Dataset Information

The Obstetrician's Role in Pregnant Women's Decision-Making Process Regarding Influenza and COVID-19 Vaccination.

ABSTRACT: Pregnant women are considered to be a population vulnerable to influenza and COVID-19 infections, and the latest guidelines consistently recommend that they receive influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations. A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted among pregnant women in Poland to determine which factors have the greatest impact on their decision to vaccinate against influenza and COVID-19. A total of 515 pregnant women participated in the study. Among them, 38.4% (n = 198) demonstrated a positive attitude toward influenza vaccination, and 64.3% (n = 331) demonstrated a positive attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the strongest influence on positive attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination is having it recommended by an obstetrician-gynecologist (OR = 2.439, p = 0.025). The obstetrician-gynecologist's recommendation to vaccinate against influenza also significantly influences the decision to vaccinate (OR = 5.323). The study results also show a strong correlation between the obstetrician-gynecologist as a source of information on influenza and vaccination and participants' positive attitudes toward vaccination (OR = 4.163). Obstetricians have a significant influence on pregnant women's decisions regarding vaccinations. Further recommendations to vaccinate and awareness-raising among obstetricians may be needed to increase the vaccination rate of pregnant women in Poland.

SUBMITTER: Sienicka A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10610802 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Obstetrician's Role in Pregnant Women's Decision-Making Process Regarding Influenza and COVID-19 Vaccination.

Sienicka Agnieszka A Pisula Agata A Pawlik Katarzyna Karina KK Dobrowolska-Redo Agnieszka A Kacperczyk-Bartnik Joanna J Romejko-Wolniewicz Ewa E

Vaccines 20231018 10

Pregnant women are considered to be a population vulnerable to influenza and COVID-19 infections, and the latest guidelines consistently recommend that they receive influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations. A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted among pregnant women in Poland to determine which factors have the greatest impact on their decision to vaccinate against influenza and COVID-19. A total of 515 pregnant women participated in the study. Among them, 38.4% (n = 198) demonstra ...[more]

PMID: 37897010

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDown syndrome is a common chromosomal abnormality and prenatal screening can inform parents of the risk of their baby having Down syndrome. Little research has examined how decisions regarding both Down syndrome screening as well as diagnosis are made among women who are currently pregnant and how their decisions are influenced by their social contexts, specifically family and social media, using mixed methods. The study was to test the validity and reliability of a scale that measures pregnant women's attitudes and decision-making concerning prenatal Down syndrome screening and diagnosis in urban areas of Taiwan.MethodsWe developed an item pool based on a literature review and in-depth interviews with 30 pregnant women recruited at two district hospitals in urban areas. The item pool was reviewed by a panel of experts and then administered to 300 women who had been pregnant for less than 24 weeks and had not received the Down syndrome screening tests. We used item analysis and exploratory factor analysis to validate the scale and test its reliability.ResultsThe initial item pool had 54 items. After the expert review, three items were deleted. After the item analysis, 16 additional items were deleted. Exploratory factor analysis of the remaining items revealed four factors labeled - "Attitudes towards Down syndrome and Screening Tests," "Important others' Attitudes towards Down Syndrome," "Influence of Important Others on Decision-Making," and "Influence of Social Media on Decision-Making" - and 16 of the remaining items had satisfactory loadings on those factors, explaining 72.0% of the total variance. The Cronbach's α values of the dimensions ranged between 0.75 and 0.90, demonstrating satisfactory internal reliability.ConclusionsThe scale has satisfactory validity and reliability, and can be used to understand pregnant women's attitudes and decision-making regarding Down syndrome screening and diagnosis, and to help design tailored consultations for pregnant women in clinical settings.

Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of complementary medicine product (CMP) use by pregnant or breastfeeding Australian mothers is high, however, there is limited data on factors influencing women's decision-making to use CMPs. This study explored and described the factors influencing women's decisions take a CMP when pregnant or breastfeeding.MethodsQualitative in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were held with 25 pregnant and/or breastfeeding women who currently used CMPs. Participants' health literacy was assessed using a validated single-item health literacy screening question and the Newest Vital Sign. Interview and focus group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.ResultsParticipants were a homogenous group. Most had higher education, medium to high incomes and high health literacy skills. They actively sought information from multiple sources and used a reiterative collation and assessment process. Their decision-making to take or not to take CMPs was informed by the need to establish the safety of the CMPs, as well as possible benefits or harms to their baby's or their own health that could result from taking a CMP. Their specific information needs included the desire to access comprehensive, consistent, clear, easy to understand, and evidence-based information. Women preferred to access information from reputable sources, namely, their trusted health care practitioners, and information linked to government or hospital websites and published research. A lack of comprehensive, clear, consistent, or evidence-based information often led to decisions not to take a CMP, as they felt unable to adequately establish its safety or benefits. Conversely, when the participants felt the CMPs information they collected was good quality and from reputable sources, it reassured them of the safety of the CMP in pregnancy and/or breastfeeding. If this confirmed a clear benefit to their baby or themselves, they were more likely to decide to take a CMP.ConclusionsThe participants' demographic profile confirms previous research concerning Australian women who use CMPs during pregnancy and lactation. Participants' high health literacy skills led them to engage in a reiterative, information-seeking and analysis process fuelled by the need to find clear information before making the decision to take, or not to take, a CMP.

Project description:BackgroundVaccination serves as an efficient primary means of control for infectious diseases. However, in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women within the United States had the lowest rates of COVID-19 vaccination and reported the lowest intent to vaccinate.ObjectivesTo explore the decision-making process for COVID-19 vaccination for people pregnant during the pandemic.DesignA secondary analysis of data from a mixed-methods study that examined the impact of COVID-19 on experiences of prenatal care, birth support, and delivery in the Southern United States.MethodsThis study used a descriptive phenomenological approach to thematically analyze in-depth interviews (n = 20) with adult women who were pregnant by January 2020 and had their prenatal care and delivery during the pandemic beginning in March 2020. The transcripts were de-identified, coded, and thematically analyzed to saturation to identify drivers of COVID-19 vaccine decision-making based on COVID-19 vaccination status and timing. Comparative analyses were conducted to assess differences in decision-making processes based on race/ethnicity and parity. Participants also completed a sociodemographic survey that included their COVID-19 vaccination status.ResultsTwo themes emerged, the weighing of parallel risks and priorities from different sources resulting in vaccine decisional conflict and the need to reconcile that conflict via multiple strategies. All participants weighed priorities and risks from multiple areas of their lives and described internal conflict around vaccination. Participants described tailoring decisions to household dynamics, reconciling public and private values around vaccination, and the impact of their identities on the decision-making process. While many described concerns over vaccine safety and fetal health, uniquely, many highlighted weighing the impact of prior pregnancy loss history, with some choosing other preventive measures like social distancing or mask-wearing, which they deemed less risky.ConclusionPregnant people make complex COVID-19 vaccination decisions, which must be considered in future vaccine messaging and advocacy for this group.

Project description:BackgroundThe online nature of decision aids (DAs) and related e-tools supporting women's decision-making regarding breast cancer screening (BCS) through mammography may facilitate broader access, making them a valuable addition to BCS programs.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the scientific evidence on the impacts of these e-tools and to provide a comprehensive assessment of the factors associated with their increased utility and efficacy.MethodsWe followed the 2020 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and conducted a search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases from August 2010 to April 2023. We included studies reporting on populations at average risk of breast cancer, which utilized DAs or related e-tools, and assessed women's participation in BCS by mammography or other key cognitive determinants of decision-making as primary or secondary outcomes. We conducted meta-analyses on the identified randomized controlled trials, which were assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. We further explored intermediate and high heterogeneity between studies to enhance the validity of our results.ResultsIn total, 22 different e-tools were identified across 31 papers. The degree of tailoring in the e-tools, specifically whether the tool was fully tailored or featured with tailoring, was the most influential factor in women's decision-making regarding BCS. Compared with control groups, tailored e-tools significantly increased women's long-term participation in BCS (risk ratio 1.14, 95% CI 1.07-1.23, P<.001, I2=0%). Tailored-to-breast-cancer-risk e-tools increased women's level of worry (mean difference 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.48, P<.001, I2=0%). E-tools also improved women's adequate knowledge of BCS, with features-with-tailoring e-tools designed and tested with the general population being more effective than tailored e-tools designed for or tested with non-BCS participants (χ21=5.1, P=.02). Features-with-tailoring e-tools increased both the rate of women who intended not to undergo BCS (risk ratio 1.88, 95% CI 1.43-2.48, P<.001, I2=0%) and the rate of women who had made an informed choice regarding their intention to undergo BCS (risk ratio 1.60, 95% CI 1.09-2.33, P=.02, I2=91%). Additionally, these tools decreased the proportion of women with decision conflict (risk ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.65-0.91, P=.002, I2=0%). Shared decision-making was not formally evaluated. This review is limited by small sample sizes, including only a few studies in the meta-analysis, some with a high risk of bias, and high heterogeneity between the studies and e-tools.ConclusionsFeatures-with-tailoring e-tools could potentially negatively impact BCS programs by fostering negative intentions and attitudes toward BCS participation. Conversely, tailored e-tools may increase women's participation in BCS but, when tailored to risk, they may elevate their levels of worry. To maximize the effectiveness of e-tools while minimizing potential negative impacts, we advocate for an "on-demand" layered approach to their design.

Project description:BACKGROUND:While women and girls face special risks from lack of access to sanitation facilities, their ability to participate and influence household-level sanitation is not well understood. This paper examines the association between women's decision-making autonomy and latrine construction in rural areas of Odisha, India. METHODS:We conducted a mixed-method study among rural households in Puri district. This included a cross sectional survey among 475 randomly selected households. These were classified as either having a functional latrine, a non-functional latrine or no latrine at all. We also conducted 17 in-depth interviews and 9 focus group discussions among household members of these three categories of households. RESULTS:Decisions on the construction of household level sanitation facilities were made exclusively by the male head in 80% of households; in 11% the decision was made by men who consulted or otherwise involved women. In only 9% of households the decision was made by women. Households where women were more involved in general decision making processes were no more likely to build a latrine, compared to households where they were excluded from decisions. Qualitative research revealed that women's non-involvement in sanitation decision making is attributed to their low socio-economic status and inability to influence the household's financial decisions. Female heads lacked confidence to take decisions independently, and were dependent on their spouse or other male family members for most decisions. The study revealed the existence of power hierarchies and dynamics within households, which constrained female's participation in decision-making processes regarding sanitation. CONCLUSIONS:Though governments and implementers emphasize women's involvement in sanitation programmes, socio-cultural factors and community and household level dynamics often prevent women from participating in sanitation-related decisions. Measures are needed for strengthening sanitation policies and effective implementation of programmes to address gender power relations and familial relationships that influence latrine adoption and use.

Dataset Information

The Obstetrician's Role in Pregnant Women's Decision-Making Process Regarding Influenza and COVID-19 Vaccination.

Publications

The Obstetrician's Role in Pregnant Women's Decision-Making Process Regarding Influenza and COVID-19 Vaccination.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets