Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (16)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by LANATA, C. F
Right arrow Articles by GONZALES, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by LANATA, C. F
Right arrow Articles by GONZALES, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1990 Oxford University Press

research-article

An Evaluation of Lot Quality Assurance Sampling to Monitor and Improve Immunization Coverage

CLAUDIO F LANATA*,, GEORGE STROH, JR.{dagger}, ROBERT E BLACK{ddagger} and HILDA GONZALES*

* Research Division, Instituto de Investigacion Nutricional Lima 18 Peru
{dagger}Division of Field Services, Epidemiology Program Office, Centers for Disease Control Atlanta. Georgia. USA
{ddagger}Department of International Health. School of Hygiene and Public Health, Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Reprint requests: Dr Claudio F. Lanata. Instituto de Investigacion Nutricional A. P. 18-0191, Lima 18, Peru

Quality assurance sampling techniques with small samples offer a method of monitoring performance of health services in small health areas, and of identifying areas with poor performance in which remedial actions need to be targetted. Lot Quality Assurance Sampling methods were used to assess the coverage resulting from three immunization campaigns in rural and urban areas in the mountains of Peru. Application of these methods in 12 health areas with populations of 538 to 15 780 by Ministry of Health personnel proved feasible and could be used to identify areas with poorer vaccination coverage. Further discussion about possible reasons for poor coverage led to corrective actions in these health areas and an improvement in overall coverage from 78% to 88% in a three-month period. These quality assurance methods are a useful supervisory tool to improve health programme performance.

Received 1 March 1990


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CLIN PEDIATRHome page
P. M. Darden, J. A. Taylor, D. A. Brooks, J.W. Hendricks, M. Massoudi, J. M. Stevenson, and A. B. Bocian
How Should Immunization Rates Be Measured in the Office Setting? A Study from PROS and NMA PedsNet
Clinical Pediatrics, April 1, 2008; 47(3): 252 - 260.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J EpidemiolHome page
E. T Luman, A. Worku, Y. Berhane, R. Martin, and L. Cairns
Comparison of two survey methodologies to assess vaccination coverage
Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2007; 36(3): 633 - 641.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.