An Ounce of Prevention: Identifying Cues to (In)Action for Maternal Vaccine Refusal

Strategies for Working With Parents With Vaccination Hesitancy

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of effective strategies for working with parents' vaccination hesitancy or refusal. An overview of historical and current trends in vaccination hesitancy and factors that contribute to and strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy are discussed. This includes an emphasis on the critical role played by health care providers, as trusted advisors and a primary source of health care information, in encouraging vaccine acceptance. Legal and ethical implications are also considered. Vaccination hesitancy strategies are most effective if they are timely, multifaceted, and collaborative.

Psychological mechanisms and interventions directed at vaccination attitudes

Attitudes about vaccination impact not only the individual but also society. Therefore, understanding the underlying psychological processes of those who disagree with vaccination is critical for creating compassion through understanding and change through promoting autonomy. The current review aimed to fill a gap in the literature, outlining the state of the recent research on vaccination attitudes, specifically on the underlying mechanisms driving anti-vaccination movements and individuals' thoughts and behaviors. In addition, we aimed to evaluate current research on the effectiveness of interventions targeting these mechanisms. Overall, results indicated that those declining vaccines had beliefs related to distrust in the scientific community and pharmaceutical companies and moral preferences for purity and liberty. In addition, our review identified the potential for utilizing motivational interviewing techniques as an intervention. This literature review provides a platform for further research and enhances the current understanding of vaccination attitudes.

Exploring the Willingness of the COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Shots in China Using the Health Belief Model: Web-Based Online Cross-Sectional Study

(1) Objective: To explore Chinese residents’ willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine booster shots and identify predictors of the level of willingness based on the health belief model (HBM). (2) Methods: The snowball sampling method was used to distribute online questionnaires. A chi-square test was used to analyze the relationship between different variables. The causal relationship between HBM-related factors and booster vaccination intentions was explored by Structural equation modeling (SEM). (3) Results: A total of 898 complete responses were included; 64.3% had already received the booster injection. Most respondents intended to vaccinate themselves, while 16.1% were hesitant. Nearly half of the respondents chose to take the booster injection to support China’s vaccination policy. Using the SEM, perceived susceptibility and perceived barriers were found to have a negative effect on booster vaccination intentions, whereas perceived benefit and cues to action positively affected booster vaccination intentions in the HBM. (4) Conclusions: Factors included in this study have different effects on the willingness to take the COVID-19 booster injections. Sociodemographic characteristics and characteristics of participants’ COVID-19 vaccination have a significant effect on the willingness to receive vaccine booster shots. The HBM constructs can serve as good predictors of the acceptance of vaccine booster shots with the exception of perceived severity, which may benefit health officials in terms of conducting targeted strategies in vaccine programs.

Vaccine Hesitancy in Pediatrics

Vaccine hesitancy is a growing complex and multifaceted phenomenon. It encompasses a wide spectrum of context-dependent attitudes and beliefs. Multiple factors influence parental decision-making including knowledge, sources of information, risk perception, trust, and individual experiences among others. This review focuses on describing the most common reasons that contribute to vaccine hesitancy among parents. Social media and the Internet have been described as major elements that can negatively influence parental decision-making regarding vaccines. The next focus is describing effective interventions that clinical providers can apply. Nonconfrontational and open discussions along with trusting and strong relationships between parents and providers seem to create a solid foundation toward vaccine acceptance. In addition, motivational interviewing is a helpful tool that has proven to be effective during these discussions. Ultimately, an individualized approach tailored to a specific community will likely be most effective in addressing vaccine hesitancy.

Health care provider trust in vaccination: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy is a growing issue globally amongst various populations, including health care providers. This study explores the factors that influence vaccine hesitancy amongst nurses and physicians.

METHODS

We performed a qualitative meta-synthesis of 22 qualitative and mixed-method studies exploring the factors that may contribute to vaccine hesitancy amongst nurses and physicians. We included all articles that mentioned any aspect of trust concerning vaccination, including how trust may influence or contribute to vaccine hesitancy in nurses and physicians.

RESULTS

Our findings revealed that vaccine hesitancy amongst nurses stemmed predominantly from two factors: distrust in health authorities and their employers, and distrust in vaccine efficacy and safety. Both nurses and physicians had a precarious relationship with health authorities. Nurses felt that their employers and health authorities did not prioritize their health over patients' health, provided inaccurate and inconsistent vaccine information, and were mistrustful of pharmaceutical company motives. Like nurses, physicians were also skeptical of pharmaceutical company motives when it came to vaccination. Additionally, physicians also held doubts regarding vaccine efficacy and safety.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship health care providers or their patients have with health authorities and other providers regarding vaccination serves as unsystematic clinical experiences that may bolster vaccine hesitancy. Providing accurate and tangible information to emphasize the safety and efficacy of vaccines to health care providers may help address their specific concerns that may ultimately increase vaccine uptake.

Becoming skeptical towards vaccines: How health views shape the trajectories following health-related events

Recent studies on skepticism towards childhood vaccination urge scholars to analyse vaccination trajectories. Focusing on a social group that recent studies point out as being especially relevant because of its relatively high level of skepticism toward childhood vaccination, we use in-depth interviews resembling open conversations to explore how more-educated parents' views on vaccination came about. Providing an in-depth understanding of these vaccine-skepticism trajectories, we additionally analyse 1) how health-related events play a role in parents' trajectories, and 2) how these trajectories are shaped by parents' pre-existing health views. Interviews with 31 more-educated Dutch parents reveal that different types of events incite respondents to start questioning vaccinations. Next to more commonly studied events that directly involve parents' or their children's health (e.g., (perceived) adverse effects of treatments), events that are also related to the topic of health or vaccination but do not involve parents' or their children's health (e.g., when health issues come up in a conversation) may incite parents to start questioning vaccination. Moreover, how respondents experience (different types of) health-related events, and how they go through distinct stages after this, proves shaped by their pre-existing health views: parents with nature-oriented health views came to doubt the fundamental principles of vaccination, turning instead to 'alternative' resources and practices; parents with science-oriented views queried the potential risks of vaccination and sought out what they viewed as the most scientifically sound information. We discuss the implications of our findings for scholarly debates and provide suggestions for further research.

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.

Why do some Korean parents hesitate to vaccinate their children?

OBJECTIVES

Vaccinations for infectious diseases are opposed despite their achievement, and this opposition has recently been revealed in Korea. However, research in Korea has not been vigorous. The authors studied why some Korean parents hesitate to vaccinate their children by applying the health belief model.

METHODS

Parents who hesitate to vaccinate and parents who do not were surveyed in alternative education preschools and elementary schools. They were classified into four types of hesitancy and statistically compared.

RESULTS

Among the 129 subjects, 43 vaccinated without hesitancy, 20 vaccinated on time with hesitancy, 32 vaccinated with a deliberate delay of one month or longer, and 34 did not vaccinate. Vaccination increased with an increase in the awareness that severe outcomes can occur when unvaccinated. Concerns about adverse reactions from vaccinations or direct/indirect experiences affected refusal. Furthermore, perceptions of the lack of meaningfulness of vaccinations, distrust of policy and safety management, influence of leaders or activists in joined organizations, and experts of Korean traditional or alternative medicine affected refusal. Explanations by doctors, text messages and mails from institutions, and concerns about disadvantages caused by not complying with government policies increased vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

The reasons for vaccine hesitancy and acceptance were similar to the results of international research. Health authorities and professionals should communicate sufficiently and appropriately with hesitant parents and find ways to rationally resolve social conflicts. However, this sample was small and there is little Korean research, so more in-depth and diverse researchs are needed.