Literature DB >> 24315883

Parent and provider perspectives on immunization: are providers overestimating parental concerns?

C Mary Healy1, Diana P Montesinos2, Amy B Middleman3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Data are limited on whether providers understand parental attitudes to recommended childhood immunizations. We determined parental attitudes and assessed how accurately providers estimated parental opinions.
METHODS: Survey of parents and providers (pediatricians, nurses, medical assistants) in randomly selected practices in Houston, Texas. Surveys assessed demographics, perceptions of immunization importance, safety and efficacy, and acceptability of vaccine delivery. Providers estimated parental responses.
RESULTS: 401 parents (82% mothers, 12% fathers, 6% other) and 105 providers participated. Parents thought vaccines were important for health (median score 9.5; 0=not important, 10=extremely important) but also were concerned regarding vaccine safety and side effects (8.9 on 0-10 scale). 309 (77%) agreed that vaccines effectively prevent disease. Route of administration mattered to 147 (37%), who preferred injection (9.0) over oral (7.3) or intranasal (4.8) routes. Although parents would prefer three or fewer injections per visit, preventing more diseases (189 [47.6%]) was more important than number of injections (167 [42.3%]) when deciding the number of vaccines allowed per visit. White parents rated vaccines less important in preventing some illnesses than did non-white (P≤0.006 for meningitis, hepatitis, HPV, influenza and rotavirus) and rated number of injections per visit more important than number of diseases prevented (51.6% white versus 34.2% non-white; P 0.002). Providers underestimated parental attitudes toward vaccine importance (particularly influenza and HPV), and overestimated the proportion of parents who thought route of administration mattered (63%) and that number of injections per visit was the most important factor (76%) around parental vaccine decisions (P<0.001 for parent-provider mismatch).
CONCLUSIONS: Most surveyed parents believe vaccines are important for child health and rate disease prevention higher than number of injections entailed. Providers underestimate the importance of some vaccines to parents and overestimate parental concerns regarding route of administration. Future research should focus on how this mismatch impacts parental vaccine decisions.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CDC; CHIP; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Children's Health Insurance Program; HPV; Haemophilus influenzae type b; Hib; Immunization; MA; Parent provider mismatch; Parental beliefs; Provider estimates; VPD; Vaccine hesitancy; human papillomavirus; medical assistant; vaccine-preventable disease

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24315883     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.11.076

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


  36 in total

1.  Association of both consistency and strength of self-reported clinician recommendation for HPV vaccination and HPV vaccine uptake among 11- to 12-year-old children.

Authors:  Lila J Finney Rutten; Jennifer L St Sauver; Timothy J Beebe; Patrick M Wilson; Debra J Jacobson; Chun Fan; Carmen Radecki Breitkopf; Susan T Vadaparampil; Kathy L MacLaughlin; Robert M Jacobson
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2017-09-27       Impact factor: 3.641

2.  Commentary on "Parental vaccine-hesitancy: Understanding the problem and searching for a resolution".

Authors:  C Mary Healy
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Acceptability of live attenuated influenza vaccine by vaccine providers in Quebec, Canada.

Authors:  Eve Dubé; Dominique Gagnon; Marilou Kiely; Nicole Boulianne; Monique Landry
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Cognitive Bias in Clinicians' Communication about Human Papillomavirus Vaccination.

Authors:  Caitlin E Hansen; Anna North; Linda M Niccolai
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2019-01-24

5.  Characterizing safety-net providers' HPV vaccine recommendations to undecided parents: A pilot study.

Authors:  L Aubree Shay; Richard L Street; Austin S Baldwin; Emily G Marks; Simon Craddock Lee; Robin T Higashi; Celette Sugg Skinner; Sobha Fuller; Donna Persaud; Jasmin A Tiro
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2016-06-25

6.  Childhood Immunizations: First-Time Expectant Mothers' Knowledge, Beliefs, Intentions, and Behaviors.

Authors:  Judith L Weiner; Allison M Fisher; Glen J Nowak; Michelle M Basket; Bruce G Gellin
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 5.043

7.  Parents' Views on the Best and Worst Reasons for Guideline-Consistent HPV Vaccination.

Authors:  Melissa B Gilkey; Mo Zhou; Annie-Laurie McRee; Melanie L Kornides; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Announcements Versus Conversations to Improve HPV Vaccination Coverage: A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Noel T Brewer; Megan E Hall; Teri L Malo; Melissa B Gilkey; Beth Quinn; Christine Lathren
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 7.124

9.  Quality of physician communication about human papillomavirus vaccine: findings from a national survey.

Authors:  Melissa B Gilkey; Teri L Malo; Parth D Shah; Megan E Hall; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  U.S. Primary Care Clinics' Experiences During Introduction of the 9-Valent HPV Vaccine.

Authors:  Melanie L Kornides; William A Calo; Jennifer A Heisler-MacKinnon; Melissa B Gilkey
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2018-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.