• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Effect of a best-practice alert on the rate of influenza vaccination of pregnant women

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Feb;119(2 Pt 1):301-5.
Effect of a best-practice alert on the rate of influenza vaccination of pregnant women.
Klatt TE, Hopp E.
Source

From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:

: To estimate the effect of a best-practice alert, a reminder within the electronic medical record on the rate of vaccination of pregnant women against influenza.
METHODS:

: Beginning on October 1, 2008, at the Medical College of Wisconsin Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic, we added a best-practice alert to our electronic prenatal record. The best-practice alert let the health care provider know at each prenatal visit if the patient had not yet either received vaccination against influenza or voiced an informed refusal. We then compared our 2008-2009 vaccination rate with our 2007-2008 rate. If a patient went unvaccinated, we reviewed her record to determine whether a discussion regarding vaccination was held and, if so, the reason she went unvaccinated.
RESULTS:

: Our 2008-2009 vaccination rate exceeded our 2007-2008 rate, 61% compared with 42%, respectively (P<.001; confidence interval [CI] for the difference in proportions 0.14-0.25). Health care providers documented a higher rate of discussions regarding influenza vaccination in 2008-2009 compared with 2007-2008, 89.5% compared with 49.5%, respectively (P<.001, CI for the difference in proportions 0.35-0.45). In 2008-2009, the most common reason for going without vaccination was an informed refusal. In 2007-2008, most of the medical records of unvaccinated women contained no documented discussion. In 2008-2009, 68.1% of the women whose health care providers documented a discussion accepted vaccination.
CONCLUSION:

: Both our rate of vaccination of pregnant women against influenza and the rate of a documented discussion regarding vaccination increased after implementation of the best-practice alert. We recommend that users of electronic medical records add a best-practice alert to improve influenza vaccination rates.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:

: II.

PMID:
22270281
[PubMed - in process]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22270281
 
Back
Top Bottom