieving high vaccination coverage, and consistent recommendations may improve vaccine acceptance among pregnant and postpartum people.

This study uses data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink on receipt of booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant individuals aged 18 to 49 years.

Vaccination is critical to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic, and health care providers play an important role in achieving high vaccination coverage (1). To examine the prevalence of report of a provider recommendation for COVID-19 vaccination and its association with COVID-19 vaccination coverage and attitudes, CDC analyzed data among adults aged ≥18 years from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM), a nationally representative cellular telephone survey. Prevalence of report of a provider recommendation for COVID-19 vaccination among adults increased from 34.6%, during April 22-May 29, to 40.5%, during August 29-September 25, 2021. Adults who reported a provider recommendation for COVID-19 vaccination were more likely to have received ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine (77.6%) than were those who did not receive a recommendation (61.9%) (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 1.12). Report of a provider recommendation was associated with concern about COVID-19 (aPR = 1.31), belief that COVID-19 vaccines are important to protect oneself (aPR = 1.15), belief that COVID-19 vaccination was very or completely safe (aPR = 1.17), and perception that many or all of their family and friends had received COVID-19 vaccination (aPR = 1.19). Empowering health care providers to recommend vaccination to their patients could help reinforce confidence in, and increase coverage with, COVID-19 vaccines, particularly among groups known to have lower COVID-19 vaccination coverage, including younger adults, racial/ethnic minorities, and rural residents.

COVID-19 vaccination is critical to ending the COVID-19 pandemic. Members of minority racial and ethnic groups have experienced disproportionate COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality (1); however, COVID-19 vaccination coverage is lower in these groups (2). CDC used data from CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)* to assess disparities in vaccination coverage among persons aged ≥16 years by race and ethnicity during December 14, 2020-May 15, 2021. Measures of coverage included receipt of ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose (i.e., receipt of the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines or 1 dose of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine [Johnson & Johnson]) and full vaccination (receipt of 2 doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines or 1 dose of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine). Among 9.6 million persons aged ≥16 years enrolled in VSD during December 14, 2020-May 15, 2021, ≥1-dose coverage was 48.3%, and 38.3% were fully vaccinated. As of May 15, 2021, coverage with ≥1 dose was lower among non-Hispanic Black (Black) and Hispanic persons (40.7% and 41.1%, respectively) than it was among non-Hispanic White (White) persons (54.6%). Coverage was highest among non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) persons (57.4%). Coverage with ≥1 dose was higher among persons with certain medical conditions that place them at higher risk for severe COVID-19 (high-risk conditions) (63.8%) than it was among persons without such conditions (41.5%) and was higher among persons who had not had COVID-19 (48.8%) than it was among those who had (42.4%). Persons aged 18-24 years had the lowest ≥1-dose coverage (28.7%) among all age groups. Continued monitoring of vaccination coverage and efforts to improve equity in coverage are critical, especially among populations disproportionately affected by COVID-19.

COVID-19 vaccines are critical for ending the COVID-19 pandemic; however, current data about vaccination coverage and safety in pregnant women are limited. Pregnant women are at increased risk for severe illness and death from COVID-19 compared with nonpregnant women of reproductive age, and are at risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as preterm birth (1-4). Pregnant women are eligible for and can receive any of the three COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States via Emergency Use Authorization.* Data from Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), a collaboration between CDC and multiple integrated health systems, were analyzed to assess receipt of ≥1 dose (first or second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines or a single dose of the Janssen [Johnson & Johnson] vaccine) of any COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy, receipt of first dose of a 2-dose COVID-19 vaccine (initiation), or completion of a 1- or 2-dose COVID-19 vaccination series. During December 14, 2020-May 8, 2021, a total of 135,968 pregnant women were identified, 22,197 (16.3%) of whom had received ≥1 dose of a vaccine during pregnancy. Among these 135,968 women, 7,154 (5.3%) had initiated and 15,043 (11.1%) had completed vaccination during pregnancy. Receipt of ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy was highest among women aged 35-49 years (22.7%) and lowest among those aged 18-24 years (5.5%), and higher among non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) (24.7%) and non-Hispanic White (White) women (19.7%) than among Hispanic (11.9%) and non-Hispanic Black (Black) women (6.0%). Vaccination coverage increased among all racial and ethnic groups over the analytic period, likely because of increased eligibility for vaccination(†) and increased availability of vaccine over time. These findings indicate the need for improved outreach to and engagement with pregnant women, especially those from racial and ethnic minority groups who might be at higher risk for severe health outcomes because of COVID-19 (4). In addition, providing accurate and timely information about COVID-19 vaccination to health care providers, pregnant women, and women of reproductive age can improve vaccine confidence and coverage by ensuring optimal shared clinical decision-making.

Opioids are a critical component of pain relief strategies for the management of patients with cancer and sickle cell disease. The escalation of opioid addiction and overdose in the United States has led to increased scrutiny of opioid prescribing practices. Multiple reports have revealed that regulatory and coverage policies, intended to curb inappropriate opioid use, have created significant barriers for many patients. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and ASCO each publish clinical practice guidelines for the management of chronic pain. A recent JAMA Oncology article highlighted perceived variability in recommendations among these guidelines. In response, leadership from guideline organizations, government representatives, and authors of the original article met to discuss challenges and solutions. The meeting featured remarks by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, presentations on each clinical practice guideline, an overview of the pain management needs of patients with sickle cell disease, an overview of perceived differences among guidelines, and a discussion of differences and commonalities among the guidelines. The meeting revealed that although each guideline varies in the intended patient population, target audience, and methodology, there is no disagreement among recommendations when applied to the appropriate patient and clinical situation. It was determined that clarification and education are needed regarding the intent, patient population, and scope of each clinical practice guideline, rather than harmonization of guideline recommendations. Clinical practice guidelines can serve as a resource for policymakers and payers to inform policy and coverage determinations.

Vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) cause substantial morbidity and mortality in the United States Affiliated Pacific Islands (USAPI).* CDC collaborates with USAPI immunization programs to monitor vaccination coverage. In 2016, (dagger) USAPI immunization programs and CDC piloted a method for estimating up-to-date status among children aged 2 years using medical record abstraction to ascertain regional vaccination coverage. This was the first concurrent assessment of childhood vaccination coverage across five USAPI jurisdictions (American Samoa; Chuuk State, Federated States of Micronesia [FSM]; Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands [CNMI]; Republic of the Marshall Islands [RMI]; and Republic of Palau).( section sign) Differences in vaccination coverage between main and outer islands( paragraph sign) were assessed for two jurisdictions where data were adequate.** Series coverage in this report includes the following doses of vaccines: >/=4 doses of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP); >/=3 doses of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV); >/=1 dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR); >/=3 doses of Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib) vaccine; >/=3 doses of hepatitis B (HepB) vaccine; and >/=4 doses of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV); i.e., 4:3:1:3:3:4. Coverage with >/=3 doses of rotavirus vaccine was also assessed. Completion of the recommended series of each of these vaccines(daggerdagger) was <90% in all jurisdictions except Palau. Coverage with the full recommended six-vaccine series (4:3:1:3:3:4) ranged from 19.5% (Chuuk) to 69.1% (Palau). In RMI and Chuuk, coverage was lower in the outer islands than in the main islands for most vaccines, with differences ranging from 0.9 to 66.8 percentage points. Medical record abstraction enabled rapid vaccination coverage assessment and timely dissemination of results to guide programmatic decision-making. Effectively monitoring vaccination coverage, coupled with implementation of data-driven interventions, is essential to maintain protection from VPD outbreaks in the region and the mainland United States.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination coverage is typically measured as the proportion of individuals who have received recommended vaccine doses by the date of assessment. This approach does not provide information about receipt of vaccines by the recommended age, which is critical for ensuring optimal protection from vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). OBJECTIVE: To assess vaccination timeliness in the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), and the projected impact of suboptimal vaccination in the event of an outbreak. METHODS: Timeliness of the 4th dose of diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) and 1st dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR) among children 24-35 months was assessed in FSM. Both doses are defined as on time if administered from 361 through 395 days in age. Timeliness was calculated by one-way frequency analysis, and dose delays, measured in months after recommended age, were described using inverse Kaplan-Meier analysis. A time-series susceptible-exposed-infected-recovery (TSEIR) model simulated measles outbreaks in populations with on time and late vaccination. RESULTS: Total coverage for the 4th dose of DTaP ranged from 36.6% to 98.8%, and for the 1st dose of MMR ranged from 80.9% to 100.0% across FSM states. On time coverage for the 4th dose of DTaP ranged from 3.2% to 52.3%, and for the 1st dose of MMR ranged from 21.1% to 66.9%. Maximum and median dose delays beyond the recommended age varied by state. TSEIR models predicted 10.8-13.7% increases in measles cases during an outbreak based on these delays. CONCLUSIONS: In each of the FSM states, a substantial proportion of children received DTaP and MMR doses outside the recommended timeframe. Children who receive vaccinations later than recommended remain susceptible to VPDs during the period they remain unvaccinated, which may have a substantial impact on health systems during an outbreak. Immunization programs should consider vaccination timeliness in addition to coverage as a measure of susceptibility to VPDs in young children.

OBJECTIVE: We compared estimates of childhood influenza vaccination coverage by health status, age, and racial/ethnic group across eight consecutive influenza seasons (2004 through 2012) based on two survey systems to assess trends in childhood influenza vaccination coverage in the U.S. METHODS: We used National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and National Immunization Survey-Flu (NIS-Flu) data to estimate receipt of at least one dose of influenza vaccination among children aged 6 months to 17 years based on parental report. We computed estimates using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis methods. RESULTS: Based on the NHIS, overall influenza vaccination coverage with at least one dose of influenza vaccine among children increased from 16.2% during the 2004-2005 influenza season to 47.1% during the 2011-2012 influenza season. Children with health conditions that put them at high risk for complications from influenza had higher influenza vaccination coverage than children without these health conditions for all the seasons studied. In seven of the eight seasons studied, there were no significant differences in influenza vaccination coverage between non-Hispanic black and non-Hispanic white children. Influenza vaccination coverage estimates for children were slightly higher based on NIS-Flu data compared with NHIS data for the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 influenza seasons (4.1 and 4.4 percentage points higher, respectively); both NIS-Flu and NHIS estimates had similar patterns of decreasing vaccination coverage with increasing age. CONCLUSIONS: Although influenza vaccination coverage among children continued to increase, by the 2011-2012 influenza season, only slightly less than half of U.S. children were vaccinated against influenza. Much improvement is needed to ensure all children aged ≥6 months are vaccinated annually against influenza.

BACKGROUND: Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months. The objective of this study was to assess trends in racial/ethnic disparities in influenza vaccination coverage among adults in the United States. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2007-2012 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to assess influenza vaccination coverage by age, presence of medical conditions, and racial/ethnic groups during the 2007-08 through 2011-12 seasons. RESULTS: During the 2011-12 season, influenza vaccination coverage was significantly lower among non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics compared with non-Hispanic whites among most of the adult subgroups, with smaller disparities observed for adults age 18-49 years compared with other age groups. Vaccination coverage for non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic adults increased significantly from the 2007-08 through the 2011-12 season for most of the adult subgroups based on the NHIS (test for trend, P < .05). Coverage gaps between racial/ethnic minorities and non-Hispanic whites persisted at similar levels from the 2007-08 through the 2011-12 seasons, with similar results from the NHIS and BRFSS. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination coverage among most racial/ethnic groups increased from the 2007-08 through the 2011-12 seasons, but substantial racial and ethnic disparities remained in most age groups. Targeted efforts are needed to improve coverage and reduce these disparities.