Examination of universal purchase programs as a driver of vaccine uptake among US States, 1995-2014.

BACKGROUND: Immunization against numerous potentially life-threatening illnesses has been a great public health achievement. In the United States, the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program has provided vaccines to uninsured and underinsured children since the early 1990s, increasing vaccination rates. In recent years, some states have adopted Universal Purchase (UP) programs with the stated aim of further increasing vaccination rates. Under UP programs, states also purchase vaccines for privately-insured children at federally-contracted VFC prices and bill private health insurers for the vaccines through assessments.

METHODS: In this study, we estimated the effect of UP adoption in a state on children's vaccination rates using state-level and individual-level data from the 1995-2014 National Immunization Survey. For the state-level analysis, we performed ordinary least squares regression to estimate the state's vaccination rate as a function of whether the state had UP in the given year, state demographic characteristics, other vaccination policies, state fixed effects, and a time trend. For the individual analysis, we performed logistic regression to estimate a child's likelihood of being vaccinated as a function of whether the state had UP in the given year, the child's demographic characteristics, state characteristics and vaccine policies, state fixed effects, and a time trend. We performed separate regressions for each of nine recommended vaccines, as well as composite measures on whether a child was up-to-date on all required vaccines.

RESULTS: In the both the state-level and individual-level analyses, we found UP had no significant (p < 0.10) effect on any of the vaccines or composite measures in our base case specifications. Results were similar in alternative specifications.

CONCLUSIONS: We hypothesize that UP was ineffective in increasing vaccination rates. Policymakers seeking to increase vaccination rates would do well to consider other policies such as addressing provider practice issues and vaccine hesitancy.