Aims and Objectives To explore the interventions aimed at increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates among adolescents in family practice settings. Background HPV is the most common sexually transmitted disease in the United States, and the cause of thousands of anogenital and oropharyngeal cancers annually. Although HPV infection can be prevented with recommended vaccination during adolescence, national HPV vaccine rates remain low. Design Systematic review. Methods Four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library) were searched. The search was guided by PRISMA and by the question, ‘What are targeted interventions that improve HPV vaccination rates among adolescents in family practice settings?’ Articles were reviewed for study characteristics and appraised for quality using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tools. Results Eleven studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Individual study size samples ranged from 749–147,294, with a combined total from all included studies of 276,205; the largest sample reviewed to date from family practice settings. Interventions used to increase HPV vaccination rates included reminder systems; provider and staff education; sensory incentives such as hitting a gong or petting a puppy; and iPad tailored messaging programmes. Studies that employed interventions pre‐, during and postvisit were most effective in increasing HPV vaccination rates. Conclusions This review provides the largest data supporting multimodal strategies to increase HPV vaccination rates among adolescent populations. It provides strong evidence to suggest that vaccination rates can be improved using measures at varying times of the patient visit. Relevance to Clinical Practice Adolescents seek health care in various settings. Many studies have examined interventions to increase HPV vaccination in paediatric settings, but few have examined interventions in family practice settings. This review suggests that family practices should implement multimodal measures before, during and after visits to increase HPV vaccination among adolescent patients.

No abstract

Aims: Thousands of anogenital and oropharyngeal cancers every year might be prevented through increased receipt of vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV). This project aimed to (1) increase the rate of HPV vaccination status assessment, and (2) improve HPV vaccine initiation and completion rates among 18 to 26-year-old patients in the family practice setting. Design: Quality improvement project, pre/post intervention design. Methods: This project implemented the HIYA! (HPV Immunization among Young Adults) Intervention in a private sports and family practice in central New Jersey. HIYA! implemented 10 pre-, during, and post-visit outcome measures during every family medicine visit with an 18 to 26-year-old patient for HPV. Data collection involved retrospective chart review of every eligible patient during the 12-week implementation period from 17 August to 06 November 2020 and during the same 12-week control period in 2019.Results/Findings: One hundred sixteen charts from 2019 and 129 charts from 2020 were reviewed for assessment of HPV vaccination status and HPV vaccine initiation and/or completion. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that participants in the control group were 84% less likely to be assessed for HPV vaccination status and were 91% less likely to initiate and complete HPV vaccination compared with the intervention group. Conclusion:This QI project found HIYA! to be an effective and feasible strategy to improve HPV vaccination rates among 18 to 26-year-old patients in a family practice setting. Impact:The human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted disease in the United States, and causes thousands of cancers annually. Although vaccination against HPV can prevent these cancers, vaccination rates remain low, particularly among young adults ages 18 to 26 years. The positive impact of HIYA! was evident based on its success despite the unique challenges presented during the implementation period due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background Audit and feedback (A&F) has been used as a strategy to modify clinician behavior with moderate success. Although A&F is theorized to work by improving the accuracy of clinicians’ estimates of their own behavior, few interventions have included assessment of clinicians’ estimates at baseline to examine whether they account for intervention success or failure. We tested an A&F intervention to reduce computed tomography (CT) ordering by emergency physicians, while also examining the physicians’ baseline estimates of their own behavior compared to peers. Methods Our study was a prospective, multi-site, 20-month, randomized trial to examine the effect of an A&F intervention on CT ordering rates, overall and by test subtype. From the electronic health record, we obtained 12 months of baseline CT ordering per 100 patients treated for every physician from four emergency departments. Those who were randomized to receive A&F were shown a de-identified graph of the group’s baseline CT utilization, asked to estimate wherein the distribution of their own CT order practices fell, and then shown their actual performance. All participants also received a brief educational intervention. CT ordering rates were collected for all physicians for 6 months after the intervention. Pre-post ordering rates were compared using independent and repeated measures t tests. Results Fifty-one of 52 eligible physicians participated. The mean CT ordering rate increased significantly in both experimental conditions after the intervention (intervention pre = 35.7, post = 40.3, t = 4.13, p < 0.001; control pre = 33.9, post = 38.9, t = 3.94, p = 0.001), with no significant between-group difference observed at follow-up (t = 0.43, p = 0.67). Within the intervention group, physicians had poor accuracy in estimating their own ordering behavior at baseline: most overestimated and all guessed that they were in the upper half of the distribution of their peers. CT ordering increased regardless of self-estimate accuracy. Conclusions Our A&F intervention failed to reduce physician CT ordering: our feedback to the physicians showed most of them that they had overestimated their CT ordering behavior, and they were therefore unlikely to reduce it as a result. After “audit,” it may be prudent to assess baseline clinician awareness of behavior before moving toward a feedback intervention.