OBJECTIVES: To identify the most important reasons underlying decisions to stock or not stock adult vaccines. STUDY DESIGN: US physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and administrators of internal medicine, family medicine, obstetrics/gynecology, and multispecialty practices who were involved in vaccine stocking decisions (N = 125) completed a best-worst scaling survey online between February and April 2018. METHODS: Sixteen potential factors influencing stocking decisions were developed based on key informant interviews and focus groups. Respondents selected factors that were most and least important in vaccine stocking decisions. Relative importance scores for the best-worst scaling factors were calculated. Survey respondents described which vaccines their practice stocks and reasons for not stocking specific vaccines. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the respondent's involvement in vaccine decision making, role in the organization, specialty, and affiliation status, as well as practice characteristics such as practice size, insurance mix, and patient age mix. RESULTS: Relative importance scores for stocking vaccines were highest for "cost of purchasing vaccine stock," "expense of maintaining vaccine inventory," and "lack of adequate reimbursement for vaccine acquisition and administration." Most respondents (97%) stocked influenza vaccines, but stocking rates of other vaccines varied from 39% (meningococcal B) to 83% (tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis). Best-worst scaling results were consistent across respondent subgroups, although the range of vaccine types stocked differed by practice type. CONCLUSIONS: Economic factors associated with the purchase and maintenance of vaccine inventory and inadequate reimbursement for vaccination services were the most important to decision makers when considering whether to stock or not stock vaccines for adults.
OBJECTIVES: To identify the most important reasons underlying decisions to stock or not stock adult vaccines. STUDY DESIGN: US physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and administrators of internal medicine, family medicine, obstetrics/gynecology, and multispecialty practices who were involved in vaccine stocking decisions (N = 125) completed a best-worst scaling survey online between February and April 2018. METHODS: Sixteen potential factors influencing stocking decisions were developed based on key informant interviews and focus groups. Respondents selected factors that were most and least important in vaccine stocking decisions. Relative importance scores for the best-worst scaling factors were calculated. Survey respondents described which vaccines their practice stocks and reasons for not stocking specific vaccines. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the respondent's involvement in vaccine decision making, role in the organization, specialty, and affiliation status, as well as practice characteristics such as practice size, insurance mix, and patient age mix. RESULTS: Relative importance scores for stocking vaccines were highest for "cost of purchasing vaccine stock," "expense of maintaining vaccine inventory," and "lack of adequate reimbursement for vaccine acquisition and administration." Most respondents (97%) stocked influenza vaccines, but stocking rates of other vaccines varied from 39% (meningococcal B) to 83% (tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis). Best-worst scaling results were consistent across respondent subgroups, although the range of vaccine types stocked differed by practice type. CONCLUSIONS: Economic factors associated with the purchase and maintenance of vaccine inventory and inadequate reimbursement for vaccination services were the most important to decision makers when considering whether to stock or not stock vaccines for adults.
Authors: Jennifer L Liang; Tejpratap Tiwari; Pedro Moro; Nancy E Messonnier; Arthur Reingold; Mark Sawyer; Thomas A Clark Journal: MMWR Recomm Rep Date: 2018-04-27
Authors: Laura P Hurley; Carolyn B Bridges; Rafael Harpaz; Mandy A Allison; Sean T O'Leary; Lori A Crane; Michaela Brtnikova; Shannon Stokley; Brenda L Beaty; Andrea Jimenez-Zambrano; Faruque Ahmed; Craig Hales; Allison Kempe Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2014-02-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Sean T O'Leary; Laura E Riley; Megan C Lindley; Mandy A Allison; Lori A Crane; Laura P Hurley; Brenda L Beaty; Michaela Brtnikova; Margaret Collins; Alison P Albert; Allison K Fisher; Angela J Jiles; Allison Kempe Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2017-12-13 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Kei Long Cheung; Ben F M Wijnen; Ilene L Hollin; Ellen M Janssen; John F Bridges; Silvia M A A Evers; Mickael Hiligsmann Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Amy Schneeberg; Julie A Bettinger; Shelly McNeil; Brian J Ward; Marc Dionne; Curtis Cooper; Brenda Coleman; Mark Loeb; Ethan Rubinstein; Janet McElhaney; David W Scheifele; Scott A Halperin Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-05-12 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Kathleen L Dooling; Angela Guo; Manisha Patel; Grace M Lee; Kelly Moore; Edward A Belongia; Rafael Harpaz Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2018-01-26 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Lisa A Grohskopf; Leslie Z Sokolow; Karen R Broder; Emmanuel B Walter; Alicia M Fry; Daniel B Jernigan Journal: MMWR Recomm Rep Date: 2018-08-24