Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T02:44:11.369Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

(A198) Bringing H1N1 Vaccinations to Vulnerable Populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2011

P. Bollinger
Affiliation:
Consultant, Portland, United States of America
S. Baird
Affiliation:
Consultant, Portland, United States of America
D. Giard
Affiliation:
Consultant, Portland, United States of America
G. Higginson
Affiliation:
Health Authority, Portland, United States of America
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background

Populations that participated in this project represented > 46% of the total H1N1 patients hospitalized and 34% of deaths in the state of Oregon.

Methods

A committee was convened by the Oregon Health Authority to increase access to vulnerable populations. The committee determined the project must be supported by: (1) a local advocacy group; (2) a local Health Department; and (3) an emergency medical services (EMS) provider agency to provide immunization. This project involved outreach to a vulnerable population that may not be able to utilize mass vaccination clinics and may have limited access to medical services. Outreach was accomplished using three models: (1) volunteers delivering meals; (2) mailings to those receiving in-home meals; and (3) a community organization that conducted a flu clinic frequented by people with disabilities. Three models were developed for receiving calls and scheduling appointments. All projects followed the same procedure for vaccine administration.

Results

Seventy home-bound individuals met the criteria for vaccination. Post-survey results indicated: 55.2% lived alone and were homebound. Over 70% had previously received their vaccinations from their healthcare provider and 38.9% were not previously vaccinated due to vaccine availability. Fifty-eight individuals were vaccinated. Partner organizations were surveyed after their efforts were completed. Findings indicated that relationships between the EMS agencies and providers were greatly enhanced.

Conclusions

Outreach using nontraditional partners was an effective method to reach a vulnerable population. The project demonstrated that qualified vaccinators can be mobilized quickly. However, because this resource-intensive effort is more costly than providing mass vaccination, similar projects should only be utilized when less costly means are not effective, or when the risk level of the vulnerable population being served warrants it.

Type
Abstracts of Scientific and Invited Papers 17th World Congress for Disaster and Emergency Medicine
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2011