Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31534316›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2019

Vaccination management for elderly patients in primary care settings - documentation and responsibilities during a vaccination campaign.

Lisa-Marie Weinmayr, Jost Steinhäuser, Svante Christoph Gehring, Katja Goetz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lisa-Marie WeinmayrInstitute of Family Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Luebeck 23538, Germany.
Jost SteinhäuserInstitute of Family Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Luebeck 23538, Germany.
Svante Christoph GehringÄrztegenossenschaft Nord eG, Bad Segeberg 23795, Germany.
Katja GoetzInstitute of Family Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Luebeck 23538, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4034-3254

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aims of the current analysis were to evaluate the vaccination status and attitudes towards vaccinations of elderly patients and to explore effects of a vaccination campaign.

methodsThe data were raised in primary care settings by a physicians network which collected data during routine care from 697 patients and by the analysis of health insurance claims data from the Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Schleswig-Holstein (KVSH/Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians of the federal state of Schleswig-Holstein, Germany), regarding vaccinations in the participating practices before and after a vaccination campaign.

resultsVaccination documentation for tetanus (57.7%), diphtheria (55.7%) and influenza (55.8%) was available for slightly more than half of the study sample. A lower documentation rate was observed for pertussis (33.1%), pneumococcal vaccination (30.3%) and polio (26.3%). Practice assistants were more responsible for determining the vaccination status than physicians. The attitude regarding influenza and pneumococcal vaccine was positive in 72.9% and 56.9% of patients respectively. After the campaign, rates of influenza and pneumococcal vaccine utilization increased by 13.4% and 62.9%, respectively.

conclusionsAttitudes regarding vaccination were generally positive. Documentation was missing for almost half of the elderly population. The delegation of vaccine management to practice assistants could increase the immunization rate. Moreover, it can be assumed that a campaign might be helpful in increasing vaccination awareness and vaccine coverage.

Indexed as

influenzapneumococcal vaccineprimary carequality improvementvaccination

Identifiers

PMID31534316
PMCPMC6682325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.