Trends in Clinical and Medical Sciences

A cross sectional study on evaluation of routine immunization sessions in ganjam district of Odisha, India

Dr. Srikanta Patra\(^{1}\), Dr. Monali Kar\(^{2}\), Dr. Sourav Parida\(^{3}\), Dr. D Shobha Malini\(^{4,*}\), Dr. Sonali P Patra\(^{5}\) and Prof. D.M.Satapathy\(^{6}\)
\(^{1}\) Senior Resident, Department of Community Medicine, MKCG Medical College, Berhampur.
\(^{2}\) Assistant Professor, Department of Community Medicine, IMS & SUM Hospital, Bhubaneswar.
\(^{3}\) Junior Resident, 3rd year, Department of Community Medicine, MKCG Medical College, Berhampur.
\(^{4}\) Associate Professor, Department of Community Medicine, MKCG Medical College, Berhampur.
\(^{5}\) MBBS IMS & SUM Hospital, SOA University, Bhubaneswar.
\(^{6}\) Prof & HOD, Department of Community Medicine, MKCG Medical College, Berhampur.
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. D Shobha Malini at shobhamalini03@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Immunization is the most effective preventive measure in reducing mortality and morbidity due to communicable diseases. The success of a universal immunization program depends on the proper conduction of session sites, which in turn relies on proper planning, availability of logistics, and the competence of the manpower involved. This study aims to evaluate the session sites based on the aforementioned aspects.
Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted across 24 randomly selected immunization sessions in 8 districts of Ganjam district. Data on resources-logistics readiness, sociodemographic profile, knowledge, and practice of the Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs) regarding various aspects of immunization were collected using two structured questionnaires. The collected data were compiled and analyzed using SPSS ver. 17.
Results: A total of 24 immunization sessions were observed in 8 blocks of Ganjam district. Immunization sessions were held according to the microplan at all sites, while beneficiary due lists were found at 18 (75%) sites. Only 6 (25%) sites had at least one vial from each vaccine. The date and time of opening the vial were recorded at 17 (70.8%) sites. Beneficiaries were advised to wait for 30 minutes at 11 (45.8%) sites, while 4 key messages were given by 15 (62.5%) of ANMs. Most ANMs were able to correctly interpret the Vaccine Vial Monitor (VVM) and were aware of which vaccines follow the open vial policy.
Conclusion: Adequate manpower was available at almost all sites, while unavailability of vaccines and logistics was observed at a few sites. The knowledge and practice of vaccinators can be improved through periodic hands-on training.

Keywords:

Immunization; Vaccine; ANM; Odisha.