Does the use of personal electronic health records increase vaccine uptake? A systematic review.


Journal

Vaccine
ISSN: 1873-2518
Titre abrégé: Vaccine
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8406899

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 08 2020
Historique:
received: 23 03 2020
revised: 24 05 2020
accepted: 28 05 2020
pubmed: 6 7 2020
medline: 28 4 2021
entrez: 5 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Although Personal Electronic Health Records (PEHR) have been identified as innovative tools enabling the provision of patient-centered care and prevention, evidence on the impact of their use is scant. With PEHRs being more and more marketed as easily implementable and cost-effective instruments to provide people with direct control on their health, the question on whether their use might be associated with the priority to improve vaccine coverage arises. We conducted a systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines to retrieve, quantitatively pool and critically appraise the effectiveness of PEHR access on vaccine uptake. Analysis on PEHR effectiveness were carried out for the following comparison strata: i) PEHR access vs no intervention (standard care, no access to PEHR), ii) PEHR access only vs access to PEHR with additional features (e.g. health education materials, active reminders). Of 3114 identified citations, 8 studies were included, the majority published in the US and before 2015; 62% were randomized trials, the rest having an observational study design. Evidence suggests a moderate positive impact of PEHR access in increasing vaccine uptake, with data available for influenza and pneumococcal vaccines, diabetic patients and childhood immunization. Pooled data report the addition of digital communication features, i.e. the delivery of educational messages, reminders and availability of scheduling features might increase vaccine uptake, as compared to PEHR access alone. However, evidence is not conclusive. While immunization programs are struggling to achieve optimal coverage targets, it seems the potential of PEHRSs supporting informed adherence to vaccines recommendations is neither fully exploited nor explored. Which factors mediate the association between PEHRs access and vaccine uptake? Which PEHRs' design and functional components can maximize their impact? On which target populations? Which PEHR models works better for high-risk populations? Our findings can only partially answer those questions and further experimental research is needed.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Although Personal Electronic Health Records (PEHR) have been identified as innovative tools enabling the provision of patient-centered care and prevention, evidence on the impact of their use is scant. With PEHRs being more and more marketed as easily implementable and cost-effective instruments to provide people with direct control on their health, the question on whether their use might be associated with the priority to improve vaccine coverage arises.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines to retrieve, quantitatively pool and critically appraise the effectiveness of PEHR access on vaccine uptake. Analysis on PEHR effectiveness were carried out for the following comparison strata: i) PEHR access vs no intervention (standard care, no access to PEHR), ii) PEHR access only vs access to PEHR with additional features (e.g. health education materials, active reminders).
RESULTS
Of 3114 identified citations, 8 studies were included, the majority published in the US and before 2015; 62% were randomized trials, the rest having an observational study design. Evidence suggests a moderate positive impact of PEHR access in increasing vaccine uptake, with data available for influenza and pneumococcal vaccines, diabetic patients and childhood immunization. Pooled data report the addition of digital communication features, i.e. the delivery of educational messages, reminders and availability of scheduling features might increase vaccine uptake, as compared to PEHR access alone. However, evidence is not conclusive.
CONCLUSION
While immunization programs are struggling to achieve optimal coverage targets, it seems the potential of PEHRSs supporting informed adherence to vaccines recommendations is neither fully exploited nor explored. Which factors mediate the association between PEHRs access and vaccine uptake? Which PEHRs' design and functional components can maximize their impact? On which target populations? Which PEHR models works better for high-risk populations? Our findings can only partially answer those questions and further experimental research is needed.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32620374
pii: S0264-410X(20)30738-6
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.05.083
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Influenza Vaccines 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

5966-5978

Subventions

Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Federica Balzarini (F)

School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.

Beatrice Frascella (B)

School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.

Aurea Oradini-Alacreu (A)

School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.

Giovanni Gaetti (G)

School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.

Pier Luigi Lopalco (PL)

Department of Translational Research, New Technologies in Medicine & Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.

Michael Edelstein (M)

Immunisation and Countermeasures Division, National Infection Service, Public Health England, London, UK; European Public Health Association Section on Infectious Diseases Control.

Natasha Azzopardi-Muscat (N)

Director Country Health Policies and Systems World Health Organisation, Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Carlo Signorelli (C)

School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.

Anna Odone (A)

School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy; Clinical Epidemiology and HTA, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; European Public Health Association Section on Infectious Diseases Control. Electronic address: odone.anna@hsr.it.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH