Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?

Ben Kasstan; Louise Letley; Sandra Mounier-Jack; Nicole Klynman; Katherine M. Gaskell; Rosalind M. Eggo; Michael Marks; Tracey Chantler

doi:10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287

Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?

Ben Kasstan, Louise Letley, Sandra Mounier-Jack, Nicole Klynman, Katherine M. Gaskell, Rosalind M. Eggo, Michael Marks, Tracey Chantler^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

UK Health Security Agency

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

23 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives: A WHO Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) evaluation was conducted in 2014-16 to investigate suboptimal childhood vaccination coverage in the north London Orthodox Jewish community. In 2021-22 a qualitative evaluation of the COVID-19 vaccine programme (CVP) was conducted in the same setting. This paper examines whether the issues identified by the TIP affected the CVP and what differences emerged between these two vaccine programme evaluations.

Study design: Qualitative study.

Methods: The CVP evaluation involved conducting 28 semi-structured interviews with public health professionals, Orthodox Jewish welfare and religious representatives, and household members in February-May 2021. The key considerations arising from the thematic analysis of this data was then compared systematically with the overarching findings from the TIP study.

Results: The issues identified in the TIP study diverged and converged with results from the CVP evaluation: i) participants did not express concerns of unmet CVP information needs; ii) the social value of COVID-19 vaccines was influenced by international travel requirements; iii) in contrast to commissioning constraints noted to have limited flexible delivery of childhood immunisations in the TIP evaluation, the CVP was characterised by a flexible commissioning and delivery model. This model was facilitated by significant government investment as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response.

Conclusions: The comparative analysis indicates that flexible vaccine commissioning and fit for purpose public health investment can influence how documented knowledge is translated into action. Implications are raised for how routine vaccination services are equipped to serve the needs of minority populations with historically suboptimal coverage levels.

Original language	English
Article number	100287
Journal	Public Health in Practice
Volume	4
Early online date	2 Jul 2022
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287
Publication status	Published - Dec 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information: This work was jointly funded by UKRI and NIHR [COV0335; MR/V027956/1], a donation from the LSHTM Alumni COVID-19 response fund, HDR UK, the MRC and the Wellcome Trust (210830/Z/18/Z). This research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Immunisation.

Tracey Chantler, Ben Kasstan, Louise Letley, and Sandra Mounier-Jack are affiliated to the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Vaccines and Immunisation (NIHR200929) at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in partnership with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). Tracey Chantler, Ben Kasstan, and Sandra Mounier-Jack are based at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and Louise Letley is based at UKHSA. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health or UKHSA.

Open Access: This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Royal Society for Public Health.

Citation: Ben Kasstan, Louise Letley, Sandra Mounier-Jack, Nicole Klynman, Katherine M. Gaskell, Rosalind M. Eggo, Michael Marks, Tracey Chantler,
Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?, Public Health in Practice, Volume 4, 2022, 100287,
ISSN 2666-5352.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287.

Keywords

Commissioning
Covid-19
Qualitative research
Tailoring Immunization Programme
United Kingdom

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287Licence: CC BY

Kasstan2022TailoringImmunisationProgrammesInATimeOfSARS-CoV-2PublicHealthPractFinal published version, 1.71 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

Kasstan, B., Letley, L., Mounier-Jack, S., Klynman, N., Gaskell, K. M., Eggo, R. M., Marks, M., & Chantler, T. (2022). Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population? Public Health in Practice, 4, Article 100287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287

@article{f6c52e9bb3d64fd8959be6b49b89d0db,

title = "Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?",

abstract = "Objectives: A WHO Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) evaluation was conducted in 2014-16 to investigate suboptimal childhood vaccination coverage in the north London Orthodox Jewish community. In 2021-22 a qualitative evaluation of the COVID-19 vaccine programme (CVP) was conducted in the same setting. This paper examines whether the issues identified by the TIP affected the CVP and what differences emerged between these two vaccine programme evaluations. Study design: Qualitative study. Methods: The CVP evaluation involved conducting 28 semi-structured interviews with public health professionals, Orthodox Jewish welfare and religious representatives, and household members in February-May 2021. The key considerations arising from the thematic analysis of this data was then compared systematically with the overarching findings from the TIP study. Results: The issues identified in the TIP study diverged and converged with results from the CVP evaluation: i) participants did not express concerns of unmet CVP information needs; ii) the social value of COVID-19 vaccines was influenced by international travel requirements; iii) in contrast to commissioning constraints noted to have limited flexible delivery of childhood immunisations in the TIP evaluation, the CVP was characterised by a flexible commissioning and delivery model. This model was facilitated by significant government investment as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Conclusions: The comparative analysis indicates that flexible vaccine commissioning and fit for purpose public health investment can influence how documented knowledge is translated into action. Implications are raised for how routine vaccination services are equipped to serve the needs of minority populations with historically suboptimal coverage levels.",

keywords = "Commissioning, Covid-19, Qualitative research, Tailoring Immunization Programme, United Kingdom",

author = "Ben Kasstan and Louise Letley and Sandra Mounier-Jack and Nicole Klynman and Gaskell, {Katherine M.} and Eggo, {Rosalind M.} and Michael Marks and Tracey Chantler",

note = "Funding Information: This work was jointly funded by UKRI and NIHR [COV0335; MR/V027956/1], a donation from the LSHTM Alumni COVID-19 response fund, HDR UK, the MRC and the Wellcome Trust (210830/Z/18/Z). This research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Immunisation. Tracey Chantler, Ben Kasstan, Louise Letley, and Sandra Mounier-Jack are affiliated to the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Vaccines and Immunisation (NIHR200929) at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in partnership with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). Tracey Chantler, Ben Kasstan, and Sandra Mounier-Jack are based at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and Louise Letley is based at UKHSA. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health or UKHSA. Open Access: This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Royal Society for Public Health. Citation: Ben Kasstan, Louise Letley, Sandra Mounier-Jack, Nicole Klynman, Katherine M. Gaskell, Rosalind M. Eggo, Michael Marks, Tracey Chantler, Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?, Public Health in Practice, Volume 4, 2022, 100287, ISSN 2666-5352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287.",

year = "2022",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287",

language = "English",

volume = "4",

journal = "Public Health in Practice",

issn = "2666-5352",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Kasstan, B, Letley, L, Mounier-Jack, S, Klynman, N, Gaskell, KM, Eggo, RM, Marks, M & Chantler, T 2022, 'Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?', Public Health in Practice, vol. 4, 100287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287

Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population? / Kasstan, Ben; Letley, Louise; Mounier-Jack, Sandra et al.
In: Public Health in Practice, Vol. 4, 100287, 12.2022.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2

T2 - What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?

AU - Kasstan, Ben

AU - Letley, Louise

AU - Mounier-Jack, Sandra

AU - Klynman, Nicole

AU - Gaskell, Katherine M.

AU - Eggo, Rosalind M.

AU - Marks, Michael

AU - Chantler, Tracey

N1 - Funding Information: This work was jointly funded by UKRI and NIHR [COV0335; MR/V027956/1], a donation from the LSHTM Alumni COVID-19 response fund, HDR UK, the MRC and the Wellcome Trust (210830/Z/18/Z). This research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Immunisation. Tracey Chantler, Ben Kasstan, Louise Letley, and Sandra Mounier-Jack are affiliated to the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Vaccines and Immunisation (NIHR200929) at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in partnership with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). Tracey Chantler, Ben Kasstan, and Sandra Mounier-Jack are based at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and Louise Letley is based at UKHSA. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health or UKHSA. Open Access: This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Royal Society for Public Health. Citation: Ben Kasstan, Louise Letley, Sandra Mounier-Jack, Nicole Klynman, Katherine M. Gaskell, Rosalind M. Eggo, Michael Marks, Tracey Chantler, Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?, Public Health in Practice, Volume 4, 2022, 100287, ISSN 2666-5352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287.

PY - 2022/12

Y1 - 2022/12

N2 - Objectives: A WHO Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) evaluation was conducted in 2014-16 to investigate suboptimal childhood vaccination coverage in the north London Orthodox Jewish community. In 2021-22 a qualitative evaluation of the COVID-19 vaccine programme (CVP) was conducted in the same setting. This paper examines whether the issues identified by the TIP affected the CVP and what differences emerged between these two vaccine programme evaluations. Study design: Qualitative study. Methods: The CVP evaluation involved conducting 28 semi-structured interviews with public health professionals, Orthodox Jewish welfare and religious representatives, and household members in February-May 2021. The key considerations arising from the thematic analysis of this data was then compared systematically with the overarching findings from the TIP study. Results: The issues identified in the TIP study diverged and converged with results from the CVP evaluation: i) participants did not express concerns of unmet CVP information needs; ii) the social value of COVID-19 vaccines was influenced by international travel requirements; iii) in contrast to commissioning constraints noted to have limited flexible delivery of childhood immunisations in the TIP evaluation, the CVP was characterised by a flexible commissioning and delivery model. This model was facilitated by significant government investment as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Conclusions: The comparative analysis indicates that flexible vaccine commissioning and fit for purpose public health investment can influence how documented knowledge is translated into action. Implications are raised for how routine vaccination services are equipped to serve the needs of minority populations with historically suboptimal coverage levels.

AB - Objectives: A WHO Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) evaluation was conducted in 2014-16 to investigate suboptimal childhood vaccination coverage in the north London Orthodox Jewish community. In 2021-22 a qualitative evaluation of the COVID-19 vaccine programme (CVP) was conducted in the same setting. This paper examines whether the issues identified by the TIP affected the CVP and what differences emerged between these two vaccine programme evaluations. Study design: Qualitative study. Methods: The CVP evaluation involved conducting 28 semi-structured interviews with public health professionals, Orthodox Jewish welfare and religious representatives, and household members in February-May 2021. The key considerations arising from the thematic analysis of this data was then compared systematically with the overarching findings from the TIP study. Results: The issues identified in the TIP study diverged and converged with results from the CVP evaluation: i) participants did not express concerns of unmet CVP information needs; ii) the social value of COVID-19 vaccines was influenced by international travel requirements; iii) in contrast to commissioning constraints noted to have limited flexible delivery of childhood immunisations in the TIP evaluation, the CVP was characterised by a flexible commissioning and delivery model. This model was facilitated by significant government investment as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Conclusions: The comparative analysis indicates that flexible vaccine commissioning and fit for purpose public health investment can influence how documented knowledge is translated into action. Implications are raised for how routine vaccination services are equipped to serve the needs of minority populations with historically suboptimal coverage levels.

KW - Commissioning

KW - Covid-19

KW - Qualitative research

KW - Tailoring Immunization Programme

KW - United Kingdom

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85134494835&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287

DO - 10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100287

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85134494835

SN - 2666-5352

VL - 4

JO - Public Health in Practice

JF - Public Health in Practice

M1 - 100287

ER -

Tailoring immunisation programmes in a time of SARS-CoV-2: What can be learnt by comparing the findings of childhood and COVID-19 vaccine evaluation studies in an underserved population?

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this