Coverage and Equity of Childhood Vaccines in China
Authors: Zhang Haijun , Lai Xiaozhen , Mak Joshua , Sriudomporn Salin , Zhang Haonan , Fang Hai , Patenaude Bryan 
Published: December 2022

ImportanceMeasuring vaccination coverage rates and equity is crucial for informing immunization policies in China.ObjectivesTo estimate coverage rates and multidimensional equity for childhood vaccination in China.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study was conducted via a survey in 10 Chinese provinces between August 5 and October 16, 2019, among children ages 6 months to 5 years and their primary caregivers. Children’s vaccination records and their primary caregivers’ demographics and socioeconomic status were collected. Data were analyzed from November 2019 to March 2022.Main Outcomes and MeasuresVaccine coverage rates were measured as a percentage of National Immunization Program (NIP) and non-NIP vaccines administered before the day on which the child was surveyed. A multidimensional equity model applied a standardized approach to ranking individuals from least to most unfairly disadvantaged by estimating differences between observed vaccination status and estimated vaccination status as function of fair and unfair variation. Fair sources of variation in coverage included whether the child was of age to receive the vaccine, and unfair sources of variation included sex of the child and sociodemographic characteristics of caregivers. Absolute equity gaps (AEGs), concentration index values, and decompositions of factors associated with vaccine equity were estimated in the model.ResultsVaccine records and sociodemographic information of 5294 children (2976 [52.8%] boys and 2498 [47.2%] girls; age range, 6-59 months; 1547 children aged 12-23 months) and their primary caregivers were collected from 10 provinces. Fully immunized coverage under the NIP was 83.1% (95% CI, 82.0%-84.1%) at the national level and more than 80% in 7 provinces (province coverage ranged from 77.8% [95% CI, 74.3% to 81.3%] in Jiangxi to 88.4% [95% CI, 85.7%-91.1%] in Beijing). For most non-NIP vaccines, however, coverage rates were less than 50%, ranging from 1.8% (95% CI, 1.3%-2.2%) for the third dose of rotavirus vaccine to 67.1% (65.4% to 68.8%) for the first dose of the varicella vaccine. The first dose of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine had the largest AEG, at 0.603 (95% CI, 0.570-0.636), and rotavirus vaccine dose 3 had the largest concentration index value, at 0.769 (95% CI, 0.709-0.829). The largest share of non-NIP vaccine inequity was contributed by monthly family income per capita, followed by education level, place of residence, and province for caregivers. For example, the proportion of explained inequity for pneumococcal conjugate vaccine dose 3 was 40.94% (95% CI, 39.49%-42.39%), 22.67% (95% CI, 21.43%-23.9%), 27.15% (95% CI, 25.84%-28.46%), and 0.68% (95% CI, 0.44%-0.92%) for these factors, respectively.Conclusions and RelevanceThis cross-sectional study found that NIP vaccination coverage in China was high but there was inequity for non-NIP vaccines. These findings suggest that improvements in equitable coverage of non-NIP vaccination may be urgently needed to meet national immunization goals.