Alexandra M Stewart1, Megan C Lindley2, Marisa A Cox3. 1. Milken Institute, School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia. Electronic address: stewarta@gwu.edu. 2. National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Milken Institute, School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study determined whether state laws permit the implementation of standing orders programs (SOPs) for immunization practice. SOPs are an effective strategy to increase uptake of vaccines. Successful SOPs require a legal foundation authorizing delegation of immunization services performed by a wide range of providers, administered to broad patient populations, in several settings. Without legal permission to administer vaccines, non-physician health professionals (NPHPs) are unable to provide preventive services. METHODS: From 2012 through 2013, researchers analyzed the legal environment in 50 states and the District of Columbia to determine whether NPHPs are authorized to (1) assess patient immunization status; (2) prescribe vaccines; and (3) administer vaccines under their own practice license or delegated authority. Laws governing the following NPHPs were included: (1) medical assistants; (2) midwives; (3) nurses in advanced practice; (4) registered, practical, and vocational nurses; (5) physician assistants; and (6) pharmacists. Additionally, the review determined which vaccines may be administered, permissible patient populations, and allowable practice settings for each category of NPHP. RESULTS: The laws are highly variable, and no state authorizes all NPHPs to conduct all elements of immunization practice for all patients. The laws frequently indicate where NPHPs may or may not administer vaccines and outline permissible vaccines, eligible patients, and required level of supervision. CONCLUSIONS: The variation in the laws could potentially present a challenge to successful implementation of public health goals to improve immunization rates. Expanded authorization of SOPs in all states could increase health practitioners' ability to deliver recommended vaccines.
INTRODUCTION: This study determined whether state laws permit the implementation of standing orders programs (SOPs) for immunization practice. SOPs are an effective strategy to increase uptake of vaccines. Successful SOPs require a legal foundation authorizing delegation of immunization services performed by a wide range of providers, administered to broad patient populations, in several settings. Without legal permission to administer vaccines, non-physician health professionals (NPHPs) are unable to provide preventive services. METHODS: From 2012 through 2013, researchers analyzed the legal environment in 50 states and the District of Columbia to determine whether NPHPs are authorized to (1) assess patient immunization status; (2) prescribe vaccines; and (3) administer vaccines under their own practice license or delegated authority. Laws governing the following NPHPs were included: (1) medical assistants; (2) midwives; (3) nurses in advanced practice; (4) registered, practical, and vocational nurses; (5) physician assistants; and (6) pharmacists. Additionally, the review determined which vaccines may be administered, permissible patient populations, and allowable practice settings for each category of NPHP. RESULTS: The laws are highly variable, and no state authorizes all NPHPs to conduct all elements of immunization practice for all patients. The laws frequently indicate where NPHPs may or may not administer vaccines and outline permissible vaccines, eligible patients, and required level of supervision. CONCLUSIONS: The variation in the laws could potentially present a challenge to successful implementation of public health goals to improve immunization rates. Expanded authorization of SOPs in all states could increase health practitioners' ability to deliver recommended vaccines.
Authors: Erin G Stone; Sally C Morton; Marlies E Hulscher; Margaret A Maglione; Elizabeth A Roth; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Brian S Mittman; Lisa V Rubenstein; Laurence Z Rubenstein; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-05-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Walter W Williams; Peng-Jun Lu; Alissa O'Halloran; Carolyn B Bridges; Tamara Pilishvili; Craig M Hales; Lauri E Markowitz Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2014-02-07 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Jessica Y Islam; Joann F Gruber; Alexandre Lockhart; Manju Kunwar; Spencer Wilson; Sara B Smith; Noel T Brewer; Jennifer S Smith Journal: Biomed Inform Insights Date: 2017-02-16
Authors: Frédérique Wiot; Jane Shirley; Anna Prugnola; Alberta Di Pasquale; Roy Philip Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2019-07-09 Impact factor: 3.452