Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T14:39:17.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Clinical Trial of Standing-Orders Strategies to Increase the Inpatient Influenza Vaccination Rate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

William E. Trick ,
Krishna Das ,
Mary N. Gerard ,
Marjorie Charles-Damte ,
Gregory Murphy ,
Irene Benson  and
Julia Y. Morita
William E. Trick*
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
Krishna Das
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
Mary N. Gerard
Affiliation:
John H. Stroger Hospital of Cook Countyand Rush Medical College, Medical Informatics, Cook County Bureau of Health Services, Chicago, Illinois
Marjorie Charles-Damte
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
Gregory Murphy
Affiliation:
Department of Nursing, Chicago, Illinois
Irene Benson
Affiliation:
Department of Nursing, Chicago, Illinois
Julia Y. Morita
Affiliation:
Chicago Department of Public Health, Chicago, Illinois
*
Collaborative Research Unit, John H. Stroger Hospital of Cook County, 1900 W. Polk St., Ste. 1600, Chicago, IL 60612 (wtrick@cchil.org)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We compared strategies to increase the rate of influenza vaccination. A written standing-orders policy that enabled nurses to vaccinate patients was compared with augmentation of the standing-orders policy with either electronic opt-out orders for physicians or electronic reminders to nurses. Use of opt-out orders yielded the highest vaccination rate (12% of patients), followed by use of nursing reminders (6%); use of the standing-orders policy alone was ineffective.

Type
Concise Communications
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 86 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Bratzler, DW, Houck, PM, Jiang, H, et al. Failure to vaccinate Medicare inpatients: a missed opportunity. Arch Intern Med 2002;162:2349–2356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), 2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2005;54:1–40.Google Scholar
3.Donato, AA, Motz, LM, Wilson, G, Lloyd, BJ. Efficacy of multiple influenza vaccine delivery systems in a single facility. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007;28:219–221.Google Scholar
4.Crouse, BJ, Nichol, K, Peterson, DC, Grimm, MB. Hospital-based strategies for improving influenza vaccination rates. J Fam Pract 1994;38:258–261.Google ScholarPubMed
5.Dexter, PR, Perkins, SM, Maharry, KS, Jones, K, McDonald, CJ. Inpatient computer-based standing orders vs physician reminders to increase influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates: a randomized trial. JAMA 2004;292:2366–2371.Google Scholar
6.Winston, CA, Lindley, MC, Wortley, PM. Lessons learned from inpatient vaccination in Michigan. Am J Med Qual 2006;21:125–133.Google Scholar
7.Bloom, HG, Wheeler, DA, Linn, J. A managed care organization's attempt to increase influenza and pneumococcal immunizations for older adults in an acute care setting. J Am Geriatr Soc 1999;47:106–110.Google Scholar
8.Gerard, M, Trick, WE, Das, K, Charles-Damte, M, Murphy, G, Benson, IM. Use of clinical decision support to increase influenza vaccination: multi-year evolution of the system. J Amer Med Inform Assoc 2007;15:776–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Nichol, K. Cost-benefit analysis of a strategy to vaccinate healthy working adults against influenza. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:749–759.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed