CDC NIP/NIC Page
CDC NIP/NIC Home Page

Monday, March 6, 2006 - 11:05 AM
10

Evaluation of Immunize LA Kids' Enhanced-AFIX Intervention in South Los Angeles: What Worked?

Julia Heinzerling1, Tamekia Mosley1, Lizz Romo1, Terry A. Silberman1, M. Stephan Baranov1, and Oliver Brooks2. (1) South Los Angeles Health Projects, LA Biomedical Research Institute @ Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, 2930 West Imperial Hwy. Ste. 601, Inglewood, CA, USA, (2) Watts Health Care Corp, 10300 S. Compton Ave, Los Angeles, CA, USA


Learning Objectives for this Presentation:
By the end of the presentation, participants will be able to:
1) Describe the methods utilized to evaluate an enhanced-AFIX intervention;
2) Describe findings of post-AFIX provider interviews;
3) Describe provider feedback on the most effective intervention elements.


Background:
Immunize LA Kids was formed under the CDC's Racial and Ethnic Approaches to Community Health Initiative - REACH 2010. It is administered by South Los Angeles Health Projects, a community-based unit of the Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at the Harbor-UCLA Medical Center. Project interventions included an “enhanced-AFIX” intervention that was conducted between 2000 and 2005. Following the conclusion of the intervention, we conducted interviews with participating practices to gain insights into their motivation for participation, assessment of the program's effectiveness, and interest in future services.

Objectives:
To evaluate an “enhanced-AFIX” protocol, which was designed to improve provider immunization practices and increase immunization up-to-date rates among two-year-old African American and Latino children.

Methods:
We administered an enhanced-AFIX intervention to 75 private providers over five years. Exit interviews were conducted with consenting providers to obtain feedback on the intervention, the impact of services, and future support strategies.

Results:
Preliminary results indicate that annual CASA assessments and follow-up visits provide an important reminder to prioritize and implement recommended immunization practices. Results provide insights into primary motivators for participation in the intervention, which include a desire to learn practice immunization up-to-date rates and to address low rates. In addition, providers revealed the types of resources that were most helpful to them, and identified the services, such as an immunization telephone support line, which were less relevant.

Conclusions:
Annual assessments and follow-up visits provide an important reminder to prioritize attention to recommended immunization practices. Those implementing AFIX interventions can improve effectiveness by integrating motivators for participation and preferred services into the intervention design.

See more of Improving Immunization Coverage Levels in Provider Offices and in the Community
See more of The 40th National Immunization Conference (NIC)