London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Hackney 1969

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Hackney]

This page requires JavaScript

Completed Primary Courses

Whooping Cough1,4741,800115744453,512
Tetanus1,4891,817122902533444, 115
Poliomyelitis1,4761,812142953113024,138
Measles545753323924591.438

Reinforcing Injections/Doses

Type of vaccine or dose19691968196719661962 1965Others under 16Total
Diphtheria36651,4111912,1895465,005
Whooping Cough26521,37718014392, 363
Tetanus46661,4111902,1745805,025
Poliomyelitis26641,3761792,1866245,031

Smallpox Vaccination

Age0-33-66-99-1212-45-15Total
mthsmthsmthsmthsyearyearsyears
Primary vaccinations41530161,787412902,354
Re-vaccinations----747313367

The immunisation acceptance rates achieved in the borough in recent years
have been in the region of 70-75% for children aged 0 to 2 years. Although
these percentages are reasonably comparable to those obtained in other areas
obviously quite a large number of children remain unprotected. Mobility of
population is one important factor which acts as a deterrent to obtaining
better figures with the present system.
In the last few years computer schemes have been introduced for immunisation
records in a number of areas. In West Sussex, which is one example very
often quoted, acceptance rates as high as 95% have been obtained since a
computer scheme was started. In Haringey a scheme worked out by the Computer
Division of the London Boroughs Management Services Unit commenced at the
beginning of 1969 using the computer owned jointly by Hackney and Tower Hamlets.
Preparations were in hand to introduce a similar scheme in Hackney for
children born from 1st January, 1970.
In view of the high rate of population mobility in the borough it was
decided, in common with a number of Inner London Boroughs, to retain the
existing immunisation schedule with its starting age of three months for
primary immunisation. This schedule will be followed in the computer scheme.
Adsorbed Triple Vaccine became available in June. This product is
considered to be a more effective antigen than the standard material which
had previously been used. It also has advantages in that there is a lower
incidence of generalised reaction. However, since the introduction of the
new type vaccine, there has been an increase in the number of local reactions
reported. These are either local inflammatory reactions within 48 hours and/
or persistence of a small nodule at the site. This could well be a deterrent
to mothers re-attending and it became imperative to investigate the problem.
Medical Officers were asked to report these reactions and there was a certain
amount of correspondence in medical journals. It was confirmed that such
a reaction can be avoided if the injection is given deeply into the muscle.