Collaborative Efforts to Increase Flu Vaccination

NCT ID: NCT01403649

Last Updated: 2015-06-02

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

117175 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2009-08-31

Study Completion Date

2015-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Beginning with the 2009-2010 season, influenza vaccine is universally recommended for children age 6 months to 18 years old, placing extra burden on health care providers across the U.S. The focus of this study is to develop new strategies and implement existing evidence-based strategies to enhance influenza immunization in these children. The intervention will involve collaboration from different types of primary care providers, the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS), public health departments and visiting nursing services (VNA). It will be designed and implemented by those involved with delivery with a focus on sustainability after the completion of the study. Parental input will be gathered during the planning year through focus groups to assist in developing the intervention. Qualitative assessments and examination of processes during the first year of implementation will guide modifications during the second implementation year in order to assure sustainability. 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 mo.-18 yr. and 2) increase in the rate of children 6 mo.-18 yr. who were fully immunized (received all required influenza injections) during the season. 3) measure outcomes by age group (6 mo.-5 yr., 6-8 yr., 9-12 yr., 13-18 yr.) and types of clinical sites (urban Peds, urban FM, rural FM)

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Specific Aim 1: Within each of three types of clinical sites (urban pediatric, urban family medicine, and rural family medicine) recruit a group of similar practices (Year 1) 1a. Randomize practices within each type of clinical site to either the intervention or the control group

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.

Influenza Collaboration

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH

Blinding Strategy

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

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Private/public collaboration to increase flu vaccination

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

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.

Group Type OTHER

Usual care

Intervention Type OTHER

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.

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Usual care

This group will continue administering influenza vaccine to their patients in their practice as they normally do.

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Children age 6 mo - 18 yr in up to 20 practices

Exclusion Criteria

* Infants under the age of 6 mo or adults over the age of 18
Minimum Eligible Age

6 Months

Maximum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

FED

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of Colorado, Denver

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

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

Site Status

Aurora Family Medicine

Aurora, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Forum Family Medicine

Aurora, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Premier Pediatrics

Brighton, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Indian Crest Pediatrics

Broomfield, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Centennial Pediatrics

Centennial, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Advanced Pediatrics

Centennial, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Greenwood Pediatrics

Centennial, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Pediatric Pathways

Centennial, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Pediatrics 5280

Centennial, Colorado, United States

Site Status

CIIS

Denver, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Hampden Medical Group

Englewood, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Family Practice Clinic

Fort Morgan, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Ft. Morgan Medical Group

Fort Morgan, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Haxtun Family Medicine

Haxtun, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Valley Medical Center

Julesburg, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Jefferson County Health dept

Lakewood, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Kids First

Lakewood, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Denver West Pediatrics

Lakewood, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Focus on Kids

Littleton, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Lone Tree Family Medicine

Lone Tree, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Crown Point Pediatrics

Parker, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Northeast County Health Dept

Sterling, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Mountain Land Pediatrics

Thornton, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Pediatrics West

Wheat Ridge, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Wray Clinic

Wray, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Yuma Clinic

Yuma, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

1U01IP000320

Identifier Type: NIH

Identifier Source: secondary_id

View Link

10-0589

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Influenza Reminder Text-Messaging
NCT06587984 COMPLETED NA
Flu Shot Pre-visit Questionnaire
NCT05508698 COMPLETED NA