A pilot study on the effects of individually tailored education for MMR vaccine-hesitant parents on MMR vaccination intention.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gowda C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3859769 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A pilot study on the effects of individually tailored education for MMR vaccine-hesitant parents on MMR vaccination intention.
Gowda Charitha C Schaffer Sarah E SE Kopec Kristin K Markel Arielle A Dempsey Amanda F AF
Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics 20130104 2
Healthcare providers need strategies to better address the concerns of vaccine-hesitant parents. We studied whether individually tailored education was more effective than untailored education at improving vaccination intention among MMR vaccine-hesitant parents. In an intervention pilot study of parents (n = 77) of children < 6 y who screened as hesitant to vaccinate against MMR (first or second dose), parents were randomly assigned to receive either (1) educational web pages that were individu ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is an issue of global concern. The quality of communication between healthcare providers and parents can influence parental immunization acceptance. We aimed to describe immunization uptake following specialist immunization clinic (SIC) consultation for Australian children of VH parents as a cohort, and according to pre-clinic parental position on immunization. At a single tertiary pediatric SIC (RCH, Melbourne) a retrospective descriptive study classified VH families according to 3 proposed parental positions on immunization at initial clinic attendance. Immunization status at follow up was ascertained via the Australian Children's Immunization Register and National HPV Program Register and compared between groups. Of the VH cohort, 13/38 (34%) families were classified as hesitant, 21 (55%) as late/selective vaccinators and 4 (11%) as vaccine refusers. Mean follow up post-SIC attendance was 14.5 months. For the overall VH cohort, the majority chose selective immunization (42%) following SIC consultation. When analyzed by pre-clinic parental position on immunization, there was a trend for hesitant families to proceed with full immunization, selective families to continue selective immunization and refusing families to remain unimmunised (p < 0.0001). The most commonly omitted vaccines were hepatitis B (66%) and Haemophilus influenzae type B (55%), followed by the meningococcal C conjugate vaccine (53%) and measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (53%). Immunization outcome appears to correlate with pre-clinic parental position on immunization for the majority of families attending a SIC in Australia, with selective immunization the most common outcome. Tailored communication approaches based on parental position on immunization may optimise clinic resources and engagement of families, but require prospective research evaluation.
| S-EPMC5054782 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is concern over the increase in the number of "vaccine-hesitant" parents, which contributes to under-vaccinated populations and reduced herd immunity. Traditional studies investigating parental immunization beliefs and practices have relied on random digit dialing (RDD); however, this method presents increasing limitations. Facebook is the most used social media platform in Canada and presents an opportunity to recruit vaccine-hesitant parents in a novel manner.The study aimed to explore the use of Facebook as a tool to reach vaccine-hesitant parents, as compared with RDD methods.We recruited Canadian parents over 4 weeks in 2013-14 via targeted Facebook advertisements linked to a Web-based survey. We compared methodological parameters, key parental demographics, and three vaccine hesitancy indicators to an RDD sample of Canadian parents. Two raters categorized respondent reasons for difficulties in deciding to vaccinate, according to the model of determinants of vaccine hesitancy developed by the World Health Organization's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization.The Facebook campaign received a total of 4792 clicks from unique users, of whom 1696 started the Web-based survey. The total response rate of fully completed unique Web-based surveys was 22.89% (1097/4792) and the survey completion rate was 64.68% (1097/1696). The total cost including incentives was reasonable (Can $4861.19). The Web-based sample yielded younger parents, with 85.69% (940/1097) under the age of 40 years as compared with 23.38% (408/1745) in the RDD sample; 91.43% (1003/1097) of the Facebook respondents were female as compared with 59.26% (1034/1745) in the RDD sample. Facebook respondents had a lower median age of their youngest child (1 year vs 8 years for RDD). When compared with the RDD sample, the Web-based sample yielded a significantly higher proportion of respondents reporting vaccines as moderately safe to not safe (26.62% [292/1097] vs 18.57% [324/1745]), partially or not at all up-to-date vaccination status of youngest child (22.06% [242/1097] vs 9.57% [167/1745]), and difficulty in making the decision to vaccinate their youngest child (21.06% [231/1097] vs 10.09% [176/1745]). Out of the Web-based respondents who reported reasons for the difficulties in deciding to vaccinate, 37.2% (83/223) reported lack of knowledge or trust due to conflicting information and 23.8% (53/223) reported the perception of the risk of the adverse effects of vaccines being higher than the risk of disease acquisition.We successfully recruited a large sample of our target population at low cost and achieved a high survey completion rate using Facebook. When compared with the RDD sampling strategy, we reached more vaccine-hesitant parents and younger parents with younger children-a population more likely to be making decisions on childhood immunizations. Facebook is a promising economical modality for reaching vaccine-hesitant parents for studies on the determinants of vaccine uptake.
| S-EPMC5547248 | biostudies-other
Project description:Vaccine hesitancy is one of the main threats to global health, as became clear once more during the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccination campaigns could benefit from appeals to social norms to promote vaccination, but without awareness of the social norm in place any intervention relying on social norms may backfire. We present a two-step approach of social norm diagnosis and intervention that identifies both whether a vaccination norm exists or develops over time and corrects misperceptions. In two studies (N=887 and N=412) conducted in Rome, Italy from June to August 2021 (during the first COVID-19 vaccination campaign), we show that vaccine-hesitant people strongly underestimated vaccine acceptance rates for COVID-19 despite increases in region-wide vaccination rates. This suggests a false consensus bias on the social norm of vaccination. We presented a subgroup of vaccine-hesitant people with the accurate vaccine acceptance rates (both planned uptake and vaccine approval) and tested if this social information would lower their vaccine hesitancy. We do not find clear effects, most likely because of the introduction of the COVID-19 health certificate (the "green pass") that was implemented during our data collection. The green pass reduced both misperceptions in the social norm and vaccine hesitancy, thus undermining our treatment effect. We conclude that to alleviate misperceptions on the social norm of vaccination in early stages of the vaccination campaign governments and media should report not just the current vaccination rate, but also about vaccination intentions and approval.
| S-EPMC10165803 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundParents use alternative protective methods instead of having their children vaccinated because of their various concerns.AimsThe aim of this study is to examine the processes by which the parents preferred alternative methods rather than the vaccines to strengthen their child's immune system.MethodsSemi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 22 parents who had vaccine hesitancy. The study sample consisted of parents whose children were between the ages of 0 and 18 years and who experienced vaccine hesitancy and lived in Turkey. The interviews with individuals were conducted online and aimed to be representative of the population of Turkey.ResultsThe factors that caused parental vaccine hesitancy were various, such as vaccine contents, distrust of healthcare workers and false information about vaccines. Because of these factors, parents resorted to natural nutrition, vitamin support and some other precautions, such as avoiding takeaway food or preparing homemade food, rather than having their children vaccinated.ConclusionsIn recent years, it is thought that parents need education about vaccination; outbreaks may be caused by immigrant children who cannot be registered, and therefore cannot be vaccinated, in Turkey, which has received immigration at a high rate.
| S-EPMC8899307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccination is a major factor in stagnating uptake rates and in the risk of health care systems becoming overwhelmed.ObjectiveTo compare an interactive risk ratio simulation (intervention) with a conventional text-based risk information format (control) and analyze change in participants' COVID-19 vaccination intention and benefit-to-harm assessment.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional study conducted online with 1255 COVID-19 vaccine-hesitant adult residents of Germany in April and May 2022, surveyed using a probability-based internet panel maintained by respondi, a research and analytics firm. Participants were randomized to 1 of 2 presentations on the benefits and adverse events associated with vaccination.ExposureParticipants were randomized to a text-based description vs an interactive simulation presenting age-adjusted absolute risks of infection, hospitalization, ICU admission, and death after exposure to coronavirus in vaccinated vs unvaccinated individuals relative to the possible adverse effects as well as additional (population-level) benefits of COVID-19 vaccination.Main outcomes and measuresAbsolute change in respondents' COVID-19 vaccination intention category and benefit-to-harm assessment category.ResultsParticipants were 1255 COVID-19 vaccine-hesitant residents of Germany (660 women [52.6%]; mean [SD] age, 43.6 [13.5] years). A total of 651 participants received a text-based description, and 604 participants received an interactive simulation. Relative to the text-based format, the simulation was associated with greater likelihood of positive change in vaccination intentions (19.5% vs 15.3%, respectively; absolute difference, 4.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.07-1.96; P = .01) and benefit-to-harm assessments (32.6% vs 18.0%; absolute difference, 14.6%; aOR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.64-2.80; P < .001). Both formats were also associated with some negative change. However, the net advantage (positive - negative change) of the interactive simulation over the text-based format was 5.3 percentage points for vaccination intention (9.8% vs 4.5%) and 18.3 percentage points for benefit-to-harm assessment (25.3% vs 7.0%). Positive change in vaccination intention (but not in benefit-to-harm assessment) was associated with some demographic characteristics and attitudes to COVID-19 vaccination; negative changes were not.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, vaccine-hesitant adults presented with an interactive risk ratio simulation were more likely to show positive change in COVID-19 vaccination intention and benefit-to-harm assessment than those presented with a conventional text-based information format. These findings suggest that the interactive risk communication format can be an important tool in addressing vaccination hesitancy and fostering public trust.
| S-EPMC9936332 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Parental vaccine hesitancy is a growing concern. Less is known about provider or practice characteristics that encounter HPV-specific vaccine-hesitant parents, the providers' confidence in responding to HPV vaccine concerns, and the attitudes and use of vaccine dismissal policies (i.e., removing patients from the practice). North Texas providers completed an online survey. Dependent variables assessed: (1) percentage of HPV vaccine-hesitant parents encountered in practice defined as substantive, or high (≥11%, or among more than one out of ten adolescent patient encounters) versus low (≤10%) levels; (2) confidence in responding to 11 HPV vaccine concerns; (3) attitudes and use of vaccine dismissal policies. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were conducted. Among 156 providers, 29% reported high HPV vaccine hesitancy (≥11% of patient population). Overall, providers reported being "very confident" in addressing vaccine concerns (mean: 3.37 out of 4, SD: 0.57). Mean confidence scores were significantly higher for white (vs. non-white) providers and for pediatricians (vs. family practitioners). Providers were least confident in responding to parents' religious/personal beliefs (69%). Some providers (25%) agreed with policies that dismissed vaccine-hesitant parents after repeated counseling attempts. More providers used dismissal policies for childhood (19%) than adolescent (10%) immunizations. Provider communication training should include parental religious/personal beliefs to effectively address HPV vaccine hesitancy. Other regions should examine their HPV-specific vaccine hesitancy levels to understand how the use of dismissal policies might vary between adolescent and childhood immunizations.
| S-EPMC8683895 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe decision about vaccinating children is subject to their parents' decision. To inform strategies that support full vaccination coverage, it is important to understand the parents' vaccination attitude and tendency to act. This study aims to investigate the intention and the factors affecting parents' decision-making about vaccinating their children.MethodsA cross-sectional, self-administered online questionnaire was completed by parents of children aged 3-12 yeas in Macao between 7 March and 17 April 2022. The survey tool was informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) which composes of the variable "intention" and three TPB constructs (Attitude, Subjective Norm, and Perceived Behavioral Control). Respondents rated their level of agreement on the construct statements using a 5-point Likert scale. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine if the TPB constructs were predictors of parents' intention.ResultsA total of 1,217 parents completed the questionnaire. The majority of participants were mothers (83.2%), aged 31-40 years (62.7%), having two or more children (74.1%), had at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine (84.4%) and considered themselves knowledgeable about the vaccine (62.1%), all of which were significantly associated with the intention to vaccinate their children (all p < 0.05). Their intention varied from negative (19.1%), neutral (38.4%) to positive (42.5%). Respondents were mostly concerned about the serious side effects that the COVID-19 vaccine (mean = 3.96 ± 1.23), highly acknowledged the expectation by the school (mean = 3.94 ± 1.15) and the community (mean = 3.90 ± 1.19) of children vaccination, and rated highly the ease of making necessary arrangement (mean = 3.93 ± 1.25). In the multiple linear regression model which explained 63.5% of the variance in the intention-to-vaccinate their children, only Attitude (B = 0.52, p < 0.001) and Subjective Norm (B = 0.39, p < 0.001) were identified as strong predictors. The major reasons for not having intention were safety concerns (n = 646/699, 92.4%). Participants' most trusted local information sources were doctors (n = 682), government (n = 426) and healthcare professional organizations (n = 416).ConclusionsVaccinating children with COVID-19 vaccine is a complex decision-making for parents. A key to a successful COVID-19 vaccination program is effective communication about the safety profile and the usage experiences warranting the integration of reliable information sources across different healthcare sectors.
| S-EPMC9575691 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesResearch has shown that physicians are encountering an increase in vaccine-hesitant parents (VHPs) numbers. This study examined physicians' vaccination knowledge, vaccine-related discussions with VHPs, beliefs about and responses to vaccine hesitancy, and challenges faced while discussing immunization with VHPs.MethodsThis cross-sectional, descriptive study was performed at King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in September 2020. The data were collected through a questionnaire distributed via email. The sample comprised 90 physicians who routinely treat children and reported they frequently have appropriate vaccine discussions when encountering VHPs.ResultsNinety participants (59% were females) completed the questionnaire. Of these, 37.8% were from family medicine, 7.8% from primary care, and 54.4% from paediatrics. The most discussed topics were vaccine necessity, reasons for vaccine refusal, and vaccine safety. Seventeen participants (18.8%) reported being extremely confident, and (42.2%) were confident in their vaccine-specific knowledge. Regarding confidence in communication skills, 22.2% reported being extremely confident and (45.6%) were confident. Determinants of higher confidence in the knowledge and communication skills were physician age (p = 0.001 and p = 0.0001, respectively), years of practice (p = 0.002 and (p = 0.005), and patients seen per workday (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.024). Other factors such as physician sex (p = 0.062), the field of practice (p = 0.329), and hours of work per week (p = 0.061) were not significantly different. Forty-six (51%) physicians sometimes find it challenging to conduct appropriate vaccine-related discussions because of having too many other issues to discuss during the consultation. Furthermore, 53 (59%) participants agreed/strongly agreed that parental refusal to vaccinate would raise suspicions of negligence. On the other hand, 59 (65%) disagreed/strongly disagreed that parental refusal of vaccines is a parental right. Participants expressed the need to refer VHPs to a specialised advisory clinic with excellent experience and negotiation skills to overcome the challenges.ConclusionVaccine safety and necessity are the topics of most concern to VHPs, and a knowledgeable physician with competent communication skills is critical in responding to such situations. This study highlights the most reported barriers to successful vaccine-related discussions. It raises underlying ethical principles such as parental autonomy and the need to train physicians in VHPs. To train physians for succucful vaccine counceling of VHPs.
| S-EPMC10478439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:Emphasizing societal benefits of vaccines has been linked to increased vaccination intentions in adults. It is unclear if this pattern holds for parents deciding whether to vaccinate their children. The objective was to determine whether emphasizing the benefits of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination directly to the vaccine recipient or to society differentially impacts parents' vaccine intentions for their infants. METHODS:In a national online survey, parents (N = 802) of infants <12 months old were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 4 MMR vaccine messages: (1) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vaccine Information Statement (VIS), (2) VIS and information emphasizing the MMR vaccine's benefits to the child, (3) VIS and information emphasizing societal benefits, or (4) VIS and information emphasizing benefits both to the child and society. Parents reported their likelihood of vaccinating their infants for MMR on a response scale of 0 (extremely unlikely) to 100 (extremely likely). RESULTS:Compared with the VIS-only group (mean intention = 86.3), parents reported increased vaccine intentions for their infants when receiving additional information emphasizing the MMR vaccine's benefits either directly to the child (mean intention = 91.6, P = .01) or to both the child and society (mean intention = 90.8, P = .03). Emphasizing the MMR vaccine's benefits only to society did not increase intentions (mean intention = 86.4, P = .97). CONCLUSIONS:We did not see increases in parents' MMR vaccine intentions for their infants when societal benefits were emphasized without mention of benefits directly to the child. This finding suggests that providers should emphasize benefits directly to the child. Mentioning societal benefits seems to neither add value to, nor interfere with, information highlighting benefits directly to the child.
| S-EPMC4143998 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTobacco use remains prevalent among Veterans of military service and those residing in rural areas. Smokers frequently experience tobacco-related issues including risky alcohol use, post-cessation weight gain, and depressive symptoms that may adversely impact their likelihood of quitting and maintaining abstinence. Telephone-based interventions that simultaneously address these issues may help to increase treatment access and improve outcomes.MethodsThis study was a two-group randomized controlled pilot trial. Participants were randomly assigned to an individually-tailored telephone tobacco intervention combining counseling for tobacco use and related issues including depressive symptoms, risky alcohol use, and weight concerns or to treatment provided through their state tobacco quitline. Selection of pharmacotherapy was based on medical history and a shared decision interview in both groups. Participants included 63 rural Veteran smokers (mean age = 56.8 years; 87 % male; mean number of cigarettes/day = 24.7). The primary outcome was self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 12 weeks and 6 months.ResultsTwelve-week quit rates based on an intention-to-treat analysis did not differ significantly by group (Tailored = 39 %; Quitline Referral = 25 %; odds ratio [OR]; 95 % confidence interval [CI] = 1.90; 0.56, 5.57). Six-month quit rates for the Tailored and Quitline Referral conditions were 29 and 28 %, respectively (OR; 95 % CI = 1.05; 0.35, 3.12). Satisfaction with the Tailored tobacco intervention was high.ConclusionsTelephone-based treatment that concomitantly addresses other health-related factors that may adversely affect quitting appears to be a promising strategy. Larger studies are needed to determine whether this approach improves cessation outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier number NCT01592695 registered 11 April 2012.
| S-EPMC4989380 | biostudies-literature