No abstract

In collaboration with WHO, IMMUNIZATION basics analyzed 126 documents from the global grey literature to identify reasons why eligible children had incomplete or no vaccinations. The main reasons for under-vaccination were related to immunization services and to parental knowledge and attitudes. The most frequently cited factors were: access to services, health staff attitudes and practices, reliability of services, false contraindications, parents' practical knowledge of vaccination, fear of side effects, conflicting priorities and parental beliefs. Some family demographic characteristics were strong, but underlying, risk factors for under-vaccination. Studies must be well designed to capture a complete picture of the simultaneous causes of under-vaccination and to avoid biased results. Although the grey literature contains studies of varying quality, it includes many well-designed studies. Every immunization program should strive to provide quality services that are accessible, convenient, reliable, friendly, affordable and acceptable, and should solicit feedback from families and community leaders. Every program should monitor missed and under-vaccinated children and assess and address the causes. Although global reviews, such as this one, can play a useful role in identifying key questions for local study, local enquiry and follow-up remain essential.

Abstractobjective While childhood immunisation coverage levels have increased since the 70s, inequities in coverage between and within countries have been widely reported. Unvaccinated children remain undetected by routine monitoring systems and strikingly unreported. The objective of this study was to provide evidence on the magnitude of the problem and to describe predictors associated with nonvaccination.methods Two hundred and forty-one nationally representative household surveys in 96 countries were analysed. Proportions and changes in time of 'unvaccinated' (children having not received a single dose of vaccine), 'partially vaccinated' and 'fully vaccinated' children were estimated. Predictors of nonvaccination were explored.results The percentage of unvaccinated children was 9.9% across all surveys. 66 countries had more than one survey: 38 showed statistically significant reductions in the proportion of unvaccinated children between the first and last survey, 10 countries showed increases and the rest showed no significant changes. However, while 18 of the 38 countries also improved in terms of partially and fully vaccinated, in the other 20 the proportion of fully vaccinated decreased. The predictors more strongly associated with being unvaccinated were education of the caregiver, education of caregiver's partner, caregiver's tetanus toxoid (TT) status, wealth index and type of family member participation in decision-making when the child is ill. Multivariable logistic regression identified the TT status of the caregiver as the strongest predictors of unvaccinated children. Country-specific summaries were produced and sent to countries.conclusion The number of unvaccinated children is not negligible and their proportion and the predictors of non-vaccination have to be drawn from specific surveys. Specific vaccine indicators cannot properly describe the performance of immunisation programmes in certain situations. National immunisation programmes and national and international immunisation stakeholders should also consider monitoring the proportion of unvaccinated children (i.e. those who have received no vaccines at all) and draw specific plans on the determinants of non-vaccination.

No abstract

All six World Health Organization (WHO) regions have now set goals for measles elimination by or before 2020. To prioritize measles elimination efforts and use available resources efficiently, there is a need to identify at-risk areas that are offtrack from meeting performance targets and require strengthening of programmatic efforts. This article describes the development of a WHO measles programmatic risk assessment tool to be used for monitoring, guiding, and sustaining measles elimination efforts at the subnational level. We outline the tool development process; the tool specifications and requirements for data inputs; the framework of risk categories, indicators, and scoring; and the risk category assignment. Overall risk was assessed as a function of indicator scores that fall into four main categories: population immunity, surveillance quality, program performance, and threat assessment. On the basis of the overall score, the tool assigns each district a risk of either low, medium, high, or very high. The cut-off criteria for the risk assignment categories were based on the distribution of scores from all possible combinations of individual indicator cutoffs. The results may be used for advocacy to communicate risk to policymakers, mobilize resources for corrective actions, manage population immunity, and prioritize programmatic activities. Ongoing evaluation of indicators will be needed to evaluate programmatic performance and plan risk mitigation activities effectively. The availability of a comprehensive tool that can identify at-risk districts will enhance efforts to prioritize resources and implement strategies for achieving the Global Vaccine Action Plan goals for measles elimination.