Evaluating the impact of using mobile vaccination units to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake in Cheshire and Merseyside, UK: a synthetic control analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of mobile vaccination units on COVID-19 vaccine uptake of the first dose, the percentage of vaccinated people among the total eligible population. We further investigate whether such an effect differed by deprivation, ethnicity and age. DESIGN: Synthetic control analysis. SETTING: The population registered with general practices (GPs) in nine local authority areas in Cheshire and Merseyside in Northwest England, UK. INTERVENTION: Mobile vaccination units that visited 37 sites on 54 occasions between 12 April 2021 and 28 June 2021. We defined intervention neighbourhoods as having their population weighted centroid located within 1 km of mobile vaccination sites (338 006 individuals). A weighted combination of neighbourhoods that had not received the intervention (1 495 582 individuals) was used to construct a synthetic control group. OUTCOME: The weekly number of first-dose vaccines received among people aged 18 years and over as a proportion of the population. RESULTS: The introduction of a mobile vaccination unit into a neighbourhood increased the number of first vaccinations conducted in the neighbourhood by 25% (95% CI 21% to 28%) within 3 weeks after the first visit to a neighbourhood, compared with the synthetic control group. Interaction analyses showed smaller or no effect among older age groups, Asian and black ethnic groups, and the most socioeconomically deprived populations. CONCLUSIONS: Mobile vaccination units are effective interventions for increasing vaccination uptake, at least in the short term. While mobile units can be geographically targeted to reduce inequalities, we found evidence that they may increase inequalities in vaccine uptake within targeted areas, as the intervention was less effective among groups that tended to have lower vaccination uptake. Mobile vaccination units should be used in combination with activities to maximise outreach with black and Asian communities and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups.

The impact of an integrated care intervention on mortality and unplanned hospital admissions in a disadvantaged community in England: A difference-in-differences study.

BACKGROUND: Many health systems are experimenting with integrated care models to improve outcomes and reduce healthcare demand. Evidence for effects on health service utilisation is variable, with few studies investigating impacts on mortality or differences by socioeconomic group. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of a multidisciplinary, integrated care team intervention on emergency admissions and mortality, and whether effects differed by deprivation group. DESIGN: A longitudinal matched controlled study using difference-in-differences analysis comparing the change in unplanned emergency admissions twelve months before and after the intervention, and inverse probability of treatment-weighted survival analysis comparing mortality, between intervention and matched control groups. SETTING: A relatively deprived city in England, U.K. INTERVENTION: A case-management integrated care programme delivered through multidisciplinary teams and aimed at complex needs and/or high hospitalisation risk patients. RESULTS: The intervention was associated with a small increase in emergency admissions of 15 per 1,000 patients per month (95% CI 5 to 24, p = 0.003) after the intervention relative to the control group and no significant change in survival between intervention and control groups (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.13, p = 0.7). Effects were similar across age and deprivation groups. CONCLUSIONS: It is unlikely that similar interventions lead to reduced emergency admissions or increased survival. Further studies should use experimental methods and assess impacts on quality of life.