Increasing immunization rates among inner-city, African American children. A randomized trial of case management

The effects of a large-scale home visiting programme for child development on use of health services in Brazil

Partnership between early childhood development interventions and primary health care services can help catalyse health care uptake by socially vulnerable families. This study aimed to assess the real-life effects of a large-scale home visiting programme [Primeira Infância Melhor (PIM)] in Brazil on the use of preventive (prenatal visits, well child visits, dentist visits and vaccination) and recovery (emergency room visits and hospitalization) health services. A quasi-experiment nested in a population-based birth cohort study was conducted. The intervention group was firstly defined as all children enrolled in PIM up to age 6 months, and afterwards stratified between those enrolled during pregnancy or after birth up to 6 months. Children receiving PIM were matched with controls on propensity scores based on 27 confounders to estimate effects on health service use from prenatal to age 2 years. Double adjustment was applied in outcome Quasi-Poisson regressions. No evidence was found for effects of PIM starting anytime up to 6 months (262 pairs), or for the children enrolled only after birth (133 pairs), on outcomes occurring after age 6 months. When the programme started during pregnancy (129 pairs), there was a 13% higher prevalence of adequate prenatal visits (prevalence ratio = 1.13; 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.27), but no effect on use of any other health service. Sensitivity analyses suggested longer participation in the programme with reduced visitor turnover might improve its impact on prenatal visits. Integration between PIM and primary health care was not adequate to affect overall patterns of contacts with health services. Nevertheless, prenatal home visits showed potential to increase health service contact during a sensitive period of development, indicating the need to start such programmes before birth, when there is more time for maternal care, and family engagement in a network of services is facilitated.

Effect of Automated and Personalized Outreach Messages on Well-Child Visit Catch Up: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of text/telephone outreach messages and personal contact attempts on well-child care (WCC) scheduling and completion and measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine receipt.

METHODS

We conducted an intent-to-treat, 2 × 2 factorial randomized clinical trial with 3 replications at 3 academic pediatric primary care practices from September 27, 2020 to August 6, 2021. We randomized participants to 1 of 4 groups: 1 automated message (group 1), 2 automated messages (group 2), 1 automated message plus personal contact attempts (group 3), or 2 automated messages plus personal contact attempts (group 4). Outcomes included: 1) scheduled WCC within 2 weeks (secondary outcome), 2) completed WCC within 8 weeks (secondary outcome), 3) receipt of first MMR by 15 months of age or second MMR within 3 months of first message for 4-year-olds (primary outcome).

RESULTS

We randomized 1312 patients (mean [SD] age = 38.8 [19.3] months, 53.5% male, 72.8% non-Hispanic Black, 86.9% Medicaid-enrolled). Scheduling rates were significantly higher in groups with personal contact attempts compared to those without (1 = 15.2%, 2 = 12.5%, 3 = 29.3%, and 4 = 31.5%). WCC completion rates also differed across groups: 1 = 27.4%, 2 = 22.3%, 3 = 32.0%, and 4 = 29.4%, with groups 3 and 4 having significantly higher rates than group 2. Similarly, groups 3 (30.2%) and 4 (31.8%) had significantly higher rates of receiving the MMR vaccine compared to group 2 (23.5%) but not group 1 (28.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Outreach messages that were followed by personal contact attempts increased the rates of scheduling and completing WCCs and receiving the MMR vaccine, providing a useful tool to re-engage at-risk populations.

A Systematic Review of Behaviour Change Techniques within Interventions to Increase Vaccine Uptake among Ethnic Minority Populations

COVID-19 caused significant morbidity and mortality amongst ethnic minority groups, but vaccine uptake remained lower than non-minoritised groups. Interventions to increase vaccine uptake among ethnic minority communities are crucial. This systematic review synthesises and evaluates behaviour change techniques (BCTs) in interventions to increase vaccination uptake in ethnic minority populations. We searched five databases and grey literature sources. From 7637 records identified, 23 studies were included in the review. Interventions were categorised using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and Behaviour Change Taxonomy v1. Vaccines included influenza, pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria, meningitis and hepatitis. Interventions were primarily delivered in health centres/clinics and community settings. Six BCW intervention functions and policy categories and 26 BCTs were identified. The main intervention functions used were education, persuasion and enablement. Overall, effective interventions had multi-components and were tailored to specific populations. No strong evidence was observed to recommend specific interventions, but raising awareness and involvement of community organisations was associated with positive effects. Several strategies are used to increase vaccine uptake among ethnic minority communities; however, these do not address all issues related to low vaccine acceptance. There is a strong need for an increased understanding of addressing vaccine hesitancy among ethnic minority groups.

Overcoming Vaccine Hesitancy Using Community-Based Efforts

Vaccine acceptance by parents and caregivers remains a public health challenge that can potentially be addressed via community-based strategies. Such strategies might augment current vaccine hesitancy interventions occurring within medical homes. This article reviews the key challenges and advantages of evidence-based community strategies for overcoming parent/caregiver vaccine hesitancy, specifically (1) community-participatory vaccine hesitancy measurement, (2) communication approaches, (3) reinforcement techniques (eg, incentives, mandates), and (4) community-engaged partnerships (eg, vaccine champion training, vaccination in community settings). This article also discusses important considerations when vaccinating children and adolescents in non-primary care settings (school-based health centers, pharmacies, community events).

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is one of the most effective ways to prevent serious illnesses and deaths in children. However, worldwide, many children do not receive all recommended vaccinations, for several potential reasons. Vaccines might be unavailable, or parents may experience difficulties in accessing vaccination services; for instance, because of poor quality health services, distance from a health facility, or lack of money. Some parents may not accept available vaccines and vaccination services. Our understanding of what influences parents' views and practices around childhood vaccination, and why some parents may not accept vaccines for their children, is still limited. This synthesis links to Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to improve coverage or uptake of childhood vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

- Explore parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination, and the factors influencing acceptance, hesitancy, or nonacceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors reduce parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three other databases for eligible studies from 1974 to June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that: utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on parents' or caregivers' views, practices, acceptance, hesitancy, or refusal of routine vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where childhood vaccination is provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a pre-specified sampling frame to sample from eligible studies, aiming to capture studies that were conceptually rich, relevant to the review's phenomenon of interest, from diverse geographical settings, and from a range of income-level settings. We extracted contextual and methodological data from each sampled study. We used a meta-ethnographic approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of criteria used in previous Cochrane Reviews and originally based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We integrated the findings of this review with those from relevant Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. We did this by mapping whether the underlying theories or components of trial interventions included in those reviews related to or targeted the overarching factors influencing parental views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination identified by this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 145 studies in the review and sampled 27 of these for our analysis. Six studies were conducted in Africa, seven in the Americas, four in South-East Asia, nine in Europe, and one in the Western Pacific. Studies included urban and rural settings, and high-, middle-, and low-income settings. Many complex factors were found to influence parents' vaccination views and practices, which we divided into four themes. Firstly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their broader ideas and practices surrounding health and illness generally, and specifically with regards to their children, and their perceptions of the role of vaccination within this context. Secondly, many parents' vaccination ideas and practices were influenced by the vaccination ideas and practices of the people they mix with socially. At the same time, shared vaccination ideas and practices helped some parents establish social relationships, which in turn strengthened their views and practices around vaccination. Thirdly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by wider political issues and concerns, and particularly their trust (or distrust) in those associated with vaccination programmes. Finally, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their access to and experiences of vaccination services and their frontline healthcare workers. We developed two concepts for understanding possible pathways to reduced acceptance of childhood vaccination. The first concept, 'neoliberal logic', suggests that many parents, particularly from high-income countries, understood health and healthcare decisions as matters of individual risk, choice, and responsibility. Some parents experienced this understanding as in conflict with vaccination programmes, which emphasise generalised risk and population health. This perceived conflict led some parents to be less accepting of vaccination for their children. The second concept, 'social exclusion', suggests that some parents, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, were less accepting of childhood vaccination due to their experiences of social exclusion. Social exclusion may damage trustful relationships between government and the public, generate feelings of isolation and resentment, and give rise to demotivation in the face of public services that are poor quality and difficult to access. These factors in turn led some parents who were socially excluded to distrust vaccination, to refuse vaccination as a form of resistance or a way to bring about change, or to avoid vaccination due to the time, costs, and distress it creates. Many of the overarching factors our review identified as influencing parents' vaccination views and practices were underrepresented in the interventions tested in the four related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review has revealed that parents' views and practices regarding childhood vaccination are complex and dynamic social processes that reflect multiple webs of influence, meaning, and logic. We have provided a theorised understanding of the social processes contributing to vaccination acceptance (or not), thereby complementing but also extending more individualistic models of vaccination acceptance. Successful development of interventions to promote acceptance and uptake of childhood vaccination will require an understanding of, and then tailoring to, the specific factors influencing vaccination views and practices of the group(s) in the target setting. The themes and concepts developed through our review could serve as a basis for gaining this understanding, and subsequent development of interventions that are potentially more aligned with the norms, expectations, and concerns of target users.

Effective interventions to increase routine childhood immunization coverage in low socioeconomic status communities in developed countries: A systematic review and critical appraisal of peer-reviewed literature

OBJECTIVES

Childhood immunization coverage rates are known to be disproportionate according to population's socioeconomic status (SES). This systematic review examined and appraised quality of interventions deemed effective to increase routine childhood immunization uptake in low SES populations in developed countries.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, EBMR, PsycInfo, PubMed, and Health STAR. We systematically searched and critically appraised articles published between January 1990 and December 2019 using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tool. This systematic review provides a synthesis of the available evidence for childhood immunization interventions deemed effective for low SES parents or families of children ≤ 5 years of age.

SYNTHESIS

The search yielded 3317 records, of which 2975 studies met the inclusion criteria. From the 100 relevant studies, a total of 40 were included. The majority of effective and strongly rated studies synthesized consisted of multi-component interventions. Such interventions addressed access, community-based mobilization, outreach, appointment reminders, education, clinical tracking and incentives, and were language and health literacy appropriate to support low SES parents. Improving access to low SES parents was deemed effective in the vast majority of strongly rated studies. Incorrect contact information of low SES parents due to increased social mobility (i.e. household moves) rendered reminders ineffective, and therefore, updating contact information should be pursued proactively by front-line healthcare providers. In addition, plain language communication with low SES parents regarding immunization was deemed effective in improving immunization uptake.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive multi-component interventions including improved access, appointment reminders, education and precision health communication are effective for addressing health inequities in immunization coverage amongst marginalized populations. Most low SES parents still believe that the benefits of immunization outweigh the risks.

Persistent Disparities in Immunization Rates for the Seven-Vaccine Series Among Infants 19-35 Months in the United States

Objective: The seven-vaccine series protects infants from several preventable diseases, yet disparities in its use remain in the United States.

Methods: We assessed the seven-vaccine immunization rate and its predictors in infants 19–35 months using the National Immunization Survey from 2009 to 2018.

Results: The seven-vaccine series rate was 72.8%, well short of the healthy people 2020 target of 90%. African American infants, infants born to mothers with less than high school education, and infants in families with an income below poverty were less likely to get the complete series.

Conclusion: Disparities still exist in protecting infants from preventable diseases in the United States.

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.

Attendance at Well-Child Visits After Reach Out and Read

Attendance at well-child visits (WCVs) is a sine qua non of preventive care. We hypothesized that Reach Out and Read (ROR) would be associated with better WCV attendance. Parents of children 76 to 72 months at 8 clinics who did not yet have ROR reported how many WCVs their child had attended in the previous year; separate samples at the same clinics were interviewed 16 months after the ROR program was instituted. Comparing 267 parents before ROR and 254 after, the percentage who had attended the minimum number of WCVs required by the American Academy of Pediatrics periodicity schedule rose from 67.4% (180/267) to 78.3% (199/254; P < .01). This difference remained significant after controlling for multiple potential confounding factors (estimated odds ratio = 2.1, 95% confidence interval = 1.3-3.5). The largest differences were among Latino children and children of less-educated parents. Programs to enhance early literacy may increase attendance at WCVs among at-risk families.

Systematic review of the incremental costs of interventions that increase immunization coverage

Achieving and maintaining high vaccination coverage requires investments, but the costs and effectiveness of interventions to increase coverage remain poorly characterized. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify peer-reviewed studies published in English that reported interventions aimed at increasing immunization coverage and the associated costs and effectiveness of the interventions. We found limited information in the literature, with many studies reporting effectiveness estimates, but not providing cost information. Using the available data, we developed a cost function to support future programmatic decisions about investments in interventions to increase immunization coverage for relatively low and high-income countries. The cost function estimates the non-vaccine cost per dose of interventions to increase absolute immunization coverage by one percent, through either campaigns or routine immunization. The cost per dose per percent increase in absolute coverage increased with higher baseline coverage, demonstrating increasing incremental costs required to reach higher coverage levels. Future studies should evaluate the performance of the cost function and add to the database of available evidence to better characterize heterogeneity in costs and generalizability of the cost function.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of interventions to increase influenza vaccination uptake in people aged 60 years and older varies by country and participant characteristics. This review updates versions published in 2010 and 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess access, provider, system, and societal interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years and older in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and ERIC for this update, as well as WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing studies to 7 December 2017. We also searched the reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomised trials of interventions to increase influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years or older in the community.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as specified by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three new RCTs for this update (total 61 RCTs; 1,055,337 participants). Trials involved people aged 60 years and older living in the community in high-income countries. Heterogeneity limited some meta-analyses. We assessed studies as at low risk of bias for randomisation (38%), allocation concealment (11%), blinding (44%), and selective reporting (100%). Half (51%) had missing data. We assessed the evidence as low-quality. We identified three levels of intervention intensity: low (e.g. postcards), medium (e.g. personalised phone calls), and high (e.g. home visits, facilitators).Increasing community demand (12 strategies, 41 trials, 53 study arms, 767,460 participants)One successful intervention that could be meta-analysed was client reminders or recalls by letter plus leaflet or postcard compared to reminder (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.15; 3 studies; 64,200 participants). Successful interventions tested by single studies were patient outreach by retired teachers (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.79 to 6.22); invitations by clinic receptionists (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76); nurses or pharmacists educating and nurses vaccinating patients (OR 152.95, 95% CI 9.39 to 2490.67); medical students counselling patients (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.35); and multiple recall questionnaires (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.24).Some interventions could not be meta-analysed due to significant heterogeneity: 17 studies tested simple reminders (11 with 95% CI entirely above unity); 16 tested personalised reminders (12 with 95% CI entirely above unity); two investigated customised compared to form letters (both 95% CI above unity); and four studies examined the impact of health risk appraisals (all had 95% CI above unity). One study of a lottery for free groceries was not effective.Enhancing vaccination access (6 strategies, 8 trials, 10 arms, 9353 participants)We meta-analysed results from two studies of home visits (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61) and two studies that tested free vaccine compared to patient payment for vaccine (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.82). We were unable to conduct meta-analyses of two studies of home visits by nurses plus a physician care plan (both with 95% CI above unity) and two studies of free vaccine compared to no intervention (both with 95% CI above unity). One study of group visits (OR 27.2, 95% CI 1.60 to 463.3) was effective, and one study of home visits compared to safety interventions was not.Provider- or system-based interventions (11 strategies, 15 trials, 17 arms, 278,524 participants)One successful intervention that could be meta-analysed focused on payments to physicians (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.77). Successful interventions tested by individual studies were: reminding physicians to vaccinate all patients (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.99); posters in clinics presenting vaccination rates and encouraging competition between doctors (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.22); and chart reviews and benchmarking to the rates achieved by the top 10% of physicians (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.37 to 4.97).We were unable to meta-analyse four studies that looked at physician reminders (three studies with 95% CI above unity) and three studies of facilitator encouragement of vaccination (two studies with 95% CI above unity). Interventions that were not effective were: comparing letters on discharge from hospital to letters to general practitioners; posters plus postcards versus posters alone; educational reminders, academic detailing, and peer comparisons compared to mailed educational materials; educational outreach plus feedback to teams versus written feedback; and an intervention to increase staff vaccination rates.Interventions at the societal levelNo studies reported on societal-level interventions.Study funding sourcesStudies were funded by government health organisations (n = 33), foundations (n = 9), organisations that provided healthcare services in the studies (n = 3), and a pharmaceutical company offering free vaccines (n = 1). Fifteen studies did not report study funding sources.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified interventions that demonstrated significant positive effects of low (postcards), medium (personalised phone calls), and high (home visits, facilitators) intensity that increase community demand for vaccination, enhance access, and improve provider/system response. The overall GRADE assessment of the evidence was moderate quality. Conclusions are unchanged from the 2014 review.

Face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination

BACKGROUND

Early childhood vaccination is an essential global public health practice that saves two to three million lives each year, but many children do not receive all the recommended vaccines. To achieve and maintain appropriate coverage rates, vaccination programmes rely on people having sufficient awareness and acceptance of vaccines.Face-to-face information or educational interventions are widely used to help parents understand why vaccines are important; explain where, how and when to access services; and address hesitancy and concerns about vaccine safety or efficacy. Such interventions are interactive, and can be adapted to target particular populations or identified barriers.This is an update of a review originally published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination on vaccination status and parental knowledge, attitudes and intention to vaccinate.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and two trial registries (July and August 2017). We screened reference lists of relevant articles, and contacted authors of included studies and experts in the field. We had no language or date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs evaluating the effects of face-to-face interventions delivered to parents or expectant parents to inform or educate them about early childhood vaccination, compared with control or with another face-to-face intervention. The World Health Organization recommends that children receive all early childhood vaccines, with the exception of human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV), which is delivered to adolescents.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently reviewed all search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, we found four new studies, for a total of ten studies. We included seven RCTs and three cluster-RCTs involving a total of 4527 participants, although we were unable to pool the data from one cluster-RCT. Three of the ten studies were conducted in low- or middle- income countries.All included studies compared face-to-face interventions with control. Most studies evaluated the effectiveness of a single intervention session delivered to individual parents. The interventions were an even mix of short (ten minutes or less) and longer sessions (15 minutes to several hours).Overall, elements of the study designs put them at moderate to high risk of bias. All studies but one were at low risk of bias for sequence generation (i.e. used a random number sequence). For allocation concealment (i.e. the person randomising participants was unaware of the study group to which participant would be allocated), three were at high risk and one was judged at unclear risk of bias. Due to the educational nature of the intervention, blinding of participants and personnel was not possible in any studies. The risk of bias due to blinding of outcome assessors was judged as low for four studies. Most studies were at unclear risk of bias for incomplete outcome data and selective reporting. Other potential sources of bias included failure to account for clustering in a cluster-RCT and significant unexplained baseline differences between groups. One cluster-RCT was at high risk for selective recruitment of participants.We judged the certainty of the evidence to be low for the outcomes of children's vaccination status, parents' attitudes or beliefs, intention to vaccinate, adverse effects (e.g. anxiety), and immunisation cost, and moderate for parents' knowledge or understanding. All studies had limitations in design. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence where we judged that studies had problems with randomisation or allocation concealment, or when outcomes were self-reported by participants who knew whether they'd received the intervention or not. We also downgraded the certainty for inconsistency (vaccination status), imprecision (intention to vaccinate and adverse effects), and indirectness (attitudes or beliefs, and cost).Low-certainty evidence from seven studies (3004 participants) suggested that face-to-face interventions to inform or educate parents may improve vaccination status (risk ratio (RR) 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.37). Moderate-certainty evidence from four studies (657 participants) found that face-to-face interventions probably slightly improved parent knowledge (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.19, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.38), and low-certainty evidence from two studies (179 participants) suggested they may slightly improve intention to vaccinate (SMD 0.55, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.85). Low-certainty evidence found the interventions may lead to little or no change in parent attitudes or beliefs about vaccination (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.27; three studies, 292 participants), or in parents' anxiety (mean difference (MD) -1.93, 95% CI -7.27 to 3.41; one study, 90 participants). Only one study (365 participants) measured the intervention cost of a case management strategy, reporting that the estimated additional cost per fully immunised child for the intervention was approximately eight times higher than usual care (low-certainty evidence). No included studies reported outcomes associated with parents' experience of the intervention (e.g. satisfaction).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggesting that face-to-face information or education may improve or slightly improve children's vaccination status, parents' knowledge, and parents' intention to vaccinate.Face-to-face interventions may be more effective in populations where lack of awareness or understanding of vaccination is identified as a barrier (e.g. where people are unaware of new or optional vaccines). The effect of the intervention in a population where concerns about vaccines or vaccine hesitancy is the primary barrier is less clear. Reliable and validated scales for measuring more complex outcomes, such as attitudes or beliefs, are necessary in order to improve comparisons of the effects across studies.

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.

Interventions to increase pediatric vaccine uptake: An overview of recent findings

Although much is known about factors contributing to variation in pediatric immunization uptake, there is a need for synthesis of effective vaccine promotion strategies. With growing public health concern on how to best sustain high pediatric immunization rates, and improve where the rates are suboptimal, this review offers evidence gathered from several studies on the achievement of these goals. We identified and analyzed reported findings on childhood (primarily ≤ 7 years) immunization outcomes from tested intervention strategies that focused on parents, guardians, and caregivers, as well as providers, clinics/practices, and communities. The findings suggest that targeted and tailored interventions offer substantial possibilities, especially in a combined manner. We describe promising intervention models that have been operationalized with success and provide evidence for scalability across contexts. Moreover, they are sensitive to parents' and providers' needs, are feasibly integrated in daily clinical practice, and account for broader community concerns and issues.

Measuring inequalities in immunization in Wales and the impact of interventions

We reviewed uptake of childhood immunization in Wales by quintile of deprivation and found that uptake was significantly lower in residents in the most socio-economically deprived areas compared with the least deprived. Differences were greater in older children. Services generally met best practice recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; however, follow up of children who had not responded to invitations to attend routine immunization sessions needed more consistent implementation. Over a three year period to 2014-15 the difference in uptake between upper and lower quintiles at the fourth birthday reduced from 8.9% to 6.7%.

Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is an effective way to prevent serious childhood illnesses, but many children do not receive all the recommended vaccines. There are various reasons for this; some parents lack access because of poor quality health services, long distances or lack of money. Other parents may not trust vaccines or the healthcare workers who provide them, or they may not see the need for vaccination due to a lack of information or misinformation about how vaccinations work and the diseases they can prevent.Communication with parents about childhood vaccinations is one way of addressing these issues. Communication can take place at healthcare facilities, at home or in the community. Communication can be two-way, for example face-to-face discussions between parents and healthcare providers, or one-way, for instance via text messages, posters or radio programmes. Some types of communication enable parents to actively discuss vaccines and their benefits and harms, as well as diseases they can prevent. Other communication types simply give information about vaccination issues or when and where vaccines are available. People involved in vaccine programmes need to understand how parents experience different types of communication about vaccination and how this influences their decision to vaccinate.

OBJECTIVES

The specific objectives of the review were to identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative studies exploring: parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences regarding communication about childhood vaccinations and the manner in which it is communicated; and the influence that vaccination communication has on parents' and informal caregivers' decisions regarding childhood vaccination.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), MEDLINE In-process and Other Non-Index Citations (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EbscoHOST), and Anthropology Plus (EbscoHost) databases for eligible studies from inception to 30 August 2016. We developed search strategies for each database, using guidelines developed by the Cochrane Qualitative Research Methods Group for searching for qualitative evidence as well as modified versions of the search developed for three related reviews of effectiveness. There were no date or geographic restrictions for the search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on the views and experiences of parents and informal caregivers regarding information about vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where information about childhood vaccinations was communicated or distributed.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used maximum variation purposive sampling for data synthesis, using a three-step sampling frame. We conducted a thematic analysis using a constant comparison strategy for data extraction and synthesis. We assessed our confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. High confidence suggests that it is highly likely that the review finding is a reasonable representation of the phenomenon of interest, while very low confidence indicates that it is not clear whether the review finding is a reasonable representation of it. Using a matrix model, we then integrated our findings with those from other Cochrane reviews that assessed the effects of different communication strategies on parents' knowledge, attitudes and behaviour about childhood vaccination.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 studies, mostly from high-income countries, many of which explored mothers' perceptions of vaccine communication. Some focused on the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine.In general, parents wanted more information than they were getting (high confidence in the evidence). Lack of information led to worry and regret about vaccination decisions among some parents (moderate confidence).Parents wanted balanced information about vaccination benefits and harms (high confidence), presented clearly and simply (moderate confidence) and tailored to their situation (low confidence in the evidence). Parents wanted vaccination information to be available at a wider variety of locations, including outside health services (low confidence) and in good time before each vaccination appointment (moderate confidence).Parents viewed health workers as an important source of information and had specific expectations of their interactions with them (high confidence). Poor communication and negative relationships with health workers sometimes impacted on vaccination decisions (moderate confidence).Parents generally found it difficult to know which vaccination information source to trust and challenging to find information they felt was unbiased and balanced (high confidence).The amount of information parents wanted and the sources they felt could be trusted appeared to be linked to acceptance of vaccination, with parents who were more hesitant wanting more information (low to moderate confidence).Our synthesis and comparison of the qualitative evidence shows that most of the trial interventions addressed at least one or two key aspects of communication, including the provision of information prior to the vaccination appointment and tailoring information to parents' needs. None of the interventions appeared to respond to negative media stories or address parental perceptions of health worker motives.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have high or moderate confidence in the evidence contributing to several review findings. Further research, especially in rural and low- to middle-income country settings, could strengthen evidence for the findings where we had low or very low confidence. Planners should consider the timing for making vaccination information available to parents, the settings where information is available, the provision of impartial and clear information tailored to parental needs, and parents' perceptions of health workers and the information provided.

Increasing Coverage of Appropriate Vaccinations: A Community Guide Systematic Economic Review

CONTEXT

Population-level coverage for immunization against many vaccine-preventable diseases remains below optimal rates in the U.S. The Community Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended several interventions to increase vaccination coverage based on systematic reviews of the evaluation literature. The present study provides the economic results from those reviews.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review was conducted (search period, January 1980 through February 2012) to identify economic evaluations of 12 interventions recommended by the Task Force. Evidence was drawn from included studies; estimates were constructed for the population reach of each strategy, cost of implementation, and cost per additional vaccinated person because of the intervention. Analyses were conducted in 2014.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Reminder systems, whether for clients or providers, were among the lowest-cost strategies to implement and the most cost effective in terms of additional people vaccinated. Strategies involving home visits and combination strategies in community settings were both costly and less cost effective. Strategies based in settings such as schools and MCOs that reached the target population achieved additional vaccinations in the middle range of cost effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

The interventions recommended by the Task Force differed in reach, cost, and cost effectiveness. This systematic review presents the economic information for 12 effective strategies to increase vaccination coverage that can guide implementers in their choice of interventions to fit their local needs, available resources, and budget.

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.

Parental reminder, recall and educational interventions to improve early childhood immunisation uptake: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Vaccination is one of the most effective ways of reducing childhood mortality. Despite global uptake of childhood vaccinations increasing, rates remain sub-optimal, meaning that vaccine-preventable diseases still pose a public health risk. A range of interventions to promote vaccine uptake have been developed, although this range has not specifically been reviewed in early childhood. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of parental interventions to improve early childhood (0-5 years) vaccine uptake. Twenty-eight controlled studies contributed to six separate meta-analyses evaluating aspects of parental reminders and education. All interventions were to some extent effective, although findings were generally heterogeneous and random effects models were estimated. Receiving both postal and telephone reminders was the most effective reminder-based intervention (RD=0.1132; 95% CI=0.033-0.193). Sub-group analyses suggested that educational interventions were more effective in low- and middle-income countries (RD=0.13; 95% CI=0.05-0.22) and when conducted through discussion (RD=0.12; 95% CI=0.02-0.21). Current evidence most supports the use of postal reminders as part of the standard management of childhood immunisations. Parents at high risk of non-compliance may benefit from recall strategies and/or discussion-based forums, however further research is needed to assess the appropriateness of these strategies.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 and older is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess access, provider, system and societal interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years and older in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 1950 to May week 3 2014), EMBASE (1980 to June 2014), AgeLine (1978 to 4 June 2014), ERIC (1965 to June 2014) and CINAHL (1982 to June 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase influenza vaccination uptake in people aged 60 and older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted influenza vaccine uptake data.

MAIN RESULTS

This update identified 13 new RCTs; the review now includes a total of 57 RCTs with 896,531 participants. The trials included community-dwelling seniors in high-income countries. Heterogeneity limited meta-analysis. The percentage of trials with low risk of bias for each domain was as follows: randomisation (33%); allocation concealment (11%); blinding (44%); missing data (49%) and selective reporting (100%). Increasing community demand (32 trials, 10 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: three trials (n = 64,200) of letter plus leaflet/postcard compared to letter (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.15); two trials (n = 614) of nurses/pharmacists educating plus vaccinating patients (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.91 to 5.66); single trials of a phone call from a senior (n = 193) (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.79 to 6.22), a telephone invitation versus clinic drop-in (n = 243) (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76), a free groceries lottery (n = 291) (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.76) and nurses educating and vaccinating patients (n = 485) (OR 152.95, 95% CI 9.39 to 2490.67).We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: postcard/letter/pamphlets (16 trials, n = 592,165); tailored communications (16 trials, n = 388,164); customised letter/phone-call (four trials, n = 82,465) and client-based appraisals (three trials, n = 4016), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Enhancing vaccination access (10 trials, six strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2112) of home visits compared to clinic invitation (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61); two trials (n = 2251) of free vaccine (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.82) and one trial (n = 321) of patient group visits (OR 24.85, 95% CI 1.45 to 425.32). One trial (n = 350) of a home visit plus vaccine encouragement compared to a home visit plus safety advice was non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: nurse home visits (two trials, n = 2069) and free vaccine compared to no intervention (two trials, n = 2250). Provider- or system-based interventions (17 trials, 11 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2815) of paying physicians (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.77); one trial (n = 316) of reminding physicians about all their patients (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.99); one trial (n = 8376) of posters plus postcards (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.22); one trial (n = 1360) of chart review/feedback (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.37 to 4.97) and one trial (n = 27,580) of educational outreach/feedback (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.81).Trials of posters plus postcards versus posters (n = 5753), academic detailing (n = 1400) and increasing staff vaccination rates (n = 26,432) were non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: reminding physicians (four trials, n = 202,264) and practice facilitators (three trials, n = 2183), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Interventions at the societal level We identified no RCTs of interventions at the societal level.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are interventions that are effective for increasing community demand for vaccination, enhancing access and improving provider/system response. Heterogeneity limited pooling of trials.

Face to face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination (also described as immunisation) is an important and effective way to reduce childhood illness and death. However, there are many children who do not receive the recommended vaccines because their parents do not know why vaccination is important, do not understand how, where or when to get their children vaccinated, disagree with vaccination as a public health measure, or have concerns about vaccine safety.Face to face interventions to inform or educate parents about routine childhood vaccination may improve vaccination rates and parental knowledge or understanding of vaccination. Such interventions may describe or explain the practical and logistical factors associated with vaccination, and enable parents to understand the meaning and relevance of vaccination for their family or community.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of face to face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination on immunisation uptake and parental knowledge.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1946 to July 2012); EMBASE + Embase Classic (OvidSP) (1947 to July 2012); CINAHL (EbscoHOST) (1981 to July 2012); PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1806 to July 2012); Global Health (CAB) (1910 to July 2012); Global Health Library (WHO) (searched July 2012); Google Scholar (searched September 2012), ISI Web of Science (searched September 2012) and reference lists of relevant articles. We searched for ongoing trials in The International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (searched August 2012) and for grey literature in The Grey Literature Report and OpenGrey (searched August 2012). We also contacted authors of included studies and experts in the field. There were no language or date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs evaluating the effects of face to face interventions delivered to individual parents or groups of parents to inform or educate about early childhood vaccination, compared with control or with another face to face intervention. Early childhood vaccines are all recommended routine childhood vaccines outlined by the World Health Organization, with the exception of human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) which is delivered to adolescents.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently reviewed database search results for inclusion. Grey literature searches were conducted and reviewed by a single author. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs and one cluster RCT involving a total of 2978 participants. Three studies were conducted in low- or middle-income countries and four were conducted in high-income countries. The cluster RCT did not contribute usable data to the review. The interventions comprised a mix of single-session and multi-session strategies. The quality of the evidence for each outcome was low to very low and the studies were at moderate risk of bias overall. All these trials compared face to face interventions directed to individual parents with control.The three studies assessing the effect of a single-session intervention on immunisation status could not be pooled due to high heterogeneity. The overall result is uncertain because the individual study results ranged from no evidence of effect to a significant increase in immunisation.Two studies assessed the effect of a multi-session intervention on immunisation status. These studies were also not pooled due to heterogeneity and the result was very uncertain, ranging from a non-significant decrease in immunisation to no evidence of effect.The two studies assessing the effect of a face to face intervention on knowledge or understanding of vaccination were very uncertain and were not pooled as data from one study were skewed. However, neither study showed evidence of an effect on knowledge scores in the intervention group. Only one study measured the cost of a case management intervention. The estimated additional cost per fully immunised child for the intervention was approximately eight times higher than usual care.The review also considered the following secondary outcomes: intention to vaccinate child, parent experience of intervention, and adverse effects. No adverse effects related to the intervention were measured by any of the included studies, and there were no data on the other outcomes of interest.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The limited evidence available is low quality and suggests that face to face interventions to inform or educate parents about childhood vaccination have little to no impact on immunisation status, or knowledge or understanding of vaccination. There is insufficient evidence to comment on the cost of implementing the intervention, parent intention to vaccinate, parent experience of the intervention, or adverse effects. Given the apparently limited effect of such interventions, it may be feasible and appropriate to incorporate communication about vaccination into a healthcare encounter, rather than conduct it as a separate activity.

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.

Randomized controlled trial of an immunization recall intervention for adolescents

OBJECTIVE

Determine if adolescent immunization rates can be improved by contacting the parents or by contacting both the parents and adolescents.

METHODS

Thirteen- to 17-year-olds overdue for at least 1 of 3 immunizations were randomized to (1) a control arm (Control), (2) telephone calls to the parent/guardian (Parent Only), or (3) telephone calls to the parent/guardian and the adolescent (Parent/Adol). Immunization records were assessed 4 weeks and 1 year after the intervention. Two-sided χ(2) tests and logistic regression models were used to compare receipt of immunizations by study arm.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat analysis showed improved immunization rates at 4 weeks (adjusted odds ratio 2.27, 95% confidence interval 1.00-5.18), but not at 1 year, in the Parent/Adol group compared with controls. There was a trend toward increased immunization in the Parent Only group (odds ratio 2.02, 95% confidence interval 0.89-4.56). However, phone contact was not achieved for many parents and adolescents in the intervention groups. A post hoc analysis of the impact of actual phone contact showed significant improvement in immunization rates both 4 weeks and 1 year after the intervention among those who were reached successfully.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvement in immunization rates was seen in the short term but not the long term after contacting both the parent and adolescent. Although telephone interventions may be effective when rapid immunization is necessary, the difficulty in reaching parents and adolescents by phone highlights the importance of up-to-date contact information and a need to assess the effectiveness of alternative means of communication.

Effectiveness and cost of immunization recall at school-based health centers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Effectiveness of recall for immunizations has not been examined in the setting of school-based health centers (SBHCs). We assessed (1) immunization rates achieved with recall among sixth-grade girls (demonstration study); (2) effectiveness of recall among sixth-grade boys (randomized controlled trial [RCT]); and (3) cost of conducting recall in SBHCs.

METHODS

During October 2008 through March 2009, in 4 Denver public SBHCs, we conducted (1) a demonstration study among 265 girls needing ≥ 1 recommended adolescent vaccine and (2) an RCT among 264 boys needing vaccines, with half randomized to recall and half receiving usual care. Immunization rates for recommended adolescent vaccines were assessed 6 months after recall. First dose costs were assessed by direct observation and examining invoices.

RESULTS

At the end of the demonstration study, 77% of girls had received ≥ 1 vaccine and 45% had received all needed adolescent vaccines. Rates of receipt among those needing each of the vaccines were 68% (160/236) for tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine, 57% (142/248) for quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine, and 59% (149/253) for the first human papillomavirus vaccine. At the end of the RCT, 66% of recalled boys had received ≥ 1 vaccine and 59% had received all study vaccines, compared with 45% and 36%, respectively, of the control group (P < .001). Cost of conducting recall ranged from $1.12 to $6.87 per recalled child immunized.

CONCLUSIONS

SBHC-based recall was effective in improving immunization rates for all adolescent vaccines, with effects sizes exceeding those achieved with younger children in practice settings.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

Although the evidence to support influenza vaccination is poor, it is promoted by many health authorities. There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates in those 60 years or older.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates in those 60 or older.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2010, issue 3), containing the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE (January 1950 to July 2010), PubMed (January 1950 to July 2010), EMBASE (1980 to 2010 Week 28), AgeLine (1978 to July 2010), ERIC (1965 to July 2010) and CINAHL (1982 to July 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to increase influenza vaccination rates in those aged 60 years and older, recording influenza vaccination status either through clinic records, billing data or local/national vaccination registers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four RCTs were included. All included RCTs studied seniors in the community and in high-income countries. No RCTs of society-level interventions were included. Heterogeneity was marked and meta-analysis was limited. Only five RCTs were graded at low and six at moderate risk of bias. They included three of 13 personalized postcard interventions (all three with the 95% confidence interval (CI) above unity), two of the four home visit interventions (both with 95% CI above unity, but one a small study), three of the four reminder to physicians interventions (none with 95% CI above unity) and three of the four facilitator interventions (one with 95% CI above unity, and one P < 0.01). The other 33 RCTs were at high risk of bias and no recommendations for practice can be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Personalized postcards or phone calls are effective, and home visits, and facilitators, may be effective. Reminders to physicians are not. There is insufficient good evidence for other interventions.

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.

REACH 2010: New York City

Most immunization coalitions have originated with health care providers, potentially excluding families without medical homes. This study focused on a community-based approach to providing timely vaccinations. A coalition of 23 organizations developed an immunization program in a low-income community in New York City. Nearly 1,000 community health workers incorporated immunization promotion into social service and educational programs. Outcomes were coverage rates for the 4:3:1:3:3 series at 19 to 35 months, which were compared with national data by ethnicity, as reported in the National Immunization Survey 2002-2006. Parents (n = 10,251) of children <5 years received immunization education and reminders. The 2003-2007 rates of 80% equaled or exceeded the national rates for 19- to 35-month-olds, and the 2007 rate of 96.8% far surpassed the national average. Coalitions can effectively integrate immunization promotion activities into community programs. Immunization rate improvements maintained for a 5-year period, suggesting this approach to be sustainable.

Factors predicting BCG immunization status in northern Nigeria: a behavioral-ecological perspective

This study examines the predictors of Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) immunization status among infants in northern Nigeria using a behavioral-ecological model. The findings show only 37.3 percent of the children had received BCG vaccine, and reveal that BCG immunization status in northern Nigeria is influenced by multiple layers of factors, including child's characteristics, parental or household factors, community characteristics, vaccine supply and the policy environment. At the child's level, place of birth and ownership of an immunization card are the two most significant predictors. The parental and household predictors of BCG immunization status include maternal use of antenatal care, maternal knowledge about immunization, maternal exposure to child health information, social influence and paternal approval of immunization. Both the regularity of vaccine supply to the health facility and the state of residence are associated independently with BCG immunization status. These findings stress the need for interventions at multiple levels in order to increase BCG immunization status.

Adaptive designs for randomized trials in public health

In this article, we present a discussion of two general ways in which the traditional randomized trial can be modified or adapted in response to the data being collected. We use the term adaptive design to refer to a trial in which characteristics of the study itself, such as the proportion assigned to active intervention versus control, change during the trial in response to data being collected. The term adaptive sequence of trials refers to a decision-making process that fundamentally informs the conceptualization and conduct of each new trial with the results of previous trials. Our discussion below investigates the utility of these two types of adaptations for public health evaluations. Examples are provided to illustrate how adaptation can be used in practice. From these case studies, we discuss whether such evaluations can or should be analyzed as if they were formal randomized trials, and we discuss practical as well as ethical issues arising in the conduct of these new-generation trials.

Effectiveness of a community coalition for improving child vaccination rates in New York City

We used a retrospective, matching, birth cohort design to evaluate a comprehensive, coalition-led childhood immunization program of outreach, education, and reminders in a Latino, urban community. After we controlled for Latino ethnicity and Medicaid, we found that children enrolled in the program were 53% more likely to be up-to-date (adjusted odds ratio = 1.53; 95% confidence interval = 1.33, 1.75) and to receive timely immunizations than were children in the control group (t = 3.91). The coalition-led, community-based immunization program was effective in improving on-time childhood immunization coverage.

WITHDRAWN: Home-based support for disadvantaged adult mothers

BACKGROUND

Babies born to socio-economically disadvantaged mothers are at higher risk of a range of problems in infancy. Home visiting programs are thought to improve outcomes, both for mothers and children, largely through advice and support.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of home visiting programmes for women who have recently given birth and who are socially or economically disadvantaged.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following electronic databases: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 3, 2006); MEDLINE (1966 to March 2006); EMBASE (1980 to 2006 week 12); CINAHL (1982 to March week 4 2006); PsycINFO (1872 to March week 4 2006); ASSIA (1987 to March 2006); LILACS (1982 to March 2006); and Sociological Abstracts(1963 to March 2006). We searched grey literature using ZETOC (1993 to March 2006); Dissertation Abstracts International (late 1960s to 2006); and SIGLE (1980 to March 2006). We also undertook communication with published authors about ongoing or unpublished research.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of home visiting directed at disadvantaged adult mothers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers (EC and JP or CB) independently assessed titles and abstracts identified in the search for eligibility. Data were extracted and entered into RevMan (EC, JP and CB), synthesised and presented in both written and graphical form (forest plots). Outcomes included in this review were established at the protocol stage by an international steering group. The review does not report on all outcomes reported in included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies with 4751 participants in this review. Data show no statistically significant differences for those receiving home visiting, either for maternal outcomes (maternal depression, anxiety, the stress associated with parenting, parenting skills, child abuse risk or potential or breastfeeding) or child outcomes (preventive health care visits, psychosocial health, language development, behaviour problems or accidental injuries. Evidence about uptake of immunisations is mixed, and the data on child maltreatment difficult to interpret.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that for disadvantaged adult women and their children, there is currently no evidence to support the adoption of home visiting as a means of improving maternal psychosocial health, parenting or outcomes for children. For reasons discussed in the review, this does not amount to a conclusion that home visiting programmes are ineffective, but indicates a need to think carefully about the problems that home visiting might influence, and improvements in the conduct of outcome studies in this area.

WITHDRAWN: Home-based support for disadvantaged teenage mothers

BACKGROUND

Babies born to socio-economically disadvantaged mothers are at higher risk of injury, abuse or neglect and health problems than babies born to more affluent mothers; disadvantaged teenage mothers are at particular risk of adverse outcomes. Home-visiting programs are thought to improve outcomes for both mothers and children, largely through advice and support.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of home-visiting programmes for women who have recently given birth and who are socially or economically disadvantaged.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following electronic databases were searched: CENTRAL (2006, Issue 3); MEDLINE (1966 to March 2006); EMBASE (1980 to week 12 2006); CINAHL (1982 to March week 4 2006); PsycINFO (1872 to March week 4 2006); ASSIA (1987 to March 2006); LILACS (1982 to March 2006); and Sociological Abstracts (1963 to March 2006). Grey literature was also be searched using ZETOC (1993 to March 2006); Dissertation Abstracts International (late 1960s to 2006); and SIGLE (1980 to March 2006). Communication with published authors about ongoing or unpublished research was also undertaken.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of home visiting directed at teenage mothers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Titles and abstracts identified in the search were independently assessed for eligibility by two review authors (EC and JP or CB). Data were extracted and entered into RevMan (EC, JP and CB), synthesised and presented in both written and graphical form (forest plots). Outcomes included in this review were established at the protocol stage by an international steering group. The review did not report on all outcomes reported in included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies with 1838 participants were included in this review. Data from single studies provided support for the effectiveness of home visiting on some outcomes, but the evidence overall provided only limited support for the effectiveness of home visiting as a means of improving the range of maternal and child outcomes considered in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests there is only limited evidence that home-visiting programmes of the kind described in this review can impact positively on the quality of parenting of teenage mothers or on child development outcomes for their offspring. For reasons discussed in the review, this does not amount to a conclusion that home-visiting programmes are ineffective but indicates a need to think carefully about the problems that home visiting might influence and about improvements in the conduct and reporting of outcome studies in this area.

WITHDRAWN: Interventions to implement prevention in primary care

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians hold a strategic position in delivering preventive services. However discrepancies exist between evidence based guidelines and practice.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions to improve the delivery of preventive services in primary care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register (November 1995; August 1999), MEDLINE (1980 to 1995) and hand searched relevant journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series analyses of interventions to improve preventive services by primary care professionals responsible for patient care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two researchers independently extracted data and assessed study quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were included, involving more than 2000 health professionals and 99,000 people, with 83 comparisons between intervention and control groups. Post intervention differences between intervention and control groups varied widely within and across categories of interventions. Most interventions were found to be effective in some studies, but not in others. Five comparisons of group education versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -4% and +31%. Nine comparisons of physician reminders versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between 5% and 24%. Fourteen comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -3% and +64%. Six comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus group education reported absolute changes varying between -31% and +28%. All these comparisons used randomised groups. Ten comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus no intervention used non-randomised groups and showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -5% and +21%. The remaining planned comparisons within categories of interventions contained less than five comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no solid basis for assuming that a particular intervention or package of interventions will work. Effective interventions to increase preventive activities in primary care exist, but there is considerable variation in the level of change achieved, with effect sizes usually small or moderate. Tailoring interventions to address specific barriers to change in a particular setting is probably important. Multifaceted interventions may be more effective than single interventions, because more barriers to change can be addressed. Future research should analyse barriers to change and interventions to implement preventive services in more detail, to clarify how interventions relate to specific barriers. Since more complex interventions are likely to be more effective but also more costly, economic evaluations should also be included.

Home-based support for disadvantaged adult mothers

BACKGROUND

Babies born to socio-economically disadvantaged mothers are at higher risk of a range of problems in infancy. Home visiting programs are thought to improve outcomes, both for mothers and children, largely through advice and support.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of home visiting programmes for women who have recently given birth and who are socially or economically disadvantaged.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following electronic databases: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 3, 2006); MEDLINE (1966 to March 2006); EMBASE (1980 to 2006 week 12); CINAHL (1982 to March week 4 2006); PsycINFO (1872 to March week 4 2006); ASSIA (1987 to March 2006); LILACS (1982 to March 2006); and Sociological Abstracts(1963 to March 2006). We searched grey literature using ZETOC (1993 to March 2006); Dissertation Abstracts International (late 1960s to 2006); and SIGLE (1980 to March 2006). We also undertook communication with published authors about ongoing or unpublished research.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of home visiting directed at disadvantaged adult mothers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers (EC and JP or CB) independently assessed titles and abstracts identified in the search for eligibility. Data were extracted and entered into RevMan (EC, JP and CB), synthesised and presented in both written and graphical form (forest plots). Outcomes included in this review were established at the protocol stage by an international steering group. The review does not report on all outcomes reported in included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies with 4751 participants in this review. Data show no statistically significant differences for those receiving home visiting, either for maternal outcomes (maternal depression, anxiety, the stress associated with parenting, parenting skills, child abuse risk or potential or breastfeeding) or child outcomes (preventive health care visits, psychosocial health, language development, behaviour problems or accidental injuries. Evidence about uptake of immunisations is mixed, and the data on child maltreatment difficult to interpret.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that for disadvantaged adult women and their children, there is currently no evidence to support the adoption of home visiting as a means of improving maternal psychosocial health, parenting or outcomes for children. For reasons discussed in the review, this does not amount to a conclusion that home visiting programmes are ineffective, but indicates a need to think carefully about the problems that home visiting might influence, and improvements in the conduct of outcome studies in this area.

Home-based support for disadvantaged teenage mothers

BACKGROUND

Babies born to socio-economically disadvantaged mothers are at higher risk of injury, abuse or neglect and health problems than babies born to more affluent mothers; disadvantaged teenage mothers are at particular risk of adverse outcomes. Home-visiting programs are thought to improve outcomes for both mothers and children, largely through advice and support.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of home-visiting programmes for women who have recently given birth and who are socially or economically disadvantaged.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following electronic databases were searched: CENTRAL (2006, Issue 3); MEDLINE (1966 to March 2006); EMBASE (1980 to week 12 2006); CINAHL (1982 to March week 4 2006); PsycINFO (1872 to March week 4 2006); ASSIA (1987 to March 2006); LILACS (1982 to March 2006); and Sociological Abstracts (1963 to March 2006). Grey literature was also be searched using ZETOC (1993 to March 2006); Dissertation Abstracts International (late 1960s to 2006); and SIGLE (1980 to March 2006). Communication with published authors about ongoing or unpublished research was also undertaken.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of home visiting directed at teenage mothers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Titles and abstracts identified in the search were independently assessed for eligibility by two review authors (EC and JP or CB). Data were extracted and entered into RevMan (EC, JP and CB), synthesised and presented in both written and graphical form (forest plots). Outcomes included in this review were established at the protocol stage by an international steering group. The review did not report on all outcomes reported in included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies with 1838 participants were included in this review. Data from single studies provided support for the effectiveness of home visiting on some outcomes, but the evidence overall provided only limited support for the effectiveness of home visiting as a means of improving the range of maternal and child outcomes considered in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests there is only limited evidence that home-visiting programmes of the kind described in this review can impact positively on the quality of parenting of teenage mothers or on child development outcomes for their offspring. For reasons discussed in the review, this does not amount to a conclusion that home-visiting programmes are ineffective but indicates a need to think carefully about the problems that home visiting might influence and about improvements in the conduct and reporting of outcome studies in this area.

The impact of inactive infants on clinic-based immunization rates

OBJECTIVE

Clinic-based immunization rates are used to evaluate clinic performance and immunization interventions, but they typically exclude so-called inactive patients (ie, those who no longer receive care at the clinic). We assessed the effect of enhanced ascertainment of inactive patients on clinic-based immunization rates and on the conclusions of a randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

The study was a post hoc analysis of a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Infant randomization to the immunization intervention (4 clinics) or control group (4 clinics) was based on the site of their 2-week well-child care visit. The study was conducted at an integrated inner-city health care system serving a low-income population. A total of 2190 infants born between July 1, 1998, and June 30, 1999, who attended at least 1 postnatal visit, participated. In control sites, clinic staff documented inactive infants in the immunization registry and medical charts. The research staff undertook additional patient tracking efforts in the intervention clinics.

RESULTS

Control clinics identified 155 (13.4%) of 1160 children as inactive within 1 year of birth, whereas 284 (27.6%) of 1030 intervention infants were documented as inactive (P < .001). In bivariate analyses from the randomized trial, immunization rates differed between intervention and control branches. In multivariate models, immunization rates were significantly higher in the intervention branch when inactive infants were removed (adjusted relative risk 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-1.89), but not when they were included (adjusted relative risk 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional patient tracking efforts can dramatically influence inactive patient documentation and clinic-based immunization rates used for various purposes.

Community-based strategies to reduce childhood immunization disparities

This study demonstrates how community-based immunization promotion reduced immunization disparities. In 2002 to 2004, the coalition enrolled 3,748 children younger than 5, with 1,502 aged 19 to 35 months in April 2004. Disparity reduction was assessed by comparing coalition immunization coverage rates (4:3:1:3:3) to the National Immunization Survey 2003 rates. Logistic regression was used to assess factors contributing to up-to-date immunizations. Coverage increased from 46.0% at enrollment to 80.5%, matching nationwide rates for all (t = 0.87) or White (t = 1.99) children. The 78% for African Americans was higher than 73% for U.S. African American children (t = 2.90); 84% for Latinos was higher than 77% for U.S. Latinos (t = 2.32). Being current with age-appropriate immunizations at enrollment (OR = 9.8), being Latino (OR = 1.6), and participating through child health insurance enrollment (OR = 4.9), Women, Infants, and Children (OR = 3.1), or child care or parenting (OR = 1.9) programs increased immunization coverage. Embedding immunization promotion into existing community programs was successful in eliminating immunization disparities. Most effective programs were those with direct linkages to health care systems or that targeted young children.

Telephone care management to improve cancer screening among low-income women: a randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Minority and low-income women receive fewer cancer screenings than other women.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a telephone support intervention to increase rates of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening among minority and low-income women.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled trial conducted between November 2001 and April 2004.

SETTING

11 community and migrant health centers in New York City.

PATIENTS

1413 women who were overdue for cancer screening.

INTERVENTION

Over 18 months, women assigned to the intervention group received an average of 4 calls from prevention care managers and women assigned to the control group received usual care. Follow-up data were available for 99% of women, and 91% of the intervention group received at least 1 call.

MEASUREMENTS

Medical record documentation of mammography, Papanicolaou testing, and colorectal cancer screening according to U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations.

RESULTS

The proportion of women who had mammography increased from 0.58 to 0.68 with the intervention and decreased from 0.60 to 0.58 with usual care; the proportion who had Papanicolaou testing increased from 0.71 to 0.78 with the intervention and was unchanged with usual care; and the proportion who had colorectal screening increased from 0.39 to 0.63 with the intervention and from 0.39 to 0.50 with usual care. The difference in the change in screening rates between groups was 0.12 for mammography (95% CI, 0.06 to 0.19), 0.07 for Papanicolaou testing (CI, 0.01 to 0.12), and 0.13 for colorectal screening (CI, 0.07 to 0.19). The proportion of women who were up to date for 3 tests increased from 0.21 to 0.43 with the intervention.

LIMITATIONS

Participants were from 1 city and had access to a regular source of care. Medical records may not have captured all cancer screenings.

CONCLUSIONS

Telephone support can improve cancer screening rates among women who visit community and migrant health centers. The intervention seems to be well suited to health plans, large medical groups, and other organizations that seek to increase cancer screening rates and to address disparities in care.

Systematically reviewing qualitative studies complements survey design: an exploratory study of barriers to paediatric immunisations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Designing survey questions requires content expertise, awareness of previous qualitative literature, and piloting. We examined surveys addressing parental barriers to vaccinating children to determine if they comprehensively included themes identified in published qualitative studies.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search of 12 electronic databases and compared questions asked in eligible surveys identified to issues raised in qualitative studies. Issues included nine themes related to harm, six related to distrust, eight to issues of access, and three other issues.

RESULTS

The 29 eligible surveys failed to adequately address several important themes identified in qualitative studies. The number that failed to address the following themes were as follows: beliefs that vaccines cause diseases (n = 26); painful (n = 25); distrust of medical community (n = 28); communication problems with staff (n = 25); memories of their own or others adverse experiences (n = 28); fear of long-term effects (n = 26); belief the medical community does not understand adverse events associated with vaccines (n = 28); and parent's own lack of knowledge about diseases (n = 29).

CONCLUSIONS

Many surveys of parental barriers to immunization failed to address a number of important themes identified in qualitative studies. To the extent this is true in other areas, ensuring that investigators have conducted an adequate number and variety of qualitative studies, and systematically reviewing those studies, will improve surveys' content validity.

Systematic review of qualitative studies exploring parental beliefs and attitudes toward childhood vaccination identifies common barriers to vaccination

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a systematic review of qualitative studies can lead to identification of consistent themes across studies, using barriers toward childhood vaccination as an example.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We performed a systematic literature search of studies identified in 10 electronic databases. Two independent reviewers selected the relevant abstracts and articles, then extracted information. Content analysis methodology was used to create a coding template for barriers and then to identify how many studies identified specific barriers.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included in this overview. Eight studies used semistructured interviews, five used focus groups, and two used both methodologies. Themes fell under four major headings: issues of harm, issues of distrust, access issues, and other issues. Barriers identified in more than half of the studies included concern about the risk of adverse effects, concern that vaccinations are painful, distrust of by those advocating vaccines (including belief in conspiracy), belief that vaccination should not occur when the child has a minor illness, unpleasant staff or poor communication, and lack of awareness of the vaccination schedule.

CONCLUSION

Systematically reviewing qualitative studies on barriers to childhood vaccination provided important information on barriers that are consistently identified by parents in several different studies.

Patient reminder and patient recall systems to improve immunization rates

BACKGROUND

Immunization rates for children and adults are rising, but coverage levels have not reached optimal goals. As a result of low immunization rates, 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 physicians, it is important to understand and promote interventions that work in primary care settings to increase immunization coverage. A common theme across immunization programs in all nations involves the challenge of determining the denominator of eligible recipients (e.g. all children who should receive the measles vaccine) and identifying the best strategy to ensure high vaccination rates. Strategies have focused on patient-oriented interventions (e.g., patient reminders), provider interventions and system interventions. One intervention strategy involves patient reminder and recall systems.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of patient reminder and recall systems in improving immunization rates and compare the effects of various types of reminders in different settings or patient populations.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A systematic search was performed for the initial review using MEDLINE (1966-1998) and four other bibliographic databases: EMBASE, PsychINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and CAB Abstracts. Authors also performed a search of The Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) register in April 2001 to update the review. Two authors reviewed the lists of titles and abstracts and used the inclusion criteria to mark potentially relevant articles for full review. The reference lists of all relevant articles and reviews were back searched for additional studies. Publications of abstracts, proceedings from scientific meetings and files of study collaborators were also searched for references. In December 2004 the EPOC register was searched to identify relevant articles to update the review.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trials (RCT), controlled before and after studies (CBA) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies written in English.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Health care personnel who deliver immunizations and children (birth to 18 years) or adults (18 years and up) who receive immunizations in any setting.

TYPES OF INTERVENTIONS

Any intervention that falls within the EPOC scope (See Group Details) and that includes patient reminder or recall systems, or both, in at least one arm of the study.

TYPES OF OUTCOME MEASURES

Immunization rates or the proportion of the target population up-to-date on recommended immunizations. Outcomes were acceptable for either individual vaccinations (e.g. influenza vaccination) or standard combinations of recommended vaccinations (e.g. all recommended vaccinations by a specific date or age).

DATA COLLECTION

Each study was read independently by two reviewers. Disagreements between reviewers were resolved by a formal reconciliation process to achieve consensus.

ANALYSIS

Results are presented for individual studies as relative rates for randomized controlled trials and as absolute changes in percentage points for controlled before and after studies. Pooled results for RCTs only were presented using the random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Five new studies were added for this update. Increases in immunization rates due to reminders were in the range of 1 to 20 percentage points. Reminders were effective for childhood vaccinations (OR = 1.45, 95% CI =1.28, 1.66), childhood influenza vaccinations (OR = 2.87, 95% CI = 1.65, 4.98), adult pneumococcus, tetanus, and Hepatitis B (OR = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.21, 3.99), and adult influenza vaccinations (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.31, 2.09). All types of reminders were effective (postcards, letters, telephone or autodialer calls), with telephone being the most effective but most costly.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patient reminder and recall systems in primary care settings are effective in improving immunization rates within developed countries.

Preventive Healthcare of Infants in a Region of Lebanon: Parental Beliefs, Attitudes and Behaviors

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate healthcare seeking behaviors of mothers for themselves and their infants in the Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, to identify attitudes and beliefs towards the preventive healthcare of infants and to assess whether a healthcare-based intervention program would be accepted by the population.

METHODS

Ninety-two interviews were conducted with women who had delivered a live birth in two hospitals in the Bekaa. The hospitals selected attracted women from different socioeconomic classes.

RESULTS

Differences were found in adequacy of healthcare utilization based on household size, number of children and prenatal care utilization. There was a higher perception of barriers to healthcare by parents who did not seek adequate preventive care for their infants. Mothers of infants who had inadequate care had a lower perception of severity of illness and of physicians' ability to prevent illness. The population believes strongly that medical professionals are reliable sources of health information and guidance. Infants' mothers and grandmothers are important sources of healthcare-related information.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of preventive infant healthcare in the Bekaa need improvement. Any intervention must target mothers and grandmothers, as they appear to influence the medical care of infants. Other targets include parents of larger families. Dissemination of information regarding the seriousness of illness and the ability to prevent illness is required. The medical profession may influence health choices made by this population. However, further investigation of healthcare barriers, especially economic and geographic barriers, is needed. In preparing to improve healthcare utilization for infants in the Bekaa, local, regional and international organizations should refer to the population's beliefs, attitudes and behaviors described in this study, as these findings may aid in planning interventions that are likely to positively impact mothers and infants.

Quality improvement in immunization delivery following an unsuccessful immunization recall

OBJECTIVES

Within a clinic serving disadvantaged children, 1) to evaluate a multifaceted quality improvement (QI) project to improve immunization (IZ) up-to-date (UTD) rates and 2) to assess the efficacy of IZ reminder/recall performed following QI.

METHODS

A year-long QI project followed by a trial of reminder/recall. QI interventions were targeted at previously identified barriers to IZ and were designed specifically to improve the efficacy of reminder/recall. QI interventions were designed to 1) increase the use of medical record releases to document IZs received elsewhere; 2) improve the accuracy of parental contact information; and 3) reduce missed opportunities by utilizing chart prompts, provider education, and provider reminders. Following QI, we conducted a randomized trial of reminder/recall.

RESULTS

UTD rates for 7-11 month olds increased from 21% before the QI project to 52% after (P <.0001); rates for 12-18 month olds increased from 16% before QI to 44% after (P <.0001); 19-25 month olds 18% before to 33% after (P <.001). After QI, an average of 61 records per month were updated with IZs received elsewhere. However, the accuracy of parental contact information worsened (29% unreachable before QI vs 44% after, P <.001) and missed opportunities did not improve (8% before vs 6% after, P = not significant [NS]). A subsequent trial of reminder/recall did not increase UTD rates, with 17% of recalled children brought UTD vs 16% of controls (P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinic-based QI increased documented UTD rates in a disadvantaged patient population. However, IZ reminder/recall did not further increase UTD rates above the rates achieved by the QI process.

Racial/ethnic disparities in preschool immunizations: United States, 1996-2001

OBJECTIVES

We examined current racial/ethnic differences in immunization coverage rates among US preschool children.

METHODS

Using National Immunization Survey data from 1996 through 2001, we compared vaccination coverage rates between non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, and Asian preschool children.

RESULTS

During the 6-year study period, the immunization coverage gap between White and Black children widened by an average of 1.1% each year, and the gap between White and Hispanic children widened by an average of 0.5% each year. The gap between White and Asian children narrowed by an average of 0.8% each year.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial/ethnic disparities in preschool immunization coverage rates have increased significantly among some groups; critical improvements in identifying, understanding, and addressing race/ethnicity-specific health care differences are needed to achieve the Healthy People 2010 goal of eliminating disparities.

Differential willingness to undergo smallpox vaccination among African-American and white individuals

OBJECTIVE

To examine potential disparities in willingness to be vaccinated against smallpox among different U.S. racial/ethnic groups.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey using an experimental design to assess willingness to be vaccinated among African Americans compared to whites according to 2 strategies: a post-exposure "ring vaccination" method and a pre-exposure national vaccination program.

SETTING

Philadelphia County district courthouse.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals awaiting jury duty.

MEASUREMENTS

We included 2 scenarios representing these strategies in 2 otherwise identical questionnaires and randomly assigned them to participants. We compared responses by African Americans and whites.

MAIN RESULTS

In the pre-exposure scenario, 66% of 190 participants were willing to get vaccinated against smallpox. In contrast, 84% of 200 participants were willing to get vaccinated in the post-exposure scenario (P =.0001). African Americans were less willing than whites to get vaccinated in the pre-exposure scenario (54% vs 77%; P =.004), but not in the post-exposure scenario (84% vs 88%; P =.56). In multivariate analyses, overall willingness to undergo vaccination was associated with vaccination strategy (odds ratio, 3.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.8 to 6.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Racial disparity in willingness to get vaccinated varies by the characteristics of the vaccination program. Overall willingness was highest in the context of a post-exposure scenario. These results highlight the importance of considering social issues when constructing bioterror attack response plans that adequately address the needs of all of society's members.

Effectiveness of individually tailored calendars in promoting childhood immunization in urban public health centers

OBJECTIVES

We examined the effectiveness of tailored calendars in increasing childhood immunization rates.

METHODS

Parents of babies aged birth to 1 year (n = 321) received individually tailored calendars promoting immunization from 2 urban public health centers. For each baby, an age- and sex-matched control was selected from the same center. Immunization status was tracked through age 24 months.

RESULTS

A higher proportion of intervention than of control babies were up to date at the end of a 9-month enrollment period (82% vs 65%, P <.001) and at age 24 months (66% vs 47%, P <.001). The younger the baby's age at enrollment in the program, the greater was the intervention effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailored immunization calendars can help increase child immunization rates.

Do HMOs affect educational disparities in health care?

BACKGROUND

We wanted to examine how membership in a health maintenance organization (HMO) is related to delivery of preventive clinical services to patients with different educational levels.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the 1996-1997 Community Tracking Study Household Survey among adults aged 18 to 64 years with private or Medicaid health insurance. We examined interactions between respondent educational level and HMO membership for the following measures: having a regular source of care and, in the past year, having had a physician visit, a mental health visit, a mammogram (women > or = 50 years), an influenza vaccination (ages > or = 55 years), or smoking cessation counseling (smokers).

RESULTS

After adjustment for sociodemographic factors, community size, insurance type, physical and mental health status, and smoking, respondents with less education were significantly less likely to have had a physician visit or mental health visit, mammogram, or influenza vaccination in the past year. Disparities in receipt of preventive care by educational level were smaller among HMO members. Differences in disparities between HMO members and non-HMO members reached statistical significance for influenza vaccination and showed a trend for mental health visits (P = .06). Moreover, HMO members with less than 12 years of education received services at levels comparable to non-HMO members with more education.

CONCLUSIONS

There are appreciable disparities in receipt of preventive care by education among nonelderly insured persons. HMO membership is associated with smaller disparities for some services. Those with the lowest levels of education appeared to benefit the most from HMO membership.

The effect of a parenting education program on the use of preventive pediatric health care services among low-income, minority mothers: a randomized, controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To determine if a community-based intervention program focusing on parenting education will have an impact on preventive health care utilization behaviors among low-income, minority mothers in Washington, DC.

DESIGN

The experimental design was a randomized, controlled study in which 286 mother-infant dyads were assigned to either the standard social services (control) group or to the intervention group. Women and their newborn infants were recruited during the immediate postpartum period in 4 Washington, DC, hospital sites from April 1995 to April 1997. The year-long multicomponent intervention included home visits and hospital-based group sessions in addition to the standard social services available at the hospital sites. A total of 286 postpartum women with inadequate prenatal care were assigned randomly to the control or the intervention group. Women and their infants were followed for 1 full year. Outcome measures included usage of preventive health care services including well care infant visits and adherence to immunization schedules during the first year of the infant's life.

RESULTS

Infants in the intervention group initiated well care at an earlier age than controls (by 6 weeks, 62.5% vs 50% had received their first well infant visit). Infants in the intervention group had more frequent well visits (by 12 months of age, 3.5 vs 2.7 visits). Multivariate analyses showed infants in the intervention group to be more likely to complete their scheduled immunizations (by 9 months, odds ratio = 2.2, 95% confidence interval: 1.09-4.53). Those in the intervention group with more frequent contacts (30+ visits) with study personnel were most likely to have followed age-appropriate immunization schedules when compared with controls (at 9 months odds ratio = 3.63, 95% confidence interval: 1.58-8.33).

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible to influence health care usage patterns of high-risk minority populations through public health interventions that are global in their perspective. Focusing on parental knowledge and beliefs regarding health-related issues and life skills in a self-efficacy model is associated with improved usage of infant health care resources.

Immunization registry accuracy: improvement with progressive clinical application

BACKGROUND

Healthcare systems have been challenged to ensure the timely administration of immunizations. Immunization registries have been proposed to improve the accuracy and completeness of immunization information and to promote effective practice.

METHODS

Comparison of randomly selected samples from two birth cohorts (1993 and 1998) from Denver Health Medical Center. Chart review and immunization registry information for these groups were compared; a composite immunization was recorded and up-to-date (UTD) status established. Registry data were compared with this composite using a sensitivity measure to assess completeness and accuracy.

RESULTS

Among 818 children in the 1993 cohort and 1043 children in the 1998 cohort, there were 6386 and 6886 valid immunizations, respectively. The registry recorded 71.4% and 97.7% of these for the 1993 and 1998 cohorts, respectively (p <0.001). The apparent UTD rate, as measured with registry data alone, improved from 37% to 79% between the two time frames (p <0.001). Composite UTD status was 83.1% and 78.9% (1993 vs 1998, respectively). Accurate registry-defined UTD status improved from 44.4% to 100% between the two intervals.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunization registry accuracy improved dramatically for recorded immunizations and UTD status. However, after 3 years of registry use, the overall proportion of children who were UTD had not significantly improved. The mere presence of a registry does not ensure more complete vaccination coverage. Other registry-based strategies, including use of the data for reminder, recall, and audit, may further improve immunization coverage.