Literature DB >> 11025835

Effect of patient reminder/recall interventions on immunization rates: A review.

P G Szilagyi1, C Bordley, J C Vann, A Chelminski, R M Kraus, P A Margolis, L E Rodewald.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Immunization rates for children and adults remain below national goals. While experts recommend that health care professionals remind patients of needed immunizations, few practitioners actually use reminders. Little is known about the effectiveness of reminders in different settings or patient populations.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of patient reminder systems in improving immunization rates, and to compare the effectiveness of different types of reminders for a variety of patient populations. DATA SOURCES: A search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and CAB Health Abstracts. Relevant articles, as well as published abstracts, conference proceedings, and files of study collaborators, were searched for relevant references. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: English-language studies involving patient reminder/recall interventions (using criteria established by the Cochrane Collaboration) were eligible for review if they involved randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, or interrupted time series, and measured immunization rates. Of 109 studies identified, 41 met eligibility criteria. Studies were reviewed independently by 2 reviewers using a standardized checklist. Results of studies are expressed as absolute percentage-point changes in immunization rates and as odds ratios (ORs). Studies with similar characteristics of patients or interventions were pooled (random effects model). DATA SYNTHESIS: Patient reminder systems were effective in improving immunization rates in 33 (80%) of the 41 studies, irrespective of baseline immunization rates, patient age, setting, or vaccination type. Increases in immunization rates due to reminders ranged from 5 to 20 percentage points. Reminders were effective for childhood vaccinations (OR, 2.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-2.72), childhood influenza vaccinations (OR, 4. 25; 95% CI, 2.10-8.60), adult pneumococcus or tetanus vaccinations (OR, 5.14; 95% CI, 1.21-21.78), and adult influenza vaccinations (OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.69-3.10). While reminders were most effective in academic settings (OR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.98-5.58), they were also highly effective in private practice settings (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1. 45-2.22) and public health clinics (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.42-3.07). All types of reminders were effective (postcards, letters, and telephone or autodialer calls), with telephone reminders being most effective but costliest.
CONCLUSIONS: Patient reminder systems in primary care settings are effective in improving immunization rates. Primary care physicians should use patient reminders to improve immunization delivery. JAMA. 2000;284:1820-1827.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11025835     DOI: 10.1001/jama.284.14.1820

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  108 in total

1.  Delivering equitable care: comparing preventive services in Manitoba.

Authors:  Sumit Gupta; Leslie L Roos; Randy Walld; Dawn Traverse; Matthew Dahl
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Cluster randomised controlled trial of an educational outreach visit to improve influenza and pneumococcal immunisation rates in primary care.

Authors:  A Niroshan Siriwardena; Aly Rashid; Mark R D Johnson; Michael E Dewey
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  The regional immunization registry as a public health tool for improving clinical practice and guiding immunization delivery policy.

Authors:  Allison Kempe; Brenda L Beaty; John F Steiner; Kellyn A Pearson; N Elaine Lowery; Matthew F Daley; Lori A Crane; Stephen Berman
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Implementation of electronic medical records: effect on the provision of preventive services in a pay-for-performance environment.

Authors:  Michelle Greiver; Jan Barnsley; Richard H Glazier; Rahim Moineddin; Bart J Harvey
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.275

5.  The causes of racial and ethnic differences in influenza vaccination rates among elderly Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Paul L Hebert; Kevin D Frick; Robert L Kane; A Marshall McBean
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  The break-even point: when medical advances are less important than improving the fidelity with which they are delivered.

Authors:  Steven H Woolf; Robert E Johnson
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.166

7.  Boosting uptake of influenza immunisation: a randomised controlled trial of telephone appointing in general practice.

Authors:  Sally Hull; Nicola Hagdrup; Ben Hart; Chris Griffiths; Enid Hennessy
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.386

8.  Provider knowledge and practice regarding hepatitis B screening in Chinese-speaking patients.

Authors:  Cindy J Lai; Tung T Nguyen; Jimmy Hwang; Susan L Stewart; Anson Kwan; Stephen J McPhee
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.037

9.  A randomized trial of population-based clinical decision support to manage health and resource use for Medicaid beneficiaries.

Authors:  David F Lobach; Kensaku Kawamoto; Kevin J Anstrom; Garry M Silvey; Janese M Willis; Fred S Johnson; Rex Edwards; Jessica Simo; Pam Phillips; David R Crosslin; Eric L Eisenstein
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2013-01-13       Impact factor: 4.460

Review 10.  Integrating clinical, community, and policy perspectives on human papillomavirus vaccination.

Authors:  María E Fernández; Jennifer D Allen; Ritesh Mistry; Jessica A Kahn
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 21.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.