Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2024 Jul 23:10:e52926.
doi: 10.2196/52926.

Effectiveness of Catch-Up Vaccination Interventions Versus Standard or Usual Care Procedures in Increasing Adherence to Recommended Vaccinations Among Different Age Groups: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Before-After Studies

Alessandra Fallucca  1 , Walter Priano  1 , Alessandro Carubia  1 , Patrizia Ferro  1 , Vincenzo Pisciotta  1 , Alessandra Casuccio  1 , Vincenzo Restivo  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Effectiveness of Catch-Up Vaccination Interventions Versus Standard or Usual Care Procedures in Increasing Adherence to Recommended Vaccinations Among Different Age Groups: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Before-After Studies

Alessandra Fallucca et al. JMIR Public Health Surveill. .

Abstract

Background: To address the global challenge of vaccine hesitancy, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization strongly promotes vaccination reminder and recall interventions. Coupled with the new opportunities presented by scientific advancements, these measures are crucial for successfully immunizing target population groups.

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of various interventions in increasing vaccination coverage compared with standard or usual care. The review will cover all vaccinations recommended for different age groups.

Methods: In February 2022, 2 databases were consulted, retrieving 1850 studies. Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 79 manuscripts were included after the assessment phase. These comprised 46 trials/randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 33 before-after studies. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model was performed with STATA software (version 14.1.2). The selected outcome was the risk ratio (RR) of vaccination coverage improvement effectiveness. Additionally, meta-regression analyses were conducted for the included manuscripts.

Results: The analyses showed an overall efficacy of RR 1.22 (95% CI 1.19-1.26) for RCTs and RR 1.70 (95% CI 1.54-1.87) for before-after studies when considering all interventions cumulatively. Subgroup analyses identified multicomponent interventions (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.36-1.85) and recall clinical interventions (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.17-1.32) as the most effective in increasing vaccination coverage for RCTs. By contrast, educational interventions (RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.60-2.83) and multicomponent interventions (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.43-1.82) achieved the highest increases for before-after studies. Meta-regression analyses indicated that the middle-aged adult population was associated with a higher increase in vaccination coverage (RCT: coefficient 0.54, 95% CI 0.12-0.95; before-after: coefficient 1.27, 95% CI 0.70-1.84).

Conclusions: Community, family, and health care-based multidimensional interventions, as well as education-based catch-up strategies, effectively improve vaccination coverage. Therefore, their systematic implementation is highly relevant for targeting undervaccinated population groups. This approach aligns with national vaccination schedules and aims to eliminate or eradicate vaccine-preventable diseases.

Keywords: PRISMA; adherence; catch-up interventions; education; education based; health care based; immunization; meta-analysis; multicomponent; multidimensional intervention; recall intervention; remind; reward; systematic review; vaccination; vaccination coverage; vaccine; vaccine literacy; vaccine strategies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) flow diagram of studies selection.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Health Organization (WHO) WHO. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2021. Global immunization policies and guidelines. WHO recommendations for routine immunization - summary tables 2021.
    1. Fine P, Eames K, Heymann DL. "Herd immunity": a rough guide. Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Apr 01;52(7):911–6. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir007.cir007 - DOI - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization (WHO) Immunization coverage. WHO. [2024-06-09]. https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/immunization-coverage .
    1. Bright T, Felix L, Kuper H, Polack S. A systematic review of strategies to increase access to health services among children in low and middle income countries. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Apr 05;17(1):252. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2180-9. https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12913-017-2... 10.1186/s12913-017-2180-9 - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hardt K, Bonanni P, King S, Santos JI, El-Hodhod M, Zimet GD, Preiss S. Vaccine strategies: optimising outcomes. Vaccine. 2016 Dec 20;34(52):6691–6699. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.10.078. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0264-410X(16)31030-1 S0264-410X(16)31030-1 - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources