LOOK AT THIS IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN:
Understanding differential coverage impact of routine delivery versus supplementary immunization activities (ie, campaign) for the delivery of the measles vaccine.
HOW YOU CAN USE THIS MATERIAL:
Decision makers can utilize this analysis to see how different measles vaccine delivery programs can have a differential impact on the equity implications of immunization programs and use the data to consider how to address disease prevention and control in their context.
OVERVIEW:
In many countries, measles disproportionately affects poorer households. To achieve equitable delivery, national immunization programs can use 2 main delivery platforms: routine immunization and supplementary immunization activities (SIAs). The objective of this article is to use data concerning measles vaccination coverage delivered via routine and SIA strategies to make inferences about the associated equity impact.
Key Points:
- Measles SIAs tend to provide a more equal coverage across socioeconomic groups than routine measles immunization programs.
- Nevertheless, there may be additional costs associated with relying on this type of vertical delivery platform.
- SIAs are a vital complement to routine immunization programs that are intended to close the coverage gaps left by incomplete access to such programs, but they may still be unable to reach children not previously reached by routine programs in LMICs.
- In addition, there may be opportunity costs (eg, diversion of human resources’ and health workers’ time) associated with SIAs that can negatively affect the functioning of health systems, for example, by potentially reducing care seeking and use of select routine child and maternal health services during SIA rollout.