Effect of Decision Support on Missed Opportunities for Human Papillomavirus Vaccination

• Published in: American journal of preventive medicine Vol. 47; no. 6; pp. 734 - 744
• Main Authors: Mayne, Stephanie L., MHS, duRivage, Nathalie E., MPH, Feemster, Kristen A., MD, MPH, MSHP, Localio, A. Russell, PhD, Grundmeier, Robert W., MD, Fiks, Alexander G., MD, MSCE
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York, NY Elsevier Inc 01.12.2014; Elsevier
• Subjects: Adolescent; Biological and medical sciences; Decision Support Systems, Clinical; Female; Human papillomavirus; Humans; Internal Medicine; Medical Order Entry Systems; Medical sciences; Miscellaneous; Papillomavirus Infections - prevention & control; Papillomavirus Vaccines - administration & dosage; Physician-Patient Relations; Prevention and actions; Preventive Health Services - methods; Primary Health Care - methods; Professional-Family Relations; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Staff Development - organization & administration; United States; Vaccination - methods; Vaccination - psychology; Vaccination - statistics & numerical data; United States; Human; Evaluation; Support; Decision making; Vaccination; Papovaviridae; Decision; Papillomavirus; Virus; Prevention; Immunoprophylaxis; Human papillomavirus; Quality
• ISSN: 0749-3797; 1873-2607
• DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.08.010

Background Missed opportunities for human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination are common, presenting a barrier to achieving widespread vaccine coverage and preventing infection. Purpose To compare the impact of clinician- versus family-focused decision support, none, or both on captured opportunities for HPV vaccination. Design Twelve-month cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in 2010–2011. Setting/participants Adolescent girls aged 11–17 years due for HPV Dose 1, 2, or 3 receiving care at primary care practices. Intervention Twenty-two primary care practices were cluster randomized to receive a three-part clinician-focused intervention (educational sessions, electronic health record–based alerts, and performance feedback) or none. Within each practice, girls were randomized at the patient level to receive family-focused, automated, educational phone calls or none. Randomization resulted in four groups: clinician-focused, family-focused, combined, or no intervention. Main outcome measures Standardized proportions of captured opportunities (due vaccine received at clinician visit) were calculated among girls in each study arm. Analyses were conducted in 2013. Results Among 17,016 adolescent girls and their 32,472 visits (14,247 preventive, 18,225 acute), more HPV opportunities were captured at preventive than acute visits (36% vs 4%, p <0.001). At preventive visits, the clinician intervention increased captured opportunities by 9 percentage points for HPV-1 and 6 percentage points for HPV-3 ( p ≤0.01), but not HPV-2. At acute visits, the clinician and combined interventions significantly improved captured opportunities for all three doses ( p ≤0.01). The family intervention was similar to none. Results differed by practice setting; at preventive visits, the clinician intervention was more effective for HPV-1 in suburban than urban settings, whereas at acute visits, the clinician intervention was more effective for all doses at urban practices. Conclusions Clinician-focused decision support is a more effective strategy than family-focused to prevent missed HPV vaccination opportunities. Given the persistence of missed opportunities even in intervention groups, complementary strategies are needed. This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT01159093.