Literature DB >> 9631672

Home vaccination for children behind in their immunisation schedule: a randomised controlled trial.

L M Bond1, T M Nolan, R A Lester.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the effectiveness of a home vaccination service for children behind in their vaccination schedule.
DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial of nurse-administered vaccination at home. Children were allocated at random to the intervention or the control group before any contact with the parents was made.
SETTING: 10 council areas in north-west metropolitan Melbourne defined by 56 postcode zones. Six-week intervention period from November 1996. PARTICIPANTS: 405 children--all those in the study area (n = 2610) 90 days late (age 9 months) for their third diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis/poliomyelitis/Haemophilus influenzae type B (DTP/OPV/Hib) vaccination, or 120 days late (age 16 months) for their measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination, according to the Australia Childhood Immunisation Register. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of children completing DTP/OPV/Hib or MMR during the intervention period, and number up to date before intervention.
RESULTS: Verification of vaccination status with the parents revealed that 123 (60%) of the children in the intervention group and 113 (56%) of those in the control group were up to date with their vaccinations, leaving a study population of 81 (intervention group) and 88 (control group). Vaccination was achieved in 46 (57%) intervention children and 24 (27%) control children (risk ratio [RR], 2.08; 95% CI, 1.4-3.1; P < 0.001). For DTP/OPV/Hib, 18/32 (56%) intervention children and 12/36 (33%) control children were vaccinated, (P = 0.06). For MMR, 28/49 (57%) and 12/52 (23%) children were vaccinated, respectively (P < 0.001). Home vaccinations were completed with 26 families (including five siblings). The average cost per child vaccinated as a result of the home program was $92.52.
CONCLUSION: Home vaccination for children behind in their immunisation schedule is an effective, acceptable and relatively cheap method of completing recommended vaccinations. We recommend that a home vaccination program be widely implemented and made available, particularly for disadvantaged families.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9631672     DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1998.tb141411.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med J Aust        ISSN: 0025-729X            Impact factor:   7.738


  4 in total

1.  Measuring inequalities in immunization in Wales and the impact of interventions.

Authors:  Richard J Roberts; Anne McGowan; Simon Cottrell
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-10-02       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 2.  Systematic review of the incremental costs of interventions that increase immunization coverage.

Authors:  Sachiko Ozawa; Tatenda T Yemeke; Kimberly M Thompson
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 3.641

Review 3.  Increasing Coverage of Appropriate Vaccinations: A Community Guide Systematic Economic Review.

Authors:  Verughese Jacob; Sajal K Chattopadhyay; David P Hopkins; Jennifer Murphy Morgan; Adesola A Pitan; John M Clymer
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  Barriers to childhood immunisation: Findings from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children.

Authors:  Anna Pearce; Helen Marshall; Helen Bedford; John Lynch
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 3.641

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.