• 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.

Automated Screening of Hospitalized Children for Influenza Vaccination

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc. 2014 Mar;3(1):7-14. Epub 2013 Aug 6.
Automated Screening of Hospitalized Children for Influenza Vaccination.
Pollack AH1, Kronman MP2, Zhou C3, Zerr DM2.
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:

This study was designed to determine whether an automated hospital-based influenza vaccination screening program leveraging the electronic medical record (EMR) increases vaccination rates.
METHODS:

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all children ≥6 months old admitted to medical, surgical, rehabilitation, or psychiatry services during influenza seasons between 2003 and 2012 at a tertiary care pediatric hospital. We compared influenza vaccination rates before (preintervention phase) and after (intervention phase) the introduction of an automated EMR intervention that utilized a nursing-based electronic screening tool to determine eligibility for influenza vaccine and facilitated vaccine ordering without requiring involvement of a physician or other provider.
RESULTS:

Overall, 42 716 (72.8%) of the 58,648 subjects admitted during the study period met inclusion criteria. The intervention phase included 20,651 admissions, of which 11 194 (54.2%) were screened. Screening increased significantly over time in the intervention phase (19.8%-77.1%; P < .001). In-hospital influenza vaccination rates increased from a mean of 2.1% (n = 472) of all subjects preintervention phase to 8.0% (n = 1645) in the intervention phase (odds ratio = 6.8; 95% confidence interval, 6.14-7.47). Of the 11 194 screened subjects, 5505 (49.2%) were found to have already been vaccinated at the time of screening. The screening process identified 478 (4.3%) subjects who were unable to receive vaccine for medical reasons, and an additional 2865 (25.6%) whose caregiver refused the vaccine.
CONCLUSIONS:

An automated, hospital-based influenza vaccination program integrated into the EMR can increase vaccinations of hospitalized patients and provide insight into the vaccination history and declination reasons for children not receiving the vaccine.
KEYWORDS:

electronic records, hospitalization, influenza, pediatric, vaccines

PMID:
24567840
[PubMed]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24567840
 
Back
Top Bottom