Too little but not too late: Results of a literature review to improve routine immunization programs in developing countries

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Globally, immunization services have been the center of renewed interest with increased funding to improve services, acceleration of the introduction of new vaccines, and the development of a health systems approach to improve vaccine delivery. Much of the credit for the increased attention is due to the work of the GAVI Alliance and to new funding streams. If routine immunization programs are to take full advantage of the newly available resources, managers need to understand the range of proven strategies and approaches to deliver vaccines to reduce the incidence of diseases. In this paper, we present strategies that may be used at the sub-national level to improve routine immunization programs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a systematic review of studies and projects reported in the published and gray literature. Each paper that met our inclusion criteria was rated based on methodological rigor and data were systematically abstracted. Routine-immunization – specific papers with a methodological rigor rating of greater than 60% and with conclusive results were reported.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Greater than 11,000 papers were identified, of which 60 met our inclusion criteria and 25 papers were reported. Papers were grouped into four strategy approaches: bringing immunizations closer to communities (n = 11), using information dissemination to increase demand for vaccination (n = 3), changing practices in fixed sites (n = 4), and using innovative management practices (n = 7).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Immunization programs are at a historical crossroads in terms of developing new funding streams, introducing new vaccines, and responding to the global interest in the health systems approach to improving immunization delivery. However, to complement this, actual service delivery needs to be strengthened and program managers must be aware of proven strategies. Much was learned from the 25 papers, such as the use of non-health workers to provide numerous services at the community level. However it was startling to see how few papers were identified and in particular how few were of strong scientific quality. Further well-designed and well-conducted scientific research is warranted. Proposed areas of additional research include integration of additional services with immunization delivery, collaboration of immunization programs with new partners, best approaches to new vaccine introduction, and how to improve service delivery.</p

Quality assurance of ethical issues and regulatory aspects relating to good clinical practices in the HELENA Cross-Sectional Study

Rationale: Research involving humans is regulated by regulatory authorities through their specific requirements and controls. The Healthy Life Style in Europe by Nutrition in Adolescence Cross-Sectional Study (HELENA-CSS) is a multicenter biomedical research study of adolescents in several representative European cities, which requires satisfying medico-regulatory requirements including Independent Ethics Committee (IEC) approval and agreement by the national or local regulatory authorities. To achieve a high level of quality assurance relating to ethical issues, we followed the good clinical practices (GCP) described at the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH), which we adapted to the national and local situations of each of the 11 participating cities in 10 European countries. Objective: The main objective of the HELENA-CSS is to evaluate reliable and comparable data of nutritional habits and lifestyle in a representative sample of European adolescents. The aim of this paper is to present the methods relating to the ethical and regulatory issues of this study and to describe the current state of the medico-regulatory requirements involved in conducting this kind of study in each country. Materials and Methods: Following the GCP-ICH guidelines, a protocol describing the HELENA-CSS was written and approved by all partners. In the pilot study, a case report form adapted to the study objectives and its manual of operation was constructed and used by all partners. All information letters to adolescents and their parents and consent forms were first written in English, then translated into the local language, and adapted to each local situation. All documents were then checked centrally for any deviation and corrected if required. An operation manual relating to ethical issues and other medico-regulatory requirements was also developed. This paper presents the current status of the medico-regulatory requirements from each HELENA-CSS participant country. Results: Before the beginning of the study, most centers had satisfied the medico-regulatory requirements of IEC approval and agreement with other national or local regulatory authorities/organizations. For a few centers, some problems were detected and corrective actions were taken to improve missing information to reach a high level of quality assurance of ethical issues. Conclusion: The GCP-ICH guidelines about nontherapeutic biomedical research are interpreted and applied differently across Europe. This study shows that high-quality nontherapeutic biomedical research can address the ethical issues included in the GCP-ICH regulations and can be harmonized among the HELENA European partners