Interventions aimed at improving immunization rates

Estimating Vaccine Hesitancy in Colorado by Using Immunization Information System Data

OBJECTIVES

Vaccine hesitancy is a complex issue that threatens global health. We used data from the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS) to quantify vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

We examined immunization records from CIIS for patients age 2 up to 9 months to estimate vaccine hesitancy by tabulating the number of doses received per visit and comparing it with the number of expected doses based on recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. We calculated the percentage of patients in each vaccine hesitancy group who were up to date on the 7-antigen series by age 35 months. We examined the distribution of vaccine-hesitant populations among vaccination providers who report to CIIS to estimate the difference in vaccine-hesitant patient populations among vaccination providers in Colorado.

RESULTS

Of 201 450 patients, 5147 (2.6%) consistently limited the number of shots received at each visit as compared with recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices; 166 927 (82.9%) patients did not limit the number of shots received; 5693 (2.8%) limited the number of shots received at >1 visit but not all visits; and 23 683 (11.8%) limited the number of shots received at only 1 visit. We found differences in vaccine hesitancy distributions among certain Colorado vaccination providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunization information system data, although sometimes incomplete, offer an opportunity to investigate state-level vaccine hesitancy. Areas of future research include performing similar analyses over time and determining geographic and socioeconomic factors that contribute to vaccine hesitancy.

Barriers and facilitators of vaccine hesitancy for COVID-19, influenza, and pertussis during pregnancy and in mothers of infants under two years: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Vaccination during pregnancy has been repeatedly demonstrated to be safe and effective in protecting against infection and associated harms for the mother, developing baby, and subsequent infant. However, maternal vaccination uptake remains low compared to the general population.

OBJECTIVES

An umbrella review to explore the barriers and facilitators to Influenza, Pertussis and COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and within 2 years after childbirth, and to inform interventions to encourage uptake (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022327624).

METHODS

Ten databases were searched for systematic reviews published between 2009 and April 2022 exploring the predictors of vaccination or effectiveness of interventions to improve vaccination for Pertussis, Influenza, or COVD-19. Both pregnant women and mothers of infants under two years were included. Barriers and facilitators were organised using the WHO model of determinants of vaccine hesitancy through narrative synthesis, the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist assessed review quality, and the degree of overlap of primary studies was calculated.

RESULTS

19 reviews were included. Considerable overlap was found especially for intervention reviews, and the quality of the included reviews and their primary studies varied. Sociodemographic factors were specifically researched in the context of COVID-19, exerting a small but consistent effect on vaccination. Concerns around the safety of vaccination particularly for the developing baby were a main barrier. While key facilitators included recommendation from a healthcare professional, previous vaccination, knowledge around vaccination, and communication with and support from social groups. Intervention reviews indicated multi-component interventions involving human interaction to be most effective.

CONCLUSION

The main barriers and facilitators for Influenza, Pertussis and COVID-19 vaccination have been identified and constitute the foundation for policy development at the international level. Ethnicity, socioeconomic status, concerns about vaccine safety and side effects, and lack of healthcare professionals' recommendations, are the most relevant factors of vaccine hesitancy. Adapting educational interventions to specific populations, person-to-person interaction, healthcare professionals' involvement, and interpersonal support are important strategies to improve uptake.

The Contribution of Reminder-Recall to Vaccine Delivery Efforts: A Narrative Review

Reminders, alerting patients to the need for vaccines that will be due in the future, and recall messages, informing patients about vaccines that are overdue, have been shown to improve immunization rates for children and adolescents in numerous systematic reviews. Therefore, reminder and recall interventions (R/R) are recommended by the Task Force on Community Preventive Services for increasing immunization rates on the basis of strong evidence. R/R messages can be delivered by mail (letter or postcard), via personal or auto-dialer phone calls, by text or e-mail or via patient-portals and can simply be alerts to action or can include educational material with the aim of motivating patients to seek vaccination. R/R has also been shown to be a relatively low-cost intervention with high cost-effectiveness compared with other recommended strategies. However, although R/R as a strategy is consistently effective and cost-effective overall, there is wide variation in the impact of R/R by 1) modality of how it is delivered, 2) the targeted vaccine, 3) the age group, and 4) whether the R/R is conducted centrally by a health system or Immunization Information System or by individual practices. This narrative review summarizes the literature about effectiveness of R/R within each of these categories. We also discuss limitations of R/R, with a focus on the potential impact of parental vaccine hesitancy in blunting its effectiveness and problems with data integrity, on which R/R relies. We also discuss challenges to sustaining R/R efforts, including potential methods of funding for R/R efforts.

Evidence-Based Strategies for Clinical Organizations to Address COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy

The success of vaccination programs is contingent upon irrefutable scientific safety data combined with high rates of public acceptance and population coverage. Vaccine hesitancy, characterized by lack of confidence in vaccination and/or complacency about vaccination that may lead to delay or refusal of vaccination despite the availability of services, threatens to undermine the success of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programs. The rapid pace of vaccine development, misinformation in popular and social media, the polarized sociopolitical environment, and the inherent complexities of large-scale vaccination efforts may undermine vaccination confidence and increase complacency about COVID-19 vaccination. Although the experience of recent lethal surges of COVID-19 infections has underscored the value of COVID-19 vaccines, ensuring population uptake of COVID-19 vaccination will require application of multilevel, evidence-based strategies to influence behavior change and address vaccine hesitancy. Recent survey research evaluating public attitudes in the United States toward the COVID-19 vaccine reveals substantial vaccine hesitancy. Building upon efforts at the policy and community level to ensure population access to COVID-19 vaccination, a strong health care system response is critical to address vaccine hesitancy. Drawing on the evidence base in social, behavioral, communication, and implementation science, we review, summarize, and encourage use of interpersonal, individual-level, and organizational interventions within clinical organizations to address this critical gap and improve population adoption of COVID-19 vaccination.

[Digital vaccination management systems may improve immunization rates in primary healthcare]

In 2018, the Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO) included various practice-relevant procedures in their recommendations, such as correct vaccination management. Vaccination management thereby follows the established quality management (QM) standards of DIN EN ISO 9000 ff. and may be promoted through the implementation of vaccination software systems.This article evaluates the significance and feasibility of standardized vaccination management in the daily practice of physicians in primary healthcare. Consequently, a selective literature research was conducted, including public recommendations, clinical trials, observational studies, and systematic reviews.Four levels of vaccination management can be identified: based on the patient, the vaccine, the personnel, and the storage. Many studies indicate an increase of immunization rates in Germany after the implementation of reminder and recall systems for healthcare workers and patients. Additionally, such software solutions might provide assistance in further aspects of vaccination management, such as stock documentation, constant follow-up orders or medical billing terms. Although many physicians in the primary healthcare system strive for a high quality vaccination process, the importance of the mentioned QM criteria is underestimated in Germany and the usage of vaccination software is rather uncommon.To improve the daily workflow in primary healthcare and to achieve a long-term increase of immunization rates in Germany, vaccination management should be promoted. Improvements could be achieved, especially through the use of appropriate digital vaccination management systems.

Evaluating the impact of multilevel evidence-based implementation strategies to enhance provider recommendation on human papillomavirus vaccination rates among an empaneled primary care patient population: a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial

Background

Each year, human papillomavirus (HPV) causes 30,000 cancers in the USA despite the availability of effective and safe vaccines. Uptake of HPV vaccine has been low and lags behind other adolescent vaccines. This protocol describes a multilevel intervention to improve HPV vaccination rates.

Methods

Using a cluster randomized trial, we will evaluate the independent and combined impact of two evidence-based implementation strategies with innovative enhancements on HPV vaccination rates for female and male patients. The clusters are six primary care sites providing care to pediatric populations. We will use a stepped-wedge cluster randomized design, including process evaluation, to test the hypothesis that compared with the current course of care and a practice-level intervention using reminder-recall interventions coupled with provider-level audit and feedback with education increases HPV vaccination rates in exposed clusters. The factorial design allows us to use a single trial to test these two interventions and to assess each individually and in combination. Our design has four 12-month steps. The first step will be a baseline period; data collected during it will provide a within-practice control group for each cluster. Second, two clusters will be randomly assigned to receive intervention 1 (reminder and recall), and two clusters will be randomly selected to receive intervention 2 (audit and feedback with education). Third, the other two clusters will be randomly allocated to intervention 1 or 2. Clusters initially with intervention 1 will be randomly allocated to 1 + 2 or 1; clusters initially with intervention 2 will be randomly allocated to 1 + 2 or 2. Fourth, all clusters will receive both interventions. To ensure balance of patient numbers across interventions, we will use block randomization at the first step, with the six clusters grouped into three pairs according to volume. Our primary outcome will be vaccination rates.

Discussion

Results of our clinical trial and process evaluation will provide evidence showing whether practice- and provider-level interventions improve HPV vaccination rates and will offer insight into contextual factors associated with direction and magnitude of trial outcomes.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03501992, registered April 18, 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-018-0778-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluation of the Immunization Program in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina - Possible Modalities for Improvement

INTRODUCTION

Immunization is a lifelong preventive activity that helps prevent/reduce disease, prevent/ reduce mortality and prevent disability from specific infectious diseases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Authors of this paper researched the WHO extended program of mandatory immunization of children from birth to the age of 18 years and analyzed how it has been implemented in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FB&H), because the guidelines of the specialist physician societies on immunization of adults, elderly people and risk groups of the population are missing.

RESULTS

The paper presents the basic characteristics of the immunization program in the FB&H and the world, points to the most frequent problems that the doctor practitioner has in carrying out immunization, and also presents possible modalities of improving immunization. It is pointed out the need to develop the national guidelines and individual immunization booklets, introduction of electronic registration of immunization, and continuous education of health professionals of all profiles, population, educators, teachers and harmonious partnership relations of health workers, population, social entities and the media with the aim of achieving an appropriate lifelong vaccination.

Patient reminder and recall interventions to improve immunization rates

BACKGROUND

Immunization rates for children and adults are rising, but coverage levels have not reached optimal goals. As a result, vaccine-preventable diseases still occur. In an era of increasing complexity of immunization schedules, rising expectations about the performance of primary care, and large demands on primary care providers, it is important to understand and promote interventions that work in primary care settings to increase immunization coverage. One common theme across immunization programs in many nations involves the challenge of implementing a population-based approach and identifying all eligible recipients, for example the children who should receive the measles vaccine. However, this issue is gradually being addressed through the availability of immunization registries and electronic health records. A second common theme is identifying the best strategies to promote high vaccination rates. Three types of strategies have been studied: (1) patient-oriented interventions, such as patient reminder or recall, (2) provider interventions, and (3) system interventions, such as school laws. One of the most prominent intervention strategies, and perhaps best studied, involves patient reminder or recall systems. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of various types of patient reminder and recall interventions to improve receipt of immunizations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL to January 2017. We also searched grey literature and trial registers to January 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series evaluating immunization-focused patient reminder or recall interventions in children, adolescents, and adults who receive immunizations in any setting. We included no-intervention control groups, standard practice activities that did not include immunization patient reminder or recall, media-based activities aimed at promoting immunizations, or simple practice-based awareness campaigns. We included receipt of any immunizations as eligible outcome measures, excluding special travel immunizations. We excluded patients who were hospitalized for the duration of the study period.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. We present results for individual studies as relative rates using risk ratios, and risk differences for randomized trials, and as absolute changes in percentage points for controlled before-after studies. We present pooled results for randomized trials using the random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

The 75 included studies involved child, adolescent, and adult participants in outpatient, community-based, primary care, and other settings in 10 countries.Patient reminder or recall interventions, including telephone and autodialer calls, letters, postcards, text messages, combination of mail or telephone, or a combination of patient reminder or recall with outreach, probably improve the proportion of participants who receive immunization (risk ratio (RR) of 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 1.35; risk difference of 8%) based on moderate certainty evidence from 55 studies with 138,625 participants.Three types of single-method reminders improve receipt of immunizations based on high certainty evidence: the use of postcards (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.30; eight studies; 27,734 participants), text messages (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.44; six studies; 7772 participants), and autodialer (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.32; five studies; 11,947 participants). Two types of single-method reminders probably improve receipt of immunizations based on moderate certainty evidence: the use of telephone calls (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.54; seven studies; 9120 participants) and letters to patients (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38; 27 studies; 81,100 participants).Based on high certainty evidence, reminders improve receipt of immunizations for childhood (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.29; risk difference of 8%; 23 studies; 31,099 participants) and adolescent vaccinations (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.42; risk difference of 7%; 10 studies; 30,868 participants). Reminders probably improve receipt of vaccinations for childhood influenza (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.99; risk difference of 22%; five studies; 9265 participants) and adult influenza (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.43; risk difference of 9%; 15 studies; 59,328 participants) based on moderate certainty evidence. They may improve receipt of vaccinations for adult pneumococcus, tetanus, hepatitis B, and other non-influenza vaccinations based on low certainty evidence although the confidence interval includes no effect of these interventions (RR 2.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 4.78; four studies; 8065 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patient reminder and recall systems, in primary care settings, are likely to be effective at improving the proportion of the target population who receive immunizations.

Acceptability of Reminders for Immunization Appointments via Mobile Devices by Mothers in Ilorin, Nigeria: A Cross-sectional Study

Objectives

Immunization coverage in Nigeria remains low despite the protection it confers. Reminders via mobile phones may be deployed as a means of improving vaccination coverage but requires the participation and cooperation of the caregiver. Therefore, we evaluated the acceptability of reminders for immunization appointment by mothers in Ilorin, Nigeria.

Methods

This descriptive cross-sectional study recruited 526 mothers from two public hospitals in Ilorin. Semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect information on ownership and access to phones, willingness to receive reminders, household, antenatal, and delivery characteristics.

Results

The majority (92.7%) of mothers had a personal phone, and all willingly provided contact details. Over half (69.0%) of mothers were willing to receive reminders. Postsecondary education (odds ratio (OR) = 1.958; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.232-3.111) and antenatal care attendance by mothers (OR = 8.381; 95% CI: 2.495-28.170) were significant determinants of mothers willingness to receive reminders. Mothers with less than or equal to four children had a three-fold increased odds of wanting reminders. Artisan mothers were less likely to want reminders compared with unemployed mothers (OR = 0.506; 95% CI: 0.291-0.847).

Conclusions

Most mothers are willing to receive reminders on immunization appointments via their mobile phone. Determinants of maternal willingness to receive reminders include mothers with less than four children, postsecondary education, and antenatal care attendance. Program planners should consider utilizing reminders as a strategy to increase the immunization uptake with access to contact details making this feasible.

Effectiveness and Cost of Bidirectional Text Messaging for Adolescent Vaccines and Well Care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and cost of bidirectional short messaging service in increasing rates of vaccination and well child care (WCC) among adolescents.

METHODS

We included all adolescents needing a recommended adolescent vaccine (n = 4587) whose parents had a cell-phone number in 5 private and 2 safety-net pediatric practices. Adolescents were randomized to intervention (n = 2228) or control (n = 2359). Parents in the intervention group received up to 3 personalized short messaging services with response options 1 (clinic will call to schedule), 2 (parent will call clinic), or STOP (no further short messaging service). Primary outcomes included completion of all needed services, WCC only, all needed vaccinations, any vaccination, and missed opportunity for vaccination.

RESULTS

Intervention patients were more likely to complete all needed services (risk ratio [RR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.53), all needed vaccinations (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.12-1.50), and any vaccination (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.20-1.54). Seventy-five percent of control patients had a missed opportunity versus 69% of intervention (P = .002). There was not a significant difference for WCC visits. Responding that the clinic should call to schedule ("1") was associated with the highest effect size for completion of all needed services (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.41-2.54). Net cost ranged from $855 to $3394 per practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Bidirectional short messaging service to parents was effective at improving rates for all adolescent vaccinations and for all needed services, especially among parents who responded they desired a call from the practice.

Overcoming Challenges to Childhood Immunizations Status

Vaccines are one of the greatest public health achievements, preventing both mortality and morbidity. However, overall immunization rates are still below the 90% target for Healthy People 2020. There remain significant disparities in immunization rates between children of different racial/ethnic groups, as well as among economically disadvantaged populations. There are systemic issues and challenges in providing access to immunization opportunities. In addition, vaccine hesitancy contributes to underimmunization. Multiple strategies are needed to improve immunization rates, including improving access to vaccines and minimizing financial barriers to families. Vaccine status should be assessed and vaccines given at all possible opportunities.

Development of a bundle measure for preventive service delivery to infants in primary care

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

In the United States, paediatric patients receive only 41% of indicated preventive services. Past improvement efforts have not bundled preventive services to measure the reliability with which infants' physical, developmental and emotional needs are all addressed. We aimed to create a comprehensive bundle measure that reflects reliable delivery of preventive services during primary care visits, as well as overall preventive service status of a population of patients served by three primary care centres.

METHOD

Data were collected from electronic health records for cohorts of infants < 14 months old with at least one visit to one of three primary care centres. Immunizations, lead screening, developmental screening and screening for biopsychosocial risk factors (gestational age, parental depression, food insecurity) were chosen by local expert consensus for inclusion in the preventive services bundle measure. Monthly measures of preventive service status at 14 months of age were constructed. A visit-level bundle measure of preventive service delivery was also created. To obtain a baseline for improvement work, bundle completion rates were calculated for infants born in May 2011. Visit-level performance was measured for visits from July to August 2012.

RESULTS

Among 278 patients born in May 2011, 22% of patients received the entire bundle of preventive services by 14 months of age. On a visit level, patients received all indicated services at 58% of visits.

CONCLUSION

A novel bundle measure can be used to characterize delivery of preventive services and drive improvement at both an individual visit level and a population level.

Age-specific strategies for immunization reminders and recalls: a registry-based randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Although previous studies have found reminder/recall to be effective in increasing immunization rates, little guidance exists regarding the specific ages at which it is optimal to send reminder/recall notices.

PURPOSE

To assess the relative effectiveness of centralized reminder/recall strategies targeting age-specific vaccination milestones among children in urban areas during June 2008-June 2009.

METHODS

Three reminder/recall strategies used capabilities of the Michigan Care Improvement Registry (MCIR), a statewide immunization information system: a 7-month recall strategy, a 12-month reminder strategy, and a 19-month recall strategy. Eligible children were randomized to notification (intervention) or no notification groups (control). Primary study outcomes included MCIR-recorded immunization activity (administration of ≥1 new dose, entry of ≥1 historic dose, entry of immunization waiver) within 60 days following each notification cycle.

RESULTS

A total of 10,175 children were included: 2,072 for the 7-month recall, 3,502 for the 12-month reminder, and 4,601 for the 19-month recall. Immunization activity was similar between notification versus no notification groups at both 7 and 12 months. Significantly more 19-month-old children in the recall group (26%) had immunization activity compared to their counterparts who did not receive a recall notification (19%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although recall notifications can positively affect immunization activity, the effect may vary by targeted age group. Many 7- and 12-month-olds had immunization activity following reminder/recall; however, levels of activity were similar irrespective of notification, suggesting that these groups were likely to receive medical care or immunization services without prompting.

Enhancing the care navigation model: potential roles for health sciences librarians

This study analyzed the overlap between roles and activities that health care navigators perform and competencies identified by the Medical Library Association’s (MLA’s) educational policy statement.Roles and activities that health care navigators perform were gleaned from published literature. Once common roles and activities that health care navigators perform were identified, MLA competencies were mapped against those roles and activities to identify areas of overlap. The greatest extent of correspondence occurred in patient empowerment and support. Further research is warranted to determine the extent to which health sciences librarians might assume responsibility for roles and activities that health care navigators perform

Seasonal influenza vaccination at school: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccination coverage for U.S. school-aged children is below the 80% national goal. Primary care practices may not have the capacity to vaccinate all children during influenza vaccination season. No real-world models of school-located seasonal influenza (SLV-I) programs have been tested.

PURPOSE

Determine the feasibility, sustainability, and impact of an SLV-I program providing influenza vaccination to elementary school children during the school day.

DESIGN

In this pragmatic randomized controlled trial of SLV-I during two vaccination seasons, schools were randomly assigned to SLV-I versus standard of care. Seasonal influenza vaccine receipt, as recorded in the state immunization information system (IIS), was measured.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Intervention and control schools were located in a single western New York county. Participation (intervention or control) included the sole urban school district and suburban districts (five in Year 1, four in Year 2).

INTERVENTION

After gathering parental consent and insurance information, live attenuated and inactivated seasonal influenza vaccines were offered in elementary schools during the school day.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Data on receipt of ≥1 seasonal influenza vaccination in Year 1 (2009-2010) and Year 2 (2010-2011) were collected on all student grades K through 5 at intervention and control schools from the IIS in the Spring of 2010 and 2011, respectively. Additionally, coverage achieved through SLV-I was compared to coverage of children vaccinated elsewhere. Preliminary data analysis for Year 1 occurred in Spring 2010; final quantitative analysis for both years was completed in late Fall 2012.

RESULTS

Results are shown for 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, respectively: Children enrolled in suburban SLV-I versus control schools had vaccination coverage of 47% vs 36%, and 52% vs 36% (p<0.0001 both years). In urban areas, coverage was 36% vs 26%, and 31% vs 25% (p<0.001 both years). On multilevel logistic analysis with three nested levels (student, school, school district) during both vaccination seasons, children were more likely to be vaccinated in SLV-I versus control schools; ORs were 1.6 (95% CI=1.4, 1.9; p<0.001) and 1.5 (95% CI=1.3, 1.8; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Delivering influenza vaccine during school is a promising approach to improving pediatric influenza vaccination coverage.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.govNCT01224301.

High uptake of HPV immunisation in Scotland--perspectives on maximising uptake

In September 2008, Scotland introduced a national human papillomavirus (HPV) immunisation programme with bivalent HPV vaccine, to prevent cervical cancer. This school-based programme routinely vaccinates girls aged between 12 and 13 years. A catch-up campaign, running over three years, also began at this time, offering vaccination to all girls aged 13 years to under 18 years old. The HPV immunisation campaign presented challenges due to this vaccine being targeted to girls in school and older girls who had left school. Following a long and comprehensive planning process, this campaign was successfully implemented across Scotland, delivering high vaccine uptake of 91.4% for three doses of vaccine in the first year (September 2008 to August 2009) for the routine cohort and 90.1% in the second year (September 2009 to August 2010) for the routine cohort. We describe the planning process, challenges and implementation strategies employed to achieve this high uptake.

Population-based versus practice-based recall for childhood immunizations: a randomized controlled comparative effectiveness trial

OBJECTIVES

We compared the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of population-based recall (Pop-recall) versus practice-based recall (PCP-recall) at increasing immunizations among preschool children.

METHODS

This cluster-randomized trial involved children aged 19 to 35 months needing immunizations in 8 rural and 6 urban Colorado counties. In Pop-recall counties, recall was conducted centrally using the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS). In PCP-recall counties, practices were invited to attend webinar training using CIIS and offered financial support for mailings. The percentage of up-to-date (UTD) and vaccine documentation were compared 6 months after recall. A mixed-effects model assessed the association between intervention and whether a child became UTD.

RESULTS

Ten of 195 practices (5%) implemented recall in PCP-recall counties. Among children needing immunizations, 18.7% became UTD in Pop-recall versus 12.8% in PCP-recall counties (P < .001); 31.8% had documented receipt of 1 or more vaccines in Pop-recall versus 22.6% in PCP-recall counties (P < .001). Relative risk estimates from multivariable modeling were 1.23 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10, 1.37) for becoming UTD and 1.26 (95% CI = 1.15, 1.38) for receipt of any vaccine. Costs for Pop-recall versus PCP-recall were $215 versus $1981 per practice and $17 versus $62 per child brought UTD.

CONCLUSIONS

Population-based recall conducted centrally was more effective and cost-effective at increasing immunization rates in preschool children.

A randomized trial of the effect of centralized reminder/recall on immunizations and preventive care visits for adolescents

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of a managed care-based patient reminder/recall system on immunization rates and preventive care visits among low-income adolescents.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial between December 2009 and December 2010 that assigned adolescents aged 11-17 years to one of three groups: mailed letter, telephone reminders, or control. Publicly insured youths (n = 4115) were identified in 37 participating primary care practices. The main outcome measures were immunization rates for routine vaccines (meningococcus, pertussis, HPV) and preventive visit rates at study end.

RESULTS

Intervention and control groups were similar at baseline for demographics, immunization rates, and preventive visits. Among adolescents who were behind at the start, immunization rates at study end increased by 21% for mailed (P < .01 vs control), 17% for telephone (P < .05), and 13% for control groups. The proportion of adolescents with a preventive visit (within 12 months) was: mailed (65%; P < .01), telephone (63%; P < .05), and controls (59%). The number needed to treat for an additional fully vaccinated adolescent was 14 for mailed and 25 for telephone reminders; for an additional preventive visit, it was 17 and 29. The intervention cost $18.78 (mailed) or $16.68 (phone) per adolescent per year to deliver. The cost per additional adolescent fully vaccinated was $463.99 for mailed and $714.98 for telephone; the cost per additional adolescent receiving a preventive visit was $324.75 and $487.03.

CONCLUSIONS

Managed care-based mail or telephone reminder/recall improved adolescent immunizations and preventive visits, with modest costs and modest impact.

Factors Affecting the Acceptance of Pandemic Influenza A H1N1 Vaccine amongst Essential Service Providers: A Cross Sectional Study

Although mentioned in the UK pandemic plan, essential service providers were not among the priority groups. They may be important targets of future influenza pandemic vaccination campaigns. Therefore, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among 380 employees from West Midlands police headquarters and 15 operational command units in the West Midlands Area during December 2009–February 2010 to identify factors affecting intention to accept the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) vaccine. One hundred and ninety nine (52.4%) employees completed the questionnaire. 39.7% were willing to accept the vaccine. The most common reasons for intention to accept were worry about catching Swine Flu (n = 42, 53.2%) and about infecting others (n = 40, 50.6%). The most common reason for declination was worry about side effects (n = 45, 57.0%). The most important factor predicting vaccine uptake was previous receipt of seasonal vaccine (OR 7.9 (95% CI 3.4, 18.5)). Employees aged <40 years, males, current smokers, and those who perceived a greater threat and severity of swine flu were also more likely to agree to the vaccine. The findings of this study could be used to improve future pandemic immunization strategies. Targeted education programs should be used to address misconceptions; the single most important factor which might lead to a large improvement in uptake is to allay concern about side effects.

Increasing inner-city adult influenza vaccination rates: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

In a population of seniors served by urban primary care centers, we evaluated the effect of the practice-based intervention on influenza immunization rates and disparities in vaccination rates by race/ethnicity and insurance status.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial during 2003-2004 tested patient tracking/recall/outreach and provider prompts on improving influenza immunization rates. Patients aged > or = 65 years in six large inner-city primary care practices were randomly allocated to study or control group. Influenza immunization coverage was measured prior to enrollment and on the end date.

RESULTS

At study end, immunization rates were greater for the intervention group than for the control group (64% vs. 22%, p < 0.0001). When controlling for other factors, the intervention group was more than six times as likely to receive influenza vaccine. The intervention was effective across gender, race/ ethnicity, age, and insurance subgroups. Among the intervention group, 3.5% of African Americans and 3.2% of white people refused influenza immunization.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient tracking/recall/outreach and provider prompts were intensive but successful approaches to increasing seasonal influenza immunization rates among this group of inner-city seniors.

Improving influenza vaccination rates by targeting individuals not seeking early seasonal vaccination

BACKGROUND

Influenza morbidity and mortality remain high in the United States although vaccination clearly improves health outcomes and reduces health expenditures. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of mail and telephone reminder strategies on improving existing clinic influenza vaccination rates among those not seeking early seasonal vaccination.

METHODS

In mid-November, we randomized 1371 patients at a hypertension clinic into 1 of 2 intervention groups, a mail reminder group (letter plus the Centers for Disease Control [CDC] Influenza Vaccine Information Statement) or a phone reminder group (same information via a personal phone call), or a control group. The following spring, records were reviewed for vaccination documentation. Patients without documentation were contacted by phone to identify whether vaccination for the current season had been obtained.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 884 patients (62% women, mean age 57.2 years old): 325 in the mail reminder group, 246 in the phone reminder group, and 313 represented the control group. Overall, 388 of these patients (44%) were vaccinated. Vaccination rates were significantly higher in the intervention groups, 46% for the mail reminder group (age and sex adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-2.5; P=.001) and 56% for the phone reminder group (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9-4.0; P<.0001), compared to 33% in the control group. Both interventions increased vaccination rates in all age/sex groups.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to earlier studies, this intervention occurred later in the influenza vaccination period excluding those who seek early vaccination and allowing interventions to target those less likely to receive vaccination. Compared to previous studies demonstrating only trivial or modest benefits, both mail and phone reminders effectively increased clinic vaccination rates in our group of patients.

A stepped intervention increases well-child care and immunization rates in a disadvantaged population

OBJECTIVE

To test a stepped intervention of reminder/recall/case management to increase infant well-child visits and immunization rates.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, controlled, practical, clinical trial with 811 infants born in an urban safety-net hospital and followed through 15 months of life. Step 1 (all infants) involved language-appropriate reminder postcards for every well-child visit. Step 2 (infants who missed an appointment or immunization) involved telephone reminders plus postcard and telephone recall. Step 3 (infants still behind on preventive care after steps 1 and 2) involved intensive case management and home visitation.

RESULTS

Infants in the intervention arm, compared with control infants, had significantly fewer days without immunization coverage in the first 15 months of life (109 vs 192 days P < .01) and were more likely to have >or=5 well-child visits (65% vs 47% P < .01). In multivariate analyses, infants in the intervention arm were more likely than control infants to be up to date with 12-month immunizations and to have had >or=5 well-child visits. The cost per child was $23.30 per month.

CONCLUSION

This stepped intervention of tracking and case management improved infant immunization status and receipt of preventive care in a population of high-risk urban infants of low socioeconomic status.

Trends in early childhood vaccination coverage: progress towards US Healthy People 2010 goals

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate trends in national vaccination coverage from 2000 to 2007 among children aged 19-35 months for at least four doses of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine (4+DTaP), three doses of poliovirus vaccine (3+Polio), one dose of measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (1+MMR), three doses of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine (3+Hib), three doses of hepatitis B vaccine (3+HepB), one dose of Varicella vaccine (1+Var), and the standard vaccine series of these six vaccines (4:3:1:3:3:1). To predict vaccination coverage levels in 2008-2010 for those vaccines that have not yet reached the Healthy People 2010 coverage targets of 90% for individual vaccines and 80% for the vaccine series.

METHODS

Data were analyzed for 167,086 children aged 19-35 months in the 2000-2007 National Immunization Survey. Vaccination coverage trends were analyzed with weighted least squares linear regression models. Nonlinear Weibull and logarithmic regression models were fitted to these past results, and extrapolation was used to predict vaccination coverage levels for 4+DTaP, 1+Var, and the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series from 2008 to 2010.

RESULTS

From 2000 to 2007, observed vaccination coverage increased significantly for four of the six vaccines and the standard vaccine series, and reached the 90% target for 3+Polio, 1+MMR, 3+Hib, and 3+HepB. Increases in coverage were not significant for 1+MMR and 3+Hib; however, coverage for these vaccines was consistently>90% throughout the study period. Both Weibull and logarithmic regression models predicted that coverage with 1+Var and the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series will surpass the 2010 target by 2008, while coverage with 4+DTaP will fall short of the target at 86% in 2010.

CONCLUSIONS

The United States is well on the way toward reaching most of the Healthy People 2010 objectives for early childhood vaccination coverage. Enhanced efforts are needed to ensure that these trends continue, and to increase coverage with 4+DTaP.

When and why children fall behind with vaccinations: missed visits and missed opportunities at milestone ages

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about when-and why-children fall behind in their recommended vaccinations. Vaccination status throughout the first 2 years of life was examined to identify vulnerable transition periods that account for attrition and to determine whether children fell behind because they missed vaccination visits or because of missed opportunities for simultaneous vaccination.

METHODS

Vaccination histories for 27,083 children aged 24-35 months in the 2006-2007 National Immunization Survey were analyzed to determine the vaccination status at each age in days, focusing on the milestone ages of 3, 5, 7, 16, 19, and 24 months. Also assessed were the percentage of children who fell behind between milestones and the percentage who did so due to the lack of a vaccination visit compared to a missed opportunity for simultaneous vaccination.

RESULTS

The percentage of children who fell behind from one milestone age to the next ranged from 9% during the interval from age 16 months to 19 months to 20% during the interval from age 7 months to age 16 months. Missed vaccination visits accounted for most attrition during the intervals from age 3 months to age 5 months, age 5 months to age 7 months, and age 16 months to age 19 months, while missed opportunities for simultaneous vaccination accounted for >90% of the children who fell behind during the interval from age 7 months to age 16 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Missed vaccination visits and missed opportunities for simultaneous vaccinations both must be addressed to reduce the number of children falling behind in their vaccinations. With one in five children falling behind during the interval from age 7 months to age 16 months--mostly as a result of missed opportunities for simultaneous vaccination--providers should focus on this time interval to deliver all of the recommended vaccinations that are due.

A comparison of populations vaccinated in a public service and in a private hospital setting in the same area

Background

Improving immunisation rates in risk groups is one of the main objectives in vaccination strategies. However, achieving high vaccination rates in children with chronic conditions is difficult. Different types of vaccine providers may differently attract high risk children.

Aim

To describe the characteristics of two populations of children who attended a private and a public immunisation provider in the same area. Secondarily, to determine if prevalence of patients with underlying diseases by type of provider differs and to study if the choice of different providers influences timeliness in immunisation.

Methods

We performed a cross-sectional study on parents of children 2 – 36 months of age who attended a private hospital immunisation service or a public immunisation office serving the same metropolitan area of Rome, Italy. Data on personal characteristics and immunisation history were collected through a face to face interview with parents of vaccinees, and compared by type of provider. Prevalence of underlying conditions was compared in the two populations. Timeliness in immunisation and its determinants were analysed through a logistic regression model.

Results

A total of 202 parents of children 2–36 months of age were interviewed; 104 were in the public office, and 98 in the hospital practice. Children immunised in the hospital were more frequently firstborn female children, breast fed for a longer period, with a lower birthweight, and more frequently with a previous hospitalisation. The prevalence of high risk children immunised in the hospital was 9.2 vs 0% in the public service (P = 0.001). Immunisation delay for due vaccines was higher in the hospital practice than in the public service (DTP, polio, HBV, and Hib: 39.8% vs 22.1%; P = 0.005). Anyway multivariate analyses did not reveal differences in timeliness between the public and private hospital settings.

Conclusion

Children with underlying diseases or a low birthweight were more frequently immunised in the hospital. This finding suggests that offering immunisations in a hospital setting may facilitate vaccination uptake in high risk groups. An integration between public and hospital practices and an effort to improve communication on vaccines to parents, may significantly increase immunisation rates in high risk groups and in the general population, and prevent immunisation delays.

Practice-proven interventions to increase vaccination rates and broaden the immunization season

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that most (73%) persons residing in the United States be vaccinated against influenza each year. The actual rate of influenza vaccination is substantially below target levels: about 60% of persons >or=65 years (target is 90%) and only 10% to 40% of other groups (target is 60% for younger persons who have risk factors and 60% for healthcare personnel). Vaccinating patients throughout the influenza vaccination season (from October into January and beyond)--providing access beyond the traditional "fall immunization season"--is an important step toward meeting the substantial need for influenza vaccination. Vaccination rates may also be increased by interventions that increase patient demand and access to vaccine and overcome practice-related barriers. Such interventions include vaccination-only clinics, standing orders, strong recommendations from healthcare providers, as well as reminder and recall efforts. For maximum impact on immunization rates, interventions should be combined into a multifaceted immunization program rather than used alone. Interventions that address site-specific needs, taking resources into account, should be implemented on a practice-by-practice basis. With supply of influenza vaccine now plentiful, efforts need to be focused on reducing missed vaccination opportunities and promoting vaccination beyond the traditional fall time frame to protect as many Americans as possible from serious and potentially deadly influenza infection.

Delivering adolescent vaccinations in the medical home: a new era?

BACKGROUND

Medical homes are health care settings that offer continuous, comprehensive, accessible primary care; these settings generally involve pediatric and family physician practices or community health centers but can also involve gynecologists or internists.

OBJECTIVES

In this article, we review available evidence on the role of the medical home in optimizing adolescent immunization delivery, particularly with respect to health care utilization patterns and barriers to vaccinations in medical homes, and solutions.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the existing immunization and adolescent literature and used a Delphi process to solicit opinions from content experts across the United States.

RESULTS

Most adolescents across the United States do have a medical home, and many pay a health care visit to their medical home within any given year. Barriers exist in regards to the receipt of adolescent immunizations, and they are related to the adolescent/family, health care provider, and health care system. Although few studies have evaluated adolescent vaccination delivery, many strategies recommended for childhood or adult vaccinations should be effective for adolescent vaccination delivery as well. These strategies include education of health care providers and adolescents/parents; having appropriate health insurance coverage; tracking and reminder/recall of adolescents who need vaccination; practice-level interventions to ensure that needed vaccinations are provided to eligible adolescents at the time of any health care visit; practice-level audits to measure vaccination coverage; and linkages across health care sites to exchange information about needed vaccinations. Medical homes should perform a quality improvement project to improve their delivery of adolescent vaccinations. Because many adolescents use a variety of health care sites, it is critical to effectively transfer vaccination information across health care settings to identify adolescents who are eligible for vaccinations and to encourage receipt of comprehensive preventive.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical homes are integral to both the delivery of adolescent immunizations and comprehensive adolescent preventive health care. Many strategies recommended for childhood and adult vaccinations should work for adolescent vaccinations and should be evaluated and implemented if they are successful. By incorporating evidence-based strategies and coordinating effectively with other health care sites used by adolescents, medical homes will be the pivotal settings for the delivery of adolescent vaccinations.

Educational outreach to promote screening for tuberculosis in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Tuberculosis is re-emerging as an important health problem in industrialised countries. Uncertainty surrounds the effect of public-health control options. We therefore aimed to assess a programme to promote screening for tuberculosis in a UK primary health care district.

METHODS

In a cluster randomised controlled trial, we randomised 50 of 52 (96%) eligible general practices in Hackney, London, UK, to receive an outreach programme that promoted screening for tuberculosis in people registering in primary care, or to continue with usual care. Screening was verbal, and proceeded to tuberculin skin testing, if appropriate. The primary outcome was the proportion of new cases of active tuberculosis identified in primary care. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00214708.

FINDINGS

Between June 1, 2002, and Oct 1, 2004, 44,986 and 48,984 patients registered with intervention and control practices, respectively. In intervention practices 57% (13,478 of 23,573) of people attending a registration health check were screened for tuberculosis compared with 0.4% (84 of 23 051) in control practices. Intervention practices showed increases in the diagnosis of active tuberculosis cases in primary care compared with control practices (66/141 [47%] vs 54/157 [34%], odds ratio (OR) 1.68, 95% CI 1.05-2.68, p=0.03). Intervention practices also had increases in diagnosis of latent tuberculosis (11/59 [19%] vs 5/68 [9%], OR 3.00, 0.98-9.20, p=0.055) and BCG coverage (mean BCG rate 26.8/1000 vs 3.8/1000, intervention rate ratio 9.52, 4.0-22.7, p<0.001).

INTERPRETATION

Our educational intervention for promotion of screening for tuberculosis in primary care improved identification of active and latent tuberculosis, and increased BCG coverage. Yield from screening was low, but was augmented by improved case-finding. Screening programmes in primary care should be considered as part of tuberculosis control initiatives in industrialised countries.

Can the ubiquitous power of mobile phones be used to improve health outcomes in developing countries?

BACKGROUND

The ongoing policy debate about the value of communications technology in promoting development objectives is diverse. Some view computer/web/phone communications technology as insufficient to solve development problems while others view communications technology as assisting all sections of the population. This paper looks at evidence to support or refute the idea that fixed and mobile telephones is, or could be, an effective healthcare intervention in developing countries.

METHODS

A Web-based and library database search was undertaken including the following databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, (nursing & allied health), Evidence Based Medicine (EBM), POPLINE, BIOSIS, and Web of Science, AIDSearch (MEDLINE AIDS/HIV Subset, AIDSTRIALS & AIDSDRUGS) databases.

RESULTS

Evidence can be found to both support and refute the proposition that fixed and mobile telephones is, or could be, an effective healthcare intervention in developing countries. It is difficult to generalize because of the different outcome measurements and the small number of controlled studies. There is almost no literature on using mobile telephones as a healthcare intervention for HIV, TB, malaria, and chronic conditions in developing countries. Clinical outcomes are rarely measured. Convincing evidence regarding the overall cost-effectiveness of mobile phone " telemedicine" is still limited and good-quality studies are rare. Evidence of the cost effectiveness of such interventions to improve adherence to medicines is also quite weak.

CONCLUSION

The developed world model of personal ownership of a phone may not be appropriate to the developing world in which shared mobile telephone use is important. Sharing may be a serious drawback to use of mobile telephones as a healthcare intervention in terms of stigma and privacy, but its magnitude is unknown. One advantage, however, of telephones with respect to adherence to medicine in chronic care models is its ability to create a multi-way interaction between patient and provider(s) and thus facilitate the dynamic nature of this relationship. Regulatory reforms required for proper operation of basic and value-added telecommunications services are a priority if mobile telecommunications are to be used for healthcare initiatives.

Comparison of parental report of blood lead testing in children enrolled in Medicaid with Medicaid claims data and blood lead surveillance reports

The purposes of this study were to identify the congruence of blood lead testing based on parental self-reports with Medicaid claims and blood lead surveillance records, and to determine factors associated with agreement between parental reports of blood lead tests and Medicaid claims or blood lead surveillance records. Data were obtained from a cross-sectional mailed survey of a randomly selected sample of parents of children 1-2 years old enrolled in Medicaid (n=532) and from existing Medicaid claims and blood lead surveillance records. Fifty-six percent of survey respondents reported their child had a blood lead test completed. Of these, only 56% could be confirmed with Medicaid claims/blood lead surveillance data. Logistic regression analysis revealed the odds of blood lead testing per parental report confirmed with Medicaid claims/blood lead surveillance data were 2.6 times greater if the child had > or =3 provider visits, 2.5 times greater if parents reported receiving a reminder about blood lead testing, 2.2 times greater if parents reported receiving information about lead poisoning, 1.6 times greater if residing in an urban county, and 1.5 times greater if the child was more than 2 years old. In conclusion, parents are not always aware if their child had a blood lead test. Information and reminders about blood lead testing should be distributed to parents of young children enrolled in Medicaid and frequently reviewed by healthcare providers.

How do caregivers know when to take their child for immunizations?

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccinations help reduce and eliminate many causes of morbidity and mortality among children. The objective of this study was to compare 4:3:1:3:3 (4+ doses of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine, 3+ doses of poliovirus vaccine, 1+ doses of measles-containing vaccine, 3+ doses of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine, and 3+ doses of hepatitis B vaccine) coverage among children whose caregivers learned by different methods when their child's most recent immunization was needed.

METHODS

Between July 2001 and December 2002, a portion of households receiving the National Immunization Survey were asked how they knew when to take the child in for his/her most recent immunization. Responses were post-coded into several categories: 'Doctor/nurse reminder at previous immunization visit', 'Shot card/record', 'Reminder/recall', and 'Other'. Respondents could give more than one answer. Children who did not receive any vaccines, had < or = 1 visits for vaccinations, or whose caregiver did not provide an answer to the question were excluded from analyses. Chi-square analyses were used to compare 4:3:1:3:3 coverage among 19-35 month old children.

RESULTS

Children whose caregivers indicated that a doctor/nurse told them at a previous immunization visit when to return for the next immunization had significantly greater 4:3:1:3:3 coverage than those who did not choose the response (77.2% vs. 70.1%, p < 0.01). However, no significant difference in coverage was found between households that did/did not indicate that reminder/recalls (71.0% vs. 75.5%, p = 0.24) helped them remember when to take their child for their most recent immunization visit; only borderline significance was found between those that did/did not choose shot cards (70.6% vs. 76.2%, p = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

A doctor or nurse's reminder during an immunization visit of the next scheduled immunization visit effectively encourages caregivers to bring children in for immunizations, providing an inexpensive and easy way to effectively increase immunization coverage.

[Flu vaccination in primary care: analysis of the process and proposals for increasing coverage]

INTRODUCTION

Flu vaccination (FV) in elderly patients at risk is linked to a 50%-60% reduction in hospital admissions and up to an 80% drop in deaths from complications arising from the illness. Equally clear benefits have been found for other risk groups, such as patients with chronic cardiovascular or respiratory diseases. The vaccine is cost-effective for both the elderly and other risk groups. Despite this, vaccination rates are low, even among health staff.

OBJECTIVES

To update our knowledge of FV by means of a review of the bibliography and to describe a series of interventions that have proved successful in increasing vaccination rates. PROGRAMME: To discover procedures, the following factors were analysed: the environment, patients and health professionals that condition vaccination, the characteristics of the health-care organisation for the vaccination campaign, and the clinical organisation of risk groups required.

DISCUSSION

After this analysis, certain communicated strategies that manage to increase vaccination coverage and others that could be introduced into primary care were discussed. We conclude that, given the clinical evidence available and the ease of introducing certain other interventions, improvement of flu vaccination procedures and increased vaccine coverage of patients at risk is not only advisable, but is an ethical imperative. Improvements that are within the possibilities of every primary care clinic could be introduced.

Beginning with the application in mind: designing and planning health behavior change interventions to enhance dissemination

Failing to retain an adequate number of study participants in behavioral intervention trials poses a threat to interpretation of study results and its external validity. This qualitative investigation describes the retention strategies promoted by the recruitment and retention committee of the Behavior Change Consortium, a group of 15 university-based sites funded by the National Institutes of Health to implement studies targeted toward disease prevention through behavior change. During biannual meetings, focus groups were conducted with all sites to determine barriers encountered in retaining study participants and strategies employed to address these barriers. All of the retention strategies reported were combined into 8 thematic retention categories. Those categories perceived to be most effective for retaining study participants were summarized and consistencies noted among site populations across the life course (e.g., older adults, adults, children, and adolescents). Further, possible discrepancies between site populations of varying health statuses are discussed, and an ecological framework is proposed for use in future investigations on retention.

Timeliness of childhood immunizations: a state-specific analysis

OBJECTIVE

We examined the timeliness of vaccine administration among children aged 24 to 35 months for each state of the United States and the District of Columbia.

METHODS

We analyzed the timeliness of vaccinations in the 2000-2002 National Immunization Survey. We used a modified Bonferroni adjustment to compare a reference state with all other states.

RESULTS

Receipt of all vaccinations as recommended ranged from 2% (Mississippi) to 26% (Massachusetts), with western states having less timeliness than eastern states.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination coverage measures usually focus on the number of vaccinations accumulated by specified ages. Our analysis of timeliness of administration shows that children rarely receive all vaccinations as recommended. State health departments can use timeliness of vaccinations along with other measures to determine children's susceptibility to vaccine-preventable diseases and to evaluate the quality of vaccination programs. States can use the modified Bonferroni comparison to appropriately compare their results with other states.

Provider response to different formats of the adult immunization schedule

BACKGROUND

Providers' failure to administer vaccines in accordance with established recommendations is a well-recognized barrier to national immunization efforts. This study evaluated the ease of use of two different formats of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) adult immunization schedule by physicians in private practice, where the majority of adult immunizations are administered.

METHODS

A series of focus groups was conducted with 94 physicians and other clinical staff in 11 private practices (family medicine and internal medicine) in six U.S. cities. Each session was based on a structured set of questions that explored barriers to adult immunizations, followed by three mock clinical scenarios to examine how each of two graphical depictions of the 2003-2004 adult immunization schedule (one from the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and the other from the Immunization Action Coalition) might facilitate assessments of recommended immunizations. Group dialogue and individual participants' written responses to the scenarios and the alternate schedule formats were analyzed.

RESULTS

Providers perceived multiple barriers to adult immunization independent of immunization schedule formats, chiefly patients' low interest in immunization and refusal of vaccines. Most participants were not familiar with either format of CDC's adult immunization schedule before the study, but quickly developed strong preferences for one versus the other (usually the second format that they encountered). About half of the providers changed their vaccine recommendations for clinical scenarios when they consulted either schedule format, although some of the changes were not clinically appropriate. Participants suggested several ways to enhance the availability of the information contained in the schedule formats, especially through electronic means.

CONCLUSIONS

This qualitative study suggests ways in which graphic depictions of an adult immunization schedule may address adult immunization barriers. Greater provider familiarity with schedule formats will be critical to their appropriate application in clinical encounters.

Can continuity of care be improved? Results from a randomized pilot study

CONTEXT

Although continuity of care is an important component of primary care, few mechanisms for improving it have been studied.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if automated reminders to providers and patient schedulers can improve continuity of care in a practice.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled trial.

SETTING AND POPULATION

Four hundred and nine patients in the lowest tertile of continuity of care in a university-affiliated clinic with a computerized information system were randomized to 1 of 4 groups: 1) control (no reminder), 2) provider alert, 3) scheduler alert, or 4) provider and scheduler alert.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Continuity of care as measured by a previously described dispersion index that ranges from 0 to 1.Results.-Initial continuity of care was.134 (standard deviation,.07). In a linear regression model, 9 months after implementation of the system, both the provider-prompt group (.027 [.006,.05]) and the provider and scheduler group (.024 [.001,.054]) were associated with increased continuity compared with the control group

CONCLUSIONS

Prompting providers for patients with poor continuity of care may improve it.