Why Aren't We Achieving High Vaccination Rates for Rotavirus Vaccine in the United States?

BACKGROUND: Rotavirus vaccine (RV) coverage levels for US infants are <80%. METHODS: We surveyed nationally representative networks of pediatricians by internet/mail from April to June, 2019. Multivariable regression assessed factors associated with difficulty administering the first RV dose (RV#1) by the maximum age. RESULTS: Response rate was 68% (303/448). Ninety-nine percent of providers reported strongly recommending RV. The most common barriers to RV delivery overall (definite/somewhat of a barrier) were: parental concerns about vaccine safety overall (27%), parents wanting to defer (25%), parents not thinking RV was necessary (12%), and parent concerns about RV safety (6%). The most commonly reported reasons for nonreceipt of RV#1 by 4 to 5 months (often/always) were parental vaccine refusal (9%), hospitals not giving RV at discharge from nursery (7%), infants past the maximum age when discharged from neonatal intensive care unit/nursery (6%), and infant not seen before maximum age for well care visit (3%) or seen but no vaccine given (4%). Among respondents 4% strongly agreed and 25% somewhat agreed that they sometimes have difficulty giving RV#1 before the maximum age. Higher percentage of State Child Health Insurance Program/Medicaid-insured children in the practice and reporting that recommendations for timing of RV doses are too complicated were associated with reporting difficulty delivering the RV#1 by the maximum age. CONCLUSIONS: US pediatricians identified multiple, actionable issues that may contribute to suboptimal RV immunization rates including lack of vaccination prior to leaving nurseries after prolonged stays, infants not being seen for well care visits by the maximum age, missed opportunities at visits and parents refusing/deferring.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Maternal Vaccine Knowledge, Attitudes, and Intentions.

OBJECTIVES: Although disparities in maternal vaccine acceptance among racial/ethnic groups are well documented, the reasons for these disparities are unclear. The objective of this study was to describe differences in pregnant women's knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, intentions, and trust regarding maternal and infant vaccines by race/ethnicity. METHODS: We collected survey data from 1862 pregnant women from diverse prenatal care practices in Georgia and Colorado from June 2017 through July 2018. We performed multiple logistic regressions to determine differences in intentions, knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and trust by race/ethnicity and calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS: Compared with White women, Black and Hispanic women were less confident in vaccine safety and efficacy and less likely to perceive risk of acquiring vaccine-preventable diseases, report provaccine social norms, indicate having enough vaccine knowledge, and trust vaccine information from health care providers and public health authorities. Black women were the least confident in the safety of the maternal influenza vaccine (OR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.27-0.49); maternal tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine (OR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.27-0.52); and infant vaccines overall (OR = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.28-0.58), and were least likely to intend to receive both maternal vaccines (OR = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.27-0.47) or all infant vaccines on time (OR = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34-0.61) as compared with White women. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding differences in behavioral constructs integral to vaccine decision making among women of different races/ethnicities can lead to tailored interventions to improve vaccine acceptance.

Cost and reimbursement of providing routine vaccines in outpatient obstetrician/gynecologist settings.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the costs and reimbursement associated with running a vaccine program in 5 obstetrics/gynecology practices in Colorado that had participated in a 3-year randomized, controlled trial focused on increasing vaccination in this setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a secondary analysis on costs from 5 clinics participating in a cluster-randomized controlled trial that assessed the effectiveness of a multimodal intervention to improve vaccination rates in outpatient obstetrics/gynecology clinics in central Colorado. The intervention included designation of an immunization champion within the practice, purchasing recommended vaccines for the practice, guidance on storage and management, implementing practices for routine identification of eligible patients for vaccination using the medical record, implementation of standing orders for vaccination, and vaccine administration to patients. Data on costs were gathered from office invoices, claims data, surveys and in-person observations during the course of the trial. These data incorporated supply and personnel costs for administering vaccines to individual patients that were derived from a combination of time-motion studies of staff and provider clinical activity, and practice reports, as well as costs related to maintaining the vaccination program at the practice level, which were derived from practice reports and invoices. Cost data for personnel time during visits in which vaccination was assessed and/or discussed, but no vaccine was given to the patient were also included in the main analysis. Data on practice revenue were derived from practice reimbursement records. All costs were described in 2014 dollars. The primary analysis was the proportion of costs for the program that were reimbursed, aggregated over all years of the study and combining all vaccines and practices, separated by obstetrics vs gynecology patients. RESULTS: Collectively the 5 clinics served >40,000 patient during the study period and served a population that was 16% Medicaid. Over the 3-year observation period, there were 6573 vaccination claims made collectively by the practices (4657 for obstetric patients, 1916 for gynecology patients). The most expensive component of the program was the material costs of the vaccines themselves, which ranged from a low of $9.67 for influenza vaccines, to a high of $141.40 for human papillomavirus vaccine. Staff costs for assessing and delivering vaccines during patient visits were minimal ($0.09-$1.24 per patient visit depending on the practice and whether an obstetrics or gynecology visit was being assessed) compared with staff costs for maintaining the program at a practice level (ie, assessing inventory, ordering and stocking vaccines; $0.89-$105.89 per vaccine dose given). When assessing all costs compared with all reimbursement, we found that vaccines for obstetrics patients were reimbursed at 159% of the costs over the study period, and for gynecology patients at 97% of the costs. Overall, the vaccination program was financially favorable across the practices, averaging 125% reimbursement of costs across the three study years. CONCLUSION: Providing routine vaccines to patients in the ambulatory obstetrics/gynecology setting is generally not financially prohibitive for practices, and may even be financially beneficial, though there is variability between practices that can affect the overall reimbursement margin.

Evidence-based strategies to increase vaccination uptake: a review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize evidence-based strategies for improving pediatric immunization rates including physician behaviors, clinic and public health processes, community-based and parent-focused interventions, and legal and policy approaches RECENT FINDINGS: Studies continue to show the effectiveness of audit and feedback, provider reminders, standing orders, and reminder/recall to increase immunization rates. Provider communication strategies may improve immunization rates including use of a presumptive approach and motivational interviewing. Centralized reminder/recall (using a state Immunization Information System) is more effective and cost-effective compared to a practice-based approach. Recent work shows the success of text messages for reminder/recall for vaccination. Web-based interventions, including informational vaccine websites with interactive social media components, have shown effectiveness at increasing uptake of pediatric and maternal immunizations. Vaccination requirements for school attendance continue to be effective policy interventions for increasing pediatric and adolescent vaccination rates. Allowance for and ease of obtaining exemptions to vaccine requirements are associated with increased exemption rates. SUMMARY: Strategies to increase vaccination rates include interventions that directly impact physician behavior, clinic and public health processes, patient behaviors, and policy. Combining multiple strategies to work across different settings and addressing different barriers may offer the best approach to optimize immunization coverage.

Primary care physicians' perspectives on respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease in adults and a potential RSV vaccine for adults.

BACKGROUND: Deaths attributable to respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) among adults are estimated to exceed 11,000 annually, and annual adult hospitalizations for influenza and RSV may be comparable. RSV vaccines for older adults are in development. We assessed the following among primary care physicians (PCPs) who treat adults: (1) perception of RSV disease burden; (2) current RSV testing practices; and (3) anticipated barriers to adoption of an RSV vaccine. METHODS: We administered an Internet and mail survey from February to March 2017 to national networks of 930 PCPs. RESULTS: The response rate was 67% (620/930). Forty-nine percent of respondents (n = 303) were excluded from analysis as they reported never or rarely caring for an adult patient with possible RSV in the past year. Among respondents who reported taking care of RSV patients (n = 317), 73% and 57% responded that in patients ≥ 50 years, influenza is generally more severe than RSV and that they rarely consider RSV as a potential pathogen, respectively. Most (61%) agreed that they do not test for RSV because there is no treatment. The most commonly reported anticipated barriers to a RSV vaccine were potential out-of-pocket expenses for patients if the vaccine is not covered by insurance (93%) and lack of reimbursement for vaccination (74%). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians reported little experience with RSV disease in adults. They are generally not testing for it and the majority believe that influenza disease is more severe. Physicians will require more information about RSV disease burden in adults and the potential need for a vaccine in their adult patients.

Update From the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a group of medical and public health experts, meets 3 times per year to develop recommendations for vaccine use in the United States. There are 15 voting members, and their terms are for 4 years. ACIP members and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention staff discuss the epidemiology of vaccine-preventable diseases and vaccine research, effectiveness, safety data, and clinical trial results. Representatives from the American Academy of Pediatrics (including D. W. K.) and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society are present as liaisons to the ACIP. In the February 2018 meeting, important votes on the use of influenza vaccine and hepatitis vaccines were held, and updates on human papillomavirus, meningococcal, and anthrax vaccines, among others, were provided.

Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Category B ACIP Recommendations Among Primary Care Providers for Children.

OBJECTIVE: In 2015, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) made a category B recommendation for use of serogroup B meningococcal (MenB) vaccines, meaning individual clinical decision-making should guide recommendations. This was the first use of a category B recommendation pertaining to a large population and the first such recommendation for adolescents. As part of a survey regarding MenB vaccine, our objectives were to assess among pediatricians (Peds) and family physicians (FPs) nationally: 1) knowledge of the meaning of category A versus B recommendations and insurance coverage implications, and 2) attitudes about category A and B recommendations. METHODS: We surveyed a nationally representative sample of Peds and FPs via e-mail and mail from October to December 2016. RESULTS: The response rate was 72% (660 of 916). Although >80% correctly identified the definition of a category A recommendation, only 24% were correct about the definition for category B. Fifty-five percent did not know that private insurance would pay for vaccines recommended as category B, and 51% did not know that category B-recommended vaccines would be covered by the Vaccines for Children program. Fifty-nine percent found it difficult to explain category B recommendations to patients; 22% thought ACIP should not make category B recommendations; and 39% were in favor of category B recommendations because they provide leeway in decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: For category B recommendations to be useful in guiding practice, primary care clinicians will need to have a better understanding of their meaning, their implications for insurance payment, and guidance on how to discuss them with parents and patients.

Exploring Facilitators and Barriers to Initiation and Completion of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Series among Parents of Girls in a Safety Net System.

Objective: To assess, among parents of predominantly minority, low-income adolescent girls who had either not initiated (NI) or not completed (NC) the HPV vaccine series, attitudes and other factors important in promoting the series, and whether attitudes differed by language preference. Design/Methods: From August 2013-October 2013, we conducted a mail survey among parents of girls aged 12-15 years randomly selected from administrative data in a Denver safety net system; 400 parents from each group (NI and NC) were targeted. Surveys were in English or Spanish. RESULTS: The response rate was 37% (244/660; 140 moved or gone elsewhere; 66% English-speaking, 34% Spanish-speaking). Safety attitudes of NIs and NCs differed, with 40% NIs vs. 14% NC's reporting they thought HPV vaccine was unsafe (p < 0.0001) and 43% NIs vs. 21% NCs that it may cause long-term health problems (p < 0.001). Among NCs, 42% reported they did not know their daughter needed more shots (English-speaking, 20%, Spanish-speaking 52%) and 39% reported that "I wasn't worried about the safety of the HPV vaccine before, but now I am" (English-speaking, 23%, Spanish-speaking, 50%). Items rated as very important among NIs in the decision regarding vaccination included: more information about safety (74%), more information saying it prevents cancer (70%), and if they knew HPV was spread mainly by sexual contact (61%). Conclusions: Safety concerns, being unaware of the need for multiple doses, and low perceived risk of infection remain significant barriers to HPV vaccination for at-risk adolescents. Some parents' safety concerns do not appear until initial vaccination.

Immunization Practices of U.S. Obstetrician/Gynecologists for Pregnant Patients.

INTRODUCTION: U.S. obstetrician/gynecologists play a critical role as vaccinators of pregnant women. However, little is known about their current immunization practices. Thus, study objectives were to determine (1) practices related to assessment of vaccination status and vaccine delivery for pregnant patients; (2) barriers to stocking and administering vaccines; and (3) factors associated with administering both influenza and tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines. METHODS: An e-mail and mail survey among a national sample of obstetrician/gynecologists conducted July-October 2015 (analysis August 2016-August 2017). RESULTS: The response rate was 73.2% (353/482). Among obstetrician/gynecologists caring for pregnant women (n=324), vaccination status was most commonly assessed for influenza (97%), Tdap (92%), and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines (88%). Vaccines most commonly administered included influenza (85%) and Tdap (76%). Few respondents reported administering other vaccines to pregnant patients. More physicians reported using standing orders for influenza (66%) than Tdap (39%). Other evidence-based strategies for increasing vaccine uptake were less frequently used (electronic decision support, 42%; immunization information system to record [13%] or assess vaccination status [11%]; reminder/recall, 7%). Barriers most commonly reported were provider financial barriers, yet provider attitudinal barriers were rare. Providers who administered both influenza and Tdap vaccines were more likely to be female, perceive fewer financial and practice barriers, less likely to be in private practice, and perceive more patient barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Although most obstetrician/gynecologists administer some vaccines to pregnant women, the focus remains on influenza and Tdap. Financial barriers and infrequent use of evidence-based strategies for increasing vaccination uptake may be hindering delivery of a broader complement of adult vaccines in obstetrician/gynecologist offices.

Financing of Vaccine Delivery in Primary Care Practices.

OBJECTIVE: Vaccines represent a significant portion of primary care practice expenses. Our objectives were to determine among pediatric (Ped) and family medicine (FM) practices: 1) relative payment for vaccine purchase and administration and estimated profit margin according to payer type, 2) strategies used to reduce vaccine purchase costs and increase payment, and 3) whether practices have stopped providing vaccines because of finances. METHODS: A national survey conducted from April through September 2011 among Ped and FM practitioners in private, single-specialty practices. RESULTS: The response rate was 51% (221 of 430). Depending on payer type, 61% to 79% of practices reported that payment for vaccine purchase was at least 100% of purchase price and 34% to 74% reported that payment for vaccine administration was at least $11. Reported strategies to reduce vaccine purchase cost were online purchasing (81% Ped, 36% FM), prompt pay (78% Ped, 49% FM), and bulk order (65% Ped, 49% FM) discounts. Fewer than half of practices used strategies to increase payment; in a multivariable analysis, practices with ≥5 providers were more likely to use strategies compared with practices with fewer providers (adjusted odds ratio, 2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.51-4.62). When asked if they had stopped purchasing vaccines because of financial concerns, 12% of Ped practices and 23% of FM practices responded 'yes,' and 24% of Ped and 26% of FM practices responded 'no, but have seriously considered.' CONCLUSIONS: Practices report variable payment for vaccination services from different payer types. Practices might benefit from increased use of strategies to reduce vaccine purchase costs and increase payment for vaccine delivery.

Noninitiation and Noncompletion of HPV Vaccine Among English- and Spanish-Speaking Parents of Adolescent Girls: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends routine human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for female adolescents aged 11 to 12 years, yet vaccination rates remain low. We conducted a qualitative study to understand English- and Spanish-speaking parents' reasons for noninitiation or noncompletion of the HPV vaccine series for their daughters. METHODS: Parents of female adolescents aged 12 to 15 years who had not initiated or not completed the HPV vaccine series were identified through administrative data in 2 large urban safety net health care systems in Colorado. Focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted with English-speaking parents and in-depth interviews were conducted with Spanish-speaking parents. All data were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for thematic content by experienced analysts using established qualitative content analysis techniques. RESULTS: Forty-one parents participated in the study. Thirty parents participated in individual interviews and 11 parents participated in 1 of 2 focus groups. The most common reasons for noninitiation and noncompletion among English-speaking parents included a low perceived risk of HPV infection, vaccine safety concerns, and distrust of government and/or medicine. In contrast, Spanish-speaking parents most often reported that providers had either not encouraged initiation of the HPV vaccine series or had not explained the necessity of completing the series. Some noninitiating parents, particularly Spanish-speaking ones, also cited concerns that vaccination would encourage sexual activity. CONCLUSIONS: The reasons for noninitiation and noncompletion of the HPV vaccine series differed substantially between English- and Spanish-speaking parents. To maximize uptake of HPV vaccine, varying approaches might be needed to effectively target specific populations.

Physician Attitudes Toward Adult Vaccines and Other Preventive Practices, United States, 2012.

OBJECTIVES: We described the following among U.S. primary care physicians: (1) perceived importance of vaccines recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices relative to U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) preventive services, (2) attitudes toward the U.S. adult immunization schedule, and (3) awareness and use of Medicare preventive service visits. METHODS: We conducted an Internet and mail survey from March to June 2012 among national networks of general internists and family physicians. RESULTS: We received responses from 352 of 445 (79%) general internists and 255 of 409 (62%) family physicians. For a 67-year-old hypothetical patient, 540/606 (89%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 87, 92) of physicians ranked seasonal influenza vaccine and 487/607 (80%, 95% CI 77, 83) ranked pneumococcal vaccine as very important, whereas 381/604 (63%, 95% CI 59, 67) ranked Tdap/Td vaccine and 288/607 (47%, 95% CI 43, 51) ranked herpes zoster vaccine as very important (p<0.001). All Grade A USPSTF recommendations were considered more important than Tdap/Td and herpes zoster vaccines. For the hypothetical patient aged 30 years, the number and percentage of physicians who reported that the Tdap/Td vaccine (377/604; 62%, 95% CI 59, 66) is very important was greater than the number and percentage who reported that the seasonal influenza vaccine (263/605; 43%, 95% CI 40, 47) is very important (p<0.001), and all Grade A and Grade B USPSTF recommendations were more often reported as very important than was any vaccine. A total of 172 of 587 physicians (29%) found aspects of the adult immunization schedule confusing. Among physicians aware of "Welcome to Medicare" and annual wellness visits, 492/514 (96%, 95% CI 94, 97) and 329/496 (66%, 95% CI 62, 70), respectively, reported having conducted fewer than 10 such visits in the previous month. CONCLUSIONS: Despite lack of prioritization of vaccines by ACIP, physicians are prioritizing some vaccines over others and ranking some vaccines below other preventive services. These attitudes and confusion about the immunization schedule may result in missed opportunities for vaccination. Medicare preventive visits are not being used widely despite offering a venue for delivery of preventive services, including vaccinations.

Evidence-based vaccination strategies in obstetrics and gynecology settings: Current practices and methods for assessment.

Obstetrician-gynecologists have the potential to play an important role in the delivery of immunizations to women. However, despite national recommendations, immunization rates among pregnant women and adults in general remain low. Pragmatic immunization delivery trials are needed to demonstrate how best to deliver vaccines in such settings. We report the development and implementation of 2 novel methodologies for immunization delivery research and quality improvement in such settings. The first was the development and application of a 47-point Immunization Delivery Scale that formally assessed variability among practices in their engagement in a variety of evidence-based practices for improving immunization rates. The second was a covariate-constrained randomization technique - a method for achieving balance between study arms in cluster-randomized trials that is especially applicable to pragmatic trials.. To best achieve meaningful and interpretable findings, we recommend use of these or similar techniques in future immunization research and quality improvement projects in OB/GYN settings.

Effectiveness and Cost of Bidirectional Text Messaging for Adolescent Vaccines and Well Care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and cost of bidirectional short messaging service in increasing rates of vaccination and well child care (WCC) among adolescents. METHODS: We included all adolescents needing a recommended adolescent vaccine (n = 4587) whose parents had a cell-phone number in 5 private and 2 safety-net pediatric practices. Adolescents were randomized to intervention (n = 2228) or control (n = 2359). Parents in the intervention group received up to 3 personalized short messaging services with response options 1 (clinic will call to schedule), 2 (parent will call clinic), or STOP (no further short messaging service). Primary outcomes included completion of all needed services, WCC only, all needed vaccinations, any vaccination, and missed opportunity for vaccination. RESULTS: Intervention patients were more likely to complete all needed services (risk ratio [RR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.53), all needed vaccinations (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.12-1.50), and any vaccination (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.20-1.54). Seventy-five percent of control patients had a missed opportunity versus 69% of intervention (P = .002). There was not a significant difference for WCC visits. Responding that the clinic should call to schedule ("1") was associated with the highest effect size for completion of all needed services (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.41-2.54). Net cost ranged from $855 to $3394 per practice. CONCLUSIONS: Bidirectional short messaging service to parents was effective at improving rates for all adolescent vaccinations and for all needed services, especially among parents who responded they desired a call from the practice.

Acceptability of human papillomavirus vaccines among women older than 26 years.

OBJECTIVE: To examine older women's (>26 years) acceptance of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, and factors associated with this outcome. STUDY DESIGN: A convenience sample of 872 women age 26-77 years were surveyed regarding the likelihood they would accept the HPV vaccine if offered to them by their provider, and factors associated with this outcome. Binomial regression, Chi square and MacNemar's analyses were used to determine associations of this outcome with demographic, attitudinal, and experiential variables. RESULTS: The response rate was 60.8%. Half the respondents indicated they would want the vaccine, even if they had to pay for it. In multivariable analyses, the only factor associated with wanting the vaccine was higher self-reported knowledge about HPV (risk ratio 1.43, 95% Confidence Interval 1.12, 1.83). A majority of participants also believed that older women in general would want the vaccine if it were covered by insurance. However, this perspective was significantly diminished if the vaccine had to be paid for out of pocket (97% vs. 22% for 26-45 year olds; 84% vs. 20% for 46-65 year olds, 60% vs. 8% for 66+ year olds, p<0.001). Nearly all (93%) believed primary care physicians should routinely discuss the vaccine with older women. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of women over 26 would want the HPV vaccine if offered by their provider, even if they had to pay for it out of pocket. This suggests that if providers were to routinely offer the HPV vaccine to their older patients, many women would choose to get vaccinated.

U.S. physicians' perspective of adult vaccine delivery.

BACKGROUND: Adults are at substantial risk for vaccine-preventable disease, but their vaccination rates remain low. OBJECTIVE: To assess practices for assessing vaccination status and stocking recommended vaccines, barriers to vaccination, characteristics associated with reporting financial barriers to delivering vaccines, and practices regarding vaccination by alternate vaccinators. DESIGN: Mail and Internet-based survey. SETTING: Survey conducted from March to June 2012. PARTICIPANTS: General internists and family physicians throughout the United States. MEASUREMENTS: A financial barriers scale was created. Multivariable linear modeling for each specialty was performed to assess associations between a financial barrier score and physician and practice characteristics. RESULTS: Response rates were 79% (352 of 443) for general internists and 62% (255 of 409) for family physicians. Twenty-nine percent of general internists and 32% of family physicians reported assessing vaccination status at every visit. A minority used immunization information systems (8% and 36%, respectively). Almost all respondents reported assessing need for and stocking seasonal influenza; pneumococcal; tetanus and diphtheria; and tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccines. However, fewer assessed and stocked other recommended vaccines. The most commonly reported barriers were financial. Characteristics significantly associated with reporting greater financial barriers included private practice setting, fewer than 5 providers in the practice, and, for general internists only, having more patients with Medicare Part D. The most commonly reported reasons for referring patients elsewhere included lack of insurance coverage for the vaccine (55% for general internists and 62% for family physicians) or inadequate reimbursement (36% and 41%, respectively). Patients were most often referred to pharmacies/retail stores and public health departments. LIMITATIONS: Surveyed physicians may not be representative of all physicians. CONCLUSION: Improving adult vaccination delivery will require increased use of evidence-based methods for vaccination delivery and concerted efforts to resolve financial barriers, especially for smaller practices and for general internists who see more patients with Medicare Part D. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Vaccine financing from the perspective of primary care physicians.

OBJECTIVES: Because of high purchase costs of newer vaccines, financial risk to private vaccination providers has increased. We assessed among pediatricians and family physicians satisfaction with insurance payment for vaccine purchase and administration by payer type, the proportion who have considered discontinuing provision of all childhood vaccines for financial reasons, and strategies used for handling uncertainty about insurance coverage when new vaccines first become available. METHODS: A national survey among private pediatricians and family physicians April to September 2011. RESULTS: Response rates were 69% (190/277) for pediatricians and 70% (181/260) for family physicians. Level of dissatisfaction varied significantly by payer type for payment for vaccine administration (Medicaid, 63%; Children's Health Insurance Program, 56%; managed care organizations, 48%; preferred provider organizations, 38%; fee for service, 37%; P < .001), but not for payment for vaccine purchase (health maintenance organization or managed care organization, 52%; Child Health Insurance Program, 47%; preferred provider organization, 45%; fee for service, 41%; P = .11). Ten percent of physicians had seriously considered discontinuing providing all childhood vaccines to privately insured patients because of cost issues. The most commonly used strategy for handling uncertainty about insurance coverage for new vaccines was to inform parents that they may be billed for the vaccine; 67% of physicians reported using 3 or more strategies to handle this uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Many primary care physicians are dissatisfied with payment for vaccine purchase and administration from third-party payers, particularly public insurance for vaccine administration. Physicians report a variety of strategies for dealing with the uncertainty of insurance coverage for new vaccines.

Maternal characteristics and hospital policies as risk factors for nonreceipt of hepatitis B vaccine in the newborn nursery.

BACKGROUND: A birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine (HBV) is a primary focus of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' strategy to eliminate transmission of hepatitis B virus in the United States. We sought to assess the impact of maternal characteristics and hospital policy on the receipt of a birth dose of HBV. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from the 2008 Colorado birth registry. Hospital policy was assessed by state health department personnel. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to examine the association of maternal characteristics and hospital policy with nonreceipt of HBV. RESULTS: A total of 64,425 infants were identified in the birth cohort, of whom 61.6% received a birth dose of HBV. Higher maternal education and income were associated with nonreceipt of HBV (master's degree vs. eighth grade or less: adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.49-1.85; >$75,000 vs. <$15,000: adjusted OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.13-1.30). Lack of a hospital policy stipulating a universal birth dose strongly predicted nonreceipt of a birth dose of HBV (policy with no birth dose vs. policy with a birth dose: adjusted OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 2.13-2.30). CONCLUSIONS: Maternal characteristics such as higher education and income are associated with nonreceipt of the HBV during the perinatal period. To effectively reduce risk of perinatal hepatitis B transmission, hospitals should stipulate that all infants are offered HBV and ensure that these policies are implemented and followed.