Leaving no one behind: Defining and implementing an integrated life course approach to vaccination across the next decade as part of the immunization Agenda 2030

Strategic Priority 4 (SP4) of the Immunization Agenda 2030 aims to ensure that all people benefit from recommended immunizations throughout the life-course, integrated with essential health services. Therefore, it is necessary for immunization programs to have coordination and collaboration across all health programs. Although there has been progress, immunization platforms in the second year of life and beyond need continued strengthening, including booster doses and catch-up vaccination, for all ages, and recommended vaccines for older age groups. We note gaps in current vaccination programs policies and achieved coverage, in the second year of life and beyond. In 2021, the second dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV2), given in the second year of life, achieved 71% global coverage vs 81% for MCV1. For adolescents, 60% of all countries have adopted human papillomavirus vaccines in their vaccination schedule with a global coverage rate of only 12 percent in 2021. Approximately 65% of the countries recommend influenza vaccines for older adults, high-risk adults and pregnant women, and only 25% recommended pneumococcal vaccines for older adults. To achieve an integrated life course approach to vaccination, we reviewed the evidence, gaps, and strategies in four focus areas: generating evidence for disease burden and potential vaccine impact in older age groups; building awareness and shifting policy beyond early childhood; building integrated delivery approaches throughout the life course; and identifying missed opportunities for vaccination, implementing catch-up strategies, and monitoring vaccination throughout the life course. We identified needs, such as tailoring strategies to the local context, conducting research and advocacy to mobilize resources and build political will. Mustering sufficient financial support and demand for an integrated life course approach to vaccination, particularly in times of COVID-19, is both a challenge and an opportunity.

Using social network analysis to examine the decision-making process on new vaccine introduction in Nigeria

The decision-making process to introduce new vaccines into national immunization programmes is often complex, involving many stakeholders who provide technical information, mobilize finance, implement programmes and garner political support. Stakeholders may have different levels of interest, knowledge and motivations to introduce new vaccines. Lack of consensus on the priority, public health value or feasibility of adding a new vaccine can delay policy decisions. Efforts to support country-level decision-making have largely focused on establishing global policies and equipping policy makers with the information to support decision-making on new vaccine introduction (NVI). Less attention has been given to understanding the interactions of policy actors and how the distribution of influence affects the policy process and decision-making. Social network analysis (SNA) is a social science technique concerned with explaining social phenomena using the structural and relational features of the network of actors involved. This approach can be used to identify how information is exchanged and who is included or excluded from the process. For this SNA of vaccine decision-making in Nigeria, we interviewed federal and state-level government officials, officers of bilateral and multilateral partner organizations, and other stakeholders such as health providers and the media. Using data culled from those interviews, we performed an SNA in order to map formal and informal relationships and the distribution of influence among vaccine decision-makers, as well as to explore linkages and pathways to stakeholders who can influence critical decisions in the policy process. Our findings indicate a relatively robust engagement of key stakeholders in Nigeria. We hypothesized that economic stakeholders and implementers would be important to ensure sustainable financing and strengthen programme implementation, but some economic and implementation stakeholders did not appear centrally on the map; this may suggest a need to strengthen the decision-making processes by engaging these stakeholders more centrally and earlier.