• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

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

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Vaccine. 2013 Jul 8. pii: S0264-410X(13)00887-6. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.06.077. [Epub ahead of print]
A qualitative analysis of the impact of healthcare personnel influenza vaccination requirements in California.
Khodyakov D, Uscher-Pines L, Lorick S, Lindley MC, Shier V, Harris K.
Source

RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA. Electronic address: Dmitry_Khodyakov@rand.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:

Using qualitative methods, we explore 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 complement our quantitative findings reported elsewhere and 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.

Copyright ? 2013. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
KEYWORDS:

Health care personnel, Influenza vaccination, Mandatory vaccination, State influenza vaccination requirements of healthcare personnel

PMID:
23845810
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23845810
 
Back
Top Bottom