Search

Integration of vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) with other essential health services for adolescents has been proposed in global strategies and tested in demonstration projects in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Published experiences, global guidance, and one key example, the implementation of "HPV Plus" in Tanzania, all demonstrate the need for greater operational evidence to guide future implementation and policy. Review of experiences earlier in the life course, integrating post-partum family planning with infant immunization, show lessons from 13 LMICs that can apply to provision of adolescent health information and services alongside HPV vaccination. Three distinct models of integration emerge from this review comprising: 1) multiple tasks and functions by health staff providing vaccination and other care, or 2) secondary tasks added to the main function of vaccination, or 3) co-location of matched services provided by different staff. These models, with strengths and weaknesses demonstrated in family planning and immunization experiences, apply in different ways to the three main platforms used for HPV vaccination: school, facility or community. For HPV vaccination policy and programming, an initial need is to combine the existing evidence on vaccine service delivery - including coverage, efficiency, cost, and cost-effectiveness information - with what is known on how integration works in practice; the operational detail and models employed. This synthesis may enable assessment which models best suit the different service delivery platforms. An additional need is to link this with more tailored local assessments of the adolescent burden of disease and other determinants of their well-being to develop new thinking on what can and cannot be done to integrate other services alongside HPV vaccination. New approaches placing adolescents at the center are needed to design services tailored to their preferences and needs. The potential synergies with cervical cancer screening and treatment for older generations of women, also require further exploration. Coordinated action aligning HPV vaccination with broader adolescent health and wellbeing will generate social, economic and demographic benefits, which in themselves are sufficient justification to devote more attention to integrated approaches.

Providers, managers, and clients valued the integrated service delivery model. Trends indicated slightly higher family planning uptake in intervention facilities, but that difference was not statistically significant. Intrafacility referrals by postpartum women did not negatively affect immunization utilization rates., Background: Integration of family planning and immunization services provides an opportunity to meet women's need for postpartum family planning and infants' vaccination needs through client-centered care, while reducing financial and opportunity costs for families. The United States Agency for International Development's Maternal and Child Survival Program (MCSP) supported the Liberia Ministry of Health to scale up integrated family planning and immunization services as part of a broader service delivery and health systems recovery program after the Ebola epidemic. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods program evaluation in 22 health facilities in Grand Bassa and Lofa counties. Family planning uptake and immunization dropout rates at project sites were compared to rates at 18 matched health facilities in the same counties. We conducted 34 focus group discussions with community members and 43 key informant interviews with health care providers and managers to explore quality of care and contextual factors affecting provision and use of integrated services including postpartum family planning. Results: From November 2016 to July 2017, 1,066 women accepted referrals from immunization to family planning counseling (10% of all vaccinator-caregiver interactions); the majority of women who were referred (75%) accepted a family planning method the same day. Trends indicated slightly higher family planning uptake in intervention over nonintervention facilities, but differences were not statistically significant. Pentavalent vaccine dropout rates did not increase in intervention compared to nonintervention facilities indicating no negative impact on utilization of immunization services. Clients and providers expressed that the integrated services reduced costs and time for the clients, educated mothers about postpartum family planning, and ensured infants were completing their vaccinations. Providers expressed the need for increased human resources to meet the elevated demand for family planning counseling services and additional focus on community-level social and behavior change activities. Both groups emphasized that social stigma and norms about postpartum sexual abstinence prevented many women from seeking postpartum family planning services. Conclusion: Although scaling up integrated family planning-immunization services may be programmatically feasible and acceptable to clients and providers, the intervention's success and ability to understand and quantify impact are driven by the effect of contextual factors and fidelity to the intervention approach. Contextual factors need to be understood before implementation, measured during implementation, and addressed throughout implementation to maximize the approach's impact on service utilization and health outcomes.

Vaccine costs in the developing world have grown from < US$1/child in 2001 to about $21 for boys and $35 for girls in 2014, as more and costlier vaccines are being introduced into national immunization programs. To address these and other challenges, additional efforts are needed to strengthen 8 critical components of routine immunization: (1) policy, standards, and guidelines; (2) governance, organization, and management; (3) human resources; (4) vaccine, cold chain, and logistics management; (5) service delivery; (6) communication and community partnerships; (7) data generation and use; and (8) sustainable financing.

There is limited understanding of why routine immunization (RI) coverage improves in some settings in Africa and not in others. Using a grounded theory approach, we conducted in-depth case studies to understand pathways to coverage improvement by comparing immunization programme experience in 12 districts in three countries (Ethiopia, Cameroon and Ghana). Drawing on positive deviance or assets model techniques we compared the experience of districts where diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP3)/pentavalent3 (Penta3) coverage improved with districts where DTP3/Penta3 coverage remained unchanged (or steady) over the same period, focusing on basic readiness to deliver immunization services and drivers of coverage improvement. The results informed a model for immunization coverage improvement that emphasizes the dynamics of immunization systems at district level. In all districts, whether improving or steady, we found that a set of basic RI system resources were in place from 2006 to 2010 and did not observe major differences in infrastructure. We found that the differences in coverage trends were due to factors other than basic RI system capacity or service readiness. We identified six common drivers of RI coverage performance improvement-four direct drivers and two enabling drivers-that were present in well-performing districts and weaker or absent in steady coverage districts, and map the pathways from driver to improved supply, demand and coverage. Findings emphasize the critical role of implementation strategies and the need for locally skilled managers that are capable of tailoring strategies to specific settings and community needs. The case studies are unique in their focus on the positive drivers of change and the identification of pathways to coverage improvement, an approach that should be considered in future studies and routine assessments of district-level immunization system performance.

In early 1822 Dr. James Smith, the Baltimore-based United States vaccine agent, received a disturbing letter from Dr. John Ward of Tarboro, North Carolina. Ward had recently vaccinated some patients with vaccine from the National Vaccine Institute, and he was concerned about its violent effects on his patients. According to physicians like Smith, vaccine was preferable to smallpox because it was a gender virus that still conveyed immunity to that disease, the scourge of the eighteenth century. Yet many of Ward's patients were now covered in a "crop of pustules." Ward wrote frantically to Smith telling him in detail about the vaccine he had used-scabs wrapped in a small piece of paper. Smith sent back a puzzled reply, asking how Ward had come by this packet. Smith noted that he always sent out the institute's vaccine preserved on glass, not as loose scabs in paper, and suggested that perhaps the vaccine had become "inert" in transit. Meanwhile, Ward obtained more trustworthy vaccine from a nearby colleague and successfully vaccinated his neighbors to prevent smallpox from spreading. All together, twelve people contracted the dreaded disease, although no one died.1Though Ward's actions halted the spread of smallpox in Tarboro, the medical emergency quickly morphed into a political batde over federal government involvement in affairs "best left to the states."2 In further correspondence among Smith, Ward, and another North Carolina physician, Benjamin Hunter, it emerged that the packet of vaccine enclosed in the letter Ward received from Smith was marked with a square box with a dot in its middle and the word "variol"-the indication Smith used for himself to denote the packets of potential smallpox scabs he collected to examine. How this packet was included in the letter to Ward remains unclear, but upon learning of the mistake, Smith castigated Ward for being so obtuse as to use scabs marked "variol," a word any trained physician should know referred to smallpox. For his part, Ward demanded to know why Smith would even have kept such a packet, let alone allowed it to slip into an official institute letter. To this challenge Smith never had a satisfactory answer.3 When word of the Tarboro disaster and Smith's confused conduct reached Congress, representatives wasted litde time in investigating and disbanding the National Vaccine Institute. Their reasoning, however, was not that vaccine was dangerous. Instead, congressman after congressman rose to register objection to the danger of federal involvement in health concerns, which they viewed as a local problem. Smith's failure as vaccine agent, they opined, was the result of improper government action. Vaccine itself emerged unblemished from the political fray.* * * 4The political theater surrounding the death of the National Vaccine Institute was the last stage in more than two decades of ideological conflict over the implementation of vaccination in the young American republic. First publicized in Edward Jenner's 1798 pamphlet, An Inquiry in to the Causes and Effects of the Variolae Vaccinae, the cowpox virus generated a global sensation as a "wonderful Prophylactic" against smallpox in the early nineteenth century. Jenner had conducted experiments confirming a longstanding folk belief that the cowpox virus protected against smallpox when inserted into the human body, a discovery welcomed as a sign of progress in science and medicine. In the United States physicians and political visionaries were especially excited about vaccine, as the "simple, easy, and intelligible" preventive seemed uniquely suited to both the enlightened ideals and the practical needs of the American republic.5 Yet because Americans interpreted these ideals in two fundamentally different ways, vaccination became a significant batdeground in disagreement over the shape of America's political future. For twenty years, conflicting political ideologies-one egalitarian, one more hierarchical-sought to shape the way in which Americans implemented Jenner's medical innovation. …

Mobilizing vaccinators to provide mothers key family planning information and referrals to co-located, same-day family planning services was feasible in resource-limited areas of Liberia, leading to substantial increases in contraceptive use. Conversely, impact on immunization rates was less clear, but at a minimum there was no decrease in doses administered., Globally, unmet need for postpartum family planning remains high, while immunization services are among the most wide-reaching and equitable interventions. Given overlapping time frames, integrating these services provides an opportunity to leverage existing health visits to offer women more comprehensive services. From March through November 2012, Liberia's government, with support from the Maternal and Child Health Integrated Program (MCHIP), piloted an integrated family planning and immunization model at 10 health facilities in Bong and Lofa counties. Vaccinators provided mothers bringing infants for routine immunization with targeted family planning and immunization messages and same-day referrals to co-located family planning services. In February 2013, we compared service statistics for family planning and immunization during the pilot against the previous year's statistics. We also conducted in-depth interviews with service providers and other personnel and focus group discussions with clients. Results showed that referral acceptance across the facilities varied from 10% to 45% per month, on average. Over 80% of referral acceptors completed the family planning visit that day, of whom over 90% accepted a contraceptive method that day. The total number of new contraceptive users at participating facilities increased by 73% in Bong and by 90% in Lofa. Women referred from immunization who accepted family planning that day accounted for 44% and 34% of total new contraceptive users in Bong and Lofa, respectively. In Lofa, pilot sites administered 35% more Penta 1 and 21% more Penta 3 doses during the pilot period compared with the same period of the previous year, while Penta 1 and Penta 3 administration decreased in non-pilot facilities. In Bong, there was little difference in the number of Penta 1 and Penta 3 doses administered between pilot and non-pilot facilities. In both counties, Penta 1 to Penta 3 dropout rates increased at pilot sites but not in non-pilot facilities, possibly due to higher than average background dropout rates at pilot sites prior to the intervention in Lofa and the disproportionate effect of data from 1 large facility in Bong. The project provided considerable basic support to assess this proof of concept. However, results suggest that introducing a simple model that is minimally disruptive to existing immunization service delivery can facilitate integration. The model is currently being scaled-up to other counties in Liberia, which could potentially contribute to increased postpartum contraceptive uptake, leading to longer birth intervals and improved health outcomes for children and mothers.

Background Anecdotal reports suggest that unsafe injections may transmit blood-borne pathogens in Mongolia. Methods The Ministry of Health of Mongolia collected information on injection practices, their determinants, and their consequences through interviews and observations of a small convenience sample of prescribers, injection providers, and members of the general population. Results The 65 members of the general population reported receiving an average of 13 injections per year. New, single-use injection devices were used in the 20 health care facilities visited. There were breaks in infection control practices while administering injections, including observations of 500-mL intravenous infusion bottles used as multiple-dose diluent vials and 8 of the 28 providers (28%) reporting reuse of device on the same patient. Injection providers reported 2.6 needle-stick injuries per year. Contaminated sharps were burned in a drum. Among persons interviewed, 19 of the 21 prescribers (90%) and 49% of the population were aware of the potential risk of HIV transmission through unsafe injections. Conclusions A multidisciplinary initiative is necessary to achieve safe and appropriate use of injections in Mongolia through (1) behavior change, (2) increasing availability of injection devices and sharps boxes, and (3) appropriate sharps waste management.

What can you do if you are concerned about a child in your class, and how can schools create a culture that helps protect against eating disorders? We get advice from Beat.