Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
117175 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2009-08-31
2015-03-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
From Innovation to Solutions: Childhood Influenza Vaccination Planning
NCT01664793
Centralized IIS-based Reminder/Recall to Increase Childhood Influenza Vaccination Rates
NCT02761551
The Effect of Time-Slot Scheduling on Flu Vaccination Rates
NCT01206686
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Vaccination With 2009 H1N1 Vaccines During Influenza Season 2010-11
NCT01206114
Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Reminders for Children With High-risk Conditions
NCT01431183
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
1b. Establish private-public collaborations for influenza vaccination delivery between county public health departments, visiting nursing associations and each of the intervention practices within the three clinical site types
Specific Aim 2: Conduct focus groups among parents of children seen at intervention practices, to assess attitudes and perceived barriers to possible practice-based and collaborative strategies to promote influenza vaccination (Year 1)
Specific Aim 3: Develop (Year 1) and implement (Years 2 and 3) a plan for comprehensive and collaborative delivery of influenza vaccine at intervention practices 3a. Develop practice-based intervention strategies focusing primarily on immunization of high-risk patients 3b. Develop private-public collaborative interventions between the intervention practices, their county public health department and visiting nursing associations focusing primarily on immunization of school-aged children 3c. Implement (Years 2 and 3) both practice-based and private-public collaborative strategies in the intervention practices while monitoring only in the control practices
Specific Aim 4: Conduct a group-randomized trial to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of the comprehensive delivery model in improving influenza vaccination coverage for children 6 months to 18 years in three different types of clinical sites (urban pediatric, urban family medicine, and rural family medicine).
4a. Evaluate effectiveness of the comprehensive delivery model at each of the three types of clinical sites
1. Compare the following primary outcome measures in the intervention and control groups: 1) increase in the rate of receipt of ≥1 influenza vaccine during the post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among children 6 months to 18 years and 2) increase in the rate of children 6 months to 18 years who were fully immunized (received all required influenza injections) during the season.
2. Compare the following secondary outcome measures: 1) increase in the rate of receipt of ≥1 influenza vaccine during the post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among high-risk children and 2) increase in the rate of high-risk children who were fully immunized during the season.
3. Evaluate sustainability of the comprehensive delivery model on the above outcome measures
4b. Compare the effectiveness of the comprehensive delivery model in three different types of clinical sites (urban pediatric private practice, urban family medicine private practice, and rural family medicine private practice)
Specific Aim 5: Evaluate the process of implementation of the comprehensive delivery model for influenza delivery in each of the three types of sites.
5a. Assess process measures relevant to implementation of practice-based interventions and compare by type of clinical site 5b. Assess process measures relevant to implementation of private-public collaborative interventions and compare by type of clinical site 5c. Using key informant interviews, assess perceptions regarding facilitators and barriers to private-public collaborative delivery, alternative methods and means of improving the process among practice providers, administrators and among participating public health and visiting nurse personnel
Specific Aim 6: In two urban pediatric intervention practices and one rural family medicine practice, conduct surveys examining parental attitudes about methods of influenza delivery and their experience with their practice's participation in a comprehensive and collaborative private-public model for influenza delivery
Major Hypotheses:
SA4. Hypothesis 1. Effectiveness on receipt of ≥1 influenza vaccine: The increase in the likelihood of receiving ≥1 influenza vaccine during the post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among children 6 months to 18 years will be greater for children in intervention practices than in control practices.
SA4. Hypothesis 2 Effectiveness - fully immunized: The increase in the likelihood of receiving all necessary influenza vaccines during the post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among children 6 months to 18 years will be greater for children in intervention practices than in control practices.
SA4. Hypothesis 3. Effectiveness by age strata: The increase in the likelihood of receiving ≥1 influenza vaccine during the post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among children in each of the following age strata will be greater in intervention than in control practices: 1) 6 months through 5 years; 2) 6 through 8 years; 3) 9 through 12 years; 4) 13 through 18 years.
SA4. Hypothesis 4. Effectiveness in high-risk children: The increase in the likelihood of receiving of ≥1 influenza vaccine during the post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among high-risk children 6 months to 18 years will be greater for high-risk children in intervention practices than in control practices.
SA4. Hypothesis 5. Sustainability: The increase in the likelihood of receiving ≥1 influenza vaccine during the second post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among children 6 months to 18 years will be greater for children in intervention practices than in control practices. (Sustainability will also be evaluated for other outcomes above.)
SA4. Hypothesis 6. Differential effectiveness by clinical site type: The increase in the likelihood of receiving of ≥1 influenza vaccine during the post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among children 6 months to 18 years for intervention vs. controls will differ by clinical site type
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Increasing flu vaccination
Collect from billing records in the 10 intervention practice sites to test for an increase in the rate of receipt of ≥1 influenza vaccine during the post-intervention year compared to the pre-intervention year among children 6 months to 18 years during the season. The interventions include: 1. Develop practice-based intervention strategies (like use of reminder-recall of children due for influenza,2. Develop Private/public collaboration to increase flu vaccination between the intervention practices, their county public health department and visiting nursing associations, and 3. Implement both practice-based and private-public collaborative strategies in the intervention practices while monitoring only in the control practices
Private/public collaboration to increase flu vaccination
Intervention practices will develop office-based interventions including methods to identify high-risk patients within their practices and methods of maximizing the immunization of these children within the practice, use of patient reminders, after-hours influenza clinics, walk-in provision of influenza vaccine and increased focus on education regarding the need for immunization. The practices will also collaborate with their county public health departments and visiting nursing associations to develop private-public collaborative interventions that may include large clinics for school-aged children for multiple practices and tracking of influenza supplies and redistribution of influenza vaccine between practices when supplies are delayed or inadequate.
Usual care
Patients in control practices will continue to receive usual care with no change in practice regarding influenza immunization delivery.
Usual care
This group will continue administering influenza vaccine to their patients in their practice as they normally do.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Private/public collaboration to increase flu vaccination
Intervention practices will develop office-based interventions including methods to identify high-risk patients within their practices and methods of maximizing the immunization of these children within the practice, use of patient reminders, after-hours influenza clinics, walk-in provision of influenza vaccine and increased focus on education regarding the need for immunization. The practices will also collaborate with their county public health departments and visiting nursing associations to develop private-public collaborative interventions that may include large clinics for school-aged children for multiple practices and tracking of influenza supplies and redistribution of influenza vaccine between practices when supplies are delayed or inadequate.
Usual care
This group will continue administering influenza vaccine to their patients in their practice as they normally do.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
6 Months
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
FED
University of Colorado, Denver
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Allison Kempe, MD, MPH
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Colorado, Children's Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Tri County Health dept
Aurora, Colorado, United States
Aurora Family Medicine
Aurora, Colorado, United States
Forum Family Medicine
Aurora, Colorado, United States
Premier Pediatrics
Brighton, Colorado, United States
Indian Crest Pediatrics
Broomfield, Colorado, United States
Centennial Pediatrics
Centennial, Colorado, United States
Advanced Pediatrics
Centennial, Colorado, United States
Greenwood Pediatrics
Centennial, Colorado, United States
Pediatric Pathways
Centennial, Colorado, United States
Pediatrics 5280
Centennial, Colorado, United States
CIIS
Denver, Colorado, United States
Hampden Medical Group
Englewood, Colorado, United States
Family Practice Clinic
Fort Morgan, Colorado, United States
Ft. Morgan Medical Group
Fort Morgan, Colorado, United States
Haxtun Family Medicine
Haxtun, Colorado, United States
Valley Medical Center
Julesburg, Colorado, United States
Jefferson County Health dept
Lakewood, Colorado, United States
Kids First
Lakewood, Colorado, United States
Denver West Pediatrics
Lakewood, Colorado, United States
Focus on Kids
Littleton, Colorado, United States
Lone Tree Family Medicine
Lone Tree, Colorado, United States
Crown Point Pediatrics
Parker, Colorado, United States
Northeast County Health Dept
Sterling, Colorado, United States
Mountain Land Pediatrics
Thornton, Colorado, United States
Pediatrics West
Wheat Ridge, Colorado, United States
Wray Clinic
Wray, Colorado, United States
Yuma Clinic
Yuma, Colorado, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
10-0589
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.