Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine childhood vaccination in 9 U.S. jurisdictions.

IMPORTANCE: Routine vaccinations are key to prevent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. However, there have been documented declines in routine childhood vaccinations in the U.S. and worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: Assess how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted routine childhood vaccinations by evaluating vaccination coverage for routine childhood vaccinations for children born in 2016-2021. METHODS: Data on routine childhood vaccinations reported to CDC by nine U.S. jurisdictions via the immunization information systems (IISs) by December 31, 2022, were available for analyses. Population size for each age group was obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' Bridging Population Estimates. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Vaccination coverage for routine childhood vaccinations at age three months, five months, seven months, one year, and two years was calculated by vaccine type and overall, for 4:3:1:3:3:1:4 series (≥4 doses DTaP, ≥3 doses Polio, ≥1 dose MMR, ≥3 doses Hib, ≥3 doses Hepatitis B, ≥1 dose Varicella, and ≥ 4 doses pneumococcal conjugate), for each birth cohort year and by jurisdiction. RESULTS: Overall, there was a 10.4 percentage point decrease in the 4:3:1:3:3:1:4 series in those children born in 2020 compared to those children born in 2016. As of December 31, 2022, 71.0% and 71.3% of children born in 2016 and 2017, respectively, were up to date on their routine childhood vaccinations by two years of age compared to 69.1%, 64.7% and 60.6% for children born in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The decline in vaccination coverage for routine childhood vaccines is concerning. In order to protect population health, strategic efforts are needed by health care providers, schools, parents, as well as state, local, and federal governments to work together to address these declines in vaccination coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic to prevent outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases by maintaining high levels of population immunity.

Federal Retail Pharmacy Program Contributions to Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 Vaccinations Across Sociodemographic Characteristics - United States, September 1, 2022-September 30, 2023.

The Federal Retail Pharmacy Program (FRPP) facilitated integration of pharmacies as partners in national efforts to scale up vaccination capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic emergency response. To evaluate FRPP's contribution to vaccination efforts across various sociodemographic groups, data on COVID-19 bivalent mRNA vaccine doses administered during September 1, 2022-September 30, 2023, were evaluated from two sources: 1) FRPP data reported directly to CDC and 2) jurisdictional immunization information systems data reported to CDC from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories, and freely associated states. Among 59.8 million COVID-19 bivalent vaccine doses administered in the United States during this period, 40.5 million (67.7%) were administered by FRPP partners. The proportion of COVID-19 bivalent doses administered by FRPP partners ranged from 5.9% among children aged 6 months-4 years to 70.6% among adults aged 18-49 years. Among some racial and ethnic minority groups (e.g., Hispanic or Latino, non-Hispanic Black or African American, non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and non-Hispanic Asian persons), ≥45% of COVID-19 bivalent vaccine doses were administered by FRPP partners. Further, in urban and rural areas, FRPP partners administered 81.6% and 60.0% of bivalent vaccine doses, respectively. The FRPP partnership administered approximately two thirds of all bivalent COVID-19 vaccine doses in the United States and provided vaccine access for persons across a wide range of sociodemographic groups, demonstrating that this program could serve as a model to address vaccination services needs for routine vaccines and to provide health services in other public health emergencies.

Advancing public health informatics during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned from a public-private partnership with pharmacies.

To support efforts to vaccinate millions of Americans across the United States (US) against COVID-19, the US federal government (USG) launched the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program (PPP) in December 2020 and the Federal Retail Pharmacy Program (FRPP) in February 2021. These programs consisted of a collaborative partnership with the USG and 21 pharmacy organizations, including large retail chains, coordinating pharmacy services administrative organizations (PSAOs) representing independent retail and long-term care pharmacies, and pharmacy network administrators. These pharmacy organizations represented over 46,000 providers and created a robust channel for far-reaching COVID-19 vaccination across 56 state and local jurisdictions. PPP reported more than 8 million COVID-19 doses administered to residents and staff in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) as of June 2021. In addition, FRPP was responsible for administering more than 304 million doses, accounting for approximately 49% of all COVID-19 doses administered as of June 2023. This unprecedented public-private partnership allowed USG to rapidly adapt, expand, and aim to provide equitable access to vaccines for adults and eligible-aged children during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the largest federal COVID-19 vaccination program, the FRPP exemplifies how public-private partnerships can expand access to immunizations during a public health emergency. End-to-end informatics support helped pharmacies meet critical national public health goals and served as convenient access points for sustained health services. This manuscript describes lessons learned regarding informatics coordination with participating pharmacy partners to support the rapid and safe administration of COVID-19 vaccines across the US. The processes of onboarding to CDC's complex data network, establishing connections to state and local immunization information systems (IIS), and monitoring the quality of data pharmacy partners submitted to the CDC Data Clearinghouse (DCH) in alignment with the COVID-19 Vaccine Reporting Specifications (CVRS) are highlighted.

Monitoring and reporting the US COVID-19 vaccination effort.

Immunizations are an important tool to reduce the burden of vaccine preventable diseases and improve population health.1 High-quality immunization data is essential to inform clinical and public health interventions and respond to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. To track COVID-19 vaccines and vaccinations, CDC established an integrated network that included vaccination provider systems, health information exchange systems, immunization information systems, pharmacy and dialysis systems, vaccine ordering systems, electronic health records, and tools to support mass vaccination clinics. All these systems reported data to CDC's COVID-19 response system (either directly or indirectly) where it was processed, analyzed, and disseminated. This unprecedented vaccine tracking effort provided essential information for public health officials that was used to monitor the COVID-19 response and guide decisions. This paper will describe systems, processes, and policies that enabled monitoring and reporting of COVID-19 vaccination efforts and share challenges and lessons learned for future public health emergency responses.

The US Federal Retail Pharmacy Program: Optimizing COVID-19 Vaccine Delivery Through a Strategic Public-Private Partnership.

To help achieve the initial goal of providing universal COVID-19 vaccine access to approximately 258 million adults in 62 US jurisdictions, the federal government launched the Federal Retail Pharmacy Program (FRPP) on February 11, 2021. We describe FRPP's collaboration among the federal government, US jurisdictions, federal entity partners, and 21 national chain and independent pharmacy networks to provide large-scale access to COVID-19 vaccines, particularly in communities disproportionately affected by COVID-19 (eg, people aged ≥65 years, people from racial and ethnic minority groups). FRPP initially provided 10 000 vaccination sites for people to access COVID-19 vaccines, which was increased to >35 000 vaccination sites by May 2021 and sustained through January 31, 2022. From February 11, 2021, through January 31, 2022, FRPP vaccination sites received 293 million doses and administered 219 million doses, representing 45% of all COVID-19 immunizations provided nationwide (38% of all first doses, 72% of all booster doses). This unprecedented public-private partnership allowed the federal government to rapidly adapt and scale up an equitable vaccination program to reach adults, later expanding access to vaccine-eligible children, during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the largest federal COVID-19 vaccination program, FRPP exemplifies how public-private partnerships can expand access to immunizations during a public health emergency. Pharmacies can help meet critical national public health goals by serving as convenient access points for sustained health services. Lessons learned from this effort-including the importance of strong coordination and communication, efficient reporting systems and data quality, and increasing access to and demand for vaccine, among others-may help improve future immunization programs and support health system resiliency, emphasizing community-level access and health equity during public health emergencies.

Relative Effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination and Booster Dose Combinations Among 18.9 Million Vaccinated Adults During the Early Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Omicron Period-United States, 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2022.

BACKGROUND: Small sample sizes have limited prior studies' ability to capture severe COVID-19 outcomes, especially among Ad26.COV2.S vaccine recipients. This study of 18.9 million adults aged ≥18 years assessed relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) in three recipient cohorts: (1) primary Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and Ad26.COV2.S booster (2 Ad26.COV2.S), (2) primary Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and mRNA booster (Ad26.COV2.S+mRNA), (3) two doses of primary mRNA vaccine and mRNA booster (3 mRNA). METHODS: We analyzed two de-identified datasets linked using privacy-preserving record linkage (PPRL): insurance claims and retail pharmacy COVID-19 vaccination data. We assessed the presence of COVID-19 diagnosis during January 1-March 31, 2022 in: (1) any claim, (2) outpatient claim, (3) emergency department (ED) claim, (4) inpatient claim, and (5) inpatient claim with intensive care unit (ICU) admission. rVE for each outcome comparing three recipient cohorts (reference: two Ad26.COV2.S doses) was estimated from adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Compared with two Ad26.COV2.S doses, Ad26.COV2.S+mRNA and three mRNA doses were more effective against all COVID-19 outcomes, including 57% (95% CI: 52-62) and 62% (95% CI: 58-65) rVE against an ED visit; 44% (95% CI: 34-52) and 54% (95% CI: 48-59) rVE against hospitalization; and 48% (95% CI: 22-66) and 66% (95% CI: 53-75) rVE against ICU admission, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that Ad26.COV2.S + mRNA doses were as good as three doses of mRNA, and better than two doses of Ad26.COV2.S. Vaccination continues to be an important preventive measure for reducing the public health impact of COVID-19.

Patient flow time data of COVID-19 vaccination clinics in 23 sites, United States, April and May 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Public health department (PHD) led COVID-19 vaccination clinics can be a critical component of pandemic response as they facilitate high volume of vaccination. However, few patient-time analyses examining patient throughput at mass vaccination clinics with unique COVID-19 vaccination challenges have been published. METHODS: During April and May of 2021, 521 patients in 23 COVID-19 vaccination sites counties of 6 states were followed to measure the time spent from entry to vaccination. The total time was summarized and tabulated by clinic characteristics. A multivariate linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the association between vaccination clinic settings and patient waiting times in the clinic. RESULTS: The average time a patient spent in the clinic from entry to vaccination was 9 min 5 s (range: 02:00-23:39). Longer patient flow times were observed in clinics with higher numbers of doses administered, 6 or fewer vaccinators, walk-in patients accepted, dedicated services for people with disabilities, and drive-through clinics. The multivariate linear regression showed that longer patient waiting times were significantly associated with the number of vaccine doses administered, dedicated services for people with disabilities, the availability of more than one brand of vaccine, and rurality. CONCLUSIONS: Given the standardized procedures outlined by immunization guidelines, reducing the wait time is critical in lowering the patient flow time by relieving the bottleneck effect in the clinic. Our study suggests enhancing the efficiency of PHD-led vaccination clinics by preparing vaccinators to provide vaccines with proper and timely support such as training or delivering necessary supplies and paperwork to the vaccinators. In addition, patient wait time can be spent answering questions about vaccination or reviewing educational materials on other public health services.

Assessment of the Costs of Implementing COVID-19 Vaccination Clinics in 34 Sites, United States, March 2021.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the costs to implement public health department (PHD)-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. DESIGN: Retrospectively reported data on COVID-19 vaccination clinic characteristics and resources used during a high-demand day in March 2021. These resources were combined with national average wages, supply costs, and facility costs to estimate the operational cost and start-up cost of clinics. SETTING: Thirty-four PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics across 8 states and 1 metropolitan statistical area. PARTICIPANTS: Clinic managers at 34 PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. INTERVENTION: Large-scale COVID-19 vaccination clinics were implemented by public health agencies as part of the pandemic response. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: Operational cost per day, operational cost per vaccination, start-up cost per clinic. RESULTS: Median operational cost per day for a clinic was $10 314 (range, $637-$95 163) and median cost per vaccination was $38 (range, $9-$206). There was a large range of operational costs across clinics. Clinics used an average of 99 total staff hours per 100 patients vaccinated. Median start-up cost per clinic was $15 348 (range, $1 409-$165 190). CONCLUSIONS: Results show that clinics require a large range of resources to meet the high throughput needs of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Estimating the costs of PHD-run vaccination clinics for the pandemic response is essential for ensuring that resources are available for clinic success. If clinics are not adequately supported, they may stop functioning, which would slow the pandemic response if no other setting or approach is possible.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Adult Vaccination: A Review of the State of Evidence.

Background: Adult vaccination coverage remains low in the United States, particularly among racial and ethnic minority populations. Objective: To conduct a comprehensive literature review of research studies assessing racial and ethnic disparities in adult vaccination. Search Methods: We conducted a search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant articles. Selection Criteria: Research studies were eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (1) study based in the United States, (2) evaluated receipt of routine immunizations in adult populations, (3) used within-study comparison of race/ethnic groups, and (4) eligible for at least one author-defined PICO (patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome) question. Data Collection and Analysis: Preliminary abstract review was conducted by two authors. Following complete abstraction of articles using a standardized template, abstraction notes and determinations were reviewed by all authors; disagreements regarding article inclusion/exclusion were resolved by majority rule. The Social Ecological Model framework was used to complete a narrative review of observational studies to summarize factors associated with disparities; a systematic review was used to evaluate eligible intervention studies. Results: Ninety-five studies were included in the final analysis and summarized qualitatively within two main topic areas: (1) factors associated with documented racial-ethnic disparities in adult vaccination and (2) interventions aimed to reduce disparities or to improve vaccination coverage among racial-ethnic minority groups. Of the 12 included intervention studies, only 3 studies provided direct evidence and were of Level II, fair quality; the remaining 9 studies met the criteria for indirect evidence (Level I or II, fair or poor quality). Conclusions: A considerable amount of observational research evaluating factors associated with racial and ethnic disparities in adult vaccination is available. However, intervention studies aimed at reducing these disparities are limited, are of poor quality, and insufficiently address known reasons for low vaccination uptake among racial and ethnic minority adults.

Influenza Vaccinations During the COVID-19 Pandemic - 11 U.S. Jurisdictions, September-December 2020.

Influenza causes considerable morbidity and mortality in the United States. Between 2010 and 2020, an estimated 9-41 million cases resulted in 140,000-710,000 hospitalizations and 12,000-52,000 deaths annually (1). As the United States enters the 2021-22 influenza season, the potential impact of influenza illnesses is of concern given that influenza season will again coincide with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which could further strain overburdened health care systems. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends routine annual influenza vaccination for the 2021-22 influenza season for all persons aged ≥6 months who have no contraindications (2). To assess the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on influenza vaccination coverage, the percentage change between administration of at least 1 dose of influenza vaccine during September-December 2020 was compared with the average administered in the corresponding periods in 2018 and 2019. The data analyzed were reported from 11 U.S. jurisdictions with high-performing state immunization information systems.* Overall, influenza vaccine administration was 9.0% higher in 2020 compared with the average in 2018 and 2019, combined. However, in 2020, the number of influenza vaccine doses administered to children aged 6-23 months and children aged 2-4 years, was 13.9% and 11.9% lower, respectively than the average for each age group in 2018 and 2019. Strategic efforts are needed to ensure high influenza vaccination coverage among all age groups, especially children aged 6 months-4 years who are not yet eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Administration of influenza vaccine and a COVID-19 vaccine among eligible populations is especially important to reduce the potential strain that influenza and COVID-19 cases could place on health care systems already overburdened by COVID-19.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Administration of Selected Routine Childhood and Adolescent Vaccinations - 10 U.S. Jurisdictions, March-September 2020.

After the March 2020 declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, an analysis of provider ordering data from the federally funded Vaccines for Children program found a substantial decrease in routine pediatric vaccine ordering (1), and data from New York City and Michigan indicated sharp declines in routine childhood vaccine administration in these areas (2,3). In November 2020, CDC interim guidance stated that routine vaccination of children and adolescents should remain an essential preventive service during the COVID-19 pandemic (4,5). To further understand the impact of the pandemic on routine childhood and adolescent vaccination, vaccine administration data during March-September 2020 from 10 U.S. jurisdictions with high-performing* immunization information systems were assessed. Fewer administered doses of routine childhood and adolescent vaccines were recorded in all 10 jurisdictions during March-September 2020 compared with those recorded during the same period in 2018 and 2019. The number of vaccine doses administered substantially declined during March-May 2020, when many jurisdictions enacted stay-at-home orders. After many jurisdictions lifted these orders, the number of vaccine doses administered during June-September 2020 approached prepandemic baseline levels, but did not increase to the level that would have been necessary to catch up children who did not receive routine vaccinations on time. This lag in catch-up vaccination might pose a serious public health threat that would result in vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks, especially in schools that have reopened for in-person learning. During the past few decades, the United States has achieved a substantial reduction in the prevalence of vaccine-preventable diseases driven in large part to the ongoing administration of routinely recommended pediatric vaccines. These efforts need to continue even during the COVID-19 pandemic to reduce the morbidity and mortality from vaccine-preventable diseases. Health care providers should assess the vaccination status of all pediatric patients, including adolescents, and contact those who are behind schedule to ensure that all children are fully vaccinated.

Worker well-being in the United States: Finding variation across job categories.

Job categories shape the contexts that contribute to worker well-being, including their health, connectivity, and engagement. Using data from the 2014 Gallup Daily tracking survey, this study documented the distribution of worker well-being across 11 broad job categories among a national sample of employed adults in the United States. Well-being was measured by Gallup-Sharecare Well-Being 5™, a composite measure of five well-being dimensions (purpose, community, physical, financial, and social). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine how well-being varied across job categories and the extent to which household income modified that relationship, controlling for demographic factors. Well-being varied significantly across job categories, even after adjusting for household income and demographic factors. Well-being was higher among business owners, professionals, managers, and farming/fishing workers and lower among clerical/office, service, manufacturing/production, and transportation workers. Purpose well-being (e.g., liking what you do and being motivated to achieve your goals) showed the greatest variability across job categories-there were small differences across income levels for business owners, professionals, managers, and farming/fishing workers, and statistically significant gaps between the high income group and the two lower income groups among clerical/office, service, manufacturing/production, and transportation workers. Physical well-being exhibited the smallest gaps across income groups within job categories. The findings suggest that job category is an important component of worker well-being that extends beyond the financial dimension to purpose well-being. Our results suggest well-being inequity across job categories, and highlight areas for future research, policy and practice, including targeted interventions to promote worker and workplace well-being.

Training Employers to Implement Health Promotion Programs: Results From the CDC Work@Health® Program.

PURPOSE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) initiated the Work@Health Program to teach employers how to improve worker health using evidence-based strategies. Program goals included (1) determining the best way(s) to deliver employer training, (2) increasing employers' knowledge of workplace health promotion (WHP), and (3) increasing the number of evidence-based WHP interventions at employers' worksites. This study is one of the few to examine the effectiveness of a program designed to train employers how to implement WHP programs. DESIGN: Pre- and posttest design. SETTING: Training via 1 of 3 formats hands-on, online, or blended. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred six individual participants from 173 employers of all sizes. INTERVENTION: Eight-module training curriculum to guide participants through building an evidence-based WHP program, followed by 6 to 10 months of technical assistance. MEASURES: The CDC Worksite Health ScoreCard and knowledge, attitudes, and behavior survey. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics, paired t tests, and mixed linear models. RESULTS: Participants' posttraining mean knowledge scores were significantly greater than the pretraining scores (61.1 vs 53.2, P < .001). A year after training, employers had significantly increased the number of evidence-based interventions in place (47.7 vs 35.5, P < .001). Employers' improvements did not significantly differ among the 3 training delivery formats. CONCLUSION: The Work@Health Program provided employers with knowledge to implement WHP interventions. The training and technical assistance provided structure, practical guidance, and tools to assess needs and select, implement, and evaluate interventions.

Building Capacity for Workplace Health Promotion: Findings From the Work@Health® Train-the-Trainer Program.

Small- and mid-sized employers are less likely to have expertise, capacity, or resources to implement workplace health promotion programs, compared with large employers. In response, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed the Work@Health® employer training program to determine the best way to deliver skill-based training to employers of all sizes. The core curriculum was designed to increase employers' knowledge of the design, implementation, and evaluation of workplace health strategies. The first arm of the program was direct employer training. In this article, we describe the results of the second arm-the program's train-the-trainer (T3) component, which was designed to prepare new certified trainers to provide core workplace health training to other employers. Of the 103 participants who began the T3 program, 87 fully completed it and delivered the Work@Health core training to 233 other employers. Key indicators of T3 participants' knowledge and attitudes significantly improved after training. The curriculum delivered through the T3 model has the potential to increase the health promotion capacity of employers across the nation, as well as organizations that work with employers, such as health departments and business coalitions.

Comparing 2 National Organization-Level Workplace Health Promotion and Improvement Tools, 2013-2015.

Creating healthy workplaces is becoming more common. Half of employers that have more than 50 employees offer some type of workplace health promotion program. Few employers implement comprehensive evidence-based interventions that reach all employees and achieve desired health and cost outcomes. A few organization-level assessment and benchmarking tools have emerged to help employers evaluate the comprehensiveness and rigor of their health promotion offerings. Even fewer tools exist that combine assessment with technical assistance and guidance to implement evidence-based practices. Our descriptive analysis compares 2 such tools, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Worksite Health ScoreCard and Prevention Partners' WorkHealthy America, and presents data from both to describe workplace health promotion practices across the United States. These tools are reaching employers of all types (N = 1,797), and many employers are using a comprehensive approach (85% of those using WorkHealthy America and 45% of those using the ScoreCard), increasing program effectiveness and impact.

Appraising quantitative research in health education: guidelines for public health educators.

Many practicing health educators do not feel they possess the skills necessary to critically appraise quantitative research. This publication is designed to help provide practicing health educators with basic tools helpful to facilitate a better understanding of quantitative research. This article describes the major components- title, introduction, methods, analyses, results, and discussion sections-of quantitative research. Readers will be introduced to information on the various types of study designs and seven key questions health educators can use to facilitate the appraisal process. On reading, health educators will be in a better position to determine whether research studies are well designed and executed.