Literature DB >> 22475862

Why did patients with cardiovascular disease in the Netherlands accept Q fever vaccination?

Marloes Bults1, Desirée J M A Beaujean, Clementine J Wijkmans, Aura Timen, Jan Hendrik Richardus, Hélène A C M Voeten.   

Abstract

This study examines patient's reasons for accepting Q fever vaccination, including risk perception, feelings of doubt, social influence, information-seeking behavior, preventive measures taken, and perceptions regarding received information and governmental action. Data was obtained from exit interviews conducted after Q fever vaccination, between January and April 2011. A total of 413 patients with specific cardiovascular conditions in the Netherlands participated in exit interviews; 70% were older than 60 years. Most reported reasons for accepting Q fever vaccination were: "I am at an increased risk for developing (chronic) Q fever" (69%) and "my general practitioner recommends Q fever vaccination for me" (34%). The majority (86%) reported a high perceived severity of Q fever, and only 6% felt vulnerable to Q fever after vaccination. One-third had doubts about getting vaccinated, primarily related to fears of side effects and practical barriers. Fifty-two percent solicited advice from their social networks; of these, 67% reported influence on their vaccination decision. General practitioners and family were the most reported sources of advice. Thirty percent actively sought information about Q fever vaccination. Twenty-two percent of all respondents had taken other preventive measures, such as avoiding contact with goats and sheep (74%), and cancelling or postponing visits to Q fever-affected areas (36%). Almost one-half of all respondents reported negative feelings regarding governmental action to control Q fever. Significant differences were observed regarding feelings of doubt, information-seeking behavior, perceived vulnerability, preventive measures taken, and perceptions regarding received information and governmental action regarding gender, age, educational level, and/or employment status. Vaccination decision-making may differ among socio-demographic subgroups. When preparing future vaccination campaigns, it is important to obtain greater insight into these differences and take these aspects into account in risk communication strategies by tailoring information to specific target groups.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22475862     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.03.056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vaccine        ISSN: 0264-410X            Impact factor:   3.641


  5 in total

1.  Role of COVID-19 Anxiety and Community Risk Factors on Physical Distancing Practice.

Authors:  Hsin-Yi Wang; Cecilia Cheng
Journal:  Behav Sci (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-16

2.  Coverage of the 2011 Q fever vaccination campaign in the Netherlands, using retrospective population-based prevalence estimation of cardiovascular risk-conditions for chronic Q fever.

Authors:  Patricia E Vermeer-de Bondt; Teske Schoffelen; Ann M Vanrolleghem; Leslie D Isken; Marcel van Deuren; Miriam C J M Sturkenboom; Aura Timen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  How far are we from a medication use process aiming at well-informed adherent patients with long-term medications in Finland? Qualitative study.

Authors:  Niina Mononen; Marika Pohjanoksa-Mäntylä; Marja Sa Airaksinen; Katri Hämeen-Anttila
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-06-21       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Trends in the receipt of medicines information among Finnish adults in 1999-2014: a nationwide repeated cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Niina Mononen; Marja S A Airaksinen; Katri Hämeen-Anttila; Satu Helakorpi; Marika Pohjanoksa-Mäntylä
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-06-14       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Q fever in the Netherlands: public perceptions and behavioral responses in three different epidemiological regions: a follow-up study.

Authors:  Marloes Bults; Desirée Beaujean; Clementine Wijkmans; Jan Hendrik Richardus; Hélène Voeten
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 3.295

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.