Provider Preferences and Experiences With a Countywide Centralized Collaborative Reminder/Recall for Childhood Immunizations. - PubMed - NCBI

Provider Preferences and Experiences With a Countywide Centralized Collaborative Reminder/Recall for Childhood Immunizations. - PubMed - NCBI

Acad Pediatr. 2016 Jan-Feb;16(1):50-6. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2015.09.002. Epub 2015 Sep 26.

Provider Preferences and Experiences With a Countywide Centralized Collaborative Reminder/Recall for Childhood Immunizations.

Saville AW1, Gurfinkel D2, Sevick C2, Beaty B3, Dickinson LM3, Kempe A4.

Author information

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To assess among providers in 7 Colorado counties where a collaborative centralized reminder/recall (CC-R/R) using the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS) was performed: 1) preferences about CC-R/R conducted by the public health department (PHD); 2) preferences for future CC-R/R for different vaccines with and without practice names; and 3) experiences with including their name on CC-R/R notices.

METHODS:

A mailed survey was sent to all primary care sites where CC-R/R had been previously conducted. Respondents self-identified as the "the person in charge of immunization policy within the practice."

RESULTS:

Overall response rate was 69.9% (160 of 229). Twenty-one were removed because they did not provide immunizations to children. Among respondents, 65.0% were from family medicine and 26.3% from pediatric practices; 32.1% physicians or midlevel providers; 34.3% nurses or medical assistants; and 33.6% office managers. Taking into account all issues, 57.6% were "okay" with either the PHD or their practice conducting recall; 27.3% preferred the PHD; and 14.4% preferred their practice conduct R/R. Fifty-six percent of active CIIS practices (n = 95) included their practice's name on CC-R/R notices. Interest in future CC-R/R for different ages and vaccines was strongly related to whether reminders included the practice name: 77.8% for routine immunizations in 4- to 6-year-olds; 74.8% for immunizations for 0- to 3-year-olds; 73.3% for vaccines administered to adolescents; and 59.7% for influenza (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS:

Most practices are accepting of the PHD centrally conducting R/R, but most prefer collaboration that includes their name. Given the success and support of this method, it should be more widely adopted.

Copyright © 2016 Academic Pediatric Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

KEYWORDS:

centralized reminder/recall; immunization information systems (IIS); immunizations; population-based reminder/recall; provider acceptability; recall and reminder messages; survey

PMID:

 

26525988

 

[PubMed - in process]