| Literature DB >> 31355274 |
Cecilia Trucchi1,2, Claudio Costantino3, Vincenzo Restivo3, Chiara Bertoncello4, Francesca Fortunato5, Silvio Tafuri6, Daniela Amicizia1,2,7, Domenico Martinelli5, Chiara Paganino1, Maria Francesca Piazza1, Federico Tassinari7, Valentino Tisa7, Pasquale Stefanizzi6, Vincenzo Baldo4, Alessandra Casuccio3, Rosa Prato5, Filippo Ansaldi1,2,7, Giancarlo Icardi2,7.
Abstract
Objective. The study aimed to assess the impact of HPV immunization campaigns organizational aspects, the characteristics of immunization program (vaccination targets and type of offer), and communicative strategies adopted by four Italian administrative regions on vaccination coverage observed. Methods. From November 2017 to March 2018, regional and Local Health Units (LHUs) representatives were invited to complete an online survey including 54 questions evaluating vaccination invite systems, access systems to vaccination centres, reminder and recall systems, and adverse events surveillance. An overall descriptive analysis was conducted. Since observed vaccine coverage (VC) obtained in females (2002-2004 birth cohorts) was lower than objectives fixed by the Italian Ministry of Health, variables were assessed using the national VC mean obtained in the 2003 girls birth cohort as outcome. Results. Twenty-six LHUs belonging to 4 Northern and Southern Italian regions participated in the study. Organizational aspects significantly related to VC lower than the national mean were access to vaccine centres without appointment and parents' reservation as appointment planning system. Recall systems for both the first and the second dose, including the appointment in the invitation letter, the availability of regional immunization registry, and education of healthcare workers on universal HPV immunization strategies, instead, were related to higher VC. As regards preadolescent immunization strategies, both VC obtained in girls and boys were far from the Ministerial goals. Only 20% of LHUs introduced multicohort female strategies while all LHUs adopted copayment targeting both men and women. Immunizations strategies targeting subjects at risk were implemented only in half of participating LHUs. Conclusions. VC observed in participating LHUs are largely lower than the national objectives in all anti-HPV vaccine targets. Both organizational and educational strategies have to be implemented to improve the VC goals.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31355274 PMCID: PMC6637711 DOI: 10.1155/2019/6764154
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Universal pre-adolescents HPV vaccination organizational aspects.
| Organizational aspects | (N=26) |
|---|---|
| N (%) | |
| Vaccination invite system | |
| | 25 (96.2%) |
| | 7 (26.9%) |
| | 1 (3.8%) |
| | 1 (3.8%) |
|
| |
| Subject who invites pre-adolescents | |
| | 26 (100%) |
|
| |
| Sending information with invitation letter | 20 (76.9%) |
|
| |
| Subjects who administers the vaccine | |
| | 26 (100%) |
|
| |
| Access system to vaccination centres | |
| | 5 (19.2%) |
| | 25 (96.1%) |
|
| |
| Appointment planning system | |
| | 19 (76%) |
| | 10 (38.5%) |
|
| |
| Reminder of the first dose appointment | 14 (53.4%) |
|
| |
| Specific HPV vaccine sessions | 21 (80.8%) |
|
| |
| Recall of subjects who missed the first dose | 18 (69.2%) |
| | 14 (77.8%) |
| | 9 (50.0%) |
| | 1 (5.9%) |
|
| |
| Second dose appointment planning | |
| | 21 (80.8%) |
| | 4 (15.4%) |
| | 1 (3.8%) |
|
| |
| Recall of subjects missing the second dose | 16 (61.5%) |
| | 8 (50%) |
| | 10 (62.5%) |
| | 1 (6.3%) |
|
| |
| AE surveillance within 30 minutes | 21 (80.8%) |
|
| |
| AE surveillance since the day after | |
| | 17 (65.4%) |
| | 9 (34.6%) |
| | 21 (80.8%) |
LHU=Local Health Unit; SMS=Short Message Service; AE=Adverse Event
Figure 1Vaccine coverage (median, 25-75 p) for first dose and complete cycle obtained in preadolescents girls (birth cohorts 2002-2004) (a) and boys (birth cohorts 2003-2005) (b) in participating Local Health Units and vaccine coverage objectives set by the Italian Ministry of Health.
Communication strategies about HPV vaccine.
| Communication strategies | (N=26) |
|---|---|
| N (%) | |
| Informative material available at immunization centres | |
| | 2 (7.7%) |
| | 11 (42.3%) |
| | 13 (50%) |
| | 3 (11.5%) |
| | 8 (30.8%) |
|
| |
| Translation of informative material | 5 (19.2%) |
|
| |
| Call center | 14 (53.8%) |
|
| |
| Focus group | 11 (42.3%) |
|
| |
| Media | 9 (34.6%) |
|
| |
| Education of HCWs on “universal” strategy | 24 (92.3%) |
| | 16 (66.7%) |
| | 14 (58.3%) |
| | 9 (37.5%) |
| | 9 (37.5%) |
| | 12 (50%) |
|
| |
| Discussion of obtained vaccine coverages | 15 (57.7%) |
|
| |
| Analysis of vaccine hesitancy determinants | 9 (34.6%) |
Univariable logistic regression of universal pre-adolescents HPV-vaccination vaccination organizational aspects associated with gaining by LHU of vaccine coverage in 2003 girls birth cohort higher than the national mean.
| Organizational aspects and communication strategies |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Yes | No | P-value | OR (95% C.I.) | |
| Access system to vaccination centres | ||||
| | 1 (5.9%) | 4 (44.4%) | 0.018 | 0.08 (0.01-0.87) |
|
| ||||
| Recall of subjects who missed the first dose | 14 (82.4%) | 4 (44.4%) | 0.046 | 5.8 (1-35.7) |
|
| ||||
| Recall of subjects missing the second dose | 13 (76.5%) | 3 (33.3%) | 0.032 | 6.5 (1.09-38.63) |
|
| ||||
| Appointment planning system | ||||
| | 15 (88.2%) | 4 (44.4%) | 0.017 | 9.37 (1.3-67.65) |
| | 1 (5.9%) | 4 (44.4%) | 0.018 | 0.08 (0.01-0.87) |
|
| ||||
| Immunization registry | ||||
| | 12 (70.6%) | 2 (22.2%) | 0.019 | 8.4 (1.27-55.39) |
|
| ||||
| Education of HCWs on “universal” strategy | 17 (100%) | 7 (77.8%) | 0.043 | NA |
LHU=Local Health Unit; VC=Vaccine Coverage; HCW=Health Care Worker
Organizational aspects selected by multivariate stepwise logistic regression for prediction of gaining by LHU of vaccine coverage in 2003 girls birth cohort higher than the national mean.
| Organizational aspects | Recall of subjects missing the second dose (p=0.063) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | ||
| Free access to vaccination centres (p=0.038) | Yes | 36.9% | 8.7% |
| No | 87.6% | 53.4% | |