Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 98, Issue 5, pp 417–421 | Cite as

Taking a Closer Look: An Examination of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Immunization Uptake in Saskatoon

  • Kyla Avis
  • Leonard Tan
  • Cathy Anderson
  • Ben Tan
  • Nazeem Muhajarine
Article

Abstract

Background

Immunization is one of the most successful public health initiatives in Canada, yet continuous monitoring of coverage rates is essential to ensure high uptake for sustained success. The purpose of this study was to utilize newly available data from the Saskatchewan Immunization Management System (SIMS) to examine city and neighbourhood uptake of the Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccine and identify potential factors that contribute to low immunization uptake in Saskatoon.

Methods

The study examined records for 10,287 two year olds between 1999 and 2002 using an ecological study design. The first step consisted of simple rate calculations to determine the total, complete, up-to-date and not up-to-date immunization rates for the city of Saskatoon and in each residential neighbourhood. Quantitative neighbourhoodlevel data were then used to determine if neighbourhood variables could significantly contribute to the variation in immunization coverage.

Results

The findings revealed MMR/MR immunization rates were relatively stable between 1999 and 2002. However, significant disparities were found at the neighbourhood level, with areas of social and economic disadvantage having lower rates of total, complete, and up-to-date immunization uptake compared to areas of greater social and economic wealth. Multivariate linear regression revealed 80.6% of variation in up-to-date immunization uptake in Saskatoon could be explained by the proportion of single mothers and vehicles per capita in the neighbourhood.

Conclusion

Significant inequities in immunization uptake exist on the neighbourhood level in Saskatoon. These findings are supported by the literature and may indicate the presence of real or perceived barriers to immunization in some Saskatoon neighbourhoods.

MeSH terms

Immunization measles mumps rubella neighbourhood 

Résumé

Contexte

Bien que l’immunisation soit l’une des initiatives les plus réussies dans le domaine de la santé publique au Canada, elle nécessite une surveillance continue de la couverture vaccinale afin de s’assurer que les taux de réception des vaccins demeurent élevés. L’objet de la présente étude était de recourir à des données récentes du Saskatchewan Immunization Management System (SIMS) afin de se pencher sur le taux de réception des vaccins contre la rougeole, les oreillons et la rubéole de la ville de Saskatoon et de ses quartiers, et de cerner les facteurs qui pourraient contribuer à un faible taux de réception des vaccins à Saskatoon.

Méthode

Les données relatives à 10 287 enfants âgés de deux ans, de 1999 à 2002, ont été analysées au moyen d’une étude écologique. La première étape consistait simplement à calculer les taux de couverture vaccinale totale, optimale, à jour et non à jour pour la ville de Saskatoon ainsi que pour chaque quartier résidentiel. Par la suite, les données quantitatives par quartier ont servi à vérifier si des variables relatives aux quartiers pouvaient avoir un effet important sur les variations de la couverture vaccinale.

Résultats

Les taux de vaccination ROR/RR sont demeurés relativement stables de 1999 à 2002. Cependant, des disparités importantes ont été décelées d’un quartier à l’autre: les quartiers désavantagés socialement et économiquement avaient des taux de vaccination plus faibles, relativement à la couverture vaccinale totale, optimale et à jour, que les quartiers plus favorisés socialement et économiquement. L’analyse de régression linéaire multivariée a révélé que 80,6 % des variations de la couverture vaccinale à jour à Saskatoon étaient attribuables à la proportion de mères seules et de véhicules par habitant se rapportant à un quartier donné.

Conclusion

Des inégalités importantes existent pour ce qui est de la couverture vaccinale au niveau des quartiers de Saskatoon. Ces observations sont appuyées par les études antérieures et pourraient signaler la présence de barrières à l’immunisation, réelles ou perçues, dans certains quartiers de Saskatoon.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Canadian Public Health Association. The value of immunization in the future of Canada’s health system: Submission to the Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada. Ottawa, ON: CPHA, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wakefield A, Murch S, Anthony A, Linnell J, Casson D, Malik M, et al. Ileal-lymphoidnodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet 1998;351:637–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jansen V, Stollenwek N, Jensen H, Ramsay M, Edmunds W, Rhodes C. Measles outbreaks in a population with declining vaccine uptake. Science 2003;301:804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Murch S, Anthony A, Casson D, Malik M, Berelowitz M, Dhillon A, et al. Retraction of an interpretation. Lancet 2004;363(9411):750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Taylor B, Miller E, Farrington P, Petropoulos M, Favot-Mayaud I, Li J, et al. Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: No epidemiological evidence for a causal association. Lancet 1999;353(9169):2026–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dales L, Hammer S, Smith N. Time trends in autism and in MMR immunization coverage in California. JAMA 2001;285(9):1183–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Meldgaard Madsen K, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, et al. A population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism. N Engl J Med 2002;347(19):1477–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaye J, del Mar Melero-Montes M, Jick H. Mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine and the incidence of autism recorded by general practitioners: A time trend analysis. BMJ 2001;322:460–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Begg N. Media dents confidence in MMR vaccine. BMJ 1998;346:561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moreton J, Bedford H, Elliman D. MMR: Weighing up the risks–vaccine versus disease. Community Practitioner 1998;71(5):169–71.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ramsay M, Yarwood J, Lewis D, Campbell H, White J. Parental confidence in measles, mumps and rubella vaccine: Evidence from vaccine coverage and attitudinal surveys. Br J Gen Pract 2002;52:912–16.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miller L, Hoffman R, Baron A, Marine W, Melinkovich P. Risk factors for delayed immunization against measles, mumps, and rubella in Colorado two-year olds. Pediatrics 1994;94(2):213–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bates A, Fitzgerald J, Dittus R, Wolinsky F. Risk factors for underimmunization in poor urban infants. JAMA 1994;272(14):1105–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bates A, Wolinsky F. Personal, financial, and structural barriers to immunization in socioeconomically disadvantaged urban children. Pediatrics 1998;101(4):591–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Klevens R, Luman E. U.S. children living in and near poverty: Risk of vaccine-preventable diseases. Am J Prev Med 2001;20(4):41–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marks J, Halpin T, Irvin J, Johnson D, Keller J. Risk factors associated with failure to receive vaccinations. Pediatrics 1979;64(3):304–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Salsberry P, Nickel J, Mitch R. Inadequate immunization among 2 year old children: A profile of children at risk. J Pediatr Nurs 1994;9(3):158–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kimmel S, Maldon-Kay D, Burns I, Admire J. Breaking the barriers to childhood immunization. Am Fam Physician 1996;53(5):1648–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Salsberry P, Nickel J, Mitch R. Why aren’t preschoolers immunized? A comparison of parents’ and providers’ perceptions of the barriers to immunization. J Community Health Nurs 1993;10(4):213–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mack R, Darden P. Children’s immunizations: The gap between parents and providers. Health Mark Q 1999;16(4):7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lannon C, Brack V, Stuart J, Caplow M, McNeil A, Bordley C, et al. What mothers say about why poor children fall behind on immunizations. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1995;149:1070–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Farizo K, Stehr-Green P, Markowitz L, Patriarca P. Vaccination levels and missed opportunities for measles vaccination: A record audit in a public pediatric clinic. Pediatrics 1992;89:589–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gamertsfelder D, Zimmerman R, DeSensi E. Immunization barriers in a family practice residency clinic. J Am Board Fam Pract 1994;7:100–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    McConnochie K, Roghmann K. Immunization opportunities missed among urban poor children. Pediatrics 1992;89:1019–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Maldon-Kay D, Harper P. Too many shots? Parent, nurse, and physician attitudes toward multiple simultaneous childhood vaccinations. Arch Fam Med 1994;3:610–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Canadian Paediatric Society. Routine immunization schedule: Update 2004. Pediatrics & Child Health 2004;9(1):17–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kyla Avis
    • 1
  • Leonard Tan
    • 2
  • Cathy Anderson
    • 3
  • Ben Tan
    • 4
  • Nazeem Muhajarine
    • 2
  1. 1.College of NursingUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, College of MedicineUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  3. 3.c/o Saskatoon Health RegionPublic Health ServicesSaskatoonCanada
  4. 4.Department of Pediatrics, College of MedicineUniversity of SaskatchewanCanada

Personalised recommendations