Dataset Information

A qualitative systematic review of factors influencing parents' vaccination decision-making in the United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT:

Background

High uptake of vaccinations is crucial for disease prevention. Although overall uptake of childhood immunisations is high in the United Kingdom (UK), pockets of lower uptake remain. Novel systematic methods have not been employed when reviewing the qualitative literature examining parents' vaccination decisions.

Aims

We aimed to conduct a qualitative systematic review of studies in the UK to understand factors influencing parental decisions to vaccinate a child.

Methods

On 12/2/14 we searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, CINAHL plus, Embase, Social Policy and Practice and Web of Science for studies using qualitative methods and reporting reasons why parents in the UK had or had not immunised their child. Participant quotes and authors' interpretations of qualitative data were extracted from the results of articles. Thematic synthesis was used to develop higher-order themes (conducted in 2015).

Results

34 papers were included. Two types of decision-making had been adopted: non-deliberative and deliberative. With non-deliberative decisions parents felt they had no choice, were happy to comply and/or relied on social norms. Deliberative decisions involved weighing up the risks and benefits, considering others' advice/experiences and social judgement. Emotions affected deliberative decision-making. Trust in information and vaccine stakeholders was integral to all decision-making. Practical issues affected those who intended to vaccinate.

Conclusions

Parents adopted two different approaches to decision-making about childhood vaccinations. By understanding more about the mechanisms underpinning parents' vaccination behaviour, in collaboration with vaccine stakeholders, we can better design interventions to enhance informed uptake.

SUBMITTER: Forster AS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5165048 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines recommend early oral feeding with nutritionally adequate diets after surgery. However, studies have demonstrated variations in practice and poor adherence to these recommendations among patients who have undergone colorectal surgery. Given doctors are responsible for prescribing patients' diets after surgery, this study explored factors which influenced medical staffs' decision-making regarding postoperative nutrition prescription to identify potential behaviour change interventions. METHODS:This qualitative study involved one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with medical staff involved in prescribing nutrition for patients following colorectal surgery across two tertiary teaching hospitals. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants with varying years of clinical experience. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) underpinned the development of a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were audio recorded, with data transcribed verbatim before being thematically analysed. Emergent themes and sub-themes were discussed by all investigators to ensure consensus of interpretation. RESULTS:Twenty-one medical staff were interviewed, including nine consultants, three fellows, four surgical trainees and five junior medical doctors. Three overarching themes emerged from the data: (i) Prescription preferences are influenced by perceptions, experience and training; (ii) Modifying prescription practices to align with patient-related factors; and (iii) Peers influence prescription behaviours and attitudes towards nutrition. CONCLUSIONS:Individual beliefs, patient-related factors and the social influence of peers (particularly seniors) appeared to strongly influence medical staffs' decision-making regarding postoperative nutrition prescription. As such, a multi-faceted approach to behaviour change is required to target individual and organisational barriers to enacting evidence-based feeding recommendations.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2016 the UK Department of Health and Social Care published the results of a comprehensive review of efficiency in hospitals, identifying "unwarranted variation" in procurement (or purchasing) practices for materials, supplies and devices. Addressing this variation in materials and supplies procurement practice has been identified as particularly important for creating efficiencies in health service delivery. However, little is known about the behaviour and experiences of front-line individuals who make these procurement decisions, which has implications for the development of strategies to improve efficiency. The objective of this study is to improve understanding of the factors influencing procurement behaviour and decisions among requisitioners who use an internal electronic procurement portal for medical supplies and equipment, and identify areas where efficiency could be improved.MethodsQualitative semi-structured individual interview study, following approximately 70 h of exploratory observations on site. The study context was a large London National Health Service (NHS) healthcare provider (the Trust), where we focussed primarily on purchases managed by a large hospital. Participants were drawn from requisitioners from multiple directorates across the Trust (n = 15; of these n = 2 clinical staff members, n = 13 non-clinical).ResultsFour factors stood out in our analysis as directly affecting procurement decisions: (1) a high level of variation in electronic purchasing and inventory management procedures throughout the Trust, (ii) an inaccurate and cumbersome search facility on the internal electronic procurement platform, exacerbated by poor IT skills training and support (iii) an inefficient purchase approvals system and (iv) multiple working sites and cluttered environments. We observed that these factors led requisitioners to employ a variety of strategies or so-called 'workarounds' to overcome the challenges they encountered, including stockpiling, relying on internal and supplier relationships, by-passing procedures to save time, purchasing outside existing agreements to save cost, and (re) delegating purchasing responsibilities among requisitioner staff - which both addressed and created difficulties.ConclusionsWorking with the assumption that staff 'workarounds' indicate where main issues lie, we offer four possible explanations to why they occur: (a) to maintain services and prepare for future care requirements, (b) to save on costs for the organisation, (c) to develop skills and development in purchasing and (d) to break silos and work collaboratively. These four explanations help provide initial starting points for improving efficiencies in health supplies' procurement processes.

Project description:BackgroundWater immersion during labour can provide benefits including reduced need for regional analgesia and a shorter labour. However, in the United Kingdom a minority of women use a pool for labour or birth, with pool use particularly uncommon in obstetric-led settings. Maternity unit culture has been identified as an important influence on pool use, but this and other possible factors have not been explored in-depth. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify factors influencing pool use through qualitative case studies of three obstetric units and three midwifery units in the UK.MethodsCase study units with a range of waterbirth rates and representing geographically diverse locations were selected. Data collection methods comprised semi-structured interviews, collation of service documentation and public-facing information, and observations of the unit environment. There were 111 interview participants, purposively sampled to include midwives, postnatal women, obstetricians, neonatologists, midwifery support workers and doulas. A framework approach was used to analyse all case study data.ResultsObstetric unit culture was a key factor restricting pool use. We found substantial differences between obstetric and midwifery units in terms of equipment and resources, staff attitudes and confidence, senior staff support and women's awareness of water immersion. Generic factors influencing use of pools across all units included limited access to waterbirth training, sociodemographic differences in desire for pool use and issues using waterproof fetal monitoring equipment.ConclusionsCase study findings provide new insights into the influence of maternity unit culture on waterbirth rates. Access to pool use could be improved through midwives based in obstetric units having more experience of waterbirth, providing obstetricians and neonatologists with information on the practicalities of pool use and improving accessibility of antenatal information. In terms of resources, recommendations include increasing pool provision, ensuring birth room allocation maximises the use of unit resources, and providing pool room environments that are acceptable to midwives.

Project description:BackgroundCaesarean section rates are increasing worldwide and are a growing concern with limited explanation of the factors that influence the rising trend. Understanding obstetricians' and midwives' views can give insight to the problem. This systematic review aimed to offer insight and understanding, through aggregation, summary, synthesis and interpretation of findings from studies that report obstetricians' and midwives' views on the factors that influence the decision to perform caesarean section.MethodsThe electronic databases of PubMed (1958-2016), CINAHL (1988-2016), Maternity and Infant Care (1971-2016), PsycINFO (1980-2016) and Web of Science (1991-2016) were searched in September 2016. All quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies, published in English, whose aim was to explore obstetricians' and/or midwives' views of factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section were included. Papers were independently reviewed by two authors for selection by title, abstract and full text. Thomas et al's 12 assessment criteria checklist (2003) was used to assess methodological quality of the included studies.ResultThe review included 34 studies: 19 quantitative, 14 qualitative, and one using mixed methods, involving 7785 obstetricians and 1197 midwives from 20 countries. Three main themes, each with several subthemes, emerged. Theme 1: "clinicians' personal beliefs"-('Professional philosophies'; 'beliefs in relation to women's request for CS'; 'ambiguous versus clear clinical reasons'); Theme 2: "health care systems"-('litigation'; 'resources'; 'private versus public/insurance/payments'; 'guidelines and management policy'). Theme 3: "clinicians' characteristics" ('personal convenience'; 'clinicians' demographics'; 'confidence and skills').ConclusionThis systematic review and metasynthesis identified clinicians' personal beliefs as a major factor that influenced the decision to perform caesarean section, further contributed by the influence of factors related to the health care system and clinicians' characteristics. Obstetricians and midwives are directly involved in the decision to perform a caesarean section, hence their perspectives are vital in understanding various factors that have influence on decision-making for caesarean section. These results can help clinicians identify and acknowledge their role as crucial members in the decision-making process for caesarean section within their organisation, and to develop intervention studies to reduce caesarean section rates in future.

Project description:IntroductionEnhancing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake rates to protect women's health is an important public health issue worldwide. China has taken a series of measures in recent years to promote HPV vaccination among school-aged girls, but the vaccine uptake rate remains low. Investigating the factors influencing vaccination-related decision-making of adolescent girls' parents is key to solving the problem. This study aimed to examine the influence of sociocultural-psychological predictors, including exposure to HPV-related stories (positive/negative), affective reactions (pride/regret), injunctive norms on the Internet and perceived moral obligation, on parents' HPV vaccination-related decision-making for girls aged 13-15 years in mainland China.MethodsA cross-sectional online survey using quota sampling was conducted in February 2022. Four hundred and five valid and qualified questionnaires were obtained. Partial least squares structural equation modeling was performed by SmartPLS 3 (i) to evaluate the reliability and validity of the measurement models of 11 constructs, and (ii) to test the effect relationships of the sociocultural-psychological predictors on parents' intention to vaccinate their daughters.ResultsThe study findings showed that parental decision-making regarding HPV vaccination was influenced by sociocultural and psychological factors. At the level of individual psychological factors, exposure to positive stories was significantly associated with perceived vaccine effectiveness (β = 0.331, t = 8.448, p < 0.001), which strongly predicted the attitude toward vaccination (β = 0.521, t = 8.133, p < 0.001); anticipated pride had more positive influence on vaccination-related decision-making (β = 0.156, t = 2.176, p < 0.05) than anticipated regret. In terms of social influence, injunctive norms on the Internet had a significantly positive influence on vaccination intention (β = 0.127, t = 2.382, p < 0.05), similar to descriptive norms (β = 0.135, t = 3.358, p < 0.01). Perceived moral obligation at the cultural level was the strongest predictor of parental decision-making regarding HPV vaccination (β = 0.193, t = 2.139, p < 0.05).DiscussionThis study is the first in mainland China to systematically examine the sociocultural-psychological predictors of parents' decision-making to vaccinate their 13-15-year-old daughters against HPV. A new extended TPB model with a sociocultural-psychological approach was developed. This model can support the investigation of factors affecting HPV vaccine uptake rates in the mainland Chinese population and similar populations and help to understand the differences in vaccination-related decision-making between Eastern and Western cultures. Furthermore, the study provided some suggestions for HPV vaccination communication campaigns targeting adolescent girls' parents.

Project description:Clinicians’ perspectives of the reasons for performing caesarean section (CS) are fundamental to deepening knowledge and understanding of factors influencing decision-making for CS. The aim of this study was to explore midwives’ and obstetricians’ views of factors influencing decision-making for CS for first-time mothers. A qualitative descriptive study with semi-structured one-to-one audio-recorded interviews was used to gather data from clinicians (15 midwives and 20 senior obstetricians). Following research ethics committee approval, clinicians, who were directly involved in the decision-making process for CS during the period of data collection, were purposively selected from three maternity units in the Republic of Ireland between June 2016 to July 2017. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Three interrelated themes with several subthemes reflective of clinicians’ views and experiences emerged following data analysis. These were: ‘A fear factor’ describing clinicians’ fear of adverse outcomes and subsequent litigation, ‘Personal preferences versus a threshold–clinician driven factors emphasising the influence of clinicians’ personal beliefs, and ‘Standardised versus individualised care–a system perspective’ explaining the effects of, or lack of, organisational policy and its direct and indirect impact on the decision-making process. Findings show that decisions to perform a CS are, on occasion, based on clinicians’ personal beliefs and interpretation, similar to findings from other published literature. Consideration of broader issues related to organisational, socio-cultural and political context is essential when seeking solutions to the rising CS rates. The findings will enable clinicians to reflect on their day-to-day practice, in order to look for modifiable factors that influence their decision-making, and help women understand the multitude of factors that can lead to a decision to perform a CS. Findings will also contribute to the development of the ‘next step action’ and assist in devising future intervention studies to reduce any unnecessary CSs.

Project description:BackgroundBreastfeeding is recognized as the gold standard of infant feeding and nutrition. The World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) of infants for the first 6 months of life. A variety of factors may impact breastfeeding practices in-hospital which may continue after hospital discharge, such as the use of breastmilk substitutes (BMS). The Baby-Friendly Initiative (BFI), which aims to promote and support breastfeeding practices, established a target rate of 75% for EBF from birth to hospital discharge. Currently, this target is not being met at The Ottawa Hospital (TOH), indicating there is room for improvement in EBF rates. The purpose of this study is to explore health care professionals (HCP) decision-making around use of BMS and identify factors that drive the use of BMS with and without medical indications.MethodsIn this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with HCPs within TOH from January to June 2022. All participants had experience in maternity or postpartum care and were probed on factors influencing use of BMS at this institution. Interview transcripts were coded using an inductive approach.ResultsA total of 18 HCPs were interviewed including physicians, midwives, lactation consultants, and registered nurses. Multilevel barriers influencing the use of BMS were categorized into patient, HCP, and institution-level factors. Subthemes that emerged ranged from parental preferences, training differences amongst HCPs, to budget and staffing issues. Over half of HCPs were prepared to answer questions on EBF and were familiar with the BFI. Although most were supportive of this institution receiving BFI designation, a few providers raised concerns of its impact on parents who would like to supplement.ConclusionsSeveral modifiable factors influencing decision-making for use of BMS were identified. These findings will be used to inform unit leads, help identify effective strategies to address modifiable barriers, and develop tailored breastfeeding supports to improve EBF rates.

Project description:BackgroundDigital health devices, such as health and well-being smartphone apps, could offer an accessible and cost-effective way to deliver health and well-being interventions. A key component of the effectiveness of health and well-being apps is user engagement. However, engagement with health and well-being apps is typically poor. Previous studies have identified a list of factors that could influence engagement; however, most of these studies were conducted on a particular population or for an app targeting a particular behavior. An understanding of the factors that influence engagement with a wide range of health and well-being apps can inform the design and the development of more engaging apps in general.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to explore user experiences of and reasons for engaging and not engaging with a wide range of health and well-being apps.MethodsA sample of adults in the United Kingdom (N=17) interested in using a health or well-being app participated in a semistructured interview to explore experiences of engaging and not engaging with these apps. Participants were recruited via social media platforms. Data were analyzed with the framework approach, informed by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model and the Theoretical Domains Framework, which are 2 widely used frameworks that incorporate a comprehensive set of behavioral influences.ResultsFactors that influence the capability of participants included available user guidance, statistical and health information, reduced cognitive load, well-designed reminders, self-monitoring features, features that help establish a routine, features that offer a safety net, and stepping-stone app characteristics. Tailoring, peer support, and embedded professional support were identified as important factors that enhance user opportunities for engagement with health and well-being apps. Feedback, rewards, encouragement, goal setting, action planning, self-confidence, and commitment were judged to be the motivation factors that affect engagement with health and well-being apps.ConclusionsMultiple factors were identified across all components of the COM-B model that may be valuable for the development of more engaging health and well-being apps. Engagement appears to be influenced primarily by features that provide user guidance, promote minimal cognitive load, support self-monitoring (capability), provide embedded social support (opportunity), and provide goal setting with action planning (motivation). This research provides recommendations for policy makers, industry, health care providers, and app developers for increasing effective engagement.

Project description:BackgroundShared decision-making, a communicative process to reach decisions based on informed preferences, evidence, and co-created goals, improves care satisfaction and patients' quality of life. However, shared decision-making has not been widely implemented in long-term care facilities, and few studies have examined how to promote the shared decision-making practice. This study aimed to identify the influencing factors of shared decision-making based on the Person-centered Practice Framework in long-term care facilities.MethodsA total of 300 staff (nursing staff, social workers, and personal care workers) in 13 Korean long-term care facilities participated in this study. Data from 280 respondents were finally analyzed, excluding respondents with missing values. Data were collected using structured questionnaires that included items on shared decision-making, personal factors (e.g., knowledge about dementia, person-centered care education, person-centered attitude, communication behavior, and job tenure), and care environment factors (e.g., person-centered climate, staffing level, effective staff relationships, supportive supervisors, and power-sharing). Multilevel linear regression analyses were performed using Mplus Version 8.8.ResultsThe mean shared decision-making score was 35.78 (range 8-45). Staff with experience of person-centered care education (β = 0.198, p = 0.034), a higher person-centered attitude score (β = 0.201, p = 0.007), and a higher communication behavior score (β = 0.242, p < 0.001) were more likely to report a higher shared decision-making score. In addition, staff who viewed their care environment as more person-centered were more likely to report a higher shared decision-making score (β = 0.416, p < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study highlights that personal (e.g., person-centered care education, person-centered attitude, and communication behavior) and care environment (e.g., person-centered climate) factors could influence shared decision-making for long-term care residents. These findings could be foundational evidence for facilitating shared decision-making practice in long-term care settings.