Age-appropriate vaccination against measles and DPT-3 in India—Closing the gaps

BMC Public Health (Impact Factor: 2.26). 04/2013; 13(1):358. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-358
Source: PubMed


In 2010, India accounted for 65,500 (47%) of the 139,300 measles-related deaths that occurred globally. Data on the quality of age-appropriate measles vaccination in rural India is sparse. We explored the following issues: (i) What proportion of Indian children were appropriately vaccinated against measles at 9 months of age, and DPT-3 at 4 months? (ii) Which health facilities administered measles vaccine to children prior to 9 months of age and DPT-3 prior to 14 weeks?

We analyzed data from the 2008 Indian District Level Health Survey (DLHS-3) to determine the extent of age-appropriate measles and DPT-3 vaccinations. Among 192,969 households in the dataset, vaccination cards with detailed records were available for 18,670 children aged between 12 and 23 months.

Among this cohort, 72.4% (13,511 infants) had received the first dose of measles vaccine. Only 30% of vaccinated infants received the measles vaccine at the recommended age of 9 months. Similarly, only 31% of infants in the cohort received DPT-3 vaccine at the recommended age of 14 weeks. About 82% of all prematurely vaccinated children were vaccinated at health sub-centres, ICDS and Pulse Polio centres.

Age-inappropriate vaccination impacts adversely on the effectiveness of India’s measles immunisation program due to sub-optimal seroconversion, if premature, and increased vulnerability to vaccine preventable diseases, if delayed. Capacity building approaches to improve age-appropriate vaccination are discussed.

Download full-text


Available from: Anu Rammohan, Sep 29, 2015
17 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and objectives India has the highest under-five death toll globally, approximately 20% of which is attributed to vaccine-preventable diseases. India's Universal Immunization Programme (UIP) is working both to increase immunization coverage and to introduce new vaccines. Here, we analyze the disease and financial burden alleviated across India's population (by wealth quintile, rural or urban area, and state) through increasing vaccination rates and introducing a rotavirus vaccine. Methods We use IndiaSim, a simulated agent-based model (ABM) of the Indian population (including socio-economic characteristics and immunization status) and the health system to model three interventions. In the first intervention, a rotavirus vaccine is introduced at the current DPT3 immunization coverage level in India. In the second intervention, coverage of three doses of rotavirus and DPT and one dose of the measles vaccine are increased to 90% randomly across the population. In the third, we evaluate an increase in immunization coverage to 90% through targeted increases in rural and urban regions (across all states) that are below that level at baseline. For each intervention, we evaluate the disease and financial burden alleviated, costs incurred, and the cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted. Results Baseline immunization coverage is low and has a large variance across population segments and regions. Targeting specific regions can approximately equate the rural and urban immunization rates. Introducing a rotavirus vaccine at the current DPT3 level (intervention one) averts 34.7 (95% uncertainty range [UR], 31.7–37.7) deaths and $215,569 (95% UR, $207,846–$223,292) out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure per 100,000 under-five children. Increasing all immunization rates to 90% (intervention two) averts an additional 22.1 (95% UR, 18.6–25.7) deaths and $45,914 (95% UR, $37,909–$53,920) OOP expenditure. Scaling up immunization by targeting regions with low coverage (intervention three) averts a slightly higher number of deaths and OOP expenditure. The reduced burden of rotavirus diarrhea is the primary driver of the estimated health and economic benefits in all intervention scenarios. All three interventions are cost saving. Conclusion Improving immunization coverage and the introduction of a rotavirus vaccine significantly alleviates disease and financial burden in Indian households. Population subgroups or regions with low existing immunization coverage benefit the most from the intervention. Increasing coverage by targeting those subgroups alleviates the burden more than simply increasing coverage in the population at large.
    Vaccine 08/2014; 32:A151–A161. DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.04.080 · 3.62 Impact Factor
  • Source
    05/2015; 5:27784. DOI:10.3402/iee.v5.27784
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Population immunity depends on the dynamic levels of immunization coverage that countries achieve over time and any transmission of viruses that occur within the population that induce immunity. In the context of developing a dynamic transmission model for measles and rubella to support analyses of future immunization policy options, we assessed the model inputs required to reproduce past behavior and to provide some confidence about model performance at the national level. We reviewed the data available from the World Health Organization (WHO) and existing measles and rubella literature for evidence of historical reported routine and supplemental immunization activities and reported cases and outbreaks. We constructed model input profiles for 180 WHO member states and three other areas to support disease transmission model development and calibration. The profiles demonstrate the significant variability in immunization strategies used historically by regions and member states and the epidemiological implications of these historical choices. The profiles provide a historical perspective on measles and rubella immunization globally at the national level, and they may help immunization program managers identify existing immunity and/or knowledge gaps. © 2015 Society for Risk Analysis.
    Risk Analysis 08/2015; DOI:10.1111/risa.12454 · 2.50 Impact Factor