Practitioner policies and beliefs and practice immunization rates: a study from Pediatric Research in Office Settings and the National Medical Association

Assessment of community pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes and their willingness to provide vaccination services in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Community pharmacists play an important role in increasing vaccination rates especially in countries where they offer vaccination services and administration. However, little is known about community pharmacist's willingness to provide vaccination services in Saudi Arabia. The objective of this study was to assess knowledge, attitudes, willingness and beliefs of community pharmacists in Saudi Arabia towards providing vaccines at pharmacies.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, online questionnaire-based study using convenience sampling (Snowball technique) was used to obtain responses from community pharmacists across Saudi Arabia. The survey collected information on participants' demographics, knowledge about vaccine, attitude towards vaccine and their attitude to be immunization providers. Bivariate analysis and multiple linear regression models were employed to assess the relationships between demographic variables and outcomes.

RESULTS

The study sample consisted of 384 community pharmacists. More than half of participants had poor knowledge about vaccines (54%). Only 8.4% of participants had good knowledge about vaccines. The results indicated that community pharmacists in the study sample have positive attitude toward vaccines and are willing to provide vaccination services. There was a significant relationship between knowledge about vaccine and attitude toward vaccines. Pharmacists with poor knowledge about vaccines had negative attitude toward vaccines as compared to those with high knowledge (β = -1.743; P-value = 0.024). Additionally, there was a significant relationship between knowledge about vaccine and attitude to be immunization providers. Pharmacists with poor knowledge about vaccines had negative attitude to be immunization providers as compared to those with high knowledge (β = -2.631; P-value = 0.002). Furthermore, a significant number of the community pharmacists reported facing critical barriers to provide vaccines including legal liability, lack of personal resources and lack of appropriate training.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive training and certification programs for pharmacists are crucial to improve their competencies in handling and administering vaccines to increase the rate of vaccinations in Saudi Arabia.

Evidence-based strategies to increase vaccination uptake: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize evidence-based strategies for improving pediatric immunization rates including physician behaviors, clinic and public health processes, community-based and parent-focused interventions, and legal and policy approaches RECENT FINDINGS: Studies continue to show the effectiveness of audit and feedback, provider reminders, standing orders, and reminder/recall to increase immunization rates. Provider communication strategies may improve immunization rates including use of a presumptive approach and motivational interviewing. Centralized reminder/recall (using a state Immunization Information System) is more effective and cost-effective compared to a practice-based approach. Recent work shows the success of text messages for reminder/recall for vaccination. Web-based interventions, including informational vaccine websites with interactive social media components, have shown effectiveness at increasing uptake of pediatric and maternal immunizations. Vaccination requirements for school attendance continue to be effective policy interventions for increasing pediatric and adolescent vaccination rates. Allowance for and ease of obtaining exemptions to vaccine requirements are associated with increased exemption rates.

SUMMARY

Strategies to increase vaccination rates include interventions that directly impact physician behavior, clinic and public health processes, patient behaviors, and policy. Combining multiple strategies to work across different settings and addressing different barriers may offer the best approach to optimize immunization coverage.

How French physicians manage with a future change in the primary vaccination of infants against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and poliomyelitis? A qualitative study with focus groups

Background

As in other European countries, the French vaccination schedule changes according to epidemiological and socio-economic situations. Further changes are planned for 2013, including the withdrawal of one dose for primary vaccination against diphtheria, tetanus, polio, pertussis and Haemophilus influenzae. A partnership between the French Technical Vaccination Committee and the French Institute for Health and Medical Research designed a study to assess primary care physicians’ agreement about this modification.

Methods

Qualitative study with focus groups and semi-structured interviews in France. Four focus groups were conducted with physicians, supplemented by four individual interviews.

Results

The physicians of the survey had accepted the suggested vaccination schedule well. A few concerns had been underlined: fear of less follow-up care for infants resulting from the removal of one visit driven by the primary vaccination; fear of loss of vaccine efficacy; suspicion of the existence of financial arguments at the origin of this change; and adjustment to current vaccination schedule. Several suggestions were made: providing strong support from health authorities; developing stable and simple recommendations; providing effective tools for monitoring patient’s vaccination status.

Conclusions

Physicians’ opinions suggested a good acceptance of a possible change about primary vaccination against diphtheria, tetanus, polio, pertussis and Haemophilus influenzae. Physicians’ suggestions resulted from this qualitative study on a new vaccination schedule. It showed how that their involvement was feasible for preparing the implementation of a new vaccination schedule.

Are Recent Medical Graduates More Skeptical of Vaccines?

Rates of delay and refusal of recommended childhood vaccines are increasing in many U.S. communities. Children’s health care providers have a strong influence on parents’ knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about vaccines. Provider attitudes towards immunizations vary and affect their immunization advocacy. One factor that may contribute to this variability is their familiarity with vaccine-preventable diseases and their sequelae. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association of health care provider year of graduation with vaccines and vaccine-preventable disease beliefs. We conducted a cross sectional survey in 2005 of primary care providers identified by parents of children whose children were fully vaccinated or exempt from one or more school immunization requirements. We examined the association of provider graduation cohort (5 years) with beliefs on immunization, disease susceptibility, disease severity, vaccine safety, and vaccine efficacy. Surveys were completed by 551 providers (84.3% response rate). More recent health care provider graduates had 15% decreased odds of believing vaccines are efficacious compared to graduates from a previous 5 year period; had lower odds of believing that many commonly used childhood vaccines were safe; and 3.7% of recent graduates believed that immunizations do more harm than good. Recent health care provider graduates have a perception of the risk-benefit balance of immunization, which differs from that of their older counterparts. This change has the potential to be reflected in their immunization advocacy and affect parental attitudes.

Are healthcare workers' intentions to vaccinate related to their knowledge, beliefs and attitudes? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The Summit of Independent European Vaccination Experts (SIEVE) recommended in 2007 that efforts be made to improve healthcare workers' knowledge and beliefs about vaccines, and their attitudes towards them, to increase vaccination coverage. The aim of the study was to compile and analyze the areas of disagreement in the existing evidence about the relationship between healthcare workers' knowledge, beliefs and attitudes about vaccines and their intentions to vaccinate the populations they serve.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search in four electronic databases for studies published in any of seven different languages between February 1998 and June 2009. We included studies conducted in developed countries that used statistical methods to relate or associate the variables included in our research question. Two independent reviewers verified that the studies met the inclusion criteria, assessed the quality of the studies and extracted their relevant characteristics. The data were descriptively analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 2354 references identified in the initial search, 15 studies met the inclusion criteria. The diversity in the study designs and in the methods used to measure the variables made it impossible to integrate the results, and each study had to be assessed individually. All the studies found an association in the direction postulated by the SIEVE experts: among healthcare workers, higher awareness, beliefs that are more aligned with scientific evidence and more favorable attitudes toward vaccination were associated with greater intentions to vaccinate. All the studies included were cross-sectional; thus, no causal relationship between the variables was established.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that interventions aimed at improving healthcare workers' knowledge, beliefs and attitudes about vaccines should be encouraged, and their impact on vaccination coverage should be assessed.

Immunization uptake in younger siblings of children with autism spectrum disorder

BACKGROUND

Parental concerns persist that immunization increases the risk of autism spectrum disorder, resulting in the potential for reduced uptake by parents of younger siblings of children with autism spectrum disorder ("younger sibs").

OBJECTIVE

To compare immunization uptake by parents for their younger child relative to their older child with autism spectrum disorder ("proband") and controls.

DESIGN

Immunization status was obtained for 98 "younger sibs," 98 "probands," and 65 controls.

RESULTS

A significant group difference emerged for overall immunization status (Fisher's exact test = 62.70, p < .001). One or more immunizations in 59/98 younger sibs were delayed (47/98; 48%) or declined (12/98; 12.2%); immunizations were delayed in 16/98 probands (16.3%) and declined in only one. All controls were fully immunized, with only 6 (9.2%) delayed. Within the "younger sibs" group, 25/98 received an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis; 7 of whom (28%) were fully immunized. The rates of autism spectrum disorder diagnosis did not differ between immunized and nonimmunized younger sib groups, although small sample size limits interpretability of this result.

CONCLUSION

Parents who already have one child with autism spectrum disorder may delay or decline immunization for their younger children, potentially placing them at increased risk of preventable infectious diseases.

Clinicians' opinions on new vaccination programs implementation

In Canada, several new vaccines were recently approved for clinical use or are expected to be soon. Decision-makers are faced with the choice whether or not to include these vaccines in publicly funded vaccination programs. The aim of this study was to assess Canadian pediatricians' and family physicians' opinions regarding 7 new vaccines, and perceived priority for the introduction of new programs. A self-administered, anonymous, mail-based questionnaire was sent during fall 2009 to a random sample of 1182 family physicians and to all 1852 Canadian pediatricians. Responses to 8 statements regarding frequency and severity of the diseases, efficacy and safety of the vaccines as well as feasibility of immunization programs were used to calculate priority scores to rank the 7 potential new vaccination programs (calculated scores ranging from 0 to 100). Overall response rate was 43%. The majority of respondents perceived the health and economic burden of diseases prevented by the seven new vaccines as important and considered new vaccines to be safe and effective. More than 90% of physicians strongly agreed or agreed that the new vaccines would be or are currently well accepted by the public and by the health professionals who administer vaccines, except for the HPV and rotavirus vaccines (respectively 30% and 29% strongly agreed or agreed). Mean priority scores were: 77.4 out of 100 for the measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (MMRV) combined vaccine; 75.6 for the hexavalent (DTaP-IPV-Hib-HBV) vaccine; 73.1 for the new pneumococcal conjugate vaccines; 69.8 for the meningococcal ACYW135; 68.9 for the combined hepatitis A and B; 63.5 for the human papillomavirus vaccine and 56.9 for the rotavirus vaccine. Health professionals' opinion is an important element to consider in the decision-making process regarding implementation of new immunization programs. Without health professional support, the introduction of a new vaccination program may be unsuccessful. In this study, the MMRV and the hexavalent (DTaP-IPV-Hib-HBV) vaccines received the highest ratings.

Research during pediatric residency training: outcome of a senior resident block rotation

BACKGROUND

The Pediatric Residency Review Committee requires programs to provide a curriculum that advances residents' knowledge of the basic principles of research. In July 2002, the Boston Combined Residency Program instituted a 3-month career-development block (CDB) rotation. During the rotation residents pursue an academic or clinical project under mentorship by a faculty member.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective for this study was to evaluate the outcome of the CDB rotation since it was implemented.

METHODS

A survey was administered to 165 residents who completed the CDB rotation.

RESULTS

Of 165 residents, 136 (82%) responded to the survey. Of 122 residents who reported the type of project they conducted, 59 (48%) completed a clinical/health services project, 24 (20%) completed a project in education or curriculum development, and 7 (6%) worked in basic science. Thirty-five residents (27%) received funding to support their work. Thirty-five residents (26%) presented at national meetings such as the Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting. Fifteen (11%) residents have had manuscripts accepted for publication, and 22 (16%) additional residents have submitted manuscripts for publication. Factors associated with successful publication included having received funding (odds ratio: 3.37 [95% confidence interval: 1.34-8.42]) and the nature of the research project (odds ratio: 3.55 [95% confidence interval: 1.40-9.04]). The majority of residents (84%) stated that the CDB rotation enhanced residency training.

CONCLUSIONS

A dedicated academic rotation that includes protected time, senior faculty mentorship, and program funding, can lead to productive research accomplishments by pediatric residents. Support of academic work during residency training may encourage engagement in a variety of academically oriented activities.

Vaccine knowledge and practices of primary care providers of exempt vs. vaccinated children

OBJECTIVES

Compare vaccine knowledge, attitudes and practices of primary care providers for fully vaccinated children and children who are exempt from school immunization requirements.

METHODS

We conducted a mailed survey of parent-identified primary care providers from four states to measure perceived risks and benefits of vaccination and other key immunization beliefs. Frequencies of responses were stratified by type of provider, identified by exempt versus vaccinated children. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios for responses by provider type.

RESULTS

551 surveys were completed (84.3% response rate). Providers for exempt children had similar attitudes to providers for non-exempt children. However, there were statistically significant increased concerns among providers for exempt children regarding vaccine safety and lack of perceived individual and community benefits for vaccines compared to other providers.

CONCLUSIONS

The great majority of providers for exempt children had similar attitudes about vaccine safety, effectiveness and benefits as providers of non-exempt children. Although providers for exempt children were more likely to believe that multiple vaccines weaken a child's immune system and were concerned about vaccine safety and less likely to consider vaccines were beneficial, a substantial proportion of providers of both exempt and vaccinated children have concerns about vaccine safety and believe that CDC underestimates the frequency of vaccine side effects. Effective continuing education of providers about the risks and benefits of immunization and including in vaccine recommendations more information on pre and post licensing vaccine safety evaluations may help address these concerns.

How should immunization rates be measured in the office setting? A study from PROS and NMA PedsNet

The aim of the study was to compare the validity and reliability of 2 sampling methods for measuring immunization rates to a reference standard in a national sample of pediatric office practices. The consecutive method involved patients seen consecutively in the office for any reason; the random record was a random selection of medical records; and the reference standard active method, data of a randomly selected subgroup of children in the random record survey were supplemented with information from a telephone interview. The consecutive method of assessing immunization rates results in rates that are, on average, higher and closer to the reference standard, but also more variable. The random record method rates are lower and further from the study reference standard compared with the consecutive method, but more precise. The consecutive method for measuring practice immunization rates could be a useful quality improvement tool as practices seek to improve immunization delivery and quality of care. It is inexpensive, simple, and easy to implement.

Factors Influencing Pediatricians' Intention to Recommend Human Papillomavirus Vaccines

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this qualitative study were to describe the range of pediatricians' attitudes about human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines and to explore factors influencing their intention to recommend HPV vaccines, extending the findings of previous quantitative studies.

METHODS

A diverse sample of pediatricians participated in semistructured individual interviews to assess attitudes and intentions regarding HPV immunization. Framework analysis was used for qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 31 participants was 47 years, 17 (55%) were female, 9 (29%) were black, and 4 (13%) were Latino. The efficacy, safety, and potential health impact of vaccination were the primary factors driving participants' decisions about recommending HPV vaccines. Perceived benefits of HPV vaccination included prevention of HPV-related disease and the opportunity to educate adolescents. Perceived barriers included anticipated parental beliefs (eg, parental denial that their child would be at risk) and provider beliefs (eg, reluctance to discuss sexuality with preadolescents). Participants reported high intention to recommend HPV vaccines overall, but intention varied according to patient age, patient gender, and HPV vaccine type. The primary reasons underlying this variation included perceptions about the health impact of vaccination and relevance of HPV vaccines to the provider's patients. The main factors driving intention to recommend HPV vaccines included knowledge, personal and professional characteristics, office procedures, vaccine cost and reimbursement, parental factors, and specific attitudes about HPV vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide a framework for understanding pediatricians' decisions to recommend HPV vaccines and may be used to guide the design of interventions to maximize vaccine recommendations.

Effective strategies for HPV vaccine delivery: the views of pediatricians

PURPOSE

Pediatricians will play a critical role in human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine delivery. The objectives of this research were to examine pediatricians' views about key issues related to HPV vaccine delivery and identify their strategies for effective vaccine delivery.

METHODS

A diverse sample of practicing pediatricians was recruited from a three-state region using a purposeful sampling strategy. Participants completed in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Qualitative data were analyzed using framework analysis.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 31 participants was 47 years (range 30-78 years), and 17 (55%) were female. In all, 18 were white, nine (29%) black, and four (13%) Latino. Participants noted that cultural issues, including a family's religious and ethnic background, were important considerations when recommending an HPV vaccine. Almost all participants believed that vaccination should be universal rather than targeted, but opinions regarding legislative mandates for vaccination varied. Those in favor of mandates cited their potential to maximize the public health impact of immunization, while those opposed noted that HPV is not transmitted casually and were concerned about limited data on the long-term safety and efficacy of HPV vaccines. Pediatricians noted that specific strategies for effective vaccine delivery would be needed for an STI vaccine targeted toward adolescents, especially considering the poor public understanding of HPV. These included provision of HPV vaccines in alternative settings, guidance for pediatricians as to how to address parental concerns, and specific educational initiatives.

CONCLUSIONS

The views of pediatricians, who have extensive experience administering vaccines to children and adolescents, will be valuable as HPV vaccine delivery strategies are designed.

Rates of contraindications and use of alternative vaccines in routine immunisation of children: a population based study in the Czech Republic

Contraindications and requests for alternative vaccines can have important implications on vaccination coverage but population rates of contraindications and alternative vaccination occurring in routine immunisation programmes have not been reported. We investigated the rates of contraindications, the proportion of children who fail to complete regular vaccination, and the use of alternative vaccines within the compulsory immunisation of children in the Czech Republic. We conducted a retrospective review of medical records of all 5038 children born between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2004 and registered in 24 primary paediatric practices. Contraindications against at least one vaccine were found in 291 (5.8%) children. Contraindications were most commonly reported for the DTP-Hib vaccine (263 children, 5.2%), and the most frequent type were central nervous system disorders (171 cases). Contraindications resulted in 181 (3.6%) of incomplete immunisations by at least 1 vaccine, with 80 children (1.6%) remaining unprotected. Alternative vaccines were administered to 935 (18.6%) children; of these, 271 were due to contraindication and 664 on parental request. The rates of contraindications, incomplete immunisations and alternative vaccine use more than tripled over the study period. This study suggests that within the routine immunisation programme, contraindications occur in approximately 6% of children, and many of these children remain incompletely vaccinated.

Support for immunization registries among parents of vaccinated and unvaccinated school-aged children: a case control study

BACKGROUND

Immunizations have reduced childhood vaccine preventable disease incidence by 98-100%. Continued vaccine preventable disease control depends on high immunization coverage. Immunization registries help ensure high coverage by recording childhood immunizations administered, generating reminders when immunizations are due, calculating immunization coverage and identifying pockets needing immunization services, and improving vaccine safety by reducing over-immunization and providing data for post-licensure vaccine safety studies. Despite substantial resources directed towards registry development in the U.S., only 48% of children were enrolled in a registry in 2004. Parental attitudes likely impact child participation. Consequently, the purpose of this study was to assess the attitudes of parents of vaccinated and unvaccinated school-aged children regarding: support for immunization registries; laws authorizing registries and mandating provider reporting; opt-in versus opt-out registry participation; and financial worth and responsibility of registry development and implementation.

METHODS

A case control study of parents of 815 children exempt from school vaccination requirements and 1630 fully vaccinated children was conducted. Children were recruited from 112 elementary schools in Colorado, Massachusetts, Missouri, and Washington. Surveys administered to the parents, asked about views on registries and perceived utility and safety of vaccines. Parental views were summarized and logistic regression models compared differences between parents of exempt and vaccinated children.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed by 56.1% of respondents. Fewer than 10% of parents were aware of immunization registries in their communities. Among parents aware of registries, exempt children were more likely to be enrolled (65.0%) than vaccinated children (26.5%) (p value = 0.01). A substantial proportion of parents of exempt children support immunization registries, particularly if registries offer choice for participation. Few parents of vaccinated (6.8%) and exempt children (6.7%) were aware of laws authorizing immunization registries. Support for laws authorizing registries and requiring health care providers to report to registries was more common among parents of vaccinated than exempt children. Most parents believed that the government, vaccine companies or insurance companies should pay for registries.

CONCLUSION

Parental support for registries was relatively high. Parental support for immunization registries may increase with greater parental awareness of the risks of vaccine preventable diseases and utility of vaccination.

The impact of DTaP-IPV-HB vaccine on use of health services for young infants

BACKGROUND

In 2003, a pentavalent vaccine (diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis, injectable polio and hepatitis B) was introduced into the childhood vaccination schedule. A premarketing study showed a higher incidence of fever than with the vaccines administered separately. Because fevers in young infants prompt medical evaluations, this study examines the impact of this vaccine (DTaP-IPV-HB) on subsequent use of health services.

METHODS

We compared use of health services among 6- to 10-week-old infants receiving DTaP-IPV-HB (n = 1776) with a historical control receiving the prior schedule (n = 2162) at an inner-city practice network. Data sources included a hospital immunization registry and medical records. Outcome measures were visits to the emergency department and ambulatory practices, fever, tests, antibiotics and hospitalizations. Outcomes were stratified by age (<8, 8-10 weeks) and days since vaccination (3, 7).

RESULTS

Infants vaccinated with DTaP-IPV-HB were more likely to visit the ED (1.2% versus 0.6%, P = 0.03) and receive tests (47.6% versus 8.3%, P = 0.03) within 3 days of vaccination compared with the controls. Multivariate analysis showed infants vaccinated with DTaP-IPV-HB had a 7-fold increased risk of receiving a full sepsis workup and a 3-fold increased risk of receiving antibiotics within 7 days of vaccination. Medical evaluations decreased over time after implementation of the DTaP-IPV-HB vaccine. Concurrently, the rate of vaccination for infants <8 weeks markedly dropped.

CONCLUSIONS

The DTaP-IPV-HB vaccine was associated with increased use of health services in the emergency department, but these associations lessened over time. These findings reveal a conflict between the obligation of timely and efficient vaccination with the medical management of febrile young infants.

Do too many shots due lead to missed vaccination opportunities? Does it matter?

BACKGROUND

Missed childhood vaccination opportunities have been generally described, yet not since the immunization schedule's recent rapid expansion. Little is known about the relationship between the number of vaccine doses due and whether all scheduled doses are administered, and the effect of dose deferral on immunization coverage.

METHODS

32 private pediatrics centers reviewed medical records covering the first 2 years of life for 858 patients. For each visit during ages 2-8 months, we determined the numbers of vaccine doses due versus administered. Logistic regression was used to assess the effect of dose deferral on immunization coverage at ages 1 and 2 years.

RESULTS

Of 2224 visits during ages 2-8 months at which > or =1 dose was administered, > or =1 due dose was deferred at 26%, 34%, and 48% of the visits at which < or =3, 4, and 5 doses were due, respectively. Absence of a deferred dose visit predicted increased coverage at age 1 (adjusted odds ratio: 2.4, 95% confidence interval: 1.8-3.2) and 2 years (2.1, 1.4-3.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Administering some but not all vaccine doses at visits during ages 2-8 months impairs immunization coverage through age 2 years.

Office laboratory procedures, office economics, parenting and parent education, and urinary tract infection

Four areas of pediatric office practice are again reviewed: office laboratory procedures, office economics, parenting and parent education, and urinary tract infection. Screening for celiac disease and the use of rapid antigen testing for extrapharyngeal group A Streptococcus infections are included in office laboratory procedures. Utilization of health care among patients with public insurance, electronic medical records, billing among pediatric residents, and satisfaction surveys are reviewed in office economics. Challenges related to breastfeeding, obesity management and timely immunizations are covered within parenting and parent education. Finally, the use of an augmented urinalysis and a discussion of imaging for first febrile urinary tract infections are included in the area of urinary tract infection.

'Parsimonious' versus patient-centered care: quality issues in childhood immunization

As currently practiced, the standard of care strictly limiting the number of medical conditions that warrant withholding vaccination may be incompatible with the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) recommendation for patient-centered care. Furthermore, the "parsimonious" approach to accepting contraindications to vaccination is inconsistent with the IOM's recommendation to consider alternative vaccination schedules and policies aimed at redistributing the benefits and burdens of immunization. This critical perspective is examined within the framework of five rules proposed by the IOM. There is an opportunity to improve the quality of childhood immunization by adopting a patient-centered approach, identifying individuals at risk for acute and/or delayed adverse vaccine effects, and developing alternative immunization schedules for these high-risk children.

The immunization delivery effectiveness assessment score: a better immunization measure?

BACKGROUND

Childhood immunization measures, such as the Health Employer Data Information Set (HEDIS) or the National Immunization Survey, assess the percentage of children up-to-date for a specified series of vaccinations. In particular, the HEDIS assesses immunization delivery to children enrolled in managed care organizations (MCO). Such measures do not assess the timeliness of immunization delivery with reference to recommended age standards. To achieve maximal protection against vaccine-preventable diseases, children should receive all immunizations within recommended age intervals-fully "on-time."

OBJECTIVE

The Immunization Delivery Effectiveness Assessment (IDEA) is a novel immunization measure that assesses, on a continuous scale, the timeliness of administration of each vaccination with reference to recommended age intervals. Specifically we ask: 1) Do absolute immunization rates differ between HEDIS and IDEA? 2) Does relative MCO performance differ when assessed by the 2 performance measures? 3) How well do MCOs perform relative to the standard of fully on-time immunization? The health services implications of using the timeliness standard to assess childhood immunization delivery is discussed.

METHODS

A vaccine-dose IDEA score was developed for each of the 14 vaccination events in the 4:3:1:3:3 combination series (4 diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus:3 polio:1 measles-mumps-rubella:3 Haemophilus influenzae type B:3 hepatitis B). Assessing the actual age of administration with reference to the recommended age of administration generates the vaccine-dose IDEA score. A child's composite IDEA score is obtained by averaging the 14 vaccine-dose IDEA scores. These composite IDEA scores, when averaged among children sampled within the MCO, constitute the MCO's immunization score.

SETTING

Retrospective analysis of childhood immunization datasets from a convenience sample of 6 MCOs in 5 states.

RESULTS

HEDIS rates ranged from 57% to 75%. IDEA scores ranged from 80% to 90%. Relative rankings of MCO immunization performance were different using HEDIS rates and IDEA scores, respectively. At most, 16% of children in any of these MCOs received all of their immunizations fully on-time. From 47% to 77% of children experienced at least 3 delayed immunizations.

CONCLUSIONS

An immunization measure based on timeliness of administration yields both absolute and relative differences in MCO childhood immunization performance when compared with HEDIS rates. By assessing delivery of each component vaccination, the IDEA score permits more detailed analysis of immunization patterns within an MCO and focuses improvement efforts.

Association between parents' preferences and perceptions of barriers to vaccination and the immunization status of their children: a study from Pediatric Research in Office Settings and the National Medical Association

OBJECTIVES

To assess the association between parents' perceptions of various barriers to vaccination and their preferences regarding specific strategies designed to reduce missed vaccination opportunities and the immunization status of their children and to estimate the overall contribution of the perception of barriers on underimmunization among children who are vaccinated in pediatricians' offices.

METHODS

As part of a nationwide study on the immunization status of children followed by practicing pediatricians, parents of children who were 8 to 35 months of age and seen consecutively at 177 participating practice sites completed a survey on health beliefs regarding the vaccination process. In addition to demographic information, parents were asked to identify the most difficult thing about obtaining immunizations, as well as their preferences regarding the maximum number of vaccine injections that should be administered to their child at 1 visit and for receiving a needed immunization during an office visit for a mild illness. Immunization data on study children were abstracted from the practice medical record, and specific survey responses for each parent were compared with the immunization status of his or her child at 8 months of age using chi2 tests. For parental health beliefs associated with immunization status by bivariate analyses, the relative risks for underimmunization and population-attributable risk percentages of each belief were calculated after potentially confounding variables were adjusted for.

RESULTS

Immunization data were collected on 13 520 children; 13 516 parents responded to at least 1 question regarding vaccination health beliefs. Two thirds of the responding parents indicated that their child should receive no more than 2 immunizations at 1 visit. However, there was no difference in the preferred maximum number of vaccines between parents of children who were fully immunized at 8 months of age and those of underimmunized children. Similarly, there was no difference in a stated preference for receiving a needed immunization during an illness visit. Overall, 74% of respondents indicated that there was "nothing" difficult about obtaining vaccines for their children. The most commonly cited barrier was concern about the side effects of vaccines, identified by 22.6% of parents. However, this barrier was not associated with immunization status. Each of the remaining barriers-including the confusing vaccination schedule, expense of vaccines, the inconvenience of the vaccination process, having a child who was often too ill to receive vaccines, religious objections, and other identified barriers-was statistically associated with immunization status, with adjusted relative risks for underimmunization ranging from 1.42 to 3.04. However, because each of these barriers was identified as important by <5% of parents, the population-attributable risk percentage for each was < or =2.5%. Overall, it was estimated that parental perception of barriers associated with immunization status accounts for 8.0% of the underimmunization observed among children who are vaccinated in the offices of primary care pediatricians.

CONCLUSIONS

Parental preferences regarding vaccination practices designed to reduce missed opportunities were not associated with the immunization status of their children. Although several barriers to vaccination were associated with immunization status, individual barriers were identified by a small minority of parents. Overall, parental perceptions of barriers to vaccination do not seem to be a significant cause of underimmunization in this population of children.