Skip to main content

Table 3 Summary of 25 papers reviewed

From: Too little but not too late: Results of a literature review to improve routine immunization programs in developing countries

Country [Ref] Year(s) Brief Description Study Type Change in FVC*
Bringing immunizations closer to the community
Kenya [11] Unknown Providing outreach immunization services in schools along with dissemination of information about immunizations by students Trial with evaluation before and after 28% and 32% §
India [6] 1975–1988 Supporting immunization activities in the community by using local women to provide health information and track immunizations Trial with comparison groups n/a**
Papua New Guinea [12] 1983–1987 Improving access to immunizations by providing vaccinations at lower level health facilities (health posts) by trained Aid Post Orderlies Trial with comparison group n/a
Nigeria [13] 1984–1986 Providing immunizations at more locations and more convenient times in combination with parent education ‡ Trial with evaluation before and after 38%
Mozambique [15,16] 1985–1987 Visiting homes to mobilize the community and refer unvaccinated children to services while providing regular pulse outreach Trial with evaluation before and after -4%, 32%, 33% and 14% §
South Africa [8] 1987–1988 Conducting home visits using village health workers who retain visit records ‡ Trial with evaluation before and after n/a
Bangladesh [7] 1987–1988 Following-up defaulters using low-literacy urban volunteers Observational n/a
Ghana [9] 1991–1992 Visiting homes to refer families to services using non-health workers ‡ Trial with comparison groups 19%
Mozambique [14] 1994 Providing outreach services to areas affected by conflict Observational n/a
Mexico [10] 1994 Identifying children needing vaccines through home visits by community members Trial with comparison groups 42%
Using information dissemination to increase demand for vaccination
The West Bank [19] 1985–1996 Developing staffed village-resource rooms Observational n/a
Philippines [17] 1989–1990 Communicating measles information through a mass media campaign ‡ Trial with evaluation before and after 11%
Bangladesh [18] 1995 Advocating, by an NGO credit program, for women to utilize immunization services ‡ Observational n/a
Changing practices in fixed sites
Sudan [21] Unknown Moving vaccination locations closer to the consulting room or having physicians give an immunization "prescription" after curative care Observational n/a
Nigeria [22] 1982 Reorganizing health centers to include a quick immunization line Trial with evaluation before and after 18%
Mexico [23] 1991 Screening hospitalized children for vaccination status and immunizing those not up-to-date Observational n/a
Ethiopia [20] 1991–1992 Using reminder stickers to reduce dropout in fixed facilities along with health education ‡ Trial with comparison groups n/a
Using innovative management practices
Papua New Guinea [26] 1982–1984 Creating a reporting system based on updated catchment area and target population data, including regular feedback Trial with evaluation before and after n/a
Nicaragua [29,30] 1985 Providing food incentives to improve attendance at well child clinics (mobile and fixed) ‡ Trial with evaluation before and after n/a
Bolivia [25] 1992–1994 Using data and community information to develop appropriate programs Trial with comparison groups 70%
Indonesia [27] 1993–1994 Training nurses in under-performing health centers using low-cost on-the-job peer training ‡ Trial with comparison groups n/a
Cambodia [24] 1997–2000 Using contractors to increase immunization coverage and equity ‡ Trial with comparison groups 13% and 1%¶
Madagascar [28] 2000 Using auto-disable syringes for increasing safety and reducing missed opportunities Trial with comparison groups n/a
  1. * The change in fully vaccinated children (FVC) may not be comparable across papers as duration of intervention, baseline coverage, and populations vary. For trials with comparison groups, the term "change" represents the difference between groups, whereas for trials with before-and-after evaluations this term represents the change over time.
  2. ** n/a indicates that the change in FVC is not reported in the paper.
  3. ‡ Paper reported a statistically significant change for vaccination results (α < 0.05).
  4. § Results for areas reported separately.
  5. Change in FVC before and after intervention in multiple areas.
  6. ¶Two different contracting methods were evaluated.