Date Log
Submitted
July 1, 2022
Published
July 1, 2022
Assessment of the Implementation of the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) in Marawi City, Lanao del Sur, Philippines Based on the Perspectives of Program Beneficiaries
International Journal of Allied Medical Sciences and Clinical Research,
Vol. 10 No. 2 (2022): 2022 Volume - 10 Issue - 2
Abstract
Background: The Philippines implements the Expanded Program on Immunization in order to achieve universal immunization of children against preventable diseases. Basic Rural Health Units administer a variety of immunizations against Tuberculosis, Poliomylitis, Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus, measles, and Hepatitis B (HB) (RHU). The EPI was assessed using public health program assessment, which is defined as a systematic way to improve and account for public health actions, to identify gaps and possible solutions for the program's enhancement.
Objective: The study aims to assess the level of implementation of the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) of the City Health Office (CHO) as perceived by the program beneficiaries of Marawi City.
Methods: The study is descriptive research utilizing both quantitative and qualitative approach in interpreting data. 125 respondents were chosen from among those who visited the City Health Office (CHO) during a two-week period. The respondents’ perceptions on the EPI implementation were then cross-checked using their child’s Immunization Schedule Card. The data was then analyzed through frequency, percentage distribution and SPSS.
Results: Majority of the respondents (91.2%) gave a high rating on the implementation of the EPI. Of the 125 respondents as sample beneficiaries of the Marawi CHO, there were 114 who rated the implementation of the EPI as high and only 11 rated moderate. Overall, then, respondents rated the implementation of EPI as high. The top six perceived problems identified by the respondents that they encountered during their visit in Marawi CHO to avail of the EPI services included the following: (1) P20 donation fee every visit, (2) lack of staff, (3) unaccommodating personnel (information area), (4) services are not organized, (5) lack of space for clients’ waiting area, (6) P20 for every syringe use among others. The top six suggested solutions given by the respondents to address perceived problems included the following: (1) additional competent personnel, (2) medical supplies must be free of charge especially syringes, (3) donations must not be compulsory, (4) with no fixed amount, (5) additional space for client’s waiting area with chairs, (6) personnel assigned at information area must be accommodating among others.
Conclusion: The findings revealed that respondents perceived EPI implementation to be highly effective in all five aspects. However, despite the respondents' high assessment of EPI implementation, only a small number of respondents identified problems that need to be addressed and proposed solutions.
Objective: The study aims to assess the level of implementation of the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) of the City Health Office (CHO) as perceived by the program beneficiaries of Marawi City.
Methods: The study is descriptive research utilizing both quantitative and qualitative approach in interpreting data. 125 respondents were chosen from among those who visited the City Health Office (CHO) during a two-week period. The respondents’ perceptions on the EPI implementation were then cross-checked using their child’s Immunization Schedule Card. The data was then analyzed through frequency, percentage distribution and SPSS.
Results: Majority of the respondents (91.2%) gave a high rating on the implementation of the EPI. Of the 125 respondents as sample beneficiaries of the Marawi CHO, there were 114 who rated the implementation of the EPI as high and only 11 rated moderate. Overall, then, respondents rated the implementation of EPI as high. The top six perceived problems identified by the respondents that they encountered during their visit in Marawi CHO to avail of the EPI services included the following: (1) P20 donation fee every visit, (2) lack of staff, (3) unaccommodating personnel (information area), (4) services are not organized, (5) lack of space for clients’ waiting area, (6) P20 for every syringe use among others. The top six suggested solutions given by the respondents to address perceived problems included the following: (1) additional competent personnel, (2) medical supplies must be free of charge especially syringes, (3) donations must not be compulsory, (4) with no fixed amount, (5) additional space for client’s waiting area with chairs, (6) personnel assigned at information area must be accommodating among others.
Conclusion: The findings revealed that respondents perceived EPI implementation to be highly effective in all five aspects. However, despite the respondents' high assessment of EPI implementation, only a small number of respondents identified problems that need to be addressed and proposed solutions.
Keywords
Public Health Programs, Program Assessment, Immunization, Vaccination, Philippines
Ashley A. Bangcola, & Monalinda M. Macawadib. (2022). Assessment of the Implementation of the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) in Marawi City, Lanao del Sur, Philippines Based on the Perspectives of Program Beneficiaries. International Journal of Allied Medical Sciences and Clinical Research, 10(2), 248–254. https://doi.org/10.61096/ijamscr.v10.iss2.2022.248-254
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)BibTeX
References
-
1. Issel LM. Health program planning and assessment: A practical, systematic approach for community health. 2nd ed. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Barlett Publishers; 2009.
2. Cuevas F, Prescilla L. Public health nursing in the Philippines. 10th ed. Manila: Publication Committee. National League of the Philippine Government Nurses, Inc; 2007.
3. Maurer FA, Smith CM. Community public health nursing practice: health for families and populations. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2005.
4. Rosenstock IM. The Health Belief Model and Preventive Health Behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2(4):354-86. doi: 10.1177/109019817400200405.
5. Keja K, Chan C, Hayden G, Henderson RH. Expanded programme on immunization. World Health Stat Q. 1988;41(2):59-63. PMID 3176515.
6. Singh S, Sahu D, Agrawal A, Vashi MD. Barriers and opportunities for improving childhood immunization coverage in slums: A qualitative study. Prev Med Rep. 2019;14:100858. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.100858, PMID 30997325.
7. Smith LE, Amlôt R, Weinman J, Yiend J, Rubin GJ. A systematic review of factors affecting vaccine uptake in young children. Vaccine. 2017;35(45):6059-69. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.09.046, PMID 28974409.
8. Derico NH. Status and Problems of the Maternal and Child Health Program implementation in Lanao del Sur: its Implication to Educational Planning and Health Program, [[doctoral dissertation]. Marawi City: Mindanao State University]; 2009.
9. Abdulraheem IS, Onajole AT, Jimoh AAG, Oladipo AR. Reasons for incomplete vaccination and factors missed opportunities among rural Nigeria children. J Public Health Epidemiol. 2011;3:194-203.
10. Negussie A, Kassahun W, Assegid S, Hagan AK. Factors associated with incomplete childhood immunization in Arbegona district, southern Ethiopia: a case--control study. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:27. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2678-1, PMID 26757893.
11. Munira SL, Fritzen SA. What influences government adoption of vaccines in developing countries? A policy process analysis. Soc Sci Med. 2007;65(8):1751-64. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.054, PMID 17644230.
12. Hajjeh R. Accelerating introduction of new vaccines: barriers to introduction and lessons learned from the recent Haemophilus influenzae type B vaccine experience. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011;366(1579):2827-32. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0046, PMID 21893547.
References
1. Issel LM. Health program planning and assessment: A practical, systematic approach for community health. 2nd ed. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Barlett Publishers; 2009.
2. Cuevas F, Prescilla L. Public health nursing in the Philippines. 10th ed. Manila: Publication Committee. National League of the Philippine Government Nurses, Inc; 2007.
3. Maurer FA, Smith CM. Community public health nursing practice: health for families and populations. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2005.
4. Rosenstock IM. The Health Belief Model and Preventive Health Behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2(4):354-86. doi: 10.1177/109019817400200405.
5. Keja K, Chan C, Hayden G, Henderson RH. Expanded programme on immunization. World Health Stat Q. 1988;41(2):59-63. PMID 3176515.
6. Singh S, Sahu D, Agrawal A, Vashi MD. Barriers and opportunities for improving childhood immunization coverage in slums: A qualitative study. Prev Med Rep. 2019;14:100858. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.100858, PMID 30997325.
7. Smith LE, Amlôt R, Weinman J, Yiend J, Rubin GJ. A systematic review of factors affecting vaccine uptake in young children. Vaccine. 2017;35(45):6059-69. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.09.046, PMID 28974409.
8. Derico NH. Status and Problems of the Maternal and Child Health Program implementation in Lanao del Sur: its Implication to Educational Planning and Health Program, [[doctoral dissertation]. Marawi City: Mindanao State University]; 2009.
9. Abdulraheem IS, Onajole AT, Jimoh AAG, Oladipo AR. Reasons for incomplete vaccination and factors missed opportunities among rural Nigeria children. J Public Health Epidemiol. 2011;3:194-203.
10. Negussie A, Kassahun W, Assegid S, Hagan AK. Factors associated with incomplete childhood immunization in Arbegona district, southern Ethiopia: a case--control study. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:27. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2678-1, PMID 26757893.
11. Munira SL, Fritzen SA. What influences government adoption of vaccines in developing countries? A policy process analysis. Soc Sci Med. 2007;65(8):1751-64. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.054, PMID 17644230.
12. Hajjeh R. Accelerating introduction of new vaccines: barriers to introduction and lessons learned from the recent Haemophilus influenzae type B vaccine experience. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011;366(1579):2827-32. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0046, PMID 21893547.
2. Cuevas F, Prescilla L. Public health nursing in the Philippines. 10th ed. Manila: Publication Committee. National League of the Philippine Government Nurses, Inc; 2007.
3. Maurer FA, Smith CM. Community public health nursing practice: health for families and populations. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2005.
4. Rosenstock IM. The Health Belief Model and Preventive Health Behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2(4):354-86. doi: 10.1177/109019817400200405.
5. Keja K, Chan C, Hayden G, Henderson RH. Expanded programme on immunization. World Health Stat Q. 1988;41(2):59-63. PMID 3176515.
6. Singh S, Sahu D, Agrawal A, Vashi MD. Barriers and opportunities for improving childhood immunization coverage in slums: A qualitative study. Prev Med Rep. 2019;14:100858. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.100858, PMID 30997325.
7. Smith LE, Amlôt R, Weinman J, Yiend J, Rubin GJ. A systematic review of factors affecting vaccine uptake in young children. Vaccine. 2017;35(45):6059-69. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.09.046, PMID 28974409.
8. Derico NH. Status and Problems of the Maternal and Child Health Program implementation in Lanao del Sur: its Implication to Educational Planning and Health Program, [[doctoral dissertation]. Marawi City: Mindanao State University]; 2009.
9. Abdulraheem IS, Onajole AT, Jimoh AAG, Oladipo AR. Reasons for incomplete vaccination and factors missed opportunities among rural Nigeria children. J Public Health Epidemiol. 2011;3:194-203.
10. Negussie A, Kassahun W, Assegid S, Hagan AK. Factors associated with incomplete childhood immunization in Arbegona district, southern Ethiopia: a case--control study. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:27. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2678-1, PMID 26757893.
11. Munira SL, Fritzen SA. What influences government adoption of vaccines in developing countries? A policy process analysis. Soc Sci Med. 2007;65(8):1751-64. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.054, PMID 17644230.
12. Hajjeh R. Accelerating introduction of new vaccines: barriers to introduction and lessons learned from the recent Haemophilus influenzae type B vaccine experience. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011;366(1579):2827-32. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0046, PMID 21893547.
