Characteristics of users of a tailored, interactive website for parents and its impact on adolescent vaccination attitudes and uptake

A World without Measles and Rubella: Addressing the Challenge of Vaccine Hesitancy

The worldwide elimination of measles and rubella is feasible, but not without overcoming the substantial challenge of vaccine hesitancy. This challenge is complicated by the spread of misinformation and disinformation fueled by rapidly progressing technologies and evolving forms of online communication. The recent COVID-19 pandemic has only added further complexity to this challenge. However, considerable progress has been made in understanding the scope of the problem and the complex factors that influence vaccine hesitancy. Our understanding of evidence-based strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy has grown significantly, including evidence for effective communication and behavioral interventions. In this article, we review measles and rubella vaccines and vaccine hesitancy. We then provide an overview of evidence-based strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy, including communication strategies and behavioral interventions. This article is relevant to healthcare professionals, health system leaders, public health professionals, policymakers, community leaders, and any individuals who have a role in addressing vaccine hesitancy in their communities. Finally, we review future directions and major areas of research need.

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.

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.

MomsTalkShots, tailored educational app, improves vaccine attitudes: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Many pregnant women and parents have concerns about vaccines. This analysis examined the impact of MomsTalkShots, an individually tailored educational application, on vaccine attitudes of pregnant women and mothers.

METHODS

MomsTalkShots was the patient-level component of a multi-level intervention to improve maternal and infant vaccine uptake that also included provider- and practice-level interventions. The impact of these interventions was studied using a two-by-two factorial design, randomizing at both the patient- and the practice-level. Study staff recruited pregnant women from a diverse set of prenatal care practices in Colorado and Georgia between June 2017 and July 2018. All participants (n = 2087) received a baseline survey of maternal and infant vaccine intentions and attitudes, and two follow-up surveys at least 1 month and 1 year after their infant's birth, respectively. Half of participants (n = 1041) were randomly assigned to receive educational videos through MomsTalkShots, algorithmically tailored to their vaccine intentions, attitudes, and demographics. Since the practice/provider intervention did not appear impactful, this analysis focused on MomsTalkShots regardless of the practice/provider intervention.

RESULTS

By 1 month post-birth, MomsTalkShots increased perceived risk of maternal influenza disease (61% among MomsTalkShots recipients vs 55% among controls; Odds Ratio: 1.61, 95% Confidence Interval: 1.23-2.09), confidence in influenza vaccine efficacy (73% vs 63%; OR: 1.97, 95%CI: 1.47-2.65), and perceived vaccine knowledge (55% vs 48%; OR: 1.39, 95%CI: 1.13-1.72). Among those intending not to vaccinate at baseline, MomsTalkShots increased perceived risk of maternal influenza disease (38% vs 32%; OR: 2.07, 95%CI: 1.15-3.71) and confidence in influenza vaccine efficacy (44% vs 28%; OR: 2.62, 95%CI: 1.46-4.69). By 1 year post-birth, MomsTalkShots increased perceived vaccine knowledge (62% vs 50%; OR: 1.74, 95%CI: 1.36-2.24) and trust in vaccine information from obstetricians and pediatricians (64% vs 55%; OR: 1.53, 95%CI: 1.17-2.00). Among those uncertain about vaccinating at baseline, MomsTalkShots increased perceived vaccine knowledge (47% vs 12%; OR: 6.89, 95%CI: 1.52-31.25) and reduced infant vaccine safety concerns (71% vs 91%; OR: 0.24, 95%CI: 0.06-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

MomsTalkShots improved pregnant women's and mothers' knowledge and perceptions of maternal and infant vaccines and the diseases they prevent, and offers a scalable tool to address vaccine hesitancy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov on 13/09/2016 (registration number: NCT02898688).

Resources for assessing parents' vaccine hesitancy: a systematic review of the literature

The concept of Vaccine Hesitancy has begun to appear in the scientific landscape, referring to the reluctance of a growing proportion of people to accept the vaccination offer. A variety of factors were identified as being associated with vaccine hesitancy but there was no universal algorithm and currently there aren’t any established metrics to assess either the presence or impact of vaccine hesitancy. The aim of this study was to systematically review the published questionnaires evaluating parental vaccine hesitancy, to highlight the differences among these surveys and offer a general overview on this matter. This study offers a deeper perspective on the available questionnaires, helping future researches to identify the most suitable one according to their own aim and study setting.

Improving vaccination uptake among adolescents

BACKGROUND

Adolescent vaccination has received increased attention since the Global Vaccine Action Plan's call to extend the benefits of immunisation more equitably beyond childhood. In recent years, many programmes have been launched to increase the uptake of different vaccines in adolescent populations; however, vaccination coverage among adolescents remains suboptimal. Therefore, understanding and evaluating the various interventions that can be used to improve adolescent vaccination is crucial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of interventions to improve vaccine uptake among adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

In October 2018, we searched the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, and eight other databases. In addition, we searched two clinical trials platforms, electronic databases of grey literature, and reference lists of relevant articles. For related systematic reviews, we searched four databases. Furthermore, in May 2019, we performed a citation search of five other websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series studies of adolescents (girls or boys aged 10 to 19 years) eligible for World Health Organization-recommended vaccines and their parents or healthcare providers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened records, reviewed full-text articles to identify potentially eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, resolving discrepancies by consensus. For each included study, we calculated risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) where appropriate. We pooled study results using random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies (eight individually randomised trials, four cluster randomised trials, three non-randomised trials, and one controlled before-after study). Twelve studies were conducted in the USA, while there was one study each from: Australia, Sweden, Tanzania, and the UK. Ten studies had unclear or high risk of bias. We categorised interventions as recipient-oriented, provider-oriented, or health systems-oriented. The interventions targeted adolescent boys or girls or both (seven studies), parents (four studies), and providers (two studies). Five studies had mixed participants that included adolescents and parents, adolescents and healthcare providers, and parents and healthcare providers. The outcomes included uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) (11 studies); hepatitis B (three studies); and tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (Tdap), meningococcal, HPV, and influenza (three studies) vaccines among adolescents. Health education improves HPV vaccine uptake compared to usual practice (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.76; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 1054 participants; high-certainty evidence). In addition, one large study provided evidence that a complex multi-component health education intervention probably results in little to no difference in hepatitis B vaccine uptake compared to simplified information leaflets on the vaccine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97 to 0.99; 17,411 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Financial incentives may improve HPV vaccine uptake compared to usual practice (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.99; 1 study, 500 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, we are uncertain whether combining health education and financial incentives has an effect on hepatitis B vaccine uptake, compared to usual practice (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.00; 1 study, 104 participants; very low certainty evidence). Mandatory vaccination probably leads to a large increase in hepatitis B vaccine uptake compared to usual practice (RR 3.92, 95% CI 3.65 to 4.20; 1 study, 6462 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Provider prompts probably make little or no difference compared to usual practice, on completion of Tdap (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.80; 2 studies, 3296 participants), meningococcal (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.79; 2 studies, 3219 participants), HPV (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.81; 2 studies, 859 participants), and influenza (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.34; 2 studies, 1439 participants) vaccination schedules (moderate-certainty evidence). Provider education with performance feedback may increase the proportion of adolescents who are offered and accept HPV vaccination by clinicians, compared to usual practice. Compared to adolescents visiting non-participating clinicians (in the usual practice group), the adolescents visiting clinicians in the intervention group were more likely to receive the first dose of HPV during preventive visits (5.7 percentage points increase) and during acute visits (0.7 percentage points for the first and 5.6 percentage points for the second doses of HPV) (227 clinicians and more than 200,000 children; low-certainty evidence). A class-based school vaccination strategy probably leads to slightly higher HPV vaccine uptake than an age-based school vaccination strategy (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.13; 1 study, 5537 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A multi-component provider intervention (including an education session, repeated contacts, individualised feedback, and incentives) probably improves uptake of HPV vaccine compared to usual practice (moderate-certainty evidence). A multi-component intervention targeting providers and parents involving social marketing and health education may improve HPV vaccine uptake compared to usual practice (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.59; 1 study, 25,869 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Various strategies have been evaluated to improve adolescent vaccination including health education, financial incentives, mandatory vaccination, and class-based school vaccine delivery. However, most of the evidence is of low to moderate certainty. This implies that while this research provides some indication of the likely effect of these interventions, the likelihood that the effects will be substantially different is high. Therefore, additional research is needed to further enhance adolescent immunisation strategies, especially in low- and middle-income countries where there are limited adolescent vaccination programmes. In addition, it is critical to understand the factors that influence hesitancy, acceptance, and demand for adolescent vaccination in different settings. This is the topic of an ongoing Cochrane qualitative evidence synthesis, which may help to explain why and how some interventions were more effective than others in increasing adolescent HPV vaccination coverage.

A Face-Aging App for Smoking Cessation in a Waiting Room Setting: Pilot Study in an HIV Outpatient Clinic

BACKGROUND

There is strong evidence for the effectiveness of addressing tobacco use in health care settings. However, few smokers receive cessation advice when visiting a hospital. Implementing smoking cessation technology in outpatient waiting rooms could be an effective strategy for change, with the potential to expose almost all patients visiting a health care provider without preluding physician action needed.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to develop an intervention for smoking cessation that would make use of the time patients spend in a waiting room by passively exposing them to a face-aging, public morphing, tablet-based app, to pilot the intervention in a waiting room of an HIV outpatient clinic, and to measure the perceptions of this intervention among smoking and nonsmoking HIV patients.

METHODS

We developed a kiosk version of our 3-dimensional face-aging app Smokerface, which shows the user how their face would look with or without cigarette smoking 1 to 15 years in the future. We placed a tablet with the app running on a table in the middle of the waiting room of our HIV outpatient clinic, connected to a large monitor attached to the opposite wall. A researcher noted all the patients who were using the waiting room. If a patient did not initiate app use within 30 seconds of waiting time, the researcher encouraged him or her to do so. Those using the app were asked to complete a questionnaire.

RESULTS

During a 19-day period, 464 patients visited the waiting room, of whom 187 (40.3%) tried the app and 179 (38.6%) completed the questionnaire. Of those who completed the questionnaire, 139 of 176 (79.0%) were men and 84 of 179 (46.9%) were smokers. Of the smokers, 55 of 81 (68%) said the intervention motivated them to quit (men: 45, 68%; women: 10, 67%); 41 (51%) said that it motivated them to discuss quitting with their doctor (men: 32, 49%; women: 9, 60%); and 72 (91%) perceived the intervention as fun (men: 57, 90%; women: 15, 94%). Of the nonsmokers, 92 (98%) said that it motivated them never to take up smoking (men: 72, 99%; women: 20, 95%). Among all patients, 102 (22.0%) watched another patient try the app without trying it themselves; thus, a total of 289 (62.3%) of the 464 patients were exposed to the intervention (average waiting time 21 minutes).

CONCLUSIONS

A face-aging app implemented in a waiting room provides a novel opportunity to motivate patients visiting a health care provider to quit smoking, to address quitting at their subsequent appointment and thereby encourage physician-delivered smoking cessation, or not to take up smoking.

Impact of a website based educational program for increasing vaccination coverage among adolescents

Data regarding the use of technology to improve adolescent knowledge on vaccines are scarce. The main aim of this study was to evaluate whether different web-based educational programmes for adolescents might increase their vaccination coverage. Overall, 917 unvaccinated adolescents (389 males, 42.4%; mean age ± standard deviation, 14.0 ± 2.2 years) were randomized 1:1:1 into the following groups: no intervention (n = 334), website educational program only (n = 281), or website plus face to face lesson (n = 302) groups. The use of the website plus the lesson significantly increased the overall knowledge of various aspects of vaccine-preventable disease and reduced the fear of vaccines (p < 0.001). A significant increase in vaccination coverage was observed for tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis and conjugated meningococcal ACYW vaccines in the 2 groups using the website (p < 0.001), and better results were observed in the group that had also received the lesson; in this last group, significant results were observed in the increase in vaccination coverage for meningococcal B vaccine (p < 0.001). Overall, the majority of the participants liked the experience of the website, although they considered it important to further discuss vaccines with parents, experts and teachers. This study is the first to evaluate website based education of adolescents while considering all of the vaccines recommended for this age group. Our results demonstrate the possibility of increasing vaccination coverage by using a website based educational program with tailored information. However, to be most effective, this program should be supplemented with face-to-face discussions of vaccines at school and at home. Thus, specific education should also include teachers and parents so that they will be prepared to discuss with adolescents what is true and false in the vaccination field.

Information sources and knowledge on vaccination in a population from southern Italy: The ESCULAPIO project

Vaccine knowledge of the general population is shaped by different information sources and strongly influences vaccination attitudes and uptake. The CCM-Italian Ministry of Health ESCULAPIO project attempted to identify the role of such information sources, in order to address adequate strategies to improve information on vaccines and vaccine preventable diseases. In the present study, data on 632 adults from Southern Italy regarding information sources were collected, and their perceived and actual knowledge on vaccinations were compared and analyzed in relation to socio-demographic characteristics and information sources. The main reported reference sources were general practitioners (GPs) (42.5%) and pediatricians (33.1%), followed by mass media (24.1%) and the Internet (17.6%). A total of 45.4% reported they believed to be informed (45.4%), while those estimated to be truly informed were 43.8%. However, as showed in the multivariate logistic regression, people having the perception to be correctly informed ascribed their good knowledge to their profession in the health sector (Adj OR 2.28, CI 1.09-4.77, p < 0.05) and to friends/relatives/colleagues (AdjOR 6.25, CI 2.38-16.44, p < 0.001), while the non-informed population thought the responsibility had to be attributed to mass media (AdjOR 0.45, CI 0.22-0.92, p < 0.05). Those showing the real correct information, instead, were younger (AdjOR 1.64, CI 1.04-2.59, p < 0.05), and their main reference sources were pediatricians (AdjOR 1.63, CI 1.11-2.39, p < 0.05) and scientific magazines (Adj OR 3.39, CI 1.51-7.59, p < 0.01). Only 6% knew the "VaccinarSì" portal, developed to counter the widespred antivaccine websites in Italy. The post-survey significant increase of connections to "VaccinarSi" could be ascribed to the counselling performed during questionnaire administration. Strategies to improve information about vaccination should be addressed to fortifying healthcare workers knowledge in order to make them public health opinion leaders. General population should be provided with correct indications on trustworthy websites on vaccines to contrast false information supplied by anti-vaccinists on their own websites or social networks pages and on the mass media.