Variation in Clinician Recommendations for Multiple Injections During Adoption of Inactivated Polio Vaccine

Author:

Lieu Tracy A.12,Davis Robert L.3,Capra Angela M.1,Mell Loren K.3,Quesenberry Charles P.1,Martin Kathleen E.1,Zavitkovsky Ann3,Black Steven B.1,Shinefield Henry R.1,Thompson Robert S.3,Rodewald Lance E.4

Affiliation:

1. From the Division of Research and the Vaccine Study Center, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California;

2. Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, Pediatric Clinical Effectiveness Program, Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, and Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts; and the

3. Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Washington;

4. National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

Abstract

Objectives. To describe variation in clinician recommendations for multiple injections during the adoption of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) in 2 large health maintenance organizations (HMOs), and to test the hypothesis that variation in recommendations would be associated with variation in immunization coverage rates. Design. Cross-sectional study based on a survey of clinician practices 1 year after IPV was recommended and computerized immunization data from these clinicians' patients. Study Settings. Two large West Coast HMOs: Kaiser Permanente in Northern California and Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound. Outcome Measures. Immunization status of 8-month-olds and 24-month-olds cared for by the clinicians during the study. Results. More clinicians at Group Health (82%), where a central guideline was issued, had adopted the IPV/oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) sequential schedule than at Kaiser (65%), where no central guideline was issued. Clinicians at both HMOs said that if multiple injections fell due at a visit and they elected to defer some vaccines, they would be most likely to defer the hepatitis B vaccine (HBV) for infants (40%). At Kaiser, IPV users were more likely than OPV users to recommend the first HBV at birth (64% vs 28%) or if they did not, to defer the third HBV to 8 months or later (62% vs 39%). In multivariate analyses, patients whose clinicians used IPV were as likely to be fully immunized at 8 months old as those whose clinicians used all OPV. At Kaiser, where there was variability in the maximum number of injections clinicians recommended at infant visits, providers who routinely recommended 3 or 4 injections at a visit had similar immunization coverage rates as those who recommended 1 or 2. At both HMOs, clinicians who strongly recommended all possible injections at a visit had higher immunization coverage rates at 8 months than those who offered parents the choice of deferring some vaccines to a subsequent visit (at Kaiser, odds ratio [OR]: 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0–1.5; at Group Health, OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.1–2.8). Conclusions. Neither IPV adoption nor the use of multiple injections at infant visits were associated with reductions in immunization coverage. However, at the HMO without centralized immunization guidelines, IPV adoption was associated with changes in the timing of the first and third HBV. Clinical policymakers should continue to monitor practice variation as future vaccines are added to the infant immunization schedule.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Reference28 articles.

1. Recommendations of the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee (ACIP): general recommendations on immunization.;Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep,1989

2. Recommended childhood immunization schedule—United States, 1999.;Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep,1999

3. Recommended childhood immunization schedule—United States, January–December 1999.;Committee on Infectious Diseases;Pediatrics,1999

Cited by 15 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3