A stepped intervention increases well-child care and immunization rates in a disadvantaged population.

OBJECTIVE: To test a stepped intervention of reminder/recall/case management to increase infant well-child visits and immunization rates. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, practical, clinical trial with 811 infants born in an urban safety-net hospital and followed through 15 months of life. Step 1 (all infants) involved language-appropriate reminder postcards for every well-child visit. Step 2 (infants who missed an appointment or immunization) involved telephone reminders plus postcard and telephone recall. Step 3 (infants still behind on preventive care after steps 1 and 2) involved intensive case management and home visitation. RESULTS: Infants in the intervention arm, compared with control infants, had significantly fewer days without immunization coverage in the first 15 months of life (109 vs 192 days P < .01) and were more likely to have >or=5 well-child visits (65% vs 47% P < .01). In multivariate analyses, infants in the intervention arm were more likely than control infants to be up to date with 12-month immunizations and to have had >or=5 well-child visits. The cost per child was $23.30 per month. CONCLUSION: This stepped intervention of tracking and case management improved infant immunization status and receipt of preventive care in a population of high-risk urban infants of low socioeconomic status.

Individually significant risk factors do not provide an accurate clinical prediction rule for infant underimmunization in one disadvantaged urban area.

OBJECTIVE: To define a clinical prediction rule for underimmunization in children of low socioeconomic status. METHODS: We assessed a cohort of 1160 infants born from July 1998 through June 1999 at an urban safety net hospital that received primary care at 4 community health centers. The main outcome measure was up-to-date status with the 3:2:2:2 infant vaccine series at 12 months of age. RESULTS: Latino infants (n = 959, 83% of cohort) had immunization rates of 74%, at least 18% higher than any other racial/ethnic group. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated the following independent associations (relative risk, 95% confidence interval) for inadequate immunization: non-Latino ethnicity (1.7, 1.4-2.0), maternal smoking (1.3, 1.1-1.7), no health insurance (1.9, 1.4-2.3), late prenatal care (1.9, 1.5-2.3), no pediatric chronic condition (2.1, 1.2-3.1), and no intent to breast-feed (1.3, 1.1-1.6). However, the index of concordance (c-index) for this model was only 0.69. Neither excluding infants who left the health care system nor accounting for infants who were "late starters" for their first vaccines improved the predictive accuracy of the model. CONCLUSIONS: In this predominantly Latino population of low socioeconomic status, Latino infants have higher immunization rates than other infants. However, we were unable to develop a model to reliably predict which infants in this population were underimmunized. Models to predict underimmunization should be tested in other settings. In this population, interventions to improve immunization rates must be targeted at all children without respect to individual risk factors.

The impact of inactive infants on clinic-based immunization rates.

OBJECTIVE: Clinic-based immunization rates are used to evaluate clinic performance and immunization interventions, but they typically exclude so-called inactive patients (ie, those who no longer receive care at the clinic). We assessed the effect of enhanced ascertainment of inactive patients on clinic-based immunization rates and on the conclusions of a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: The study was a post hoc analysis of a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Infant randomization to the immunization intervention (4 clinics) or control group (4 clinics) was based on the site of their 2-week well-child care visit. The study was conducted at an integrated inner-city health care system serving a low-income population. A total of 2190 infants born between July 1, 1998, and June 30, 1999, who attended at least 1 postnatal visit, participated. In control sites, clinic staff documented inactive infants in the immunization registry and medical charts. The research staff undertook additional patient tracking efforts in the intervention clinics. RESULTS: Control clinics identified 155 (13.4%) of 1160 children as inactive within 1 year of birth, whereas 284 (27.6%) of 1030 intervention infants were documented as inactive (P < .001). In bivariate analyses from the randomized trial, immunization rates differed between intervention and control branches. In multivariate models, immunization rates were significantly higher in the intervention branch when inactive infants were removed (adjusted relative risk 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-1.89), but not when they were included (adjusted relative risk 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.21). CONCLUSIONS: Additional patient tracking efforts can dramatically influence inactive patient documentation and clinic-based immunization rates used for various purposes.

Strategies to improve immunization rates and well-child care in a disadvantaged population: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the effect of a multimodal intervention on well-child care visit (WCV) and immunization rates in an inner-city population. DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: One-year cohort of 2843 infants born at a hospital in an integrated inner-city health care system. INTERVENTIONS: Eleven clinics were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 study arms: WCV intervention (n = 3), immunization intervention (n = 4), and controls (n = 4). Interventions to improve immunization and WCV rates included both patient-based and clinic-based activities. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Up-to-date status with childhood immunizations and WCVs by age 12 months (primary) and health care utilization and charges (secondary). RESULTS: Compared with the control arm, the WCV and immunization arms had 5% to 6% higher immunization rates and 7% to 8% higher WCV rates. In multivariate analyses that accounted for the clustered nature of the data, the number of immunizations received was greater in the WCV arm than in controls. However, neither the WCV nor the immunization intervention increased WCV or immunization up-to-date rates. The WCV arm had slightly higher health care charges. Neither intervention affected emergency, urgent care or inpatient utilization. CONCLUSIONS: This multimodal intervention produced a small increase in the number of childhood immunizations delivered. However, patient- and clinic-based methods did not lead to significant increases in WCV or immunization up-to-date rates after controlling for other factors. Methods found in some settings to increase immunization up-to-date rates may not be as effective in a population of inner-city socioeconomically disadvantaged children.

Immunization registry accuracy: improvement with progressive clinical application.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems have been challenged to ensure the timely administration of immunizations. Immunization registries have been proposed to improve the accuracy and completeness of immunization information and to promote effective practice. METHODS: Comparison of randomly selected samples from two birth cohorts (1993 and 1998) from Denver Health Medical Center. Chart review and immunization registry information for these groups were compared; a composite immunization was recorded and up-to-date (UTD) status established. Registry data were compared with this composite using a sensitivity measure to assess completeness and accuracy. RESULTS: Among 818 children in the 1993 cohort and 1043 children in the 1998 cohort, there were 6386 and 6886 valid immunizations, respectively. The registry recorded 71.4% and 97.7% of these for the 1993 and 1998 cohorts, respectively (p <0.001). The apparent UTD rate, as measured with registry data alone, improved from 37% to 79% between the two time frames (p <0.001). Composite UTD status was 83.1% and 78.9% (1993 vs 1998, respectively). Accurate registry-defined UTD status improved from 44.4% to 100% between the two intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Immunization registry accuracy improved dramatically for recorded immunizations and UTD status. However, after 3 years of registry use, the overall proportion of children who were UTD had not significantly improved. The mere presence of a registry does not ensure more complete vaccination coverage. Other registry-based strategies, including use of the data for reminder, recall, and audit, may further improve immunization coverage.