Comparison of text-messaging to voice telephone interviews for active surveillance of adverse events following immunisation

Article from ScienceDirect

From the PubMed abstract: "A number of 344 women who received TIV were randomly assigned to a telephone interview group. They were telephoned seven days post-vaccination and administered a standard survey soliciting any adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) they experienced. They were matched by brand of vaccine, age group, and residence to 344 women who were sent a SMS seven days post-vaccination. The SMS solicited similar information. AEFI reported by SMS and telephone interview were compared by calculating risk ratios."

Results:"Response rate was higher to SMS compared to telephone interview (90.1% vs. 63.9%). Women who were surveyed by SMS were significantly less likely to report an AEFI compared to women who were surveyed by telephone (RR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.29-0.59). The greatest discrepancies between SMS and telephone interview were for self-reported injection site reactions (3.1% vs. 16.8%) and unsolicited (or "other") events (11.4% vs. 4.1%). Data collected by SMS was significantly timelier."

mFHAST Implications: Opportunities to use SMS for vaccination program adverse event reporting collection.