Promising practices for school-located vaccination clinics - part II: clinic operations and program sustainability

Knox County Health Department, 140 Dameron Ave., Knoxville, TN 37917, USA.
PEDIATRICS (Impact Factor: 5.3). 03/2012; 129 Suppl 2:S81-7. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2011-0737G
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A school-located mass vaccination program can enable rapid vaccination of a large number of students while minimizing disruption of their school activities. During 3 consecutive influenza seasons beginning in 2005, the Knox County Health Department conducted school-located mass vaccination clinics using live attenuated influenza vaccine. Overall, the proportion of elementary schoolchildren vaccinated with live attenuated influenza vaccine exceeded 40% each year. We describe key lessons learned in clinic operations, including obtaining informed consent, defining the organizational structure and roles, preparing the school, staffing, training, supplies, vaccine management, team communication, and data management. We conclude by discussing program costs and sustainability.

  • PEDIATRICS 03/2012; 129 Suppl 2(Supplement 2):S51-3. DOI:10.1542/peds.2011-0737B · 5.30 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Influenza vaccination coverage for U.S. school-aged children is below the 80% national goal. Primary care practices may not have the capacity to vaccinate all children during influenza vaccination season. No real-world models of school-located seasonal influenza (SLV-I) programs have been tested. Determine the feasibility, sustainability, and impact of an SLV-I program providing influenza vaccination to elementary school children during the school day. In this pragmatic randomized controlled trial of SLV-I during two vaccination seasons, schools were randomly assigned to SLV-I versus standard of care. Seasonal influenza vaccine receipt, as recorded in the state immunization information system (IIS), was measured. Intervention and control schools were located in a single western New York county. Participation (intervention or control) included the sole urban school district and suburban districts (five in Year 1, four in Year 2). After gathering parental consent and insurance information, live attenuated and inactivated seasonal influenza vaccines were offered in elementary schools during the school day. Data on receipt of ≥1 seasonal influenza vaccination in Year 1 (2009-2010) and Year 2 (2010-2011) were collected on all student grades K through 5 at intervention and control schools from the IIS in the Spring of 2010 and 2011, respectively. Additionally, coverage achieved through SLV-I was compared to coverage of children vaccinated elsewhere. Preliminary data analysis for Year 1 occurred in Spring 2010; final quantitative analysis for both years was completed in late Fall 2012. Results are shown for 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, respectively: Children enrolled in suburban SLV-I versus control schools had vaccination coverage of 47% vs 36%, and 52% vs 36% (p<0.0001 both years). In urban areas, coverage was 36% vs 26%, and 31% vs 25% (p<0.001 both years). On multilevel logistic analysis with three nested levels (student, school, school district) during both vaccination seasons, children were more likely to be vaccinated in SLV-I versus control schools; ORs were 1.6 (95% CI=1.4, 1.9; p<0.001) and 1.5 (95% CI=1.3, 1.8; p<0.001). Delivering influenza vaccine during school is a promising approach to improving pediatric influenza vaccination coverage. ClinicalTrials.govNCT01224301.
    American journal of preventive medicine 01/2014; 46(1):1-9. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.08.021 · 4.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Maine implemented a statewide pre-K through 12-school vaccination program during the 2009-2010 H1N1 influenza pandemic. The main objective of this study was to determine which school, nurse, consent form, and clinic factors were associated with school-level vaccination rates for the first dose of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic vaccine.
    Journal of public health management and practice: JPHMP 10/2014; 21(2). DOI:10.1097/PHH.0000000000000156 · 1.47 Impact Factor
Show more