A validated modification of the vaccine hesitancy scale for childhood,influenza and HPV vaccines

IntroductionVaccine hesitancy contributes to outbreaks of preventable disease worldwide. The Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS), developed by the international WHO SAGE Working Group, has been validated previously for measuring hesitancy towards childhood vaccines; some psychometric properties were suboptimal.MethodsWe collected data using large, nationally-representative samples of parents in the U.S. We adapted the VHS items, and additional hesitancy items, to assess hesitancy towards influenza and HPV vaccines in addition to routine childhood vaccines. We then used exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to identify latent constructs and create modified scales for childhood (VHS-child), influenza (VHS-flu) and HPV (VHS-HPV) vaccines with improved psychometric properties. Finally, we compared hesitancy scores on the VHS-child, VHS-flu, and VHS-HPV, to self-reported receipt of each vaccine category, and compared subscale scores to assess whether drivers of hesitancy differed by vaccine category.Results2052 parents of children <18 years old completed the VHS-child and VHS-flu while 2020 parents of adolescents completed the VHS-HPV. A two-factor structure of ‘risks’ and a ‘lack of confidence’ was found for each vaccine category. Slight modifications to the VHS improved psychometric properties. Hesitancy was strongly associated with vaccine receipt: e.g., 76% of parents not hesitant towards influenza vaccine had vaccinated their child the past season, versus 9% of hesitant parents (p < 0.0001). Subscale scores also differed significantly between vaccines: lack of confidence was greater towards influenza (Median (IQR): 2.0 (1.2, 3.3)) and HPV (2.0 (1.3, 3.0)) vaccines than childhood (1.2 (1.0, 1.8), p < 0.0001 for both) vaccines; perceived risks of HPV vaccines (2.7 (1.7, 3.7)) were greater than for childhood vaccines (2.0 (1.3, 3.0), p < 0.0001).ConclusionsOur modified VHS scales perform well psychometrically and allow for consistent measurement of the extent and reasons for hesitancy between vaccine categories. We suggest that future work use these scales to examine hesitancy towards other vaccines and to monitor hesitancy over time.     

What is ‘confidence’ and what could affect it?: A qualitative study of mothers who are hesitant about vaccines

BackgroundPublic confidence in immunization is critical to maintaining high vaccine-coverage rates needed to protect individuals and communities from vaccine-preventable diseases. Recent attention has been placed on factors influencing confidence in vaccination in the US and globally, but comprehensive understanding of what drives or hinders confidence in childhood vaccination is yet to be reached. As such, assessing parents' confidence in childhood vaccination and the ways in which educational materials affect confidence is needed.ObjectiveWe sought to (1) learn how mothers who are hesitant about vaccination characterize confidence in health-related products for young children, including the recommended vaccines; (2) gain insights on what influences vaccine confidence beliefs; and (3) assess whether short, education materials affect parental confidence in childhood vaccinations.MethodsEight moderator-lead focus groups (n = 61), stratified by socioeconomic status, were undertaken with mothers of children 5 years of age of less who are hesitant about vaccines. Four of the groups were held in the Philadelphia, PA area and four were held in the San Francisco/Oakland, CA area. Three educational material pairs, each consisting of a 2–3 min video and an infographic poster about an immunization-related topic, were reviewed and assessed for influence on confidence.ResultsQualitative data analysis was used to identify overarching themes across the focus groups. Themes, insights, and illustrative quotes were identified and provided for each of the major discussion areas: primary health concerns for young children; confidence beliefs and perceptions, including for recommended vaccines; facilitators and barriers to confidence; and reactions to the educational materials.ConclusionsResults provide helpful insights into how mothers who are hesitant about vaccines perceive confidence in childhood vaccines and health-related products, suggestions for how to improve confidence, and support for the value and use of short videos as part of vaccination education efforts. Findings can aid those developing vaccination education materials and resources designed to foster vaccine confidence.     

An assessment of parents’ childhood immunization beliefs,intentions, and behaviors using a smartphone panel

IntroductionIt is important to quickly identify parent beliefs, intentions, and behaviors toward childhood vaccination, especially parents of children 19 to 35 months. This paper describes parental immunization beliefs, intentions, and behaviors; assesses the relationships between beliefs and intentions regarding child immunization and actual behaviors; and assesses whether beliefs, intentions, and/or behaviors varied across demographic subgroups.MethodsA sample of parents, ages 18 and older, from a mobile panel with people residing in the U.S. were invited to answer immunization behavior, intention, and belief questions using a smartphone app that was not vaccine specific. 10,000 panel members with a child under 18 were sent invitations. 1029 surveys were completed by a respondent with a child 19 to 35 months. The survey instrument replicated many NIS questions and had similar sequencing.FindingsRespondents reported that most children received all recommended vaccines, except flu vaccine, suggesting some may not understand the immunization schedule. Demographics closely associated with immunization behaviors were respondents’ education and household income. There is strong agreement that vaccines are effective, important to community health, and the child’s health. There is concern about the number of shots received, disease prevention, and ingredient safety. Some belief remains about vaccines causing learning disabilities. Positive beliefs about the benefits of childhood vaccines and concomitant risks vary with demographics.ConclusionsThis survey provided insights into beliefs and behaviors of parents regarding childhood vaccination. It found evidence of differences in beliefs, particularly related to delaying or declining recommended childhood vaccinations. The survey was conducted in a few days and at lower cost than traditional methods. This serves as a model for health agencies where rapid results or inexpensive approaches are needed.     

Using Facebook to increase coverage of HPV vaccination among Danish girls: An assessment of a Danish social media campaign

ObjectivesIn this study we assess how different Facebook (FB) posts resonate with parents hesitant about HPV vaccination and how to engage parents in positive dialogues on FB.BackgroundVaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) was successfully introduced in the Danish childhood vaccination program in 2009 for 12 year-old girls, with coverage reaching approximately 90%. However, negative public debate questioning the safety of the vaccine coincided with a rapid decline in vaccination coverage from 2015. In May 2017, we launched the national campaign Stop HPV – stop cervical cancer with the aim to rebuild trust in the HPV vaccine and increase vaccination coverage. We used a FB page and a social media strategy to engage the campaign’s primary target group: mothers hesitant about HPV vaccination of their daughters.MethodsWe analyzed a variety of posts on the FB page Stop HPV – stop cervical cancer posted from May 2017 to December 2017. We performed analysis documenting post reach, engagement in the posts and sentiment (positive, neutral or negative) of the comments. Focus groups were recruited to provide data about attitudes to the posts and the responses from the FB management team.Results84 unique posts were published on the FB page from May 2017 to December 2017 reaching 3,476,023 individual FB profiles. In focus groups, parents requested more in-depth information. However, analyses of FB posts and sentiment of comments showed that personal stories generated higher engagement rates and more positive dialogues compared to factual posts.ConclusionThe FB page Stop HPV – stop cervical cancer has successfully reached and engaged FB users in dialogue about HPV vaccination. Personal stories are effective in creating positive dialogues on FB. However, it remains important to provide factual information to parents to enable informed decision making about HPV vaccination.     

Vaccine hesitancy among parents of adolescents and its association with vaccine uptake

BackgroundAddressing parental vaccine hesitancy may increase adolescent vaccination acceptance. However, no validated measure exists to identify parents hesitant toward adolescent vaccines.ObjectiveTo determine if a modified version of the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) survey, a previously validated tool to identify parental hesitancy toward vaccines in infants, predicts adolescent vaccine uptake at office visits.MethodsWe modified the PACV for use in the adolescent setting and distributed it to a convenience sample of parents of adolescents aged 11 to 17 presenting for care at a diverse group of six pediatric practices in Oklahoma and South Carolina. We determined the vaccination status of the parents’ adolescents for 3 vaccines (Tetanus–diphtheria–acellular pertussis [Tdap], meningococcal conjugate [MCV4], and human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccines). We used Fisher's exact tests to compare vaccination status with each survey item and with an overall general hesitancy scale that we constructed.ResultsWe analyzed 363 surveys. At the time of the visit, vaccination coverage was 84% for Tdap, 73% for MCV, and 45% for any dose of HPV. Thirty-nine percent of parents expressed concern about vaccine efficacy and 41% expressed concern about side effects. Forty-five percent of parents disagreed with the statement that “teens can get all of the vaccines that are due at a single visit.” Two individual items were associated with not receiving a dose of HPV vaccine that was due. The overall modified PACV score failed to predict adolescent vaccine uptake at an office visit.ConclusionSeveral individual items were associated with vaccine uptake. The cumulative modified PACV, a general measure of vaccine hesitancy, was not associated with vaccination status despite illuminating parental hesitancy. We need to better understand vaccine-specific concerns for the adolescent population.     

Stages of HPV Vaccine Hesitancy Among Guardians of Female Secondary School Students in China

PurposeFemale secondary school students are the primary recommended population for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. However, vaccine hesitancy may affect uptake. In this study, we assessed the vaccine hesitancy levels among the guardians of female secondary school students in China.MethodsWe developed a questionnaire and conducted cross-sectional surveys among guardians of secondary school girls aged 12–19 years in mainland China based on the Increasing Vaccination Model and the Precaution Adoption Process Model.ResultsWe collected 3,225 valid samples. Among the participating guardians, 53.9% were vaccine hesitant, although only 0.9% had refused HPV vaccines. Some individual characteristics of guardians (e.g. sex, education/income level) were associated with understanding HPV vaccines. Better knowledge of HPV vaccines and communication with reliable sources of information were associated with vaccine nonhesitancy. Practical barriers such as vaccine shortage and busy schedules prevented nonhesitant guardians from vaccinating their children.DiscussionA substantial proportion of the guardians surveyed were HPV vaccine hesitant. Promoting HPV knowledge and communication with reliable sources (e.g. clinical doctors) could help fight against vaccine hesitancy.     

“Everybody just wants to do what's best for their child”: Understanding how pro-vaccine parents can support a culture of vaccine hesitancy

BackgroundAlthough a large majority of parents vaccinate their children, vaccine hesitancy has become more widespread. It is not well understood how this culture of vaccine hesitancy has emerged and how it influences parents’ decisions about vaccine schedules.ObjectiveWe sought to examine how attitudes and beliefs of parents who self-report as pro-vaccine are developed and contribute to immunization decisions, including delaying or spacing vaccines.MethodsOpen-ended, in-depth interviews (N = 23) were conducted with upper-middle class parents with young children living in Philadelphia. Interview data were coded and key themes identified related to vaccine decision-making.ResultsParents who sought out vaccine information were often overwhelmed by the quantity and ambiguity when interpreting that information, and, consequently, had to rely on their own instinct or judgment to make vaccine decisions. In particular, while parents in this sample did not refuse vaccines, and described themselves as pro-vaccine, they did frequently delay or space vaccines. This experience also generated sympathy for and tolerance of vaccine hesitancy in other parents. Parents also perceived minimal severe consequences for deviating from the recommended immunization schedule.ConclusionThese findings suggest that the rise in and persistence of vaccine hesitancy and refusal are, in part, influenced by the conflicts in the information parents gather, making it difficult to interpret. Considerable deviations from the recommended vaccination schedule may manifest even within a pro-vaccine population due to this perceived ambiguity of available information and resulting tolerance for vaccine hesitancy.     

Physicians’ decision processes about the HPV vaccine: A qualitative study

BackgroundThe contemporary crisis of trust in vaccines has severely impaired acceptance of the HPV vaccine, especially in France, where its uptake culminated at 23.7% in 2018 (complete course at age 16). Physicians’ recommendations strongly influence its acceptance/refusal. Our study sought to understand the decision processes leading physicians to recommend this vaccine (or not).MethodsQualitative interviews of French physicians (general practitioners, gynecologists, and pediatricians). We first randomly selected doctors in a national register of medical professionals and then resorted to snowballing to build a convenience sample. We coded the interviews in a thematic analysis built both inductively and deductively from our research questions and data.ResultsTwo thirds of the participants (19/28) were favorable to HPV vaccination, some (4) opposed it, while the others were hesitant about recommending it. In explaining their opinions, most participants mentioned that they trusted the stakeholders within the vaccination system: the less trust they had, the more critical they were of the vaccine and the more importance they attributed to patients’ opinions. We identified three different ways they interacted with patients on this topic: informing and convincing; adapting to patients’ opinions; refusing compromise about vaccination. Crossing these various themes, we found 5 types of physicians: dissidents (mistrustful of the healthcare system and HPV vaccine), hesitant (finding it difficult to make up their minds about this vaccination), laissez-faire (letting patients decide by themselves, but very favorable to HPV vaccination), educator (very favorable), and uncompromising vaccinators (refusing debate). Pediatricians were overrepresented among the latter two types.ConclusionsPhysicians’ judgment was influenced by their trust in the stakeholders involved in designing and implementing the HPV vaccination strategy. In this sense, doctors did not differ substantially from laypeople. They were, nonetheless, strongly influenced by their professional style and ethos.     

Parental attitudes towards mandatory vaccination; a systematic review

Uptake of childhood vaccines is decreasing. While mandatory vaccination schemes can increase vaccine uptake rates, they can also cause backlash among some parents. We conducted a systematic review investigating parental beliefs about vaccine mandates and factors associated with support for mandatory vaccination schemes. We searched Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Global Health, APA PsycINFO and Web of Science from inception to 17th September 2020. Seventeen studies (five qualitative, twelve quantitative) were eligible for inclusion. We synthesised results of qualitative and quantitative studies separately. As quantitative studies were heterogeneous in the mandatory vaccination schemes and associated factors investigated, there was no scope to conduct a meta-analysis. Instead, data were narratively synthesised, considering risk of bias ratings. Qualitative data were synthesised using meta-ethnography, synthesising themes reported across studies included. Quantitative studies reported that support for mandatory vaccination schemes was reasonably high (73% to 88%). However, due to heterogeneity, there was little evidence for any factors being consistently associated with support for mandatory vaccination. Qualitative studies gave an insight into how parents perceive mandatory vaccination. Studies found that parents perceived mandatory vaccination schemes as an infringement of their rights, and particularly disliked schemes offering financial incentives for vaccination. Nevertheless, some parents felt that schemes limiting access to schooling of unvaccinated children gave them “peace of mind.” Results should be taken with caution due to the purposive use of non-representative samples. Before deciding to mandate vaccination, it is important to understand the impact it could have on parental beliefs and attitudes about vaccination.     

An innovative medical school curriculum to address human papillomavirus vaccine hesitancy

BackgroundVaccination rates against Human Papillomavirus (HPV) in the US remain alarmingly low. Physicians can significantly influence a parent’s decision to vaccinate their children. However, medical education often lacks training on specific strategies for communicating with vaccine hesitant parents.MethodsWe created an innovative curriculum designed to teach medical students how to address HPV vaccine hesitancy. The curriculum consisted of (1) a presentation on the epidemiology, biology, and disease morbidity associated with HPV, (2) a video that teaches specific communication strategies and (3) role-playing simulations. This curriculum was delivered to medical students at two separate sites. Medical students were surveyed before and after completing the educational curriculum. The surveys assessed student comfort talking to HPV vaccine hesitant parents and their likelihood to recommend the HPV vaccine.ResultsPre- and post-intervention surveys were completed by 101 of the 132 participants (77% response rate). After the intervention, student awareness of the benefits of the HPV vaccine increased by a mean of 0.82 points (Likert scale 1–5, p < 0.01) and student comfort talking to vaccine hesitant parents increased by a mean of 1.37 points (p < 0.01). Prior to the intervention, students more strongly recommended the HPV vaccine to females compared to males, but this gender disparity was eliminated after the intervention (p < 0.01). Personal vaccination status was independately associated with a higher likelihood of recommending the HPV vaccine both before and after the intervention.ConclusionOur innovative curriculum improved medical student comfort level discussing HPV vaccination with hesitant parents and increased the perceived likelihood of recommending HPV vaccination. The intervention is easy to implement, scalable, and requires minimal resources. Educating future providers on this important topic has the potential to improve vaccination rates nationwide and thus should be considered for all medical students.     

Prevalence and characteristics of HPV vaccine hesitancy among parents of adolescents across the US

BackgroundWhile many clinicians encounter parents or adolescents who refuse HPV vaccine, little is known about the prevalence of hesitancy for HPV vaccine nationally or its association with vaccination.MethodsIn April 2019, we surveyed families with adolescents 11–17 years using a national online panel (Knowledge Panel®) as the sampling frame. We assessed the prevalence of HPV vaccine hesitancy with the validated 9-item Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS). We used multivariate analyses to assess demographic factors associated with HPV vaccine hesitancy. We also assessed practical barriers to receipt of HPV vaccine and the relationship between barriers and hesitancy. Finally, we evaluated the association between both HPV vaccine hesitancy and practical barriers on HPV vaccine receipt or refusal.Results2,177 parents out of 4,185 sampled (52%) completed the survey, 2,020 qualified (lived with adolescent). Using a VHS cut-off score > 3 out of 5 points, 23% of US parents were hesitant about HPV vaccine. Hesitancy was lower among those with Hispanic ethnicity. At least one out of five parents disagreed that the HPV vaccine is beneficial for their adolescent, that the vaccine is effective, protects against HPV-related cancers, or that they followed their adolescent’s health-care provider’s recommendation about the vaccine. Many were concerned about vaccine side effects and the novelty of the vaccine. Adolescents living with vaccine-hesitant parents were less than one-third as likely to have received the vaccine (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.24, 0.35) or completed the vaccine series (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.23, 0.36), and were 6-fold more likely to have refused the vaccine because of parental vaccine-related concerns (RR = 6.09, 95% CI = 5.26, 7.04). Most practical barriers were independently associated with vaccine receipt but not with vaccine refusal.ConclusionsHPV vaccine hesitancy is common nationally and strongly related to both under-vaccination and vaccine refusal.     

Confidence in the National Immunization Program among parents in Sweden 2016 – A cross-sectional survey

BackgroundVaccination coverage for infant vaccinations in the Swedish National Immunization Program (NIP) has been high for more than a decade, with approximately 97% of 2-year-old children fully immunized. Vaccination coverage against Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) has been around 80% since introduction for girls in 2012. This indicates high parental confidence in the NIP, but as seen in other European countries rapid shifts in confidence may occur. This study examined vaccine confidence and attitudes towards vaccinations among parents in the Swedish population.MethodsA web-based survey was sent to 1046 parents with children aged 0–15 years, in a panel administrated by The Public Health Agency of Sweden. The survey included questions on vaccination awareness, safety and information channels. The response rate was 87%. Data were weighted to adjust for non-responders and for representativeness of the Swedish population.ResultsParents were categorized as acceptors (79%), questioning acceptors (19%) or selective refusers (2%). When excluding responses for HPV vaccination, the proportion of acceptors increased to 91%. The main reasons for questioning or refusing a vaccine were worry over adverse events, negative or lack of information. Along a spectrum of beliefs, acceptors and questioning acceptors were more similar compared to selective refusers. Nurses at child health clinics constituted the most used vaccination information source for acceptors, whereas selective refusers to a greater extent searched information online and in social media.ConclusionsThe study demonstrates that parents in Sweden have confidence in and are positive towards vaccinations given within the NIP. One in five parents question vaccines, particularly regarding the HPV vaccine, but still concur to the NIP. Information on vaccines online and at vaccination appointments, including vaccine safety, is important for maintaining confidence in vaccination. Conducting recurring studies is valuable for monitoring vaccine confidence and changes in attitudes towards vaccination.     

A survey of office practice: Parents,front office staff,nurses and clinicians hold disparate views on adolescent vaccines

BackgroundPrevious work suggests provider recommendation improves vaccine delivery. Less examined is the role of practice’s front office staff and nurses in vaccine communication. Messaging and communication about vaccines should be consistent across all levels of the pediatric practice.MethodsWe distributed surveys to clinicians, nurses, front office staff, and parents of adolescents 11–17 years in pediatric and family medicine office practices. We inquired about perceived importance of adolescent vaccines and the use of recommendations to families about receiving vaccines. We also asked front office staff about concerns from families about vaccines as well as vaccine refusal for themselves and their child.ResultsNurses perceived that the HPV vaccine was less important than the MenACWY and Tdap vaccines (% very important 84% v. 95% and 94%; P < .01). Parents also perceived HPV vaccine as being less important than MenACWY and Tdap vaccines (59% v 68% and 79%; P < .01. Between groups, parents perceived all vaccines as being less important than front office staff. Nurses and clinicians reported using a strong recommendation less often for HPV vaccine compared to the MenACWY and Tdap (70% v 84% and 84%; P < .01 for nurses, and 77% v. 88% and 86%; P < .05 for clinicians). Front office staff were more likely to report concerns from parents about HPV vaccine than from MenACWY and Tdap after the visit is complete.ConclusionParents, front office staff and nurses differ on the importance of vaccines. Interventions to improve vaccine communication and delivery must include all who work in the practice.     

Untangling the psychosocial predictors of HPV vaccination decision-making among parents of boys

BackgroundHPV vaccination uptake in boys is suboptimal in many jurisdictions, particularly in the absence of publicly funded HPV vaccination programs. Parents represent key decision-makers of HPV vaccination and their HPV vaccine decision-making stage is influenced by multiple psychosocial determinants. Our objective was to assess the relationship between a broad range of psychosocial factors and parents of boys’ HPV vaccine decision-making stage.MethodsData were collected through an online survey from a nationally representative sample of Canadian parents of boys in February (T1) and November 2014 (T2). We assessed a broad number of psychosocial factors including: socio-demographics, health behaviours and validated scales for assessing HPV knowledge, attitudes and beliefs. Parents selected their HPV vaccination adoption stage based on the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM). Multinomial logistic regression was used to test the association between predictors and PAPM stage at T1 and T2.ResultsDiscussion with a healthcare provider about the HPV vaccine and increased HPV knowledge was associated with increased odds of being in the more advanced PAPM stages. Increased perception of risks in the absence of HPV vaccination, increased perception that others endorse HPV vaccination and positive attitudes related to vaccines in general were associated with increased odds of being in the decided to vaccinate stage. Believing that HPV vaccination is harmful increased, and perceiving the benefits of HPV vaccination decreased the odds of deciding not to vaccinate.ConclusionsThis study highlights the psychosocial predictors of the decision-making stage reported by parents regarding HPV vaccination of their sons, that were significant at two time-points. Targeted interventions that consider the impact of the health care provider and address knowledge gaps as well as individual beliefs about benefits, risks, and harms of the HPV vaccine and vaccines in general should be implemented to help parents make better informed decisions that is, to move closer to actual vaccination adoption.     

Social amplification of risk and “probable vaccine damage”: A typology of vaccination beliefs in 28 European countries

BackgroundDespite lacking scientific support, vaccine hesitancy is widespread. While serious vaccine damage as a scientific fact is real yet statistically highly uncommon, emerging social and technological forces have amplified perceptions of risk for “probable vaccine damage”, making it a widely shared intersubjective reality.MethodsUsing the Eurobarometer 91.2 survey on a statistically representative EU27-UK sample interviewed in March 2019, we documented perceptions of vaccine risks and identified three belief configurations regarding vaccine effectiveness, safety, and usefulness, through exploratory cluster analysis.ResultsThe public beliefs in significant vaccine risks are frequent. Approximatively one-tenth of the EU27-UK population consider that vaccines are not rigorously tested before authorization, one-third believe that vaccines can overload or weaken the immune system and that they can cause the disease against which they protect, and almost one-half believe that vaccines can cause serious side effects. We identified three belief configurations: hesitant, confident, and trade-off clusters. The hesitant type (approx. 11% of EU27-UK respondents) is defined by the perception that vaccines are rather ineffective, affected by risks of probable vaccine damage, not well-tested, and useless; the confident type (approx. 59%) is defined by beliefs that vaccines are effective, safe, well-tested, and useful; and the trade-off type (approx. 29%) combines beliefs that vaccines are effective, well-tested and useful, with perceptions of probable vaccine damage. The vaccine-confident and the trade-off types have similar vaccination histories, indicating the significant role of other factors besides beliefs in inducing behavior.ConclusionsThe high proportion of varying public beliefs in significant vaccine risks and the presence of a trade-off type of vaccination assessment indicate the social normality of beliefs in probable vaccine damage. Communication campaigns should take into account the social normality of the perceived risk of “probable vaccine damage” across various social types, and patterns of concomitant trust and mistrust in vaccination.     

Vaccine decision-making begins in pregnancy: Correlation between vaccine concerns,intentions and maternal vaccination with subsequent childhood vaccine uptake

IntroductionMaternal and childhood vaccine decision-making begins prenatally. Amongst pregnant Australian women we aimed to ascertain vaccine information received, maternal immunisation uptake and attitudes and concerns regarding childhood vaccination. We also aimed to determine any correlation between a) intentions and concerns regarding childhood vaccination, (b) concerns about pregnancy vaccination, (c) socioeconomic status (SES) and (d) uptake of influenza and pertussis vaccines during pregnancy and routine vaccines during childhood.MethodsWomen attending public antenatal clinics were recruited in three Australian states. Surveys were completed on iPads. Follow-up phone surveys were done three to six months post delivery, and infant vaccination status obtained via the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register (ACIR).ResultsBetween October 2015 and March 2016, 975 (82%) of 1184 mothers consented and 406 (42%) agreed to a follow up survey, post delivery. First-time mothers (445; 49%) had significantly more vaccine concerns in pregnancy and only 73% had made a decision about childhood vaccination compared to 89% of mothers with existing children (p-value < 0.001). 66% of mothers reported receiving enough information during pregnancy on childhood vaccination. In the post delivery survey, 46% and 82% of mothers reported receiving pregnancy influenza and pertussis vaccines respectively. The mother's degree of vaccine hesitancy and two attitudinal factors were correlated with vaccine uptake post delivery. There was no association between reported maternal vaccine uptake or SES and childhood vaccine uptake.ConclusionFirst time mothers are more vaccine hesitant and undecided about childhood vaccination, and only two thirds of all mothers believed they received enough information during pregnancy. New interventions to improve both education and communication on childhood and maternal vaccines, delivered by midwives and obstetricians in the Australian public hospital system, may reduce vaccine hesitancy for all mothers in pregnancy and post delivery, particularly first-time mothers.     

Misinformation and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has emerged as a major public health challenge. Although medical and scientific misinformation has been known to fuel vaccine hesitancy in the past, misinformation surrounding COVID-19 seems to be rampant, and increasing evidence suggests that it is contributing to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy today. The relationship between misinformation and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is complex, however, and it is relatively understudied.MethodsIn this article, we report qualitative data from two related but distinct studies from a larger project. Study 1 included semi-structured, open-ended interviews conducted in October–November 2020 via phone with 30 participants to investigate the relationship between misinformation and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Study 1′s results then informed the design of open-ended questions for Study 2, an online survey conducted in May–June 2021 to consider the relationship between misinformation and vaccine hesitancy further. The data were examined with thematic analysis.ResultsStudy 1 led to the identification of positive and negative themes related to attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines. In Study 2, responses from vaccine-hesitant participants included six categories of misinformation: medical, scientific, political, media, religious, and technological. Across both Study 1 and Study 2, six vaccine hesitancy themes were identified from the data: concerns about the vaccines’ future effects, doubts about the vaccines’ effectiveness, commercial profiteering, preference for natural immunity, personal freedom, and COVID-19 denial.ConclusionsThe relationship between misinformation and vaccine hesitancy is complicated. Various types of misinformation exist, with each related to a specific type of vaccine hesitancy-related attitude. Personal freedom and COVID-19 denial are vaccine attitudes of particular interest, representing important yet understudied phenomena. Medical and scientific approaches may not be sufficient to combat misinformation based in religion, media, or politics; and public health officials may benefit from partnering with experts from those fields to address harmful misinformation that is driving COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.     

Vaccine hesitancy towards childhood immunisation amongst urban pregnant mothers in Malaysia

BackgroundVaccine hesitancy is a complex behaviour which involves various degrees of indecision about specific vaccines or vaccination uptake. Access to antenatal care had been associated with positive vaccine behavior.ObjectiveTo determine the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy towards childhood immunisation amongst urban pregnant mothers and the associated socio-demographic factors.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 1081 women who received antenatal care at a teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur. Vaccine hesitancy was assessed using the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) Survey in both English and validated Malay versions. The sociodemographic data of the mothers and their partners, source of vaccine information and reasons for hesitancy were analysed.ResultsEighty-six (8.0%) pregnant mothers were vaccine hesitant. Ethnicity, religion, number of children, educational level and employment status were significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy. Multivariable analysis showed that a low level of education was the most significant risk factor (p < 0.001), followed by religion (p = 0.03). Health professionals was the main source of information about vaccine. The non-vaccine hesitant women were more likely to seek information from health professionals, and health books and magazine. Fear of adverse side effects of vaccines was the predominant concern for all participants (58%) whilst fear of vaccination pain, preference for alternative medicine and lack of trust in the pharmaceutical industry were significant reasons given by the vaccine hesitant group. Partners’ ethnicity, a low educational level and a low income were significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy amongst pregnant mothers.ConclusionPrevalence of vaccine hesitancy amongst urban Malaysian pregnant women was relatively low. Muslim mothers are less likely to be vaccine hesitant. Educational level of mothers and their partners are the common determinant of vaccine hesitancy amongst antenatal mothers.