Synopsis
The CDC program on Seasonal Influenza is the focus of this discussion. The paper is aimed at considering the program effectiveness by means of reviewing studies devoted to evaluation of the CDC actions directed at population vaccination.
Background
The CDC program on Seasonal Influenza is considered to be the central program in the USA. The main ideas of this program cover the following tasks, (1) informing people about the problems connected with the spread of seasonal flue, its symptoms, and risks, (2) dwelling upon the preventive measures (which include the recommendation to be vaccinated from the age of 6 months), (3) highlighting the information about treatment, and (4) providing data devoted to influenza vaccination coverage and the number of infected and dead because of failure to be vaccinated on time (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011).
Objectives
The main purpose of this program review is to consider the effectiveness of the seasonal influenza vaccination program CDC promotes.
Selection criteria
The criteria for program review are considered on the basis of randomized selection. The data is found on the CDC website and in the academic journals devoted to the program and vaccination in general. Statistical data is observes from National Health Interview Surveys (NHIS), National Immunization Survey (NIS), Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and the National 2009 H1N1 Flu Survey (NHFS) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011). People aged from 6 months and older are the participants of the review as the CDC program of Seasonal Influenza is directed at them.
Subjects are divided into those which fall under generally recommended and those who appear in the groups of risk connected with diseases. The program is analyzed in comparison with other programs which operate on the territory of the USA. The outcome measures are based on the comparative statistical data before the program was established and during the years of its spread. Generally, the cases of the seasonal influenza have reduced since the program implementation.
Search strategy for identification of studies
The information for research has been searched in two ways, electronic access and handsearching of journals. Furthermore, some relevant sources are available at the CDC website and other reference lists of relevant articles, which are used as the basic data for the research.
Methods of the review
Four studies have been selected for the review as they directly point at the CDC program on Seasonal Influenza, state some specific results and make reasonable conclusions. The quality of those studies is assessed by means of the sources the studies are put at and the relevant research procedure. The data in the studies is carefully analyzed using the principle of selecting both positive and negative results of evaluating the CDC program on Seasonal Influenza. Age groups along with the groups of risks are included in the analysis description as they point out the results of the program implementation in different layers of population and those with specific needs.
Description of studies
As it has already been mentioned, four studies have been used for reviewing the CDC program on Seasonal Influenza. The first study titled Findings from case studies of state and local immunization programs by Fairbrother et al. (2000) is aimed at analyzing the USA existing programs (including those which operate in different states) and assessing their effectiveness based on the purchasing custom power. The research was conducted via interviews with officials, vaccination program directors, advisors, etc. The results have shown that local and state government is a guarantee of successful implementation of seasonal flue prevention programs which are conducted successfully.
Furlow et al. (2011) conducted a research in 43 states and the District of Columbia to understand the vaccination coverage. The general results have shown that even though people aged from 6 month and older have received about 163 million vaccine doses during the period from August 2010 up to February 2011, the immunization results can be improved. The research differentiates the vaccination coverage by age, by race/ethnicity, and by month.
The study by Madjid et al. (2009) considered the population with coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease and the reasons which prevented them from vaccination. Even though the CDC program advises such patients to be vaccinated, the number of taken preventive measures within the discussed sample is low. Therefore, the CDC program on Seasonal Influenza does not affect people with heart diseases.
Smith, Snider and Pickering (2009) evaluate the work of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), subjected to the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The study considers the Committee structure, process, and the applied practices. The main purpose of this research is to evaluate the work of ACIP supervised by CDC. The results of the research point at the CDC’s professionalism and the ability to give advice. The given recommendations show that the program is still at the developing stage as CDC assistance should be increased.
Methodological quality of included studies
Even though the research conducted by Fairbrother et al. (2000) is relevant, the results can be doubted because the statistical data is avoided. The interviews are conducted with officials who are interested in the successful outcome of the research, therefore the results cannot be objective and unprejudiced. The results of the research by Furlow et al. (2011) are mostly reliable. However, in some cases the estimates may be influenced by >10 confidence interval half-width, low sample size, and high standard error that point at irrelevance of some results. The study by Madjid et al. (2009) in influenced by the common limitations which usually occur while telephone interviews. The results of this study can also be put under question as “it is unknown whether the nonrespondents experienced a higher or lower influenza vaccination rate and whether they exhibited different health-related behavior” (Madjid et al., 2009, p. 551) due to the specific of the data collection.
Results
The research data show that the program under discussion is relevant and has already proven its effectiveness. However, mush should be done to increase population awareness of the program and its effectiveness.
Discussion
The overall awareness of elder children about vaccination and its effectiveness remains low (Briss, Brownson, Fielding, & Zaza, 2004). Nevertheless, the number of the vaccinated individuals has been increased since the day of program implementation. The results show that the cases of mortality in the USA have significantly reduced. Still, much should be done to increase the program effectiveness in future and spread vaccination coverage.
Conclusion
Practically, CDC should involve more means for information spread. The increase of human awareness of the problem is the first step of problem solving, that is the increase of the vaccinated people in the period from August 2011 up to February 2012. In theory, the program should be evaluated from the point of view of its cost effectiveness.
Reference List
Briss, P., Brownson, R., Fielding, J., & Zaza, S. (2004). Developing and using the Guide to Community Preventive Services: Lessons learned about evidence based public health. Annual Review Public Health , 25, 281-302.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). Seasonal Flu. Web.
Fairbrother, G., Kuttner, H., Miller, W., Hogan, R., McPhillips, H., Johnson, K. A., & Alexander, E. R. (2000). Findings from case studies of state and local immunization programs. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19(3), 54-77.
Furlow, C., Gonzalez-Feliciano, A. G., Bryan, L. N., Euler, G. L., Ding, H., Singleton, J. A., & Balluz, L. S. (2011). Interim Results: State-Specific Influenza Vaccination Coverage — United States, August 2010-February 2011. MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 60(22), 737-743.
Madjid, M., Alfred, A., Sahai, A., Conyers, J. & Casscells, S. (2009). Factors contributing to suboptimal vaccination against influenza. Texas Heart Institute Journal, 26(6), 546-552.
Smith, J., Snider, D., & Pickering, L. (2009). Immunization policy development in the United States: the role of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Annals of Internal Medicine, 150(1), 45-49.