Further observations on comparison of immunization coverage by lot quality assurance sampling and 30 cluster sampling.
Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health
; 27(2): 267-73, 1996 Jun.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-9279988
ABSTRACT
Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) and standard EPI methodology (30 cluster sampling) were used to evaluate immunization coverage in a Primary Health Center (PHC) where coverage levels were reported to be more than 85%. Of 27 sub-centers (lots) evaluated by LQAS, only 2 were accepted for child coverage, whereas none was accepted for tetanus toxoid (TT) coverage in mothers. LQAS data were combined to obtain an estimate of coverage in the entire population; 41% (95% CI 36-46) infants were immunized appropriately for their ages, while 42% (95% CI 37-47) of their mothers had received a second/ booster dose of TT. TT coverage in 149 contemporary mothers sampled in EPI survey was also 42% (95% CI 31-52). Although results by the two sampling methods were consistent with each other, a big gap was evident between reported coverage (in children as well as mothers) and survey results. LQAS was found to be operationally feasible, but it cost 40% more and required 2.5 times more time than the EPI survey. LQAS therefore, is not a good substitute for current EPI methodology to evaluate immunization coverage in a large administrative area. However, LQAS has potential as method to monitor health programs on a routine basis in small population sub-units, especially in areas with high and heterogeneously distributed immunization coverage.
Buscar no Google
Coleções:
01-internacional
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
Atenção Primária à Saúde
/
Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde
/
Vacinação
/
Pesquisa sobre Serviços de Saúde
Limite:
Humans
/
Infant
País/Região como assunto:
Asia
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health
Ano de publicação:
1996
Tipo de documento:
Article
País de afiliação:
Índia