ABSTRACT
Background Mass vaccination is a cornerstone of public health emergency preparedness and response. However, injudicious placement of vaccination sites can lead to the formation of long waiting lines or queues, which discourages individuals from waiting to be vaccinated and may thus jeopardize the achievement of public health targets. Queueing theory offers a framework for modeling queue formation at vaccination sites and its effect on vaccine uptake.
Methods We developed an algorithm that integrates queueing theory within a spatial optimization framework to optimize the placement of mass vaccination sites. The algorithm was built and tested using data from a mass canine rabies vaccination campaign in Arequipa, Peru. We compared expected vaccination coverage and losses from queueing (i.e., attrition) for sites optimized with our queue-conscious algorithm to those obtained from a queue-naive version of the same algorithm.
Results Sites placed by the queue-conscious algorithm resulted in 9-19% less attrition and 1-2% higher vaccination coverage compared to sites placed by the queue-naïve algorithm. Compared to the queue-naïve algorithm, the queue-conscious algorithm favored placing more sites in densely populated areas to offset high arrival volumes, thereby reducing losses due to excessive queueing. These results were not sensitive to misspecification of queueing parameters or relaxation of the constant arrival rate assumption.
Conclusion One should consider losses from queueing to optimally place mass vaccination sites, even when empirically derived queueing parameters are not available. Due to the negative impacts of excessive wait times on participant satisfaction, reducing queueing attrition is also expected to yield downstream benefits and improve vaccination coverage in subsequent mass vaccination campaigns.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (grant nos. K01AI139284 and R01AI168291).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Institutional Review Board of Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia gave ethical approval for this work. The Institutional Review Board of the University of Pennsylvania gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Update title, author names, and figures (original upload had poor pdf rendering).
Data Availability
All code and non-sensitive data are publicly available on Github.