Social inequities in vaccination coverage among infants and pre-school children in Europe and Australia - a systematic review.
Child primary care services
Equity
Immunization
Vaccination uptake
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Mar 2019
12 Mar 2019
Historique:
received:
18
06
2018
accepted:
25
02
2019
entrez:
15
3
2019
pubmed:
15
3
2019
medline:
16
5
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Herd immunity levels of vaccine uptake are still not reached in some high-income countries, usually in countries with persisting social inequities in uptake. Previous studies have focused on factors within one health care system. This study takes a broader health care systems approach by reviewing the socioeconomic distribution of vaccination coverage on the national level in light of structural and organizational differences of primary care for children. A systematic literature review of socio-economic patterns of uptake of Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) and/or Diphteria-Tetanus-Pertusis (DTP) in population based studies of children 0-5 years of age living in the 30 European Economic Area (EEA) or European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries and Australia, was carried out using the PRISMA guidelines. The health care system in the countries in the study were categorized by degree of freedom of the primary care provider (hierarchical or non-hierarchical) and whether preventive services were provided in a separate organization (well-baby clinics). The review identified 15 studies from 10 European countries and Australia that fulfilled the criteria. Although the heterogeneity of the socio-economic indicators did not allow for a conclusive meta-analysis, the study pointed towards lower levels of inequities in primary care models with well-baby clinics. In non-hierarchical primary care organizations that also lacked well-baby clinics, socioeconomic gaps in uptake were often found to be large. This review indicates that structural and organizational aspects of health care systems for young children are important for equity in vaccine uptake.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Herd immunity levels of vaccine uptake are still not reached in some high-income countries, usually in countries with persisting social inequities in uptake. Previous studies have focused on factors within one health care system. This study takes a broader health care systems approach by reviewing the socioeconomic distribution of vaccination coverage on the national level in light of structural and organizational differences of primary care for children.
METHODS
METHODS
A systematic literature review of socio-economic patterns of uptake of Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) and/or Diphteria-Tetanus-Pertusis (DTP) in population based studies of children 0-5 years of age living in the 30 European Economic Area (EEA) or European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries and Australia, was carried out using the PRISMA guidelines. The health care system in the countries in the study were categorized by degree of freedom of the primary care provider (hierarchical or non-hierarchical) and whether preventive services were provided in a separate organization (well-baby clinics).
RESULTS
RESULTS
The review identified 15 studies from 10 European countries and Australia that fulfilled the criteria. Although the heterogeneity of the socio-economic indicators did not allow for a conclusive meta-analysis, the study pointed towards lower levels of inequities in primary care models with well-baby clinics. In non-hierarchical primary care organizations that also lacked well-baby clinics, socioeconomic gaps in uptake were often found to be large.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This review indicates that structural and organizational aspects of health care systems for young children are important for equity in vaccine uptake.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30866881
doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6597-4
pii: 10.1186/s12889-019-6597-4
pmc: PMC6417277
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
290Subventions
Organisme : Horizon 2020
ID : 634201
Références
Milbank Q. 2005;83(3):457-502
pubmed: 16202000
Vaccine. 2007 Apr 20;25(16):3240-3
pubmed: 17320249
Vaccine. 2007 Jun 21;25(26):4940-8
pubmed: 17524528
Eur J Pediatr. 2008 Oct;167(10):1161-8
pubmed: 18204860
BMJ. 2008 Apr 5;336(7647):754-7
pubmed: 18309964
Int J Public Health. 2008;53(4):180-7
pubmed: 18716721
Vaccine. 2009 Apr 28;27(19):2563-9
pubmed: 19428862
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Vaccine. 2010 Feb 17;28(7):1861-9
pubmed: 20006570
CMAJ. 2010 Mar 9;182(4):E199-200
pubmed: 20142376
Vaccine. 2010 Aug 31;28(38):6338-43
pubmed: 20637302
BMC Fam Pract. 2010 Oct 27;11:81
pubmed: 20979612
Eur J Pediatr. 2012 Oct;171(10):1533-40
pubmed: 22729242
J Child Health Care. 2013 Mar;17(1):17-29
pubmed: 23197384
Arch Pediatr. 2013 Mar;20(3):241-7
pubmed: 23375080
Eur J Public Health. 2014 Apr;24(2):304-9
pubmed: 23531526
BMC Public Health. 2013 Oct 02;13:908
pubmed: 24083352
Eur J Epidemiol. 2014 Aug;29(8):551-8
pubmed: 24407880
Vaccine. 2014 Jun 5;32(27):3438-44
pubmed: 24721529
Vaccine. 2015 Jun 26;33(29):3377-83
pubmed: 26003493
Epidemiol Infect. 2016 Apr;144(6):1201-11
pubmed: 26542197
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2017 Jan;71(1):87-97
pubmed: 27535769
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jan 28;17(1):91
pubmed: 28129751
Int J Equity Health. 2017 Jan 28;16(1):29
pubmed: 28129771
Vaccine. 2017 Aug 24;35(36):4673-4680
pubmed: 28757057
Expert Rev Vaccines. 2017 Nov;16(11):1107-1118
pubmed: 28914112