Integrating the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system in a mass vaccination clinic to improve the experience of individuals during COVID-19 vaccination: a pre-post implementation study

CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) and community pharmacy vaccinations: Evaluation of implementation outcomes from a cluster randomized trial

The CARD system (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) is a protocol for vaccine delivery that includes interventions that facilitate vaccine recipient coping and improve the vaccination experience. CARD was compared to control (usual care) in a pragmatic hybrid effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized trial. Of 25 participating community pharmacies, 12 were randomized to CARD and 13 to control for all vaccines administered between November 2023 and January 2024. Implementation strategies planned to support CARD integration included an educational webinar, customized implementation recommendations, change equipment, online chat group, and audit and feedback. Educational outreach was added to improve intervention fidelity. This paper reports on implementation outcomes of the trial. Provider surveys and focus groups revealed acceptability and feasibility of CARD and implementation strategies. Vaccinators in CARD pharmacies (vs. control) reported higher satisfaction with vaccine recipient interactions and that overall, CARD was time neutral. They also reported higher utilization of some CARD-recommended injection techniques. Administrative data verified utilization of the CARD coping checklist, which solicits vaccine recipient coping preferences, in 96% of vaccine recipients that participated. Post-vaccination feedback surveys were available for 90% of vaccine recipients that participated. Implementation results were aligned with trial effectiveness outcomes, and support routine use of CARD in community pharmacies.Trial registration : NCT06098703.

Online environmental scan and content analysis of social stories about needle procedures

Needle procedures are often difficult for autistic children. Preparatory education is an evidence-based strategy that is especially important for autistic children given they commonly struggle with unpredictability. Carol Gray developed Social Stories to walk autistic children through new/challenging situations step-by-step. Although needle-related Social Stories exist online, no research has investigated whether their content aligns with best practices for needle pain and fear management and Gray's guidelines for Social Story development.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to characterize the content of online Social Stories about vaccination and venipuncture. Specifically, the degree to which Social Stories (a) depict evidence-based/helpful and unhelpful coping strategies, (b) follow Gray's guidelines, and (c) depict accurate procedural steps, was examined in an exploratory manner.

METHODS

An online environmental scan (systematic method of collecting and synthesizing information) characterized the content of Social Stories. A Google search was conducted, including free, English-language stories. After screening, two coders conducted deductive content analysis (>80 codes) with the sample of 82 eligible Social Stories; frequency statistics and quotes were derived.

RESULTS

Most Social Stories focused on vaccination (89%). Social Stories commonly conveyed evidence-based strategies (e.g., 70% depicted distraction), accurate procedural information (e.g., >80% depicted step of needle insertion), and followed Gray's guidelines (e.g., 90% had meaningful titles). Several areas for improvement exist, including allowing for user customization and depicting less commonly shown evidence-based strategies like topical anesthetics.

CONCLUSION

Social Stories may have utility for supporting autistic children and their caregivers through needle procedures. Examining effectiveness/outcomes of usage is a future research avenue.

A Comparative Study of the CARD™ System and Tell-show-do Technique in the Behavior Management of 6-10-year-old Children

Background

Dental fear and anxiety are common issues affecting pediatric dental care, leading to challenges in treatment delivery and patient compliance. Nonpharmacological techniques such as the tell-show-do (TSD) method and CARD™ system have emerged as effective strategies for managing child dental anxiety.

Aim

This study aims to compare the effectiveness of the CARD™ system and TSD technique in managing the behavior of 6-10-year-old children during dental procedures.

Methods

Forty children requiring invasive dental treatments were randomly assigned to either the TSD technique (group 1, n = 20) or CARD™ system (group 2, n = 20) groups. Physiological parameters (oxygen saturation and pulse rate) and behavioral responses (evaluated using the Facial Image Scale) were assessed before and after procedures. Data were analyzed using t-tests and Mann-Whitney U tests as appropriate.

Results

No statistically significant differences were found between the techniques regarding physiological parameters or behavioral responses. Both groups exhibited comparable oxygen saturation levels (CARD™: 98.00 ± 1.02; TSD: 98.00 ± 1.12) and pulse rates (CARD™: 87.45 ± 7.28 bpm; TSD: 90.30 ± 10.26 bpm) before procedures, with minimal changes observed postprocedure. Similarly, there were no significant differences in emotional responses assessed by the Facial Image Scale before (CARD™: 1.90 ± 0.85; TSD: 1.80 ± 0.76) or after procedures (CARD™: 2.80 ± 1.60; TSD: 2.95 ± 1.50).

Conclusion

This study suggests that the CARD™ system and TSD technique are equally effective in managing child dental anxiety. Both methods offer viable options for reducing anxiety and enhancing cooperation during dental procedures.

How to cite this article

Babu A, Eagappan SAR, Srinivasan D, et al. A Comparative Study of the CARD™ System and Tell-show-do Technique in the Behavior Management of 6-10-year-old Children. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2025;18(1):53-57.

Omission of alcohol skin cleansing and risk of adverse events in long-term care residents undergoing COVID-19 vaccination: A cohort study

Despite a lack of clinical data demonstrating the effectiveness of alcohol swab cleansing prior to vaccinations as a prophylactic measure to prevent skin infections, it is recommended for vaccine administration by the Canadian Immunization Guide. The objective of this study was to evaluate the risk of adverse events after omitting alcohol skin cleansing in long-term care (LTC) residents receiving vaccinations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Two medium-sized LTC homes participated in a cohort study, whereby one LTC used alcohol swab cleansing prior to resident vaccinations and the other did not. All residents received two doses of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine separated by an average (SD) 29.3 (8.5) days. The electronic chart records of participants were reviewed by researchers blinded to group allocation to assess for the presence of adverse events following immunization (AEFI), including reactogenicity, cellulitis, abscess, or systemic reactions. Log-binomial regression was used to compute risk ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) of an AEFI according to alcohol swab status. 189 residents were included, with a total of 56 AEFI between the two doses. The risk of reactogenicity (adjusted RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.17-1.73) or systemic reactions (adjusted RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.26-2.13) did not differ for the residents that received alcohol skin antisepsis compared to those that did not. There were no cases of cellulitis or abscess. This study did not demonstrate an elevated risk of AEFI in LTC residents receiving two doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID vaccine without alcohol skin antisepsis.

How stressful was the COVID-19 vaccination procedure? Comparison between mass vaccination centers and general practices

Negative past experiences with vaccines or unfamiliar environments can be sources of stress during the COVID-19 vaccination procedure. We examined whether the perceived stressfulness of the vaccination procedure differ between mass vaccination centers and general practitioner (GP) practices. A survey was distributed (07/2021-10/2021) among newly vaccinated individuals in ten GP practices (n = 364) and two vaccine centers (n = 474). Stress was low at all sites. The perceived stressfulness of the procedure was higher among younger participants and those in GP practices, and increased with longer waiting time at the site. Stress decreased with better comprehensibility of the procedure and higher satisfaction with patient education. Participants who expressed greater concern about the health risks of COVID-19 vaccines perceived the vaccination procedure as more stressful. Our findings indicate opportunities for improvements in future vaccination campaigns and highlight the important role of healthcare providers in mitigating stress by addressing individual concerns.

A randomized double-blinded trial to assess recurrence of systemic allergic reactions following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination

BACKGROUND

Systemic allergic reactions (sARs) following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines were initially reported at a higher rate than after traditional vaccines.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the safety of revaccination in these individuals and to interrogate mechanisms underlying these reactions.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blinded, phase 2 trial, participants aged 16 to 69 years who previously reported a convincing sAR to their first dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine were randomly assigned to receive a second dose of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty) vaccine and placebo on consecutive days in a blinded, 1:1 crossover fashion at the National Institutes of Health. An open-label BNT162b2 booster was offered 5 months later if the second dose did not result in severe sAR. None of the participants received the mRNA-1273 (Spikevax) vaccine during the study. The primary end point was recurrence of sAR following second dose and booster vaccination; exploratory end points included biomarker measurements.

RESULTS

Of 111 screened participants, 18 were randomly assigned to receive study interventions. Eight received BNT162b2 second dose followed by placebo; 8 received placebo followed by BNT162b2 second dose; 2 withdrew before receiving any study intervention. All 16 participants received the booster dose. Following second dose and booster vaccination, sARs recurred in 2 participants (12.5%; 95% CI, 1.6 to 38.3). No sAR occurred after placebo. An anaphylaxis mimic, immunization stress-related response (ISRR), occurred more commonly than sARs following both vaccine and placebo and was associated with higher predose anxiety scores, paresthesias, and distinct vital sign and biomarker changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support revaccination of individuals who report sARs to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Distinct clinical and laboratory features may distinguish sARs from ISRRs.

Experiences of community pharmacists administering COVID-19 vaccinations: A qualitative study

Background

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, community pharmacists have played an important role in the provision of patient care, including the delivery of COVID-19 vaccines. The additional workload and related demands arising from these extended services might affect worklife burnout. This qualitative study explored the experiences of Canadian community pharmacists in providing COVID-19 vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Eighteen community pharmacists across 10 provinces were asked about vaccination processes and perceptions about their role in separate, virtual semistructured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a deductive approach using the Areas of Worklife Burnout framework, with pharmacists' self-reported descriptions of their activities summarized using the Association of Faculties of Pharmacy of Canada's (AFPC) professional competencies framework.

Results

Participants identified aspects of their role that were rewarding and challenging. Some challenges included lack of control, increased workload, inadequate communication, unfair treatment and conflicting values. They described being able to meet challenges and demonstrating resiliency via adaptability, developing communities and valuing their contribution to ending the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-identified AFPC competencies contributing to their ability to manage their worklife included care-provider, professional, leader-manager, collaborator and scholar.

Conclusion

Pharmacists accepted their additional responsibility of managing COVID-19 vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, they expressed some challenges with this role. To ensure sustainability of these services, prioritizing adequate resources, work processes and efficient communication with all relevant stakeholder groups, including public health, government and corporate leaders, is recommended for the future. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2023;156(Suppl):xx-xx.

Community pharmacists' perceptions of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system for use during vaccinations

Introduction

We explored Canadian community pharmacists' perceptions of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system, a vaccine delivery framework that integrates evidence-based interventions that reduce immunization stress-related responses (ISRRs). The objective was to introduce CARD to pharmacists and obtain their feedback to guide future implementation efforts for community pharmacy-based vaccinations.

Methods

Eighteen pharmacists across all provinces participated in one-on-one moderated virtual interviews. A semistructured interview guide was used to guide the discussion and included questions about experiences with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine administration and perceptions of CARD as a framework for vaccination delivery in the pharmacy. In this report, we focus on feedback about CARD. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and deductively coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results

The study was conducted from May 28 to August 16, 2021. Pharmacists' responses were categorized in 3 CFIR domains: intervention characteristics, inner setting and characteristics of individuals. Overall, pharmacists were receptive towards CARD and thought it filled a current gap in practice, particularly for childhood vaccinations. Pharmacists reported learning techniques to make vaccinations more comfortable for their clients. They provided feedback on how specific interventions could be adapted for their practice (e.g., dissemination of client-directed education via appointment booking portals, provision of distraction items in waiting and vaccinating spaces).

Discussion

This study provided preliminary evidence that pharmacists found CARD acceptable and appropriate for community pharmacy-based vaccinations. The data collected from this study were used to inform a small-scale implementation project with CARD during COVID-19 vaccine administration in children aged 5 to 11 years.

Perceptions of pharmacy technician students of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) e-module introduced as part of vaccine injection training

Introduction

The scope of practice for pharmacy technicians is expanding to include vaccine administration in some provinces. Vaccine training courses and programs currently do not include education about mitigating immunization stress-related responses (ISRR) and improving the vaccination experience. We obtained feedback from pharmacy technician students about a new e-module that addresses this identified knowledge gap, whereby learners are educated about CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract), a vaccine delivery framework that reduces ISRR and improves the vaccination experience.

Methods

Mixed-methods design including second-year pharmacy technician students who elected to take an accredited vaccine injection training program. Students were given access to the CARD e-module after completing mandatory vaccine education components. Eight students answered a quantitative survey and 4 (50%) additionally participated in a focus group. Qualitative data were analyzed deductively using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results

The study was conducted between April 28 and June 12, 2022. Students reported positive attitudes about the CARD e-module across quantitative and qualitative measures. Qualitative feedback spanned 4 CFIR constructs: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting and individual characteristics. Students reported the e-module was well designed and that the content was relevant. They believed CARD facilitated provision of vaccinations using a person-centred approach that promotes vaccination. They felt that CARD could potentially add time to the vaccination appointment and that it would need to be acceptable to pharmacy leaders because of implications for training and vaccination delivery. They suggested that CARD education should be mandatory. CARD improved their confidence in delivering vaccinations, and they planned to integrate CARD into their practice.

Conclusion

The CARD e-module was well received by pharmacy technician students when coupled with usual vaccine injection training.

CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for community pharmacy vaccinations in children: Effect on immunization stress-related responses and satisfaction

Introduction

CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) is a vaccine delivery program demonstrated to reduce pain, fear and associated immunization stress-related responses (ISRR) in children undergoing vaccinations at school. This study evaluated CARD's clinical impact when integrated into community pharmacy-based pediatric vaccinations.

Methods

This was a before-and-after CARD implementation study in 5 independent pharmacies offering COVID-19 vaccinations to children aged 5-11 years. No changes were made to practices in the "before" phase. CARD interventions were integrated in the "after" phase (e.g., children prepared a coping plan using a checklist, distraction toolkits were placed in waiting and vaccination spaces, vaccinations were performed with privacy, needles were obscured). Children self-reported ISRR, including fear, pain and dizziness during vaccination, and both children and parents/caregivers (herein, parents) compared the child's experience to their last needle (better, same, worse). In the "after" phase, parents and children reported how much CARD helped (not at all, a little bit, a moderate amount, a lot).

Results

The study was conducted between January 16 and March 20, 2022. Altogether, 152 children participated (71 before and 81 after CARD); demographic characteristics did not differ. Children's self-reported fear was lower after CARD, when assessed continuously (2.5 vs 3.7 out of 10; p = 0.02) or dichotomously, using a cut-off of 0 vs >0 (58% vs 80%; p = 0.01). Pain was lower when assessed dichotomously (<2 vs ≥2; p = 0.03). There was no difference in dizziness. After CARD, children and parents reported more positive experiences compared to the child's last needle (p = 0.01, both analyses) and more children and parents reported that distraction and child participation in the process were helpful (p < 0.001, both analyses). Overall, 92% of children and 91% of parents said CARD helped.

Conclusion

CARD reduced children's fear and improved vaccination experiences for children and parents when integrated in community pharmacy-based vaccinations.

Prevalence of pain and fear as barriers to vaccination in children - Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Injection-related pain and fear are common adverse reactions in children undergoing vaccination and influence vaccine acceptance. Despite the large body of literature on sources of vaccine non-compliance, there is no estimate of the prevalence of pain and fear as contributing factors. The objective was to estimate the prevalence of injection pain or fear of needles as barriers to childhood (i.e., 0-18 years) vaccination.

METHODS

Four databases were searched from inception for relevant English and French articles until August 2021. In addition, the references of recent systematic reviews and all articles included in the review were hand searched. Article screening and data extractions were performed in duplicate. Studies were included if they reported on injection-related pain or fear of needles in children (0-18 years) using a checklist/closed-ended question(s). Results were stratified by respondent (parents or children), type of pediatric population (general or under-vaccinated), and relative importance of barrier (pain or needle fear as primary reason or any reason for under-vaccination). Prevalence rates of pain or needle fear were combined using a random effects model. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for prevalence data. Quality across studies was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

There were 26 studies with 45 prevalence estimates published between 1995 and 2021. For parent reports (of children) and children self-reported reasons for non-compliance, prevalence rates of pain or needle fear ranged from 5 to 13% in a general population and 8 to 28% in an under-vaccinated population, with a substantial variation in the prevalence estimates. There was no difference between category of respondent or relative importance on pain or needle fear prevalence rate. A regression model demonstrated an overall prevalence rate of pain or needle fear as an obstacle to vaccination of 8% in the general population and 18.3% in the under-vaccinated population. All evidence was very low in quality.

CONCLUSION

This is the first review to systematically quantify the prevalence and therefore, importance, of pain and needle fear as obstacles to vaccination in children around the world. Pain from injection or fear of needles were demonstrated to be sufficiently prevalent as barriers to vaccination in children to warrant attention. Addressing pain and fear has the potential to significantly improve vaccination acceptance.