Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Can opportunities be enhanced for vaccinating children in home visiting programs? A population-based cohort study

Authors: Michael R Isaac, Mariette Chartier, Marni Brownell, Dan Chateau, Nathan C Nickel, Patricia Martens, Alan Katz, Joykrishna Sarkar, Milton Hu, Elaine Burland, ChunYan Goh, Carole Taylor, PATHS Equity Team Members

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Home visiting programs focused on improving early childhood environments are commonplace in North America. A goal of many of these programs is to improve the overall health of children, including promotion of age appropriate vaccination. In this study, population-based data are used to examine the effect of a home visiting program on vaccination rates in children.

Methods

Home visiting program data from Manitoba, Canada were linked to several databases, including a provincial vaccination registry to examine vaccination rates in a cohort of children born between 2003 and 2009. Propensity score weights were used to balance potential confounders between a group of children enrolled in the program (n = 4,562) and those who were eligible but not enrolled (n = 5,184). Complete and partial vaccination rates for one and two year old children were compared between groups, including stratification into area-level income quintiles.

Results

Complete vaccination rates from birth to age 1 and 2 were higher for those enrolled in the Families First program [Average Treatment Effect Risk Ratio (ATE RR) 1.06 (95 % CI 1.03–1.08) and 1.10 (95 % CI 1.05–1.15) respectively]. No significant differences were found between groups having at least one vaccination at age 1 or 2 [ATE RR 1.01 (95 % CI 1.00–1.02) and 1.00 (95 % CI 1.00–1.01) respectively). The interaction between program and income quintiles was not statistically significant suggesting that the program effect did not differ by income quintile.

Conclusions

Home visiting programs have the potential to increase vaccination rates for children enrolled, despite limited program content directed towards this end. Evidence-based program enhancements have the potential to increase these rates further, however more research is needed to inform policy makers of optimal approaches in this regard, especially with respect to cost-effectiveness.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Ten great public health achievements--United States, 1900–1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1999;48(12):241–3.
2.
Hilderman T, Katz A, Derksen S, McGowan K, Chateau D, Kurbis C, et al. Manitoba immunization study. Winnipeg, MB: Manitoba Centre for Health Policy; 2011.
3.
Kruk ME, Prescott MR, de Pinho H, Galea S. Equity and the child health Millennium Development Goal: the role of pro-poor health policies. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2011;65(4):327–33.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Kendrick D, Hewitt M, Dewey M, Elkan R, Blair M, Robinson J, et al. The effect of home visiting programmes on uptake of childhood immunization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Public Health Med. 2000;22(1):90–8.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Mathew JL. Inequity in childhood immunization in India: a systematic review. Indian Pediatr. 2012;49(3):203–23.CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Briss PA, Rodewald LE, Hinman AR, Shefer AM, Strikas RA, Bernier RR, et al. Reviews of evidence regarding interventions to improve vaccination coverage in children, adolescents, and adults. The Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Am J Prev Med. 2000;18(1 Suppl):97–140.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Sweet MA, Appelbaum MI. Is home visiting an effective strategy? A meta-analytic review of home visiting programs for families with young children. Child Dev. 2004;75(5):1435–56.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Olds DL, Robinson J, O’Brien R, Luckey DW, Pettitt LM, Henderson Jr CR, et al. Home visiting by paraprofessionals and by nurses: a randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics. 2002;110(3):486–96.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Olds DL, Robinson J, Pettitt L, Luckey DW, Holmberg J, Ng RK, et al. Effects of home visits by paraprofessionals and by nurses: age 4 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2004;114(6):1560–8.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Olds DL, Kitzman H, Cole R, Robinson J, Sidora K, Luckey DW, et al. Effects of nurse home-visiting on maternal life course and child development: age 6 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2004;114(6):1550–9.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Koniak-Griffin D, Anderson NL, Brecht ML, Verzemnieks I, Lesser J, Kim S. Public health nursing care for adolescent mothers: impact on infant health and selected maternal outcomes at 1 year postbirth. J Adolesc Health. 2002;30(1):44–54.CrossRefPubMed
13.
El-Mohandes AA, Katz KS, El-Khorazaty MN, McNeely-Johnson D, Sharps PW, Jarrett MH, et al. The effect of a parenting education program on the use of preventive pediatric health care services among low-income, minority mothers: a randomized, controlled study. Pediatrics. 2003;111(6 Pt 1):1324–32.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Healthy Child Manitoba. Families first program evaluation report: evaluating the effectiveness of the families first home visiting program in improving the well-being of at-risk families with preschool children. Winnipeg, MB: Government of Manitoba; 2010.
15.
Manitoba Health, Healthy Living and Seniors, Public Health and Primary Health Care Division, Public Health Branch, Epidemiology and Surveillance. Manitoba annual immunization surveillance report - 2012 and 2013. Winnipeg, MB: Government of Manitoba; 2014.
16.
Frohlich KL, Potvin L. Transcending the known in public health practice: the inequality paradox: the population approach and vulnerable populations. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(2):216–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
El-Kamary SS, Higman SM, Fuddy L, McFarlane E, Sia C, Duggan AK. Hawaii’s healthy start home visiting program: determinants and impact of rapid repeat birth. Pediatrics. 2004;114(3):e317–26.CrossRefPubMed
18.
19.
20.
Nickel NC, Chateau DG, Martens PJ, Brownell MD, Katz A, Burland EM, et al. Data resource profile: pathways to Health and Social Equity for Children (PATHS Equity for Children). Int J Epidemiol. 2014;43(5):1438–49.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Robinson JR, Young TK, Roos LL, Gelskey DE. Estimating the burden of disease. Comparing administrative data and self-reports. Med Care. 1997;35(9):932–47.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Roos LL, Menec V, Currie RJ. Policy analysis in an information-rich environment. Soc Sci Med. 2004;58(11):2231–41.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Roos LL, Gupta S, Soodeen RA, Jebamani L. Data quality in an information-rich environment: Canada as an example. Can J Aging. 2005;24 Suppl 1:153–70.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Chateau D, Metge C, Prior H, Soodeen RA. Learning from the census: the Socio-economic Factor Index (SEFI) and health outcomes in Manitoba. Can J Public Health. 2012;103(8 Suppl 2):S23–7.PubMed
25.
Rubin D. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1987.CrossRef
26.
Schafer JL. Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. New York: Chapman and Hall; 1997.CrossRef
27.
Rosenbaum P. Observational studies. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag New York Inc; 2010.CrossRef
28.
Guo S, Fraser MW. Propensity score analysis: statistical methods and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2009.
29.
Morgan SL, Winship C. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007.CrossRef
30.
31.
Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res. 2011;46(3):399–424.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Wacholder S. Binomial regression in GLIM: estimating risk ratios and risk differences. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;123(1):174–84.PubMed
33.
SAS Inc. Version 9.2 of the SAS system for windows. Cary, NC: SAS Inc; 2008.
34.
35.
Metadata
Title
Can opportunities be enhanced for vaccinating children in home visiting programs? A population-based cohort study
Authors
Michael R Isaac
Mariette Chartier
Marni Brownell
Dan Chateau
Nathan C Nickel
Patricia Martens
Alan Katz
Joykrishna Sarkar
Milton Hu
Elaine Burland
ChunYan Goh
Carole Taylor
PATHS Equity Team Members
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1926-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Public Health 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Nutritional and lifestyle risk behaviors and their association with mental health and violence among Pakistani adolescents: results from the National Survey of 4583 individuals

Study protocol

Family planning to promote physical activity: a randomized controlled trial protocol

Research article

Country characteristics and acute diarrhea in children from developing nations: a multilevel study

Research article

Reducing diarrhoea deaths in South Africa: costs and effects of scaling up essential interventions to prevent and treat diarrhoea in under-five children

Research article

Factors that challenge health for people involved in the compensation process following a motor vehicle crash: a longitudinal study

Research article

The association between social capital and quality of life among type 2 diabetes patients in Anhui province, China: a cross-sectional study