Qualitative Analysis of Immunization Programs With Most Improved Childhood Vaccination Coverage From 2001 to 2004

National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Immunization Services Division, Health Services Research and Evaluation Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA.
Journal of public health management and practice: JPHMP (Impact Factor: 1.47). 01/2010; 16(1):E1-8. DOI: 10.1097/PHH.0b013e3181b0b8bc
Source: PubMed


State and urban immunization programs are responsible for the implementation of comprehensive programs to vaccinate populations within their geographic area. Given the variability in immunization coverage rates between geographic areas, the purpose of this two-phase study was to first identify the state and urban areas that achieved the highest increases in coverage, and then those with the highest sustained coverage, between two designated periods, and to interview key program staff members and their community counterparts to capture their perspectives on what factors may have contributed to increasing and sustaining high rates. In this article, we describe phase 1, in which we visited the seven sites that achieved the largest increases in coverage from 2001 to 2004. Results describe outcomes from the 71 semistructured key informant interviews with internal staff and external partners at the site's immunization programs. Interview transcripts were analyzed qualitatively, using a general inductive approach. Common challenges encountered among the seven sites included increasing reluctance among parents and overcoming barriers to accessing care. Common strategies to address these and other challenges included collecting and using data on immunization coverage, developing communication and education efforts, and continuously reaching out and collaborating with immunization partners. Lessons learned from these programs may help inform others who are working to improve childhood immunization delivery and coverage in their own programs.

1 Follower
13 Reads
  • Source
    • "Public health services delivery depends on data and information for enumeration and reporting as part of disease surveillance [1], preventive and medical service delivery [2], local decision making, strategic planning, and quality improvement [3-5]. Such activities make reporting and managing data substantial portions of local public health practitioners daily job activities [6]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Data collection and management by local health departments (LHDs) is a complex endeavor, complicated by system level and organizational factors. The purpose of this study was to describe the processes and use of information systems (IS) utilized for data collection, management, and sharing by LHD employees. We interviewed a purposive sample of 12 staff working in the key public health practice areas of communicable disease control, immunizations, and vital records from three LHDs in different states. Our interview questions addressed job descriptions, daily activities, and the use and perceptions of both data and IS in support of their work. A content analytic approach was used to derive themes and categories common across programmatic areas. Local public health involves the use of mix of state-supplied and locally implemented IS supported by paper records. Additionally, each LHD in this study used at least one shadow system to maintain a duplicate set of information. Experiences with IS functionality and the extent to which it supported work varied by programmatic area, but inefficiencies, challenges in generating reports, limited data accessibility, and workarounds were commonly reported. Current approaches to data management and sharing do not always support efficient public health practice or allow data to be used for organizational and community decision making. Many of the challenges to effective and efficient public health work were not solely technological. These findings suggest the need for interorganizational collaboration, increasing organizational capacity, workflow redesign, and end user training.
    02/2014; 5(3):227. DOI:10.5210/ojphi.v5i3.4847
  • Source
    • "Sixteen articles described state-level systems, but reports also included data and systems specific to Atlanta,25 Boston,20 New York city,15,21 and Philadelphia.18,19 One study interviewed immunization program managers both in urban areas and at the state level.1 In addition, the majority of included studies (17 out of 23) were cross-sectional analysis of the information system records, often compared to data generated in clinical settings or in other information systems.16–21,23–28,30–35 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Public health professionals rely on quantitative data for the daily practice of public health as well as organizational decision making and planning. However, several factors work against effective data sharing among public health agencies in the US. This review characterizes the reported barriers and enablers of effective use of public health IS from an informatics perspective. A systematic review of the English language literature for 2005 to 2011 followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) format. The review focused on immunization information systems (IIS) and vital records information systems (VRIS). Systems were described according to the structural aspects of IS integration and data quality. Articles describing IIS documented issues pertaining to the distribution of the system, the autonomy of the data providers, the heterogeneous nature of information sharing as well as the quality of the data. Articles describing VRIS were focused much more heavily on data quality, particularly whether or not the data were free from errors. For state and local practitioners to effectively utilize data, public health IS will have to overcome the challenges posed by a large number of autonomous data providers utilizing a variety of technologies.
    09/2012; 4(2). DOI:10.5210/ojphi.v4i2.4198
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives  We conducted a case study of an urban immunization outreach strategy to determine the feasibility of the intervention and to measure administrative immunization coverage outcomes. Methods  A multipronged strategy for improving immunization coverage in Urban Patna, India, was implemented for 1 year (2009/2010). The strategy was designed to increase immunization sites, shift human resources, plan logistics, improve community mobilization, provide supervision, strengthen data flow and implement special vaccination drives. Results  Over 1 year, the coverage of all primary vaccines of the Universal Immunization Program improved by over 100%. Conclusion  Coverage can be rapidly improved through outreach immunization in low socioeconomic areas if existing opportunities are carefully utilized.
    Tropical Medicine & International Health 12/2011; 17(3):292-9. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-3156.2011.02916.x · 2.33 Impact Factor
Show more