Elizabeth Helen Hayles1, Spring Chenoa Cooper2, Nicholas Wood3, John Sinn4, S Rachel Skinner5. 1. Royal North Shore Hospital, Pacific Highway, St Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia; Discipline of Paediatric and Child Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Cnr Hawksbury Rd & Hainsworth St, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia; National Centre for Immunisation, Research and Surveillance, Sydney, Australia; Kids Research Institute at The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Cnr Hawksbury Rd & Hainsworth St, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia. Electronic address: ehay8329@uni.sydney.edu.au. 2. Discipline of Paediatric and Child Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Cnr Hawksbury Rd & Hainsworth St, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia; Western Sydney Sexual Health Centre, University of Sydney, Jeffery House, Marsden St, Paramatta, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: spring.cooper@sydney.edu.au. 3. Discipline of Paediatric and Child Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Cnr Hawksbury Rd & Hainsworth St, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia; National Centre for Immunisation, Research and Surveillance, Sydney, Australia; Kids Research Institute at The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Cnr Hawksbury Rd & Hainsworth St, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia. Electronic address: nicholas.woods@health.nsw.gov.au. 4. Royal North Shore Hospital, Pacific Highway, St Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia; Discipline of Obstetrics & Gynaecology and Neonatology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Northern Clinical School at Royal North Shore Hospital, Pacific Highway, St Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia. Electronic address: john.sinn@sydney.edu.au. 5. Discipline of Paediatric and Child Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Cnr Hawksbury Rd & Hainsworth St, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia. Electronic address: rachel.skinner@health.nsw.gov.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: 'Cocooning' aims to protect susceptible infants from pertussis via caregiver vaccination. Control trials evaluating educational interventions to promote cocooning are lacking. We evaluated the role of message-framing vs. standard health information in promoting pertussis vaccination. METHODS: We recruited postpartum women from a maternity hospital in Sydney, Australia (November 2010-July 2012). Participants self-completed a pertussis knowledge and attitudes questionnaire. We then assigned pertussis-susceptible (no pertussis vaccine ≤10 years) participants to receive a gain-framed, loss-framed pamphlet or control (Government Pertussis factsheet) using weekly sequential block allocation. Next, participants were offered a pertussis vaccine (dTpa) and completed a post-questionnaire on discharge. RESULTS: A baseline questionnaire was completed for 96.4% (1433/1486) of postpartum women approached. Missing data was excluded (n=29). Next, participants (1404) were screened for vaccine status: 324 (23%) reported prior pertussis booster vaccine receipt, leaving 1080 participants requiring vaccination. Among susceptible mothers, 70% (754/1080) were vaccinated post-intervention. Rates were similar between 'gain', 'loss' or 'control' pamphlets (69.1% vs. 71.8% vs. 68.8%; p=0.62). Intention to be vaccinated (OR 2.46, p<0.001; 95% CI: 1.69-3.58), perceived vaccine benefits (OR: 1.61, p<0.001; 95% CI: 1.25-2.15) and having received a vaccine recommendation (OR 1.68; p=0.025; 95% CI: 1.07-2.65) were independent predictors of vaccine uptake. At discharge, overall pertussis vaccine coverage had increased from 23% to 77% among women screened (1078/1404). CONCLUSION: A cocooning strategy for pertussis vaccination can be highly effective when partially implemented within maternity hospitals, with information accompanied by a funded vaccine. Mothers were highly receptive to vaccination in the postnatal ward: facts about pertussis were as effective as message-framing in promoting a high uptake of 70%. Perceived vaccine benefits, intentions and vaccine recommendation were important predictors of uptake. Our intervention trial increased the existing pertussis vaccine coverage of 23-77%. Crown
BACKGROUND: 'Cocooning' aims to protect susceptible infants from pertussis via caregiver vaccination. Control trials evaluating educational interventions to promote cocooning are lacking. We evaluated the role of message-framing vs. standard health information in promoting pertussis vaccination. METHODS: We recruited postpartum women from a maternity hospital in Sydney, Australia (November 2010-July 2012). Participants self-completed a pertussis knowledge and attitudes questionnaire. We then assigned pertussis-susceptible (no pertussis vaccine ≤10 years) participants to receive a gain-framed, loss-framed pamphlet or control (Government Pertussis factsheet) using weekly sequential block allocation. Next, participants were offered a pertussis vaccine (dTpa) and completed a post-questionnaire on discharge. RESULTS: A baseline questionnaire was completed for 96.4% (1433/1486) of postpartum women approached. Missing data was excluded (n=29). Next, participants (1404) were screened for vaccine status: 324 (23%) reported prior pertussis booster vaccine receipt, leaving 1080 participants requiring vaccination. Among susceptible mothers, 70% (754/1080) were vaccinated post-intervention. Rates were similar between 'gain', 'loss' or 'control' pamphlets (69.1% vs. 71.8% vs. 68.8%; p=0.62). Intention to be vaccinated (OR 2.46, p<0.001; 95% CI: 1.69-3.58), perceived vaccine benefits (OR: 1.61, p<0.001; 95% CI: 1.25-2.15) and having received a vaccine recommendation (OR 1.68; p=0.025; 95% CI: 1.07-2.65) were independent predictors of vaccine uptake. At discharge, overall pertussis vaccine coverage had increased from 23% to 77% among women screened (1078/1404). CONCLUSION: A cocooning strategy for pertussis vaccination can be highly effective when partially implemented within maternity hospitals, with information accompanied by a funded vaccine. Mothers were highly receptive to vaccination in the postnatal ward: facts about pertussis were as effective as message-framing in promoting a high uptake of 70%. Perceived vaccine benefits, intentions and vaccine recommendation were important predictors of uptake. Our intervention trial increased the existing pertussis vaccine coverage of 23-77%. Crown
Authors: Amanda F Dempsey; Sarah E Brewer; Carter Sevick; Jennifer Pyrzanowski; Sara Mazzoni; Sean T O'Leary Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2015-10-02 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Stefania Vergnano; Jim Buttery; Ben Cailes; Ravichandran Chandrasekaran; Elena Chiappini; Ebiere Clark; Clare Cutland; Solange Dourado de Andrade; Alejandra Esteves-Jaramillo; Javier Ruiz Guinazu; Chrissie Jones; Beate Kampmann; Jay King; Sonali Kochhar; Noni Macdonald; Alexandra Mangili; Reinaldo de Menezes Martins; César Velasco Muñoz; Michael Padula; Flor M Muñoz; James Oleske; Melvin Sanicas; Elizabeth Schlaudecker; Hans Spiegel; Maja Subelj; Lakshmi Sukumaran; Beckie N Tagbo; Karina A Top; Dat Tran; Paul T Heath Journal: Vaccine Date: 2016-08-01 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Edouard Ledent; Giovanni Gabutti; Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Juan Luis Alcázar Zambrano; Magda Campins Martí; María Teresa Del Hierro Gurruchaga; María José Fernández Cruz; Giuseppe Ferrera; Francesca Fortunato; Pierfederico Torchio; Giorgio Zoppi; Christian Agboton; Walid Kandeil; Federico Marchetti Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2019-04-15 Impact factor: 3.452