34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Vaccination Coverage by Age 24 Months Among Children Born in 2015 and 2016 — National Immunization Survey-Child, United States, 2016–2018

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that children be vaccinated against 14 potentially serious illnesses during the first 24 months of life ( 1 ). CDC used data from the National Immunization Survey-Child (NIS-Child) to assess vaccination coverage with the recommended number of doses of each vaccine at the national, state, territorial, and selected local levels* among children born in 2015 and 2016. Coverage by age 24 months was at least 90% nationally for ≥3 doses of poliovirus vaccine, ≥1 dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR), ≥3 doses of hepatitis B vaccine (HepB), and ≥1 dose of varicella vaccine, although MMR coverage was <90% in 20 states. Children were least likely to be up to date by age 24 months with ≥2 doses of influenza vaccine (56.6%). Only 1.3% of children born in 2015 and 2016 had received no vaccinations by the second birthday. Coverage was lower for uninsured children and for children insured by Medicaid than for those with private health insurance. Vaccination coverage can be increased by improving access to vaccine providers and eliminating missed opportunities to vaccinate children during health care visits. Increased use of local vaccination coverage data is needed to identify communities at higher risk for outbreaks of measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases. The NIS-Child is a random-digit–dialed telephone survey † of parents or guardians of children aged 19–35 months. Respondents are asked to provide contact information for all providers who administered vaccines to their children. With parental consent, a survey is mailed to each identified provider, requesting the child’s vaccination history. Multiple responses for an individual child are synthesized into a comprehensive vaccination history which is used to estimate vaccination coverage. To estimate coverage for the 25,059 children with adequate provider data § born in 2015 and 2016, NIS-Child data from 2016–2018 were combined; for survey year 2018, the Council of American Survey Research Organizations’ response rate was 24.6%, and 54.0% of children with household interviews had adequate provider data. ¶ With this report, CDC has transitioned to reporting NIS-Child data by birth year rather than survey year. Vaccination coverage by age 24 months was estimated using Kaplan-Meier (time to event) analysis to account for children who were aged <24 months on the date vaccination status was assessed. Coverage with ≥2 doses of hepatitis A vaccine (HepA) was assessed at 35 months (the maximum age included in the survey), because the second dose of HepA can be administered as late as age 41 months under the current schedule. Previous NIS-Child weighting methods were modified to optimize estimation by birth year and to reflect the shift from a dual landline and cellular telephone sample frame to an exclusively cellular telephone sampling frame in 2018.** Differences in coverage estimates were evaluated using t-tests on weighted data; p-values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Analyses were performed using SAS (version 9.4; SAS institute) and SUDAAN (version 11.0.1; Research Triangle Institute). No evidence for a change in survey accuracy from the 2017 to 2018 survey year was detected (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/coverage/childvaxview/pubs-presentations/NIS-child-vac-coverage-estimates-2014-2018-tables.html#supp-table-01) ( 2 ). National Vaccination Coverage Coverage by age 24 months was ≥90% for ≥3 doses of poliovirus vaccine (92.7%), ≥1 dose of MMR (90.4%), ≥3 doses of HepB (91.0%), and ≥1 dose of varicella vaccine (90.0%) (Table 1). Compared with estimates for children born in 2013 and 2014, coverage for children born during 2015–2016 increased for the HepB birth dose (3.2 percentage points), ≥1 dose of HepA (1.5 percentage points), and ≥2 doses of influenza vaccine (3.6 percentage points). Coverage with ≥2 HepA doses by age 35 months increased from 74.0% for children born during 2013–2014 to 76.6% for children born during 2015–2016. Children were least likely to be up to date by age 24 months with ≥2 doses of influenza vaccine (56.6%) and the combined 7-vaccine series †† (68.5%). TABLE 1 Estimated vaccination coverage by age 24 months* among children born during 2013–2016 for selected vaccines and doses — National Immunization Survey-Child, United States, 2014–2018 Vaccine/Dose % (95% CI) Birth years† Difference (2013–2014) to (2015–2016) 2013–2014 2015–2016 DTaP§ ≥3 doses 93.6 (93.0 to 94.2) 93.8 (93.1 to 94.5) 0.2 (−0.7 to 1.1) ≥4 doses 80.6 (79.7 to 81.6) 80.3 (79.0 to 81.5) −0.4 (−1.9 to 1.2) Poliovirus (≥3 doses) 91.7 (91.0 to 92.4) 92.7 (92.0 to 93.4) 1.0 (0.0 to 2.0) MMR (≥1 dose)¶ 90.0 (89.3 to 90.7) 90.4 (89.5 to 91.2) 0.3 (−0.8 to 1.5) Hib** Primary series 92.7 (92.1 to 93.3) 92.7 (91.8 to 93.5) 0.0 (−1.1 to 1.0) Full series 80.2 (79.3 to 81.1) 79.6 (78.3 to 80.9) −0.6 (−2.1 to 1.0) HepB Birth dose†† 71.8 (70.7 to 72.8) 75.0 (73.7 to 76.2) 3.2 (1.6 to 4.9)§§ ≥3 doses 90.9 (90.2 to 91.6) 91.0 (90.2 to 91.9) 0.1 (−1.0 to 1.2) Varicella (≥1 dose)¶ 89.3 (88.6 to 90.1) 90.0 (89.1 to 90.9) 0.7 (−0.5 to 1.8) PCV ≥3 doses 91.9 (91.2 to 92.5) 92.0 (91.1 to 92.8) 0.1 (−1.0 to 1.2) ≥4 doses 81.5 (80.6 to 82.4) 81.0 (79.8 to 82.3) −0.4 (−2.0 to 1.1) HepA ≥1 dose 83.2 (82.4 to 84.1) 84.7 (83.6 to 85.8) 1.5 (0.1 to 2.9)§§ ≥2 doses (by 35 months) 74.0 (72.8 to 75.3) 76.6 (74.7 to 78.4) 2.6 (0.4 to 4.8)§§ Rotavirus (by 8 months)¶¶ 72.4 (71.3 to 73.4) 73.6 (72.2 to 74.9) 1.2 (−0.5 to 2.9) Influenza (≥2 doses)*** 53.0 (51.9 to 54.1) 56.6 (55.2 to 58.0) 3.6 (1.8 to 5.4)§§ Combined 7-vaccine series††† 68.4 (67.3 to 69.5) 68.5 (67.1 to 69.9) 0.1 (−1.7 to 1.9) No vaccinations 1.1 (1.0 to 1.3) 1.3 (1.1 to 1.5) 0.1 (−0.2 to 0.4) Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; DTaP = diphtheria, tetanus toxoids, and acellular pertussis vaccine; HepA = hepatitis A vaccine; HepB = hepatitis B vaccine; Hib = Haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate vaccine; MMR = measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine; PCV = pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. * Includes vaccinations received by age 24 months (before the day the child turns 24 months), except for the HepB birth dose, rotavirus vaccination, and ≥2 HepA doses by 35 months. For all vaccines, except the HepB birth dose and rotavirus vaccination, the Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate vaccination coverage to account for children whose vaccination history was ascertained before age 24 months (35 months for ≥2 HepA doses). † Data for the 2013 birth year are from survey years 2014, 2015, and 2016; data for the 2014 birth year are from survey years 2015, 2016, and 2017; data for the 2015 birth year are from survey years 2016, 2017, and 2018; data for the 2016 birth year are considered preliminary and come from survey years 2017 and 2018 (data from survey year 2019 are not yet available). § Includes children who might have received diphtheria and tetanus toxoids vaccine or diphtheria, tetanus toxoids, and pertussis vaccine. ¶ Includes children who might have received measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella combination vaccine. ** Hib primary series: receipt of ≥2 or ≥3 doses, depending on product type received; full series: primary series and booster dose, which includes receipt of ≥3 or ≥4 doses, depending on product type received. †† One dose HepB administered from birth through age 3 days. §§ Statistically significantly different from 0 at p<0.05. ¶¶ Includes ≥2 doses of Rotarix monovalent rotavirus vaccine, or ≥3 doses of RotaTeq pentavalent rotavirus vaccine. The maximum age for the final rotavirus dose is 8 months, 0 days. *** Doses must be at least 24 days apart (4 weeks with a 4-day grace period). ††† The combined 7-vaccine series (4:3:1:3*:3:1:4) includes ≥4 doses of DTaP, ≥3 doses of poliovirus vaccine, ≥1 dose of measles-containing vaccine, the full series of Hib (≥3 or ≥4 doses, depending on product type), ≥3 doses of HepB, ≥1 dose of varicella vaccine, and ≥4 doses of PCV. Vaccination Coverage by Selected Characteristics and Geographic Location For most of the vaccines assessed, uninsured children, and children with Medicaid or other nonprivate insurance, had lower coverage than did privately insured children (Table 2). Compared with privately insured children, coverage disparities were largest among uninsured children, ranging from 7.8 percentage points for the HepB birth dose to 33.8 percentage points for ≥2 doses of influenza vaccine. The proportion of children who received no vaccinations was higher among uninsured children (7.4%) than among those with private insurance (0.8%). Disparities were also observed for race/ethnicity (Supplementary Table 1, https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/81681), poverty level (Supplementary Table 2, https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/81682), and metropolitan statistical area §§ (MSA) (Supplementary Table 2, https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/81682) but tended to be smaller than those seen with health insurance status. Coverage varied widely by state/local area for many vaccines (Supplementary Table 3, https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/81683). Coverage with ≥1 dose of MMR was <90% in 20 states; only six states had coverage of 94% or higher (Figure). TABLE 2 Estimated vaccination coverage by age 24 months* among children born during 2015–2016, † by selected vaccines and doses and health insurance status § — National Immunization Survey-Child, United States, 2016–2018 Vaccine/Dose Health insurance status, % (95% CI) Private only (referent) (n = 12,702) Any Medicaid (n = 9,442) Other insurance (n = 2,141) Uninsured (n = 774) DTaP¶ ≥3 doses 96.9 (96.3–97.5) 91.8 (90.5–93.1)** 93.9 (92.2–95.3)** 80.6 (75.2–85.5)** ≥4 doses 87.1 (85.7–88.5) 75.8 (73.6–77.9)** 78.8 (75.4–82.0)** 59.8 (53.8–65.9)** Poliovirus (≥3 doses) 96.1 (95.4–96.7) 90.7 (89.3–92.0)** 92.3 (90.4–94.0)** 79.3 (73.9–84.3)** MMR (≥1 dose)†† 93.7 (92.8–94.5) 88.6 (87.0–90.1)** 89.8 (87.6–91.8)** 73.2 (67.4–78.7)** Hib§§ Primary series 95.7 (94.5–96.8) 90.7 (89.3–92.1)** 93.7 (91.9–95.1) 78.4 (72.8–83.5)** Full series 85.5 (83.7–87.1) 75.9 (73.8–78.0)** 79.1 (75.8–82.1)** 58.1 (52.1–64.2)** HepB Birth dose¶¶ 75.6 (73.9–77.2) 76.1 (74.0–78.1) 68.2 (64.3–71.9)** 67.8 (61.9–73.2)** ≥3 doses 93.0 (91.8–94.0) 90.0 (88.5–91.4)** 91.9 (89.9–93.6) 78.6 (73.3–83.5)** Varicella (≥1 dose)†† 93.2 (92.3–94.0) 88.6 (86.9–90.1)** 89.1 (86.8–91.2)** 70.3 (64.5–75.9)** PCV ≥3 doses 94.9 (93.5–96.0) 90.3 (88.9–91.7)** 92.0 (90.1–93.7)** 77.2 (71.7–82.4)** ≥4 doses 87.3 (85.6–88.8) 76.8 (74.7–78.9)** 80.9 (77.7–83.9)** 62.5 (56.7–68.3)** HepA ≥1 dose 87.5 (85.9–89.0) 83.7 (81.9–85.4)** 84.0 (81.2–86.6)** 65.5 (59.7–71.3)** ≥2 doses (by 35 months) 80.5 (77.9–83.1) 75.2 (72.2–78.0)** 76.8 (71.3–81.9) 48.2 (41.0–56.0)** Rotavirus (by 8 months)*** 83.5 (81.9–85.0) 65.9 (63.5–68.1)** 72.4 (68.5–76.0)** 59.8 (53.8–65.5)** Influenza (≥2 doses)††† 68.5 (66.6–70.4) 48.2 (45.9–50.5)** 52.7 (48.6–56.9)** 34.7 (29.4–40.7)** Combined 7-vaccine series§§§ 75.4 (73.5–77.2) 64.3 (62.0–66.6)** 65.9 (62.1–69.6)** 46.7 (40.9–52.9)** No vaccinations 0.8 (0.6–1.0) 1.2 (0.9–1.6) 1.8 (1.2–2.6)** 7.4 (4.7–10.7)** Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; DTaP = diphtheria, tetanus toxoids, and acellular pertussis vaccine; HepA = hepatitis A vaccine; HepB = hepatitis B vaccine; Hib = Haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate vaccine; MMR = measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine; PCV = pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. * Includes vaccinations received by age 24 months (before the day the child turns 24 months), except for the HepB birth dose, rotavirus vaccination, and ≥2 HepA doses by 35 months. For all vaccines, except the HepB birth dose and rotavirus vaccination, the Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate vaccination coverage to account for children whose vaccination history was ascertained before age 24 months (35 months for ≥2 HepA doses). † Data for the 2015 birth year are from survey years 2016, 2017, and 2018; data for the 2016 birth year are considered preliminary and come from survey years 2017 and 2018 (data from survey year 2019 are not yet available). § Children’s health insurance status was reported by parent or guardian. “Other insurance” includes the Children’s Health Insurance Program, military insurance, coverage via the Indian Health Service, and any other type of health insurance not mentioned elsewhere. ¶ Includes children who might have received diphtheria and tetanus toxoids vaccine or diphtheria, tetanus toxoids, and pertussis vaccine. ** Statistically significant (p<0.05) difference compared with the referent group. †† Includes children who might have received measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella combination vaccine. §§ Hib primary series: receipt of ≥2 or ≥3 doses, depending on product type received; full series: primary series and booster dose, which includes receipt of ≥3 or ≥4 doses, depending on product type received. ¶¶ One dose HepB administered from birth through age 3 days. *** Includes ≥2 doses of Rotarix monovalent rotavirus vaccine (RV1), or ≥3 doses of RotaTeq pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (RV5). The maximum age for the final rotavirus dose is 8 months, 0 days. ††† Doses must be at least 24 days apart (4 weeks with a 4-day grace period). §§§ The combined 7-vaccine series (4:3:1:3*:3:1:4) includes ≥4 doses of DTaP, ≥3 doses of poliovirus vaccine, ≥1 dose of measles-containing vaccine, the full series of Hib (≥3 or ≥4 doses, depending on product type), ≥3 doses of HepB, ≥1 dose of varicella vaccine, and ≥4 doses of PCV. FIGURE Estimated coverage with ≥1 dose of MMR by age 24 months among children born 2015–2016* — National Immunization Survey-Child, United States, 2016–2018 Abbreviations: DC = District of Columbia; MMR = measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine. * Data for the 2015 birth year are from survey years 2016, 2017, and 2018; data for the 2016 birth year are considered preliminary and come from survey years 2017 and 2018 (data from survey year 2019 are not yet available). The figure is a map of the United States showing the estimated coverage with ≥1 dose of MMR by age 24 months among children born 2015–2016, using data from the National Immunization Survey-Child from 2016 to 2018. Trends in Vaccination Coverage Vaccination coverage was stable by single birth year from 2011 through 2016 (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/coverage/childvaxview/pubs-presentations/NIS-child-vac-coverage-estimates-2014-2018-tables.html#supp-figure-01), except for an increase in ≥2 doses of HepA by age 35 months from 71.1% (2011) to 76.6% (2016). The proportion of children that received no vaccinations by age 24 months increased slightly across birth years 2011 through 2016, with an estimated change per year of 0.09 percentage points (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/coverage/childvaxview/pubs-presentations/NIS-child-vac-coverage-estimates-2014-2018-tables.html#supp-figure-02). Only 1.3% of children born in 2015 and 2016 received no vaccinations (Table 1). Discussion Vaccination coverage by the second birthday among children born during 2015–2016 remained high, with small increases in coverage with hepatitis A and B and influenza vaccines; only 1.3% of children received no vaccinations. However, several opportunities for improvement were apparent. Coverage was lower for children without private health insurance, especially those with no insurance, as well as those living below the poverty level and in more rural areas. Vaccination coverage also varied by state, with 20 states having MMR coverage <90%. Coverage with ≥2 doses of influenza vaccine was the lowest among all recommended childhood vaccines. The importance of achieving and sustaining high vaccination coverage across all communities is illustrated by the 22 measles outbreaks occurring in the United States in 2019, with 1,249 measles cases identified during January 1–October 1, 2019 ( 3 ). Most cases have been among persons who were not vaccinated against measles. Pockets of low vaccination coverage, because of lack of access to vaccination services or to hesitancy resulting from the spread of inaccurate information about vaccines, increase the likelihood of a measles outbreak. Strategies are needed to increase access to vaccination services, identify communities at risk, and implement initiatives to counter inaccurate vaccine information ( 4 ). Lower vaccination coverage among children who are uninsured, insured by Medicaid or other nonprivate insurance, living below the poverty level, and living in rural areas suggests challenges with access to affordable vaccinations or optimal vaccination services. Uninsured children are eligible for vaccine at no cost through the Vaccines for Children ¶¶ program, but efforts to promote the program might not be reaching this population and therefore might need to be modified. Targeted programs to address logistical issues such as expanded office hours and transportation to vaccination appointments could facilitate access to vaccination services, regardless of the child’s type of insurance. Providers need to use every patient encounter to screen for and offer vaccinations. An analysis of NIS-Child data for children born during 2005–2015 found that disparities in coverage with ≥4 doses of diphtheria, tetanus toxoids, and acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) for those with Medicaid compared with those with private health insurance could have been reduced by 42% had opportunities for receipt of the fourth DTaP dose not been missed during visits when other vaccinations were received ( 5 ). The transition to reporting by birth year rather than by survey year more directly assesses recent changes in vaccination coverage and provides more interpretable estimates and more accurate comparisons to evaluate immunization information systems ( 2 , 6 , 7 ). With a standard age at assessment (e.g., 24 months), estimates by birth year might be slightly lower for some vaccines than were estimates by survey year, which on average, assessed vaccination by age 27.5 months. Trends in vaccination coverage by birth year and survey year are similar ( 8 ). Other changes include addition of assessment of ≥2 HepA doses by age 35 months to better reflect current ACIP recommendations and the addition of vaccination with 2 doses of influenza vaccine by age 24 months.*** The findings in this report are subject to at least two limitations. First, as with previous NIS-Child estimates by survey year, vaccination coverage estimates by birth year might be biased because of an incomplete sample frame, nonresponse, and underascertainment of vaccination ( 6 ). No evidence for change in survey accuracy from 2017 to 2018 was detected. Second, starting in 2018, the NIS-Child sample was drawn only from cellular telephone numbers. Vaccination coverage trends should thus be viewed with caution, although the effect of dropping the landline sample is likely small. Improvements in childhood vaccination coverage will require that parents and other caregivers have access to vaccination providers and believe in the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Increased opportunity for vaccination can be facilitated through expanded access to health insurance, greater promotion of available vaccines through the Vaccines for Children program, and solutions to logistical challenges such as transportation, child care, and time off from work. Providers can improve vaccination coverage overall and reduce disparities by administering all recommended vaccines during office visits. Compelling and accessible educational materials, combined with effective techniques for providers to use when discussing vaccination, can be used to counter inaccurate claims and communicate the value of vaccines in protecting the health of children ( 9 ). In addition, actionable data at a local level are needed so that interventions can be targeted to areas at risk for outbreaks of measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases. More immunization information systems will contribute to this effort because they streamline their data collection processes and improve data quality ( 10 ). ††† Given low survey response rates, CDC is working to better assess accuracy of NIS-Child vaccination coverage estimates, evaluate new survey approaches (e.g., switching to an address-based sample frame), and integrate data from immunization information systems and, potentially, other data sources ( 7 ). Summary What is already known about this topic? The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends that children be vaccinated against 14 potentially serious illnesses before age 24 months. What is added by this report? Among children born in 2015 and 2016, coverage was high and stable for most vaccines. There were sociodemographic disparities in coverage, especially by health insurance status. The proportion of completely unvaccinated children remained small. What are the implications for public health practice? Coverage can be improved with increased access to providers and health insurance, administration of all recommended vaccines during office visits, and more effective patient education about vaccine safety and efficacy. Actionable local level data are a priority for creating targeted interventions to prevent outbreaks of measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases.

          Related collections

          Most cited references4

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Socioeconomic differences in childhood vaccination in developed countries: a systematic review of quantitative studies.

          The reasons for vaccine hesitancy and its relation to individual socioeconomic status (SES) must be better understood. Areas covered: This review focused on developed countries with programs addressing major financial barriers to vaccination access. We systematically reviewed differences by SES in uptake of publicly funded childhood vaccines and in cognitive determinants (beliefs, attitudes) of parental decisions about vaccinating their children. Using the PRISMA statement to guide this review, we searched three electronic databases from January 2000 through April 2016. We retained 43 articles; 34 analyzed SES differences in childhood vaccine uptake, 7 examined differences in its cognitive determinants, and 2 both outcomes. Expert commentary: Results suggest that barriers to vaccination access persist among low-SES children in several settings. Vaccination programs could be improved to provide all mandatory and recommended vaccines 100% free of charge, in both public organizations and private practices, and to reimburse vaccine administration. Multicomponent interventions adapted to the context could also be effective in reducing these inequalities. For specific vaccines (notably for measles, mumps, and rubella), in UK and Germany, uptake was lowest among the most affluent. Interventions carefully tailored to respond to specific concerns of vaccine-hesitant parents, without reinforcing hesitancy, are needed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Influences on Immunization Decision-Making among US Parents of Young Children.

            Objectives This study assessed influences on vaccination decisions among parents of young children and examined common vaccination information and advice sources. Methods Using panel samples of parents of children under 7 years, web-based surveys were conducted in 2012 (n = 2603) and 2014 (n = 2518). A vaccine decision-making typology (non-hesitant acceptors, hesitant acceptors, delayers, and refusers) was established and weighted population estimates of potential factors influencing parental vaccination decision (e.g., provider influence, source of information and advice) were computed by year and decision type. Results Delayers and refusers were more likely than acceptors to know someone whose child experienced a severe reaction to a vaccine or delayed/refused vaccine(s). High proportions of delayers (2012: 33.4%, 2014: 33.9%) and refusers (2012: 49.6%, 2014: 58.6%) reported selecting their healthcare provider based on whether the provider would allow them to delay/refuse vaccines. Providers were the most frequently reported trusted vaccine information source among all parents, though more often by acceptors than refusers (2012, 2014: p < 0.01). We found differing patterns of provider advice-seeking and internet as a reliable vaccine information source by group. Among those who had considered delay/refusal, trust in their healthcare provider's advice was the most common reason cited for their decision reversal. Conclusions for Practice Provider trust and communication along with varying degrees of personal-network influences likely contribute to immunization decisions of parents. Vaccine hesitant parents often seek providers amenable to accommodating their vaccine beliefs. Providers may benefit from vaccine communication training as their recommendations may influence hesitant parents to immunize their children.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Progress in Childhood Vaccination Data in Immunization Information Systems — United States, 2013–2016

              In 2016, 55 jurisdictions in 49 states and six cities in the United States* used immunization information systems (IISs) to collect and manage immunization data and support vaccination providers and immunization programs. To monitor progress toward achieving IIS program goals, CDC surveys jurisdictions through an annual self-administered IIS Annual Report (IISAR). Data from the 2013–2016 IISARs were analyzed to assess progress made in four priority areas: 1) data completeness, 2) bidirectional exchange of data with electronic health record systems, 3) clinical decision support for immunizations, and 4) ability to generate childhood vaccination coverage estimates. IIS participation among children aged 4 months through 5 years increased from 90% in 2013 to 94% in 2016, and 33 jurisdictions reported ≥95% of children aged 4 months through 5 years participating in their IIS in 2016. Bidirectional messaging capacity in IISs increased from 25 jurisdictions in 2013 to 37 in 2016. In 2016, nearly all jurisdictions (52 of 55) could provide automated provider-level coverage reports, and 32 jurisdictions reported that their IISs could send vaccine forecasts to providers via Health Level 7 (HL7) messaging, up from 17 in 2013. Incremental progress was made in each area since 2013, but continued effort is needed to implement these critical functionalities among all IISs. Success in these priority areas, as defined by the IIS Functional Standards ( 1 ), bolsters clinicians’ and public health practitioners’ ability to attain high vaccination coverage in pediatric populations, and prepares IISs to develop more advanced functionalities to support state/local immunization services. Success in these priority areas also supports the achievement of federal immunization objectives, including the use of IISs as supplemental sampling frames for vaccination coverage surveys like the National Immunization Survey (NIS)-Child, reducing data collection costs, and supporting increased precision of state-level estimates. IISs, also known as immunization registries, are confidential, computerized, population-based systems that collect and consolidate vaccination data from providers in a jurisdiction ( 2 ). IISs increase vaccination rates and reduce vaccine-preventable diseases by enabling effective interventions (e.g., client reminder and recall, provider assessment and feedback), tracking patient immunizations, estimating vaccination coverage, and facilitating vaccine management and accountability ( 3 ). For IISs to support real-time immunization efforts both at the population level and at the point of clinical care, these systems need to capture complete childhood immunization data. To promote IIS functionality and data quality, CDC and external partners, including state/local immunization programs and IIS vendors, developed 27 Functional Standards to guide IIS development from 2013 to 2017 ( 1 ). CDC monitors progress toward these Functional Standards through a self-administered survey known as the IIS Annual Report (IISAR). During 2016–2017, CDC issued guidance to jurisdictions identifying four priority areas (covering multiple Functional Standards) that immunization programs should focus on before developing other IIS functionalities. The four priority areas are: 1) data completeness for children aged 0–6 years (Functional Standard 1.1, 3.1); 2) bidirectional information exchange with electronic health record systems (1.4, 1.5); 3) pediatric clinical decision support for immunizations (1.2), and 4) ability to generate jurisdictional and provider-level childhood vaccination coverage estimates (5.2). This report assesses progress toward achieving success in these four priority areas from 2013 to 2016, using data from the 2013–2016 IISARs. IISAR is a secure web-based survey instrument distributed annually to state, local, and territorial immunization programs by CDC. Immunization programs self-report their IIS’s progress toward meeting the Functional Standards during the previous calendar year. Data completeness comprises four measures: birth record capture, child participation, provider participation, and IIS coverage estimate comparison to NIS-Child. These measures represent the ability of an IIS to capture the population within the jurisdiction as well as all vaccinations administered. Birth record capture is defined as the ability of an IIS to create patient records for all children who are born in a jurisdiction. Child participation is defined as the number of children aged 4 months through 5 years with ≥2 vaccinations recorded in the IIS, divided by the total U.S. Census–based population estimate for the same age group in that jurisdiction. Provider participation is defined as the number of vaccination provider sites enrolled in an IIS that reported ≥1 vaccine doses to the IIS within the last 6 months of the preceding calendar year. IIS participation among the >40,000 provider sites served by the publicly funded Vaccines for Children (VFC) program † was analyzed. The comparison of IIS coverage estimates with estimates from NIS-Child measures an IIS’s success in capturing complete population and vaccination information within a jurisdiction. § Across all IIS jurisdictions, 106% ¶ of U.S. births were captured in IIS in 2016, an increase from 102% in 2013. Childhood IIS participation increased from 90% in 2013 to 94% in 2016, which approaches the Healthy People 2020 objective of ≥95% child IIS participation. Among the 55 jurisdictions, 33 (60%) reported that ≥95% of children aged 4 months through 5 years in their geographic area participated in their IIS in 2016, compared with 24 (44%) in 2013. In 2016, provider participation was 85% among VFC provider sites enrolled in an IIS. The number of VFC provider sites enrolled in an IIS decreased from 41,710 in 2014 to 41,393 in 2016. Among these enrolled sites, the number of VFC provider sites participating in an IIS increased slightly from 33,266 in 2013 to 34,662 in 2016 (Figure 1). FIGURE 1 Number and percentage of Vaccines for Children program provider sites enrolled and participating* in an Immunization Information System (IIS), by year — IIS Annual Report, United States, 2013–2016 * Participation is defined as having submitted information to the IIS about administering ≥1 vaccine dose in the last 6 months of the preceding calendar year. Provider sites must be enrolled in an IIS to participate in the IIS. The figure above is a combination line and bar graph showing the number and percentage of Vaccines for Children program provider sites enrolled and participating in an Immunization Information System, by year, in the United States during 2013–2016. For the combined 7-vaccine series,** the number of jurisdictions with IIS estimates within 10 percentage points of the corresponding NIS-Child coverage estimates increased from 17 in 2013 to 25 in 2016 (Figure 2). In 2016, 30 IISs had 7-vaccine series coverage estimates that were at least 10 percentage points lower than the corresponding NIS-Child estimate. FIGURE 2 Percentage point differences between National Immunization Survey (NIS)-Child and Immunization Information Systems (IISs) for combined 7-vaccine series* completion — IIS Annual Report, United States, 2013–2016 * ≥4 doses of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis vaccine; ≥3 doses of poliovirus vaccine; ≥1 doses of measles-containing vaccine; Haemophilus influenzae type B vaccine full series; ≥3 doses of hepatitis B vaccine; ≥1 dose of varicella vaccine; and ≥4 doses of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. The figure above is a bar graph showing percentage point differences between National Immunization Survey-Child and Immunization Information Systems for combined 7-vaccine series completion in the United States during 2013–2016. Bidirectional information exchange allows providers to submit immunization data directly from electronic health records (EHRs) to IISs, and to request and receive immunization information from IISs into EHRs for the patients they serve. HL7 messaging is a nationally recognized platform-independent standard that supports the bidirectional exchange of health-related information, including immunization-related messaging. In 2016, 91% of jurisdictions had an IIS that used HL7 version 2.5.1 to receive vaccination histories from providers and returned acknowledgment messages, compared with 87% in 2013. Furthermore, in 2016, 67% of jurisdictions had an IIS that received requests for vaccination histories and returned responses to those requests, compared with 45% in 2013 (Figure 3). Finally, in 2016, 78% of jurisdictions had an IIS that could transmit immunization data using Simple Object Access Protocol, the CDC-endorsed transport standard for the exchange of immunization information, compared with 75% of jurisdictions reporting this capability in 2013 ( 4 ). FIGURE 3 Percentage of Immunization Information Systems (IISs) with unidirectional and bidirectional information exchange functionality* — United States, 2013–2016 * Unidirectional functionality is defined as the ability to receive vaccination histories (message type: VXU) from providers and return acknowledgment messages (message type: ACK), and bidirectional functionality is defined as the ability to receive requests for vaccination histories (message type: QBP) and return responses to those requests (message type: RSP). Achievement of unidirectional functionality is a prerequisite to achieving bidirectional functionality. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/iis/technical-guidance/downloads/hl7guide-1-5-2014-11.pdf. The figure above is a line graph showing the percentage of Immunization Information Systems with unidirectional and bidirectional information exchange functionality in the United States during 2013–2016. Clinical Decision Support (CDS) functionalities enable providers to evaluate the validity of vaccine doses administered to patients and forecast future vaccines that will be needed, based on recommendations developed by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. From 2013 to 2016, all jurisdictions’ IISs had CDS capabilities that were available to providers through the IIS’s user interface. In 2016, 58% (32 of 55) of jurisdictions reported sending a vaccine forecast to another system via HL7 messaging. This is an 87% increase from 2013, when 31% (17 of 55) of jurisdictions reported performing this task. IISs can be used to generate coverage estimates for childhood vaccinations at the jurisdictional level (e.g., state, postal code, or county) and at the provider level to identify vulnerable subpopulations. In 2016, 89% of jurisdictions (49 of 55) provided a predefined, automatic report on immunization coverage by geography. This is 11% higher than in 2013, when 80% of jurisdictions provided these reports. In 2016, 95% of jurisdictions (52 of 55) provided a predefined, automatic report on immunization coverage by provider site. This is 7% higher than in 2013, when 89% of jurisdictions reported providing these reports. Discussion Since 2013, incremental progress was noted in each of the four priority areas for immunization programs that were assessed. Notably, the increased number of jurisdictions that had IIS estimates that were within 10 percentage points of the corresponding NIS-Child coverage estimate suggests that more jurisdictions have IISs with more complete data, or at least that the IIS and NIS are similar in their ability to estimate vaccination coverage for that jurisdiction’s population. Jurisdictions with IIS coverage estimates that were at least 10 percentage points lower than the corresponding NIS-Child estimate might have less complete IIS data, particularly at sites with the largest IIS–NIS discrepancies. By prioritizing resources to the identified priority areas, jurisdictions can make substantial progress in this important subset of activities rather than incremental progress across all Functional Standards. Improvements in priority areas can also support a broader range of immunization services; for example, improved data completeness for children aged <6 years would strengthen immunization delivery for this population (Functional Standard 1.1–1.3) and increase VFC program accountability (2.1–2.6). In addition, as IISs identify more children and record all doses administered within their jurisdiction, IIS-based vaccination coverage estimates will be able to supplement estimates from surveys like the NIS-Child ( 5 ). IISs are integral components of routine clinical practice and public health surveillance for immunization. Availability of more complete IIS data also offer many benefits to health care providers and public health practitioners, including consolidating patients’ vaccination histories, identifying undervaccinated subgroups, and forecasting the needs of individual patients for recommended vaccines ( 3 ). Standards and best practices exist that can guide IIS development and maintenance activities, including the IIS Functional Standards ( 1 ), national standards for the electronic exchange of immunization information, †† CDS resources, §§ and data quality best practices. ¶¶ Alignment with these standards and best practices reduces variability across IISs and helps IISs use resources more efficiently to provide the most value for immunization programs, providers, patients, and parents. Continuously monitoring the progress of each IIS can also help jurisdictions identify areas for improvement. Such monitoring is done using the IISAR or other tools, such as an initiative to assess, measure, and validate IISs that was recently developed by the American Immunization Registry Association ( 6 ). The findings in this report are subject to at least three limitations. First, results were self-reported and might be subject to response bias. Second, only a subset of the Functional Standards pertaining to the four priority areas was analyzed in this report; this evaluation was not a comprehensive analysis of the progress made in all Functional Standards. Finally, reported capacity of a functionality does not necessarily indicate active utilization of that functionality. This was the first systematic assessment of progress in four priority areas that are foundational for IISs. Incorporating strategies such as prioritizing activities, aligning resources, implementing best practices, adhering to national standards, and implementing independent third-party assessments can promote consistency across jurisdictions, encourage program accountability, ensure quality standards, and help IISs more rapidly attain their full potential to facilitate complete vaccination of U.S. children against vaccine-preventable diseases. Summary What is already known about this topic? In 2012, 86% of U.S. children aged 4 months through 5 years (19.5 million) had ≥2 doses recorded in immunization information systems (IISs). What is added by this report? From 2013 to 2016, the percentage of children with ≥2 immunizations recorded in IISs increased from 90% to 94%, approaching the Healthy People 2020 objective of ≥95%. However, variability in IIS pediatric data quality persists: 30 of 55 IISs produced 7-vaccine series coverage rates that were at least 10 percentage points lower than the corresponding National Immunization Survey-Child coverage rate in 2016, suggesting incompleteness of IIS data. Across all IISs, there was progress in achieving bidirectional information exchange with electronic health record systems, pediatric clinical decision support for immunizations, and the ability to generate jurisdictional and provider-level childhood vaccination coverage estimates. What are the implications for public health practice? To realize the full benefits of IISs, immunization programs need to implement strategies that prioritize and align resources to achieve functionality and high data quality in four focus areas: 1) pediatric data completeness, 2) bidirectional data exchange with electronic health record systems, 3) clinical decision support for immunizations, and 4) ability to generate childhood vaccination coverage estimates. Strategies such as implementing best practices, adhering to national standards, and incorporating independent third-party assessments can reduce variability across IISs, and support IIS’ full potential to facilitate complete vaccination of U.S. children against vaccine-preventable diseases.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
                MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep.
                Centers for Disease Control MMWR Office
                0149-2195
                1545-861X
                October 18 2019
                October 18 2019
                October 18 2019
                October 18 2019
                : 68
                : 41
                : 913-918
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Immunization Services Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC.
                Article
                10.15585/mmwr.mm6841e2
                0d1cb3d5-c9db-483e-b11c-710675d04d18
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article