Grace W. Ryan PhD, Amanda R. Kahl MS, Don Callaghan BS, Bethany Kintigh RN, Natoshia M. Askelson PhD
{"title":"COVID-19疫苗接种地点:城乡差异","authors":"Grace W. Ryan PhD, Amanda R. Kahl MS, Don Callaghan BS, Bethany Kintigh RN, Natoshia M. Askelson PhD","doi":"10.1111/jrh.12811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Our goal was to compare locations of COVID-19 vaccine provision in urban and rural communities over the course of the pandemic.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We used the Iowa Immunization Registry Information System (IRIS) to identify the organizations providing COVID-19 vaccines (eg, pharmacies, public health departments, and medical providers). Proportions of first-dose vaccines by organization type and patient census-based statistical area were generated. We calculated Chi-square tests to assess differences among metropolitan, micropolitan, and noncore communities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>IRIS data revealed that 64% (n = 2,043,251) of Iowans received their first COVID-19 vaccine between December 14, 2020, and December 31, 2022. For metropolitan-dwelling individuals, most first doses were administered at pharmacies (53%), with similar trends observed for micropolitan (49%) and noncore (42%) individuals. The second most common location for metropolitan individuals was medical practices (17%); public health clinics and departments were the second most common provider for micropolitan (26%) and noncore (33%) individuals. These trends shifted over time. In December 2020, hospitals were the most common vaccine provider for everyone, but by December 2022, medical providers were the most common source for metropolitan individuals, and pharmacies were most common for micropolitan and noncore individuals.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Trends in the type of vaccine provider differentiated metropolitan residents from micropolitan and noncore residents. For the latter groups, local public health departments played a more significant role. Across all groups, pharmacists emerged as a critical vaccine provider. Our findings can be used to plan for seasonal vaccine campaigns as well as potential future mass vaccination campaigns.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50060,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rural Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Locations of COVID-19 vaccination provision: Urban-rural differences\",\"authors\":\"Grace W. Ryan PhD, Amanda R. Kahl MS, Don Callaghan BS, Bethany Kintigh RN, Natoshia M. Askelson PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jrh.12811\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our goal was to compare locations of COVID-19 vaccine provision in urban and rural communities over the course of the pandemic.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We used the Iowa Immunization Registry Information System (IRIS) to identify the organizations providing COVID-19 vaccines (eg, pharmacies, public health departments, and medical providers). Proportions of first-dose vaccines by organization type and patient census-based statistical area were generated. We calculated Chi-square tests to assess differences among metropolitan, micropolitan, and noncore communities.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>IRIS data revealed that 64% (n = 2,043,251) of Iowans received their first COVID-19 vaccine between December 14, 2020, and December 31, 2022. For metropolitan-dwelling individuals, most first doses were administered at pharmacies (53%), with similar trends observed for micropolitan (49%) and noncore (42%) individuals. The second most common location for metropolitan individuals was medical practices (17%); public health clinics and departments were the second most common provider for micropolitan (26%) and noncore (33%) individuals. These trends shifted over time. In December 2020, hospitals were the most common vaccine provider for everyone, but by December 2022, medical providers were the most common source for metropolitan individuals, and pharmacies were most common for micropolitan and noncore individuals.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Trends in the type of vaccine provider differentiated metropolitan residents from micropolitan and noncore residents. For the latter groups, local public health departments played a more significant role. Across all groups, pharmacists emerged as a critical vaccine provider. Our findings can be used to plan for seasonal vaccine campaigns as well as potential future mass vaccination campaigns.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rural Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rural Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jrh.12811\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rural Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jrh.12811","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Locations of COVID-19 vaccination provision: Urban-rural differences
Purpose
Our goal was to compare locations of COVID-19 vaccine provision in urban and rural communities over the course of the pandemic.
Methods
We used the Iowa Immunization Registry Information System (IRIS) to identify the organizations providing COVID-19 vaccines (eg, pharmacies, public health departments, and medical providers). Proportions of first-dose vaccines by organization type and patient census-based statistical area were generated. We calculated Chi-square tests to assess differences among metropolitan, micropolitan, and noncore communities.
Findings
IRIS data revealed that 64% (n = 2,043,251) of Iowans received their first COVID-19 vaccine between December 14, 2020, and December 31, 2022. For metropolitan-dwelling individuals, most first doses were administered at pharmacies (53%), with similar trends observed for micropolitan (49%) and noncore (42%) individuals. The second most common location for metropolitan individuals was medical practices (17%); public health clinics and departments were the second most common provider for micropolitan (26%) and noncore (33%) individuals. These trends shifted over time. In December 2020, hospitals were the most common vaccine provider for everyone, but by December 2022, medical providers were the most common source for metropolitan individuals, and pharmacies were most common for micropolitan and noncore individuals.
Conclusions
Trends in the type of vaccine provider differentiated metropolitan residents from micropolitan and noncore residents. For the latter groups, local public health departments played a more significant role. Across all groups, pharmacists emerged as a critical vaccine provider. Our findings can be used to plan for seasonal vaccine campaigns as well as potential future mass vaccination campaigns.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Rural Health, a quarterly journal published by the NRHA, offers a variety of original research relevant and important to rural health. Some examples include evaluations, case studies, and analyses related to health status and behavior, as well as to health work force, policy and access issues. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies are welcome. Highest priority is given to manuscripts that reflect scholarly quality, demonstrate methodological rigor, and emphasize practical implications. The journal also publishes articles with an international rural health perspective, commentaries, book reviews and letters.