Immunisation: rationale for IPV after OPV type 2 withdrawal: practice question

A Pediatrics question in the style of the NEET PG paper. Answer it first, then read why the right option is right and why each of the others is wrong.

Try it

Pediatrics · Immunisation: rationale for IPV after OPV type 2 withdrawal

Sample item

Globally, the trivalent oral polio vaccine was replaced by a bivalent vaccine containing types 1 and 3. Why was inactivated polio vaccine added to routine schedules at the same time?

ATo avoid the need for the birth dose of OPVBTo protect children from type 3 virus, which OPV does not coverCTo replace the bivalent OPV completely within one yearDTo provide protection against type 2 poliovirus after the type 2 OPV component was withdrawn

Original practice item, not a recalled exam question. Nothing here is recorded.

The answer and the reasoning

D. To provide protection against type 2 poliovirus after the type 2 OPV component was withdrawn

Type 2 wild poliovirus was declared eradicated, and type 2 OPV was withdrawn because it was the main cause of vaccine-derived outbreaks. IPV gives type 2 immunity without any risk of reversion, and it acts as a safeguard if type 2 is reintroduced. OPV types 1 and 3 continue in the schedule.

Option by option

A. To avoid the need for the birth dose of OPV
The OPV zero dose remains in the Indian schedule and is not replaced by IPV.
B. To protect children from type 3 virus, which OPV does not cover
Bivalent OPV already contains type 3, so type 3 is covered.
C. To replace the bivalent OPV completely within one year
IPV was added to the schedule alongside bivalent OPV, not to replace it.
D. To provide protection against type 2 poliovirus after the type 2 OPV component was withdrawn (correct)
Correct. IPV supplies type 2 immunity once the type 2 OPV component is removed.

Source note: Original NextPrep sample item — pending expert review. This item is original practice material awaiting independent expert review, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.

Questions about this Pediatrics question

What is the answer to this Pediatrics question?

The best answer is D, To provide protection against type 2 poliovirus after the type 2 OPV component was withdrawn. Type 2 wild poliovirus was declared eradicated, and type 2 OPV was withdrawn because it was the main cause of vaccine-derived outbreaks.

Why is "To avoid the need for the birth dose of OPV" not the answer?

The OPV zero dose remains in the Indian schedule and is not replaced by IPV.

Why is "To protect children from type 3 virus, which OPV does not cover" not the answer?

Bivalent OPV already contains type 3, so type 3 is covered.

Why is "To replace the bivalent OPV completely within one year" not the answer?

IPV was added to the schedule alongside bivalent OPV, not to replace it.

What concept does this question test?

It tests Immunisation: rationale for IPV after OPV type 2 withdrawal in Pediatrics. IPV gives type 2 immunity without any risk of reversion, and it acts as a safeguard if type 2 is reintroduced. OPV types 1 and 3 continue in the schedule.

How hard is this question?

We tag it as an application question: it asks you to use a fact on a patient or a finding. The tag is our own editorial judgement, not an official difficulty rating, so read the reason for every option, not only the answer.

How should I study Immunisation: rationale for IPV after OPV type 2 withdrawal?

Memorise milestones and the vaccine schedule as tables and revise them often. Then use the flashcards and the other Pediatrics questions on this site to test what stuck.

Is this a real NEET PG question?

No. It is an original practice item (editorial status: sample, version 1). NextPrep does not publish recalled or leaked questions, and independent faculty review of this item has not been completed yet, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.