National, State, and Local Area Vaccination Coverage Among Children
Aged 19--35 Months --- United States, 2007
The National Immunization Survey (NIS) provides vaccination coverage estimates among children aged 19--35 months
for each of the 50 states and selected urban areas.* This report describes the results of the 2007 NIS, which provided
coverage estimates among children born during January 2004--July 2006.
Healthy People 2010 established vaccination coverage
targets of 90% for each of the vaccines included in the combined
4:3:1:3:3:1† vaccine series and a target of 80% for the
combined series (
1). Findings from the 2007 NIS indicated that
>90% coverage was achieved for most of the routinely
recommended vaccines (
2). The majority of parents were vaccinating their children, with less than 1% of children receiving no vaccines
by age 19--35 months. The coverage level for the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series remained steady at 77.4%, compared with 76.9% in
2006. Among states and local areas, substantial variability continued, with estimated vaccination coverage ranging from 63.1%
to 91.3%. Coverage remained high across all racial/ethnic groups and was not significantly different among racial/ethnic
groups after adjusting for poverty status. However, for some vaccines, coverage remained lower among children living below
the poverty level compared with children living at or above the poverty level. Maintaining high vaccination coverage
and continued attention to reducing current poverty disparities is needed to limit the spread -preventable diseases and ensure
that children are protected.
To collect vaccination information on age-eligible children
(i.e., those aged 19--35 months), NIS uses a quarterly,
random-digit--dialing sample of telephone numbers for each survey area.
When respondents grant permission to contact providers, the telephone
interview is followed by a mail survey of the children's vaccination
providers to validate immunization information. NIS methodology,
including how the responses are weighted to represent the population of
children aged 19--35 months, has been described previously (
3). During 2007, the household response rate
(
4)
was 64.9%; a total of 17,017 children with provider-verified
vaccination records were included in this report, representing 68.6% of
all children with completed household interviews. Statistical analyses
were conducted using t-tests. Differences were considered statistically
significant at p<0.05. A poverty status variable§ was added to the logistic regression models to
control for racial/ethnic differences among children living at or above
the poverty level and children living below the poverty level. This
report describes coverage levels for vaccines that have been included
in the routine childhood vaccination schedule recommended by the
Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) since 2000 or
before (
2).
In 2007, national coverage with the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series was 77.4%; this coverage has been stable since 2004. Coverage
with the combined 4:3:1:3:3:1:4 vaccine series (i.e., the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series plus
>4 doses of 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate
vaccine [PCV7]) is being reported for the first time and was 66.5%. National coverage was
>90% for each of the vaccines included
in the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series except for
>4 doses of DTaP (84.5%); coverage with
>3 doses of DTaP was 95.5% (Table 1).
Coverage with
>1 dose of varicella vaccine (VAR) reached 90% for the first time. VAR coverage among American Indian/Alaska
Native (AI/AN)¶ children increased significantly, from 85.4% in 2006 to 94.9% in 2007. National vaccination coverage estimates
for PCV7 continued to increase, from 86.9% in 2006 to 90.0% in 2007 for
>3 doses and from 68.4% to 75.3% for
>4 doses. Among AI/AN children, coverage with the fourth dose of PCV7 increased significantly, from 62.7% to 80.4%.
Substantial differences were observed in vaccination coverage among states and local areas
(Table 2).
Estimated coverage for the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series ranged from 91.3% in
Maryland to 63.1% in Nevada. Among the 14 local areas included in the
2007 NIS, coverage with the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series ranged from 82.2% in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to 69.6% in San Bernardino, California.
Vaccination coverage levels were higher among AI/ANs compared with whites for measles, mumps, and rubella
(MMR) vaccine, hepatitis B (HepB) vaccine, and VAR
(Table 3). Coverage with the fourth dose of DTaP and the fourth dose of
PCV7 among black children was not significantly lower than white children after controlling for poverty status. Vaccination
coverage with the fourth dose of DTaP and the fourth dose of PCV7 was lower among children living below the poverty level
compared with children living at or above the poverty level, but this difference declined from 6.1% in 2006 to 4.8% in 2007 for
>4 doses of DTaP and from 9.4% in 2006 to 3.5% in 2007 for
>4 doses of PCV7. Vaccination coverage levels were similar
across all racial/ethnic groups for the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series. Coverage differed for this
series among children living at or above the
poverty level compared with children living below the poverty level, but this difference declined from 4.9% in 2006 to 3.2% in
2007.
Coverage between white and black children with the 4:3:1:3:3:1:4
series was not significantly different after controlling
for poverty status.
Reported by:
N Darling, MPH, M Kolasa, MPH, KG Wooten, MA, Immunization Svcs Div, National Center for Immunization
and Respiratory Diseases, CDC.
Editorial Note:
NIS is the only population-based, provider-verified survey to provide national, state, and local area
estimates of vaccination coverage among children aged 19--35 months. The results of the 2007 survey indicate that vaccination
coverage for vaccines recommended routinely by ACIP since 2000 and before
(
2) reached record high levels. Improvements
in vaccination coverage for VAR meant that national coverage estimates for all individual vaccines in the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series
were
>90%, except coverage with
>4 doses of DTaP. Coverage with
>4 doses of PCV7 also was <90%. However, 3-dose coverage
for both DTaP and PCV7 remained high. Coverage with
>4 doses of PCV7 increased significantly to 75.3% in 2007,
a substantial increase since PCV7 was first recommended in 2000
(
5). However, coverage with
>4 doses of DTaP has
not changed during the past 5 years. Increasing coverage for the fourth dose of DTaP and the fourth dose of PCV7 would
improve national coverage for the 4:3:1:3:3:1 series and the 4:3:1:3:3:1:4 series, which will be used to monitor the
Healthy People 2010 immunization objectives beginning with 2009 NIS data. The vaccine shortage that ended in September 2004
(
6) might have reduced coverage with the fourth dose of PCV7 among children in the 2007 NIS cohort (i.e., those born during
January 2004--July 2006). Use of effective interventions, such as parent and provider reminder/recall, reducing out-of-pocket
costs, increasing access to vaccination, and multicomponent interventions that include education might further improve
overall coverage in areas where coverage is low
(
7).
In addition, closing the coverage gap between areas with the highest
and lowest coverage remains a priority. To achieve this, further
collaborative efforts among CDC, state immunization coordinators,
immunization programs, and other entities are essential.
Vaccination coverage among AI/AN children for VAR, MMR vaccine,
and the fourth dose of PCV7 increased significantly in 2007 compared
with 2006; in 2007, coverage levels among AI/AN children were higher
for two of these vaccines (VAR and MMR vaccine) compared with white
children. Improved exchange of data between the Indian Health Service
information system and state immunization information systems and
implementation of evidence-based strategies such as reminder/recall at
Indian Health Service and tribal facilities, might have contributed to
these increases in vaccination coverage (A. Groom, CDC, personal
communication, August 2008). However, further monitoring is needed to
determine whether these levels will be sustained.
As in 2006, the results of the 2007 NIS indicate that differences in poverty status accounted for the observed differences
in coverage between white and black children for the fourth dose of DTaP and fourth dose of PCV7. In 2007, these differences
in coverage between children living at or above the poverty level compared with children living below the poverty level were
reduced by one percentage point for DTaP and by nearly
six percentage points for PCV7. Continued efforts are needed to
improve vaccination coverage among children of all racial and ethnic groups living below the poverty level.
The 2007 NIS results confirm that the majority of parents are vaccinating their children, with less than 1% of
children receiving no vaccines by age 19--35 months. Although vaccination coverage in this age group remains high, recent
outbreaks of measles have occurred in certain communities
(
8).
Several factors might explain this apparent paradox. Despite record
high coverage with MMR vaccine, nearly 8% of children aged 19--35
months surveyed for the 2007 NIS remained unvaccinated. Measles is
highly contagious, and clustering of unimmunized children within
geographic areas can increase risk for measles and other
vaccine-preventable disease transmission. Clusters of unimmunized
children might not be detected by NIS methods and might not be visible
in national and state rates. Furthermore, any changes in vaccination
behaviors among parents of children born after July 2006 would not have
been detected by the 2007 survey. Increased attention to parental
concerns about vaccine safety has become apparent in recent years (
9). The 2008 NIS is collecting information on parental
concerns about vaccine safety to better assess parental attitudes and beliefs about vaccines. In addition, CDC and its partners
are developing new educational materials that can assist parents in making fully informed decisions about immunizing
their children.**
The findings in this report are subject to at least three
limitations. First, NIS is a telephone survey, and statistical
adjustments might not compensate fully for nonresponse and households
without landline telephones. Second, underestimates of vaccination
coverage might have resulted from the exclusive use of
provider-verified vaccination histories because completeness of these
records is unknown. Finally, although national coverage estimates are
precise, annual estimates and trends for state and local areas should
be interpreted with caution because of smaller sample sizes and wider
confidence intervals.
Achieving and maintaining high vaccination coverage levels is
important to further reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases
and prevent a resurgence of measles and other diseases that have been
eliminated in the United States (
10). Although vaccination coverage estimates were at record highs and above the
Healthy People 2010 target for most of the
routinely recommended vaccines in 2007, ongoing efforts through partnerships among national, state, local, private, and public
entities are needed to sustain these levels and ensure that vaccination programs in the United States remain strong.
Acknowledgments
The findings in this report are based, in part, on contributions by PJ Smith, PhD, Immunization Svcs Div, and BP Bell, MD,
Office of the Director, National Center for Immunization and
Respiratory Diseases, CDC.
References
-
US Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy
people 2010 (conference ed, in 2 vols). Washington, DC: US Department
of Health and Human Services; 2000. Available at http://www.healthypeople.gov/document/html/objectives/14-24.htm.
-
CDC. Recommendations and guidelines: 2008 child & adolescent
immunization schedules for persons aged 0--6 years, 7--18 years, and
catch-up schedule. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human
Services, CDC; 2008. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/child-schedule.htm.
-
CDC. Statistical methodology of the National Immunization Survey, 1994--2002. Vital Health Stat 2005;2(138). Available at
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_02/sr02_138.pdf.
-
Ezzati-Rice TM, Frankel MR, Hoaglin DC, Loft JD, Coronado VG, Wright RA. An alternative measure of response rate in
random-digit-dialing surveys that screen for eligible subpopulations. J Econ Soc Meas 2000;26:99--109.
-
CDC. Preventing pneumococcal disease among infants and young children: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 2000;49(No. RR-9).
-
CDC. Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine shortage resolved. MMWR
2004; 53:851--2.
-
Briss PA, Rodewald LE, Hinman AR, et al. Reviews of evidence
regarding interventions to improve vaccination coverage in children,
adolescents, and adults. The Task Force on Community Preventive
Services. Am J Prev Med 2000;18:97--140.
-
CDC. Update: measles---United States, January--July 2008. MMWR
2008;57:893--6.
-
Cooper LZ, Larsen HJ, Katz SL. Protecting public trust in immunization. Pediatrics 2008;122:149--53.
-
CDC. Measles---United States, January 1--April 25, 2008. MMWR
2008; 57:494--8.
* Fourteen local areas were sampled separately for the 2007
NIS. These included six areas that receive federal immunization grant
funds and are included in the NIS sample every year (District of
Columbia; Chicago, Illinois; New York, New York; Philadelphia County,
Pennsylvania; Bexar County, Texas; and Houston, Texas); seven
previously sampled areas (Alameda County, California; Los Angeles
County, California; San Bernardino County, California; Miami-Dade
County, Florida; Marion County, Indiana; Dallas County, Texas; and El
Paso County, Texas); and one area sampled for the first time (western
Washington). Local areas sampled in the NIS might change yearly as
state immunization programs target local assessments where they are
most needed.
†
>4 doses of diphtheria, tetanus toxoid,
and any acellular pertussis vaccine, which can include diphtheria and
tetanus toxoid vaccine or diphtheria, tetanus toxoid, and pertussis
vaccine (DTaP);
>3 doses of poliovirus vaccine;
>1 dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine;
>3 doses of
Haemophilus
influenzae type b vaccine;
>3 doses of hepatitis B vaccine; and
>1 dose of varicella vaccine).
§ Poverty status was based on 2006 U.S. Census poverty thresholds (available at
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).
¶ For this report, persons identified as white,
black, Asian, or American Indian/Alaska Native are all non-Hispanic.
Persons identified as Hispanic might be of any race.
** Additional information available at
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines.
Table 1

Return to top.
Table 2

Return to top.
Table 3

Return to top.
|
Use of trade names and commercial sources is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services.
References to non-CDC sites on the Internet are
provided as a service to
MMWR readers and do not constitute or imply
endorsement of these organizations or their programs by CDC or the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. CDC is not responsible for the content
of pages found at these sites. URL addresses listed in
MMWR were current as of
the date of publication. |
All
MMWR HTML versions of articles are electronic conversions from typeset documents.
This conversion might result in character translation or format errors in the HTML version.
Users are referred to the electronic PDF version (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr)
and/or the original
MMWR paper copy for printable versions of official text, figures, and tables.
An original paper copy of this issue can be obtained from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402-9371;
telephone: (202) 512-1800. Contact GPO for current prices.
**Questions or messages regarding errors in formatting should be addressed to
mmwrq@cdc.gov.
Date last reviewed: 9/4/2008