Monday, October 27, 2003 - 2:00 PM
3643

This presentation is part of A4: Immunization Registries as Tools for Vaccination Coverage Assessment

Use of a Regional Registry to Identify Patterns of Immunization Documentation & Effect on UTD Rates

Allison Kempe1, John F. Steiner2, N. Elaine Lowery3, Lori A Crane4, Brenda L Beaty2, Kellyn Pearson3, Matthew F Daley1, and Stephen Berman1. (1) Department of Pediatrics & the Children's Outcomes Research Program, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, 1056 E. 19th Avenue, B032, Denver, CO, USA, (2) Colorado Health Outcomes Program, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, P.O. Box 6508, F-443, Aurora, CO, USA, (3) Children's Outcome Research Program, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Colorado Immunization Information System, PO Box 6508/F456, Aurora, CO, USA, (4) Preventative Medicine & Biometrics, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, 4200 E 9th Ave, Box C-=245, Denver, CO, USA


KEYWORDS:
Regional Registry, Public and Private Providers, UTD rates, Documentation, Immunizations

BACKGROUND:
The Colorado Rural Immunization Services Project (CRISP) had developed regional registries in two rural regions of Colorado with immunization data from private, community health and public health offices.

OBJECTIVE:
To assess 1) the distribution of immunization records among 3 health delivery sectors and 2) the impact of a regional immunization registry on immunization up-to-date (UTD) rates.

METHOD:
Immunization records in an immunization registry in two rural regions of Colorado were categorized as originating in the private, community health center (CHC) or public health clinic (PHC) sectors. The incremental benefit of the registry was assessed by calculating UTD rates after sequentially adding immunization records from all sectors.

RESULT:
The percentage of children with immunizations in multiple sectors increased as age increased from 7 to 24 months (Region 1: 13% to 31%, p<0.0001; Region 2: 19% to 32%, p<0.0001). Children seen in multiple sectors were more likely to be UTD (Region 1: 64% Multiple, 23% Private, 44%PHC [p<0.01]; Region 2: 72% Multiple, 53% Private, 42%CHC, 49% PHC [p<0.0001] ). The registry resulted in relative increases in UTD rates of 9% for 7 month old and 50% for 24 month old children.

CONCLUSION:
The regional immunization registry is a powerful tool in increasing documented UTD rates and in providing insights into patterns of immunization delivery.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
Learner will be able to describe the effect each sector of health care delivery has on UTD rates in two rural regions of Colorado.

Back to Immunization Registries as Tools for Vaccination Coverage Assessment
Back to The 2003 Immunization Registry Conference (October 27-29, 2003)