BACKGROUND: The measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine has been the focus of considerable adverse publicity in recent years. AIM: To describe recent trends in parental attitudes to, and coverage of, MMR vaccine. DESIGN OF STUDY: Routine surveillance of vaccine coverage and cross-sectional surveys of parental attitudes. SETTING: All health authorities in England (vaccine coverage) and 132 enumeration districts in England (attitude survey). METHOD: Quarterly MMR vaccine coverage for all resident children in England at two years of age was requested from computerised child health information systems. Data was also obtained from 26 English health authorities/trusts on MMR coverage at 16 months of age. The proportion of mothers who believed that MMR vaccine was safe or carried only a slight risk, and the proportion who intended to fully vaccinate any future children, was obtained from biannual interviews with a national representative sample of over 1000 mothers of children under three years of age. RESULTS: Vaccine coverage at two years of age fell 8.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.4 to 8.8) between April and June 1995 and between April and June 2001. In September 2001, 67% of mothers reported that the MMR vaccine was safe or carried only a slight risk and 92% of mothers agreed with the statement: 'If I had another child in the future I would have them fully immunised against all childhood diseases'. CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable adverse publicity, the fall in MMR coverage has been relatively small, mothers' attitudes to MMR remain positive, and most continue to seek advice on immunisation from health professionals. As the vast majority of mothers are willing to have future children fully immunised, we believe that health professionals should be able to use the available scientific evidence to help to maintain MMR coverage.
BACKGROUND: The measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine has been the focus of considerable adverse publicity in recent years. AIM: To describe recent trends in parental attitudes to, and coverage of, MMR vaccine. DESIGN OF STUDY: Routine surveillance of vaccine coverage and cross-sectional surveys of parental attitudes. SETTING: All health authorities in England (vaccine coverage) and 132 enumeration districts in England (attitude survey). METHOD: Quarterly MMR vaccine coverage for all resident children in England at two years of age was requested from computerised child health information systems. Data was also obtained from 26 English health authorities/trusts on MMR coverage at 16 months of age. The proportion of mothers who believed that MMR vaccine was safe or carried only a slight risk, and the proportion who intended to fully vaccinate any future children, was obtained from biannual interviews with a national representative sample of over 1000 mothers of children under three years of age. RESULTS: Vaccine coverage at two years of age fell 8.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.4 to 8.8) between April and June 1995 and between April and June 2001. In September 2001, 67% of mothers reported that the MMR vaccine was safe or carried only a slight risk and 92% of mothers agreed with the statement: 'If I had another child in the future I would have them fully immunised against all childhood diseases'. CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable adverse publicity, the fall in MMR coverage has been relatively small, mothers' attitudes to MMR remain positive, and most continue to seek advice on immunisation from health professionals. As the vast majority of mothers are willing to have future children fully immunised, we believe that health professionals should be able to use the available scientific evidence to help to maintain MMR coverage.
Authors: Erlend T Aasheim; Thomas Inns; Amy Trindall; Lynsey Emmett; Kevin E Brown; Chris J Williams; Mark Reacher Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2014 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Robert McMurray; Francine M Cheater; Anna Weighall; Carolyn Nelson; Martin Schweiger; Suzanne Mukherjee Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 5.386