Unit of Global Health, Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Asc Academics, Groningen, Netherlands.
Front Public Health. 2023 Jan 9;10:1080678. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1080678. eCollection 2022.
Delaying of policies for immunization of aging adults, low vaccine uptake, and the lack of supportive evidence at the national level could diminish the value in health and economics of such programs. This study aims to develop a "country score tool" to assess readiness and to facilitate evidence generation for aging adult immunization programs in Europe, and examine the comprehensiveness, relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of the tool.
The tool was developed in two phases. First, a modified Delphi process was used to construct the tool. The process included a literature review, stakeholder consultations, and a three-round Delphi study. The Delphi panel included researchers, supra-national and national decision-makers of immunization programs recruited from five countries, using snowball sampling method. The consensus was predefined at the agreement rate of 70%. Pilot testing of the tool was conducted in the Netherlands, Germany, Serbia, and Hungary involving researchers in the field of health technology assessment. After assessing the countries' readiness, researchers evaluated four features, namely comprehensiveness, relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of the tool an online survey that included 5-scale Likert questions. The percentages of affirmative answers including "agree" and "totally agree" choices were presented.
The review identified 16 tools and frameworks that formed the first version of our tool with 14 items. Eight experts were involved in the Delphi panel. Through three Delphi rounds, four items were added, one was dropped, and all others were amended. The consensus was achieved on the tool with 17 items divided into decision-making and implementation parts. Each item has a guiding question, corresponding to explanations and rationales to inform assessment with readiness scores. Eight researchers completed the pilot testing. The tool was rated as comprehensive (75%), relevant (100%), acceptable (75%), and feasible (88%) by participants.
Through a thorough and transparent process, a country score tool was developed helping to identify strengths, weaknesses, and evidential requirements for decision-making and implementation of immunization programs of aging adults. The tool is relevant for different European contexts and shows good comprehensiveness, acceptability, and feasibility.
老龄化人群免疫接种政策的延迟、疫苗接种率低以及国家层面缺乏支持性证据,可能会降低此类项目在健康和经济方面的价值。本研究旨在开发一种“国家评分工具”,以评估老龄化人群免疫接种项目在欧洲的准备情况,并促进证据的产生,并考察该工具的全面性、相关性、可接受性和可行性。
该工具分两个阶段开发。首先,采用改良 Delphi 法构建工具。该过程包括文献回顾、利益相关者咨询以及三轮 Delphi 研究。Delphi 小组包括从五个国家招募的研究人员、免疫规划的超国家和国家决策者,采用滚雪球抽样方法。共识的预设标准为 70%的同意率。该工具的试点测试在荷兰、德国、塞尔维亚和匈牙利进行,涉及健康技术评估领域的研究人员。在评估各国的准备情况后,研究人员评估了工具的四个特征,即全面性、相关性、可接受性和可行性,采用包含 5 级李克特问题的在线调查。呈现了肯定回答(包括“同意”和“完全同意”选项)的百分比。
综述确定了 16 种工具和框架,这些工具和框架构成了我们的工具的第一版,共包含 14 个项目。有 8 名专家参与了 Delphi 小组。通过三轮 Delphi 研究,增加了 4 个项目,删除了 1 个项目,其余项目都进行了修订。在 17 个项目分为决策和实施两部分的工具上达成了共识。每个项目都有一个指导问题,对应于评估准备情况的解释和基本原理,给出了准备情况得分。8 名研究人员完成了试点测试。参与者认为该工具具有全面性(75%)、相关性(100%)、可接受性(75%)和可行性(88%)。
通过一个彻底和透明的过程,开发了一种国家评分工具,有助于确定老龄化人群免疫接种项目的决策和实施的优势、劣势和证据需求。该工具与不同的欧洲背景相关,具有良好的全面性、可接受性和可行性。