A descriptive qualitative study of perceptions of parents on their child's vaccination

The Impact of a Revised National Childhood Immunization Schedule on Vaccination Defaulters

Immunization schedules affect community vaccine uptake rates, especially in children who have defaulted on their regular immunization timelines. In 2020, Singapore revised its National Childhood Immunization Schedule (NCIS) to incorporate two new combination vaccines: the hexavalent hepatitis, diphtheria, acellular pertussis, tetanus (DTaP), hemophilus influenzae b (Hib), inactivated poliovirus (IPV) (6-in-1), and the quadrivalent measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) vaccines, thus reducing the mean number of clinic visits and vaccine doses by two. Our database study aims to evaluate the impact of the 2020 NCIS on catch-up vaccination uptake rates in children at 18 and 24 months of age and the catch-up immunization rates of individual vaccines at two years. Vaccination data from two cohorts, in 2018 (n = 11,371) and in 2019 (n = 11,719), were extracted from the Electronic Medical Records. Catch-up vaccination rates increased by 5.2% and 2.6% in children on the new NCIS at 18 and 24 months, respectively. The uptake of individual 5-in-1 (DTaP, IPV, Hib), MMR, and pneumococcal vaccines increased by 3.7%, 4.1%, and 1.9% at 18 months. Reduced vaccination doses and visits in the new NCIS bring direct and indirect benefits to parents and promote vaccination adherence for their children. These findings highlight the importance of timelines in improving catch-up vaccination rates in any NCIS.

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is one of the most effective ways to prevent serious illnesses and deaths in children. However, worldwide, many children do not receive all recommended vaccinations, for several potential reasons. Vaccines might be unavailable, or parents may experience difficulties in accessing vaccination services; for instance, because of poor quality health services, distance from a health facility, or lack of money. Some parents may not accept available vaccines and vaccination services. Our understanding of what influences parents' views and practices around childhood vaccination, and why some parents may not accept vaccines for their children, is still limited. This synthesis links to Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to improve coverage or uptake of childhood vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

- Explore parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination, and the factors influencing acceptance, hesitancy, or nonacceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors reduce parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three other databases for eligible studies from 1974 to June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that: utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on parents' or caregivers' views, practices, acceptance, hesitancy, or refusal of routine vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where childhood vaccination is provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a pre-specified sampling frame to sample from eligible studies, aiming to capture studies that were conceptually rich, relevant to the review's phenomenon of interest, from diverse geographical settings, and from a range of income-level settings. We extracted contextual and methodological data from each sampled study. We used a meta-ethnographic approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of criteria used in previous Cochrane Reviews and originally based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We integrated the findings of this review with those from relevant Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. We did this by mapping whether the underlying theories or components of trial interventions included in those reviews related to or targeted the overarching factors influencing parental views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination identified by this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 145 studies in the review and sampled 27 of these for our analysis. Six studies were conducted in Africa, seven in the Americas, four in South-East Asia, nine in Europe, and one in the Western Pacific. Studies included urban and rural settings, and high-, middle-, and low-income settings. Many complex factors were found to influence parents' vaccination views and practices, which we divided into four themes. Firstly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their broader ideas and practices surrounding health and illness generally, and specifically with regards to their children, and their perceptions of the role of vaccination within this context. Secondly, many parents' vaccination ideas and practices were influenced by the vaccination ideas and practices of the people they mix with socially. At the same time, shared vaccination ideas and practices helped some parents establish social relationships, which in turn strengthened their views and practices around vaccination. Thirdly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by wider political issues and concerns, and particularly their trust (or distrust) in those associated with vaccination programmes. Finally, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their access to and experiences of vaccination services and their frontline healthcare workers. We developed two concepts for understanding possible pathways to reduced acceptance of childhood vaccination. The first concept, 'neoliberal logic', suggests that many parents, particularly from high-income countries, understood health and healthcare decisions as matters of individual risk, choice, and responsibility. Some parents experienced this understanding as in conflict with vaccination programmes, which emphasise generalised risk and population health. This perceived conflict led some parents to be less accepting of vaccination for their children. The second concept, 'social exclusion', suggests that some parents, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, were less accepting of childhood vaccination due to their experiences of social exclusion. Social exclusion may damage trustful relationships between government and the public, generate feelings of isolation and resentment, and give rise to demotivation in the face of public services that are poor quality and difficult to access. These factors in turn led some parents who were socially excluded to distrust vaccination, to refuse vaccination as a form of resistance or a way to bring about change, or to avoid vaccination due to the time, costs, and distress it creates. Many of the overarching factors our review identified as influencing parents' vaccination views and practices were underrepresented in the interventions tested in the four related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review has revealed that parents' views and practices regarding childhood vaccination are complex and dynamic social processes that reflect multiple webs of influence, meaning, and logic. We have provided a theorised understanding of the social processes contributing to vaccination acceptance (or not), thereby complementing but also extending more individualistic models of vaccination acceptance. Successful development of interventions to promote acceptance and uptake of childhood vaccination will require an understanding of, and then tailoring to, the specific factors influencing vaccination views and practices of the group(s) in the target setting. The themes and concepts developed through our review could serve as a basis for gaining this understanding, and subsequent development of interventions that are potentially more aligned with the norms, expectations, and concerns of target users.

Virtual Reality: Is It Helping Children Cope with Fear and Pain During Vaccination?

Background

Virtual reality (VR) is an innovative distraction technology in health care, but little is known about this topic in Saudi Arabia. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of using VR to reduce pain and fear among children during vaccination.

Methods

It is a cross-sectional study design. A total of 104 children (ages 4–6 years) receiving routine vaccinations in a single primary health care in Eastern Region, Saudi Arabia, participated in the study and grouped to a VR technology intervention group or vaccination as usual without VR distraction. The primary outcome is the difference in the child’s self-rated fear and pain scores between those who have been vaccinated with or without VR distraction, measured by the two validated international facial expressions scales Wong–Baker FACES Pain Scale and Children’s Fear Scale.

Results

In the two-month study period, 53 children were vaccinated using the VR technology and 50 children were vaccinated without VR. Bivariate analysis showed a significantly lower pain score among the VR group (\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage[substack]{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage[mathscr]{eucal} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \DeclareFontFamily{T1}{linotext}{} \DeclareFontShape{T1}{linotext}{m}{n} {linotext }{} \DeclareSymbolFont{linotext}{T1}{linotext}{m}{n} \DeclareSymbolFontAlphabet{\mathLINOTEXT}{linotext} \begin{document} $$\overline {\bf{\it{x}}} $$ \end{document}=1.36, SD 2.06) compared with the group without VR (\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage[substack]{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage[mathscr]{eucal} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \DeclareFontFamily{T1}{linotext}{} \DeclareFontShape{T1}{linotext}{m}{n} {linotext }{} \DeclareSymbolFont{linotext}{T1}{linotext}{m}{n} \DeclareSymbolFontAlphabet{\mathLINOTEXT}{linotext} \begin{document} $$\overline {\bf{\it{x}}} $$ \end{document}=6.90, SD 3.47) (P-value < 0.001). Similarly, fear score was lower in the VR group (\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage[substack]{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage[mathscr]{eucal} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \DeclareFontFamily{T1}{linotext}{} \DeclareFontShape{T1}{linotext}{m}{n} {linotext }{} \DeclareSymbolFont{linotext}{T1}{linotext}{m}{n} \DeclareSymbolFontAlphabet{\mathLINOTEXT}{linotext} \begin{document} $$\overline {\bf{\it{x}}} $$ \end{document}=0.64, SD 0.92) compared with the group without VR (\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage[substack]{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage[mathscr]{eucal} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \DeclareFontFamily{T1}{linotext}{} \DeclareFontShape{T1}{linotext}{m}{n} {linotext }{} \DeclareSymbolFont{linotext}{T1}{linotext}{m}{n} \DeclareSymbolFontAlphabet{\mathLINOTEXT}{linotext} \begin{document} $$\overline {\bf{\it{x}}} $$ \end{document}=2.88, SD1.55) (P < 0.001). In multivariable regression models adjusted for age and gender, children vaccinated using the VR technology had significantly lower pain and fear scores compared with those who were vaccinated as usual without VR distraction.

Conclusion

VR technology showed a positive impact on reducing pain and fear among children aged 4–6 years during vaccination. Policymakers are encouraged to expand the use of this distraction tool in primary health centers to improve the vaccination experience among children.

A Qualitative Study Exploring Singaporean Parents' Perceptions on PreParing their Child for Surgery

PURPOSE

To explore the perceptions of parents regarding the preparation of their children for surgery.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. Sixteen parents of children who were undergoing various types of elective surgery in a public tertiary hospital in Singapore were recruited. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews and analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Five themes were derived: (1) assumed roles of the parents; (2) communication, decision-making, and emotional challenges; (3) factors facilitating the preparation of children for surgery; (4) surgery-related and financial concerns; and (5) the desire for more information and better management. While preparing their children for surgery, parents undertook several roles to ensure readiness and to provide support. Parents faced challenges while communicating with their children regarding their surgeries, experiencing negative emotions and dilemmas in making decisions for surgery. Factors such as previous experiences, children's positive mentality, and access to information helped to facilitate their preparation. Parents expressed surgery-related concerns such as anesthesia and a successful outcome of the surgery, the timing of the surgery, and postoperative care. Parents expressed a desire for easier to understand information through the use of visual materials, and improvements in current practices and management.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a greater understanding of parents' perceptions of their roles, challenges, influencing factors, concerns, and needs when preparing their children for surgery.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The study findings provide insightful aspects for improving current healthcare practices and informing future research studies in exploring better surgery preparation programs for both parents and children.