tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Vaccine
. 2023 Jul 30;S0264-410X(23)00907-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.07.064. Online ahead of print. Interventions for increasing the uptake of immunisations in healthcare workers: A systematic review
Jane Tuckerman[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Kathryn Riley[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Sebastian Straube[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Hassen Mohammed[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Margie Danchin[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Helen S Marshall[SUP] 5 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Objective: This systemic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for increasing the uptake of immunisation in healthcare workers (HCWs) compared to no or alternative interventions.
Methods: A systematic review was undertaken (until March 2022) using a search strategy established a priori to capture studies that examined the effect of interventions on vaccination levels in HCWs. We included randomised controlled trials (RCT), cluster RCTs, controlled before-after (CBA) studies and interrupted time-series (ITS) studies. We described studies descriptively and synthesized results with a fixed-effect or random-effects model meta-analysis, where appropriate. The risk of bias was assessed for each study; the quality evidence per comparison was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
Results: We identified three RCTs, six cluster RCTs and four ITS studies. There was a diverse range of interventions; many included an educational component. Based on the evidence examined the following may be effective strategies in increasing the proportion of HCWs vaccinated: policy interventions, targeted and multicomponent strategies, tailored programs directed at management, physician delivered education with a vaccine 'champion' and individual decision analysis. Limited eligible studies restricted synthesis and interpretation of findings. No studies evaluated the effectiveness of legislation. Nor did we find studies evaluating the effectiveness of incentives on their own or studies focusing solely on improving access to vaccination. We judged all the studies as either unclear or high risk of bias.
Conclusion: Few robust studies that evaluate interventions to increase vaccination in HCWs are available. A limitation of this systematic review is that interventions are diverse, poorly reported and few were sufficiently alike to combine in an evaluation. More research on the effects of interventions to increase vaccination in HCWs is required, this should address a variety of vaccines and not just influenza vaccination.
Keywords: Healthcare workers; Immunisation; Vaccine preventable diseases.
. 2023 Jul 30;S0264-410X(23)00907-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.07.064. Online ahead of print. Interventions for increasing the uptake of immunisations in healthcare workers: A systematic review
Jane Tuckerman[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Kathryn Riley[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Sebastian Straube[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Hassen Mohammed[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Margie Danchin[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Helen S Marshall[SUP] 5 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 37527954
- DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.07.064
Objective: This systemic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for increasing the uptake of immunisation in healthcare workers (HCWs) compared to no or alternative interventions.
Methods: A systematic review was undertaken (until March 2022) using a search strategy established a priori to capture studies that examined the effect of interventions on vaccination levels in HCWs. We included randomised controlled trials (RCT), cluster RCTs, controlled before-after (CBA) studies and interrupted time-series (ITS) studies. We described studies descriptively and synthesized results with a fixed-effect or random-effects model meta-analysis, where appropriate. The risk of bias was assessed for each study; the quality evidence per comparison was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
Results: We identified three RCTs, six cluster RCTs and four ITS studies. There was a diverse range of interventions; many included an educational component. Based on the evidence examined the following may be effective strategies in increasing the proportion of HCWs vaccinated: policy interventions, targeted and multicomponent strategies, tailored programs directed at management, physician delivered education with a vaccine 'champion' and individual decision analysis. Limited eligible studies restricted synthesis and interpretation of findings. No studies evaluated the effectiveness of legislation. Nor did we find studies evaluating the effectiveness of incentives on their own or studies focusing solely on improving access to vaccination. We judged all the studies as either unclear or high risk of bias.
Conclusion: Few robust studies that evaluate interventions to increase vaccination in HCWs are available. A limitation of this systematic review is that interventions are diverse, poorly reported and few were sufficiently alike to combine in an evaluation. More research on the effects of interventions to increase vaccination in HCWs is required, this should address a variety of vaccines and not just influenza vaccination.
Keywords: Healthcare workers; Immunisation; Vaccine preventable diseases.