Provider-reported acceptance and use of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention messages and materials to support HPV vaccine recommendation for adolescent males

HPV Vaccination Rates of 7th Grade Students After a Strong Recommending Statement from the School Nurse

The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine can prevent 90% of cancers caused by HPV. Health care provider recommendations affect vaccine uptake, yet there are a lack of studies examining the impact of the school nurse (SN) in vaccine recommendations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of adding a SN HPV recommendation to the standard vaccination letter sent to parents/guardians. The rate of vaccination between the intervention and control schools was not statistically significant (Estimate (Std. Error) = -0.3066 (0.2151), p = 0.154). After controlling for age, sex, race, insurance type, and medical practice type, there was no significant difference in the likelihood to receive the HPV vaccine (OR = 1.53, 95% CI: 0.563-4.19 in 2018; OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 0.124-14.54 in 2019. Further work is needed to clarify how school nurses can better promote HPV vaccine, and which adolescent demographic groups (e.g., race, insurance type, provider type) face barriers to HPV vaccine uptake.

North-Central Florida Clinicians' Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Recommendation Priorities and Practices for 11- to 12-Year-Olds: A Discrete Choice Experiment

PURPOSE

Within the United States, human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates remain low. We examined HPV vaccine recommendation practices among Florida clinicians by assessing variability in: (1) recommendation priorities by patient characteristics and (2) concordance with best practices.

METHODS

In 2018 and 2019, we conducted a cross-sectional survey incorporating a discrete choice experiment among primary care clinicians (MD/DO, APRN, and PA). We used linear mixed-effects models to determine the importance of patient characteristics (age, sex, time in practice, and chronic condition) and parental concerns. We compared clinician endorsement of predetermined constructs with reported vaccine recommendation statements.

RESULTS

Among 540 surveys distributed, 272 were returned and 105 reported providing preventive care to 11- to 12-year-olds (43% response rate). Among completing clinicians, 21/99 (21%) did not offer the HPV vaccine. Among clinicians offering the vaccine (n = 78), 35%-37% of each decision to recommend the vaccine was based on the child's age (15 vs. 11 years). For closed-ended questions, most clinicians endorsed best practices including emphasizing cancer prevention (94% for girls and 85% for boys; p = .06), vaccine efficacy (60% both sexes), safety (58% girls and 56% boys), importance at 11-12 years (64% both sexes), and bundling vaccines (35% girls and 31% boys). When clinicians reported their typical recommendation, fewer clinicians incorporated best practices (59% cancer prevention, 5% safety, 8% the importance at 11-12 years, and 8% bundling vaccines).

DISCUSSION

HPV vaccination recommendation strategies among Florida clinicians somewhat aligned with best practices. Alignment was higher when clinicians were explicitly asked to endorse constructs versus provide recommendations.

What impact does the attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination have on physicians as vaccine providers? A cross sectional study from the German outpatient sector

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccination is recognized as a key component in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic. Physicians' attitudes toward vaccination are known to play a defining role in the management and dissemination of medical advice to patients. In Germany, outpatient practitioners are predominantly responsible for the dissemination of vaccines.

METHOD

Using a cross-sectional online survey, 932 outpatient general practitioners, gynecologists, and pediatricians in Germany were asked in fall, 2021, about their attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination and - among others - their communication in vaccine discussions, their assessment of vaccine safety, and reporting of suspected adverse events. Physicians were divided into two groups along their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination. In addition, multivariate linear regression models were constructed to assess differences in communication strategies.

RESULTS

92 % of physicians had a positive or very positive attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination. Own vaccination status, practice-based vaccination delivery, and estimated vaccination coverage among patients were significantly associated with the attitude toward vaccination. Confidence in vaccine safety was significantly lower among physicians with negative attitudes. There were no differences between the two groups in self-assessment of the ability to detect suspected adverse events, but there were differences in the observing and reporting of adverse events. For the linear regression models, we found that a more negative attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination was significantly associated with increased acceptance of patient refusal of COVID-19 vaccination and empathic behavior for patient concerns. In contrast, willingness to engage in a detailed persuasion consultation was significantly lower. Pediatricians showed significantly higher empathy for patient-side concerns compared to general practitioners, whereas gynecologists showed less empathy than general practitioners.

DISCUSSION

The physician's attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination influences the physician's practices as a vaccine provider. However, when providing medical advice and healthcare, the physician should focus on the actual needs of the patient.

Tdap-HPV vaccination bundling in the USA: Trends, predictors, and implications for vaccine series completion

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) promotes taking a 'bundling approach' (i.e., administering Tetanus, diphtheria toxoids, and acellular pertussis [Tdap] and human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccines in the same way and on the same day) for adolescent vaccinations. Recent trends and patterns in Tdap-HPV vaccination bundling in the USA remain undocumented. In addition, the implications of bundling Tdap-HPV vaccination for HPV vaccine series completion remain unknown. To address these critical knowledge gaps, we performed a retrospective study using a nationwide sample of privately insured adolescents (Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database). Tdap-HPV vaccination bundling (per 100 Tdap vaccination encounters) during 2014-2018 was estimated overall, for 50 states, and by adolescents' age, sex, and provider specialties. Survival model estimated the likelihood of series completion among 9-14-year-old adolescents. From 2014 to 2018, 560,806 adolescents received a Tdap vaccine of which 172,604 (30.8%) received the HPV vaccines on the same day. Tdap-HPV vaccination bundling (per 100 Tdap vaccinations) increased nationally, from 22.9 in 2014 to 39.1 in 2018 (Ptrend < 0.001); bundling was lowest in New York and New Jersey. The likelihood of receiving the Tdap and HPV vaccines bundled was higher for young and female adolescents. Adolescents who received their first HPV vaccine bundled with the Tdap vaccine were more likely to complete the series compared to those who received it alone (Hazards Ratio = 1.45; 1.43-1.48). HPV vaccination bundling has increased in recent years in the USA. The increased likelihood of HPV vaccine series completion provides important evidence supporting the adoption of same-day Tdap-HPV vaccine administration in clinical practice to boost HPV vaccination coverage.

The state of vaccine safety science: systematic reviews of the evidence

This Review updates the scientific evidence assessing possible causal associations of adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) compiled in the 2012 report from the Institute of Medicine and the 2014 report from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. For 12 of 46 AEFI examined, a causal relationship has been established with at least one vaccine currently routinely recommended to the general USA population: anaphylaxis, arthralgia or arthritis (mild, acute, and transient, not chronic), deltoid bursitis (when vaccine is administered improperly), disseminated varicella infection (in immune deficient individuals for whom the varicella vaccine is contraindicated), encephalitis, febrile seizures, Guillain-Barré syndrome, hepatitis (in immune deficient individuals for whom the varicella vaccine is contraindicated), herpes zoster, immune thrombocytopenic purpura, meningitis, and syncope. Other than mild acute and transient arthralgia or arthritis, which is very common in adult women after rubella vaccine, these adverse reactions are rare or very rare. Vaccines have an excellent safety profile overall and provide protection against infectious diseases to individuals and the general population.

Florida physicians' reported use of AFIX-based strategies for human papillomavirus vaccination

HPV vaccination rates in Florida are low. To increase rates, the CDC recommends clinics adhere to components of their evidence-based quality improvement program, AFIX (Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange of information). We explored factors associated with engaging in HPV-specific AFIX-related activities. In 2016, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of 770 pediatric and family medicine physicians in Florida and assessed vaccination practices, clinic characteristics, and HPV-related knowledge. Data were analyzed in 2017. The primary outcome was whether physicians' clinics engaged in ≥1 AFIX activity. We stratified by physician specialty and developed multivariable models using a backward selection approach. Of the participants in the analytic sample (n = 340), 52% were male, 60% were White of any ethnicity, and 55% were non-Hispanic. Pediatricians and family medicine physicians differed on: years practicing medicine (p < 0.001), HPV-related knowledge (p < 0.001), and VFC provider status (p < 0.001), among others. Only 39% of physicians reported engaging in ≥1 AFIX activity. In the stratified multivariable model for pediatricians, AFIX activity was significantly associated with HPV-related knowledge (aOR = 1.33;95%CI = 1.08-1.63) and provider use of vaccine reminder prompts (aOR = 3.61;95%CI = 1.02-12.77). For family medicine physicians, HPV-related knowledge was significant (aOR = 1.57;95%CI = 1.20-2.05) as was majority race of patient population (non-Hispanic White vs. Other: aOR = 3.02;95%CI = 1.08-8.43), daily patient load (<20 vs. 20-24: aOR = 9.05;95%CI = 2.72-30.10), and vaccine administration to male patients (aOR = 2.98;95%CI = 1.11-8.02). Fewer than half of Florida pediatric and family medicine physicians engaged in any AFIX activities. Future interventions to increase AFIX engagement should focus on implementing and evaluating AFIX activities in groups identified as having low engagement in AFIX activities.

A content analysis of HPV vaccination messages available online

Parents have varied HPV vaccine communication needs, which presents a challenge for healthcare providers. To improve communication resources for providers, we sought to characterize HPV vaccination messages available in existing educational materials. In fall 2016, we searched PubMed, educational material clearinghouses, and Google for English language HPV vaccination messages. We extracted messages that a provider might use when raising the topic of HPV vaccination, answering common questions, and motivating vaccination. Two reviewers independently coded each message. The search identified 267 unique messages about HPV vaccination. Messages generally were long (mean no. of words = 44, standard deviation [SD] = 33) and required a high level of education to read (mean reading grade level = 10, SD = 3). Only 32% of messages were shorter than 25 words, and 12% had a readability at or below grade 6. Most frequent were messages to address common parent questions or concerns (62%); the most common topics were diseases prevented by HPV vaccine (18%) and safety and side effects (16%). Many messages included information about cancer prevention (26%) and same-day vaccination (13%). Few messages (6%) used a presumptive style to recommend HPV vaccination. In conclusion, available messages about HPV vaccination were markedly varied. We identified few messages that were both brief (to facilitate providers memorizing them) and accessible (to facilitate parents understanding them). Future research should identify which messages lead to HPV vaccine uptake.

An environmental scan to examine stakeholder perspectives on human papillomavirus vaccination: A mixed methods study

PURPOSE

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine series completion rates among females and males remain low in Florida (46.4% and 34.5%, respectively). Multiple stakeholders influence vaccination uptake, including health care providers (HCPs), public health professionals (PHPs), and members of professional organizations. We examined stakeholder efforts related to increasing vaccine uptake and education among parents/adolescents and HCPs.

METHODS

We conducted an environmental scan of stakeholder efforts and identified stakeholders using our professional networks and a snowball sampling approach. Stakeholders (n = 46) completed a survey about involvement in and barriers to vaccination promotion efforts. A subset (n = 12) of stakeholders participated in follow-up interviews further exploring vaccination efforts and barriers. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Interview data were analyzed using deductive analysis and coded using constructs from the PRECEDE-PROCEED model.

RESULTS

The majority of our survey sample was PHPs (50.0%) and HCPs (32.6%). Stakeholder efforts were focused on adolescent/parent/HCP education including providing: educational materials for HCPs (55.8%) and adolescents/parents (59.6%), one-on-one consultations for adolescents/parents (55.3%), and HCP education (54.7%). Lack of knowledge/understanding and education/information were barriers reported across almost all groups/areas. Office staff/HCP education and distribution of patient education materials were efforts described as important during qualitative interviews. Stakeholders also noted HCP discomfort when recommending HPV vaccine, parental perceptions that the vaccine is unnecessary, and a lack of education/understanding among parents and HCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest the need for parent/adolescent education, specifically targeting key areas we identified: importance and benefits of HPV vaccine, and education and skill building in vaccine communication for HCPs.

Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Rates in Young Cancer Survivors

Purpose

Cancer survivors are at high risk for human papillomavirus (HPV)-related morbidities; we estimated the prevalence of HPV vaccine initiation in cancer survivors versus the US population and examined predictors of noninitiation.

Methods

Participants included 982 cancer survivors (9 to 26 years of age; 1 to 5 years postcompletion of therapy); we assessed HPV vaccine initiation, sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and vaccine-specific health beliefs; age-, sex-, and year-matched US population comparisons were from the National Immunization Survey-Teen and the National Health Interview Survey (2012-2015).

Results

The mean age at the time of the study was 16.3 ± 4.7 years; the mean time off therapy was 2.7 ± 1.2 years; participants were 55% male and 66% non-Hispanic white; 59% had leukemia/lymphoma. Vaccine initiation rates were significantly lower in cancer survivors versus the general population (23.8%; 95% CI, 20.6% to 27.0% v 40.5%; 95% CI, 40.2% to 40.7%; P < .001); survivors were more likely to be HPV vaccine-naïve than general population peers (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.09; P < .001). Initiation in adolescent survivors (ages 13 to 17 years) was 22.0% (95% CI, 17.3% to 26.7%), significantly lower than population peers (42.5%; 95% CI, 42.2% to 42.8%; P < .001). Initiation in young adult survivors and peers (ages 18 to 26 years) was comparably low (25.3%; 95% CI, 20.9% to 29.7% v 24.2%; 95% CI, 23.6% to 24.9%). Predictors of noninitiation included lack of provider recommendation (OR, 10.8; 95% CI, 6.5 to 18.0; P < .001), survivors' perceived lack of insurance coverage for HPV vaccine (OR, 6.6; 95% CI, 3.9 to 11.0; P < .001), male sex (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.7 to 4.8; P < .001), endorsement of vaccine-related barriers (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.6 to 4.6; P < .001), and younger age (9 to 12 years; OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.8-7.6; P < .001; comparison, 13 to 17 years).

Conclusion

HPV vaccine initiation rates in cancer survivors are low. Lack of provider recommendation and barriers to vaccine receipt should be targeted in vaccine promotion efforts.

Physicians' current use and preferences for male HPV vaccine-related patient education materials

Understanding physician preferences for educational materials to support male HPV vaccination is critical to improving vaccine uptake. Pediatric (Peds) and Family Medicine (FM) physicians in Florida completed a survey from May-August 2014 assessing current use of male-specific HPV vaccination patient education materials, and preferences for materials to increase HPV vaccination uptake. Peds and FM responses were compared with chi-squared or nonparametric tests. Most participants were FM (53.2%), White (66.6%), non-Hispanic (74.1%), and provided male patients/parents with HPV educational materials (59.1%). More than half (55.5%) provided a CDC factsheet for parents. Peds were more likely to indicate they provide educational materials (p<0.0001) than FM. The preferred source was the CDC (77.8%). Peds preferred using a factsheet as the medium of information more often than FM (85.6% vs. 68.0%; p<0.0001). When asked about preferences for targeted materials, 74.8% of providers indicated they would prefer materials targeted towards patients, 63.2% preferred information targeted towards parents, and 20.7% indicated they prefer non-targeted materials. Future research should focus on the development and testing of new HPV vaccine-specific materials and communication strategies for Peds and FM physicians.

Missing the Target for Routine Human Papillomavirus Vaccination: Consistent and Strong Physician Recommendations Are Lacking for 11- to 12-Year-Old Males

BACKGROUND

Rates of routine human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination of adolescent males in the United States are low. Leading health organizations advocate consistent and strong physician recommendations to improve HPV vaccine dissemination. This study describes the prevalence and correlates of consistent and strong physician recommendations for HPV vaccination of adolescent males.

METHODS

We surveyed pediatric and family medicine physicians in Florida about their HPV vaccine recommendations for male vaccine-eligible age groups (11-12, 13-17, 18-21 years). Descriptive statistics compared consistency and strength of HPV recommendations across age groups. Multivariable logistic regression examined factors associated with consistent and strong recommendations for 11- to 12-year-olds.

RESULTS

We received 367 completed surveys (51% response rate). Physicians most often consistently and strongly recommended HPV vaccine to males ages 13 to 17 (39%) compared with ages 11 to 12 (31%) and 18 to 21 (31%). Consistent and strong recommendation for 11- to 12-year-old males was more likely to be delivered by Vaccine for Children providers and less likely among physicians who reported more personal barriers to vaccination, particularly concerns about vaccine safety, concerns about adding vaccines to the vaccine schedule, and difficulty in remembering to discuss HPV vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians' current consistency and strength of HPV vaccine recommendations do not align with national recommendations. Interventions to improve HPV vaccine recommendations must also consider the influence of physicians' personal barriers to HPV vaccine delivery.

IMPACT

As one of the first studies to examine both consistency and strength of physicians' HPV vaccine recommendations for males, our findings can inform future interventions focused on facilitating physicians' recommendations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(10); 1435-46. ©2016 AACR.