Impact of the change in polio vaccination schedule on immunization coverage rates: a study in two large health maintenance organizations.

OBJECTIVE: In January 1997, one of the most significant changes to United States vaccine policy occurred when polio immunization guidelines changed to recommend a schedule containing inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). There were concerns that parent or physician reluctance to accept IPV into the routine childhood immunization schedule would lead to lowered coverage. We determined whether adoption of an IPV schedule had a negative impact on immunization coverage. DESIGN: A cohort study of 2 large health maintenance organizations (HMOs), Group Health Cooperative and Kaiser Permanente Northern California, was conducted. For analysis at 12 months of age, children who were born between October 1, 1996, and December 31, 1997, and were commercially insured and covered by Medicaid were continuously enrolled; for analysis at 24 months of age, children who were born between October 1, 1996, and June 30, 1997, and were commercially insured and covered by Medicaid were continuously enrolled. The 3 measures of immunization status at 12 and 24 months of age were up-to-date status, cumulative time spent up-to-date, and the number of missed opportunity visits. RESULTS: At both HMOs, children who received IPV were as likely to be up to date at 12 months as were children who received oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), whereas at Group Health, children who received IPV were slightly more likely to be up to date at 24 months (relative risk: 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05, 1.19). These findings were consistent for children who were covered by Medicaid. At Kaiser Permanente, children who received IPV spent ~3 fewer days up to date in the first year of life, but this difference did not persist at 2 years of age. At Group Health, children who received IPV were no different from those who received OPV in terms of days spent up to date by 1 or 2 years of age. At Group Health, children who received IPV were less likely to have a missed opportunity by 12 months old (odds ratio [OR] 0.46; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.70), but this finding did not persist at 24 months of age. At Kaiser Permanente, children who received IPV were more likely to have a missed opportunity by 12 months (OR 2.06; 95% CI: 1.84, 2.30), and 24 months of age (OR 1.50; 95% CI: 1.36, 1.67). CONCLUSIONS: The changeover from an all-OPV schedule to one containing IPV had little if any negative impact on vaccine coverage. Use of IPV was associated with a small increase in the likelihood of being up to date at 2 years of age at one of the HMOs and conversely was associated with a small increase in the likelihood of having a missed-opportunity visit in the other HMO.polio, poliomyelitis, vaccination, immunization coverage.

Variation in clinician recommendations for multiple injections during adoption of inactivated polio vaccine.

OBJECTIVES: To describe variation in clinician recommendations for multiple injections during the adoption of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) in 2 large health maintenance organizations (HMOs), and to test the hypothesis that variation in recommendations would be associated with variation in immunization coverage rates. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study based on a survey of clinician practices 1 year after IPV was recommended and computerized immunization data from these clinicians' patients. STUDY SETTINGS: Two large West Coast HMOs: Kaiser Permanente in Northern California and Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound. OUTCOME MEASURES: Immunization status of 8-month-olds and 24-month-olds cared for by the clinicians during the study. RESULTS: More clinicians at Group Health (82%), where a central guideline was issued, had adopted the IPV/oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) sequential schedule than at Kaiser (65%), where no central guideline was issued. Clinicians at both HMOs said that if multiple injections fell due at a visit and they elected to defer some vaccines, they would be most likely to defer the hepatitis B vaccine (HBV) for infants (40%). At Kaiser, IPV users were more likely than OPV users to recommend the first HBV at birth (64% vs 28%) or if they did not, to defer the third HBV to 8 months or later (62% vs 39%). In multivariate analyses, patients whose clinicians used IPV were as likely to be fully immunized at 8 months old as those whose clinicians used all OPV. At Kaiser, where there was variability in the maximum number of injections clinicians recommended at infant visits, providers who routinely recommended 3 or 4 injections at a visit had similar immunization coverage rates as those who recommended 1 or 2. At both HMOs, clinicians who strongly recommended all possible injections at a visit had higher immunization coverage rates at 8 months than those who offered parents the choice of deferring some vaccines to a subsequent visit (at Kaiser, odds ratio [OR]: 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0-1.5; at Group Health, OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.1-2.8). CONCLUSIONS: Neither IPV adoption nor the use of multiple injections at infant visits were associated with reductions in immunization coverage. However, at the HMO without centralized immunization guidelines, IPV adoption was associated with changes in the timing of the first and third HBV. Clinical policymakers should continue to monitor practice variation as future vaccines are added to the infant immunization schedule.

Introduction of the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention group B streptococcal prevention guideline at a large West Coast health maintenance organization.

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to assess the impact of new consensus guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Academy of Pediatrics to prevent perinatal group B streptococcal disease. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a descriptive analysis and a before-and-after analysis of implementation of the group B streptococcal disease prevention guidelines among singleton-birth pregnancies in 2 Group Health Cooperative hospitals from October 1, 1995, through December 31, 1997. We studied the speed and completeness of implementation and the effect on pregnancy care practices including intrapartum antibiotic use, test ordering, and maternal and neonatal health. RESULTS: Guideline implementation occurred rapidly. The proportion of term pregnancies screened according to the guideline increased markedly, and overall intrapartum antibiotic use more than doubled. Among group B streptococci-positive women, intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis increased from 24% before to 74% after guideline implementation. Median duration of treatment before delivery increased from 1.8 to 4.3 hours. The rate of rash did not increase, and there were no cases of anaphylaxis or pseudomembranous colitis. The proportion of infants undergoing evaluation decreased after implementation of the neonatal guidelines; among infants of group B streptococci-negative women, test ordering dropped by almost 40%. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the new guidelines is feasible and can be accomplished rapidly. The guidelines were associated with increased maternal intrapartum antibiotic use, particularly among women at highest risk, and with a decrease in laboratory use for infants.