Dataset Information

Improving immunisation coverage in rural India: clustered randomised controlled evaluation of immunisation campaigns with and without incentives.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the efficacy of modest non-financial incentives on immunisation rates in children aged 1-3 and to compare it with the effect of only improving the reliability of the supply of services.

Design

Clustered randomised controlled study.

Setting

Rural Rajasthan, India.

Participants

1640 children aged 1-3 at end point.

Interventions

134 villages were randomised to one of three groups: a once monthly reliable immunisation camp (intervention A; 379 children from 30 villages); a once monthly reliable immunisation camp with small incentives (raw lentils and metal plates for completed immunisation; intervention B; 382 children from 30 villages), or control (no intervention, 860 children in 74 villages). Surveys were undertaken in randomly selected households at baseline and about 18 months after the interventions started (end point).

Main outcome measures

Proportion of children aged 1-3 at the end point who were partially or fully immunised.

Results

Among children aged 1-3 in the end point survey, rates of full immunisation were 39% (148/382, 95% confidence interval 30% to 47%) for intervention B villages (reliable immunisation with incentives), 18% (68/379, 11% to 23%) for intervention A villages (reliable immunisation without incentives), and 6% (50/860, 3% to 9%) for control villages. The relative risk of complete immunisation for intervention B versus control was 6.7 (4.5 to 8.8) and for intervention B versus intervention A was 2.2 (1.5 to 2.8). Children in areas neighbouring intervention B villages were also more likely to be fully immunised than those from areas neighbouring intervention A villages (1.9, 1.1 to 2.8). The average cost per immunisation was $56 (2202 rupees) in intervention A and $28 (1102 rupees, about pound16 or euro19) in intervention B.

Conclusions

Improving reliability of services improves immunisation rates, but the effect remains modest. Small incentives have large positive impacts on the uptake of immunisation services in resource poor areas and are more cost effective than purely improving supply.

Trial registration

IRSCTN87759937.

SUBMITTER: Banerjee AV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2871989 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAs mobile phone access continues to expand globally, opportunities exist to leverage these technologies to support demand for immunisation services and improve vaccine coverage. We aimed to assess whether short message service (SMS) reminders and monetary incentives can improve immunisation uptake in Kenya.MethodsIn this cluster-randomised controlled trial, villages were randomly and evenly allocated to four groups: control, SMS only, SMS plus a 75 Kenya Shilling (KES) incentive, and SMS plus 200 KES (85 KES = USD$1). Caregivers were eligible if they had a child younger than 5 weeks who had not yet received a first dose of pentavalent vaccine. Participants in the intervention groups received SMS reminders before scheduled pentavalent and measles immunisation visits. Participants in incentive groups, additionally, received money if their child was timely immunised (immunisation within 2 weeks of the due date). Caregivers and interviewers were not masked. The proportion of fully immunised children (receiving BCG, three doses of polio vaccine, three doses of pentavalent vaccine, and measles vaccine) by 12 months of age constituted the primary outcome and was analysed with log-binomial regression and General Estimating Equations to account for correlation within clusters. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01878435.FindingsBetween Oct 14, 2013, and Oct 17, 2014, we enrolled 2018 caregivers and their infants from 152 villages into the following four groups: control (n=489), SMS only (n=476), SMS plus 75 KES (n=562), and SMS plus 200 KES (n=491). Overall, 1375 (86%) of 1600 children who were successfully followed up achieved the primary outcome, full immunisation by 12 months of age (296 [82%] of 360 control participants, 332 [86%] of 388 SMS only participants, 383 [86%] of 446 SMS plus 75 KES participants, and 364 [90%] of 406 SMS plus 200 KES participants). Children in the SMS plus 200 KES group were significantly more likely to achieve full immunisation at 12 months of age (relative risk 1·09, 95% CI 1·02-1·16, p=0·014) than children in the control group.InterpretationIn a setting with high baseline immunisation coverage levels, SMS reminders coupled with incentives significantly improved immunisation coverage and timeliness. Given that global immunisation coverage levels have stagnated around 85%, the use of incentives might be one option to reach the remaining 15%.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Recent research in two cholera-endemic communities of Zanzibar has shown that a majority (?94%) of the adult population was willing to receive free oral cholera vaccines (OCVs). Since OCV uptake in the 2009 campaign reached only ?50% in these communities, an evaluation of social and cultural factors and of barriers was conducted to understand this difference for future cholera control planning. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A random sample of 367 adult peri-urban and rural community residents (46.6% immunized vs. 53.4% unimmunized) was studied with a semi-structured interview that inquired about social and cultural features of cholera depicted in a vignette and barriers to OCV uptake. Symptoms (rectal pain, loose skin only in rural community) and perceived causes (uncovered food, contact with contaminated water) specific for severe diarrhea were associated with uptake. Purchasing drugs from pharmacies to stop diarrhea and vomiting was negatively associated with uptake. Increasing household size, age and previous enteric illness episode were positively related to uptake, the latter only at the rural site. The most prominent barrier to uptake was competing obligations or priorities (reported by 74.5%, identified as most important barrier by 49.5%). Next most prominent barriers were lacking information about the campaign (29.6%, 12.2%), sickness (14.3%, 13.3%) and fear of possible vaccine side effects (15.3%, 5.6%). The majority of unvaccinated respondents requested repetition of the vaccination with free OCVs. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Factors associated with uptake indicated a positive impact of the vaccination campaign and of sensitization activities on vaccine acceptance behavior. Unlike communities opposed to cholera control or settings where public confidence in vaccines is lacking, identified barriers to uptake indicated a good campaign implementation and trust in the health system. Despite prospects and demand for repeating the vaccination, local decision-makers should reconsider how careful logistical arrangements may improve community coverage and thus effectiveness of vaccination campaigns.

Project description:BackgroundPakistan faces huge challenges in eradicating polio due to widespread poliovirus transmission and security challenges. Innovative interventions are urgently needed to strengthen community buy-in, to increase the coverage of oral polio vaccine (OPV) and other routine immunisations, and to enhance immunity through the introduction of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) in combination with OPV. We aimed to evaluate the acceptability and effect on immunisation coverage of an integrated strategy for community engagement and maternal and child health immunisation campaigns in insecure and conflict-affected polio-endemic districts of Pakistan.MethodsWe did a community-based three-arm cluster randomised trial in healthy children aged 1 month to 5 years that resided within the study sites in three districts of Pakistan at high risk of polio. Clusters were randomly assigned by a computer algorithm using restricted randomisation in blocks of 20 by an external statistician (1:1:1) to receive routine polio programme activities (control, arm A), additional interventions with community outreach and mobilisation using an enhanced communication package and provision of short-term preventive maternal and child health services and routine immunisation (health camps), including OPV (arm B), or all interventions of arm B with additional provision of IPV delivered at the maternal and child health camps (arm C). An independent team conducted surveys at baseline, endline, and after each round of supplementary immunisation activity for acceptability and effect. The primary outcome measures for the study were coverage of OPV, IPV, and routine extended programme on immunisation vaccines and changes in the proportion of unvaccinated and fully vaccinated children. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01908114.FindingsBetween June 4, 2013, and May 31, 2014, 387 clusters were randomised (131 to arm A, 127 to arm B, and 129 to arm C). At baseline, 28 760 children younger than 5 years were recorded in arm A, 30 098 in arm B, and 29 126 in arm C. 359 clusters remained in the trial until the end (116 in arm A, 120 in arm B, and 123 in arm C; with 23 334 children younger than 5 years in arm A, 26 110 in arm B, and 25 745 in arm C). The estimated OPV coverage was 75% in arm A compared with 82% in arm B (difference vs arm A 6·6%; 95% CI 4·8-8·3) and 84% in arm C (8·5%, 6·8-10·1; overall p<0·0001). The mean proportion of routine vaccine doses received by children younger than 24 months of age was 43% in arm A, 52% in arm B (9%, 7-11) and 54% in arm C (11%, 9-13; overall p<0·0001). No serious adverse events requiring hospitalisation were reported after immunisation.InterpretationDespite the challenges associated with the polio end-game in high-risk, conflict-affected areas of Pakistan, a strategy of community mobilisation and targeted community-based health and immunisation camps during polio immunisation campaigns was successful in increasing vaccine coverage, including polio vaccine coverage.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:ObjectivesTo test the impact of provider performance pay for anaemia reduction in rural China.DesignA cluster randomised trial of information, subsidies, and incentives for school principals to reduce anaemia among their students. Enumerators and study participants were not informed of study arm assignment.Setting72 randomly selected rural primary schools across northwest China.Participants3553 fourth and fifth grade students aged 9-11 years. All fourth and fifth grade students in sample schools participated in the study.InterventionsSample schools were randomly assigned to a control group, with no intervention, or one of three treatment arms: (a) an information arm, in which principals received information about anaemia; (b) a subsidy arm, in which principals received information and unconditional subsidies; and (c) an incentive arm, in which principals received information, subsidies, and financial incentives for reducing anaemia among students. Twenty seven schools were assigned to the control arm (1816 students at baseline, 1623 at end point), 15 were assigned to the information arm (659 students at baseline, 596 at end point), 15 to the subsidy arm (726 students at baseline, 667 at end point), and 15 to the incentive arm (743 students at baseline, 667 at end point).Main outcome measuresStudent haemoglobin concentrations.ResultsMean student haemoglobin concentration rose by 1.5 g/L (95% CI -1.1 to 4.1) in information schools, 0.8 g/L (-1.8 to 3.3) in subsidy schools, and 2.4 g/L (0 to 4.9) in incentive schools compared with the control group. This increase in haemoglobin corresponded to a reduction in prevalence of anaemia (Hb <115 g/L) of 24% in incentive schools. Interactions with pre-existing incentives for principals to achieve good academic performance led to substantially larger gains in the information and incentive arms: when combined with incentives for good academic performance, associated effects on student haemoglobin concentration were 9.8 g/L (4.1 to 15.5) larger in information schools and 8.6 g/L (2.1 to 15.1) larger in incentive schools.ConclusionsFinancial incentives for health improvement were modestly effective. Understanding interactions with other motives and pre-existing incentives is critical.Trial registration numberISRCTN76158086.

Project description:BackgroundChildhood vaccinations are a vital preventive measure to reduce disease incidence and deaths among children. As a result, immunisation coverage against measles was a key indicator for monitoring the fourth Millennium Development Goal (MDG), aimed at reducing child mortality. India was among the list of countries that missed the target of this MDG. Immunisation targets continue to be included in the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), and are a monitoring tool for the Indian health care system. The SDGs also strongly emphasise reducing inequalities; even where immunisation coverage improves, there is a further imperative to safeguard against inequalities in immunisation outcomes. This study aims to document whether socioeconomic inequalities in immunisation coverage exist among children aged 12-59 months in India.MethodsData for this observational study came from the fourth round of the National Family Health Survey (2015-16). We used the concentration index to assess inequalities in whether children were fully, partially or never immunised. Where children were partially immunised, we also examined immunisation intensity. Decomposition analysis was applied to examine the underlying factors associated with inequality across these categories of childhood immunisation.ResultsWe found that in India, only 37% of children are fully immunised, 56% are partially immunised, and 7% have never been immunised. There is a disproportionate concentration of immunised children in higher wealth quintiles, demonstrating a socioeconomic gradient in immunisation. The data also confirm this pattern of socioeconomic inequality across regions. Factors such as mother's literacy, institutional delivery, place of residence, geographical location, and socioeconomic status explain the disparities in immunisation coverage.ConclusionsIn India, there are considerable inequalities in immunisation coverage among children. It is essential to ensure an improvement in immunisation coverage and to understand underlying factors that affect poor uptake and disparities in immunisation coverage in India in order to improve child health and survival and meet the SDGs.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The majority of children who die from vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) live in low-income and-middle-income countries (LMICs). With the rapid urbanisation and rural-urban migration ongoing in LMICs, available research suggests that migration status might be a determinant of immunisation coverage in LMICs, with rural-urban migrant (RUM) children being less likely to be immunised. OBJECTIVES:To examine and synthesise the data on immunisation coverage in RUM children in LMICs and to compare coverage in these children with non-migrant children. METHODS:A multiple database search of published and unpublished literature on immunisation coverage for the routine Expanded Programme on Immunisation (EPI) vaccines in RUM children aged 5 years and below was conducted. Following a staged exclusion process, studies that met the inclusion criteria were assessed for quality and data extracted for meta-analysis. RESULTS:Eleven studies from three countries (China, India and Nigeria) were included in the review. There was substantial statistical heterogeneity between the studies, thus no summary estimate was reported for the meta-analysis. Data synthesis from the studies showed that the proportion of fully immunised RUM children was lower than the WHO bench-mark of 90% at the national level. RUMs were also less likely to be fully immunised than the urban-non-migrants and general population. For the individual EPI vaccines, all but two studies showed lower immunisation coverage in RUMs compared with the general population using national coverage estimates. CONCLUSIONS:This review indicates that there is an association between rural-urban migration and immunisation coverage in LMICs with RUMs being less likely to be fully immunised than the urban non-migrants and the general population. Specific efforts to improve immunisation coverage in this subpopulation of urban residents will not only reduce morbidity and mortality from VPDs in migrants but will also reduce health inequity and the risk of infectious disease outbreaks in wider society.

Project description:BackgroundA new cadre of village-based frontline health workers, called Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs), was created in India. However, coverage of selected community-based maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) services remains low.ObjectiveThis article describes the process of development and formative evaluation of a complex mHealth intervention (ImTeCHO) to increase the coverage of proven MNCH services in rural India by improving the performance of ASHAs.DesignThe Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for developing complex interventions was used. Gaps were identified in the usual care provided by ASHAs, based on a literature search, and SEWA Rural's1 three decades of grassroots experience. The components of the intervention (mHealth strategies) were designed to overcome the gaps in care. The intervention, in the form of the ImTeCHO mobile phone and web application, along with the delivery model, was developed to incorporate these mHealth strategies. The intervention was piloted through 45 ASHAs among 45 villages in Gujarat (population: 45,000) over 7 months in 2013 to assess the acceptability, feasibility, and usefulness of the intervention and to identify barriers to its delivery.ResultsInadequate supervision and support to ASHAs were noted as a gap in usual care, resulting in low coverage of selected MNCH services and care received by complicated cases. Therefore, the ImTeCHO application was developed to integrate mHealth strategies in the form of job aid to ASHAs to assist with scheduling, behavior change communication, diagnosis, and patient management, along with supervision and support of ASHAs. During the pilot, the intervention and its delivery were found to be largely acceptable, feasible, and useful. A few changes were made to the intervention and its delivery, including 1) a new helpline for ASHAs, 2) further simplification of processes within the ImTeCHO incentive management system and 3) additional web-based features for enhancing value and supervision of Primary Health Center (PHC) staff.ConclusionsThe effectiveness of the improved ImTeCHO intervention will be now tested through a cluster randomized trial.