Welcome to CDC Stacks | Use of Immunization Information Systems in Primary Care - 43931 | CDC Public Access
Stacks Logo
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.
 
 
Help
Clear All Simple Search
Advanced Search
Use of Immunization Information Systems in Primary Care
  • Published Date:
    Sep 14 2016
  • Source:
    Am J Prev Med. 52(2):173-182.


Public Access Version Available on: February 01, 2018 information icon
Please check back on the date listed above.
Details:
  • Pubmed ID:
    27639786
  • Pubmed Central ID:
    PMC5253311
  • Funding:
    CC999999/Intramural CDC HHS/United States
    U01 IP000849/IP/NCIRD CDC HHS/United States
  • Document Type:
  • Collection(s):
  • Description:
    Introduction

    Immunization information systems (IISs) are highly effective for increasing vaccination rates but information about how primary care physicians use them is limited.

    Methods

    Pediatricians, family physicians (FPs), and general internists (GIMs) were surveyed by e-mail and mail from January 2015 to April 2015 from all states with an existing IIS. Providers were recruited to be representative of national provider organization memberships. Multivariable log binomial regression examined factors associated with IIS use (October 2015–April 2016).

    Results

    Response rates among pediatricians, FPs, and GIMs, respectively, were 75% (325/435), 68% (310/459), and 63% (272/431). A proportion of pediatricians (5%), FPs (14%), and GIMs (48%) did not know there was a state/local IIS; 81%, 72%, and 27% reported using an IIS (p < 0.0001). Among those who used IISs, 64% of pediatricians, 61% of FPs, and 22% of GIMs thought the IIS could tell them a patient’s immunization needs; 22%, 29%, and 51% did not know. The most frequently reported major barriers to use included the IIS not updating the electronic medical record (29%, 28%, 35%) and lack of ability to submit data electronically (22%, 27%, 31%). Factors associated with lower IIS use included FP (adjusted risk ratio=0.85; 95% CI=0.75, 0.97) or GIM (adjusted risk ratio=0.33; 95% CI=0.25, 0.42) versus pediatric specialty and older versus younger provider age (adjusted risk ratio=0.96; 95 CI%=0.94, 0.98).

    Conclusions

    There are substantial gaps in knowledge of IIS capabilities, especially among GIMs; barriers to interoperability between IISs and electronic medical records affect all specialties. Closing these gaps may increase use of proven IIS functions including decision support and reminder/recall.

  • Supporting Files:
    No Additional Files