| Literature DB >> 24690667 |
Svea Closser1, Kelly Cox1, Thomas M Parris2, R Matthew Landis2, Judith Justice3, Ranjani Gopinath4, Kenneth Maes5, Hailom Banteyerga Amaha6, Ismaila Zango Mohammed7, Aminu Mohammed Dukku7, Patricia A Omidian8, Emma Varley9, Pauley Tedoff1, Adam D Koon10, Laetitia Nyirazinyoye11, Matthew A Luck2, W Frank Pont2, Vanessa Neergheen1, Anat Rosenthal12, Peter Nsubuga13, Naveen Thacker14, Rashid Jooma15, Elizabeth Nuttall1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: After 2 decades of focused efforts to eradicate polio, the impact of eradication activities on health systems continues to be controversial. This study evaluated the impact of polio eradication activities on routine immunization (RI) and primary healthcare (PHC).Entities:
Keywords: eradication; health systems; poliomyelitis; routine immunization
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24690667 PMCID: PMC4197907 DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jit232
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Infect Dis ISSN: 0022-1899 Impact factor: 5.226
Figure 1.Study hypotheses. Abbreviations: PHC, primary healthcare; RI, routine immunization.
Figure 2.Qualitative case studies.
Figure 3.Association between the onset of polio eradication campaigns and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP3) vaccine coverage from 2 different sources, the World Health Organization (WHO; left side) and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME; middle), and attended birth coverage, from the World Bank's World Development Indicators (right side). Each line depicts the predicted values from regression models fit to restricted cubic splines in the presence of covariates. All additional covariates were set at median values. Lines indicate quintiles of initial values of coverage (at time 0), showing that the change in coverage over time depends on the initial coverage.
Figure 4.Association between polio eradication campaign intensity and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine coverage (data are from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, IHME; left side) and on attended birth coverage (right side). Thick lines indicate different levels of initial coverage (first quartile, median, and third quartile). Dotted lines represent 95% confidence intervals. Partial effects for both dependent variables were very similar for an alternate measure of campaign intensity, percentage of population targeted (not shown). The very wide confidence intervals in the right panel for higher initial values of coverage (dot-dash and solid lines) indicate a lack of observations at high levels of campaign intensity for countries. This selection bias complicates interpretation of this analysis.
Figure 5.Results of qualitative analysis. Please refer to the end of the Supplementary Materials for definitions of the categories used in the figure.