Implementation of universal influenza immunization recommendations for healthy young children: Results of a randomized, controlled trial with registry-based recall

Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, United States
PEDIATRICS (Impact Factor: 5.3). 01/2005; 115(1):146-54. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2004-1804
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT An Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices policy of encouraging influenza vaccination for healthy 6- to 23-month-old children was in effect during the 2003-2004 influenza season, which was unusually severe in Colorado. We collaborated with 5 pediatric practices to attempt universal influenza immunization in this age group.
The objectives were (1) to assess the maximal influenza immunization rates that could be achieved for healthy young children in private practice settings, (2) to evaluate the efficacy of registry-based reminder/recall for influenza vaccination, and (3) to describe methods used by private practices to implement the recommendations.
The study was conducted in 5 private pediatric practices in Denver, Colorado, with a common billing system and immunization registry. Although recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices included children who were 6 to 23 months of age at any point during the influenza season, our practices chose not to recall children 22 to 23 months of age, because they would have become >24 months of age during the study period. Therefore, our study population consisted of all healthy children 6 to 21 months of age from the 5 practices (N = 5193), who were randomized to intervention groups (n = 2595) that received up to 3 reminder/recall letters or to control groups (n = 2598) that received usual care. The primary outcome was receipt of >or=1 influenza immunization, as noted either in the immunization registry or in billing data.
Immunization rates for >or=1 dose of influenza vaccine for the intervention groups in the 5 practices were 75.9%, 75.4%, 68.1%, 55.6%, and 44.3% at the end of the season. Overall, 62.4% of children in the intervention groups and 58.0% of children in the control groups were immunized (4.4% absolute difference), with absolute differences, compared with control values, ranging from 1.0% to 9.1% according to practice. However, before intensive media coverage of the influenza outbreak began (November 15, 2003), absolute differences, compared with control values, ranged from 5.1% to 15.3% and were 9.6% overall. Before November 15, significant effects of recall were seen for children in the intervention groups, in both the 12- to 21-month age category (10.4% increase over control) and the 6- to 11-month category (8.1% increase over control); at the end of the season, however, significant effects of recall were seen only for the older age group (6.2% increase over control). The rates of receipt of 2 vaccine doses >or=1 month apart for eligible children ranged from 21% to 48% among the practices. Four of the 5 practices held influenza immunization clinics during office hours, evenings, or weekends, and these clinics achieved higher coverage rates.
These results demonstrated that, in an epidemic influenza year, private practices were able to immunize the majority of 6- to 21-month-old children in a timely manner. Although media coverage regarding the epidemic blunted the effect of registry-based recall, recall was effective in increasing rates early in the epidemic, especially for children between 1 and 2 years of age. The practices that achieved the highest immunization rates were proactive in planning influenza clinics to handle the extra volume of immunizations required.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although previous studies have found reminder/recall to be effective in increasing immunization rates, little guidance exists regarding the specific ages at which it is optimal to send reminder/recall notices. To assess the relative effectiveness of centralized reminder/recall strategies targeting age-specific vaccination milestones among children in urban areas during June 2008-June 2009. Three reminder/recall strategies used capabilities of the Michigan Care Improvement Registry (MCIR), a statewide immunization information system: a 7-month recall strategy, a 12-month reminder strategy, and a 19-month recall strategy. Eligible children were randomized to notification (intervention) or no notification groups (control). Primary study outcomes included MCIR-recorded immunization activity (administration of ≥1 new dose, entry of ≥1 historic dose, entry of immunization waiver) within 60 days following each notification cycle. A total of 10,175 children were included: 2,072 for the 7-month recall, 3,502 for the 12-month reminder, and 4,601 for the 19-month recall. Immunization activity was similar between notification versus no notification groups at both 7 and 12 months. Significantly more 19-month-old children in the recall group (26%) had immunization activity compared to their counterparts that did not receive a recall notification (19%). Although recall notifications can positively affect immunization activity, the effect may vary by targeted age group. Many 7- and 12-month-olds had immunization activity following reminder/recall; however, levels of activity were similar irrespective of notification, suggesting that these groups were likely to receive medical care or immunization services without prompting.
    American journal of preventive medicine 04/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2014.02.009 · 4.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To increase childhood influenza vaccination rates using a toolkit and early vaccine delivery in a randomized cluster trial. Twenty primary care practices treating children (range for n=536-8183) were randomly assigned to Intervention and Control arms to test the effectiveness of an evidence-based practice improvement toolkit (4 Pillars Toolkit) and early vaccine supplies for use among disadvantaged children on influenza vaccination rates among children 6 months-18 years. Follow-up staff meetings and surveys were used to assess use and acceptability of the intervention strategies in the Intervention arm. Rates for the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 influenza seasons were compared. Two-level generalized linear mixed modeling was used to evaluate outcomes. Overall increases in influenza vaccination rates were significantly greater in the Intervention arm (7.9 percentage points) compared with the Control arm (4.4 percentage points; P<0.034). These rate changes represent 4522 additional doses in the Intervention arm vs. 1390 additional doses in the Control arm. This effect of the intervention was observed despite the fact that rates increased significantly in both arms - 8/10 Intervention (P<0.001) and 7/10 Control sites (P-values 0.04 to <0.001). Rates in two Intervention sites with pre-intervention vaccination rates >58% did not significantly increase. In regression analyses, a child's likelihood of being vaccinated was significantly higher with: younger age, white race (Odds ratio [OR]=1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.23-1.34), having commercial insurance (OR=1.30; 95%CI=1.25-1.35), higher pre-intervention practice vaccination rate (OR=1.25; 95%CI=1.16-1.34), and being in the Intervention arm (OR=1.23; 95%CI=1.01-1.50). Early delivery of influenza vaccine was rated by Intervention practices as an effective strategy for raising rates. Implementation of a multi-strategy toolkit and early vaccine supplies can significantly improve influenza vaccination rates among children in primary care practices but the effect may be less pronounced in practices with moderate to high existing vaccination rates. Clinical trial registry name/number: From Innovation to Solutions: Childhood Influenza.
    Vaccine 04/2014; 32(29). DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.04.057 · 3.49 Impact Factor
  • Clinical Pediatrics 03/2014; 53(10). DOI:10.1177/0009922814527505 · 1.26 Impact Factor