Health care and health status in the Udaipur district, Rajasthan: demand and supply factors in early childhood immunisation

Improving immunisation coverage in rural India: A clustered randomised controlled evaluation of immunisation campaigns with and without incentives

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

ISRCTN

Registry ID

ISRCTN87759937

Enrollment

9000

Registered

2008-07-25

Start date

2005-01-05

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2015-01-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Immunisation against tuberculosis, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus and polio Infections and Infestations Other and unspecified infectious diseases

Interventions

134 villages in rural Udaipur were randomised to one of 3 groups: 1. A once-monthly reliable immunisation camp (intervention A

30 villages) 2. A once-monthly reliable immunisation camp with small incentives (lentils and metal plates for completed immunization

intervention B

30 villages) 3. Control (no intervention, 74 villages) The vaccine package administered in this study is the World Health Organization (WHO)/UNICEF Extended Package of Immunization (EPI), which is th

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Participants must: 1. Be children under five years of age 2. Not have already received all of the following vaccinations: tuberculosis (BCG), diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT1, DPT2, DPT3), oral polio vaccine (OPV1, OPV2, OPV3), measles and measles booster 3. Be brought to an immunisation camp to be immunised by a parent or guardian OR Participants included in the study must: 1. Be pregnant 2. Not have already received both the tetanus and tetanus booster vaccinations 3. Voluntarily attend an immunisation camp run in the village Anybody meeting this condition is eligible for immunisation in all intervention villages (regardless of residence) and for incentives in intervention B villages.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Children older than 5, since immunisation has been shown to be most effective for children under 5

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Proportion of children receiving part or all of the EPI in intervention A, B and control villages. The main analysis reported in this study focuses on children aged 1- 3 at endline (i.e. eligible and old enough to be fully immunised), and the proportion of pregnant women receiving tetanus immunisation and booster.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Proportion of children receiving part or all of the EPI in neighbouring villages (hamlets neighbouring intervention A and intervention B camps, differences between these two groups of neighbouring hamlets and the control group, and relative risks). The main analysis reported in this study focuses on children aged 1- 3 at endline (i.e. eligible and old enough to be fully immunised), and the proportion of pregnant women receiving tetanus immunisation and booster, as for the intervention and control villages (see Primary outcome measures).	—

Measure

Time frame

Proportion of children receiving part or all of the EPI in neighbouring villages (hamlets neighbouring intervention A and intervention B camps, differences between these two groups of neighbouring hamlets and the control group, and relative risks). The main analysis reported in this study focuses on children aged 1- 3 at endline (i.e. eligible and old enough to be fully immunised), and the proportion of pregnant women receiving tetanus immunisation and booster, as for the intervention and control villages (see Primary outcome measures).

—

Countries

India

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026