Search

Objective: To evaluate the effect of different modalities of centralized reminder/recall (autodialer, text, mailed reminders) on increasing childhood influenza vaccination., Study Design: Two simultaneous randomized clinical trials conducted from October 2017 to April 1, 2018, in New York State and Colorado. There were 61 931 children in New York (136 practices) and 23 845 children in Colorado (42 practices) who were randomized to different centralized reminder/recall modalities-4 arms in New York (autodialer, text, mailed, and no reminder control) and 3 arms in Colorado (autodialer, mailed, and no reminder control). The message content was similar across modalities. Up to 3 reminders were sent for intervention arms. The main outcome measure was receipt of ≥1 influenza vaccine., Results: In New York, compared with the control arm (26.6%), postintervention influenza vaccination rates in the autodialer arm (28.0%) were 1.4 percentage points higher (adjusted risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10), but the rates for text (27.6%) and mail (26.8%) arms were not different from controls. In Colorado, compared with the control arm (29.9%), postintervention influenza vaccination rates for the autodialer (32.9%) and mail (31.5%) arms were 3.0 percentage points (adjusted risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12) and 1.6 percentage points (adjusted risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10) higher, respectively. Compared with the control arm, the incremental cost per additional vaccine delivered was $20 (New York) and $16 (Colorado) for autodialer messages., Conclusions: Centralized reminder/recall for childhood influenza vaccine was most effective via autodialer, less effective via mail, and not effective via text messages. The impact of each modality was modest. Compared with no reminders, the incremental cost per additional vaccine delivered was also modest for autodialer messages., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03294473 and NCT03246100., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although autodialer centralized reminder and recall (C-R/R) from state immunization information systems (IISs) has been shown to raise childhood vaccination rates, its impact on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates is unclear., Methods: In a 4-arm pragmatic randomized controlled trial across 2 states, we randomly selected practices representative of the specialty (pediatrics, family medicine, and health center) where children received care. Within each practice, patients 11 to 17.9 years old who had not completed their HPV vaccine series (NY: N = 30 616 in 123 practices; CO: N = 31 502 in 80 practices) were randomly assigned to receive 0, 1, 2, or 3 IIS C-R/R autodialer messages per vaccine dose. We assessed HPV vaccine receipt via the IIS, calculated intervention costs, and compared HPV vaccine series initiation and completion rates across study arms., Results: In New York, HPV vaccine initiation rates ranged from 37.0% to 37.4%, and completion rates were between 29.1% and 30.1%, with no significant differences across study arms. In Colorado, HPV vaccine initiation rates ranged from 31.2% to 33.5% and were slightly higher for 1 reminder compared with none, but vaccine completion rates, ranging from 27.0% to 27.8%, were similar. On adjusted analyses in Colorado, vaccine initiation rates were slightly higher for 1 and 3 C-R/R messages (adjusted risk ratios 1.07 and 1.04, respectively); completion rates were slightly higher for 1 and 3 C-R/R messages (adjusted risk ratios 1.02 and 1.03, respectively)., Conclusions: IIS-based C-R/R for HPV vaccination did not improve HPV vaccination rates in New York and increased vaccination rates slightly in Colorado., Competing Interests: POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Introduction: A proven, but underutilized, method to increase current low vaccination rates is reminder/recall. Centralized reminder/recall using an Immunization Information System reduces the burden of an individual practice conducting reminder/recall. The objectives were to assess the effectiveness of centralized vaccine reminder/recall on improving adult vaccination rates using Colorado's Immunization Information System., Study Design: This study is a pragmatic RCT., Setting/participants: Denver Health patients were divided into three strata: 25,039 individuals aged 19-64 years without a high-risk condition for pneumococcal disease, 16,897 individuals aged 19-64 years with a high-risk condition, and 5,332 individuals aged ≥65 years. Data were collected from October 2015 to April 2016 and analyzed between September 2016 and June 2017., Intervention: Adults aged 19-64 years without a high-risk condition who needed influenza or tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis vaccine or both, and adults with a high-risk condition and adults aged ≥65 years who needed influenza, or tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis, or pneumococcal vaccine, or all three vaccines were randomized to receive up to three reminder/recalls or usual care., Main Outcome Measures: Documentation of receipt of any needed vaccine in Immunization Information System ≤6 months after the reminder/recall was the primary outcome. A secondary outcome included implementation costs of the reminder/recall effort. A mixed effects model assessed the association between the intervention and receipt of any needed vaccine while controlling for gender, age, race, ethnicity, insurance type, and history of vaccine refusal., Results: The intervention was associated with receipt of any needed vaccine in the adults aged ≥65 years population (AOR=1.15, 95% CI=1.02, 1.30), but not the other two populations. Influenza vaccine was the source of this difference, with 32.0% receiving a vaccine in intervention versus 28.6% in usual-care groups (p≤0.01). Start-up and implementation costs per person were $0.86. In the population aged ≥65 years, 29.4 patients would need to be contacted to gain one additional vaccination., Conclusions: Centralized reminder/recall was effective at increasing influenza vaccination rates in adults aged ≥65 years over a short time period, without burdening the practices, and at a reasonable cost., Trial Registration: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT02133391., (Copyright © 2018 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of different modalities of centralized reminder/recall (autodialer, text, mailed reminders) on increasing childhood influenza vaccination.Study designTwo simultaneous randomized clinical trials conducted from October 2017 to April 1, 2018, in New York State and Colorado. There were 61 931 children in New York (136 practices) and 23 845 children in Colorado (42 practices) who were randomized to different centralized reminder/recall modalities-4 arms in New York (autodialer, text, mailed, and no reminder control) and 3 arms in Colorado (autodialer, mailed, and no reminder control). The message content was similar across modalities. Up to 3 reminders were sent for intervention arms. The main outcome measure was receipt of ≥1 influenza vaccine.ResultsIn New York, compared with the control arm (26.6%), postintervention influenza vaccination rates in the autodialer arm (28.0%) were 1.4 percentage points higher (adjusted risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10), but the rates for text (27.6%) and mail (26.8%) arms were not different from controls. In Colorado, compared with the control arm (29.9%), postintervention influenza vaccination rates for the autodialer (32.9%) and mail (31.5%) arms were 3.0 percentage points (adjusted risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12) and 1.6 percentage points (adjusted risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10) higher, respectively. Compared with the control arm, the incremental cost per additional vaccine delivered was $20 (New York) and $16 (Colorado) for autodialer messages.ConclusionsCentralized reminder/recall for childhood influenza vaccine was most effective via autodialer, less effective via mail, and not effective via text messages. The impact of each modality was modest. Compared with no reminders, the incremental cost per additional vaccine delivered was also modest for autodialer messages.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03294473 and NCT03246100.