Nelson Kristin N, Wallace Aaron S, Sodha Samir V, Daniels Danni, Dietz Vance
Emory University, 201 Dowman Drive, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.
Emory University, 201 Dowman Drive, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States; Global Immunization Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-A04, Atlanta, GA 30329, United States.
Vaccine. 2016 Nov 4;34(46):5495-5503. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.09.038. Epub 2016 Sep 28.
Immunization programs in developing countries increasingly face challenges to ensure equitable delivery of services within cities where rapid urban growth can result in informal settlements, poor living conditions, and heterogeneous populations. A number of strategies have been utilized in developing countries to ensure high community demand and equitable availability of urban immunization services; however, a synthesis of the literature on these strategies has not previously been undertaken.
We reviewed articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals between 1990 and 2013 that assessed interventions for improving routine immunization coverage in urban areas in low- and middle-income countries. We categorized the intervention in each study into one of three groups: (1) interventions aiming to increase utilization of immunization services; (2) interventions aiming to improve availability of immunization services by healthcare providers, or (3) combined availability and utilization interventions. We summarized the main quantitative outcomes from each study and effective practices from each intervention category.
Fifteen studies were identified; 87% from the African, Eastern Mediterranean and Southeast Asian regions of the World Health Organization (WHO). Six studies were randomized controlled trials, eight were pre- and post-intervention evaluations, and one was a cross-sectional study. Four described interventions designed to improve availability of routine immunization services, six studies described interventions that aimed to increase utilization, and five studies aiming to improve both availability and utilization of services. All studies reported positive change in their primary outcome indicator, although seven different primary outcomes indicators were used across studies. Studies varied considerably with respect to the type of intervention assessed, study design, and length of intervention assessment.
Few studies have assessed interventions designed explicitly for the unique challenges facing immunization programs in urban areas. Further research on sustainability, scalability, and cost-effectiveness of interventions is needed to fill this gap.
发展中国家的免疫规划在确保城市地区公平提供服务方面面临着越来越多的挑战,城市的快速发展可能导致非正规住区、恶劣的生活条件以及人口的多样性。发展中国家已采用多种策略来确保社区对城市免疫服务有较高需求并能公平获得;然而,此前尚未对有关这些策略的文献进行综合分析。
我们回顾了1990年至2013年间在同行评审期刊上发表的英文文章,这些文章评估了改善低收入和中等收入国家城市地区常规免疫接种覆盖率的干预措施。我们将每项研究中的干预措施分为三组之一:(1)旨在提高免疫服务利用率的干预措施;(2)旨在提高医疗服务提供者提供免疫服务能力的干预措施,或(3)提高可及性和利用率的综合干预措施。我们总结了每项研究的主要定量结果以及每个干预措施类别的有效做法。
共确定了15项研究;其中87%来自世界卫生组织(WHO)的非洲、东地中海和东南亚区域。6项研究为随机对照试验,8项为干预前后评估,1项为横断面研究。4项研究描述了旨在提高常规免疫服务可及性的干预措施,6项研究描述了旨在提高利用率的干预措施,5项研究旨在提高服务的可及性和利用率。所有研究均报告其主要结果指标有积极变化,尽管各项研究使用了7种不同的主要结果指标。在评估的干预措施类型、研究设计和干预评估时长方面,各项研究差异很大。
很少有研究评估专门针对城市地区免疫规划所面临独特挑战而设计的干预措施。需要进一步研究干预措施的可持续性、可扩展性和成本效益,以填补这一空白。