Post-campaign coverage evaluation of a measles and rubella supplementary immunization activity in five districts in India, 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: In alignment with the Measles and Rubella (MR) Strategic Elimination plan, India conducted a mass measles and rubella vaccination campaign across the country between 2017 and 2020 to provide a dose of MR containing vaccine to all children aged 9 months to 15 years. We estimated campaign vaccination coverage in five districts in India and assessed campaign awareness and factors associated with vaccination during the campaign to better understand reasons for not receiving the dose. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Community-based cross-sectional serosurveys were conducted in five districts of India among children aged 9 months to 15 years after the vaccination campaign. Campaign coverage was estimated based on home-based immunization record or caregiver recall. Campaign coverage was stratified by child- and household-level risk factors and descriptive analyses were performed to assess reasons for not receiving the campaign dose. Three thousand three hundred and fifty-seven children aged 9 months to 15 years at the time of the campaign were enrolled. Campaign coverage among children aged 9 months to 5 years documented or by recall ranged from 74.2% in Kanpur Nagar District to 90.4% in Dibrugarh District, Assam. Similar coverage was observed for older children. Caregiver awareness of the campaign varied from 88.3% in Hoshiarpur District, Punjab to 97.6% in Dibrugarh District, Assam, although 8% of children whose caregivers were aware of the campaign were not vaccinated during the campaign. Failure to receive the campaign dose was associated with urban settings, low maternal education, and lack of school attendance although the associations varied by district. CONCLUSION: Awareness of the MR vaccination campaign was high; however, campaign coverage varied by district and did not reach the elimination target of 95% coverage in any of the districts studied. Areas with lower coverage among younger children must be prioritized by strengthening the routine immunization programme and implementing strategies to identify and reach under-vaccinated children.

Access to Urological Care for Medicaid-Insured Patients at Urology Practices Acquired by Private Equity Firms.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize appointment access for Medicaid-insured patients seeking care at urology practices affiliated with private equity firms in light of the recent national trends in practice consolidation. METHODS: We identified 214 urology offices affiliated with private equity firms that were geographically matched with 231 non-private equity affiliated urology offices. Using a standardized script, researchers posed as an adult patient with either Medicaid or commercial insurance in the clinical setting of new onset, painless hematuria. The primary outcome was whether the patient's insurance was accepted for an appointment. The secondary outcome was appointment wait time. RESULTS: We conducted 815 appointment inquiry calls to 214 private equity (PE) and 231 non-PE-affiliated urology offices across 12 states. Appointment availability was higher for commercially-insured patients (99.0%; 95% CI: 98.1%-99.9%) vs Medicaid-insured patients (59.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 55.0%-64.6%) (P < .0001). Medicaid acceptance was higher at non-PE affiliated (66.8%; CI 60.4%-73.2%) than PE-affiliated practices (52.1%; 95% CI 45.0%-59.2%) (P = .003). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, state Medicaid expansion status (odds ratio [OR] 2.20; CI 1.14-4.28; P = .020) was independently associated with Medicaid appointment availability, whereas PE-affiliation (OR 0.55; CI 0.37-0.83; P = .004) was independently associated with lower Medicaid access. Appointment wait times did not differ significantly for commercially-insured vs Medicaid patients (19.2 vs 20.1 days; p = .59), but PE-affiliated practices offered shorter mean wait times than non-PE offices (17.5 vs 21.4 days; P = .017). CONCLUSION: Access disparities for urologic evaluation in patients with Medicaid insurance at urology practices and were more pronounced at private equity acquired practices.