Factors Associated with the Completeness of the Vaccination Schedule of Children at 12 and 24 Months of Age in a Brazilian Medium-Size Municipality

Low Vaccine Coverage and Factors Associated with Incomplete Childhood Immunization in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and Rural Groups, Central Brazil

Discrimination and limited access to healthcare services in remote areas can affect vaccination coverage. Therefore, this study aimed to estimate vaccination coverage for children living in quilombola communities and rural settlements in the central region of Brazil during their first year of life and to analyze the factors associated with incomplete vaccination. An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted on children born between 2015 and 2017. The percentage of children who received all vaccines recommended by the National Immunization Program in Brazil by 11 months and 29 days was used to calculate immunization coverage. Children who received the following vaccines were considered as having a complete basic vaccination schedule: one dose of BCG; three doses of Hepatitis B, of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis (DPT), of Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), and of Poliovirus (Polio); two doses of Rotavirus, of 10-valent pneumococcal (PCV10), and of Serogroup C meningococcal conjugate (MenC); and one dose of Yellow Fever (YF). Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and other doses recommended at or after 12 months were not included. Consolidated logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with incomplete vaccination coverage. Overall vaccination coverage was 52.8% (95% CI: 45.5-59.9%) and ranged from 70.4% for the Yellow Fever vaccine to 78.3% for the Rotavirus vaccine, with no significant differences between the quilombola and settler groups. Notably, the likelihood of incomplete general vaccination coverage was higher among children who did not receive a visit from a healthcare professional. Urgent strategies are required to achieve and ensure health equity for this unique and traditionally distinct group with low vaccination coverage.

Best shot: A motivational interviewing approach to address vaccine hesitancy in pediatric outpatient settings

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy in parents and childhood vaccine refusal is increasing. A standard of care to address this problem has not been identified.

PURPOSE

To identify if the use of motivational interviewing by pediatric providers during routine well child visits, when compared to standard of care, would increase vaccine rates in children 0-12 months of age. Factors associated with vaccine hesitancy were also investigated.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study was completed on a convenience sample of pediatric providers (N = 6) and caregivers of children 0-12 months of age (N = 66). Four providers were trained to use motivational interviewing. During the well child visit the Parent Attitudes About Childhood Vaccines survey was completed, and the motivational interviewing intervention was implemented. Clinic's data were compared with other clinic data of non-trained providers.

FINDINGS

Vaccine refusal/delays rate was 11.4% among caregivers. Vaccine refusal rate decreased after the intervention (9.00% pre-intervention and 6.40% post-intervention). An ordinal regression identified caregivers with higher vaccine hesitancy scores and more children were more likely to delay or refuse vaccines, while caregivers ≥30 years or with high income were less likely to delay/refuse vaccines. A difference in difference analysis identified that an additional 2.6% of children received vaccines when seen by trained providers compared to non-trained (β = -0.330, OR = 0.719, p = 0.470).

DISCUSSION

Findings indicate a condensed motivational interviewing education session may be clinically significant in decreasing vaccine hesitancy among this population.

APPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE

A more robust study to confirm these findings is recommended prior to practice implementation.