Impact of elementary school-located influenza vaccinations: A stepped wedge trial across a community

Parents and teachers' perspectives on a school-located influenza vaccination program: A pilot study in the Region of Murcia, Spain

During the 2022-2023 season, the Region of Murcia (an autonomous community of Spain) introduced the influenza vaccination campaign in children aged 24-59 months with the live-attenuated influenza nasal spray vaccine. To expand coverage, a pilot study was conducted to include the 3- to 4-year population in 24 public schools. The aim of the study was to assess the experiences of parents and teachers involved in the project. This was a psychosocial qualitative study in which information was collected from a cohort of 23 parents and 17 teachers who attended three and two focus group sessions, respectively. A high degree of satisfaction with the school-located influenza vaccination program was consistently reported. The teachers reported creating a friendly environment and acting as companions to support children in the absence of their parents. They also considered the intranasal route, which avoids intramuscular puncture, as a facilitating element that turned the vaccination process into a kind of game. Parents emphasized the importance of vaccination to protect their children, and secondarily, to ensure protection of the family nucleus. Some parents who had their children already vaccinated in the health care center reported preference for the school setting, probably selecting this option in the future. The availability of school-based influenza vaccination promoted greater equity in accessing the vaccine and facilitated family reconciliation. To optimize coverage and minimize potential reluctance, providing the necessary information to parents both before and after vaccination was considered. School-located influenza vaccination was feasible and is a valuable strategy to be implemented in future campaigns.

Quadrivalent Live-Attenuated Influenza Vaccine in Milan preschools: an Italian experience of school-located flu vaccination within the 2022-2023 season

BACKGROUND

In Italy, since the 2020-2021 flu season, the flu vaccine recommendation was extended to all children aged 6 months to 6 years and quadrivalent Live-Attenuated Influenza Vaccine (qLAIV) was introduced. Since school-aged children are important carriers of annual influenza epidemics, a school-based influenza vaccination program may potentially increase vaccine uptake. Recent studies, conducted in the UK and the US, show that school-based vaccination can reach higher percentage of paediatric vaccination coverage compared to children vaccinated in other settings.

METHODS

During 2022-2023 flu season in 9 preschools located in Milan healthcare personnel vaccinated children with qLAIV at the end of a school day. A Google Form questionnaire was administered to preschoolers' parents of all preschools within the Municipality of Milan.

RESULTS

In the preschools engaged in the vaccination program, 233 out of 1939 children were vaccinated (12%). Among these, 61 (26.2%) had never been vaccinated for influenza before. Vaccination coverage was 11.5% for Italian children and 14.3% for children coming from an immigrant background. We collected 3659 questionnaire responses, divided according to study participation status (371 from preschools that participated in the vaccination program and 3288 from other preschools in Milan). 57% of the families who answered to the questionnaire vaccinated their children for flu. qLAIV accounted for 85.6% of vaccinations. We observed a statistically significant difference in the percentage of vaccinated children between those attending a school participating in the project (67.9%) and children attending other schools (56%) (p < 0.001). Vaccination was administered by family pediatricians (48.9%), in vaccination centers (34.8%), in vaccine hubs (11.3%), in schools (2.6%), by private pediatricians (1.6%) and in other settings (0.7%). Focusing on the responses from families whose children attend schools participating in the vaccination program, 21.8% stated that the vaccination was provided in school.

CONCLUSION

According to our experience, in Italy, at the moment, only the cooperation between health providers and alternative settings, including schools, may expand flu vaccination coverage. In particular, schools are to be considered a place to inform and reach out to families, useful to increase vaccination coverage.

Effectiveness of Multifaceted Strategies to Increase Influenza Vaccination Uptake: A Cluster Randomized Trial

Importance

Influenza vaccination rates remain low among primary school students and vary by school in Beijing, China. Theory-informed, multifaceted strategies are needed to improve influenza vaccination uptake.

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of multifaceted strategies in improving influenza vaccination uptake among primary school students.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cluster randomized trial was conducted from September 2022 to May 2023 across primary schools in Beijing, China. Schools were allocated randomly in a 1:1 ratio to multifaceted strategies or usual practice. Schools were deemed eligible if the vaccination rates in the 2019 to 2020 season fell at or below the district-wide average for primary schools. Eligible participants included students in grades 2 and 3 with no medical contraindications for influenza vaccination.

Intervention

The multifaceted strategies intervention involved system-level planning and coordination (eg, developing an implementation blueprint, building social norms, and enhancing supervision), school-level training and educating school implementers (eg, conducting a 1-hour training and developing educational materials), and individual-level educating and reminding students and parents (eg, conducting educational activities and sending 4 reminders about vaccination).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were influenza vaccination uptake at school reported by school clinicians as well as overall vaccine uptake either at school or outside of school as reported by parents at 3 months. Generalized linear mixed models were used for analysis.

Results

A total of 20 schools were randomized. One intervention school and 2 control schools did not administer vaccination on school grounds due to COVID-19, resulting in a total of 17 schools (9 intervention and 8 control). There was a total of 1691 students aged 7 to 8 years (890 male [52.6%]; 801 female [47.4%]) including 915 in the intervention group and 776 in the control group. Of all participants, 848 (50.1%) were in grade 2, and 1209 (71.5%) were vaccinated in the 2021 to 2022 season. Participants in the intervention and control groups shared similar characteristics. At follow-up, of the 915 students in the intervention group, 679 (74.5%) received a vaccination at school, and of the 776 students in the control group, 556 (71.7%) received a vaccination at school. The overall vaccination rates were 76.0% (695 of 915 students) for the intervention group and 71.3% (553 of 776 students) for the control group. Compared with the control group, there was significant improvement of vaccination uptake at school (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.06-1.85; P = .02) and overall uptake (odds ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.12-1.99; P = .01) for the intervention group.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, multifaceted strategies showed modest effectiveness in improving influenza vaccination uptake among primary school students, which provides a basis for the implementation of school-located vaccination programs of other vaccines in China, and in other countries with comparable programs.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200062449.

Identifying implementation strategies to address barriers of implementing a school-located influenza vaccination program in Beijing

BACKGROUND

The school-located influenza vaccinations (SLIV) can increase influenza vaccination and reduce influenza infections among school-aged children. However, the vaccination rate has remained low and varied widely among schools in Beijing, China. This study aimed to ascertain barriers and facilitators of implementing SLIV and to identify implementation strategies for SLIV quality improvement programs in this context.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with diverse stakeholders (i.e., representatives of both the Department of Health and the Department of Education, school physicians, class headteachers, and parents) involved in SLIV implementation. Participants were identified by purposive and snowball sampling. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was adopted to facilitate data collection and analysis. Themes and subthemes regarding barriers and facilitators were generated using deductive and inductive approaches. Based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (CFIR-ERIC) matching tool, practical implementation strategies were proposed to address the identified barriers of SLIV delivery.

RESULTS

Twenty-four participants were interviewed. Facilitators included easy access to SLIV, clear responsibilities and close collaboration among government sectors, top-down authority, integrating SLIV into the routine of schools, and priority given to SLIV. The main barriers were parents' misconception, inefficient coordination for vaccine supply and vaccination dates, the lack of planning, and inadequate access to knowledge and information about the SLIV. CFIR-ERIC Matching tool suggested implementation strategies at the system (i.e., developing an implementation blueprint, and promoting network weaving), school (i.e., training and educating school implementers), and consumer (i.e., engaging students and parents) levels to improve SLIV implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

There were substantial barriers to the delivery of the SLIV program. Theory-driven implementation strategies developed in this pre-implementation study should be considered to address those identified determinants for successful SLIV implementation.

Association between contextual factors and coverage of the Acwy meningococcal vaccine, after three years of its overdue, in the vaccination calendar of adolescents in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil: global space regressions

The objective of the study was to analyze the spatial distribution of vaccination coverage of bacterial meningitis vaccine: A, C, W and Y (menacwy) and identify the association between socioeconomic and social environment factors with menacwy vaccine coverage among adolescents in the state of Minas Gerais (MG), Brazil. This is an ecological, mixed study, conducted with secondary data from the 853 municipalities of the State of MG, Brazil, from 2020 to 2022, provided by the information system of the National Immunization Program. For spatial statistical analysis, spatial dependence and the presence of spatial clusters formed by municipalities with high and low vaccination coverage of Menacwy were evaluated. In the year 2021, MG presented the largest vaccination coverage (60.58%) since the introduction of the Menacwy vaccine by the PNI. Regarding the analysis of global regressions, it is observed that for the year 2020, as the MG Index of Social Responsibility-Health increased and MG Index of Social Responsibility-Public Security increased, increased the vaccination coverage of the municipalities of the Menacwy vaccine. Finally, compared to 2021, similar association was observed in relation to the proportion of the population served by the Family Health Strategy of the municipalities of the state of MG and per capita spending on education activities: as this indicator increased, with increased coverage of the Vaccine of the Menacwy vaccine of the state municipalities. They reinforce the importance of assessing the quality-of-care management and health surveillance system, professional training, and damage reduction to populations, especially adolescents.

Interventions to Improve Immunization Coverage Among Children and Adolescents: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Vaccinations are recognized as a feasible, cost-effective public health intervention for reducing the burden and associated mortality of many infectious diseases. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of potential interventions to improve the uptake of vaccines among children and adolescents.

METHODS

We performed a literature search until December 2020. Eligible studies were identified using Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, and other sources. We included studies conducted on children and adolescents aged 5 to 19 years. Studies comprised of hospitalized children and those with comorbid conditions were excluded. Two authors independently performed the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Findings from 120 studies (123 articles), of which 95 were meta-analyzed, reveal that vaccination education may increase overall vaccination coverage by 19% (risk ratio [RR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.26), reminders by 15% (RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.11-1.18), interventions for providers by 13% (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.19), financial incentives by 67% (RR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.40-1.99), and multilevel interventions by 25% (RR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.41). The impact of school-based clinics and policy and legislation on overall vaccination coverage is still uncertain, and no impact of a multicomponent intervention on overall vaccination coverage was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational interventions, reminders, provider-directed interventions, financial incentives, and multilevel interventions may improve vaccination coverage among school-aged children and adolescents.

Evaluation of a city-wide school-located influenza vaccination program in Oakland, California with respect to race and ethnicity: A matched cohort study

Background:

Increasing influenza vaccination coverage in school-aged children may substantially reduce community transmission. School-located influenza vaccinations (SLIV) aim to promote vaccinations by increasing accessibility, which may be especially beneficial to race/ethnicity groups that face high barriers to preventative care. Here, we evaluate the effectiveness of a city-wide SLIV program by race/ethnicity from 2014 to 2018.

Methods:

We used multivariate matching to pair schools in the intervention district in Oakland, CA with schools in a comparison district in West Contra Costa County, CA. We distributed cross-sectional surveys to measure caregiver-reported student vaccination status and estimated differences in vaccination coverage levels and reasons for non-vaccination between districts stratifying by race/ethnicity. We estimated difference-in-differences (DID) of laboratory confirmed influenza hospitalization incidence between districts stratified by race/ethnicity using surveillance data.

Results:

Differences in influenza vaccination coverage in the intervention vs. comparison district were larger among White (2017–18: 21.0% difference [95% CI: 9.7%, 32.3%]) and Hispanic/Latino (13.4% [8.8%, 18.0%]) students than Asian/Pacific Islander (API) (8.9% [1.3%, 16.5%]), Black (5.9% [−2.2%, 14.0%]), and multiracial (6.3% [−1.8%, 14.3%)) students. Concerns about vaccine effectiveness or safety were more common among Black and multiracial caregivers. Logistical barriers were less common in the intervention vs. comparison district, with the largest difference among White students. In both districts, hospitalizations in 2017–18 were higher in Blacks (Intervention: 111.5 hospitalizations per 100,00; Comparison: 134.1 per 100,000) vs. other races/ethnicities. All-age influenza hospitalization incidence was lower in the intervention site vs. comparison site among White/API individuals in 2016–17 (DID −25.14 per 100,000 [95% CI: −40.14, −10.14]) and 2017–18 (−36.6 per 100,000 [−52.7, −20.5]) and Black older adults in 2017–18 (−282.2 per 100,000 (−508.4, −56.1]), but not in other groups.

Conclusions:

SLIV was associated with higher vaccination coverage and lower influenza hospitalization, but associations varied by race/ethnicity. SLIV alone may be insufficient to ensure equitable influenza outcomes.

City-wide school-located influenza vaccination: A retrospective cohort study

Background:

We measured the effectiveness of a city-wide school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV) program implemented in over 102 elementary schools in Oakland, California.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) members of all ages residing in either the intervention or a multivariate-matched comparison site from September 2011 - August 2017. Outcomes included medically attended acute respiratory illness (MAARI), influenza hospitalization, and Oseltamivir prescriptions. We estimated difference-in-differences (DIDs) in 2014–15, 2015–16, and 2016–17 using generalized linear models and adjusted for race, ethnicity, age, sex, health plan, and language.

Results:

Pre-intervention member characteristics were similar between sites. The proportion of KPNC members vaccinated for influenza by KPNC or the SLIV program was 8–11% higher in the intervention site than the comparison site during the intervention period. Among school-aged children, SLIV was associated with lower Oseltamivir prescriptions per 1,000 (DIDs: −3.5 (95% CI −5.5, −1.5) in 2015–16; −4.0 (95% CI −6.5, −1.6) in 2016–17) but not with other outcomes. SLIV was associated with lower MAARI per 1,000 in adults 65 + years (2014–15: −13.2, 95% CI −23.2, −3.2; 2015–16: −21.5, 95% CI −31.1, −11.9; 2016–17: −13.0, 95% CI −23.2, −2.9). There were few significant associations with other outcomes among adults.

Conclusions:

A city-wide SLIV intervention was associated with higher influenza vaccination coverage, lower Oseltamivir prescriptions in school-aged children, and lower MAARI among people over 65 years, suggesting possible indirect effects of SLIV among older adults.

Reduction in self-reported influenza-like-illness in school children and household members following influenza vaccine administration - a cohort study, Israel, 2016-7

Background

Second-grade pupils in Israel have been vaccinated against influenza since the winter of 2016–2017. This study aims to appraise the rate reduction of seasonal influenza vaccine among vaccinated children and their household members, and that of the vaccinated cohort and their household members.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study was performed in winter 2016–2017 in Tel-Aviv District, Israel and compared second-grade pupils who were vaccinated at school, with third-grade pupils- who were not vaccinated at school. Parents in nine schools were asked to report prior vaccination against influenza and influenza-like illness (ILI) of their children and other household members. Rate reduction was defined as [(ILI among unvaccinated) – (ILI among vaccinated)] / (ILI among vaccinated) (%).

Results

Of 527 participants, 359 (68.1%) were unvaccinated and 168 (31.9%) vaccinated. Unvaccinated children reported more ILI compared with vaccinated children (19.5% vs. 7.7%), yielding a rate reduction of 60.5%. Unvaccinated children also had a greater number of physicians’ visits and missed school days (35.7% vs. 14.9 and 42.9% vs. 25.6%, respectively). The rate of ILI among household members of unvaccinated children was 34.5%, compared with 25.0% among household members of vaccinated children.

The vaccinated cohort (defined as all children in second grade) reported less ILI compared with the unvaccinated cohort (defined as all children in third grade), with a rate reduction of 44.6%. Pupils of the unvaccinated cohort were more likely to miss school days (42.1% vs. 32.0%, respectively), and a higher rate of ILI was reported among household members of the unvaccinated cohort (35.4% vs. 27.3%, respectively).

Conclusion

Influenza vaccine administered in school setting reduced ILI among the vaccinated cohort and their household members by 60.5 and 27.5%, respectively, compared with the unvaccinated cohort. Expansion of the vaccination program in a school setting increased the public health benefit of influenza vaccines among both school children and their household members.

Evaluation of a city-wide school-located influenza vaccination program in Oakland, California, with respect to vaccination coverage, school absences, and laboratory-confirmed influenza: A matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

It is estimated that vaccinating 50%-70% of school-aged children for influenza can produce population-wide indirect effects. We evaluated a city-wide school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV) intervention that aimed to increase influenza vaccination coverage. The intervention was implemented in ≥95 preschools and elementary schools in northern California from 2014 to 2018. Using a matched cohort design, we estimated intervention impacts on student influenza vaccination coverage, school absenteeism, and community-wide indirect effects on laboratory-confirmed influenza hospitalizations.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We used a multivariate matching algorithm to identify a nearby comparison school district with pre-intervention characteristics similar to those of the intervention school district and matched schools in each district. To measure student influenza vaccination, we conducted cross-sectional surveys of student caregivers in 22 school pairs (2017 survey, N = 6,070; 2018 survey, N = 6,507). We estimated the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza hospitalization from 2011 to 2018 using surveillance data from school district zip codes. We analyzed student absenteeism data from 2011 to 2018 from each district (N = 42,487,816 student-days). To account for pre-intervention differences between districts, we estimated difference-in-differences (DID) in influenza hospitalization incidence and absenteeism rates using generalized linear and log-linear models with a population offset for incidence outcomes. Prior to the SLIV intervention, the median household income was $51,849 in the intervention site and $61,596 in the comparison site. The population in each site was predominately white (41% in the intervention site, 48% in the comparison site) and/or of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (26% in the intervention site, 33% in the comparison site). The number of students vaccinated by the SLIV intervention ranged from 7,502 to 10,106 (22%-28% of eligible students) each year. During the intervention, influenza vaccination coverage among elementary students was 53%-66% in the comparison district. Coverage was similar between the intervention and comparison districts in influenza seasons 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 and was significantly higher in the intervention site in seasons 2016-2017 (7%; 95% CI 4, 11; p < 0.001) and 2017-2018 (11%; 95% CI 7, 15; p < 0.001). During seasons when vaccination coverage was higher among intervention schools and the vaccine was moderately effective, there was evidence of statistically significant indirect effects: The DID in the incidence of influenza hospitalization per 100,000 in the intervention versus comparison site was -17 (95% CI -30, -4; p = 0.008) in 2016-2017 and -37 (95% CI -54, -19; p < 0.001) in 2017-2018 among non-elementary-school-aged individuals and -73 (95% CI -147, 1; p = 0.054) in 2016-2017 and -160 (95% CI -267, -53; p = 0.004) in 2017-2018 among adults 65 years or older. The DID in illness-related school absences per 100 school days during the influenza season was -0.63 (95% CI -1.14, -0.13; p = 0.014) in 2016-2017 and -0.80 (95% CI -1.28, -0.31; p = 0.001) in 2017-2018. Limitations of this study include the use of an observational design, which may be subject to unmeasured confounding, and caregiver-reported vaccination status, which is subject to poor recall and low response rates.

CONCLUSIONS

A city-wide SLIV intervention in a large, diverse urban population was associated with a decrease in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza hospitalization in all age groups and a decrease in illness-specific school absence rate among students in 2016-2017 and 2017-2018, seasons when the vaccine was moderately effective, suggesting that the intervention produced indirect effects. Our findings suggest that in populations with moderately high background levels of influenza vaccination coverage, SLIV programs are associated with further increases in coverage and reduced influenza across the community.

Effect of State Immunization Information System Based Reminder/Recall for Influenza Vaccinations: A Randomized Trial of Autodialer, Text, and Mailed Messages

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of different modalities of centralized reminder/recall (autodialer, text, mailed reminders) on increasing childhood influenza vaccination.

STUDY DESIGN

Two simultaneous randomized clinical trials conducted from October 2017 to April 1, 2018, in New York State and Colorado. There were 61 931 children in New York (136 practices) and 23 845 children in Colorado (42 practices) who were randomized to different centralized reminder/recall modalities-4 arms in New York (autodialer, text, mailed, and no reminder control) and 3 arms in Colorado (autodialer, mailed, and no reminder control). The message content was similar across modalities. Up to 3 reminders were sent for intervention arms. The main outcome measure was receipt of ≥1 influenza vaccine.

RESULTS

In New York, compared with the control arm (26.6%), postintervention influenza vaccination rates in the autodialer arm (28.0%) were 1.4 percentage points higher (adjusted risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10), but the rates for text (27.6%) and mail (26.8%) arms were not different from controls. In Colorado, compared with the control arm (29.9%), postintervention influenza vaccination rates for the autodialer (32.9%) and mail (31.5%) arms were 3.0 percentage points (adjusted risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12) and 1.6 percentage points (adjusted risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10) higher, respectively. Compared with the control arm, the incremental cost per additional vaccine delivered was $20 (New York) and $16 (Colorado) for autodialer messages.

CONCLUSIONS

Centralized reminder/recall for childhood influenza vaccine was most effective via autodialer, less effective via mail, and not effective via text messages. The impact of each modality was modest. Compared with no reminders, the incremental cost per additional vaccine delivered was also modest for autodialer messages.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03294473 and NCT03246100.

Disparities in parental awareness of children's seasonal influenza vaccination recommendations and influencers of vaccination

Objective

To determine parental awareness of influenza vaccination recommendations for children and explore associations with awareness.

Design

Cross-sectional survey.

Setting/participants

South Australian parents with a telephone listing in the Electronic White Pages were randomly selected.

Methods

Participants were interviewed using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) during May–July 2016. Univariable and multivariable analyses explored characteristics associated with awareness; with the survey data weighted to reflect the population of SA and the probability of selection within a household.

Results

Of 539 parents, 33% were aware of the recommendation that all children (<5 years) should receive the influenza vaccine annually with 51.9% aware that children with special risk medical conditions (SRMC) should also receive the vaccine annually. Characteristics strongly associated with parental awareness of the recommendation for children aged < 5 years were knowledge of recommendation for children with a SRMC (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 10.46, CI 4.44–24.63) or living in a metropolitan area (aOR 2.91, CI 1.19–7.09). There was lack of awareness in those not working (aOR 0.13, CI 0.04–0.47), with trade level education (compared with high school) (aOR 0.25 CI, 0.09–0.71) and in those born in the UK or Ireland (aOR 0.19, CI 0.04–0.85). Awareness of the recommendation for children with SRMC to receive the vaccine was strongly associated with knowledge of the influenza recommendation for children <5 years (aOR 10.22, CI 4.39–23.77) or not being born in Australia [UK/ Ireland (aOR 7.63, CI 1.86–31.31); other (aOR 3.93, CI 0.94–16.42)]. The most influential cues to future receipt were a general practitioner (GP) recommendation (63.8%) and providing influenza vaccine free for all children (37.6%). More parents who delayed or excluded vaccines believed that their children’s vaccinations (in general) were unnecessary, as other children were vaccinated (42.8%) compared to those with no or minor concerns (11.1%) (p<0.0001).

Conclusions

Parental awareness of children’s influenza vaccine recommendations is low. Targeted communication strategies and resources are required to establish broader community awareness of recommendations. Healthcare provider endorsement of the vaccine remains key and health care professionals, particularly GPs and paediatric specialists should be encouraged to discuss influenza vaccine with parents at every opportunity. Many parents have vaccine concerns and addressing concerns across the spectrum of hesitancy is crucial.

Nontraditional Uses of Live Attenuated Influenza Vaccine: School-Located Influenza Vaccination

Immunization against influenza continues to be the best method of preventing influenza infection in children, and additionally, indirectly helping to lower disease in adults, given the role of children as "spreaders" of influenza to the community at large. An increasing evidence base exists for the use of school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV) programs to increase the influenza vaccination rates among children. Live, attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) has unique characteristics that make it useful for SLIV programs, including ease of immunization without needles, faster delivery, and in many (but not all) years, good vaccine effectiveness. Reviewed herein are results of selected published trials as well as guidance on planning a successful SLIV program.

School-Located Influenza Vaccination: Do Vaccine Clinics at School Raise Vaccination Rates?

BACKGROUND

Only half of US schoolchildren receive influenza vaccine. School-located influenza vaccination (SLIV) might raise vaccination rates but conducting flu vaccine clinics at schools is challenging to implement. We compared 2 school-based programs designed to raise influenza vaccination rates: parent reminder/educational messages sent to parents from schools which is a low-intensity intervention vs the combination of reminder/educational messages plus SLIV clinics which is a high-intensity intervention.

METHODS

We assigned 36 schools (6 school districts, 2 per group) to 3 groups: (1) control, ie, no SLIV and no parent reminder/education, (2) parent reminder/education emailed by schools, and (3) parent reminder/education plus SLIV clinics. Some schools had SLIV clinics in prior years. Health department nurses conducted SLIV clinics.

RESULTS

Among 24,832 children at 36 schools, vaccination rates were control (51.3%), parent reminder/education-only (41.2%), and reminder/education + SLIV (58.7%). On multivariate analyses which controlled for vaccination in prior seasons, children in reminder/education + SLIV schools had higher vaccination rates (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.10-1.47), but children in reminder/education-only schools had lower rates (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-1.00) than children in control schools.

CONCLUSIONS

Parent reminder/education combined with SLIV clinics raise vaccination rates, but parent reminder/education alone does not.

Cost effectiveness of school-located influenza vaccination programs for elementary and secondary school children

Background

Studies have noted variations in the cost-effectiveness of school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV), but little is known about how SLIV’s cost-effectiveness may vary by targeted age group (e.g., elementary or secondary school students), or vaccine consent process (paper-based or web-based). Further, SLIV’s cost-effectiveness may be impacted by its spillover effect on practice-based vaccination; prior studies have not addressed this issue.

Methods

We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis on two SLIV programs in upstate New York in 2015–2016: (a) elementary school SLIV using a stepped wedge design with schools as clusters (24 suburban and 18 urban schools) and (b) secondary school SLIV using a cluster randomized trial (16 suburban and 4 urban schools). The cost-per-additionally-vaccinated child (i.e., incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)) was estimated by dividing the incremental SLIV intervention cost by the incremental effectiveness (i.e., the additional number of vaccinated students in intervention schools compared to control schools). We performed deterministic analyses, one-way sensitivity analyses, and probabilistic analyses.

Results

The overall effectiveness measure (proportion of children vaccinated) was 5.7 and 5.5 percentage points higher, respectively, in intervention elementary (52.8%) and secondary schools (48.2%) than grade-matched control schools. SLIV programs vaccinated a small proportion of children in intervention elementary (5.2%) and secondary schools (2.5%). In elementary and secondary schools, the ICER excluding vaccine purchase was $85.71 and $86.51 per-additionally-vaccinated-child, respectively. When additionally accounting for observed spillover impact on practice-based vaccination, the ICER decreased to $80.53 in elementary schools -- decreasing substantially in secondary schools. (to $53.40). These estimates were higher than the published practice-based vaccination cost (median = $25.50, mean = $45.48). Also, these estimates were higher than our 2009–2011 urban SLIV program mean costs ($65) due to additional costs for use of a new web-based consent system ($12.97 per-additionally-vaccinated-child) and higher project coordination costs in 2015–2016. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that ICER estimates were most sensitive to the SLIV effectiveness.

Conclusions

SLIV raises vaccination rates and may increase practice-based vaccination in primary care practices. While these SLIV programs are effective, to be as cost-effective as practice-based vaccination our SLIV programs would need to vaccinate more students and/or lower the costs for consent systems and project coordination.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT02227186 (August 25, 2014), updated NCT03137667 (May 2, 2017).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4228-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Text Message Reminders for Child Influenza Vaccination in the Setting of School-Located Influenza Vaccination: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Half of US school children receive influenza vaccine. In our previous trials, school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV) raised vaccination rates by 5 to 8 percentage points. We assessed whether text message reminders to parents could raise vaccination rates above those observed with SLIV. Within urban elementary schools we randomized families into text message + SLIV (intervention) versus SLIV alone (comparison). All parents were sent 2 backpack notifications plus 2 autodialer phone reminders about SLIV at a single SLIV clinic. Intervention group parents also were sent 3 text messages from the school nurse encouraging flu vaccination via either primary care or SLIV. Among 15 768 children at 32 schools, vaccination rates were text + SLIV (40%) and SLIV control (40%); 4% of students per group received influenza vaccination at SLIV. Text message reminders did not raise influenza vaccination rates above those observed with SLIV alone. More intensive interventions are needed to raise influenza vaccination rates.