Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework and the Analysis of Decision-Making Processes Regarding Publicly-Funded Immunization Programs

The tension between national consistency and jurisdictional professional expansion: The case of pharmacist-administered vaccinations

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of coordinating policies on vaccinations at the national level. In Australia, the regulation and management of pharmacist-administered vaccination programs are the responsibility of each of the eight jurisdictions (six states and two territories), and have been developed independently of each other, leading to substantial variation. Consequently, there are variations regarding which vaccines pharmacists can administer, the minimum age, and whether these vaccines are publicly funded.

Objective(s)

To identify opportunities for a nationally consistent approach to pharmacist-administered vaccinations in Australia.

Methods

This policy analysis used the Multiple Streams Framework to identify barriers and enablers within the three “streams” of problem, policy, and politics, and how they affected the development of a national approach. Data were drawn from semi-structured interviews with 13 key policy actors and documents (pre-budget submissions and parliamentary inquiry reports). Themes were generated around actor interests, current and proposed pharmacist vaccination programs, and policymaking processes.

Results

From the pharmacy sector, there was little clarity around the need for a nationally consistent approach. This issue was linked to their ultimate goal of expanding pharmacist vaccination programs; it was seen as a means for states/territories with smaller programs to ‘catch up’ to other jurisdictions. There was also no unified policy approach from this sector; additionally, decision-makers within jurisdictional health departments faced different service delivery models, policy priorities, agendas, and policy actor relationships. Lastly, there was no federal body that had the capacity to coordinate a national approach. Possible enablers include refining the problem definition and re-framing it to a patient-centric model.

Conclusions

Coordination of vaccination policies is an ongoing policy issue with implications for pharmacist vaccination programs and other health policy areas in which a national approach is being considered. This analysis provides insight into how this may be developed in the future.

Health actor approaches to financing universal coverage strategies for pneumococcal and rotavirus immunisation programmes in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Sustainable financing of immunisation programmes is an important step towards universal coverage of life-saving vaccines. Yet, financing mechanisms for health programmes could have consequences on the design of universal approaches to immunisation coverage. Effective implementation of immunisation interventions necessitates investigating the roles of institutions and power on interventions. This review aims to understand how sustainable financing and equitable immunisation are conceptualised by health actors like Gavi, and government-related entities across low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) and how financing mechanisms can affect universal coverage of vaccines.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study protocol outline a scoping review of the peer-reviewed and the grey literature, using established methodological framework for scoping review. Literature will be identified through a comprehensive search of multiple databases and grey literature. All peer-reviewed implementation research studies from the year 2002 addressing financing and universal coverage of immunisation programmes for the pneumococcal conjugated vaccine and rotavirus vaccines immunisation interventions will be included and grey literature published in/after the year 2015. For the study scope, population, concept and context are defined: Population as international and national health stakeholders financing immunisation programmes; Concept as implementation research on pneumococcal conjugate and rotavirus vaccination interventions; and Context as LMICs. Findings will be quantitatively summarised to provide an overview and narratively synthesised and analysed. Studies that do not use implementation research approaches, frameworks or models will be excluded.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. Findings and recommendations will be presented to implementation researchers and health stakeholders.

National decision-making for the introduction of new vaccines: A systematic review, 2010-2020

BACKGROUND

Competing priorities make using a transparent and evidence-based approach important when deciding to recommend new vaccines. We conducted a literature review to document the processes and frameworks for national decision-making on new vaccine introductions and explored which key features have evolved since 2010.

METHODS

We searched literature published on policymaking related to vaccine introduction from March 2010 to August 2020 in six databases. We screened articles for eligibility with the following exclusion criteria: non-human or hypothetical vaccines, the sole focus on economic evaluation or decision to adopt rather than policy decision-making. We employed nine broad categories of criteria from the 2012 review for categorization and abstracted data on the country, income level, vaccine, and other relevant criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 3808 unique references screened, 116 met eligibility criteria and were classified as: a) framework of vaccine adoption decision-making (27), b) studies that analyse empirical data on or examples of vaccine adoption decision-making (45), c) theoretical and empirical articles that provide insights into the vaccine policymaking process (44 + 17 already included in the previous categories). Commonly reported criteria for decision-making were the burden of disease; vaccine efficacy/effectiveness, safety; impact on health and non-health outcomes; economic evaluation and cost-effectiveness of alternative interventions. Programmatic and acceptability aspects were not as often considered. Most (50; 82%) of the 61 articles describing the process of vaccine introduction policymaking highlighted the role of country, regional, or global evidence-informed recommendations and a robust national governance as enabling factors for vaccine adoption.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature on vaccine adoption decision-making has expanded since 2010. We found that policymakers and expert advisory committee members (e.g., National Immunization Technical Advisory Group [NITAG]) increasingly value the interventions based on economic evaluations. The results of this review could guide discussions on evidence-informed immunization decision-making among country, sub-regional, and regional stakeholders.

Epidemiology and Control of Meningococcal Disease in Canada: A Long, Complex, and Unfinished Story

The epidemiology of meningococcal disease in Canada has been punctuated by outbreaks caused by serogroup A strains in the 1940s, virulent serogroup C clones from 1985 to 2001, a serogroup B clone in Quebec from 2003 to 2014, and more recently a W clone in British Columbia. Region- and province-wide immunization campaigns have been implemented to control these outbreaks using meningococcal C polysaccharide and conjugate vaccines, a quadrivalent ACWY conjugate vaccine, and a serogroup B protein-based vaccine. Meningococcal C conjugate vaccines have been included in routine immunization programs for children, and ACWY conjugate vaccines have been included in school-based programs for adolescents in most jurisdictions. In contrast, serogroup B protein-based vaccines were only recommended and used for high-risk individuals and to control outbreaks. Currently, the immunization schedules adopted in provinces and territories are not uniform. This is not explained by notable epidemiologic differences. Publicly funded immunization programs are the result of a complex decision-making process. Political factors including public opinion, media attention, interest groups' advocacy campaigns, decision-makers' priorities and budgetary constraints have played important roles in shaping meningococcal programs in Canada, and this should be recognized. As the recent occurrence of outbreaks caused by virulent W clones shows, continued investments in epidemiological surveillance at both the provincial and national levels are necessary, so there can be early warning and informed decisions can be made.