TY - JOUR
T1 - Improving the rates of inpatient pneumococcal vaccination
T2 - Impact of standing orders versus computerized reminders to physicians
AU - Coyle, Christina M.
AU - Currie, Brian P.
PY - 2004/11
Y1 - 2004/11
N2 - OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of interventions using standing orders and computerized reminders to physicians on inpatient pneumococcal vaccination rates relative to a control group. DESIGN: Open trial of the following approaches, each on a different ward: (1) standing orders for vaccination of eligible consenting patients, (2) computerized reminders to physicians, and (3) usual practice. SETTING AND PATIENTS: Four hundred twenty-four patients were admitted to three 30-bed inpatient medical wards during a 4-month period in 1999 at one hospital. Unvaccinated patients 65 years or older and competent to give oral consent were included. INTERVENTION: A pharmacist activated a standing orders protocol for vaccination of all eligible consenting patients on one ward and computerized reminders to physicians on a second ward. A third ward served as a control group. RESULTS: Forty-two patients met inclusion criteria and accepted vaccination in the standing orders arm versus 35 patients in the computerized reminder arm. Vaccination rates on the standing orders ward included 98% of those eligible and accepting vaccination, 73% of eligible patients, and 28% of all patients admitted. Rates on the computerized reminder ward were 23%, 15%, and 7%, respectively. All of the rates from the standing orders ward were significantly greater than those from the computerized reminder ward (P < .0001). Only 0.6% of all patients on the control arm were vaccinated. CONCLUSION: Although both interventions were effective in increasing inpatient pneumococcal vaccination rates relative to baseline practice, physician independent initiation of standing orders was clearly more effective.
AB - OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of interventions using standing orders and computerized reminders to physicians on inpatient pneumococcal vaccination rates relative to a control group. DESIGN: Open trial of the following approaches, each on a different ward: (1) standing orders for vaccination of eligible consenting patients, (2) computerized reminders to physicians, and (3) usual practice. SETTING AND PATIENTS: Four hundred twenty-four patients were admitted to three 30-bed inpatient medical wards during a 4-month period in 1999 at one hospital. Unvaccinated patients 65 years or older and competent to give oral consent were included. INTERVENTION: A pharmacist activated a standing orders protocol for vaccination of all eligible consenting patients on one ward and computerized reminders to physicians on a second ward. A third ward served as a control group. RESULTS: Forty-two patients met inclusion criteria and accepted vaccination in the standing orders arm versus 35 patients in the computerized reminder arm. Vaccination rates on the standing orders ward included 98% of those eligible and accepting vaccination, 73% of eligible patients, and 28% of all patients admitted. Rates on the computerized reminder ward were 23%, 15%, and 7%, respectively. All of the rates from the standing orders ward were significantly greater than those from the computerized reminder ward (P < .0001). Only 0.6% of all patients on the control arm were vaccinated. CONCLUSION: Although both interventions were effective in increasing inpatient pneumococcal vaccination rates relative to baseline practice, physician independent initiation of standing orders was clearly more effective.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=9244225111&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=9244225111&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1086/502317
DO - 10.1086/502317
M3 - Article
C2 - 15566021
AN - SCOPUS:9244225111
SN - 0899-823X
VL - 25
SP - 904
EP - 907
JO - Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
JF - Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
IS - 11
ER -