WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that health departments in all 50 states deliver AFIX (Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange) consultations to 25% of federally funded vaccine providers each year. AFIX effectively raises vaccination coverage among young children.WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: AFIX consultations achieved short-term gains in coverage for 11-to 12-year-olds for vaccines in the adolescent platform. No gains occurred for older adolescents or over the long term. Consultations were equally effective when delivered in-person or by webinar. abstract OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of in-person and webinardelivered AFIX (Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange) consultations for increasing adolescent vaccine coverage. METHODS:We randomly assigned 91 primary care clinics in North Carolina, serving 107 443 adolescents, to receive no consultation or an in-person or webinar AFIX consultation. We delivered in-person consultations in April through May 2011 and webinar consultations in May through August 2011. The state' s immunization registry provided vaccine coverage data for younger patients (ages 11-12 years) and older patients (ages 13-18 years) for 3 adolescent vaccines: tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap); meningococcal; and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines ($1 dose, females only). RESULTS:At the 5-month follow-up, AFIX consultations increased vaccine coverage among younger adolescents. Patients in the in-person arm experienced coverage changes that exceeded those in the control arm for Tdap (3.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.2 to 4.6]), meningococcal (4.7% [95% CI: 2.3 to 7.2], and HPV (1.5% [95% CI: 0.3 to 2.7]) vaccines. Patients in the webinar versus control arm also experienced larger changes for these vaccines. AFIX did little to improve coverage among older adolescents. At 1 year, the 3 arms showed similar coverage changes. The effectiveness of in-person and webinar consultations was not statistically different at either time point (all, P ..05).CONCLUSIONS: Webinar AFIX consultations were as effective as in-person consultations in achieving short-term increases in vaccine coverage for younger adolescents. AFIX consultations for adolescents need improvement to have a stronger and more durable impact, especially for HPV vaccine. Pediatrics 2014;134:e346-e353 AUTHORS:

Sub-Saharan Africa bears 69 % of the global burden of HIV, and strong evidence indicates an association between alcohol consumption, HIV risk behavior, and HIV incidence. However, characteristics of efficacious HIV-alcohol risk reduction interventions are not well known. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize the characteristics and synthesize the findings of HIV-alcohol risk reduction interventions implemented in the region and reported in peer-reviewed journals. Of 644 citations screened, 19 met the inclusion criteria for this review. A discussion of methodological challenges, research gaps, and recommendations for future interventions is included. Relatively few interventions were found, and evidence is mixed about the efficacy of HIV-alcohol risk reduction interventions. There is a need to further integrate HIV-alcohol risk reduction components into HIV prevention programming and to document results from such integration. Additionally, research on larger scale, multi-level interventions is needed to identify effective HIV-alcohol risk reduction strategies.

Introduction As the tobacco market expands, so too have the opportunities for youth to be introduced to nicotine. The goal of this study was to identify product choice for initial tobacco trial, correlates associated with product choice, and the relationship between first product and current cigarette smoking among college students. Methods A cross-sectional web survey of 3,146 first-year students at 11 universities in North Carolina and Virginia was conducted in fall 2010. Results Weighted prevalence of ever use of tobacco was 48.6%. Cigarettes were the most common first product (37.9%), followed by cigars (29.3%), hookahs (24.6%), smokeless tobacco (6.1%), and bidis/kreteks (2.2%). Two thirds (65%) of current smokers initiated with cigarettes, but 16.4% started with cigars, 11.1% with hookahs, 5.7% with smokeless, and 1.7% with bidis/kreteks. Females were more likely to report their first product was cigarettes and hookahs, while males were more likely to start with cigars and smokeless tobacco. Compared to those whose first product trial occurred after the age of 18, younger age of initiation (17 years or younger) was associated with cigarettes and smokeless as first products, while older age of initiation (18 or older) was associated with starting with hookahs and cigars. Dual or poly tobacco use was more common among those who initiated with hookahs and smokeless tobacco. Conclusions While over a third of students used cigarettes first, two thirds started with a non-cigarette product. Just about a third of current cigarette smokers initiated with a non-cigarette product, suggesting that those non-cigarette products may have facilitated escalation to cigarettes.