首页> 外文期刊>The British journal of general practice: the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners >Cluster randomised controlled trial of an educational outreach visit to improve influenza and pneumococcal immunisation rates in primary care.
【24h】

Cluster randomised controlled trial of an educational outreach visit to improve influenza and pneumococcal immunisation rates in primary care.

机译:一项针对教育外访的聚类随机对照试验,旨在提高初级保健中的流感和肺炎球菌免疫率。

获取原文
       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Improvement in the delivery of influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations to high-risk groups is an important aspect of preventive care for primary healthcare teams. AIM: To investigate the effect of an educational outreach visit to primary healthcare teams on influenza and pneumococcal vaccination uptake in high-risk patients. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Thirty general practices in the Trent region, UK. METHODS: Fifteen practices were randomised to intervention and 15 to the control group after stratifying for baseline vaccination rate. All intervention practices were offered and received an educational outreach visit to primary healthcare teams, in addition to audit and feedback directed at improving influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates in high-risk groups. Control practices received audit and feedback alone. All practices measured influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates in high-risk groups. Primary outcomes were improvements in vaccination rates in patients aged 65 years and over, and patients with coronary heart disease (CHD), diabetes and a history of splenectomy. RESULTS: Improvements in pneumococcal vaccination rates in the intervention practices were significantly greater compared with controls in patients with CHD, 14.8% versus 6.5% (odds ratio [OR] = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13 to 1.34) and diabetes, 15.5% versus 6.8% (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.08 to 1.29) but not splenectomy, 6.5% versus 4.7% (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.42). Improvements for influenza vaccination were also usually greater in intervention practices but did not reach statistical significance. The increases for influenza vaccination in intervention versus control practices were for CHD, 18.1% versus 13.1% (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.12); diabetes, 15.5% versus 12.0% (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.16), splenectomy 16.1% versus 2.9% (OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.78 to 1.93); and those over 65 years 20.7% versus 25.4% (OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.02). CONCLUSION: Practices where primary care teams received an educational outreach visit demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in uptake in high-risk groups for pneumococcal but not influenza vaccine.
机译:背景:改善向高危人群提供流感和肺炎球菌疫苗的工作是基层医疗团队预防性护理的重要方面。目的:调查对初级保健团队进行的教育外访对高危患者的流感和肺炎球菌疫苗接种的影响。设计:集群随机对照试验。地点:英国特伦特地区的30种常规做法。方法:对基线疫苗接种率进行分层后,将15种方法随机分为干预措施,将15种方法随机分为对照组。提供了所有干预措施并接受了对初级保健团队的教育性外访,此外还进行了旨在提高高危人群的流感和肺炎球菌疫苗接种率的审核和反馈。控制措施仅接受审核和反馈。所有做法均测量了高危人群的流感和肺炎球菌疫苗接种率。主要结果是改善65岁及65岁以上患者以及患有冠心病(CHD),糖尿病和脾切除史的患者的疫苗接种率。结果:在患有冠心病的患者中,与对照组相比,干预措施中肺炎球菌疫苗接种率的改善明显高于对照组,分别为14.8%和6.5%(优势比[OR] = 1.23,95%置信区间[CI] = 1.13至1.34)和糖尿病,分别为15.5%和6.8%(OR = 1.18,95%CI = 1.08至1.29),而不是脾切除术,是6.5%和4.7%(OR = 0.96,95%CI = 0.65至1.42)。在干预措施中,流感疫苗接种的改善通常也更大,但未达到统计学意义。与对照组相比,干预组的流感疫苗接种增加了18.1%和13.1%(OR = 1.06,95%CI = 0.99至1.12);糖尿病,15.5%对12.0%(OR = 1.07,95%CI = 0.99至1.16),脾切除术16.1%对2.9%(OR = 1.22,95%CI = 0.78至1.93);而65岁以上的受访者则为20.7%,而同期为25.4%(OR = 0.99,95%CI = 0.96至1.02)。结论:基层医疗团队接受教育访问的实践表明,高危人群中肺炎球菌而非流感疫苗的摄入明显改善。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号