Assessment of eVIN (Electronic Vaccine Intelligence Network) in utility and constraints of various stakeholders in Nainital District: A mixed method study

Abstract

Vaccines are important tools in the fight against many diseases for which eVIN was created. eVIN is working exceptionally, but the remaining gaps (electronic or non-electronic generated) are still present and cannot be assessed solely by the quantitative method. Thus, the objective of the present study was to assess the eVIN (Electronic Vaccine Intelligence Network) in utility and constraints of various stakeholders in Nainital District: A mixed method study. Methodology: This cross-sectional study was carried out among 8 available stakeholders in district Nainital, Uttarakhand. Open-ended KII was conducted individually. Results: Key informants comprised eight Stakeholders (7 medical officers in charge and one senior medical officer). The informants had a mean age of 40 ± 8 years with a mean experience of 10 ± 5 years. Big changes and benefits to the immunization program from eVIN were stated by all the stakeholders. The lacunas that remained and need further lookout, were the funds (for minor maintenance and purchase), the capacity building, more technical training, and the regular practices of vaccination. While in low-lying areas there were no major issues stated but for high altitude blocks, all stated persisting facing issues of road accessibility, mobile network, and CCE wear and tear, which makes them tough to carry for outreach sessions on foot. Thus, the findings suggest positive changes in the regions of vaccine usage, stock management distribution, and documentation. However, an Unreliable power supply at public health centers appears to be a continuous major challenge in maintaining the recommended temperature range. Adherence to good storage and handling practices, Supportive supervision, regular training, and budgetary provisions require the attention of higher-level management.

Keywords: Nainital; eVIN; immunization; qualitative; stakeholders.

Figure 1

Sunburst chart showing responses of Stakeholders in percentage (n = 8)

Figure 2

Treemap in rectangle showing Responses of Stakeholders in percentage with rectangle area (n = 8)