ArticleVaccines2026
Evaluating a Tailored Quality Improvement Intervention to Improve Vaccination Coverage in Sydney Residential Aged Care Facilities.
Article in Vaccines, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAged care residents are highly vulnerable to vaccine-preventable diseases. Despite recommendations and funding under Australian programs, vaccination rates among residents for COVID-19, influenza, pneumococcal and shingles remain sub-optimal. The aim of this work was to assess if tailored quality improvement interventions would improve vaccination coverage in aged care residents.
methodsThis was a quality improvement initiative evaluated using a quasi-experimental pre-post design. Building on previously identified barriers and enablers, a package of interventions and resources was developed to support consent processes, vaccination planning, and tracking. Pre- and post-intervention vaccination coverage was assessed using resident lists from participating aged care facilities and data extracted from the Australian Immunisation Register (AIR) at two time points, 14 months apart. A process evaluation survey was distributed to RACF staff.
resultsOf the 6964 residents listed, 5153 (74%) remained registered in AIR when data was extracted post-intervention. Shingles showed the greatest improvement in absolute difference (+23.4%), followed by pneumococcal (+14.2%) and influenza (+10.9%), despite a high baseline of 68.5%. COVID-19 coverage declined by 7.4% when applying a 6-month reporting interval. Twenty-five staff completed the process evaluation survey; 45% of respondents identified discrepancies between AIR data and internal records, indicating underreporting by external providers. Interventions including the consent template and vaccination tracker were reported as useful and were used to support local vaccination.
conclusionsThis quality improvement initiative improved coverage for three of the four recommended and funded vaccines for RACF residents and demonstrated the value of tailored interventions informed by consumer and provider feedback. The approach potentially offers a scalable model for improving vaccination rates in aged care across Australia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.