Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Archives of Disease in Childhood logoLink to Archives of Disease in Childhood
. 1998 Aug;79(2):136–140. doi: 10.1136/adc.79.2.136

Randomised controlled trial of the use of a modified postal reminder card on the uptake of measles vaccination

P Hawe 1, N McKenzie 1, R Scurry 1
PMCID: PMC1717666  PMID: 9797594

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—To determine whether rewording postal reminder cards according to the "health belief model", a theory about preventive health behaviour, would help to improve measles vaccination rates.
DESIGN—A randomised controlled trial, with blind assessment of outcome status. Parents of children due for their first measles vaccination were randomised to one of two groups, one receiving the health belief model reminder card, the other receiving the usual, neutrally worded card. The proportion of children subsequently vaccinated in each group over a five week period was ascertained from clinical (provider based) records.
SETTING—A local government operated public vaccination clinic.
PARTICIPANTS—Parents of 259 children due for measles vaccination.
MAIN RESULTS—The proportion of children vaccinated in the health belief model card group was 79% compared with 67% of those sent the usual card (95% CI, 2% to 23%), a modest but important improvement.
CONCLUSION—This study illustrates how the effectiveness of a minimal and widely practised intervention to promote vaccination compliance can be improved with negligible additional effort.



Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (143.7 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bussey A. L., Harris A. S. Computers and the effectiveness of the measles vaccination campaign in England and Wales. Community Med. 1979 Feb;1(1):29–35. doi: 10.1007/BF02548740. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Byrne E. B., Schaffner W., Dini E. F., Case G. E. Infant immunization surveillance: cost vs effect. A prospective, controlled evaluation of a large-scale program in Rhode Island. JAMA. 1970 May 4;212(5):770–773. doi: 10.1001/jama.212.5.770. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Eng E., Naimoli J., Naimoli G., Parker K. A., Lowenthal N. The acceptability of childhood immunization to Togolese mothers: a sociobehavioral perspective. Health Educ Q. 1991 Spring;18(1):97–110. doi: 10.1177/109019819101800110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Harrison J. A., Mullen P. D., Green L. W. A meta-analysis of studies of the Health Belief Model with adults. Health Educ Res. 1992 Mar;7(1):107–116. doi: 10.1093/her/7.1.107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Janz N. K., Becker M. H. The Health Belief Model: a decade later. Health Educ Q. 1984 Spring;11(1):1–47. doi: 10.1177/109019818401100101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Larson E. B., Bergman J., Heidrich F., Alvin B. L., Schneeweiss R. Do postcard reminders improve influenza compliance? A prospective trial of different postcard "cues". Med Care. 1982 Jun;20(6):639–648. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198206000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Loeser H., Zvagulis I., Hercz L., Pless I. B. The organization and evaluation of a computer-assisted, centralized immunization registry. Am J Public Health. 1983 Nov;73(11):1298–1301. doi: 10.2105/ajph.73.11.1298. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Newell D. J. Intention-to-treat analysis: implications for quantitative and qualitative research. Int J Epidemiol. 1992 Oct;21(5):837–841. doi: 10.1093/ije/21.5.837. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Reading R., Colver A., Openshaw S., Jarvis S. Do interventions that improve immunisation uptake also reduce social inequalities in uptake? BMJ. 1994 Apr 30;308(6937):1142–1144. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6937.1142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Reid J. S., Graham-Smith H. J. Childhood immunisations: a recall system is worthwhile. N Z Med J. 1984 Oct 10;97(765):688–689. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Soames Job R. F. Effective and ineffective use of fear in health promotion campaigns. Am J Public Health. 1988 Feb;78(2):163–167. doi: 10.2105/ajph.78.2.163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Stehr-Green P. A., Dini E. F., Lindegren M. L., Patriarca P. A. Evaluation of telephoned computer-generated reminders to improve immunization coverage at inner-city clinics. Public Health Rep. 1993 Jul-Aug;108(4):426–430. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Szilagyi P. G., Rodewald L. E., Savageau J., Yoos L., Doane C. Improving influenza vaccination rates in children with asthma: a test of a computerized reminder system and an analysis of factors predicting vaccination compliance. Pediatrics. 1992 Dec;90(6):871–875. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Tannenbaum T. N., Gyorkos T. W., Abrahamowicz M., Bédard L., Carsley J., Franco E. D., Delage G., Miller M. A., Lamping D. L., Grover S. A. Immunization delivery methods: practice recommendations. Can J Public Health. 1994 Jul-Aug;85 (Suppl 1):S37–S40. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Archives of Disease in Childhood are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES