Behavioral interventions for vaccination uptake: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Human behavior and more specifically behavioral insight-based approaches to vaccine uptake have often been overlooked. While there have been a few narrative reviews indexed in Medline on behavioral interventions to increase vaccine uptake, to our knowledge, none have been systematic reviews and meta-analyses covering not just high but also low-and-middle income countries.

METHODS

We included 613 studies from the Medline database in our systematic review and meta-analysis categorizing different behavioral interventions in 9 domains: education campaigns, on-site vaccination, incentives, free vaccination, institutional recommendation, provider recommendation, reminder and recall, message framing, and vaccine champion. Additionally, considering that there is variability in the acceptance of vaccines among different populations, we assessed studies from both high-income countries (HICs) and low- to middle-income countries (LMICs), separately.

FINDINGS

Our results showed that behavioral interventions can considerably improve vaccine uptake in most settings. All domains that we examined improved vaccine uptake with the highest effect size associated with provider recommendation (OR: 3.4 (95%CI: 2.5-4.6); Domain: motivation) and on-site vaccination (OR: 2.9 (95%CI: 2.3-3.7); Domain: practical issues). While the number of studies conducted in LMICs was smaller, the quality of studies was similar with those conducted in HICs. Nevertheless, there were variations in the observed effect sizes.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings indicate that "provider recommendation" and "on-site vaccination" along with other behavioral interventions can be employed to increase vaccination rates globally.

Communicating Guideline Recommendations Using Graphic Narrative Versus Text-based Broadcast Screensavers

Background

The use of graphic narratives, defined as stories that use images for narration, is growing in health communication.

Objective

The aim of this study was to describe the design and implementation of a graphic narrative screensaver (GNS) to communicate a guideline recommendation (ie, avoiding low-value acid suppressive therapy [AST] use in hospital inpatients) and examine the comparative effectiveness of the GNS versus a text-based screensaver (TBS) on clinical practice (ie, low-value AST prescriptions) and clinician recall.

Methods

During a 2-year period, the GNS and the TBS were displayed on inpatient clinical workstations. The numbers of new AST prescriptions were examined in the four quarters before, the three quarters during, and the one quarter after screensavers were implemented. Additionally, an electronic survey was sent to resident physicians 1 year after the intervention to assess screensaver recall.

Results

Designing an aesthetically engaging graphic that could be rapidly understood was critical in the development of the GNS. The odds of receiving an AST prescription on medicine and medicine subspecialty services after the screensavers were implemented were lower for all four quarters (ie, GNS and TBS broadcast together, only TBS broadcast, only GNS broadcast, and no AST screensavers broadcast) compared to the quarter prior to implementation (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.92; OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97; OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95; and OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.89, respectively; P<.001 for all comparisons). There were no statistically significant decreases for other high-volume services, such as the surgical services. These declines appear to have begun prior to screensaver implementation. When surveyed about the screensaver content 1 year later, resident physicians recalled both the GNS and TBS (43/70, 61%, vs 54/70, 77%; P=.07) and those who recalled the screensaver were more likely to recall the main message of the GNS compared to the TBS (30/43, 70%, vs 1/54, 2%; P<.001).

Conclusions

It is feasible to use a graphic narrative embedded in a broadcast screensaver to communicate a guideline recommendation, but further study is needed to determine the impact of graphic narratives on clinical practice.

Empowering Health Workers to Protect Their Own Health: A Study of Enabling Factors and Barriers to Implementing HealthWISE in Mozambique, South Africa, and Zimbabwe

Ways to address the increasing global health workforce shortage include improving the occupational health and safety of health workers, particularly those in high-risk, low-resource settings. The World Health Organization and International Labour Organization designed HealthWISE, a quality improvement tool to help health workers identify workplace hazards to find and apply low-cost solutions. However, its implementation had never been systematically evaluated. We, therefore, studied the implementation of HealthWISE in seven hospitals in three countries: Mozambique, South Africa, and Zimbabwe. Through a multiple-case study and thematic analysis of data collected primarily from focus group discussions and questionnaires, we examined the enabling factors and barriers to the implementation of HealthWISE by applying the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARiHS) framework. Enabling factors included the willingness of workers to engage in the implementation, diverse teams that championed the process, and supportive senior leadership. Barriers included lack of clarity about how to use HealthWISE, insufficient funds, stretched human resources, older buildings, and lack of incident reporting infrastructure. Overall, successful implementation of HealthWISE required dedicated local team members who helped facilitate the process by adapting HealthWISE to the workers’ occupational health and safety (OHS) knowledge and skill levels and the cultures and needs of their hospitals, cutting across all constructs of the i-PARiHS framework.

Examination of the British Columbia influenza prevention policy for healthcare workers: Phase 1 qualitative case study

In August 2012, British Columbia became the first Canadian province to implement a province-wide Influenza Prevention Policy requiring all healthcare workers (HCWs) in residential and acute care facilities to either be immunized against influenza, or wear masks in patient care areas during the influenza season. This qualitative case study sought to understand the key facilitators and barriers involved in developing and implementing British Columbia's Influenza Prevention Policy. An explanatory qualitative case study approach was selected for this project. Data were collected through the review of 110 documents (policy and planning documents, implementation tools, press releases, communication materials, etc.), and through 7 focus groups with policy implementation team members (n = 48). Focus group interview transcripts were analyzed using Framework Analysis methods, and Prior's approach guided document analysis. Four themes were identified: (1) Clashing paradigms, (2) Policy implementation gaps, (3) Pathways of power, and (4) Personal impacts. Issues embedded in macro-, meso-, and micro-level contexts, and planning across the province, were identified as critical to policy implementation. A province-wide approach with senior-level engagement and dedicated resources is critical in a province-wide influenza prevention policy for HCW. Recommendations to improve large-scale implementation of condition-of-service influenza policies include: engaging stakeholders early, considering the complexity of political contexts, allotting time to plan appropriately, developing 'enforcement' plans, and providing education and skills to frontline providers.

Vaccination of healthcare workers: A review

Vaccine-preventable diseases are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. As new vaccines are proving to be effective and as the incidence of some infections decreases, vaccination practices are changing. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are particularly exposed to and play a role in nosocomial transmission, which makes them an important target group for vaccination. Most vaccine-preventable diseases still carry a significant risk of resurgence and have caused outbreaks in recent years. While many professional societies favor vaccination of HCWs as well as the general population, recommendations differ from country to country. In turn, vaccination coverage varies widely for each microorganism and for each country, making hospitals and clinics vulnerable to outbreaks. Vaccine mandates and non-mandatory strategies are the subject of ongoing research and controversies. Optimal approaches to increase coverage and turn the healthcare workforce into an efficient barrier against infectious diseases are still being debated.

Recommended Health Care Personnel Immunization: Exploring Immunization Rates, Motivators, and Barriers to Immunization in Health Care Personnel

Immunization rates among health care personnel (HCP) have remained low despite advances in vaccine development with reported rates ranging from 27% to 72% for commonly recommended vaccines. Within the United States, HCP are placing patients, families, and themselves at considerable risk for vaccine-preventable diseases. A significant source of infection, HCP are carriers of infectious agents and often unknowingly transmit these contagious diseases while experiencing minimal or no symptoms. This study examined the current immunization rates of HCP for influenza, tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (Tdap), and hepatitis B in Nebraska, as well as identified motivators and barriers to vaccination. Nebraska HCP surveyed included physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, medical assistants, nursing assistants, and clerical or administrative staff of nonrestricted ethnic backgrounds age 19 years and older. Nebraska HCP immunization rates were statistically above the national rates. Motivators and barriers were also identified for each vaccine.

Strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy - A systematic review

The purpose of this systematic review is to identify, describe and assess the potential effectiveness of strategies to respond to issues of vaccine hesitancy that have been implemented and evaluated across diverse global contexts.

METHODS

A systematic review of peer reviewed (January 2007-October 2013) and grey literature (up to October 2013) was conducted using a broad search strategy, built to capture multiple dimensions of public trust, confidence and hesitancy concerning vaccines. This search strategy was applied and adapted across several databases and organizational websites. Descriptive analyses were undertaken for 166 (peer reviewed) and 15 (grey literature) evaluation studies. In addition, the quality of evidence relating to a series of PICO (population, intervention, comparison/control, outcomes) questions defined by the SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy (WG) was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria; data were analyzed using Review Manager.

RESULTS

Across the literature, few strategies to address vaccine hesitancy were found to have been evaluated for impact on either vaccination uptake and/or changes in knowledge, awareness or attitude (only 14% of peer reviewed and 25% of grey literature). The majority of evaluation studies were based in the Americas and primarily focused on influenza, human papillomavirus (HPV) and childhood vaccines. In low- and middle-income regions, the focus was on diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis, and polio. Across all regions, most interventions were multi-component and the majority of strategies focused on raising knowledge and awareness. Thirteen relevant studies were used for the GRADE assessment that indicated evidence of moderate quality for the use of social mobilization, mass media, communication tool-based training for health-care workers, non-financial incentives and reminder/recall-based interventions. Overall, our results showed that multicomponent and dialogue-based interventions were most effective. However, given the complexity of vaccine hesitancy and the limited evidence available on how it can be addressed, identified strategies should be carefully tailored according to the target population, their reasons for hesitancy, and the specific context.

Examining the views of key stakeholders regarding the provision of occupational influenza vaccination for healthcare workers in Australia

Annual vaccination of hospital healthcare workers (HCWs) may be an effective measure to reduce the transmission of healthcare associated influenza. However, vaccine coverage rates among HCWs in most public Australian hospitals are below satisfactory for a number of reasons. This study aimed to examine the opinions of key health stakeholders on current issues regarding HCW influenza vaccination. A qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews was undertaken with key Australian health stakeholders representing different organizations and sectors involved in influenza vaccination and policy. Amongst the participants, there was overwhelming support for HCW influenza vaccination. They viewed vaccination as one of the most important preventive measures for healthcare associated influenza and generally agreed that vaccination of HCWs reduces the overall risk of transmission to patients. However, there were contradictory attitudes regarding the evidence available for justifying the impact of vaccinating HCWs against influenza. Amongst the stakeholders interviewed, there was support for continuing to promote influenza vaccination for HCWs via the conventional framework. Participants recommended that hospitals continue to use conventional, voluntary strategies to increase vaccine coverage such as education and mobile carts. Given that the World Health Organization has included HCWs as a target group for influenza vaccination, Australian hospitals may need to start considering the use of mandatory policies in the near future.

Ethical analyses of institutional measures to increase health care worker influenza vaccination rates

Health care worker (HCW) influenza vaccination rates are modest. This paper provides a detailed ethical analysis of the major options to increase HCW vaccination rates, comparing how major ethical theories would address the options. The main categories of interventions to raise rates include education, incentives, easy access, competition with rewards, assessment and feedback, declination, mandates with alternative infection control measures, and mandates with administrative action as consequences. The aforementioned interventions, except mandates, arouse little ethical controversy. However, these efforts are time and work intensive and rarely achieve vaccination rates higher than about 70%. The primary concerns voiced about mandates are loss of autonomy, injustice, lack of due process, and subsuming the individual for institutional ends. Proponents of mandates argue that they are ethical based on beneficence, non-maleficence, and duty. A number of professional associations support mandates. Arguments by analogy can be made by mandates for HCW vaccination against other diseases. The ethical systems used in the analyses include evolutionary ethics, utilitarianism, principalism (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice), Kantism, and altruism. Across these systems, the most commonly preferred options are easy access, assessment and feedback, declinations, and mandates with infection control measures as consequences for non-compliance. Given the ethical imperatives of non-maleficence and beneficence, the limited success of lower intensive interventions, and the need for putting patient safety ahead of HCW convenience, mandates with additional infection control measures as consequences for non-compliance are preferred. For those who opt out of vaccination due to conscience concerns, such mandates provide a means to remain employed but not put patient safety at risk.

Predictive factors associated with the acceptance of pandemic and seasonal influenza vaccination in health care workers and students in Tuscany, Central Italy

Assessing the beliefs and attitudes of Health Care Workers (HCW) to influenza and influenza vaccination can be useful in overcoming low compliance rates. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the opinion of HCW and students regarding influenza, influenza vaccine and the factors associated with vaccination compliance. A survey was conducted between October 2010 and April 2011 in the Florence metropolitan area. A questionnaire was administered to HCW in three local healthcare units and at Careggi University Teaching Hospital. Students matriculating in health degree programs at Florence University were also surveyed.

The coverage with vaccination against seasonal and pandemic influenza is generally low, and it is lower in students than in HCW (12.5% vs 15% for the seasonal vaccination, 8.5% vs 18% for the pandemic vaccination). Individuals comply with vaccination offer mainly to protect themselves and their contacts. Individuals not receiving vaccination did not consider themselves at risk, had never been vaccinated before or believed that pandemic influenza was not a public health concern. Physicians had the highest compliance to vaccination and women were less frequently vaccinated than men. HCW do not appear to perceive their possible influenza infections as a risk for patients: HCW receive vaccination mainly as a form of personal protection.

Low compliance to vaccination is determined by various factors and therefore requires a multi-faceted strategy of response. This should include short-term actions to overcome organizational barriers, in addition to long-term interventions to raise HCW’s level of knowledge about influenza and influenza vaccination.

Impact of hospital policies on health care workers' influenza vaccination rates

BACKGROUND

Overall annual influenza vaccination rate has slowly increased among health care workers but still remains below the national goal of 90%.

METHODS

To compare hospitals that mandate annual health care worker (HCW) influenza vaccination with and without consequences for noncompliance, a 34-item survey was mailed to an infection control professional in 964 hospitals across the United States in 4 waves. Respondents were grouped by presence of a hospital policy that required annual influenza vaccination of HCWs with and without consequences for noncompliance. Combined with hospital characteristics from the American Hospital Association, data were analyzed using χ(2) or Fisher exact tests for categorical variables and t tests for continuous variables.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty hospitals required influenza vaccination, 84 with consequences (wear a mask, termination, education, restriction from patient care duties, unpaid leave) and 66 without consequences for noncompliance. Hospitals whose mandates have consequences for noncompliance included a broader range of personnel, were less likely to allow personal belief exemptions, or to require formal declination. The change in vaccination rates in hospitals with mandates with consequences (19.5%) was nearly double that of the hospitals with mandates without consequences (11%; P=.002). Presence of a state law regulating HCW influenza vaccination was associated with an increase in rates for mandates with consequences nearly 3 times the increase for mandates without consequences.

CONCLUSION

Hospital mandates for HCW influenza vaccination with consequences for noncompliance are associated with larger increases in HCW influenza vaccination rates than mandates without such consequences.