Abstract
Objectives
To explore the perspectives of older adults on the acceptability of reminder letters for influenza vaccinations.
Methods
We randomly selected 23 family physicians from each Family Health and Primary Care network participating in a demonstration project designed to increase the delivery of preventive services in Ontario. From the roster of each physician, we surveyed 35 randomly selected patients over 65 years of age who recently received a reminder letter regarding influenza vaccinations from their physician. The questionnaires sought patient perspectives on the acceptability and usefulness of the letter. We also conducted follow-up telephone interviews with a subgroup of respondents to explore some of the survey findings in greater depth.
Results
85.3% (663/767) of patients completed the questionnaire. Sixty-five percent of respondents recalled receiving the reminder (n=431), and of those, 77.3% found it helpful. Of the respondents who recalled the letter and received a flu shot (n=348), 11.2% indicated they might not have done so without the letter. The majority of respondents reported that they would like to continue receiving reminder letters for influenza vaccinations (63.0%) and other preventive services (77.1%) from their family physician. The interview participants endorsed the use of reminder letters for improving vaccination coverage in older adults, but did not feel that the strategy was required for them personally.
Conclusions
The general attitude of older adults towards reminder letters was favourable, and the reminders appear to have contributed to a modest increase in influenza vaccination rates.
Key words: Reminder systems, preventive health services, influenza vaccine, patient satisfaction
Résumé
Objectifs
Étudier le point de vue de personnes âgées sur l’acceptabilité des lettres de rappel concernant les vaccins antigrippaux.
Méthode
Nous avons sélectionné au hasard 23 médecins de famille associés aux réseaux de santé familiale et de soins primaires compris dans un projet de démonstration visant à accroître la prestation des services préventifs en Ontario. Sur la liste des patients de chaque médecin, nous avons sondé 35 patients de plus de 65 ans sélectionnés au hasard qui avaient reçu récemment une ettre de rappel de leur médecin concernant les vaccins antigrippaux. Dans le questionnaire, on demandait au patient ce qu’il ou elle pensait de l’acceptabilité et de l’utilité de la lettre. Nous avons aussi mené des entrevues téléphoniques de suivi auprès d’un sous-groupe de répondants pour approfondir certains des résultats du sondage.
Résultats
85,3 % des patients (663/767) ont rempli le questionnaire. Soixante-cinq p. cent des répondants se souvenaient d’avoir reçu la lettre de rappel (n=431), et parmi eux, 77,3 % l’avaient trouvée utile. Parmi les répondants qui se souvenaient de la lettre et qui s’étaient fait vacciner contre la grippe (n=348), 11,2 % ont indiqué qu’ils ne l’auraient peut-être pas fait sans cette lettre. Les répondants ont déclaré en majorité qu’ils aimeraient continuer à recevoir des lettres de rappel de leur médecin de famille concernant les vaccins antigrippaux (63 %) et d’autres services de prévention (77,1 %). Les participants aux entrevues étaient d’accord avec l’envoi de lettres de rappel pour améliorer la couverture vaccinale chez les personnes âgées, mais ne considéraient pas qu’une telle stratégie était nécessaire dans leur cas personnel.
Conclusion
L’attitude générale des personnes âgées à l’égard des lettres de rappel était favorable, et les rappels semblent avoir contribué à une hausse modeste des taux de vaccination contre la grippe.
Mots clés: systèmes de rappel, services préventifs de santé, vaccin contre la grippe, satisfaction des patients
Footnotes
Acknowledgements: This work was supported by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (Primary Health Care Transition Fund G03-02757).
References
- 1.Jacobson Vann J, Szilagyi P. Patient reminder and patient recall systems to improve immunization rates: A review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;(3):CD003941. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 2.Baker AM, McCarthy B, Gurley VF, Yood MU. Influenza immunization in a managed care organization. J Gen Intern Med. 1998;13(7):469–75. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00136.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Armstrong K, Berlin M, Schwartz JS, Propert K, Ubel PA. Educational content and the effectiveness of influenza vaccination reminders. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14(11):695–9S. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.11098.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Hutchinson HL, Norman LA. Compliance with influenza immunization: A survey of high-risk patients at a family medicine clinic. J Am Board Fam Pract. 1995;8(6):448–51. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Van Essen GA, Kuyvenhoven MM, de Melker RA. Why do healthy elderly people fail to comply with influenza vaccination? Age Ageing. 1997;26(4):275–79. doi: 10.1093/ageing/26.4.275. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Evans MR, Watson PA. Why do older people not get immunised against influenza? A community survey. Vaccine. 2003;21(19–20):2421–27. doi: 10.1016/S0264-410X(03)00059-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Ornstein SM, Musham C, Reid A, Jenkins RG, Zemp LD, Garr DR. Barriers to adherence to preventive services reminder letters: The patient’s perspective. J Fam Pract. 1993;36(2):195–200. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Hunter DJ, Shortt SE, Walker PM, Godwin M. Family physician views about primary care reform in Ontario: A postal questionnaire. BMC Fam Pract. 2004;5:2. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-5-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Creswell JW. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2003. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Creswell JW, Piano Clark VL, Gutmann ML, Hanson WE. Advanced mixed methods research designs. In: Tashakkori A, Teddlie C, editors. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. 2003. pp. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications–40. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Kemper EA, Stringfield S, Teddlie C. Mixed methods sampling strategies in social science research. In: Tashakkori A, Teddlie C, editors. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2003. pp. 273–96. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Kelsey JL, Whittemore AS, Evans AS, Thompson WD. Methods in Observational Epidemiology. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Yin RK. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2003. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Crabtree BF, Miller WL. Using codes and code manuals: A template organizing style of interpretation. In: Crabtree BF, Miller WL, editors. Doing Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1999. pp. 163–77. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1994. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Kurji K. The Ontario experience with universal vaccination. Atlanta, GA: Presented at the National Influenza Vaccine Summit on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care; 2004. [Google Scholar]