National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups …

1 Vaccine 28S (2010) A18 A25 Contents lists available atScienceDirectVaccinejournal Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs): Guidance for theirestablishment and strengthening Philippe Duclos Department of Immunization , Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, 20 Ave Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerlandarticle infoKeywords:ImmunizationPolicy recommendationsNational Advisory committeeabstractThe majority of industrialized and some developing countries have formally established nationaltechnical Advisory bodies to guide Immunization policies; other countries are working towards or con-templating the establishment of such bodies. These Advisory bodies are often referred to as NationalImmunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs). A NITAG is a Technical resource supplying guidanceto National policy makers and programme managers to enable them to make evidence-based immu-nization related policy and program decisions.

2 The focus of this paper is to: (1) review the value andfunctions of a NITAG; (2) provide directions and identify issues for countries to consider when estab-lishing or improving the functioning of a NITAG; and (3) outline potential WHO and partners roles andactivities in support of the establishment and strengthening of NITAGs. World Health Organization 2010. All rights reserved. The World Health Organization has grantedthe Publisher permission for reproduction of this BackgroundWhile for many years, at both the global and the country lev-els, the focus of Immunization programmes has been on infantsand a limited number of traditional vaccines, the vaccine world hasevolved with new demands and expectations of global and nationalpolicy makers, donors, other interested parties, and the public.

3 Thedevelopment and availability of several new vaccines targetinga variety of age Groups , the emergence of new technologies, theincreased public focus on vaccine safety issues, the enhanced pro-cedures for regulation and approval of vaccines, the need to expandtheimmunizationschedulewithconside rationofallagegroupsandspecific at-risk populations are all demanding increased attention[1].Key to improving routine Immunization programmes and sus-tainably introducing new vaccines and Immunization technologiesis for countries to ensure that they have the necessary evidenceand clear processes to enable informed decision making in theestablishment of Immunization programme priorities and theintroduction of new programme strategies, vaccines and technolo-Abbreviations:ICC, Coordinating Committees; NITAG, National ImmunizationTechnical Advisory group ; SIVAC, Supporting Independent Immunization and Vac-cine Advisory Committees; UNICEF, United Nations Children s Fund; WHO, WorldHealth Organization.

4 Disclaimer: The author alone is responsible for the views expressed in this pub-lication and they do not necessarily represent the decisions, policy or views of theWorld Health Organization. Tel.: +41 22 791 4527; fax: +41 22 791 Similarly, such evidence and processes are needed to justifythe continuation of, or any necessary adjustments to, existingimmunization programmes and developing countries have long struggled with vac-cine funding problems and limited ability to optimize coveragewithstandardimmunizationprograms ,evenindustrializednationstoday face problems involving the financing and delivery new vaccines by developing countries[2 4], from a public healthperspective, the overall limited financial resources require that dis-tribution of funds must be undertaken in as fair and as effective amanner as possible in order to achieve the best possible decisions on introducing new vaccines into nationalimmunization programs should be unbiased, comprehensive andsystematic and based on deliberate, rational, comprehensible andevidence-based criteria[5].

5 Certainly all governments have to con-sider opportunity costs in their present, the majority of industrialized and some develop-ing countries have formally constituted National Technical advisorybodies to guide Immunization policies. Other countries are onlystarting to work towards or are just contemplating the estab-lishment of such bodies. Still others have not even embarked as National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs)and will be referred to as such in the remainder of this can also be referred to using different names such as NationalAdvisory Committee on Immunization or National Committee onImmunization Practice to name a few of the most commonly usedtitles. Many countries still lack credible decision-making processes0264-410X/$ see front matter World Health Organization 2010.

6 All rights reserved. The World Health Organization has granted the Publisher permission for reproduction of this Duclos / Vaccine 28S (2010) A18 A25A19that can facilitate the review and assessment of immunizationinterventions and strategies[6].The focus of this document is to: (1) review the value, roles andfunctions of a NITAG; (2) provide directions and identify issues forcountries to consider when establishing or improving the function-ing of a NITAG; and (3) outline potential WHO and partners rolesand activities in support of the establishment and strengthening Value, roles and functions of a National ImmunizationTechnical Advisory GroupA NITAG is both a Technical resource and a deliberative bodyto empower the National authorities and policy makers to view of the complex and vast bodies of evidence and the globalinterdependence and integration of health well balanced and institutionalized group can aid a nationalprogrammetoresistpressurefromany interestorlobbygroupwithnarrow scopes or interests, including, but not only, that of industryand anti- Immunization Groups .

7 This protective function is impor-tant,becausewithoutit,pressurefrom specialinterestgroupscouldresult in programme changes that are not well justified in the localcontext and may even cause major advantage of a NITAG is the credibility of the processby which major policy decisions are made, which in turn addscredibility to the National Immunization programme and to thegovernment at large[7,8]. This credibility is of course linked totherigor,transparency,andinformed/evid ence-basedprocessesbywhich the NITAG arrives at its decisions. Highly credible decisionscan positively impact perceptions within the government, withinthe country or even beyond the country, thereby lending additionalweight to proposed adjustments to the Immunization programmeand enhancing the ability to secure government or donor funding,support from professional organizations, and acceptance from addition, a standing NITAG will facilitate a more compre-hensive and cohesive country Immunization program perspectivethat cannot easily be achieved by a series of disease or vaccinespecific task forces orad hoccommittees composed of specificdisease experts and advocates.

8 These latter Groups often providerecommendations in isolation without consideration of the com-pleteimmunizationprogrampicturewithi nthefullcontextofotherintervention strategies. Ideally, disease-specific Technical workinggroups should be supported by and report to a NITAG or even a group which may have a broader mandate,such as an infectious disease control committee, will help consoli-date programmes and have a more comprehensive and integratedapproach in terms of interventions and target populations ( would,consider the health of the entire populationversusthatofinfantsonly).Inthe ory,advisorygroupscouldhaveabroaderhealt h mandate that extends beyond vaccines and , an Immunization focus is recommended to ensure thatthe required expertise is included on the committee and due atten-tion given to vaccines, which could not be given by a more genericor all-purpose Advisory committee serving the Ministry of mandates usually include to recommend nationalimmunization policies and strategies that take into account thelocal epidemiologic and social contexts.

9 And possibly to adviseon implementation of National Immunization programmes and tomonitor programme the above in mind, the overall objective of establish-ing a functioning Technical Advisory body at the country level isto provide guidance to policy makers and programme managersfor making evidence-based Immunization related policy decisions,including choices of new vaccines and technologies and neededadjustments to existing programmes and schedules. The proposedbroad general terms of reference for such a group are as follows: Conduct policy analyses and determine optimal National immu-nization policies. Guide the National government and the National immunizationprogramme on the formulation of strategies for the control ofvaccine preventable diseases through Immunization . Advise the National authorities on the monitoring of the immu-nization programme so that impact can be measured andquantified.

10 Advisethegovernmentonthecollectionofimpo rtantdiseaseandvaccine uptake data and information. Identify the need for further data for policy making. Guide, where appropriate, organizations, institutions or govern-ment agencies in the formulation of policies, plans and strategiesfor research and development of new vaccines and vaccine deliv-ery technologies for the country will have to adjust its NITAG s terms of referencebased on its own needs and resources. Therefore, the terms of ref-erence proposed above are general and not necessarily exhaustiveor the role of NITAGs is essentially consultative andthe ultimate decisions about programs remains in the hand ofgovernment officials, this process requires the acceptance of thegovernmenttoyieldsomelevelofcontrolov erthedecision-makingprocess.