Low birth weight (LBW) infants constitute a vulnerable subset of infants with impaired immunity in early life. In India, there is scarcity of studies that focus on immunization practices in such infants. This analysis aimed to examine immunization practices in LBW infants with the intention to identify areas requiring intervention.
Data on immunization status of LBW infants enrolled in an individually randomized, double–masked, placebo–controlled trial of neonatal vitamin A supplementation were analysed. Study outcomes were full immunization by one year of age and delayed vaccination with DPT1 and DPT3. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with the outcome(s).
Out of 10 644 LBW infants enrolled in trial, immunization data were available for 10 517 (98.8%). Less than one–third (29.7%) were fully immunized by one year of age. Lowest wealth quintile (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32–0.47), Muslim religion (AOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.35–0.48) and age of mother <20 years (AOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52–0.73) were associated with decreased odds of full immunization. Proportion of infants with delayed vaccination for DPT1 and DPT3 were 52% and 81% respectively. Lowest wealth quintiles (AOR 1.51, 95% CI 1.25–1.82), Muslim religion (AOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.21–1.65), mother aged <20 years (AOR 1.31, 95% CI 1.11–1.53) and birth weight <2000 g (AOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03–1.40) were associated with higher odds of delayed vaccination for DPT–1. Maternal education (≥12 years of schooling) was associated with high odds of full immunization (AOR 2.39, 95% CI 1.97–2.91) and low odds of delayed vaccination for both DPT–1 (AOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.49–0.73) and DPT–3 (AOR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43–0.76)
In this population, LBW infants are at a risk of delayed and incomplete immunization and therefore need attention. The risks are even higher in identified subgroups that should specifically be targeted
Approximately 15% of infants born in low and middle income countries (LMIC) have a low birth weight (<2500 g) [
Low birth weight (LBW) infants have a lower passive immunity prior to vaccination and also their immune defences are functionally impaired in early life [
Previous studies, largely from high income countries, suggest that LBW infants are less likely to receive vaccines on time and be fully immunized [
Recently, few studies have been conducted that document immunization practices in LBW infants from rural Ghana [
The present analysis utilizes data on the immunization status of low birth weight infants enrolled in a large individually randomized, double–masked, placebo–controlled trial of neonatal vitamin A supplementation within 72 hours of birth. This study was conducted in Faridabad and Palwal districts in the state of Haryana, North India from June 2010 to July 2012 [
The trial was approved by the ethics review committees of the Society for Applied Studies, World Health Organization (WHO) and by the state government of Haryana. It is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01138449. Permission was taken from all the concerned investigators of the primary trial for this secondary data analysis
Study teams identified pregnant women through household surveillance at intervals of 3 months in areas allocated to them. The pregnancies identified were followed up until delivery and birth outcomes were reported to the co–ordinators who then informed the enrolment workers immediately [
At enrolment, information was collected primarily on household characteristics (social class, religion, wealth quintile), infant characteristics (birth weight, sex, place of delivery, personnel conducting delivery, multiple births), maternal characteristics (number of living children, age, education, occupation) and father’s education. Each enrolled infant was allocated a home visit worker for further follow up until 12 months of age. All infants were contacted when aged 29 days and at 3, 6 and 12 months and at each such visit, information was collected on vital status and immunization.
At each visit, the study team member looked for written documentation of vaccines administered to the infant. The documents reviewed were maternal and child health card, immunization card of the infant or any slip(s) issued by the facility where vaccination was done. The study team made several attempts to obtain written documented evidence of vaccination. This included a wait time, to ensure the mother ample time to search for the missing record, telephoning the father for any relevant information, and also postponing the visit to a later date. If the immunization card was still not available the team helped mother to report accurate dates by referring to important events or festivals. Also, the mother was asked to recall which vaccines were given, at what body site and the mode of vaccination (oral or injection). An infant was categorised as “not vaccinated” when the mother reported infant had never been vaccinated.
The primary outcomes were full immunization by one year of age and delayed vaccination with DPT1 and DPT3 in LBW infants. In concordance with the guidelines of the National Immunization Program in India, an infant was considered “fully immunized” if he/she had received BCG, 3 doses of DPT, OPV each and measles by one year of age [
Operationally, “delayed vaccination” was defined as having received the vaccine after 4 weeks of recommended/due time [
Additionally, sensitivity analysis was done to assess whether delayed DPT3 vaccination reflected delayed DPT1 vaccination. Starting with follow–up at receipt of DPT1 vaccination, an infant was labelled as having a “delayed receipt” of DPT–3 when it was given >12 weeks after DPT–1 (according to National Immunization Schedule, the time interval between DPT–1 and DPT–3 should be 8 weeks).
For the analyses, infants with known vaccination status, dates of vaccination and with complete data on covariates were included. Infants who were lost to follow–up or died before the vaccination due date, were excluded. This principle was followed for all the time points of analysis. Data analysis was performed using STATA version 11 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX). Proportions were calculated for all categorical variables used in the analysis. Median (interquartile range; IQR) was calculated for delay in vaccination (in days), from the recommended time, for each of the vaccine that was considered in the analysis. Chi–square test was done to compare proportions and Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney 2– sample rank sum test to compare medians across the two birth weight categories.
Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with full immunization and delayed vaccination. Bivariate analysis was first done for all explanatory variables and those with a
Additionally, to assess the association of birth weight on study outcome(s) ie, “full immunization “and “delayed vaccination”, regression analysis was done with birth weight as the exposure variable (in dichotomous form ie, ≥2500 and <2500 g) and adjustment done for other covariates. Assessment for effect modification (ie, potential interaction) between birth weight and all covariates was done using interaction term in the model. Likelihood ratio test was used to compare models with or without the interaction term. Sensitivity analysis was also conducted where data collected only from immunization cards were analysed to document the determinants of full immunization and delayed vaccination in low birth weight infants. Analysis to document the determinants of full immunization and delayed vaccination in normal birth weight infants was also undertaken on an exploratory basis.
A total of 44 984 infants were recruited in the primary trial, within 72 hours of birth, out of which 10 644 (23.7%) were low birth weight infants. This subset of LBW infants was analysed for the primary outcome(s). However, to give a general sense of how these low birth weight infants compared to their normal birth weight counterparts, a comparative description of the characteristics have been presented (
Baseline characteristics of the primary trial population, segregated by low and normal birth weight infants (N = 44 984)
Variables |
Normal birth weight (≥2500 g; n = 34 340) |
Low birth weight (<2500 g; n = 10 644) | |
---|---|---|---|
|
|
||
|
|
||
1 (Least poor) |
7391 (21.5) |
1613 (15.1) |
|
2 |
7043 (20.5) |
1947 (18.3) |
|
3 |
6873 (20.0) |
2124 (20.0) |
|
4 |
6628 (19.3) |
2369 (22.3) |
|
5 (Poorest) |
6405 (18.7) |
2591 (24.3) |
|
|
|
|
|
Hindu |
26 401 (76.9) |
8171 (76.8) |
|
Muslim |
7582 (22.1) |
2323 (21.8) |
|
Others |
357 (1.0) |
148 (1.4) |
|
|
|
|
|
General |
9587 (27.9) |
2453 (23.1) |
|
Other Backward Class (OBC) |
16 583 (48.3) |
5308 (49.8) |
|
Scheduled Caste/Tribe (SC/ST) |
8170 (23.8) |
2881 (27.1) |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
<20 |
2388 (6.9) |
1175 (11.0) |
|
20–25 |
22 705 (66.1) |
7097 (66.7) |
|
26–30 |
7159 (20.9) |
1784 (16.8) |
|
>30 |
2088 (6.1) |
588 (5.5) |
|
|
|
|
|
Illiterate (0) |
13 895 (40.5) |
4918 (46.2) |
|
Less than primary (1 to <5) |
1351 (3.9) |
433 (4.1) |
|
Primary completed and secondary incomplete (5 to <12) |
14 847 (43.2) |
4418 (41.5) |
|
Secondary complete and higher education (≥12) |
4247 (12.4) |
875 (8.2) |
|
|
|
|
|
Employed outside home |
888 (2.6) |
252 (2.4) |
|
Home maker |
33 452 (97.4) |
10 392 (97.6) |
|
|
|
|
|
Illiterate (0) |
4367 (12.7) |
1652 (15.5) |
|
Less than primary (1 to <5) |
1617 (4.7) |
600 (5.7) |
|
Primary completed and secondary incomplete (5 to <12) |
19 396 (56.5) |
6336 (59.5) |
|
Secondary complete and higher education (≥12) |
8960 (26.1) |
2056 (19.3) |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
Home |
14 694 (42.8) |
4753(44.6) |
|
Government facility |
10 863 (31.6) |
3273 (30.8) |
|
Private facility |
8783 (25.6) |
2618 (24.6) |
|
|
|
|
|
Skilled |
21 187 (61.7) |
6371 (59.9) |
|
Unskilled |
13 153 (38.3) |
4273 (40.1) |
|
|
|
|
|
Singleton |
34 245 (99.7) |
10 168 (95.5) |
|
Multiple |
95 (0.3) |
476 (4.5) |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
10 501 (30.6) |
4226 (39.7) |
|
1–2 |
17 489 (50.9) |
4938 (46.4) |
|
3–4 |
3293 (9.6) |
761 (7.1) |
|
≥4 |
3057 (8.9) |
719 (6.8) |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
Male |
18 676 (54.4) |
4742 (44.5) |
|
Female |
15 664 (45.6) |
5902 (55.5) |
*Statistically significant difference in proportion across the two groups (
†General – group that do not qualify for any of the positive discrimination schemes by Government of India (GOI); OBC – term used by the Government of India to classify castes which are socially and educationally disadvantaged; SC/ST – official designations given to groups of historically disadvantaged indigenous people in India [
‡Excluding the baby recently born/enrolled in the study.
Flow of infants recruited in the primary trial. *LBW – low birth weight; NBW – normal birth weight. The flow shows the number of alive babies at 6, 10, 14 weeks and at 9 and 12 months of age specifically with the intention of present the number of babies eligible for OPV1/DPT1 (given at 6 weeks), OPV2/DPT2 (given at 10 weeks), OPV3/DPT3 (given at 14 weeks) and Measles (given at 9 months of age).
Out of the total 10 644 LBW infants that were enrolled in the trial, immunization data was available for 10 517 (98.8%). In 77.8% infants, data was obtained through “immunization card” and in rest; it was elicited through reliable history. Low birth weight infants had a comparatively lower immunization uptake compared to normal weight infants, both in terms of the proportion that received a particular vaccine and also in appropriateness of timing of receiving vaccine (
Immunization uptake among normal birth weight (≥2500 g) and low birth weight (<2500 g) babies in rural Haryana, North India
Vaccines under National Immunization Schedule |
Number |
Proportion received (%) |
Deviation from recommended time (days) of vaccination, median (IQR) |
Proportion with delay (%) |
||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BCG |
10 517 |
34 262 |
44 779 |
75.9‡ |
80.8 |
79.6 |
41 (19–75)‡ |
39 (18–70) |
39 (18–71) |
64.4‡ |
62.7 |
63.1 |
OPV–0§ |
20.3‡ |
22.2 |
21.8 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
|||
OPV–1 |
10 240 |
34 020 |
44 260 |
64.4‡ |
68.9 |
67.9 |
27 (10–56)‡ |
24 (9–52) |
25 (10–53) |
48.1‡ |
44.6 |
45.4 |
DPT–1 |
74.1‡ |
78.3 |
77.3 |
30 (12–63)‡ |
27 (11–58) |
27 (11–59) |
51.7‡ |
47.9 |
48.7 |
|||
OPV–2 |
10 156 |
33 902 |
44 058 |
51.5‡ |
57.5 |
56.1 |
44 (21–84)‡ |
41 (20–77) |
42 (20–79) |
65.7‡ |
63.6 |
64.0 |
DPT–2 |
58.3‡ |
63.9 |
62.7 |
46 (23–89)‡ |
44 (21–82) |
44 (21–84) |
67.8‡ |
65.5 |
65.9 |
|||
OPV–3 |
10 088 |
33 813 |
43 901 |
40.8‡ |
46.6 |
45.3 |
60 (33–107)‡ |
59 (31–101) |
59 (32–102) |
79.6‡ |
77.8 |
78.2 |
DPT–3 |
45.4‡ |
51.2 |
49.9 |
62 (34–112)‡ |
60 (32–104) |
61 (32–105) |
80.7‡ |
78.7 |
79.1 |
|||
Measles (at 9 months) |
9879 |
33 505 |
43 384 |
35.6‡ |
41.2 |
39.9 |
24 (9–46)‡ |
22 (8–43) |
22 (8–44) |
43.4‡ |
41.1 |
41.6 |
Fully immunized at 1 year of age | 9779 | 33 340 | 43 119 | 29.7‡ | 35.2 | 34.0 | – | – | – | – |
LBW – low birth weight, NBW – normal birth weight
*For 205 babies (all died in the first month of life) information on immunization was not available, 724 babies died at or before 42 days (6 weeks) of age, 923 died at or before 70 days (10 weeks) of age, 1076 died at or before 98 days (14 weeks) of age, 1582 died at or before 270 days (9 months) of age, 1818 died within one year.
†According to the National Immunization Schedule (Government of India). BCG and OPV-0 at birth, OPV-1/DPT-1 at 6 weeks of age, OPV-2/DPT-2 at 10 weeks of age, OPV-3/DPT-3 at 14 weeks of age and Measles at 9 months of age.
‡Statistically significant difference (
§Data not available on the time of receiving of birth dose of polio vaccine.
There was a delay in the time of receipt of the vaccines compared to the recommended time as per the National Immunization Schedule. The median (interquartile range; IQR) delay for BCG, DPT–1, DPT–2 and DPT–3 was 41 (19–75), 30 (12–63), 46 (23–89) and 62 (34–112) days respectively. Around 65% of the LBW babies had delay in receiving BCG, 52% in DPT–1, 68% in DPT–2 and 81% in DPT–3. For measles vaccine, the median (IQR) delay from the recommended time was 24 (9–46) days and around two–fifth infants (43.5%) had delay in receiving the vaccine.
Out of 9779 LBW infants that were alive at the age of 1 year, 2913 (29.7%) were fully immunized. There was a dose response relationship between wealth quintiles and full immunization status. Those LBW infants who were from the lowest wealth quintile had the lowest odds compared to those in highest wealth quintile (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32–0.47] (
Determinants of full immunization at one year of age among low birth weight babies in rural Haryana, North India
Variables | Unadjusted OR (95% CI) |
|
Adjusted OR (95% CI) |
|
---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
1 (Least poor) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
2 |
0.70 (0.61–0.81) |
<0.001 |
0.83 (0.71–0.95) |
0.010 |
3 |
0.45 (0.38–0.51) |
<0.001 |
0.61 (0.52–0.71) |
<0.001 |
4 |
0.35 (0.30–0.40) |
<0.001 |
0.54 (0.46–0.64) |
<0.001 |
5 (Poorest) |
0.19 (0.16–0.22) |
<0.001 |
0.39 (0.32–0.47) |
<0.001 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hindu |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Muslim |
0.24 (0.21–0.28) |
<0.001 |
0.41 (0.35–0.48) |
<0.001 |
Others† |
0.96 (0.67–1.37) |
0.824 |
1.23 (0.84–1.79) |
0.284 |
|
|
|
|
|
General |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Other Backward Class |
0.52 (0.46–0.57) |
<0.001 |
1.10 (0.97–1.24) |
0.122 |
Scheduled Caste/Tribe |
0.75 (0.67–0.84) |
<0.001 |
1.30 (1.14–1.49) |
<0.001 |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
<20 |
0.59 (0.51–0.69) |
<0.001 |
0.62 (0.52–0.73) |
<0.001 |
20–25 |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
26–30 |
0.94 (0.83–1.06) |
0.305 |
1.38 (1.19–1.58) |
<0.001 |
>30 |
0.62 (0.49–0.77) |
<0.001 |
1.49 (1.15–1.95) |
0.003 |
|
|
|
|
|
Illiterate (0) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Less than primary (1 to <5) |
1.48 (1.16–1.88) |
0.001 |
1.23 (0.96–1.58) |
0.105 |
Primary completed and secondary incomplete (5 to <12) |
2.61 (2.36–2.89) |
<0.001 |
1.56 (1.39–1.75) |
<0.001 |
Secondary complete and higher education (≥12) |
5.56 (4.76–6.50) |
<0.001 |
2.39 (1.97–2.91) |
<0.001 |
|
|
|
|
|
Illiterate (0) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
0.203 |
Less than primary (1 to <5) |
1.27 (0.97–1.66) |
0.075 |
1.19 (0.91–1.58) |
<0.001 |
Primary completed and secondary incomplete (5 to <12) |
2.53 (2.17–2.95) |
<0.001 |
1.53 (1.29–1.81) |
<0.001 |
Secondary complete and higher education (≥12) |
4.51 (3.80–5.35) |
<0.001 |
1.49 (1.22–1.83) |
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
Home |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Government facility |
1.97 (1.78–2.19) |
<0.001 |
1.29 (1.08–1.54) |
0.004 |
Private facility |
1.98 (1.77–2.22) |
<0.001 |
0.96 (0.79–1.15) |
0.649 |
|
|
|
|
|
Skilled |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Unskilled |
0.45 (0.41–0.48) |
<0.001 |
0.77 (0.64–0.91) |
0.003 |
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
1–2 |
0.86 (0.78–0.95) |
0.002 |
0.89 (0.79–0.98) |
0.031 |
3–4 |
0.56 (0.46–0.68) |
<0.001 |
0.70 (0.56–0.88) |
0.002 |
>4 |
0.32 (0.26–0.41) |
<0.001 |
0.58 (0.43–0.77) |
<0.001 |
|
|
|
|
|
Singleton |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Multiple |
1.29 (1.04–1.61) |
0.019 |
1.14 (0.89–1.45) |
0.302 |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
2000–2499 |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
<2000 |
0.88 (0.76–1.03) |
0.104 |
0.88 (0.75–1.03) |
0.122 |
|
|
|
|
|
Male |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Female | 0.86 (0.78–0.93) | <0.001 | 0.84 (0.77–0.92)† | <0.001 |
OR – odds ratio, Ref. – reference value
*Variables with
† Others – Christian/Sikh/Jain/Parsi/Zoroastrian/Buddhist/neo Buddhist.
‡Skilled attendant included doctor/nurse/Auxiliary Nurse Midwife/community health worker; unskilled included traditional birth attendant/relative/neighbour.
Compared to infants with illiterate parents, those with mothers [AOR 2.39; 95% CI, 1.97–2.91] and fathers [AOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.22–1.83] who were educated until secondary school or higher (≥12 years of schooling) had increased odds of full immunization. Mother’s age was also an important determinant. Compared to mother’s aged 20–25 years, those aged 26–30 years [AOR 1.38; 95% CI, 1.19–1.58] and >30 years [AOR 1.49; 95% CI, 1.15–1.95] had higher odds of getting their child fully immunized. Also, delivery at a government health facility [AOR 1.29; 95% CI, 1.08–1.54] increased the odds (
In the sensitivity analysis, using data documented through immunization cards, 15.2% of LBW infants were fully immunized by 12 months of age. The determinants of full immunization in these infants were essentially similar to those obtained when combined data obtained through immunization cards and reliable histories were analysed (Table S1 in
Lowest wealth quintiles [AOR 1.51; 95% CI, 1.25–1.82], Muslim religion (AOR 1.41; 95% CI, 1.21–1.65), mother aged <20 years (AOR 1.31; 95% CI, 1.11–1.53) and birth weight <2000 g (AOR 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03–1.40) were associated with higher odds of delayed vaccination with first–dose of DPT (DPT–1) vaccine (
Determinants of delayed vaccination with first dose DPT at age >10 weeks and third dose DPT at age >18 weeks for low birth weight babies in rural Haryana, North India
Variables |
DPT–1 (at >10 weeks after birth) |
DPT–3 (at >18 weeks after birth) |
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 (Least poor) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
2 |
1.36 (1.18–1.57) |
<0.001 |
1.26 (1.09–1.47)† |
0.002 |
1.19 (0.96–1.47) |
0.110 |
1.04 (0.83–1.30) |
0.742 |
3 |
1.49 (1.29–1.72) |
<0.001 |
1.32 (1.13–1.55)† |
0.001 |
1.04 (0.83–1.29) |
0.736 |
0.84 (0.65–1.07) |
0.150 |
4 |
1.48 (1.28–1.71) |
<0.001 |
1.27 (1.08–1.51)† |
0.005 |
1.07 (0.86–1.34) |
0.537 |
0.83 (0.64–1.08) |
0.164 |
5 (Poorest) |
1.93 (1.66–2.24) |
<0.001 |
1.51 (1.25–1.82)† |
<0.001 |
1.20 (0.93–1.55) |
0.157 |
0.83 (0.61–1.14) |
0.266 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hindu |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Muslim |
1.66 (1.44–1.90) |
<0.001 |
1.41 (1.21–1.65)† |
<0.001 |
1.31 (0.99–1.73) |
0.055 |
1.06 (0.79–1.43) |
0.680 |
Others‡ |
1.17 (0.81–1.70) |
0.404 |
1.12 (0.77–1.64) |
0.554 |
1.78 (0.88–3.59) |
0.106 |
1.59 (0.79–3.24) |
0.194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Other Backward Class |
1.28 (1.15–1.43) |
<0.001 |
1.00 (0.89–1.13) |
0.990 |
1.28 (1.07–1.53) |
0.006 |
1.17 (0.96–1.41) |
0.113 |
Scheduled Caste/Tribe |
1.18 (1.04–1.33) |
0.008 |
0.97 (0.85–1.11) |
0.704 |
0.97 (0.81–1.17) |
0.783 |
0.89 (0.72–1.08) |
0.243 |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<20 |
1.40 (1.21–1.63) |
<0.001 |
1.31 (1.11–1.53)† |
0.001 |
1.36 (1.04–1.81) |
0.027 |
1.31 (0.97–1.73) |
0.060 |
20–25 |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
26–30 |
1.05 (0.92–1.19) |
0.475 |
0.95 (0.83–1.09) |
0.467 |
0.98 (0.81–1.21) |
0.906 |
0.97 (0.79–1.19) |
0.792 |
>30 |
1.22 (0.97–1.52) |
0.080 |
0.92 (0.71–1.19) |
0.521 |
1.08 (0.72–1.61) |
0.706 |
0.97 (0.64–1.45) |
0.871 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illiterate (0) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Less than primary (1 to <5) |
0.82 (0.64–1.05) |
0.116 |
0.87 (0.68–1.11) |
0.274 |
0.76 (0.51–1.13) |
0.177 |
0.77 (0.51–1.15) |
0.212 |
Primary completed and secondary incomplete (5 to <12) |
0.76 (0.68–0.84) |
<0.001 |
0.86 (0.77–0.97)† |
0.014 |
0.88 (0.74–1.05) |
0.162 |
0.86 (0.71–1.05) |
0.131 |
Secondary complete and higher education (≥12) |
0.47 (0.39–0.55) |
<0.001 |
0.59 (0.49–0.73)† |
<0.001 |
0.58 (0.46–0.72) |
<0.001 |
0.57 (0.43–0.76)† |
<0.001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illiterate (0) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Less than primary (1 to <5) |
1.02 (0.79–1.32) |
0.857 |
1.06 (0.82–1.37) |
0.648 |
0.86 (0.54–1.38) |
0.547 |
0.91 (0.56–1.47) |
0.703 |
Primary completed and secondary incomplete (5 to <12) |
0.84 (0.73–0.97) |
0.018 |
1.02(0.87–1.19) |
0.831 |
0.87 (0.66–1.15) |
0.328 |
0.93 (0.69–1.25) |
0.634 |
Secondary complete and higher education (≥12) |
0.67 (0.67–0.78) |
<0.001 |
1.07 (0.88–1.29) |
0.502 |
0.72 (0.53–0.95) |
0.025 |
0.87(0.62–1.21) |
0.406 |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Government facility |
0.68 (0.61–0.75) |
<0.001 |
0.81 (0.68–0.96)† |
0.017 |
0.72 (0.60–0.86) |
<0.001 |
0.79 (0.60–1.06) |
0.126 |
Private facility |
0.82 (0.73–0.92) |
0.001 |
1.08 (0.91–1.29) |
0.377 |
0.79 (0.66–0.95) |
0.014 |
0.88 (0.66–1.18) |
0.409 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skilled |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Unskilled |
1.41 (1.28–1.55) |
<0.001 |
1.15 (0.96–1.37) |
0.114 |
1.32 (1.11–1.56) |
0.001 |
1.08 (0.81–1.45) |
0.589 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
– |
– |
0 |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
|
|
1–2 |
0.95 (0.86–1.05) |
0.312 |
0.93 (0.84–1.04) |
0.204 |
0.97 (0.84–1.13) |
0.725 |
|
|
3–4 |
1.28 (1.05–1.56) |
0.013 |
1.14 (0.92–1.43) |
0.235 |
1.24 (0.86–1.77) |
0.247 |
|
|
≥4 |
1.37 (1.09–1.72) |
0.006 |
1.09 (0.83–1.43) |
0.544 |
1.18 (0.75–1.85) |
0.473 |
|
|
|
|
|
– |
– |
|
0.977 |
– |
– |
Singleton |
Ref |
|
|
|
Ref |
|
|
|
Multiple |
0.98 (0.78–1.23) |
0.878 |
|
|
0.99 (0.69–1.42) |
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2000–2499 |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
<2000 |
1.23 (1.06–1.43) |
0.007 |
1.20 (1.03–1.40)† |
0.019 |
1.06 (0.83–1.37) |
0.602 |
1.04 (0.81–1.34) |
0.774 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Male |
Ref. |
|
– |
– |
Ref. |
|
– |
– |
Female | 0.95 (0.87–1.05) | 0.340 | 0.92 (0.79–1.07) | 0.275 |
*Variables with
†Statistically significant at P<0.05.
‡Christian/Sikh/Jain/Parsi/Zoroastrian/Buddhist/neo Buddhist.
§Skilled attendant included doctor/nurse/Auxiliary Nurse Midwife/community health worker; unskilled included traditional birth attendant/relative/neighbour.
In the sensitivity analysis, using data obtained through immunization cards, 46.6% and 79.2% of the LBW infants had delay in vaccination for DPT–1 and DPT–3 respectively. Lower wealth quintiles, Muslim religion, mother aged <20 years and birth weight <2000 g were associated with higher odds of delayed vaccination with first–dose of DPT (DPT–1) vaccine (Table S2 in
Low birth weight was associated with reduced odds of full immunization (AOR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.81–0.90) (
Birth weight as a determinant of full immunization and delayed vaccination in infants from rural Haryana, North India
Variables | Proportion (%) | Unadjusted OR (95% CI) |
|
Adjusted OR (95% CI)* |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Birth weight (grams): |
|
|
|
|
|
≥2500 |
11760/33340; (35.2) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
<2500 |
2913/9779; (29.7) |
0.78 (0.74–0.82) |
<0.001 |
0.85 (0.81–0.90) |
<0.001 |
|
|
|
|||
|
|||||
Male infants – Birth weight (grams): |
|
|
|
|
|
≥2500 |
6835/14737; (46.3) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
<2500 |
1800/3443; (52.3) |
1.27 (1.17–1.36) |
<0.001 |
1.18 (1.10–1.28) |
<0.001 |
Female infants – Birth weight (grams): |
|
|
|
|
|
≥2500 |
5918/11892; (49.7) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
<2500 |
2123/4148; (51.2) |
1.05 (0.98–1.14) |
0.116 |
1.02 (0.94–1.09) |
0.592 |
|
|||||
Male infants – Birth weight (grams): |
|
|
|
|
|
≥2500 |
7639/9818; (77.8) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
<2500 |
1737 /2135; (81.3) |
1.24 (1.11–1.40) |
<0.001 |
1.18 (1.04–1.33) |
0.008 |
Female infants – Birth weight (grams): |
|
|
|
|
|
≥2500 |
5986/7513; (79.6) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
<2500 |
1962/2450; (80.1) |
1.03 (0.92–1.15) |
0.664 |
0.99 (0.88–1.12) |
0.984 |
|
|||||
Birth weight (grams): |
|
|
|
|
|
≥2500 |
9207/17315; (53.1) |
Ref. |
|
Ref. |
|
<2500 | 2506/4579; (54.7) | 1.06 (0.99–1.14) | 0.061 | 1.04 (0.97–1.12) | 0.183 |
*Adjusted for infant sex, multiple births, place of delivery, personnel conducting delivery (skilled/unskilled), mother’s education, mother’s age, mother’s occupation, father’s education, religion, social class, wealth quintiles and number of living children the women had.
As part of the exploratory analysis, determinants of full immunization and delayed vaccination were also documented for normal birth weight infants. Lower wealth quintiles, belonging to Muslim community, mother’s age <20 years and female sex were associated with low odds to full immunization, largely similar to that observed in low birth weight infant. Higher maternal education and delivery at a government facility were associated with increased odds of full immunization and decreased odds of delayed vaccination. They are presented in Table S3 and S4 in
The present secondary data analysis aimed to understand immunization practices in low birth weight babies and elucidate their determinants. Only a third of LBW infants were fully immunized and majority had delayed vaccination for DPT–1 and DPT–3. The findings pertain to study districts where overall immunization performance is lower compared to other districts of the state. These study districts are recognized as “low performing” by the government of Haryana, based on the indicators for uptake of immunization services [
The strength of this study is the robust population– based surveillance system and low loss to follow up. All babies were recruited within 72 hours of birth and weight measured by trained study team, thereby reducing chances of misclassification of infants by birth weight. To achieve adequate quality of data on vaccination status, the study team members were rigorously trained and underwent periodic inter and intra observer standardization exercises [
A limitation that must be considered while interpreting the findings is that the main trial excluded sick babies or those that were unable to feed. Such babies would include a certain proportion of LBW infants (possibly the smallest/with lowest birth weight) and in them, the delay and incompleteness in vaccination may be possibly of greater magnitude. Excluding them, therefore, may underestimate the actual delay and incompleteness in immunization. Also, in this setting, we recognize that a small proportion of pregnant women, especially those having the first baby, tend to go to their parents home for delivery and these were therefore not available for enrolment. The immunization practices of these primigravida mothers could be different from those who would have had children previously and this might have possibly affected the findings observed. There was no reliable data on gestational age and so through the current analysis, it would be difficult to interpret whether the immunization practices were influenced by prematurity or not. In around one–fifth of the infants, data on immunization was obtained through reliable history instead of documented evidence in form of immunization card. Thus, the possibility of reporting inaccurate vaccination dates cannot be ruled out. Other factors that could affect immunization uptake such as maternal illness and distance from the health facility were not considered as data was unavailable for these variables. Delayed immunization and low rates of full immunization could also be due to factors affecting supply ie, shortage of vaccines and skilled manpower and other logistic issues but these have not been considered in the current analysis.
After adjustment for potential confounders, being born with low birth weight emerged as a significant determinant of full immunization, and in male infants, also for delayed vaccination with DPT–1 and DPT–3. Interestingly, it was not associated with delay for either DPT–1 or DPT–3 vaccination in females. It could possibly mean that family members/caregivers might hesitate vaccinating their LBW infant, early in life, as they are considered fragile and this fear may be more for male babies, as they are valued more in a patriarchal society like that of Haryana. Lower wealth quintiles, Muslim religion and young maternal age (<20 years) were found to be associated with lower odds of full immunization and higher odds of delayed vaccination for DPT–1 in the final multivariable model. This is in concordance with findings from earlier studies [
In the final regression model; female sex of the infant, delivery by an unskilled attendant and increasing number of children a woman had were also associated with low odds of full immunization. Social constructs in traditional Indian society subject females towards unequal treatment, notably in the state of Haryana. Studies have reported a household level gender– based differential in terms of allocation of food, care seeking and education, usually with the female child being neglected [
Similar to previous studies, in this study as well, high maternal education was found to be strongly associated with improved vaccination status of the infant [
To the best of our knowledge, it is one of the few data presented from LMIC, particularly in India, to understand the immunization practices in LBW infants and their determinants. The findings show that immunization uptake in these infants was inadequate. Strengthening of essential newborn care practices early in life, with a focus on timely initiation of vaccination and ensuring full immunization should form the linchpin of the low birth weight infant care package. In the current study, poor immunization uptake was observed in the economically weaker sections of the society. This calls for due emphasis on ensuring equity in terms of utilization of immunization services and improving coverage.
Data surveillance and monitoring should routinely focus on identifying groups that are underserved by vaccination. Mobilization activities need to focus on infants from the marginalized sections of the society. Interventions aimed at delaying the age at child birth, addressing female bias, providing targeted education on the importance of immunization to mothers of child bearing age and to women of certain religious communities could prove beneficial. Promoting institutional births and emphasizing on immunization as an integral part of the discharge counselling package would be warranted. Interventions that target the determinants should necessarily be accompanied by efforts to improve the health system.
We would like to acknowledge Dr Vinohar Balraj (Consultant, Centre for Health Research and Development, Society for Applied Studies, New Delhi & Former Professor, Department of Community Health, CMC Vellore, India) for his expert guidance in reviewing the manuscript. The Society for Applied Studies acknowledges the core support provided by the Department of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health, World Health Organisation, Geneva (WHO Collaborating Centre IND–096) and the Centre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health (RCN Project No. 223269), Centre for International Health, University of Bergen (Norway). We also acknowledge the support extended by Clinical Development Services Agency (an autonomous institute established by the Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India) and the Knowledge Integration and Technology Platform (KnIT), a Grand Challenges Initiative of the Department of Biotechnology and Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council (BIRAC) of Government of India and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (USA).