ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Improving Influenza Vaccination in the Pediatric Emergency Department.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends annual influenza vaccination for patients aged 6 months or older. In 2019, our local pediatric emergency department (ED) vaccination rate was below the national average. We aimed to increase influenza vaccination screening from 53% to 95% and vaccine administration from 48% to 58% by March 2023. Methods: We included patients older than 6 months of age who were discharged from the ED, excluding those resuscitated or transferred from outside hospitals. Interventions included triage screening questions and electronic health record alerts to prompt vaccination. The baseline period was February-April 2020, with interventions during the next 3 influenza seasons, and a poststudy period from September 2023 to March 2024. Measures included vaccine administration (outcome), screening rate (process), provider discontinuation, family refusal, and discharge time (balancing). Data were analyzed using Shewhart charts (P and P'). Results: We achieved nearly universal screening for vaccine eligibility (98%) and administered the vaccine to 70% of eligible patients during season 1 of implementation. Thereafter, the influenza screening rate dropped to 85% and 86% (seasons 2 and 3, respectively) and 79% (poststudy). Likewise, influenza immunization rates decreased below baseline in season 2 (37%) and remained low at 40% (season 3) and 50% (poststudy). There was no difference in parental refusal of the vaccine at the time of discharge; however, there was an increase in provider discontinuation from 1 consecutive season to the next. Conclusions: An ED-based influenza vaccine delivery model can be successful when the triage process includes screening, a consistent group of ED-based staff orders the vaccine, and there is effective use of the electronic health record.
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.