Cargando…

Monitoring vaccination coverage: Defining the role of surveys

Vaccination coverage is a widely used indicator of programme performance, measured by registries, routine administrative reports or household surveys. Because the population denominator and the reported number of vaccinations used in administrative estimates are often inaccurate, survey data are oft...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cutts, Felicity T., Claquin, Pierre, Danovaro-Holliday, M. Carolina, Rhoda, Dale A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4967442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27349841
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.06.053
_version_ 1782445514728407040
author Cutts, Felicity T.
Claquin, Pierre
Danovaro-Holliday, M. Carolina
Rhoda, Dale A.
author_facet Cutts, Felicity T.
Claquin, Pierre
Danovaro-Holliday, M. Carolina
Rhoda, Dale A.
author_sort Cutts, Felicity T.
collection PubMed
description Vaccination coverage is a widely used indicator of programme performance, measured by registries, routine administrative reports or household surveys. Because the population denominator and the reported number of vaccinations used in administrative estimates are often inaccurate, survey data are often considered to be more reliable. Many countries obtain survey data on vaccination coverage every 3–5 years from large-scale multi-purpose survey programs. Additional surveys may be needed to evaluate coverage in Supplemental Immunization Activities such as measles or polio campaigns, or after major changes have occurred in the vaccination programme or its context. When a coverage survey is undertaken, rigorous statistical principles and field protocols should be followed to avoid selection bias and information bias. This requires substantial time, expertise and resources hence the role of vaccination coverage surveys in programme monitoring needs to be carefully defined. At times, programmatic monitoring may be more appropriate and provides data to guide program improvement. Practical field methods such as health facility-based assessments can evaluate multiple aspects of service provision, costs, coverage (among clinic attendees) and data quality. Similarly, purposeful sampling or censuses of specific populations can help local health workers evaluate their own performance and understand community attitudes, without trying to claim that the results are representative of the entire population. Administrative reports enable programme managers to do real-time monitoring, investigate potential problems and take timely remedial action, thus improvement of administrative estimates is of high priority. Most importantly, investment in collecting data needs to be complemented by investment in acting on results to improve performance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4967442
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Elsevier Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49674422016-08-04 Monitoring vaccination coverage: Defining the role of surveys Cutts, Felicity T. Claquin, Pierre Danovaro-Holliday, M. Carolina Rhoda, Dale A. Vaccine Review Vaccination coverage is a widely used indicator of programme performance, measured by registries, routine administrative reports or household surveys. Because the population denominator and the reported number of vaccinations used in administrative estimates are often inaccurate, survey data are often considered to be more reliable. Many countries obtain survey data on vaccination coverage every 3–5 years from large-scale multi-purpose survey programs. Additional surveys may be needed to evaluate coverage in Supplemental Immunization Activities such as measles or polio campaigns, or after major changes have occurred in the vaccination programme or its context. When a coverage survey is undertaken, rigorous statistical principles and field protocols should be followed to avoid selection bias and information bias. This requires substantial time, expertise and resources hence the role of vaccination coverage surveys in programme monitoring needs to be carefully defined. At times, programmatic monitoring may be more appropriate and provides data to guide program improvement. Practical field methods such as health facility-based assessments can evaluate multiple aspects of service provision, costs, coverage (among clinic attendees) and data quality. Similarly, purposeful sampling or censuses of specific populations can help local health workers evaluate their own performance and understand community attitudes, without trying to claim that the results are representative of the entire population. Administrative reports enable programme managers to do real-time monitoring, investigate potential problems and take timely remedial action, thus improvement of administrative estimates is of high priority. Most importantly, investment in collecting data needs to be complemented by investment in acting on results to improve performance. Elsevier Science 2016-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4967442/ /pubmed/27349841 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.06.053 Text en © 2016 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Cutts, Felicity T.
Claquin, Pierre
Danovaro-Holliday, M. Carolina
Rhoda, Dale A.
Monitoring vaccination coverage: Defining the role of surveys
title Monitoring vaccination coverage: Defining the role of surveys
title_full Monitoring vaccination coverage: Defining the role of surveys
title_fullStr Monitoring vaccination coverage: Defining the role of surveys
title_full_unstemmed Monitoring vaccination coverage: Defining the role of surveys
title_short Monitoring vaccination coverage: Defining the role of surveys
title_sort monitoring vaccination coverage: defining the role of surveys
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4967442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27349841
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.06.053
work_keys_str_mv AT cuttsfelicityt monitoringvaccinationcoveragedefiningtheroleofsurveys
AT claquinpierre monitoringvaccinationcoveragedefiningtheroleofsurveys
AT danovarohollidaymcarolina monitoringvaccinationcoveragedefiningtheroleofsurveys
AT rhodadalea monitoringvaccinationcoveragedefiningtheroleofsurveys