Impact of measles vaccination strategies on vaccination rates in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Kiddus Yitbarek, Abela Mahimbo, Firew Tekle Bobo, Mirkuzie Woldie, Meru Sheel, Jane Frawley, Andrew Hayen
{"title":"Impact of measles vaccination strategies on vaccination rates in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Kiddus Yitbarek, Abela Mahimbo, Firew Tekle Bobo, Mirkuzie Woldie, Meru Sheel, Jane Frawley, Andrew Hayen","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-016647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>While many interventions aim to raise measles vaccination coverage in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), their overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are unknown. We did a review to identify and synthesise scientific research that evaluated the impact and cost-effectiveness of measles vaccination strategies on measles vaccination coverage, timeliness, hospitalisation rates, and mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this review, we searched for English-language articles published between 2012 and July 2023 in eight databases, including PubMed, ProQuest, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also included relevant grey literature sources. The review focused on studies evaluating the impact of vaccination strategies on vaccination-related outcomes in children under 5. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines throughout the process, we used Covidence software to manage most review activities. Two independent reviewers screened articles, assessed their quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and extracted data using a predefined electronic tool. We predetermined measles vaccination coverage and timeliness as the primary outcomes, with hospitalisation and mortality as secondary outcomes. A random-effects model was employed for the meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 44 articles, of which 14 were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis indicated that vaccination-targeting interventions such as vaccination reminders, cash incentives, community engagement and health education activities increase measles vaccination coverage (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.27). Our analysis also indicated that interventions such as vaccine reminders, educational programmes and incentives improved timely vaccination. Furthermore, we identified cost-effective strategies such as geographically informed microplanning, unrestricted vial opening, supplementary immunisation activities, community engagement, outreach programmes and financial incentives.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most of the identified vaccination interventions significantly improve measles vaccination coverage and timeliness in LMICs while remaining cost-effective. Tailoring these interventions to local contexts is crucial for maximising their effectiveness in protecting children from measles and its adverse consequences.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42023433125.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"10 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11815466/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-016647","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: While many interventions aim to raise measles vaccination coverage in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), their overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are unknown. We did a review to identify and synthesise scientific research that evaluated the impact and cost-effectiveness of measles vaccination strategies on measles vaccination coverage, timeliness, hospitalisation rates, and mortality.

Methods: In this review, we searched for English-language articles published between 2012 and July 2023 in eight databases, including PubMed, ProQuest, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also included relevant grey literature sources. The review focused on studies evaluating the impact of vaccination strategies on vaccination-related outcomes in children under 5. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines throughout the process, we used Covidence software to manage most review activities. Two independent reviewers screened articles, assessed their quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and extracted data using a predefined electronic tool. We predetermined measles vaccination coverage and timeliness as the primary outcomes, with hospitalisation and mortality as secondary outcomes. A random-effects model was employed for the meta-analysis.

Results: We identified 44 articles, of which 14 were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis indicated that vaccination-targeting interventions such as vaccination reminders, cash incentives, community engagement and health education activities increase measles vaccination coverage (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.27). Our analysis also indicated that interventions such as vaccine reminders, educational programmes and incentives improved timely vaccination. Furthermore, we identified cost-effective strategies such as geographically informed microplanning, unrestricted vial opening, supplementary immunisation activities, community engagement, outreach programmes and financial incentives.

Conclusion: Most of the identified vaccination interventions significantly improve measles vaccination coverage and timeliness in LMICs while remaining cost-effective. Tailoring these interventions to local contexts is crucial for maximising their effectiveness in protecting children from measles and its adverse consequences.

Prospero registration number: CRD42023433125.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信