1 / 20

Vaccine Preventable Disease in NJ: Improving Outcomes

Vaccine Preventable Disease in NJ: Improving Outcomes. Peter Tabbot, NJCEPH Project Director Mitchel Rosen, UMDNJ-School of Public Health MLC-3 Open Forum - State Sharing Session September 2009. NJ Public Health System. NJ Department of Health and Senior Services

sumi
Télécharger la présentation

Vaccine Preventable Disease in NJ: Improving Outcomes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Vaccine Preventable Disease in NJ: Improving Outcomes Peter Tabbot, NJCEPH Project Director Mitchel Rosen, UMDNJ-School of Public Health MLC-3 Open Forum - State Sharing Session September 2009

  2. NJ Public Health System • NJ Department of Health and Senior Services • County, regional and municipal departments • Local Boards of Health • Practice Standards of Performance for Local Boards of Health • Performance evaluation instrument

  3. Selecting Target Areas • Process Outcome: Steering Committee • Health Outcome: Applicants (ranked) • VPD selected by both mini-collaboratives • The composition of our mini-collaboratives…

  4. Selecting Participants • Online application process; bidder’s conference call • Seven applicants • Scoring • Final selection: • Quality of application • Capacity & sustainability • Geography & demographics

  5. Who’s on Board?

  6. Who’s on Board?

  7. Who’s on Board?

  8. Who’s on Board?

  9. Two Groups, Two Approaches Monmouth • Intent was to educate non-vaccinating parents about safety/importance of childhood vaccinations • Sought out local data as first step (PLAN) • Lack of reliable/complete/ current data became a concern • Result: Shift in aim statement / focus area

  10. Monmouth GPHP What the Data Showed • Immunization rates* • ‘Adequate’ compliance until 12 mos. • Not HP2010, but close…. • At 24 months, rate dropped to 69% • But still incomplete data • Shifted from education to data collection • Needed to gather reliable local rates • Needed to implement process to do so

  11. Monmouth GPHP • Developed retrospective audit process for use during routine pre-school immunization audits PLAN: • Assessed and selected existing immunization audit form • Develop sampling protocol of 10% of pre-school population, aged 36 - 60 mos. DO: • Each dept. performed audits, Feb - May ‘09 • Assessed local Immunization Exemption reports

  12. Monmouth GPHP STUDY: • 818 records collected • CoCASA employed by epidemiologist to assess immunization rates • Reports shared and reviewed by MC members in July ACT: • MC is evaluating frequency of repeat audits • Upcoming NJSIIS implementation will influence decisions

  13. Monmouth GPHP Next Steps • Careful analysis of data to define education effort • Development of targeted education • Dissemination of materials as appropriate

  14. Southern GPHP • Focused on development of HCP ‘tools’ for patient education (re: childhood immunization) • Focus on prenatal, including: OB/GYN, childbirth educators and others • Surveyed HCP to assess preferred mode of education materials

  15. Southern GPHP PLAN • Assessed HCP preferred mode of education materials • “Tip cards” selected as mode of education • Developed list of 36 objections to immunizations for ‘counter’ statements DO • Divided ‘objections’ among GPHP participants for response development • Researched science-based responses; credible sources for additional information

  16. Southern GPHP STUDY • Evaluate each objection response for validity, clarity of message, etc.. ACT • Pilot tip cards with locally-identified HCPs • Partner with local vaccine producer to assist with material review/development • Distribute ‘toolkit’ in fall to identified providers

  17. Improvements Overall • Improved planning capacity for those involved • Increased regional collaboration • Established foundational QI knowledge and application • Developed unified PH response to anti-vaccination voice

  18. Improvements Specifics • Development of replicable audit process to gather local immunization data • Gathering of reliable baseline immunization data • Development of educational ‘toolkit’ that can be distributed regionally and replicated by other departments

  19. Next Steps Monmouth • Develop education effort to address findings (possibly apply Southern GPHP’s) • Continue to review exemption reports Southern • Implement campaign to provide HCP with easy-to-use resources for parental education

  20. Sustainability • Mini-collaboratives to participate in ‘round two’ learning sessions • All story boards/resources to be posted on NJCEPH website • Retreat and implicit/designed mentoring • Showcase at future local and regional conferences

More Related