Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 11024332

Measuring immunization coverage.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Information about immunization coverage comes from five major sources: the National Immunization Survey, the National Health Interview Survey, retrospective school-entry surveys, the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures reported by managed care plans, and assessments performed on clinics and private practices. In this article, we describe the methodology of the major surveys, discuss technical and policy issues in measuring immunization coverage, and identify issues that must be addressed to harmonize immunization rates calculated from different sources. METHODS AND TOPICS: We describe the (1) design and methodology of the five major sources of immunization coverage assessments, (2) issues and controversies in measuring immunization coverage, and (3) preliminary efforts to harmonize calculation of immunization coverage. Technical and policy issues involve dose and interval requirements, which vaccines are included in the series-completion calculations, and who is excluded from each method of calculation. CONCLUSIONS: The purpose of measuring up-to-date immunization coverage determines the way that it is measured. The tension between measuring immunization coverage to monitor population protection against disease and measuring immunization coverage to determine how well the health care delivery system is working leads to different ways of selecting a sample and reporting coverage. These differences create confusion for the public policymakers who try to identify problems and to set priorities for immunization efforts. Although some unavoidable differences may occur because of differences in purpose of the measurement, greater harmonization is possible.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G Fairbrother, G L Freed, J W Thompson. 2000. Measuring immunization coverage.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0749-3797(00)00208-7

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The continuing challenge of lower respiratory tract infections.

Lower respiratory tract infections have been a major cause of morbidity and mortality among humans since the dawn of history. The initial hope that the era of antibiotics would remove this scourge has been replaced by the more realistic view that although antimicrobial agents represent a major therapeutic advance, they have not yet solved all of the problems of lower respiratory tract infections. The pneumococcus, for example, causes mortality in a certain number of patients despite antimicrobial therapy. An even greater challenge is being imposed by the emergence of antimicrobial resistance among important bacterial pathogens, especially Streptococcus pneumoniae.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.↗

Fifty years of epidemiology at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: significant and consequential.

The Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) was the vision of Alexander Langmuir, who developed a program with a vital mission to address an unmet need in the United States. The Communicable Disease Center, now the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC; Atlanta, Georgia), and the EIS steadily expanded from focusing on infectious disease to address chronic diseases, health statistics, occupational and environmental health and safety, injury prevention and control, and reproductive health. Langmuir recognized the need for epidemiologists to collaborate with others, initially from the laboratory and later including veterinarians, demographers, statisticians, nutritionists, behavioral and social scientists, industrial hygienists, and sanitarians. These partnerships stimulated the further evolution of the EIS Program to include sophisticated statistical analysis, economics, and the tools of the behavioral and social sciences. A mixture of analytical rigor and practical application characterizes the practice of epidemiology at CDC and in the EIS. Thus, the "significant" in the title of this paper refers to the analytical rigor of the public health approach and the validity of the results, while the "consequential" reflects the practical application of the results, trying to make a difference in health outcomes.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.↗