Implementing a declination form programme to improve influenza vaccine uptake by staff in Department of Veterans Affairs spinal cord injury centres: a pilot study.

Hill JN, Smith BM, Evans CT, Anaya H, Goldstein B, LaVela SL. Implementing a declination form programme to improve influenza vaccine uptake by staff in Department of Veterans Affairs spinal cord injury centres: a pilot study. The Journal of hospital infection. 2015 Oct 1; 91(2):158-65.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• RRP 12-515 – Use of Declination Forms to Improve Influenza Vaccination in Health Care Workers

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Individuals with spinal cord injuries and disorders are at high risk for respiratory and influenza-related complications after developing influenza. These individuals often have frequent contact with the healthcare system. Vaccination rates in healthcare workers at Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) spinal cord injury (SCI) centres have been approximately 50% for several years. Efforts are needed to increase vaccination uptake among SCI HCWs. Declination form programmes (DFPs) in combination with other strategies have resulted in significant increases in influenza vaccination uptake in HCWs. AIM: Use of external and internal facilitation including local teams and consensus processes to pilot a DFP in two VA SCI centres and evaluate factors influencing implementation. METHODS: Implementation meetings and a consensus-building process with leadership and implementation team members were conducted, along with semi-structured post-implementation interviews with members of each implementation team (N = 7). FINDINGS: The DFP was well accepted and easy to use. Leadership was a key facilitator for DFP implementation. Barriers included difficulty communicating with HCWs working during early/late shifts. Participation was 100% at Site 1 and 48% at Site 2. CONCLUSION: Use of local teams and consensus to identify strategies to implement a DFP is feasible and effective for achieving moderate-to-high levels of participation in the programme.