Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34781905›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

An evaluation of strategies to achieve greater than 90% coverage of maternal influenza and pertussis vaccines including an economic evaluation.

Michelle L Giles, Kong Khai, Sushena Krishnaswamy, Karen Bellamy, Margaret Angliss, Christopher Smith, Olivia Fay, Paul Paddle, Beverley Vollenhoven

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Improving Tdap maternal immunization rate in Saudi Arabia.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023
    Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Michelle L GilesDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Australia. Michelle.giles@monash.edu.
Kong KhaiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Australia.
Sushena KrishnaswamyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Australia.
Karen BellamyMonash Immunisation, Monash Health, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Margaret AnglissMonash Immunisation, Monash Health, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Christopher SmithAspex Consulting, 212 Clarendon Street, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Olivia FayAspex Consulting, 212 Clarendon Street, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Paul PaddleDepartment of Surgery, Monash University, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Beverley VollenhovenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaternal immunisation is an essential public health intervention aimed at improving the health outcomes for pregnant women and providing protection to the newborn. Despite international recommendations, safety and efficacy data for the intervention, and often a fully funded program, uptake of vaccines in pregnancy remain suboptimal. One possible explanation for this includes limited access to vaccination services at the point of antenatal care. The aim of this study is to evaluate the change in vaccine coverage among pregnant women following implementation of a modified model of delivery aimed at improving access at the point of antenatal care, including an economic evaluation.

methodsThis prospective multi-centre study, using action research design, across six maternity services in Victoria, Australia, evaluated the implementation of a co-designed vaccine delivery model (either a pharmacy led model, midwife led model or primary care led model) supported by provider education. The main outcome measure was influenza and pertussis vaccine uptake during pregnancy and the incremental cost of the new model (compared to existing models) and the cost-effectiveness of the new model at each participating health service.

resultsInfluenza vaccine coverage in 2019 increased between 50 and 196% from baseline. All services reduced their average cost per immunisation under the new platforms due to efficiencies achieved in the delivery of maternal immunisations. This cost saving ranged from $9 to $71.

conclusionOur study demonstrated that there is no 'one size fits all' model of vaccine delivery. Future successful strategies to improve maternal vaccine coverage at other maternity services should be site specific, multifaceted, targeted at the existing barriers to maternal vaccine uptake, and heavily involve local stakeholders in the design and implementation of these strategies. The cost-effectiveness analysis indicates that an increase in maternal influenza immunisation uptake can be achieved at a relatively modest cost through amendment of maternal immunisation platforms.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisInfluenza VaccinesMaternal Health ServicesPertussis VaccineAustraliaDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansPregnancyProspective StudiesVaccination CoverageVictoriaInfluenza VaccinesPertussis VaccineBarriersImmunisationInfluenzaPertussisService deliveryVaccine

Identifiers

PMID34781905
PMCPMC8591824

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.