1
|
Razai MS, Mansour R, Ravindran P, Freeman S, Mason-Apps C, Morris J, Majeed A, Ussher M, Hargreaves S, Oakeshott P. Facilitators and barriers to vaccination uptake in pregnancy: A qualitative systematic review. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0298407. [PMID: 38640190 PMCID: PMC11029626 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298407] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 01/25/2024] [Indexed: 04/21/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Vaccination during pregnancy protects both the mother and the foetus from vaccine-preventable diseases. However, uptake of the recommended vaccines (influenza, pertussis, COVID-19) by pregnant women remains low in Europe and the USA. Understanding the reasons for this is crucial to inform strategies to increase vaccination rates in pregnant women. This qualitative systematic review aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators to vaccination against influenza, pertussis/whooping cough and COVID-19 during pregnancy and identify possible strategies to increase vaccination rates. METHODS We conducted a comprehensive search of electronic databases, including Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, WHO database, Embase and grey literature to identify qualitative studies that explored barriers and facilitators to vaccine uptake among pregnant women (PROSPERO CRD42023399488). The search was limited to studies published between 2012 and 2022 conducted in high-income countries with established vaccination programmes during pregnancy. Studies were thematically analysed and underwent quality assessment using the Joanna Briggs Institute validated critical appraisal tool for qualitative research. RESULTS Out of 2681 articles screened, 28 studies (n = 1573 participants) were eligible for inclusion. Five overarching themes emerged relating to personal, provider and systemic factors. Barriers to vaccine uptake included concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy, lack of knowledge about vaccines' benefits and necessity, fear of adverse effects on the foetus or mother and low perception of disease severity. Facilitators included recommendations from trusted healthcare providers, easy access to vaccination, clear communication on the benefits and safety of vaccination, and positive social influences from family and friends. Strategies for increasing vaccination uptake included strong and proactive vaccine recommendations by trusted healthcare professionals, provision of vaccines during routine antenatal care, and clear and consistent communication about vaccines addressing pregnant women's concerns. CONCLUSION This review highlights the need for interventions that address the identified barriers to vaccine uptake among pregnant women. Recommendation from a healthcare provider can play a significant role in promoting vaccine uptake, as can clear risk/benefit communication and convenient access to vaccination. Addressing concerns about vaccine safety and providing accurate information about vaccines is also important.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammad S. Razai
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Rania Mansour
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Samuel Freeman
- University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust, Sussex, United Kingdom
| | - Charlotte Mason-Apps
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Joan Morris
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Azeem Majeed
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Michael Ussher
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Institute for Social Marketing and Health, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom
| | - Sally Hargreaves
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, London, United Kingdom
- The Migrant Health Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George’s, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Pippa Oakeshott
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zaildo T, Santino TA, Chaves G, da Silva BAK, Alchieri JC, Patino CM, Leite S, Luz KG, Guerra RO, da Penha THS, da Silva GR, Jácome AC, Monteiro KS, de Mendonça KMPP. Barriers to and facilitators of populational adherence to prevention and control measures of COVID-19 and other respiratory infectious diseases: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Eur Respir Rev 2023; 32:220238. [PMID: 37343960 DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0238-2022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2022] [Accepted: 04/03/2023] [Indexed: 06/23/2023] Open
Abstract
AIMS To summarise the evidence on barriers to and facilitators of population adherence to prevention and control measures for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other respiratory infectious diseases. METHODS A qualitative synthesis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care: Qualitative Evidence Synthesis. We performed an electronic search on MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO from their inception to March 2023. RESULTS We included 71 studies regarding COVID-19, pneumonia, tuberculosis, influenza, pertussis and H1N1, representing 5966 participants. The measures reported were vaccinations, physical distancing, stay-at-home policy, quarantine, self-isolation, facemasks, hand hygiene, contact investigation, lockdown, infection prevention and control guidelines, and treatment. Tuberculosis-related measures were access to care, diagnosis and treatment completion. Analysis of the included studies yielded 37 barriers and 23 facilitators. CONCLUSIONS This review suggests that financial and social support, assertive communication, trust in political authorities and greater regulation of social media enhance adherence to prevention and control measures for COVID-19 and infectious respiratory diseases. Designing and implementing effective educational public health interventions targeting the findings of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this review are key to reducing the impact of infectious respiratory diseases at the population level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tácito Zaildo
- Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate Program in Physical Therapy, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | - Thayla Amorim Santino
- Department of Physical Therapy, State University of Paraiba, Campina Grande, PB, Brazil
| | | | | | - João Carlos Alchieri
- Department of Psychology, Graduate Program in Science, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | - Cecilia M Patino
- Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Sarah Leite
- Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate Program in Physical Therapy, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | - Kleber Giovanni Luz
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | - Ricardo Oliveira Guerra
- Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate Program in Physical Therapy, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | - Tito Hugo Soares da Penha
- Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate Program in Physical Therapy, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | - Gabriel Rodrigues da Silva
- Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate Program in Physical Therapy, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | - Ada Cristina Jácome
- Public Health Department of the State of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | - Karolinne Souza Monteiro
- Faculty of Health Sciences of Trairi, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Knowledge, Perceptions, Attitudes and Practices of Midwives Regarding Maternal Influenza and Pertussis Vaccination: A Qualitative Study. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph19148391. [PMID: 35886242 PMCID: PMC9322479 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19148391] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2022] [Revised: 06/28/2022] [Accepted: 07/07/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
The coverage of maternal vaccination against pertussis and, particularly, influenza is lower than expected. The lack of recommendation from healthcare providers conditions non-vaccination in pregnant women. The purpose was to determine the knowledge, perceptions, attitudes and practices of midwives regarding maternal influenza and pertussis vaccination. A qualitative descriptive study based on semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with seventeen midwives was conducted, including purposive sampling and thematic analyses. Midwives had disparate knowledge and perceptions about the severity of influenza and pertussis in pregnant women, and influenza was not considered very serious. The vaccines were generally considered safe. However, because midwives did not have enough information about the safety of the influenza vaccine, there was a tendency not to recommend it. While most midwives had a positive attitude toward vaccination, their advocation for vaccination against influenza was not as clear as it was for pertussis. Not wanting to influence the decision and assuming an informative–facilitating role also led providers to recommend the influenza vaccine less frequently. Midwives are among the main sources of professional advice for pregnant women. Addressing their understanding and professional practices regarding maternal vaccination is key to change the attitude of pregnant women and thus increase vaccine uptake among them, particularly for influenza.
Collapse
|
4
|
Young A, Charania NA, Gauld N, Norris P, Turner N, Willing E. Knowledge and decisions about maternal immunisation by pregnant women in Aotearoa New Zealand. BMC Health Serv Res 2022; 22:779. [PMID: 35698133 PMCID: PMC9192336 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-022-08162-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2022] [Accepted: 06/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Maternal vaccinations for influenza and pertussis are recommended in New Zealand to protect mothers and their infant from infection. However, maternal immunisation coverage in New Zealand is suboptimal. Furthermore, there is unacceptable inequitable maternal immunisation rates across the country with Māori and Pacific women having significantly lower maternal immunisation rates than those of other New Zealanders. METHODS This research set out to explore what pregnant/recently pregnant Māori and Pacific women knew about immunisation during pregnancy and what factors influenced their decision to be vaccinated. A semi-structured interview guide was developed with questions focusing on knowledge of pertussis and influenza vaccination during pregnancy and decision-making. Māori and Pacific women aged over 16 years were purposively sampled and interviewed in Dunedin and Gisborne, New Zealand between May and August 2021. Interviews were analysed following a directed qualitative content approach. Data were arranged into coding nodes based on the study aims (deductive analysis) informed by previous literature and within these participant experiences were inductively coded into themes and subthemes. RESULTS Not all women were aware of maternal vaccine recommendations or they diseases they protected against. Many underestimated how dangerous influenza and pertussis could be and some were more concerned about potential harms of the vaccine. Furthermore, understanding potential harms of infection and protection provided by vaccination did not necessarily mean women would choose to be vaccinated. Those who decided to vaccinate felt well-informed, had vaccination recommended by their healthcare provider, and did so to protect their and their infant's health. Those who decided against vaccination were concerned about safety of the vaccines, lacked the information they needed, were not offered the vaccine, or did not consider vaccination a priority. CONCLUSIONS There is a lack of understanding about vaccine benefits and risks of vaccine-preventable diseases which can result in the reinforcement of negative influences such as the fear of side effects. Furthermore, if vaccine benefits are not understood, inaccessibility of vaccines and the precedence of other life priorities may prevent uptake. Being well-informed and supported to make positive decisions to vaccinate in pregnancy is likely to improve vaccine coverage in Māori and Pacific Island New Zealanders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amber Young
- Division of Health Sciences , Kōhatu-Centre for Hauora Māori, Otago Medical School, University of Otago, PO Box 56 , 9054, Dunedin, New Zealand.
| | - Nadia A Charania
- Department of Public Health, School of Public Health and Interdisciplinary Studies, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Natalie Gauld
- Department of Paediatrics: Child and Youth Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.,School of Pharmacy, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Pauline Norris
- Va'a o Tautai - Centre for Pacific Health, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
| | - Nikki Turner
- Immunisation Advisory Centre, Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Esther Willing
- Division of Health Sciences , Kōhatu-Centre for Hauora Māori, Otago Medical School, University of Otago, PO Box 56 , 9054, Dunedin, New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|