Systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions to increase the uptake of vaccines recommended during pregnancy.

IF 6.9 1区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY
Annette K Regan, Honorine Uwimana, Stacey L Rowe, Elizabeth Jitka Olsanska, Brianna Agnew, Eliana Castillo, Alice Fiddian-Green, Michelle L Giles
{"title":"Systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions to increase the uptake of vaccines recommended during pregnancy.","authors":"Annette K Regan, Honorine Uwimana, Stacey L Rowe, Elizabeth Jitka Olsanska, Brianna Agnew, Eliana Castillo, Alice Fiddian-Green, Michelle L Giles","doi":"10.1038/s41541-025-01120-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although immunization during pregnancy can protect mothers and their infants from vaccine-preventable morbidity and mortality, vaccination rates are often poor. We systematically reviewed the literature from inception to July 4, 2023, for randomized and non-randomized quasi-experimental studies estimating the effects of interventions to increase vaccination during pregnancy. Of 9331 studies screened, 36 met inclusion criteria, including 18 demand-side interventions, 11 supply-side interventions, and seven multi-level (demand and supply-side) interventions. Demand-side interventions commonly addressed patient education, showing modest improvement (pooled RR 1.18; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.33; I<sup>2</sup> = 63.1%, low certainty). Supply-side interventions commonly implemented Assessment-Feedback-Incentive-eXchange interventions with little improvement (pooled RR 1.13; 95% CI: 0.96, 1.33; I<sup>2</sup> = 94.0%, low certainty). Multi-level interventions were modestly effective in increasing vaccination (pooled RR 1.62; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.42; I<sup>2</sup> = 97%, very low certainty). Interventions identified in the literature mostly resulted in low to moderate increases in vaccination with likely high heterogeneity and low to very low certainty in the findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":19335,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Vaccines","volume":"10 1","pages":"76"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12009365/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Vaccines","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41541-025-01120-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although immunization during pregnancy can protect mothers and their infants from vaccine-preventable morbidity and mortality, vaccination rates are often poor. We systematically reviewed the literature from inception to July 4, 2023, for randomized and non-randomized quasi-experimental studies estimating the effects of interventions to increase vaccination during pregnancy. Of 9331 studies screened, 36 met inclusion criteria, including 18 demand-side interventions, 11 supply-side interventions, and seven multi-level (demand and supply-side) interventions. Demand-side interventions commonly addressed patient education, showing modest improvement (pooled RR 1.18; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.33; I2 = 63.1%, low certainty). Supply-side interventions commonly implemented Assessment-Feedback-Incentive-eXchange interventions with little improvement (pooled RR 1.13; 95% CI: 0.96, 1.33; I2 = 94.0%, low certainty). Multi-level interventions were modestly effective in increasing vaccination (pooled RR 1.62; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.42; I2 = 97%, very low certainty). Interventions identified in the literature mostly resulted in low to moderate increases in vaccination with likely high heterogeneity and low to very low certainty in the findings.

增加妊娠期间推荐接种疫苗的干预措施的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
虽然怀孕期间的免疫接种可以保护母亲及其婴儿免受疫苗可预防的发病率和死亡率的影响,但疫苗接种率往往很低。我们系统地回顾了从开始到2023年7月4日的文献,随机和非随机准实验研究估计了干预措施对增加妊娠期间疫苗接种的影响。在筛选的9331项研究中,有36项符合纳入标准,其中包括18项需求侧干预,11项供给侧干预和7项多层次(需求和供给侧)干预。需求方干预措施通常涉及患者教育,显示出适度的改善(合并RR 1.18;95% ci: 1.04, 1.33;I2 = 63.1%,低确定性)。供应方干预措施通常实施评估-反馈-激励-交换干预措施,但收效甚微(合计RR 1.13;95% ci: 0.96, 1.33;I2 = 94.0%,低确定性)。多层次干预在增加疫苗接种方面效果一般(合并RR为1.62;95% ci: 1.09, 2.42;I2 = 97%,非常低的确定性)。文献中确定的干预措施大多导致低至中等程度的疫苗接种增加,结果可能具有高异质性和低至非常低的确定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
NPJ Vaccines
NPJ Vaccines Immunology and Microbiology-Immunology
CiteScore
11.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
146
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Online-only and open access, npj Vaccines is dedicated to highlighting the most important scientific advances in vaccine research and development.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信