BACKGROUND: Limited human papillomavirus (HPV) related knowledge might be a barrier to future vaccine acceptance. From 2008-2010, PATH conducted an HPV vaccination demonstration project in partnership with the government immunization program in Vietnam, which included awareness campaigns prior to vaccination. OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare knowledge and attitudes about cervical cancer and HPV vaccines between mothers and daughters, and whether knowledge was associated with vaccination status. METHODS: We analyzed HPV-related knowledge and attitude data from mother-daughter paired responses to a cross-sectional household survey. After parents completed the survey, daughters were asked the same questions. We calculated the frequency of responses for each question and devised a scaled composite measure for knowledge. RESULTS: Participants believed they had received enough information about cervical cancer and HPV vaccines and it was sufficient to make a decision about vaccination. Fifty percent of the participants knew HPV causes cervical cancer and 80% knew the HPV vaccine prevented cervical cancer. Mothers had more knowledge about cervical cancer and HPV infection (p<0.01), compared to daughters, who had more vaccine specific knowledge (p<0.01). However, the total mean knowledge score was similar for the groups. Girls not fully vaccinated had a lower mean knowledge score than fully vaccinated girls (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the purpose of the HPV vaccine was clearly messaged; however, some misconceptions about cervical cancer and HPV still exist. Limited knowledge about the magnitude of cervical cancer, HPV as a cause of cervical cancer, and HPV vaccines may have contributed to incomplete vaccination.
BACKGROUND: Limited human papillomavirus (HPV) related knowledge might be a barrier to future vaccine acceptance. From 2008-2010, PATH conducted an HPV vaccination demonstration project in partnership with the government immunization program in Vietnam, which included awareness campaigns prior to vaccination. OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare knowledge and attitudes about cervical cancer and HPV vaccines between mothers and daughters, and whether knowledge was associated with vaccination status. METHODS: We analyzed HPV-related knowledge and attitude data from mother-daughter paired responses to a cross-sectional household survey. After parents completed the survey, daughters were asked the same questions. We calculated the frequency of responses for each question and devised a scaled composite measure for knowledge. RESULTS:Participants believed they had received enough information about cervical cancer and HPV vaccines and it was sufficient to make a decision about vaccination. Fifty percent of the participants knew HPV causes cervical cancer and 80% knew the HPV vaccine prevented cervical cancer. Mothers had more knowledge about cervical cancer and HPV infection (p<0.01), compared to daughters, who had more vaccine specific knowledge (p<0.01). However, the total mean knowledge score was similar for the groups. Girls not fully vaccinated had a lower mean knowledge score than fully vaccinated girls (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the purpose of the HPV vaccine was clearly messaged; however, some misconceptions about cervical cancer and HPV still exist. Limited knowledge about the magnitude of cervical cancer, HPV as a cause of cervical cancer, and HPV vaccines may have contributed to incomplete vaccination.
Authors: Andrew Kampikaho Turiho; Elialilia S Okello; Wilson W Muhwezi; Steve Harvey; Pauline Byakika-Kibwika; David Meya; Anne R Katahoire Journal: Afr J Reprod Health Date: 2014-12
Authors: S F La Vincente; D Mielnik; K Jenkins; F Bingwor; L Volavola; H Marshall; P Druavesi; F M Russell; K Lokuge; E K Mulholland Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-12-18 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Bach Xuan Tran; Tracy Vo; Anh Kim Dang; Quang Nhat Nguyen; Cuong Tat Nguyen; Chi Linh Hoang; Khanh Nam Do; Carl A Latkin; Cyrus S H Ho; Roger C M Ho Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-11-05 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Li Ping Wong; Raja Nur Amalina Raja Muhammad Yusoff; Zobaida Edib; I-Ching Sam; Gregory D Zimet Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-09-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Severin Kabakama; Katherine E Gallagher; Natasha Howard; Sandra Mounier-Jack; Helen E D Burchett; Ulla K Griffiths; Marta Feletto; D Scott LaMontagne; Deborah Watson-Jones Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-08-19 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Katherine E Gallagher; Natasha Howard; Severin Kabakama; Sandra Mounier-Jack; Ulla K Griffiths; Marta Feletto; Helen E D Burchett; D Scott LaMontagne; Deborah Watson-Jones Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-06-02 Impact factor: 3.240