Immunization Information Systems A Decade of Progress in Law and Policy

Immunization Information Systems A Decade of Progress in Law and Policy



ImmunizationInformation Systems: A Decade of Progress in Law and Policy

Article:Martin, E. W. et al (2015). “Immunization Information Systems: ADecade of Progress in Law and Policy”, Journalof public health management practice,21(3), p 296-303.


Electronicpatient information has become an important aspect of the modernhealth care system. Exchange of electronic data in the health caresystem has positive impacts on the quality of healthy care, healthyoutcomes and the cost of health care. Patient immunizationinformation is one of the critical data in the healthy care systems.The article by Martin and others looks at the laws, regulation andpolicies that govern immunization information systems or immunizationregistries. The study looks at the different administrative codes,statutes, opinions, interviews and online questionnaires that arerelevant to the study question. The research design involved anonline survey, legal research and telephone interviews. The datacorrected with validated with follow up interviews and comparisonwith other similar studies. The study established that there is areasonable development in the number of jurisdictions that directlyaddress immunization information system. This indicates that there isan improvement in supportive policies and laws in the collection andexchange of patient information data. Although in some cases the IISprograms was guided by the general laws in the health care systemrather than specific laws and regulation, there are laws specificallyauthorizing IIS as well as sharing of information in both childrenand adult patients. However, it is important to note that the studyis not a comprehensive review of the policies, regulations and lawsgoverning immunization information systems in differentjurisdictions.



Theproblem is clearly stated and practically important in the healthcare system. The study identifies the key terms, hypothesis andlimitations of the study. The hypothesis of the study is that thereare significant developments in laws and policies that guide IIS. Thepurpose of the study is to collect information on laws and policiesthat are relevant to the Immunization Information Systems. The mainlimitation identify in the article is the fact that the study is nota comprehensive law review. However, the article can be characterizedas a review of the laws and polices that govern IIS.


Thestudy referred to 24 relevant and peer reviewed articles. Althoughthe literature review narrows to how laws and policies on IIS haveevolved over the years, it is pertinent to the study. Although thereare some sources that are over fifteen years, majority of them arerecent articles. The central theme of the reviewed sources is basedon the objective of the study and thus revolves around policies andlaws related to immunization records.


Themethodologies used in the study include online survey, follow uptelephone interviews and legal research. A pilot study was conductedbefore the main study and the variables were different immunizationprograms represented by the program managers. No sampling was done inthe study and no measurement tools were mentioned. In the procedurestructures, the program managers were required to fill thequestionnaire after a pilot study which was later followed by athirty minutes telephone interview. This was followed by validationand comparison of the data collected. Due to the nature of thesubjects involved in the study, the design and methodologies wereappropriate.


Thedata collected was summarized in a supplemental digital contentsurvey data. The data was mainly quantitative with figures mentioned.Calculation of percentages was the main data analysis method used inthe study. The weaknesses and problems in the study were discussed.The finding of the study supported the hypothesis of the study.


Theconclusion is related to the original purpose of the study anddescribes the purpose of the study. The conclusion gives somerecommendations and the implications of the results. However, theconclusion does not present the strengths and weaknesses of thestudy.


Generally,the article is good. There are no ideas in the article that areoveremphasized or underemphasized. The statements by the author areclear, although some of them may require more extrapolation.Nonetheless, the author answers the research questions fairly wellusing the data collected and supporting studies.


Martin,E. W. et al (2015). “Immunization Information Systems: A Decade ofProgress in Law and Policy”, Journalof public health management practice,21(3), p 296-303.