Providers' time spent and tools used when discussing the HPV vaccine with parents of adolescents

Exploring mother-daughter communication and social media influence on HPV vaccine refusal for daughters aged 9-17 years in a cross-sectional survey of 11,728 mothers in China

This study investigated the influences of mother-daughter communication and social media on mothers' HPV vaccine refusal for their daughters aged 9-17. A cross-sectional online survey among 11,728 mothers of girls aged 9-17 in Shenzhen, China was implemented between July and October 2023. Multi-level logistic regression models were fitted. Among 11,728 participants, 43.2% refused to have their daughters receive an HPV vaccination. In multivariate analysis, more openness in the mother-daughter communication (AOR: 0.99, 95%CI: 0.98, 0.99), perceived more positive outcomes of mother-daughter communication (AOR: 0.77, 95%CI: 0.75, 0.79), higher frequency of exposure to testimonials about daughters' HPV vaccination (AOR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.78, 0.85) and information encouraging parents to vaccinate their daughters against HPV on social media (AOR: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.73, 0.79), and thoughtful consideration of the veracity of the information specific to HPV vaccines (AOR: 0.80, 95%CI: 0.77, 0.83) were associated with lower vaccine refusal. Mothers who were not the main decision-makers of daughters' HPV vaccination (AOR: 1.28 to 1.46), negative outcome expectancies of mother-daughter communication (AOR: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.04, 1.08), and mothers' HPV vaccine refusal (AOR: 2.81, 95%CI: 2.58, 3.06) were associated with higher vaccine refusal for their daughters. The level of mothers' HPV vaccine refusal for their daughters was high in China. Openness and outcome expectancies of mother-daughter communication and information exposure on social media were considered key determinants of HPV vaccine refusal for daughters. Future HPV vaccination programs should consider these interpersonal factors.

Identifying Healthcare Professionals With Lower Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Recommendation Quality: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Strengthening healthcare professionals' (HCPs) communication is an evidence-based approach to increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake among adolescents. To better target future interventions, we sought to synthesize evidence on HCP subgroups who most need to improve their HPV vaccine recommendation quality.

METHODS

We searched five databases for quantitative studies published from 2012 to 2022 on HPV vaccine recommendation quality, including recommendation consistency and strength, for United States adolescents. Two coders independently abstracted data from each eligible study, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We summarized variation in recommendation quality by clinical and HCP characteristics.

RESULTS

The 28 eligible studies indicated that relatively low proportions of HCPs used higher-quality recommendation practices (median: 61% across 30 measures) and that recommendation quality varied across HCP subgroups. The most consistent findings were that more pediatric HCPs used higher-quality recommendations than family medicine HCPs (8 of 11 studies, 2-60 percentage point difference) and that HPV-related knowledge was associated with higher recommendation quality (four of seven studies). Most studies observed no differences in recommendation quality by clinical role (e.g., provider vs. nurse) or HCP demographics (e.g., gender, age, race/ethnicity).

DISCUSSION

Studies suggest a substantial need to improve HCPs' recommendation quality, with opportunities for targeting future interventions.

Impact of visit characteristics on intention to recommend HPV vaccine: An experiment with US health care professionals

OBJECTIVE

Presumptive recommendations that assume parents want to vaccinate can increase human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake. We sought to examine how visit characteristics affect health care professionals' (HCPs) intention to use this evidence-based recommendation style.

METHODS

In 2022, we conducted an online experiment with 2527 HCPs who had a role in adolescent vaccination in the United States. Participants read 1 of 8 randomly assigned vignettes about a well-child visit. Using a 2 × 2 × 2 between-subjects factorial design, the vignettes varied the following visit characteristics: patient age (9 vs. 12-year-old), prior parental vaccine refusal (yes vs. no), and time pressure on the HCP (low vs. high). HCPs reported on their intention to use a presumptive HPV vaccine recommendation, as well as on related attitudes, subjective norms, and self-efficacy. Analyses used 3-way analysis of variance and parallel mediation.

RESULTS

Participants were pediatricians (26%), family/general medicine physicians (22%), advanced practitioners (24%), and nursing staff (28%). Overall, about two-thirds of HCPs (64%) intended to use a presumptive recommendation. Intentions were higher for older children (b = 0.23) and parents without prior vaccine refusal (b = 0.39, both p < 0.001). Time pressure had no main effect or interactions. HCPs' attitudes and self-efficacy partially mediated effects of patient age and prior vaccine refusal (range of b = 0.04-0.28, all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

To better support visits with younger children and parents who have refused vaccines, HCPs may need more training for making presumptive recommendations for HPV vaccine. Reinforcing positive attitudes and self-efficacy can help HCPs adopt this evidence-based recommendation style.

Factors that Influence Healthcare Provider Recommendation of HPV Vaccination

Purpose: This study examined factors associated with healthcare providers' (HCPs') recommendation of HPV vaccination for younger and older adolescents. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study, using web-based survey of HCPs in New Jersey in 2018. The study outcome was a dichotomous measure of HCPs' recommendation of the HPV vaccine. The study predictors included practice characteristics (i.e., proportions of race/ethnicity, age groups, insurance type, and VFC recipients) and HCP's characteristics (i.e., specialty and perceived knowledge, effectiveness, concerns, parent- and system-related barriers, and facilitators). Data analysis included logistic regression models using separate blocks for practice and provider characteristics, followed by a backward stepwise approach to determine the surviving predictors. Results: Respondents (N=390) included physicians (75%) and nurse practitioners (25%), specialized in pediatrics (62%), family medicine (20%), and women's health (18%). The HCPs' recommendation rates for HPV vaccination were 56% for younger adolescents (11-13 years old) and 73% for older adolescents (14-17 years old). For younger adolescents, the recommendation rates were significantly higher in practices with higher proportions of younger adolescent, Black and Hispanic patients; among pediatric providers; and with HCPs' higher levels of knowledge and lower levels of concern about the vaccine. For older adolescents, the rates were significantly higher in practices with higher proportions patients who are Hispanic, privately insured, and VFC recipients; among pediatric providers; and with HCPs' higher levels of knowledge and lower levels of concern about the vaccine as well as higher levels of facilitators for recommending the HPV vaccine. Conclusions: Interventions targeting HCPs need to focus on improving their knowledge regarding the vaccine, reduce their concerns around its safety, and utilize facilitators strategies, particularly among non-pediatric providers.

Disparities in Healthcare Providers' Recommendation of HPV Vaccination for U.S. Adolescents: A Systematic Review

Infrequent provider recommendations continue to be a key barrier to human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, including among adolescents at higher risk for future HPV cancers. To inform future interventions, we sought to characterize disparities in health care providers' HPV vaccine recommendation for U.S. adolescents. We systematically reviewed studies published in 2012-2019 that assessed provider HPV vaccine recommendations for adolescents aged 9-17. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we identified 52 eligible studies and used a standardized abstraction form to assess recommendation prevalence by adolescent demographic characteristics. Studies consistently found that fewer parents of boys than girls reported receiving HPV vaccine recommendations (14 studies, range of difference: -11 to -35 percentage points). Studies also found fewer recommendations for adolescents who were younger (2 studies, -3% to -12% points), non-White (3 studies, -5% to -7% points, females only), lower income (3 studies, -1% to -8% points), or uninsured (1 study, -21% points, males only). Studies identified geographic disparities in southern and rural areas. In conclusion, findings from this systematic review identify disparities in HPV vaccine recommendation that may contribute to suboptimal vaccine uptake. Efforts to improve providers' HPV vaccine communication should focus on increasing recommendation consistency, especially for lower-income, non-White, and rural adolescents.

Hispanic mothers' accounts of vaccinating their adolescent children against HPV: features of the clinic visit

ABSTRACTObjective: Despite the widespread availability of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in the US, rates of vaccination among Hispanic adolescents lag behind those of other recommended vaccines. Understanding what happens during the HPV vaccination visit should provide important insight into communication between health care providers and Hispanic mothers and identifies areas where communication can be improved. As such, this qualitative study explored Hispanic mothers' experiences during their adolescent child's HPV vaccination visit.Design: Fifty-one participants completed individual interviews. Transcripts were analyzed using a conventional content analysis approach to identify emergent categories or themes.Results: We identified three features of the HPV vaccination visit including: the primary reason for the visit, the type of counseling the mother received about the vaccine and the type of HPV vaccine recommendation received. Most mothers reported that their child was vaccinated against HPV at a routine well-child visit. Some mothers reported that they received in-depth counseling about the vaccine, while others received brief or no counseling from the provider. Mothers also reported receiving either a strong recommendation to vaccinate, a recommendation to vaccinate that emphasized her choice, or no recommendation to vaccinate.Conclusion: Most Hispanic mothers report that they received counseling and a recommendation from their adolescent child's health care provider before vaccinating. However, most of the mothers first heard about the HPV vaccine at the vaccination visit. Mothers who had previously heard about the vaccine outside of the clinic, reported making an appointment specifically for their child to be vaccinated against HPV. Together, these findings indicate a need to raise awareness of the vaccine and to promote HPV vaccination more strongly in this population. Education efforts should target mothers in community settings, in addition to clinic settings in order to increase awareness and vaccination in this population.

Effect of provider recommendation style on the length of adolescent vaccine discussions

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether providers' vaccine recommendation style affects length of the adolescent vaccine discussions.

METHODS

We analyzed vaccine discussions using audio-recordings of clinical encounters where adolescents were eligible for HPV vaccines ± meningococcal vaccines. We measured length of vaccine discussions, the provider's use of an "indicated" (vaccination due at visit) or "elective" (vaccination is optional) recommendation style, and vaccine receipt. Parent and child demographics, parental vaccination intentions, and parental satisfaction with vaccine discussion were collected from pre- and post-visit surveys. We used linear and logit regressions with random effects to estimate recommendation style's association with discussion length and with vaccine receipt, respectively.

RESULTS

We analyzed 106 vaccine discussions (82 HPV; 24 meningococcal) across 82 clinical encounters and 43 providers. Vaccine discussions were longer when providers presented vaccination as elective versus indicated (140 vs. 74 s; p-value < 0.001). Controlling for vaccine type, parental vaccination intent, and patient characteristics, an elective style was associated with 41 seconds longer vaccine discussion (p-value < 0.05). Providers used the indicated style more frequently with the meningococcal vaccine than with the HPV vaccine (96% vs. 72%; p-value < 0.05). Parents' odds of vaccinating were 9.3 times higher following an indicated versus an elective presentation (p-value < 0.05). Vaccine discussion length and presentation style were not associated with parental satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that using an indicated recommendation improves vaccine discussions' efficiency and effectiveness, but this style is used more often with meningococcal than HPV vaccines. Increasing providers' use of indicated styles for HPV vaccines has the potential to increase vaccination rates and save time during medical visits.

Logistical and structural challenges are the major obstacles for family medicine physicians' ability to administer adult vaccines

PURPOSE

This study was conducted to characterize the vaccination practices and challenges of family medicine physicians in Los Angeles County, California.

METHODS

The Los Angeles Academy of Family Physicians (LA AFP) sent out electronic surveys to all of their active members (N = 1121) between December 2017 and January 2018, and asked them to answer questions about themselves, their practice, their patient population, and their immunization practices and challenges. We then analyzed the results through basic statistical calculations and Pearson's chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Seventy-four people (6.6%) responded to the survey, and 75% of responders stated that they administer all Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended vaccines. The lowest vaccine administration rates were for the high-dose influenza vaccine, which 66.2% (n = 49) of respondents reported to administer, followed by the meningococcal B vaccine (68.9%; n = 51). The respondents who belonged to practices with more than 11 providers, were part of a large hospital or healthcare system, had electronic medical records (EMRs), and used the California Immunization Registry (CAIR) were more likely to report to vaccinate. The number one responding physician-reported challenge to vaccination was limited time and resources to address patient resistance followed by vaccine cost and lack of infrastructure to store vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

In this pilot study, structural and logistical challenges appeared to make the biggest impact on adult vaccination for the responding family medicine physicians. Solutions addressing these challenges will help improve the adult immunization rates.

Evaluation of the Implementation of a Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Health Care Provider Communication About Human Papillomavirus Vaccination

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relative use, usefulness, and facilitators and barriers to use as perceived by providers of 5 different components in a human papillomavirus vaccine communication intervention-which was found to be effective at improving human papillomavirus vaccination rates.

METHODS

Four serial surveys of 108 providers (doctor of medicine, nurse practitioner, or doctor of osteopathic medicine) from intervention clinics involved in the study assessed the use and usefulness of the 5 communication intervention components during a 12-month period.

RESULTS

Survey response rates were 79% to 86%. The fact sheet (64%-77%) and motivational interviewing techniques (MI; 86%) were the most used components-use was sustained during the 12-month period. These components also were perceived as somewhat or very useful by most providers, and this perceived usefulness increased over time (very or somewhat useful at end of study, 97% fact sheet, 98% MI, respectively). Although fewer providers reported using the Web site (15%-42%), or disease images (6%-17%), when these were used, most providers (67%-87%) felt they were somewhat or very useful. The decision aid was not used frequently (17%-41% of providers), and 43% of providers felt it was not very or not at all useful. Facilitators and barriers were identified for each component. The fact sheet and MI were perceived as the easiest to integrate into the clinic workflow.

CONCLUSIONS

The fact sheet and MI were the most used and most useful intervention components. Both were easy to integrate into clinic workflow, and their use was sustained over time. Dissemination of similar interventions in the future should focus on these 2 specific components.

Provider and Parent Perspectives on Enhanced Communication Tools for Human Papillomavirus Vaccine-Hesitant Parents

OBJECTIVE

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine initiation and completion rates remain far below the Healthy People 2020 goal, suggesting that additional tools and training may be needed to help medical staff provide a quality recommendation. As part of a larger pragmatic trial, we conducted a qualitative study to understand how a multifaceted communication intervention used by medical staff with HPV vaccine-hesitant parents can improve HPV vaccination rates in the primary care setting.

METHODS

At 8 primary care intervention clinics in the Denver metro area, medical staff and parents of adolescent boys and girls ages 11 to 17 years eligible to start the HPV vaccine series at a recent well care visit were recruited for study participation. Focus groups with medical staff and in-depth interviews with hesitant parents were conducted during the post-intervention period. All data were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using established qualitative methods.

RESULTS

Twenty parents and 46 medical staff participated. All parents and medical staff felt that the overall intervention was beneficial and should continue to be used and preferred the HPV vaccine fact sheet component. Medical staff reported that communication trainings (intervention component) that taught a presumptive approach and motivational interviewing were the most beneficial for introducing the HPV vaccine and for countering HPV vaccine hesitancy, respectively. Least favorable components were the decision aid, disease images, and parent website.

CONCLUSIONS

Select components of a multifaceted communication intervention were seen as beneficial to HPV vaccine-hesitant parents and medical staff. Future studies should look at how to implement these intervention components in a greater number of primary care settings.

Practice-, Provider-, and Patient-level interventions to improve preventive care: Development of the P3 Model

For adequate provision of preventive services, there is an interplay between activities at the healthcare practice, healthcare provider, and patient levels of the clinical encounter. Commonly used health promotion and behavior theoretical models address some of these three levels, but none fully account for all three. Building off of key components of many existing theoretical models, including the Health Belief Model, Theory of Planned Behavior/Theory of Reasoned Action, Social Cognitive Theory, Social Ecological Model, and the Systems Model of Clinical Preventive Care, we describe the development of the P3 (Practice-, Provider-, and Patient-level) Model for preventive care interventions. The P3 Model accounts for all three levels of the clinical encounter, and the factors that impact these levels, concurrently. This yields a model for preventive care that is applicable and adaptable to different settings, and that provides a framework for the development, implementation, and evaluation of preventive care promotion interventions. The applicability of the P3 Model is shown through two exemplar preventive care programs – immunization and colorectal cancer screening. The P3 Model allows interventions to be developed and evaluated in a modular approach, to allow more practical refinement and optimization of the intervention.

Why is announcement training more effective than conversation training for introducing HPV vaccination? A theory-based investigation

BACKGROUND

Improving healthcare providers' communication about HPV vaccination is critical to increasing uptake. We previously demonstrated that training providers to use presumptive announcements to introduce HPV vaccination improved uptake, whereas training them to use participatory conversations had no effect. To understand how communication training changed provider perceptions and communication practices, we evaluated intermediate outcomes and process measures from our randomized clinical trial, with a particular focus on identifying mechanisms that might explain the announcement training's impact.

METHODS

In 2015, a physician educator delivered 1-h in-clinic HPV vaccination recommendation trainings at 20 primary care clinics in North Carolina serving 11,578 patients age 11 or 12. Clinics were randomized to receive training to use "announcements" that presume parents are ready to vaccinate or "conversations" that invite dialog about vaccination. Training participants were 83 HPV vaccine providers. Pre- and post-training surveys assessed constructs from the theory of planned behavior (TPB), including providers' attitudes and subjective norms about HPV vaccination and their perceived behavioral control to recommend HPV vaccination. Surveys also assessed providers' perceptions of the announcement and conversation communication strategies.

RESULTS

Both trainings improved TPB-related constructs, including providers' positive attitudes toward HPV vaccination, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control to recommend the vaccine (all p < .001, Cohen's d = .62-.90). Furthermore, in both trainings, the amount of time providers reported needing to discuss HPV vaccination with parents decreased from pre-training to 1-month follow-up (mean = 3.8 vs. 3.2 min, p = .01, d = .28). However, announcement trainings outperformed conversation trainings on other measures. For example, providers who received announcement training more often reported that the communication strategy saved them time, was easy to use, helped them promote HPV vaccination as routine care, and increased HPV vaccination coverage in their clinics (all p < .05; d = .44-.60).

CONCLUSIONS

Both announcement and conversation trainings improved providers' HPV vaccine-related perceptions. However, providers viewed announcements as easier to use and more effective, which may help to explain the success of this training approach. Future provider communication interventions should consider implementation outcomes, including acceptability, alongside more traditional TPB constructs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02377843 . Registered on February 27, 2015.

Parental Refusal of Human Papillomavirus Vaccine: Multisite Study

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to explore reasons why parents may refuse administration of the human papillomavirus vaccine to their children. The data from this multisite study will contribute to our understanding of why parents may refuse administration of the vaccine.

METHODS

This mixed-methods study took place in several pediatric settings after a pilot study was completed. After a health visit in which the vaccine was refused, a survey was provided to the parent in a private room. The survey was kept confidential and anonymous.

RESULTS

There were 72 surveys completed. Demographic data were reported. Data were analyzed for descriptive statistics, and themes were extracted. Overall, 58% of parents refused the vaccine because it was too new, and 50% believed the vaccine required more research.

DISCUSSION

The data from this study correlated with the pilot study regarding parental perceptions of the vaccine; however, it appears that with new public campaigns and education, parents' perceptions are improving. Nurse practitioners are in an excellent position to clarify information about human papillomavirus vaccination.