Reduction of frequent otitis media and pressure-equalizing tube insertions in children after introduction of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine.

OBJECTIVE: Streptococcus pneumoniae is an important cause of otitis media in children. In this study we estimated the effect of routine childhood immunization with heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on frequent otitis media (3 episodes in 6 months or 4 episodes in 1 year) and pressure-equalizing tube insertions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population included all children who were enrolled at birth in TennCare or selected upstate New York commercial insurance plans as of July 1998 and continuously followed until 5 years old, loss of health plan enrollment, study outcome, or end of the study. We compared the risk of developing frequent otitis media or having pressure-equalizing tube insertion for 4 birth cohorts (1998-1999, 1999-2000, 2000-2001, and 2001-2002) by using Cox regression analysis. We used data from the National Immunization Survey to estimate the heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine uptake for children in these 4 birth cohorts in Tennessee and New York. RESULTS: The proportion of children in Tennessee and New York who received at least 3 doses of heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine by 2 years of age increased from < or = 1% for the 1998-1999 birth cohort to approximately 75% for the 2000-2001 birth cohort. By age 2 years, 29% of Tennessee and New York children born in 2000-2001 had developed frequent otitis media, and 6% of each of these birth cohorts had pressure-equalizing tubes inserted. Comparing the 2000-2001 birth cohort to the 1998-1999 birth cohort, frequent otitis media declined by 17% and 28%, and pressure-equalizing tube insertions declined by 16% and 23% for Tennessee and New York children, respectively. For the 2000-2001 to the 2001-2002 birth cohort, frequent otitis media and pressure-equalizing tubes remained stable in New York but increased in Tennessee. CONCLUSIONS: After heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine introduction, children were less likely to develop frequent otitis media or have pressure-equalizing tube insertions.

Physician perspectives regarding pneumococcal conjugate vaccine.

OBJECTIVES: Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) was first licensed for routine administration to young children in February 2000. The objective of this study was to assess physician perspectives about the use of PCV, to ascertain which children were being given the vaccine soon after licensure, and to determine how the addition of PCV to the schedule of recommended childhood vaccines may affect the timing of other vaccinations. METHODS: A 30-item survey containing questions about the use of PCV was sent to all pediatricians and family physicians who provide primary care to young children in Monroe County (Rochester, NY) and Davidson County (Nashville, TN) in October 2000. As many as 3 subsequent mailings were sent to nonresponders. Descriptive and chi(2) statistical analyses and logistic regression were used to evaluate the responses. RESULTS: Response rates were 82% in Rochester and 78% in Nashville. Eighty-two percent of responding physicians, including 92% of pediatricians and 55% of family physicians, indicated that they were giving PCV to their patients at the time of the survey. Sixty percent noted that an initial lack of insurance reimbursement for the cost of the vaccine caused them to delay introducing PCV. Fifty-one percent delayed initially offering the vaccine to any of their patients because the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program did not begin to offer PCV until several months later. The vast majority routinely vaccinated healthy children who are younger than 2 years as well as older children who had defined chronic medical conditions that put them at high risk of invasive pneumococcal disease. Fewer than 15% were recalling patients for PCV, with most recall efforts focused on patients who had chronic medical conditions. When discussing PCV with parents, 78% of physicians primarily emphasized the vaccine's potential to decrease the risk of sepsis and/or meningitis, whereas smaller percentages primarily emphasized the vaccine's potential to decrease the risk of pneumonia or ear infections. Approximately 20% of physicians who gave PCV delayed other vaccinations (primarily varicella vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, or polio vaccine) because of concern about administering 4 or more vaccines simultaneously. Similarly, 40% of physicians indicated that they considered PCV to be more important than varicella vaccine or hepatitis B vaccine, whereas 26% percent considered PCV to be more important than polio vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: PCV has been widely accepted by physicians in both Rochester and Nashville. However, many physicians delayed introducing the vaccine for reasons that were ultimately related to financial considerations. For privately insured patients, delays were related to when coverage for PCV was added to benefit packages. For patients who receive publicly purchased vaccine via the VFC program, delays were related to availability of the vaccine through the VFC program. In addition, after the introduction of PCV, some physicians began delaying the administration of other vaccines because of the need to give multiple vaccinations simultaneously. Although lack of insurance or VFC coverage and concerns about multiple simultaneous injections may somewhat delay the initial use of newly recommended vaccines, physicians rapidly begin to provide new vaccines that they believe to be beneficial once those vaccines are incorporated into existing payment mechanisms.