Biomedical subjects

Kate M Shaw

Publications and source records attributed to Kate M Shaw.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Impact of state vaccine financing policy on uptake of heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine.

OBJECTIVE: We examined heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) uptake among children aged 19 to 35 months in the United States and determined how uptake rates differed by state vaccine financing policy. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2001-2003 National Immunization Survey. States that changed their vaccine financing policy between 2001 and 2003 (n=17) were excluded from analysis. Logistic regression was performed to identify the association between state vaccine financing policy and receipt of 3 or more doses of PCV7 after control for demographic characteristics. RESULTS: The proportion of children receiving 3 or more doses increased from 6.7% in 2001 to 69.0% in 2003. After controlling for demographic characteristics, children residing in states that provided all vaccines except PCV7 to all children had lower odds of receiving 3 or more doses compared to children residing in states that provided PCV7 only to children eligible for the Vaccines for Children program (odds ratio=0.58; 95% confidence interval=0.51, 0.66). CONCLUSION: It is essential that we continue to monitor the effect that state vaccine financing policy has on the delivery of PCV7 and future vaccines, which are likely to be increasingly expensive.

Child Health Services↗

PubMed2006

Assessment of delay in age-appropriate vaccination using survival analysis.

Assessment of delay in age-appropriate vaccination provides more information about timeliness of vaccination than up-to-date vaccination coverage. The authors applied survival analysis methods to data from a vaccination coverage survey among children aged 13-59 months conducted in Argentina in 2002. By age 19 months, 43% of children (95% confidence interval (CI): 40, 46) were vaccinated with the fourth dose of diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP4). By age 13 months, 55% of children (95% CI: 52, 57) were vaccinated with measles-containing vaccine. By age 7 months, 33% of children (95% CI: 27, 40) were vaccinated with the third dose of hepatitis B. Compared with firstborn children, third children were more likely to be delayed for DTP4 (relative risk (RR) = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.22, 1.62), measles-containing vaccine (RR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.32, 1.78), and the third dose of hepatitis B (RR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.67). Children whose caregivers had completed secondary school were less likely to be delayed for DTP4 (RR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.52, 0.90) compared with those whose caregivers had not completed primary school. Survival analysis methods were helpful in measuring vaccine uptake and should be considered in future surveys when assessing delay in age-appropriate vaccination.

Age Factors↗

PubMed2006

Disparities between white and African-American children in immunization coverage.

INTRODUCTION: A recent study has shown that the national-scale difference in immunization coverage between non-Hispanic white (abbreviated "white") and non-Hispanic African-American (abbreviated "African-American") children aged 19-35 months in the United States has increased by about 1 percentage point annually. We examined how this widening gap differs with geography and income. METHODS: We used data from the National Immunization Survey, 1998-2003, a national telephone survey. We examined differences between white and African-American children in immunization coverage within income groups (at or above versus below the federal poverty level) for each census region (northeast, south, midwest and west). We tested the hypothesis of constant disparity over time. RESULTS: Among households at or above the federal poverty level in the northeast census region, disparity is widening (white coverage minus African-American coverage was -0.5 in 1998 but 15.5 in 2003). Among household at or above the federal poverty level in the midwest census region, disparity is narrowing (white coverage minus African-American coverage was 13.9 in 1998 but 2.5 in 2003). We found no significant evidence of a trend in other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Widening national-level disparity in immunization coverage is primarily attributable to trends in the northeast census region. Addressing the widening disparity in coverage requires new strategies that consider current social and economic contexts.

Black or African American↗

PubMed2005

How do caregivers know when to take their child for immunizations?

BACKGROUND: Childhood vaccinations help reduce and eliminate many causes of morbidity and mortality among children. The objective of this study was to compare 4:3:1:3:3 (4+ doses of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine, 3+ doses of poliovirus vaccine, 1+ doses of measles-containing vaccine, 3+ doses of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine, and 3+ doses of hepatitis B vaccine) coverage among children whose caregivers learned by different methods when their child's most recent immunization was needed. METHODS: Between July 2001 and December 2002, a portion of households receiving the National Immunization Survey were asked how they knew when to take the child in for his/her most recent immunization. Responses were post-coded into several categories: 'Doctor/nurse reminder at previous immunization visit', 'Shot card/record', 'Reminder/recall', and 'Other'. Respondents could give more than one answer. Children who did not receive any vaccines, had < or = 1 visits for vaccinations, or whose caregiver did not provide an answer to the question were excluded from analyses. Chi-square analyses were used to compare 4:3:1:3:3 coverage among 19-35 month old children. RESULTS: Children whose caregivers indicated that a doctor/nurse told them at a previous immunization visit when to return for the next immunization had significantly greater 4:3:1:3:3 coverage than those who did not choose the response (77.2% vs. 70.1%, p < 0.01). However, no significant difference in coverage was found between households that did/did not indicate that reminder/recalls (71.0% vs. 75.5%, p = 0.24) helped them remember when to take their child for their most recent immunization visit; only borderline significance was found between those that did/did not choose shot cards (70.6% vs. 76.2%, p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: A doctor or nurse's reminder during an immunization visit of the next scheduled immunization visit effectively encourages caregivers to bring children in for immunizations, providing an inexpensive and easy way to effectively increase immunization coverage.

Caregivers↗

PubMed2005

Measurement of vaccination coverage at age 24 and 19-35 months: a case study of multiple imputation in public health.

AIM: Childhood immunization coverage in the United States (US) is often measured at age 24 months or, in the National Immunization Survey (NIS) at age of interview, which is between 19 and 35 months. This paper compares these standards. METHODS: Data from the NIS is used to compare immunization coverage at time of interview, retrospectively among all children aged 24 or more months at time of interview, and obtained via multiple imputation (with 10 imputations) for all children, both nationally, by state, and by demographic groups. RESULTS: At the national level, the difference between the 19-35 month estimate and the 24 month complete-case estimate was 1.9 percentage points. For most but not all states and subgroups, the 19-35 month estimate was higher than the 24 month complete-case estimate. The difference between vaccination coverage measured at 19-35 months and 24 months ranged from -2.3 to 7.5 percentage points among states. For three states, the difference between the 19-35 month and 24 month complete-case estimate was more than 6 percentage points, in twelve states there was a 4-6 percentage point difference, and in sixteen states a 2-4 percentage point difference. Conversely, five states had higher 24 month complete-case estimates than 19-35 month estimates. CONCLUSION: We found that the coverages at 19-35 and 24 months differ such that they would rarely be adequate surrogates for one another, particularly at a state level. Multiple imputation, which is easily implemented, increases precision of estimates of coverage at age 24 months.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2005

Timeliness of childhood vaccinations in the United States: days undervaccinated and number of vaccines delayed.

CONTEXT: Only 18% of children in the United States receive all vaccinations at the recommended times or acceptably early. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent of delay of vaccination during the first 24 months of life. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The 2003 National Immunization Survey was conducted by random-digit dialing of households and mailings to vaccination providers to estimate vaccination coverage rates for US children aged 19 to 35 months. Data for this study were limited to 14,810 children aged 24 to 35 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cumulative days undervaccinated during the first 24 months of life for each of 6 vaccines (diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis; poliovirus; measles, mumps, and rubella; Haemophilus influenzae type b; hepatitis B; and varicella) and all vaccines combined, number of late vaccines, and risk factors for severe delay of vaccination. RESULTS: Children were undervaccinated a mean of 172 days (median, 126 days) for all vaccines combined during their first 24 months of life. Approximately 34% were undervaccinated for less than 1 month and 29% for 1 to 6 months, while 37% were undervaccinated for more than 6 months. Vaccine-specific undervaccination of more than 6 months ranged from 9% for poliovirus vaccine to 21% for Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine. An estimated 25% of children had delays in receipt of 4 or more of the 6 vaccines. Approximately 21% of children were severely delayed (undervaccinated for more than 6 months and for > or vaccines). Factors associated with severe delay included having a mother who was unmarried or who did not have a college degree, living in a household with 2 or more children, being non-Hispanic black, having 2 or more vaccination providers, and using public vaccination provider(s). CONCLUSIONS: More than 1 in 3 children were undervaccinated for more than 6 months during their first 24 months of life and 1 in 4 children were delayed for at least 4 vaccines. Standard measures of vaccination coverage mask substantial shortfalls in ensuring that recommendations are followed regarding age at vaccination throughout the first 24 months of life.

Child, Preschool↗

PubMed2005

Parental vaccine safety concerns: results from the National Immunization Survey, 2001-2002.

BACKGROUND: According to the 2002 National Immunization Survey (NIS), vaccination coverage with recommended vaccines among U.S. children aged 19 to 35 months remained near all-time highs. Sustaining this high coverage requires significant effort, including consideration of parental vaccine safety concerns that have led to decreasing coverage in other countries. METHODS: The Parental Knowledge and Experiences module was administered to a random subset of NIS respondents from July 2001 to December 2002. The module included questions regarding attitudes toward vaccine safety and side effects, simultaneous vaccine administration, and acceptance of new vaccines. Multivariate logistic regression analyses examined associations between attitudes and up-to-date (UTD) vaccination coverage (four or more doses of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine, three or more doses of poliovirus vaccine, one or more doses of any measles-containing vaccine, three or more doses of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine, and three or more doses of hepatitis B vaccine), while controlling for demographics. RESULTS: Ninety-three percent of parents rated vaccines as safe, 6% as neither safe nor unsafe, and 1% as unsafe. After adjusting for demographics, parental safety belief was significantly associated with the child's vaccination status. For children whose parents believed vaccines are safe, the odds of being UTD were 2.9 times the odds of being UTD for children of parents who believed vaccines are unsafe (75% vs 53%, respectively). Children whose parents were neutral about the safety of vaccines had vaccination coverage similar to children whose parents believed vaccines are unsafe. CONCLUSIONS: A significant association with vaccine coverage was found for a small group of parents with high vaccine safety concerns. Strategies focused on safety concerns may yield better protection for these children.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Immunization requirements for childcare programs. Are they enough?

BACKGROUND: School immunization legislation has resulted in high vaccination coverage rates and low rates of vaccine-preventable disease among school children. Similar legislation has been directed toward children in licensed and regulated childcare programs. The purpose of this investigation was to compare immunization coverage among children in and not in childcare. METHODS: For 18 months during 2001 and 2002, the National Immunization Survey (NIS), a random-digit-dialing telephone survey, collected information on children aged 19 through 35 months, including data on enrollment in childcare. Data were analyzed retrospectively to determine coverage at 24 months and at the time of the survey. Children were considered up-to-date if they had received all recommended immunizations for their age. RESULTS: Of the eligible NIS respondents, about 41% had a child in childcare at the time of or before the survey. Retrospective analysis of children at 24 months showed no significant differences in coverage between those in and not in childcare (73.1% vs 71.9%). Likewise, analysis of coverage at the time of the survey revealed no significant differences (76.4% vs 72.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Immunization legislation and regulations have been successful in increasing coverage rates in the school population. Similar legislation for childcare facilities appears not to have been as effective. Given these findings, it seems that new strategies are needed to increase coverage in preschool children.

Child Day Care Centers↗