Justin Chin1,2, YaQun Zhou3, Chijen L Chen4, Christine M Lomiguen5, Suzanne McClelland6, Mary Lee-Wong6. 1. Medicine, Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Erie, USA. 2. Family Medicine, LifeLong Medical Care, Richmond, USA. 3. Primary Care, Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine, New York, USA. 4. Internal Medicine, Zhongshan School of Medicine at Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, CHN. 5. Pathology, Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Erie, USA. 6. Allergy and Immunology, Mount Sinai Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Many comparisons have been made on the effect and impact of COVID-19 on influenza pandemics of history. Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that the strategies utilized by healthcare providers to improve influenza vaccination rates can similarly be applied to the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine. The purpose of this study was to determine the rationale of low influenza vaccination rates in an urban allergy clinic and how to improve patient education and knowledge regarding the importance of influenza vaccination. A three-year comparison of interventions is presented as well as its application to future COVID-19 vaccinations. METHODS: This study was performed at an outpatient allergy and clinical immunology practice (MSBI) with hospital affiliation in New York City, New York. A quality improvement medical committee was formed to optimize influenza vaccination rates to greater than 71% and established standardized protocols regarding patient intake workflows, vaccine counseling, and documentation. Patient records from four providers were used for this study to compare pre-and post-intervention rates. RESULTS: 984 patients met inclusion criteria, with a normal distribution of ages (18-80), race, and sex. Average vaccination rates prior to the intervention were 9.25-13.60%. The average vaccination rate after the intervention was 91.34%. DISCUSSION: The MSBI quality improvement study identified key areas to address in improving influenza vaccination rates. Vaccine hesitancy, public misinformation, and ambivalence surrounding vaccination with egg allergies or during a subcutaneous immunotherapy injection were all topics addressed during the 2018-2019 intervention year. Additional attention was also put toward provider education and standardization of documentation. Shared decision making and intensive education/outreach efforts are needed by physicians and patients alike to overcome vaccine hesitancy. In comparing this to upcoming COVID-19 vaccine challenges, similar barriers will likely also need to be addressed. Greater research is needed to understand patient motivations regarding hesitancy specific to the COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: As evidenced in the yearly battle with influenza and now the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become essential to identify and implement multi-level strategies to maximize vaccination rates, especially amid a global pandemic. With COVID-19 vaccines reaching emergency approval stages, it is important for healthcare providers to start creating workflows and strategies to address patient inquiries. The influenza vaccination quality improvement project presented here can be used as a guideline for future evaluations of COVID-19 vaccination efforts.
INTRODUCTION: Many comparisons have been made on the effect and impact of COVID-19 on influenza pandemics of history. Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that the strategies utilized by healthcare providers to improve influenza vaccination rates can similarly be applied to the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine. The purpose of this study was to determine the rationale of low influenza vaccination rates in an urban allergy clinic and how to improve patient education and knowledge regarding the importance of influenza vaccination. A three-year comparison of interventions is presented as well as its application to future COVID-19 vaccinations. METHODS: This study was performed at an outpatientallergy and clinical immunology practice (MSBI) with hospital affiliation in New York City, New York. A quality improvement medical committee was formed to optimize influenza vaccination rates to greater than 71% and established standardized protocols regarding patient intake workflows, vaccine counseling, and documentation. Patient records from four providers were used for this study to compare pre-and post-intervention rates. RESULTS: 984 patients met inclusion criteria, with a normal distribution of ages (18-80), race, and sex. Average vaccination rates prior to the intervention were 9.25-13.60%. The average vaccination rate after the intervention was 91.34%. DISCUSSION: The MSBI quality improvement study identified key areas to address in improving influenza vaccination rates. Vaccine hesitancy, public misinformation, and ambivalence surrounding vaccination with egg allergies or during a subcutaneous immunotherapy injection were all topics addressed during the 2018-2019 intervention year. Additional attention was also put toward provider education and standardization of documentation. Shared decision making and intensive education/outreach efforts are needed by physicians and patients alike to overcome vaccine hesitancy. In comparing this to upcoming COVID-19 vaccine challenges, similar barriers will likely also need to be addressed. Greater research is needed to understand patient motivations regarding hesitancy specific to the COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: As evidenced in the yearly battle with influenza and now the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become essential to identify and implement multi-level strategies to maximize vaccination rates, especially amid a global pandemic. With COVID-19 vaccines reaching emergency approval stages, it is important for healthcare providers to start creating workflows and strategies to address patient inquiries. The influenza vaccination quality improvement project presented here can be used as a guideline for future evaluations of COVID-19 vaccination efforts.
Authors: Eunha Shim; Kenneth J Smith; Mary Patricia Nowalk; Jonathan M Raviotta; Shawn T Brown; Jay DePasse; Richard K Zimmerman Journal: Vaccine Date: 2018-01-09 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Sara S Kim; Brendan Flannery; Ivo M Foppa; Jessie R Chung; Mary Patricia Nowalk; Richard K Zimmerman; Manjusha Gaglani; Arnold S Monto; Emily T Martin; Edward A Belongia; Huong Q McLean; Michael L Jackson; Lisa A Jackson; Manish Patel Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 20.999