Vaccine Delays, Refusals, and Patient Dismissals: A Survey of Pediatricians

Challenging the 'acceptable option': Public health's advocacy for continued care in the case of pediatric vaccine refusal

BACKGROUND

In the United States, nearly half of pediatricians dismiss or refuse to accept families that withhold consent from the administration of childhood vaccines. Since 2016, the American Academy of Pediatrics has called patient dismissal in these cases "an acceptable option." Clinician dismissal and non-acceptance pose a problem to public health because they cluster under-vaccinated children in the practices that remain willing to treat such children, and they decrease access to routine care for children who cannot find practices willing to accept or retain them. This paper reports the emergence of a new consciousness about dismissal and non-acceptance policies in the leadership of a local health department (LHD) of a populous metropolitan county.

OBJECTIVES

To understand the prevalence and diversity of patient dismissal within Oakland County, Michigan and to measure shifts in clinicians' attitudes about dismissal following an educational intervention.

METHODS

A preliminary community survey was distributed to immunizing providers during April 2023 with 61 responses measuring the frequency and reasoning for dismissal policies. The results of the survey were used to inform a brief, evidence-backed educational intervention which was delivered in June 2023 to 82 participants from local pediatric medical offices.

RESULTS

The initial survey was completed by 61 immunizing providers, representing an estimated 37% of vaccinating practices in the county. Half said their practice "always" or "sometimes" dismisses patients due to vaccine refusal. After the educational intervention, the proportion of participants who agreed/strongly agreed with the statement "I believe patient dismissal for vaccine refusal is a good choice for public health" decreased from 36% to 18%.

CONCLUSION

The changes that we observed between the pre- and post-intervention surveys demonstrate the opportunity that exists for LHD leaders to enter the conversation around patient dismissal and nonacceptance and shed new light on this issue.

A cross-sectional study of physicians on fluoride-related beliefs and practices, and experiences with fluoride-hesitant caregivers

The goal of this study was to describe medical providers' fluoride-related beliefs and practices, experiences with fluoride-hesitant caregivers, and barriers to incorporating oral health activities into their practice. In this cross-sectional study, we specifically tested the hypothesis of whether these factors differed between pediatric and family medicine providers. A 39-item online survey was administered to a convenience sample of pediatric and family medicine providers in Washington state and Ohio (U.S.A.). Responses to the fluoride survey were compared between pediatric and family medicine providers with a chi-square test (α = 0.05). Of the 354 study participants, 45% were pediatric providers and 55% were family medicine providers. About 61.9% of providers believed fluoridated water was highly effective at preventing tooth decay while only 29.1% believed prescription fluoride supplements were highly effective. Nearly all providers recommend over-the-counter fluoride toothpaste (87.3%), 44.1% apply topical fluoride in clinic, and 30.8% prescribe fluoride supplements. Most providers reported fluoride hesitancy was a small problem or not a problem (82.5%) and the most common concerns patients raise about fluoride were similar to those raised about vaccines. Lack of time was the most commonly reported barrier to incorporating oral health into practice, which was more commonly reported by family medicine providers than pediatric providers (65.6% vs. 50.3%; p = .005). Pediatric and family medicine providers have early and frequent access to children before children visit a dentist. Improving the use of fluorides through children's medical visits could improve pediatric oral health and reduce oral health inequities, especially for vulnerable populations at increased risk for tooth decay.

Mapping Adult Vaccine Confidence in Future Health Professionals: A Pilot Study among Undergraduate Students at Two Universities in Greece

Health professionals' recommendations increase vaccine uptake. We aimed to document stances, practices regarding adult vaccination, and their predictors among undergraduate medical and biomedical science students, as well as their perspectives on increasing vaccine confidence. Among the 430 participants, third-year students from two universities in Greece, only 25.4% were in favor of all vaccines, while no refuters were detected. Predictors of recommending vaccination were the Attitudes Towards Adult Vaccination (ATAVAC) Value (OR 3.26, p < 0.001) and ATAVAC Safety subscales scores (OR 1.36, p < 0.05), being a medical student (OR 2.45, p < 0.05), and having better self-rated health status (OR 2.27, p < 0.05). The importance of getting vaccinated as health professionals was recognized by participants with a higher ATAVAC value (OR 5.39, p < 0.001), ATAVAC Safety scores (OR 1.46, p < 0.05), and increased knowledge regarding the National Immunization Program (OR 1.31, p < 0.05). The God Locus of Health Control (GLHC) was a predictor only in vaccination against COVID-19 (OR 0.91, p < 0.05). Improving community health literacy and health providers' education, boosting trust in authorities, and adopting a person-centered approach emerged as the main themes regarding how to increase vaccine confidence. Mapping health professionals' confidence in vaccines and providing lifelong training support is pivotal in supporting positive attitudes, enhancing their competence, and promoting vaccination in the post-COVID-19 era.

Vaccine Confidence as Critical to Pandemic Preparedness and Response

Vaccine confidence is a belief that vaccines work, are safe, and are part of a trustworthy medical system. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility of the public's confidence in vaccines and the vaccine enterprise, limiting the public health impact of vaccination. In this review, we examine the critical nature of vaccine confidence to pandemic preparedness and response.

Non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and reasons for non-uptake among healthcare workers in Uganda: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Vaccines play a crucial role in eradicating and containing disease outbreaks. Therefore, understanding the reasons behind vaccine refusal and associated factors is essential for improving vaccine acceptance rates. Our objective was to examine the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine non-uptake and explore the reasons for non-uptake among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Uganda.

METHODS

Between July and August 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional study among healthcare workers in primary healthcare facilities (private and government) in Entebbe Municipality, Uganda. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling, and consenting individuals received credentials to access an electronic database and complete a structured questionnaire. There were no established HCWs contact registers in the municipality, and the study was conducted during a national lock down, therefore, the HCWs who were on duty at the time of the study were approached. The survey questions were based on the '3Cs' model of vaccine hesitancy and focused on confidence, convenience, and complacency factors. Non-uptake of vaccines was defined as not having received any of the available vaccines in the country. We employed counts, percentages, and simple logit models to summarize the reasons for non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and to identify associated factors.

RESULTS

The study recruited 360 HCWs, 61.7% of whom were female, with an average age of 31 years (SD = 7.9). Among them, 124 (34.4%) healthcare workers did not receive any COVID-19 vaccine. Non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines was independently associated with several factors, including age [35 + years adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.13-0.66 compared with 18-24 years], facility ownership [government, aOR = 0.22 (0.10-0.49) compared with private not-for-profit], previous testing for coronavirus [yes, aOR = 0.35 (0.19-0.65)], and previous involvement in COVID-19 vaccine activities [yes, aOR = 0.17 (0.10-0.29)]. The primary reasons cited for non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines were related to a lack of confidence in the vaccines, such as concerns about side effects (79.8%) and the need for more time to understand the vaccines (89.5%), as well as the importance of weighing benefits and risks (84.7%) before being vaccinated. A smaller proportion, approximately 23%, cited reasons related to complacency and lack of convenience in accessing vaccination services.

CONCLUSION

The high proportion of non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among this population primarily stems from a lack of confidence and trust in the vaccines, coupled with insufficient time allowed for users to make informed decisions. This underscores the urgent need for ongoing monitoring and trend analysis of vaccine non-uptake to guide the development and implementation of strategies aimed at building and sustaining vaccine confidence. Adequate time should be allowed to explain benefits of vaccination to the population to allay fears that might exist before actual vaccination is rolled out.

High uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers in urban Uganda

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to describe the facilitators, barriers to and level of uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers in primary healthcare facilities in an urban setting in Uganda.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study among HCWs in private and public health facilities in Entebbe municipality between July 2021 and August 2021. Data was collected using a structured questionnaire that was shared, via an online link, to consented participants. Uptake of the vaccines among healthcare workers was analysed as proportions, and logistic regression was used to analyse barriers and facilitators to uptake of COVID-19 vaccines.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 360 participants, with 61.7% (n = 222) females. A total of 236 (65.6%) healthcare workers had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, with higher uptake among females 64% (n = 151). Age above 40 years (OR 2.16), working in a government healthcare facility (OR 3.12), participating in COVID-19 vaccine related activities (OR 4.62), and having tested for SARS-COV-2 (OR 3.05) increased the odds of having been vaccinated. Working in small roadside clinics reduced the odds of being vaccinated by almost 70%, while HCWs in government health services were 3.1 times more likely to have been vaccinated. History of having cared for a COVID-19 patient and having a positive SARS-COV-2 test result did not influence the uptake of the vaccines in the study population.

CONCLUSION

Vaccine uptake among HCWs was close to the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended uptake of 70% by mid-2022.

Bulgarian General Practitioners' Communication Styles about Child Vaccinations, Mainly Focused on Parental Decision Making in the Context of a Mandatory Immunization Schedule

The communication practices of general practitioners in relation with vaccines have not been a topic of wide scientific interest. In this article, we outline them in the context of Bulgaria. A representative, cross-sectional, quantitative, face-to-face survey was conducted among 358 Bulgarian general practitioners in 2022 using simple random sampling. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis using questions about the role of the GPs, which measure models of communication. Based on the factor analysis, we distinguished four communication styles. They were called: active communicator, restrictive communicator, informing communicator, and strained communicator. One-way ANOVA and the T-test were carried out to explore the connections between factor scores (communication styles) and other variables. One of the most important results in the study was that the informing physician (emphasizing the choice of the parents) was the most common model in Bulgaria. This is somewhat contradictory, because of the mandatory status of most vaccines. We found connections between the communication styles and other variables-such as the type of settlement, having a hesitant parent in the practice, recommendations of non-mandatory vaccines, and experience with vaccine-preventable diseases. On the basis of the factor analysis and analysis of relationships with other variables, we reached the conclusion that in Bulgaria, hesitant parents are not sufficiently involved in active, effective communication about vaccines by GPs.

A Qualitative Analysis of Social-Ecological Factors Shaping Childhood Immunisation Hesitancy and Delay in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia

(1) Background: Immunisation is a crucial and effective method for preventing infectious diseases, with its success dependent on high immunisation rates to protect under-immunised individuals and promote herd immunity. This qualitative descriptive study is part of a larger explanatory sequential mixed method design that aims to explore factors influencing parents' decision making to complete childhood immunisation in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, a country experiencing disparities in immunisation coverage across its population. (2) Methods: The sample consisted of a subset of participants from the initial quantitative phase, which included a survey on the immunisation attitudes of parents living in Qatif. This initial phase included n = 350 participants, who were over 18, had access to one of the 27 Primary Health Care (PHC) Centres in Qatif, and had a child under 24 months. This paper presents the qualitative-descriptive phase, which used a qualitative survey to gain open-ended responses from parents (n = 20) and analysed using thematic analysis. (3) Results: Participants identified certain vaccines, particularly MMR, as influencing their immunisation practices. Specific factors identified as deterring parents from immunising their children included fear of autism and other developmental delays, concerns about risks and side effects, mistrust in vaccine efficacy, and discouraging information from the media. Parents' immunisation decisions were evidently affected by policy compliance, family and friends, and social networking sites. These factors are explained through the socio-ecological model. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic influenced parents' decisions on vaccine completion in terms of perceived barriers, perceived benefits, and perceived trust. (4) Conclusions: By examining the social-ecological factors shaping parents' decisions to immunise their children in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, this research contributes to the literature and informs the Saudi National Childhood Immunisation Programme about factors contributing to childhood immunisation hesitancy, helping to address a critical healthcare issue.

Vaccine hesitancy among health-care professionals in the era of COVID-19

Health-care professionals (HCPs) are key trusted figures in addressing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) challenges. They are thought to influence others' health decisions by personal example. However, during the COVID-19 crisis, some HCPs hesitated to be vaccinated. We examined factors contributing to that decision. We performed 12 semi-structured interviews, between February and May 2021, with Israeli HCPs who had declined or delayed COVID-19 vaccination. Three coders conducted a combined top-down and bottom-up analysis. We identified four main themes shaping vaccine decision-making: (i) sources of information, (ii) perceptions of necessity and risks of the vaccine, (iii) individual versus collective responsibility and (iv) political climate and media influence. Participants were worried about long-term effectiveness and safety, and while many agreed that high-risk populations should be vaccinated, all considered themselves to be at low risk for serious disease. Some felt they should avoid taking a perceived risk (accepting a new vaccine) to protect society, although they felt pressured to do so. Vaccination campaign politization and the way the media approached the subject also contributed to mistrust and hesitancy to be vaccinated. These findings help us understand HCP beliefs and uncertainties about COVID-19 vaccinations. This study can help inform future campaigns targeted at HCPs to promote the acceptance of vaccines.

The influence of pediatricians' recommendation on caregivers' COVID-19 vaccine acceptance for children: A nationwide cross-sectional survey study from USA

Background

The influence of pediatricians on parental acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine for children has not been well studied. We designed a survey to estimate the impact of pediatricians' recommendations on caregivers' vaccine acceptance while accounting for participants' socio-demographic and personal characteristics. The secondary objectives were to compare childhood vaccination rates among different age groups and categorize caregivers' concerns about vaccinating young (under-five) children. Overall, the study aimed to provide insight into potential pro-vaccination strategies that could integrate pediatricians to alleviate parental vaccine hesitancy.

Methods

We conducted an online cross-sectional survey study using Redcap, in August 2022. We enquired COVID-19 vaccination status of the children in the family (≥five years). The survey questionnaire included socio-demographic and personal characteristics: age, race, sex, education, financial status, residence, healthcare worker, COVID-19 vaccination status and side effects, children's influenza vaccination status, and pediatricians' recommendations (1-5 scale). Logistic regression and neural network models were used to estimate the influence of socio-demographic determinants on children's vaccine status and build predictors' ranking.

Results

The participants (N = 2,622) were predominantly white, female, middle-class, and vaccinated against COVID-19 (89%). The logistic regression model was significant vs. the null (likelihood-ratio χ² = 514.57, p < 0.001, pseudo-R²= .440). The neural network model also demonstrated strong prediction ability with a correct prediction rates of 82.9% and 81.9% for the training and testing models, respectively. Both models identified pediatricians' recommendations, self-COVID-19 vaccination status, and post-vaccination side effects as dominant predictors of caregivers' vaccine acceptance. Among the pediatricians, 70.48% discussed and had an affirmative opinion about COVID-19 vaccine for children. Vaccine acceptance was lower for children aged 5-8 years compared to older age groups (9-12 and 13-18 years), and acceptance varied significantly among the three cohorts of children (χ² = 65.62, p < 0.001). About half of the participants were concerned about inadequate availability of vaccine safety information for under-five children.

Conclusions

Pediatricians' affirmative recommendation was significantly associated with caregivers' COVID-19 vaccine acceptance for children while accounting for participants' socio-demographic characteristics. Notably, vaccine acceptance was lower among younger compared to older children, and caregivers' uncertainty about vaccine safety for under-five children was prevalent. Thus, pro-vaccination strategies might incorporate pediatricians to alleviate parental concerns and optimize poor vaccination rate among under-five children.

Characteristics of Oklahoma Pediatricians Who Dismiss Families for Refusing Vaccines

Vaccine refusal is increasing. Objectives were to assess frequency of declining or dismissing patients who refuse vaccines, which vaccine(s) prompt pediatricians to decline/dismiss patients, and demographics of pediatricians who decline/dismiss patients. Active members of the Oklahoma American Academy of Pediatricians (AAP) were surveyed. Chi-square tests with non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals compared proportions of providers across various metrics. In all, 47% (48/103) versus 35% (34/98) reported declining versus dismissing patients for refusing vaccines, respectively. Pediatricians were unlikely to decline/dismiss patients if they refused influenza, human papilloma virus (HPV), or MenB vaccines. Pediatricians with more years in practice were less likely to decline 15% (9/62) versus 44% (16/36), P = 0.002 and dismiss 8% (5/62) versus 33% (12/36), P = 0.002 patients. Rural pediatricians were less likely than urban to decline 12% (2/17) versus 29% (26/89), P = NS and dismiss patients 0% (0/17) versus 21% (19/89), P = 0.04. Dismissing/declining patients for vaccine refusal is more common among Oklahoma pediatricians than nationally reported. Patterns differ by practice setting, years in practice, and specific vaccine refused.

Compulsory vaccination against COVID-19: a legal and ethical perspective on public good versus personal reticence

Coercive measures to protect public health are controversial, eliciting questions regarding state-patient relationships and conflicts between individual autonomy and public good. This is challenging in a time when respect for patient autonomy has become elevated yet society faces an increasing number of public health challenges, the most recent being the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19). In that context, there is emphasis on increasing vaccination rates internationally in order to achieve "herd immunity", raising the possibility of compulsory vaccination of populations in the future. Here, we explore current rights of individuals to decline vaccination, utilising prior learning from other viral pathogens internationally (specifically, measles, mumps and rubella), and related public health outcomes. Further, we consider freedom of choice versus mandatory treatment necessitated to avoid contagion during disease outbreaks (such as COVID-19). In doing so, we utilise rhetorical reasoning in the form of casuistry focusing on the core challenges regarding public good versus personal antipathy towards vaccination.

Healthcare University Courses Fail to Improve Opinions, Knowledge, and Attitudes toward Vaccines among Healthcare Students: A Southern Italy Cross-Sectional Study

(1) Background: Healthcare providers have a crucial role in contrasting vaccine hesitancy (VH). We aimed to investigate opinions, knowledge, and attitudes toward vaccines in healthcare students (HS) at the University of Catania (Italy). (2) Methods: A survey was conducted from 1 October 2019 to 31 January 2020. Data on the opinions, knowledge, and attitudes of HS toward vaccinations were collected using an anonymous self-administered questionnaire. The opinion answers were added to calculate the VH index (<18 = low, 19−22 = medium, >23 = high). Data were summarized by the VH index, degree, year of study, and sex differences, using descriptive statistics. (3) Results: A total of 1275 students (53.7% females) participated in the study, with a median (IQR) age of 21 (19−22) years. The median level of VH was 20 (17−23), with slightly higher values in males. We found an inverse trend between VH and opinions, knowledge, and attitudes toward vaccines. The same trend was confirmed in all study courses. Furthermore, the comparison between sexes revealed a higher level of knowledge in women. (4) Conclusions: The results highlight a lack of knowledge about vaccines, as well as contrasting opinions and attitudes among future health professionals. Therefore, future interventions on these topics in the preparation of future healthcare providers are needed.

The influence of social class and institutional relationships on the experiences of vaccine-hesitant mothers: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy is a growing problem in the United States. However, our understanding of the mechanisms by which socioeconomic status (SES) shapes the experience of vaccine hesitancy and decision-making is incomplete.

AIM

The aim of this study was to understand how social class influences the experiences and perspectives of vaccine-hesitant mothers.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with middle- and working-class vaccine-hesitant mothers. Participants were identified through neighborhood parenthood groups in the Philadelphia area, as well as in-person and online groups whose members express concerns about vaccines. Interviews were audio recorded and inductively analyzed.

RESULTS

Interviews were conducted with 37 vaccine-hesitant mothers, who described their vaccine decision-making through the lens of interactions with three institutional stakeholders: 1) pediatric clinicians; 2) school administrators; and 3) emergency room staff. In discussing these interactions, middle- and working-class mothers invoked distinct levels of authority in relation to these institutions. Specifically, working-class mothers expressed concerns that medical or school professionals could act as reporters for state intervention, including Child Protective Services, while middle-class mothers did not. These interactions highlighted the ways middle- and working-class mothers in our study felt differently empowered and constrained in their vaccine choices, and ultimately influenced their perceptions of available actions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that experiences of vaccine hesitancy may be influenced by mothers' social class via their relationships to institutional authorities. These findings have implications for how clinicians communicate with parents from different social backgrounds to best build trust and facilitate vaccine uptake.

"I don't think there's a point for me to discuss it with my patients": exploring health care providers' views and behaviours regarding COVID-19 vaccination

BACKGROUND

Health care providers' knowledge and attitudes about vaccines are important determinants of their own vaccine uptake, their intention to recommend vaccines, and their patients' vaccine uptake. This qualitative study' objective was to better understand health care providers' vaccination decisions, their views on barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and proposed solutions, their opinions on vaccine policies, and their perceived role in discussing COVID-19 vaccination with patients.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews on perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines were conducted with Canadian health care providers (N = 14) in spring 2021. A qualitative thematic analysis using NVivo was conducted.

RESULTS

Participants had positive attitudes toward vaccination and were vaccinated against COVID-19 or intended to do so once eligible (two delayed their first dose). Only two were actively promoting COVID-19 vaccination to their patients; others either avoided discussing the topic or only provided answers when asked questions. Participants' proposed solutions to enhance COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the public were in relation to access to vaccination services, information in multiple languages, and community outreach. Most participants were in favor of mandatory vaccination policies and had mixed views on the potential impact of the Canadian vaccine-injury support program.

CONCLUSIONS

While health care providers are recognized as a key source of information regarding vaccines, participants in our study did not consider it their role to provide advice on COVID-19 vaccination. This is a missed opportunity that could be avoided by ensuring health care providers have the tools and training to feel confident in engaging in vaccine discussions with their patients.

Vaccination barriers and drivers in Romania: a focused ethnographic study

BACKGROUND

In 2016-18, a large measles outbreak occurred in Romania identified by pockets of sub-optimally vaccinated population groups in the country. The aim of the current study was to gain insight into barriers and drivers from the experience of measles vaccination from the perspectives of caregivers and their providers.

METHODS

Data were collected by non-participant observation of vaccination consultations and individual interviews with health workers and caregivers in eight Romanian clinics with high or low measles vaccination uptake. Romanian stakeholders were involved in all steps of the study. The findings of this study were discussed during a workshop with key stakeholders.

RESULTS

Over 400 h of observation and 161 interviews were conducted. A clear difference was found between clinics with high and low measles vaccination uptake which indicates that being aware of and following recommended practices for both vaccination service delivery and conveying vaccine recommendations to caregivers may have an impact on vaccine uptake. Barriers identified were related to shortcomings in following recommended practices for vaccination consultations by health workers (e.g. correctly assessing contraindications or providing enough information to allow an informed decision). These observations were largely confirmed in interviews with caregivers and revealed significant knowledge gaps.

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of key barriers provided an opportunity to design specific interventions to improve vaccination service delivery (e.g. mobile vaccination clinics, use of an electronic vaccination registry system for scheduling of appointments) and build capacity among health workers (e.g. guidance and supporting materials and training programmes).

The case against COVID-19 vaccine mandates in pediatric solid organ transplantation

BACKGROUND

The American Society of Transplantation in conjunction with the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation released a joint statement on August 13, 2021 in which they strongly recommend that solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients and their eligible household members and close contacts be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 with an approved COVID-19 vaccine. Some SOT programs have gone further and will refuse to list or transplant candidates unless the candidate and their household are vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

Two general pediatrician-ethicists use current best evidence and moral theory to argue why it is unethical to mandate COVID-19 vaccination for pediatric SOT candidates, their primary support person, and their households.

RESULTS

Pediatric vaccine mandates are most justifiable when they prevent the harm of a serious vaccine preventable disease (VPD) in children in settings where transmission is highly likely and there are no alternatives that are effective in preventing transmission that intrude less on individual freedom. An additional justification for a vaccine mandate in the SOT context is stewardship of a scarce resource if there is significant risk of graft loss from the VPD to an unvaccinated SOT candidate or recipient. Current evidence does not support fulfillment of these criteria in pediatric solid organ transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Making SOT listing contingent on COVID-19 vaccination is problematic. Though there is some risk of harm to a pediatric SOT candidate in remaining unvaccinated, the risk of harm of not being listed and transplanted is greater and overriding.

A Qualitative Content Analysis of Caregiver Reports of Conversations with Their Children about Vaccinations

Low childhood vaccination rates are associated with recent outbreaks of serious preventable diseases. However, prior research suggests that parent-physician communication may not be sufficient for increasing caregivers' intentions to follow the recommended vaccination schedule. Children sometimes play a role in the health decisions caregivers make on their behalf. Yet there is little research on the communication between caregivers and children about vaccinations and their influence on caregivers' vaccine decisions. The objectives of this study were to explore caregivers' conversations with their children about vaccinations and to examine how these conversations differed by child's vaccination status. 376 caregivers provided open-ended descriptions of a memorable conversation they'd had with their child about vaccinations. Qualitative content analysis revealed five key themes and four sub-themes mentioned by caregivers when discussing these conversations. Results suggest that most caregivers are discussing vaccines with their children. However, the topics discussed by caregivers who choose not to vaccinate and who vaccinate on a delayed schedule were quite different from those who fully or partially vaccinate their children. Understanding these different patterns of conversation themes can provide valuable insight for targeted intervention campaigns and messaging strategies.

Timing of Monovalent Vaccine Administration in Infants Receiving DTaP-based Combination Vaccines in the United States

BACKGROUND

The recommended US infant immunization schedule includes doses of diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis (DTaP), inactivated poliovirus (IPV), Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) and hepatitis B virus (HepB) during the first 6 months of life. Little information is available about the timing of associated, complementary monovalent vaccine administration in infants receiving DTaP-based pentavalent combination vaccines.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of infants born between July 1, 2010, and June 30, 2018, in the US MarketScan commercial claims and encounters database. Descriptive statistics were used to assess vaccine administration patterns. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to explore factors associated with coadministration of DTaP-IPV/Hib and HepB.

RESULTS

Among infants who received DTaP-HepB-IPV (n = 129,885), 93.7% had claims for at least 2 Hib doses; most (91.5%-98.3%) of these doses were administered on the same day as DTaP-HepB-IPV doses. Among infants who received DTaP-IPV/Hib (n=214,172), 95.3% had claims for ≥2 doses of HepB. Although coverage was high, 59.2% received the second HepB dose on the same day as the first DTaP-IPV/Hib dose, and 44.6% received the third dose of HepB on the same day as the third DTaP-IPV/Hib dose. Differences in coadministration of the second and third HepB doses with DTaP-IPV/Hib were associated with the region of residence, provider type, health plan type and coadministration of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine and rotavirus vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost all infants received the appropriate, complementary monovalent vaccine series. However, this study found variability in the timing of HepB doses in relation to DTaP-IPV/Hib doses with many infants not completing the HepB series until 9 months of age.

Incorporating a learning unit on vaccine hesitancy into a first-year doctor of pharmacy immunization course

INTRODUCTION

Vaccine hesitancy is a growing threat to public health. The objective of this research was to investigate the effect of incorporating a learning unit on addressing vaccine hesitancy into a doctor of pharmacy immunization delivery course.

METHODS

The learning unit, implemented fall 2019 at the University of Rhode Island, involved two interactive lectures and an at-home assignment. A family medicine physician spoke about her experiences with vaccine-hesitant families, and students viewed video scenarios depicting a pharmacist talking with vaccine-hesitant patients followed by an in-class discussion. Data was collected using pre- and post-surveys and a one-year follow-up survey.

RESULTS

Out of 125 students enrolled in the course, 121 completed the pre-survey, 113 the post-survey, and 120 the follow-up survey. For pre-/post-survey comparison questions, statistically significant improvements were seen in 9 of 13 items. The follow-up survey showed 83.4% of students had applied knowledge and 85.7% had applied skills gained from the learning unit.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating a learning unit on addressing vaccine hesitancy into a pharmacy immunization class resulted in improvements in student self-reported knowledge and comfort in talking with patients who are vaccine hesitant. Long-term use of self-reported knowledge and skills gained was seen one-year post-implementation.

Evaluating vaccination coverage and timeliness in American Indian/Alaska Native and non-Hispanic White children using state immunization information system data, 2015-2017

Comprehensive estimates of vaccination coverage and timeliness of vaccine receipt among American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) children in the United States are lacking. This study’s objectives were to quantify vaccination coverage and timeliness, as well as the proportion of children with specific undervaccination patterns, among AI/AN and non-Hispanic White (NHW) children ages 0–24 months in Montana, a large and primarily rural U.S. state. Data from Montana’s immunization information system (IIS) for children born 2015–2017 were used to calculate days undervaccinated for all doses of seven recommended vaccine series. After stratifying by race/ethnicity, up-to-date coverage at key milestone ages and the proportion of children demonstrating specific patterns of undervaccination were reported. Among n = 3,630 AI/AN children, only 23.1% received all recommended vaccine doses on-time (i.e., zero days undervaccinated), compared to 40.4% of n = 18,022 NHW children (chi-square p < 0.001). A greater proportion of AI/AN children were delayed at each milestone age, resulting in lower overall combined 7-vaccine series completion, by age 24 months (AI/AN: 56.6%, NHW: 64.3%, chi-square p < 0.001). As compared with NHW children, a higher proportion of AI/AN children had undervaccination patterns suggestive of structural barriers to accessing immunization services and delayed starts to vaccination. More than three out of four AI/AN children experienced delays in vaccination or were missing doses needed to complete recommended vaccine series. Interventions to ensure on-time initiation of vaccine series at age 2 months, as well initiatives to encourage completion of multi-dose vaccine series, are needed to reduce immunization disparities and increase vaccination coverage among AI/AN children in Montana.

Why Aren't We Achieving High Vaccination Rates for Rotavirus Vaccine in the United States?

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus vaccine (RV) coverage levels for US infants are <80%.

METHODS

We surveyed nationally representative networks of pediatricians by internet/mail from April to June, 2019. Multivariable regression assessed factors associated with difficulty administering the first RV dose (RV#1) by the maximum age.

RESULTS

Response rate was 68% (303/448). Ninety-nine percent of providers reported strongly recommending RV. The most common barriers to RV delivery overall (definite/somewhat of a barrier) were: parental concerns about vaccine safety overall (27%), parents wanting to defer (25%), parents not thinking RV was necessary (12%), and parent concerns about RV safety (6%). The most commonly reported reasons for nonreceipt of RV#1 by 4 to 5 months (often/always) were parental vaccine refusal (9%), hospitals not giving RV at discharge from nursery (7%), infants past the maximum age when discharged from neonatal intensive care unit/nursery (6%), and infant not seen before maximum age for well care visit (3%) or seen but no vaccine given (4%). Among respondents 4% strongly agreed and 25% somewhat agreed that they sometimes have difficulty giving RV#1 before the maximum age. Higher percentage of State Child Health Insurance Program/Medicaid-insured children in the practice and reporting that recommendations for timing of RV doses are too complicated were associated with reporting difficulty delivering the RV#1 by the maximum age.

CONCLUSIONS

US pediatricians identified multiple, actionable issues that may contribute to suboptimal RV immunization rates including lack of vaccination prior to leaving nurseries after prolonged stays, infants not being seen for well care visits by the maximum age, missed opportunities at visits and parents refusing/deferring.

Parental and provider vaccine hesitancy and non-timely childhood vaccination in Switzerland

OBJECTIVE

Although medical providers are a trusted vaccination information source for parents, they do not universally support vaccination. Complementary medicine (CM) providers are particularly likely to hold vaccine hesitant (VH) views, and VH parents often consult with them. Little research compares VH of parents and providers, and if and how each is associated with uptake of recommended childhood vaccines.

METHODS

We defined non-timely receipt as recommended vaccines given > 1 month later than officially recommended, based on vaccination records. We administered versions of the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) 5-item survey instrument to 1256 parents and their children's pediatricians (N = 112, 40 CM-oriented, 72 biomedical [not CM-oriented]) to identify moderately (PACV-score 5-6) and highly (PACV-score 7+) hesitant providers/parents. We obtained multivariable adjusted odds ratios to test relationships between parental VH and provider type/VH, and between non-timely receipt of selected childhood vaccines and parental VH and provider type/VH.

RESULTS

No biomedical providers were VH, 9 CM providers were moderately VH, and 17 were highly VH. Parents seeing moderately and highly hesitant providers had adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for being VH = 6.6 (95% confidence interval (CI), 3.1-14.0) and AOR = 31.3 (95% CI 16.8-58.3), respectively. Across all vaccine uptake endpoints, children of moderately and highly hesitant parents had 1.9-3.8 and 7.1-12.3 higher odds of non-timely vaccination, and children seeing highly hesitant CM providers had 4.9-9.4 higher odds. Children seeing moderately hesitant CM providers had 3.3 higher odds of non-timely vaccination for the 1st dose of measles and 3.5 higher odds for 1st dose of polio/pertussis/tetanus.

CONCLUSION

VH by both parents and providers each is associated with non-timely childhood vaccination. As VH parents are more likely to consult with VH providers, interventions aimed at increasing timely vaccination need to primarily target VH providers and their clients.

Vaccination Attitudes and Experiences of Medical Doctors in Croatia amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Social Roles Conflict?

The study aimed to investigate the range of experiences and attitudes of Croatian medical doctors (MDs) related to vaccination and vaccine hesitancy. In January 2021 three asynchronous online focus groups were held using MRQual, a web-based platform, which included 46 MDs from all three levels of the healthcare system in Croatia. NVivo, a qualitative data analysis software package, was used for the thematic analysis of collected data. The participants expressed a high level of support for the Croatian immunization program and vaccines in general. However, some skepticism was expressed regarding new vaccines and the regulatory processes of their approval. A significant number of participants raised concerns over the approval of COVID-19 vaccines, especially given their rapid development. The results also revealed that the process of communication with patients is often based on the very elaborate categorizations of patients based on previous experience, which leads to prioritizing and a communication breakup when dealing with “problematic patients”. MDs find themselves in a delicate situation where a fine balance between time-consuming communication with patients and the demands for maintaining satisfying vaccination uptake is needed. The situation arises from a social roles conflict that is embedded in wider social values and expectations, since communication problems do not arise in the doctor’s office, and therefore cannot be solved without addressing the social forces that cause trust deficiencies. To achieve better immunization results public health leaders need to better understand the social contexts and constraints of MDs vaccine-related behaviors.

Standardized Vaccine-Hesitant Patients in the Assessment of the Effectiveness of Vaccine Communication Training

OBJECTIVES

To determine if training residents in a structured communication method elicits specific behaviors in a laboratory model of interaction with vaccine-hesitant parents.

STUDY DESIGN

Standardized patients portraying vaccine-hesitant parents were used to assess the effectiveness of training in the Announce, Inquire, Mirror, Secure (AIMS) Method for Healthy Conversations. Blinded pediatric residents were pseudorandomized to receive AIMS or control training and underwent pre- and post-training encounters with blinded standardized patients. Encounters were assessed by blinded raters using a novel tool. Participant confidence and standardized patient evaluations of the participants' general communication skills were assessed.

RESULTS

Ratings were available for 27 AIMS and 26 control participants. Statistically significant increases in post-training scores (maximum = 30) were detected in AIMS, but not in control, participants (median, 21.3 [IQR, 19.8-24.8] vs 18.8 [IQR, 16.9-20.9]; P < .001). Elements (maximum score = 6) with significant increases were Inquire (0.67 [IQR, 0-1.76] vs -0.33 [IQR, -0.67 to 0.33]; P < .001); Mirror (1.33 [IQR, 0 to 2] vs -0.33 [IQR, -0.92 to 0]; P < .001) and Secure (0.33 [IQR, 0 to 1.67] vs -0.17 [IQR, -0.67 to 0.33]; P = .017). Self-confidence increased equally in both groups. Standardized patients did not detect a difference in communication skills after training and between groups. Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the assessment tool were modest.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardized patients proved useful in studying the effectiveness of structured communication training, but may have been limited in their ability to perceive a difference between groups owing to the predetermined encounter outcome of vaccine refusal. AIMS training should be studied in real-world scenarios to determine if it impacts vaccine acceptance.

Provider response and follow-up to parental declination of HPV vaccination

OBJECTIVE

Parents often decline HPV vaccination, but little is known about how healthcare providers should promote vaccination at a later visit for secondary acceptance. We examined the associations of two factors, providers' response to declination during the visit and follow-up after the visit, with secondary acceptance.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of US parents whose 9- to 17-year-old child had not yet completed the HPV vaccination series. Parents who declined HPV vaccination during an initial discussion with a provider (n = 447) reported whether their provider engaged in any active response during the visit (e.g., giving information, trying to change their mind) or any follow-up after the visit (e.g., scheduling another visit). We conducted multivariable logistic regression to determine whether an active response or follow-up was associated with secondary acceptance of HPV vaccination.

RESULTS

Only about one-third of parents reported an active response during the visit (35%) or follow-up after the visit (39%) following HPV vaccination declination. Parents had higher odds of secondary acceptance of HPV vaccine if they received any provider follow-up after the visit (43% vs. 20%, aOR:3.19; 95% CI:2.00:5.07). Receipt of an active provider response was not associated with secondary acceptance. More parents thought a provider should actively respond and follow-up (61% and 68% respectively), compared with those who received such a response (both p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Providers' follow-up after the visit may be important for promoting secondary acceptance of HPV vaccination. Parents who decline HPV vaccination often prefer to receive an active response or follow-up from a provider.

Considering a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for pediatric kidney transplant candidates

The world continues to face the effects of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective in protecting recipients, decreasing the risk of COVID-19 acquisition, transmission, hospitalization, and death. Transplant recipients may be at greater risk for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. As a result, transplant programs have begun instituting mandates for COVID-19 vaccine for transplant candidacy. While the question of mandating COVID-19 vaccine for adult transplant candidates has garnered attention in the lay and academic press, these discussions have not explicitly addressed children who may be otherwise eligible for kidney transplants. In this paper we seek to examine the potential ethical justifications of a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for pediatric kidney transplant candidacy through an examination of relevant ethical principles, analogous cases of the use of mandates, differences between adult and pediatric kidney transplant candidates, and the role of gatekeeping in transplant vaccine mandates. At present, it does not appear that pediatric kidney transplant centers are justified to institute a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for candidates. Finally, we will offer suggestions to be considered prior to the implementation of a COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

Immersive Virtual Reality in Alleviating Pain and Anxiety in Children During Immunization in Primary Care: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Pediatric immunization is often associated with significant fear and anxiety among the children and their parents. Their distress may potentially affect their adherence to the childhood immunization schedule and the acceptance of other recommended vaccines by physicians.

OBJECTIVE

The study primarily aimed to assess the feasibility of using immersive virtual reality (VR) during immunization in children in primary care. The secondary aim was to determine the effectiveness of immersive VR in alleviating pain and anxiety among children, reduction of anxiety of their parents and attending nurses during immunization compared to usual care without VR.

METHODS

A pilot open-label randomized control trial was conducted at a public primary care clinic in Singapore. Thirty children, aged 4-10 years were randomized to an intervention group (n = 15) using VR and a control group (n = 15) without VR during immunization. Feasibility was assessed by the response rate to the use of VR. The Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) and the Children's Fear Scale (CFS) were used to determine their pain and anxiety, respectively. The anxiety level of their accompanying parents and attending nurses were evaluated using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) prior and post-immunization of these children. The FPS-R and CFS scores, and anxiety assessment for parents and nurses were assessed using Mann-Whitney U test. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to assess the difference in the nurses' experience of using the VR application.

RESULTS

One child refused to use the VR equipment, constituting a rejection rate of 6.7% (1/15) but no adverse event occurred in the intervention arm. The overall response rate of 88% (30/34) when the parents were approached to participate in the study, indicating feasibility of using VR in childhood immunization. In the intervention group compared to the control group, the change in scores for CFS (median -1, IQR -2 to 0; P = 0.04), parental VAS (median -4, IQR -5 to -1; P = 0.04) were significantly decreased. After immunization, nurses scored favorably for VR, in terms of simplicity (median 9.5, IQR 5.72 to 10; P = 0.01), acceptability (median 10, IQR 5 to 10; P = 0.005) and willingness to use VR in the future (median 10, IQR 5 to 10; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Immersive VR is feasible, safe and effective in alleviating anxiety among the children and parents. Nurses viewed the application of VR in childhood immunization favorably.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

[https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04748367], identifier [NCT04748367].

Prevention of measles, mumps and rubella: 40 years of global experience with M-M-RII

Measles, mumps, and rubella are highly contagious diseases that caused significant global mortality and morbidity in the pre-vaccine era. Since its first approval in the United States over 40 years ago, M-M-RII has been used in >75 countries for prevention of these diseases. The vaccine has been part of immunization programs that have achieved dramatic global reductions in case numbers and mortality rates, as well as the elimination of measles and rubella in several countries and regions. This report summarizes over four decades of global safety, immunogenicity, efficacy, and effectiveness data for the vaccine. We include studies on the use of M-M-RII in different age groups, concomitant use with other routine childhood vaccines, administration via different routes, persistence of immunity, and vaccine effectiveness during outbreaks of measles and mumps. We conclude that M-M-RII is well tolerated and has shown consistently high performance during routine use in multiple countries, in randomized controlled trials with diverse designs, and in outbreak settings, including use as measles postexposure prophylaxis. Physicians, parents, and the public can continue to have a high degree of confidence in the use of M-M-RII as a vital part of global public health programs.

Provider perspectives on communication and dismissal policies with HPV vaccine hesitant parents

Parental vaccine hesitancy is a growing concern. Less is known about provider or practice characteristics that encounter HPV-specific vaccine-hesitant parents, the providers' confidence in responding to HPV vaccine concerns, and the attitudes and use of vaccine dismissal policies (i.e., removing patients from the practice). North Texas providers completed an online survey. Dependent variables assessed: (1) percentage of HPV vaccine-hesitant parents encountered in practice defined as substantive, or high (≥11%, or among more than one out of ten adolescent patient encounters) versus low (≤10%) levels; (2) confidence in responding to 11 HPV vaccine concerns; (3) attitudes and use of vaccine dismissal policies. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were conducted. Among 156 providers, 29% reported high HPV vaccine hesitancy (≥11% of patient population). Overall, providers reported being "very confident" in addressing vaccine concerns (mean: 3.37 out of 4, SD: 0.57). Mean confidence scores were significantly higher for white (vs. non-white) providers and for pediatricians (vs. family practitioners). Providers were least confident in responding to parents' religious/personal beliefs (69%). Some providers (25%) agreed with policies that dismissed vaccine-hesitant parents after repeated counseling attempts. More providers used dismissal policies for childhood (19%) than adolescent (10%) immunizations. Provider communication training should include parental religious/personal beliefs to effectively address HPV vaccine hesitancy. Other regions should examine their HPV-specific vaccine hesitancy levels to understand how the use of dismissal policies might vary between adolescent and childhood immunizations.

Knowledge of mothers regarding children's vaccinations in Greece: an online cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

One of the main reasons that influence parental choice to postpone or avoid children's vaccination is insufficient knowledge. Mothers' knowledge can be considered as an important factor when determining childcare, as they are often the primary decision maker for their children's healthcare issues. This study aimed to assess the level of mothers' knowledge and practice on certain aspects of vaccination for their child/children in Greece.

METHODS

This was an online cross-sectional survey, which collected information about mother's socio-demographic characteristics, vaccination-related information, and vaccine knowledge using a self-administered questionnaire. The survey was conducted between April 2020 and June 2020 and the study population included mothers over 18 years old with at least one child (< 18 years old), living in four broad geographical areas of Greece (Attica, Central Greece, North Greece, and Crete/Aegean Islands).

RESULTS

A total of 1885 Greek mothers participated in the study. The majority stated that they vaccined their child/children (98%), and the most popular source of information about vaccination was their child's pediatrician (89%). About half of participants (52%) have delayed their child/children vaccination with their pediatrician's suggestion being the main driver. The median knowledge score was 11 which indicates a high knowledge level for childhood vaccination among Greek mothers. Multiple linear regression analysis identified an inverse association between education and knowledge score, characterized by higher knowledge scores among individuals with secondary and even higher among those with higher education. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that the strict adherence to the prescribed dosage as indicated by the local recommendations for each vaccine, was associated with most of the knowledge items included in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that the vast majority of mothers in Greece did vaccinate their child/children, while pediatricians appear to have a very influential role in mothers' decision making. High knowledge around vaccination was associated with mothers' educational attainment, being particularly high among those who completed higher education. Considerable attention is required from public health authorities to promote vaccination through educational programs and campaigns, particularly aimed at people with lower educational attainment. Additionally, improving communication between pediatricians and mothers to reach those women who have not decided to vaccinate or delayed vaccination for their children, may prove to be very beneficial.

Evaluation of the Safety and Immunogenicity of M-M-RII (Combination Measles-mumps-rubella Vaccine): Clinical Trials of Healthy Children and Adults Published Between 2010 and 2019

BACKGROUND

The safety and immunogenicity of M-M-RII (measles, mumps and rubella virus vaccine live, Merck & Co., Inc., West Point, PA)-the only combined measles, mumps and rubella vaccine licensed for use in the United States-were previously reported in pre- and postlicensure clinical trials conducted from 1988 to 2009. M-M-RII continues to be evaluated as a comparator in clinical trials of other vaccines. Here, we review safety and efficacy data from more recent clinical trials of M-M-RII.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review of trials using M-M-RII published from 2010 to 2019.

RESULTS

In the 15 studies that met the inclusion criteria, a total of 12,032 subjects were vaccinated: 7667 persons received a first dose only, 2137 participated in 2-dose studies (128 received 1 dose and 2009 received both) and 2063 received a single dose of M-M-RII as their second dose. Dose number was not specified for 165 participants, ≥6 years old, in 2 studies in which a single dose of M-M-RII was administered. Similar to previous reports, M-M-RII was well tolerated and immunogenic when administered alone or concomitantly with other routinely recommended vaccinations. The most common adverse events included transient injection site pain and fever. Serious adverse events were extremely rare, with only 4 probable or potential vaccine-related events reported among the 12,032 participating subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

In trials published from 2010 to 2019, M-M-RII continued to be safe and immunogenic in all age groups studied. These data, along with the results of earlier trials, indicate that the performance of the vaccine has been consistent across more than 30 years of postlicensure studies.

Effectiveness of Flippits and Virtual Reality Therapy on Pain and Anxiety Among Children Undergoing Painful Procedures

Introduction

Pain experienced by children during painful procedures may cause stress, fear, and anxiety. Currently, a number of interventions are used to reduce pain perception during medical procedures and distraction therapy is one of the most commonly used interventions.

Method

A randomized control trial was conducted among 105 children aged between three years and 12 years undergoing painful procedures such as intravenous cannulation, blood sampling, and injections to evaluate the effect of flippits and virtual reality therapy (VRT) on pain and anxiety. Through a computerized random approach, 35 samples were allotted to each group. Experimental group -1 received VRT, experimental group -2 received flippit (distraction card) therapy during painful procedures, and the control group received the conventional intervention. Standard tools were used to assess the pain and anxiety.

Result

Total 128 children were admitted to the ward and 23 were not included in the study for various reasons. Total 105 children undergone randomization to three groups, 35 in each group. All were analyzed for primary and secondary outcomes. After adjusting for confounding factors using multiple logistic regression, it was found that pain scores of VRT and flippit groups were less than the control group (aOR, 95% CI 0.635, 0.504-0.799, P = 0.000 and aOR, 95% CI 0.705, 0.572-0.868, P = 0.001, respectively) and no difference was observed between VRT and Flippit group (aOR, 95% CI; 0.901, 0.723 - 1.123, P 0.353). Flippit group perceived less intensity of pain compared to control group (aOR, 95% CI 0.542, 0.322-0.912, P = 0.021) and children received VRT perceived less intensity of pain than both control and flippit groups of children (aOR, 95% CI 0.258, 0.132-0.503, P = 0.000 and aOR, 95% CI 0.476, 0.252-0.900, respectively). Children received VRT and flippit therapy perceived less anxiety compared to control group (aOR, 95% CI 0.589, 0.348-0.999, P = 0.050 and aOR, 95% CI 0.385, 0.217-0.682, P = 0.001, respectively). But, there was no difference between VRT and flippit groups (aOR, 95% CI 1.532, 0.940-2.498, P = 0.087).

Conclusion

Flippit therapy and virtual reality therapy were better than conventional therapy in reducing the perception of anxiety and pain in children, aged three to 12 years, undergone painful procedures. Virtual reality therapy had an edge over flippit therapy in reducing the worst hurt.

Knowledge of mothers regarding children's vaccinations in Cyprus: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Vaccine hesitancy is identified as one of the top threats to global health. A significant drop of childhood vaccine coverage is reported worldwide. One of the key reasons that influenced mothers' choice to postpone, or avoid children's vaccination, is knowledge. This study aimed to assess the level of Cypriot mothers' knowledge on certain aspects of vaccination of their children, examine the association between vaccination knowledge and selected socio-demographic factors, and lastly assess the association of mothers' knowledge about vaccination with vaccination coverage and delay, compliance to the recommended schedules, vaccination during pregnancy and mother-pediatrician relationship.

METHODS

An online-based cross-sectional study conducted to collect information about socio-demographic characteristics, child's characteristics, vaccination, and vaccine knowledge, using a self-administered questionnaire. The survey was conducted between April 2020 and June 2020 and the study population included mothers over 18 years old with at least one child (<18 years old) living in Cyprus.

RESULTS

A total of 703 Cypriot mothers participated in the study. Most of the participants stated that they vaccined their children (97%) and the most popular source of information about vaccination was their pediatrician (90%). More than half of the participants (57%) have delayed their child/children vaccination with their pediatrician's suggestion being the main reason. 36% of mothers had low knowledge while the overall correct rate was 13.6% and the median (IQR) knowledge score was 11 (9-12). Having a medium knowledge about vaccination was associated with having a medium or high income, whilst high knowledge compared to low knowledge was associated with completed a higher education and having a high income. Our analysis showed that the correct knowledge by mothers with regards to vaccination increases the probability of vaccinating their children, following the local recommendations for vaccine dosages, and acquiring and trusting vaccination-related information from their children's pediatrician.

CONCLUSION

Our findings show that the majority of mothers in Cyprus had positives perceptions regarding childhood vaccination, as reflected with the high vaccination rate, however, some aspects of mothers' knowledge of vaccination need to be improved. Public health strategies to promote vaccination, education programs as well as improved communication tools between pediatricians and mothers need to be considered to achieve favorable vaccination attitudes and practices for all mothers in Cyprus.

Vaccine hesitancy and reported non-vaccination in an Irish pediatric outpatient population

Vaccine hesitancy is defined as a delay in acceptance, or refusal, of vaccines, despite availability. It is a complex and context specific phenomenon and identified as a global health priority. The "Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines" (PACV) questionnaire is a validated tool for identifying vaccine hesitancy. Our aim was to use the PACV to assess vaccine hesitancy and its relationship with reported non-vaccination in an Irish population, for the first time. Our participants were parents or caregivers of children attending general pediatric clinics in a tertiary pediatric hospital in Dublin, Ireland, between September and December 2018. In total, 436 participants completed the questionnaire. 5.5% of our population reported non-vaccination. Human papilloma virus and measles, mumps, rubella vaccines were the most commonly cited vaccines of concern (11.5% and 6.7%, respectively), and autism spectrum disorder was the most commonly side effect of concern (4.3%). Mean PACV score was 26.9 (SD 19.1), with a significant difference between non-vaccinators and vaccinators (53.2 vs 25.3, p<0.001). Safety and efficacy concerns were the major contributor to non-vaccination. 14.4% of our population were vaccine-hesitant using the conventional cut-off score, which increased to 22% when using an optimal cut-off which maximized sensitivity and specificity. The accuracy of the PACV score to identify non-vaccination was good (area under the ROC curve = 0.827), and the optimal cut-off had a high negative predictive value (98.5%).Conclusion: PACV identified reported non-vaccination with high accuracy in our population. It may be useful to screen vaccine-hesitant parents who could benefit from interventions to improve uptake. What is Known: • Vaccine hesitancy is a leading threat to global health, with falls in vaccine uptake associated with disease outbreaks worldwide. • The Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) questionnaire is a validated measure of vaccine hesitancy and correlates with non-vaccination in many populations. What is New: • This large study in a pediatric outpatient clinic setting represents the first use of the PACV in a Western European population to assess vaccination hesitancy. • The PACV may be an effective way of screening a pediatric clinic population to identify vaccine-hesitant parents or caregivers for targeted vaccine promotion.

The limits of refusal: An ethical review of solid organ transplantation and vaccine hesitancy

Patients pursuing solid organ transplantation are encouraged to receive many vaccines on an accelerated timeline. Vaccination prior to transplantation offers the best chance of developing immunity and may expand the pool of donor organs that candidates can accept without needing posttransplant therapy. Furthermore, transplant recipients are at greater risk for acquiring vaccine-preventable illnesses or succumbing to severe sequelae of such illnesses. However, a rising rate of vaccine refusal has challenged transplant centers to address the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy. Transplant centers may need to consider adopting a policy of denial of solid organ transplantation on the basis of vaccine refusal for non-medical reasons (i.e., philosophical or religious objections or personal beliefs that vaccines are unnecessary or unsafe). Arguments supporting such a policy are motivated by utility, stewardship, and beneficence. Arguments opposing such a policy emphasize justice and respect for persons, and seek to avoid worsening inequities or medical coercion. This paper examines these arguments and situates them within the special cases of pediatric transplantation, emergent transplantation, and living donation. Ultimately, a uniform national policy addressing vaccine refusal among transplant candidates is needed to resolve this ethical dilemma and establish a consistent, fair, and standard approach to vaccine refusal in transplantation.

Measles outbreak in Romania: understanding factors related to suboptimal vaccination uptake

Background

A large measles outbreak started in Romania in 2016. Current study aimed to (i) clarify who was affected by the outbreak, (ii) identify their barriers and drivers to vaccination and (iii) explore variation by population group.

Methods

This was a two-component study. Outbreak surveillance data for 6743 measles cases were reviewed to identify key characteristics. A survey was administered via telephone to 704 caregivers of measles cases (520 respondents) to explore capability, opportunity and motivation barriers to vaccination. Data were summarized descriptively for respondent characteristics and statements. Differences by population group (education, household income, ethnicity, setting and mobility) were explored using χ² tests, Fisher’s exact tests or regression models.

Results

Most cases were unvaccinated and lived in low coverage areas. Ethnic minorities were disproportionally affected. Most caregivers felt welcome at health facilities. Some were less satisfied with the waiting time and had found the vaccine out of stock. Not everybody knew that vaccines were free of charge. Less than half knew the child’s next vaccination date, some had not been informed and did not know where to seek this information. Some said their peers did not vaccinate. Beliefs were generally supportive of vaccination; but many were concerned about vaccine safety and found they had not received good information about this. Conclusions varied greatly between minorities and less educated groups, compared with people with higher education levels.

Conclusions

Identifying characteristics of the population affected and underlying factors can inform a strategy to avoid future outbreaks and further research to obtain deeper insights.

Vaccine safety issues at the turn of the 21st century

Global gains in vaccination coverage during the early 21st century have been threatened by the emergence of antivaccination groups that have questioned the effectiveness of vaccines to generate public distrust of vaccines and immunisation programmes. This manuscript summarises six key topics that have been at the centre of global discussions on vaccine safety during the early 21st century: thiomersal in multi-dose non-live vaccines, aluminium adjuvants used with several non-live vaccines, autism and auto-immune conditions as possible consequences of vaccination, a risk of immune overload with increasing numbers of vaccinations, and detrimental non-specific effects (NSEs) of vaccination. For each topic, we describe the hypothesis behind the public concern, the evidence reviewed by the WHO’s Global Advisory Committee for Vaccine Safety (GACVS) during 1999–2019, and any significant new data that has emerged since GACVS conclusions were made. Although the scientific evidence on these issues overwhelmingly supports the safety of vaccines, communication messages to caregivers and providers need to condense and convey scientific information in an appropriate way to address concerns contributing to vaccine distrust. In addition, there is need for further studies specifically designed to address both positive and negative NSE of vaccination. The role of GACVS will be increasingly important in evaluating the evidence and engaging the global community in promoting and assuring the safety of vaccines in the decades to come as we move into an era in which we use new vaccination platforms, antigens and formulations.

Attitude towards Vaccination among Health Science Students before the COVID-19 Pandemic

Health science students are tomorrow's health professionals, the duties of whom could include vaccination. This work examines the general attitude towards vaccination in students attending the Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Chiropody at a university in Madrid, Spain, using the 'Attitudes and Behaviour With Regard To Vaccination Among Health Science Students Questionnaire'. The results were subjected to multivariate analysis to identify the influence of sex, the degree being pursued, and 'course year'. The number of students vaccinated against influenza in the campaign preceding the present study was also recorded, as were the factors that influenced decision-making in this regard. A total of 934 students completed the questionnaire. Their beliefs regarding vaccination were positive (mean score 3.23 points out of 4), as was their behaviour (3.35/4). Their general attitude (all variables taken together) was therefore also good (3.27/4). Only 26.8% of the students had been vaccinated against influenza. Beliefs scores among the students of nursing in their more senior course years were significantly better than those recorded for all other groups. These students also showed the best general attitude towards vaccination and formed the largest group vaccinated against influenza. The results obtained are encouraging since nursing students are the most likely of future healthcare professionals to be involved in vaccination programmes.

Effect of prophylactic administration of antipyretics on the immune response to pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in children: a systematic review

Background

Prophylactic administration of antipyretics at the time of immunization seems to decrease some side effects, however reduced immune responses have been reported in some studies. This systematic review aimed to investigate the effect of prophylactic use of antipyretics on the immune response following administration of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs).

Methods

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies concerning the immune response to PCVs after antipyretic administration was performed up to November 2020 in the electronic databases of Pubmed and Scopus.

Results

Of the 3956 citations retrieved, a total of 5 randomized control trials including 2775 children were included in the review. Included studies were referred to PCV10 (3 studies), PCV7 and PCV13 (one study each). The prophylactic administration of paracetamol decreased the immune response to certain pneumococcal serotypes in all included studies. The effect was more evident following primary vaccination and with immediate administration of paracetamol. Despite the reductions in antibody geometric mean concentrations, a robust memory response was observed following the booster dose. Besides, antibody titers remained above protective levels in 88–100% of participants. The use of ibuprofen, that was evaluated in two studies, did not seem to affect the immunogenicity of PCVs .

Conclusion

Although the reviewed studies had significant heterogeneity in design, paracetamol administration seems to affect the immune response for certain serotypes. The clinical significance of reduced immunogenicity especially before booster dose needs further investigation.

What Affects Maternal Response to Measles Vaccinations? Examining the Health Beliefs Model (HBM)

Background: Renewed measles outbreaks in recent years indicate that despite the routine availability of vaccines for a disease that is considered contagious, dangerous and deadly, many anti-vaccinationists do not vaccinate their children, which consequently endangers public health. This study aimed to investigate the factors that influence mothers to vaccinate their children, and whether the Health Belief Model (HBM) could predict compliance or non-compliance. Methods: This was a quantitative correlational research, using a 40-item questionnaire administered to 181 mothers in Israel. Results: The findings indicated two main factors that affected mothers’ intention to vaccinate their children against measles: first, their perception of the vaccine’s advantages, and second, their perception of the severity of the disease. It was also found that the HBM variables significantly affected the intention to administer vaccines. Conclusion: Consequently, raising public awareness of the vaccine’s advantages and importance to preventing mass infection, as well as attempts by the health system and practitioners to understand the motivations of anti-vaccinationists (including health beliefs and cultural sensitivities) could significantly increase the percentage of vaccinated children, and eradicate the measles epidemic.

Vaccination ethics

Vaccination decisions and policies present tensions between individual rights and the moral duty to contribute to harm prevention. This article focuses on ethical issues around vaccination behaviour and policies. It will not cover ethical issues around vaccination research.

SOURCES OF DATA

Literature on ethics of vaccination decisions and policies.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Individuals have a moral responsibility to vaccinate, at least against certain infectious diseases in certain circumstances.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Some argue that non-coercive measures are ethically preferable unless there are situations of emergency. Others hold that coercive measures are ethically justified even in absence of emergencies.

GROWING POINTS

Conscientious objection to vaccination is becoming a major area of discussion.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

The relationship between individual, collective and institutional responsibilities to contribute to the public good of herd immunity will be a major point of discussion, particularly with regard to the COVID-19 vaccine.

Strengthening Vaccine Confidence and Acceptance in the Pediatric Provider Office

Although vaccine acceptance and uptake are overall high among children in the United States, vaccine delays or refusals are a growing concern. Vaccine hesitancy is a challenge for the pediatric provider, given the diverse factors associated with hesitancy and the limited evidence on effective strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy in the provider office. In this article, we review available evidence and approaches for vaccine communication, including the importance of using a whole-team approach, building trust, starting the conversation early, using a presumptive approach for vaccine recommendations, motivational interviewing with parents who have concerns for vaccines, and additional techniques for responding to parent questions. We also review organizational strategies to help create a culture of immunization in the practice, including evidence-based approaches for increasing vaccine uptake and efficiency. Although these communication approaches and organizational strategies are intended to reassure parents who are vaccine hesitant that all routine, universally recommended vaccines are safe and effective, they likely will take on increased significance as the development, implementation, and evaluation of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines continue to unfold. [Pediatr Ann. 2020;49(12):e523-e531.].

Kansas Family Physicians Perceptions of Parental Vaccination Hesitancy

Introduction

In the past few decades, patients expressing the idea that vaccines are unsafe or unneeded have been experienced increasingly by physicians and other healthcare providers. Discussions with patients regarding their reasons for vaccine refusals are important, as it may provide information that can be utilized in an intervention to increase vaccination rates and combat the spread of diseases that are making a resurgence in the United States. The main objective of this study was to explore the perceptions of family physicians as to why parents in Kansas may be vaccine hesitant.

Methods

An electronic survey was distributed to family physicians in the State of Kansas via the University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita Family Medicine Research and Data Information Office (FM RADIO). Several aspects of physician perceptions regarding patients’ vaccine hesitancy were measured in this study, including vaccines that are most often refused, reasons for refusing vaccinations, as well as what responses physicians employ when presented with vaccine concerns.

Results

The majority of physicians surveyed have experienced vaccine hesitancy or refusal in their practice, and the human papillomavirus (HPV) and flu vaccines were reported to be the primary vaccines refused for children. In addition, physicians reported frequently employing various practices in response to vaccine refusals, including requiring parents to sign a form (40%) and dismissing families from their practice (1.5%). Physician perceptions on the reasons as to why parents/guardians refuse vaccinations also were measured, and the most common response was that parents possess a fear of long-term complications for their children as a result of vaccines (74%). Additionally, the three most commonly refused vaccines were HPV, influenza, and measles, mumps, and rubella.

Conclusion

Physicians must not only deal with time constraints that vaccine hesitant discussions require, but also must try and implement discussions or interventions suited to the varying reasons why parents/guardians refuse vaccines to convince parents of their safety. The results suggested that vaccine refusals by parents/guardians seemed to be affecting Kansas family physicians’ clinics in more than one way. This study could be a useful tool to help physicians better understand why vaccine refusals occur and be able to combat unwarranted concerns about vaccines.

Process-based functional analysis can help behavioral science step up to novel challenges: COVID - 19 as an example

Historically speaking, the behavioral tradition advanced functional analysis as a method of applying existing principles to novel situations. In the more than half a century since that idea was advanced, functional analysis has either fallen into disuse, as in most of applied psychology, or has been used but modified to a point that is virtually inapplicable elsewhere, as in applied behavior analysis work with severe developmental disabilities. In this paper we argue that the current challenges with COVID-19 present an ideal time to reinvigorate functional analysis by combining it with the growing body of evidence on processes of change, organized under an extended evolutionary meta-model. This new form of process-based functional analysis takes advantage of the strengths of contextual behavioral science, while opening avenues of fruitful interaction with other wings of intervention and evolutionary science more generally. Using the psychological flexibility model as an example, we show how this approach solves the key problems of classical functional analysis and helps professionals deal with novel challenges such as those posed by COVID-19. Humanity is now facing an extraordinary and unexpected situation. Behavioral science needs to rise to that challenge in a way that provides both immediate practical value and greater assurance of long-term benefits for our understanding of human complexity more generally. Process-based functional analysis can be a vehicle to do just that.

The problem of vaccination refusal: a review with guidance for pediatricians

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the wake of multiple recent outbreaks of the measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases, it is crucial to understand and address parental concerns about vaccination. The purposes of this review are: to identify the causes of vaccine resistance, to elucidate the variables that have led to the success or failure of interventions to date, and to consider implications for pediatricians treating children whose parents are vaccination-resistant.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent research draws on insights from cognitive science to understand vaccine resistance and to develop more effective interventions. Studies show that vaccine resistors are more likely to value lifestyle liberty, to favor individualistic over hierarchical worldviews, and to believe in conspiracy theories. Interventions that seek primarily to correct erroneous beliefs about the dangers of vaccination are likely to fail or even backfire. On the other hand, intervention strategies, such as motivational interviewing, in which the provider elicits and shows respect for parents' values and concerns while empowering them to make well informed and well reasoned decisions, are more likely to be successful. Parents cite a trusting relationship with their pediatrician as the most important factor influencing their decision to vaccinate.

SUMMARY

Pediatricians are in the best position to successfully apply insights from cognitive science and intervention research to overcome vaccination-hesitancy.

Psychological reactance impacts ratings of pediatrician vaccine-related communication quality, perceived vaccine safety, and vaccination priority among U.S. parents

Physician communication surrounding vaccination is important in driving patient compliance with schedules and recommendations, but patient psychological factors suggest that communication strategies may have differential effects on patients. This paper investigates how psychological reactance, defined as an individuals' propensity to restore their autonomy when they perceive that others are trying to impose their will on them, impacts perceptions about physician communication and perceptions and prioritizations of vaccination. We propose and describe the results of a study that was conducted to assess the relationship between individual differences in reactance, perceived quality of pediatrician communication, perceptions of vaccination safety, and vaccination prioritization using a sample of parents. We recruited 300 parent participants via the online platform Prolific Academic in which they completed a computer-mediated survey. Results show that compared to those who are low in psychological reactance, those high in psychological reactance place less of a priority on vaccination, and that this relationship is driven by evaluations of physician communication quality and perceived vaccine safety. Our findings suggest that physicians should not adopt a one-size-fits-all approach when interacting with patients and should tailor messaging to patients based on psychological factors including reactance.