The impact of influenza vaccination requirements for hospital personnel in California: knowledge, attitudes, and vaccine uptake.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza infections are a leading cause of illness, death, and lost productivity. Vaccinating health care personnel (HCP) can reduce transmission of influenza virus to patients and reduce influenza-related absenteeism, enabling the health care system to meet elevated demand for care during influenza outbreaks. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of California's 2006 influenza vaccination requirement for hospital workers (requiring vaccination or signed declinations) on uptake and vaccination-related attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge among hospital HCP. METHODS: We used a causal difference-in-differences approach to compare changes over the prior 10 years in the self-reported frequency of influenza vaccination for California hospital HCP and those from other states without similar laws using data from a stratified sample (N = 3,529) of HCP drawn from online survey panels. We also examined cross-sectional differences in awareness of vaccination policies, promotion efforts, and attitudes toward influenza vaccination. All analyses used propensity score weighting to balance the observable characteristics of the 2 samples. RESULTS: We found that compared with their counterparts in other states, California hospital HCP were (1) more likely to report working under a formal written policy for influenza vaccination, (2) no more likely to be vaccinated, and (3) less likely to report working for an employer who provided financial incentives for vaccination or rewarded or recognized employees for being vaccinated. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that state-level vaccination requirements such as those enacted by California, may not be sufficient to increase uptake among hospital HCP.

A qualitative analysis of the impact of healthcare personnel influenza vaccination requirements in California.

OBJECTIVE: Using qualitative methods, we explored the implementation of California's 2007 influenza immunization requirements of hospital-based health care personnel (HCP). METHODS: We conducted nine case studies of California hospitals with different HCP vaccination rates and policies. Case studies consisted of interviewing 13 hospital representatives and analyzing relevant hospital documents, including influenza policies. We also conducted 13 semi-structured phone interviews with key state and county public health officials, union representatives, and officials of various professional healthcare organizations. RESULTS: Our qualitative results suggest that California's vaccination requirements likely did not increase influenza vaccination uptake among HCP. The law was not strong enough to compel hospitals with low and medium vaccination rates to improve their vaccination efforts, and hospitals with high vaccination rates were able to comply fully with the law by continuing to do what they were already doing - namely offering vaccinations to HCP, providing education about the risks of influenza and the benefits of vaccination, and obtaining signed declinations from those who refuse vaccination. Nonetheless, we found that by publicly raising the issue of influenza vaccination in the context of public safety and healthcare quality, California's law encouraged hospitals to develop and implement data systems to monitor the effectiveness of vaccination promotion efforts and prompted discussions, and, in some cases, adoption of stricter vaccination requirements at hospital or county levels. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings generally support the literature that suggests that permissive influenza vaccination requirements, though politically feasible, provide little direct incentive for hospitals to focus efforts on increasing HCP vaccination rates.

A qualitative assessment of a performance measure for reporting influenza vaccination rates among healthcare personnel.

To understand the feasibility of implementing a standardized performance measure for collecting and reporting influenza vaccination rates among healthcare personnel, qualitative, semistructured interviews were conducted with key informants in 32 healthcare facilities. Despite practical and logistical challenges to implementing the measure, respondents perceived clear benefits to its use.

Costs of school-located influenza vaccination clinics in Maine during the 2009-2010 H1N1 pandemic.

This study retrospectively estimated costs for a convenience sample of school-located vaccination (SLV) clinics conducted in Maine during the 2009-2010 influenza season. Surveys were developed to capture the cost of labor including unpaid volunteers as well as supplies and materials used in SLV clinics. Six nurses from different school districts completed a clinic day survey on staff time; four of the six also provided data for materials and supplies. For all clinics, average per-dose labor cost was estimated at $5.95. Average per-dose material cost, excluding vaccine, was $5.76. From the four complete clinic survey responses, total per-dose cost was estimated to be an average of $13.51 (range = $4.91-$32.39). Use of donated materials and uncompensated volunteer staff could substantially reduce per-dose cost. Average per-dose cost could also be lowered by increasing the number of doses administered in a clinic.

Coordination costs for school-located influenza vaccination clinics, Maine, 2009 H1N1 pandemic.

School nurses played a key role in Maine's school-located influenza vaccination (SLV) clinics during the 2009-2010 pandemic season. The objective of this study was to determine, from the school district perspective, the labor hours and costs associated with outside-clinic coordination activities (OCA). The authors defined OCA as labor hours spent by staff outside of clinic operations. The authors surveyed a convenience sample of 10 school nurses from nine school districts. Eight nurses responded to the survey, representing seven districts, 45 schools and 84 SLV clinics that provided a total of 22,596 vaccine doses (H1N1 and seasonal combined) to children and adolescents. The mean total OCA time per clinic was 69 hours: out of total hours, 22 (36%) were spent outside regular clinic operation time. The authors estimated the mean cost of OCA to be $15.36 per dose. Survey respondents reported that costs would be lower during non-pandemic seasons and as schools become more proficient at planning clinics.

Uptake of meningococcal conjugate vaccine among adolescents in large managed care organizations, United States, 2005: demand, supply and seasonality.

BACKGROUND: In February 2005, the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended the new meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MCV4) for routine use among 11- to 12-year-olds (at the preadolescent health-care visit), 14- to 15-year-olds (before high-school entry), and groups at increased risk. Vaccine distribution started in March; however, in July, the manufacturer reported inability to meet demand and widespread MCV4 shortages were reported. Our objectives were to determine early uptake patterns among target (11-12 and 14-15 year olds) and non-target (13- plus 16-year-olds) age groups. A post hoc analysis was conducted to compare seasonal uptake patterns of MCV4 with polysaccharide meningococcal (MPSV4) and tetanus diphtheria (Td) vaccines. METHODS: We analyzed data for adolescents 11-16 years from five managed care organizations participating in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). For MCV4, we estimated monthly and cumulative coverage during 2005 and calculated risk ratios. For MPSV4 and Td, we combined 2003 and 2004 data and compared their seasonal uptake patterns with MCV4. RESULTS: Coverage for MCV4 during 2005 among the 623,889 11-16 years olds was 10%. Coverage for 11-12 and 14-15 year olds was 12% and 11%, respectively, compared with 8% for 13- plus 16-year-olds (p < 0.001). Of the 64,272 MCV4 doses administered from March-December 2005, 73% were administered June-August. Fifty-nine percent of all MPSV4 doses and 38% of all Td doses were administered during June-August. CONCLUSION: A surge in vaccine uptake between June and August was observed among adolescents for MCV4, MPSV4 and Td vaccines. The increase in summer-time vaccinations and vaccination of non-targeted adolescents coupled with supply limitations likely contributed to the reported shortages of MCV4 in 2005.

U.S. Healthcare personnel and influenza vaccination during the 2004-2005 vaccine shortage.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare personnel with direct patient contact were prioritized for influenza vaccination during the 2004-2005 vaccine shortage. Data about vaccination coverage among healthcare personnel during vaccine shortages are limited. METHODS: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2005 data were analyzed in 2007 for a sample of healthcare facility workers (HCFW) aged 18-64 with (n=3456) and without (n=1153) direct patient contact and non-HCFWs (n=39,405). Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used to identify factors associated with influenza vaccination among HCFWs and to compare HCFWs with non-HCFWs with regard to the main reason for nonvaccination during the shortage. RESULTS: Vaccination coverage was 37% (SE +/- 3.1) among HCFWs with direct patient contact and 25% (SE +/- 5.7) among those without. In multivariate analysis, coverage was higher among HCFWs who were older, more educated, and with higher incomes and better access to health care. The reason most commonly reported by HCFWs and non-HCFWs for nonvaccination was the belief that they did not need vaccination (35% versus 40%, respectively; p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Even in a time of influenza-vaccine shortage, when most healthcare personnel were targeted for vaccination, their uptake of the vaccine remained suboptimal. Continued efforts are needed to develop effective interventions to improve the use of influenza vaccination among healthcare workers.