Increasing provision of adolescent vaccines in primary care: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of in-person and webinar-delivered AFIX (Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange) consultations for increasing adolescent vaccine coverage. METHODS: We randomly assigned 91 primary care clinics in North Carolina, serving 107 443 adolescents, to receive no consultation or an in-person or webinar AFIX consultation. We delivered in-person consultations in April through May 2011 and webinar consultations in May through August 2011. The state's immunization registry provided vaccine coverage data for younger patients (ages 11-12 years) and older patients (ages 13-18 years) for 3 adolescent vaccines: tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap); meningococcal; and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines (≥1 dose, females only). RESULTS: At the 5-month follow-up, AFIX consultations increased vaccine coverage among younger adolescents. Patients in the in-person arm experienced coverage changes that exceeded those in the control arm for Tdap (3.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.2 to 4.6]), meningococcal (4.7% [95% CI: 2.3 to 7.2], and HPV (1.5% [95% CI: 0.3 to 2.7]) vaccines. Patients in the webinar versus control arm also experienced larger changes for these vaccines. AFIX did little to improve coverage among older adolescents. At 1 year, the 3 arms showed similar coverage changes. The effectiveness of in-person and webinar consultations was not statistically different at either time point (all, P >.05). CONCLUSIONS: Webinar AFIX consultations were as effective as in-person consultations in achieving short-term increases in vaccine coverage for younger adolescents. AFIX consultations for adolescents need improvement to have a stronger and more durable impact, especially for HPV vaccine.

Comparing in-person and webinar delivery of an immunization quality improvement program: a process evaluation of the adolescent AFIX trial.

BACKGROUND: Immunization quality improvement programs are often limited by the cost and inconvenience associated with delivering face-to-face consultations to primary care providers. To investigate a more efficient mode of intervention delivery, we conducted a process evaluation that compared in-person consultations to those delivered via interactive webinar. METHODS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange (AFIX) Program is an immunization quality improvement program implemented in all 50 states. In 2011, we randomly assigned 61 high-volume primary care clinics in North Carolina to receive an in-person or webinar AFIX consultation focused on adolescent immunization. We used surveys of participating vaccine providers and expense tracking logs to evaluate delivery modes on participation, satisfaction, and cost. Clinics served 71,874 patients, ages 11 to 18. RESULTS: Clinics that received in-person and webinar consultations reported similar levels of participation on key programmatic activities with one exception: more webinar clinics reported improving documentation of previously administered, 'historical' vaccine doses. Both in-person and webinar clinics showed sustained improvement in confidence to use reminder/recall systems (both p < 0.05). Participants rated delivery modes equally highly on satisfaction measures such as convenience (mean = 4.6 of 5.0). Delivery cost per clinic was $152 for in-person consultations versus $100 for webinar consultations. CONCLUSIONS: In-person and webinar delivery modes were both well received, but webinar AFIX consultations cost substantially less. Interactive webinar delivery shows promise for considerably extending the reach of immunization quality improvement programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01544764.

Organizational correlates of adolescent immunization: findings of a state-wide study of primary care clinics in North Carolina.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze organizational correlates of immunization coverage among adolescents served by high-volume primary care providers in North Carolina. METHODS: We randomly selected 91 clinics with at least 200 active records for patients ages 11-18 in the North Carolina Immunization Registry. For the 105,121 adolescents served by these clinics, we obtained immunization status for 6 vaccines, including human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine (females only); meningococcal conjugate; and tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis booster (Tdap). RESULTS: Clinics specializing in pediatrics had higher coverage for meningococcal vaccine (OR=1.79, 95% CI: 1.25-2.55), Tdap vaccine (OR=1.22, 95% CI: 1.00-1.50), and childhood vaccines. However, pediatric clinics had lower coverage for HPV vaccine initiation (OR=0.70, 95% CI: 0.52-0.94). Other correlates, which varied by vaccine, included policies related to vaccine documentation and the age at which clinics recommended vaccines. CONCLUSION: Overall, adolescents were more likely to receive vaccines, except HPV vaccine, if they attended a pediatric clinic with supportive clinical policies.