Trust and a school-located immunization program

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Sana'a, Yemen

Background and Aim: The development of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine is ongoing. This study aimed to prepare for public acceptance of the vaccine. There is a need to identify the current acceptance and potential barriers to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine in Yemen. Understanding the hesitancy and acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine are crucial to develop local evidence-based interventions. Materials and Methods: Twenty students were interviewed in this study. An interview guide was developed and it addressed the willingness to accept a future COVID-19 vaccine. In-depth interviews were conducted, transcribed, and manually analyzed. Results: The majority of participants agreed that they would take a COVID-19 vaccine for several reasons, including protection for themselves, their families, and others and to stop the spread of COVID-19, for which the vaccine is important, as in other routine vaccinations. However, some participants shared that they would not take the COVID-19 vaccine due to the following reasons: Concerns regarding the safety of the vaccine; feeling fit and healthy, and thus considering themselves to have strong immunity; feeling that the vaccine was manufactured in a rushed manner and thus it would require approval by the World Health Organization; being previously infected with COVID-19 and considering themselves protected, and placing their trust in God and believing no vaccine was needed. Conclusion: The willingness to receive a future COVID-19 vaccine was high among medical students. However, some students hesitated to take the vaccine. Therefore, mass media interventions are required to maximize vaccine uptake.

Parental Trust in School-Based Health Care: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Health care delivery in schools is a frequently adopted approach to reduce health care inequalities. Lack of parental trust has been identified as impacting participation in school-based health care programs (SBHPs). The aim of our systematic review is to outline themes related to parental trust in SBHPs.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINHAL, ERIC, PsycInfo, and Web of Science for articles published between 1969 and 2019. Eligible studies (1) were peer-reviewed primary research articles; (2) were school-based health interventions or screening programs; (3) included parental trust data; and (4) were carried out on schoolchildren from pre-K to grade 12. Study location, data collection date, number of participants, demographics, intervention type, study aim and methodology, and all trust themes mentioned, were extracted. Studies were critically appraised using the CASP checklist for qualitative research.

RESULTS

We identified 9 themes related to parental trust in SBHPs: (1) safety; (2) effectiveness; (3) health professionals' training and credentials; (4) communication; (5) confidentiality; (6) providers; (7) government, authorities, and health service; (8) the pharmaceutical industry; and (9) research and data sharing.

CONCLUSIONS

The themes identified provide a framework for examining trust in SBHPs, and may guide the development of interventions to increase trust and engagement in SBHPs.

Improving vaccination uptake among adolescents

BACKGROUND

Adolescent vaccination has received increased attention since the Global Vaccine Action Plan's call to extend the benefits of immunisation more equitably beyond childhood. In recent years, many programmes have been launched to increase the uptake of different vaccines in adolescent populations; however, vaccination coverage among adolescents remains suboptimal. Therefore, understanding and evaluating the various interventions that can be used to improve adolescent vaccination is crucial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of interventions to improve vaccine uptake among adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

In October 2018, we searched the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, and eight other databases. In addition, we searched two clinical trials platforms, electronic databases of grey literature, and reference lists of relevant articles. For related systematic reviews, we searched four databases. Furthermore, in May 2019, we performed a citation search of five other websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series studies of adolescents (girls or boys aged 10 to 19 years) eligible for World Health Organization-recommended vaccines and their parents or healthcare providers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened records, reviewed full-text articles to identify potentially eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, resolving discrepancies by consensus. For each included study, we calculated risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) where appropriate. We pooled study results using random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies (eight individually randomised trials, four cluster randomised trials, three non-randomised trials, and one controlled before-after study). Twelve studies were conducted in the USA, while there was one study each from: Australia, Sweden, Tanzania, and the UK. Ten studies had unclear or high risk of bias. We categorised interventions as recipient-oriented, provider-oriented, or health systems-oriented. The interventions targeted adolescent boys or girls or both (seven studies), parents (four studies), and providers (two studies). Five studies had mixed participants that included adolescents and parents, adolescents and healthcare providers, and parents and healthcare providers. The outcomes included uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) (11 studies); hepatitis B (three studies); and tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (Tdap), meningococcal, HPV, and influenza (three studies) vaccines among adolescents. Health education improves HPV vaccine uptake compared to usual practice (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.76; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 1054 participants; high-certainty evidence). In addition, one large study provided evidence that a complex multi-component health education intervention probably results in little to no difference in hepatitis B vaccine uptake compared to simplified information leaflets on the vaccine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97 to 0.99; 17,411 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Financial incentives may improve HPV vaccine uptake compared to usual practice (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.99; 1 study, 500 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, we are uncertain whether combining health education and financial incentives has an effect on hepatitis B vaccine uptake, compared to usual practice (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.00; 1 study, 104 participants; very low certainty evidence). Mandatory vaccination probably leads to a large increase in hepatitis B vaccine uptake compared to usual practice (RR 3.92, 95% CI 3.65 to 4.20; 1 study, 6462 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Provider prompts probably make little or no difference compared to usual practice, on completion of Tdap (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.80; 2 studies, 3296 participants), meningococcal (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.79; 2 studies, 3219 participants), HPV (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.81; 2 studies, 859 participants), and influenza (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.34; 2 studies, 1439 participants) vaccination schedules (moderate-certainty evidence). Provider education with performance feedback may increase the proportion of adolescents who are offered and accept HPV vaccination by clinicians, compared to usual practice. Compared to adolescents visiting non-participating clinicians (in the usual practice group), the adolescents visiting clinicians in the intervention group were more likely to receive the first dose of HPV during preventive visits (5.7 percentage points increase) and during acute visits (0.7 percentage points for the first and 5.6 percentage points for the second doses of HPV) (227 clinicians and more than 200,000 children; low-certainty evidence). A class-based school vaccination strategy probably leads to slightly higher HPV vaccine uptake than an age-based school vaccination strategy (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.13; 1 study, 5537 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A multi-component provider intervention (including an education session, repeated contacts, individualised feedback, and incentives) probably improves uptake of HPV vaccine compared to usual practice (moderate-certainty evidence). A multi-component intervention targeting providers and parents involving social marketing and health education may improve HPV vaccine uptake compared to usual practice (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.59; 1 study, 25,869 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Various strategies have been evaluated to improve adolescent vaccination including health education, financial incentives, mandatory vaccination, and class-based school vaccine delivery. However, most of the evidence is of low to moderate certainty. This implies that while this research provides some indication of the likely effect of these interventions, the likelihood that the effects will be substantially different is high. Therefore, additional research is needed to further enhance adolescent immunisation strategies, especially in low- and middle-income countries where there are limited adolescent vaccination programmes. In addition, it is critical to understand the factors that influence hesitancy, acceptance, and demand for adolescent vaccination in different settings. This is the topic of an ongoing Cochrane qualitative evidence synthesis, which may help to explain why and how some interventions were more effective than others in increasing adolescent HPV vaccination coverage.

School-Located Influenza Vaccination: Do Vaccine Clinics at School Raise Vaccination Rates?

BACKGROUND

Only half of US schoolchildren receive influenza vaccine. School-located influenza vaccination (SLIV) might raise vaccination rates but conducting flu vaccine clinics at schools is challenging to implement. We compared 2 school-based programs designed to raise influenza vaccination rates: parent reminder/educational messages sent to parents from schools which is a low-intensity intervention vs the combination of reminder/educational messages plus SLIV clinics which is a high-intensity intervention.

METHODS

We assigned 36 schools (6 school districts, 2 per group) to 3 groups: (1) control, ie, no SLIV and no parent reminder/education, (2) parent reminder/education emailed by schools, and (3) parent reminder/education plus SLIV clinics. Some schools had SLIV clinics in prior years. Health department nurses conducted SLIV clinics.

RESULTS

Among 24,832 children at 36 schools, vaccination rates were control (51.3%), parent reminder/education-only (41.2%), and reminder/education + SLIV (58.7%). On multivariate analyses which controlled for vaccination in prior seasons, children in reminder/education + SLIV schools had higher vaccination rates (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.10-1.47), but children in reminder/education-only schools had lower rates (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-1.00) than children in control schools.

CONCLUSIONS

Parent reminder/education combined with SLIV clinics raise vaccination rates, but parent reminder/education alone does not.

Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review

Vaccine acceptance depends on public trust and confidence in the safety and efficacy of vaccines and immunization, the health system, healthcare professionals and the wider vaccine research community. This systematic review analyses the current breadth and depth of vaccine research literature that explicitly refers to the concept of trust within their stated aims or research questions. After duplicates were removed, 19,643 articles were screened by title and abstract. Of these 2,779 were screened by full text, 35 of which were included in the final analysis. These studies examined a range of trust relationships as they pertain to vaccination, including trust in healthcare professionals, the health system, the government, and friends and family members. Three studies examined generalized trust. Findings indicated that trust is often referred to implicitly (19/35), rather than explicitly examined in the context of a formal definition or discussion of the existing literature on trust in a health context. Within the quantitative research analysed, trust was commonly measured with a single-item measure (9/25). Only two studies used validated multi-item measures of trust. Three studies examined changes in trust, either following an intervention or over the course of a pandemic. The findings of this review indicate a disconnect between the current vaccine hesitancy research and the wider health-related trust literature, a dearth in research on trust in low and middle-income settings, a need for studies on how trust levels change over time and investigations on how resilience to trust-eroding information can be built into a trustworthy health system.

School-located Influenza Vaccinations for Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the effect of school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV) on adolescents' influenza vaccination rates.

METHODS

In 2015-2016, we performed a cluster-randomized trial of adolescent SLIV in middle/high schools. We selected 10 pairs of schools (identical grades within pairs) and randomly allocated schools within pairs to SLIV or usual care control. At eight suburban SLIV schools, we sent parents e-mail notifications about upcoming SLIV clinics and promoted online immunization consent. At two urban SLIV schools, we sent parents (via student backpack fliers) paper immunization consent forms and information about SLIV. E-mails were unavailable at these schools. Local health department nurses administered nasal or injectable influenza vaccine at dedicated SLIV clinics and billed insurers. We compared influenza vaccination rates at SLIV versus control schools using school directories to identify the student sample in each school. We used the state immunization registry to determine receipt of influenza vaccination.

RESULTS

The final sample comprised 17,650 students enrolled in the 20 schools. Adolescents at suburban SLIV schools had higher overall influenza vaccination rates than did adolescents at control schools (51% vs. 46%, p < .001; adjusted odds ratio = 1.27, 95% confidence interval 1.18-1.38, controlling for vaccination during the prior two seasons). No effect of SLIV was noted among urbanschools on multivariate analysis. SLIV did not substitute for vaccinations in primary care or other settings; in suburban settings, SLIV was associated with increased vaccinations in primary care or other settings (adjusted odds ratio = 1.10, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.19).

CONCLUSIONS

SLIV in this community increased influenza vaccination rates among adolescents attending suburban schools.

Acceptability of School-Based Health Centers for Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Visits: A Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Countries with high human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates have achieved this success largely through school-based vaccination. Using school-based health centers (SBHCs) in the United States, where HPV vaccine remains underutilized, could improve uptake. In this mixed-methods study, we examined acceptability, facilitators, and barriers of HPV vaccination visits at SBHCs from the perspectives of adolescents and parents.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews and structured surveys with adolescents and parents recruited from an urban, hospital-based clinic. Interviews with parents (N = 20) and adolescents (N = 20) were audio-recorded and transcribed for analysis using an iterative thematic approach. Quantitative measures for a survey administered to parents (N = 131) were derived from the qualitative findings. Survey results were analyzed by chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Many participants expressed favorable opinions of HPV vaccination at SBHCs in qualitative interviews. Facilitators included convenience, ease of scheduling, and not missing work or school. However, barriers were noted including concerns about obtaining care outside the medical home, fragmentation of medical records, and negative perceptions about SBHCs. Quantitative findings revealed that a higher proportion of parents with experience using SBHCs were willing to use a middle school (59.5%) or high school (80.5%) SBHC for HPV vaccinations compared with those who had not used SBHCs (p < .05 for both comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

HPV vaccination visits at SBHCs were acceptable, and SBHC users expressed more favorable attitudes. Barriers to HPV vaccination at SBHCs can be addressed through more education about SBHCs' role, and improvement of systems to coordinate care.

Facilitators and barriers of parental attitudes and beliefs toward school-located influenza vaccination in the United States: Systematic review

The study objective was to identify facilitators and barriers of parental attitudes and beliefs toward school-located influenza vaccination in the United States. In 2009, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expanded their recommendations for influenza vaccination to include school-aged children. We conducted a systematic review of studies focused on facilitators and barriers of parental attitudes toward school-located influenza vaccination in the United States from 1990 to 2016. We reviewed 11 articles by use of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework. Facilitators were free/low cost vaccination; having belief in vaccine efficacy, influenza severity, and susceptibility; belief that vaccination is beneficial, important, and a social norm; perception of school setting advantages; trust; and parental presence. Barriers were cost; concerns regarding vaccine safety, efficacy, equipment sterility, and adverse effects; perception of school setting barriers; negative physician advice of contraindications; distrust in vaccines and school-located vaccination programs; and health information privacy concerns. We identified the facilitators and barriers of parental attitudes and beliefs toward school-located influenza vaccination to assist in the evidence-based design and implementation of influenza vaccination programs targeted for children in the United States and to improve influenza vaccination coverage for population-wide health benefits.

HPV vaccine uptake in a school-located vaccination program

Previous research has implied that while parents may be willing to have their adolescents receive some recommended vaccines via school-located vaccination program (SLVP), they were less likely to agree to the HPV vaccine being administered via SLVP. During an SLVP in a large urban area, 86% of those participating in the program received an HPV vaccine.

School-located vaccination for adolescents: Past, present, and future and implications for HPV vaccine delivery

Adolescents were first specifically targeted for school-located vaccination (SLV) in the 1990s when hepatitis B catch-up vaccination was recommended for all adolescents. SLV affords the opportunity to access adolescents at a time when their activities have developmental import and the patients have the capacity to decline repeatedly missing school and extracurricular events to get vaccinated. As noted above, SLV has been primarily reserved for brief catch-up interventions among youth, with routine vaccination recommendations quickly defaulting to the primary care provider. Now in 2016, with relatively disappointing adolescent immunization rates for the routinely recommended human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, the SLV option is one that could potentially help increase vaccination rates for a particularly effective, life-saving, 3-dose vaccination series. This article will serve as a brief review of the successful use of SLV in other countries, lessons learned when SLV was employed to immunize adolescents against hepatitis B in the United States in the late 1990s and early 2000s, and the current hopes and challenges for the future of adolescent SLV programming in the United States. Overall, the shift to the use of SLV to administer routinely recommend vaccine for adolescents will require careful planning to implement known strategies for accessing youth and in addition to new strategies designed to assure appropriate reimbursement for cost-effect SLV services. While not the best option for all adolescents, SLV provides an important opportunity to immunize youth with limited access to healthcare services in the community at large.