Original Article

Impact of Two Different Models on Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccination in Hospitalized Patients

Authors: Mobolaji Bakare, MD, Rakesh Shrivastava, MD, Vinodh Jeevanantham, MD, MPH, Sankar D. Navaneethan, MD, MPH

Abstract

Objective: The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommends trivalent influenza (TIV) and pneumococcal (PPV) vaccination for eligible hospitalized patients. We conducted a retrospective study comparing two different methods of assessment and its impact on TIV and PPV vaccination in hospitalized patients.


Design: Two sequential models were compared in a community hospital for assessing patients’ vaccination status and eligibility for TIV and PPV in an inpatient setting. In the first model (Model I), physicians were responsible for assessing eligibility and ordering TIV and/or PPV. In the second model (Model II), nurses were responsible for assessment and vaccination of eligible patients. Charts of hospitalized patients were randomly analyzed for completion rates of the assessment form, rate of vaccination, and documentation of the reason for not vaccinating eligible patients.


Results: A total of 138 charts were analyzed for Model I and 168 charts were analyzed for Model II. A significantly higher completion rate for assessment was noted for Model II compared with Model I (79.16% versus 34.78%, P < 0.001 for TIV; 72.02% versus 33.33%, P < 0.001 for PPV). Hospital vaccination rates were not significantly different between the two models for TIV (P = 0.625) and PPV (P = 0.689). A significant percentage of patients refused PPV in Model II [8.03% versus Model I at 3.2% (P = 0.04)].


Conclusion: A standing order protocol for assessing hospitalized patients’ vaccination status by nursing staff and allowing them to vaccinate eligible patients without depending upon a physician order significantly improved the assessment compliance rate, but not the vaccination rates. Our findings suggest that a system-based method with nursing assessing the need for vaccination and a physician ordering the vaccination would probably have a higher potential for success.


Key Points


* Nursing assessment rates on the need for influenza and pneumococcal vaccination is better than physician assessment rates in hospitalized patients.


* Physician involvement in the ordering process would increase vaccination rates.


* A system-based method with nursing assessing the need for vaccination and physicians ordering the vaccination would increase both the assessment and vaccination rates for influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Norwalk MP, Middleton DB, Zimmerman RK, et al. Increasing pneumococcal vaccination rates among hospitalized patients. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003;24:526–531.
 
2. Healthy People 2010. Leading health Indicators: United States selected years 1990–2002 and 2010 target. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/tables/2003/03hus051.pdf. Accessed December 15, 2006.
 
3. Non-Patient Specific Standing Order and Protocol Guidelines. New York State Education Department. Available at: http://www.op.nysed.gov/immunguide.htm. Accessed December 4, 2006.
 
4. Use of Standing Orders Programs to Increase Adult Vaccination Rates. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/RR/RR4901.pdf. Accessed December 15, 2006.
 
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevention and control of Influenza. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report April 12 2002;51(RR-03):1–31.
 
6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevention of Pneumococcal Disease. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00047135.htm. Accessed December 15, 2006.
 
7. Agresti A. Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences. 3rd ed. New York, Prentice Hall, 1997, pp 196–212.
 
8. Rhew DC, Glassman PA, Goetz MB. Improving pneumococcal vaccine rates: nurse protocols versus clinical reminders. J Gen Intern Med 1999;14:351–356.
 
9. Hulley SB, Cummings SR, Browner WS, et al. Designing Clinical Research, 2nd edition. Philadelphia, Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins, 2001, pp 65–91.
 
10. Fedson DS, Houck P, Bratzler D. Hospital-based influenza and pneumococcal vaccination: Sutton’s law applied to prevention. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000;21:692–699.
 
11. Nichol KL. The additive benefits of influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations during influenza seasons among elderly persons with chronic lung disease. Vaccine 1991;17(Suppl):S91–4, S93.
 
12. Sisk JE, Moskowitz AJ, Whang W, et al. Cost effectiveness of vaccination against pneumococcal bacteremia among elderly people. JAMA 1997;278:1333–1339.
 
13. Nichol KL, Baken L, Wourenma J, et al. The health and economic benefit associated with pneumococcal vaccination of elderly persons with chronic lung disease. Arch Intern Med 1999;159:2437–2442.
 
14. Nichol KL. Tenyear durability and success of an organized program to increase influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates among high -risk adults. Am J Med 1998;105:385–392.
 
15. Klein RS, Adachi N. An effective hospital based pneumococcal immunization program. Arch Intern Med 1986;146:327–329.
 
16. Landis S, Scarbrough ML. Using a vaccine manager to enhance in-hospital vaccine administration. J Fam Pract 1995;41:364–369.
 
17. Slobodkin D, Kitlas JL, Zielske PG. A test of the feasibility of pneumococcal vaccination in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 1999;6:724–727.
 
18. Herman CJ, Speroff T, Cebul RD. Improving compliance with immunization in the older adult: results of a randomized cohort study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1994;42:1154–1159.
 
19. Hoey JR, McCallum HP, Lepage EM. Expanding the nurse’s role to improve preventive service in an outpatient clinic. Can Med Assoc J 1982;127:27–28.
 
20. Christy C, McConnochie KM, Zernik N, et al. Impact of an algorithm-guided nurse intervention on the use of immunization opportunities. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1997;151:384–391.
 
21. Lawson F, Baker V, Au D, et al. Standing orders for influenza vaccination increased vaccination rates in inpatient settings compared with community rates. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000;55:M522–M526.
 
22. Dexter PR, Perkins SM, Maharry KS, et al. Inpatient computer-based standing orders versus physician reminders to increase influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates: a randomized trial. JAMA 2004;292:2366–2371.
 
23. Jackson LA, Benson P, Sneller VP, et al. Safety of revaccination with pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine. JAMA 1999;281:243–248.
 
24. CMS Initiatives. Available at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/AdultImmunizations/05_CMS%20Initiatives.asp. Accessed December 4, 2006.