Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Obstetrician-Gynecologists Regarding Influenza Prevention and Treatment Following the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic

Views and experiences of maternal healthcare providers regarding influenza vaccine during pregnancy globally: A systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that pregnant women receive influenza vaccination; however, uptake of the vaccine remains low. Maternity health care professionals (MHCPs) play an important role in motivating pregnant women to receive the influenza vaccine. However, factors such as MHCPs' views and knowledge about the vaccine, and time constraints due to workload may influence MHCPs' practices and opinions about women receiving the influenza vaccine during pregnancy. To date, the qualitative evidence exploring MHCPs' views and experiences around influenza vaccine uptake in pregnant women has not been synthesised.

AIM

To systematically review and thematically synthesise qualitative evidence that explores the views and experiences of MHCPs involved in the provision of the maternal influenza vaccine worldwide.

METHODS

Five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science) were searched, supplemented with searches of included paper reference lists and grey literature. Study selection was conducted by up to three researchers applying pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria. Quality assessment was undertaken, data were extracted, coded and synthesised to develop descriptive and analytical themes.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 277 participants were included. Seventeen descriptive themes were interpreted, embedded within six analytical themes. MHCPs perceived that maternal influenza vaccination delivery can be facilitated by trusting relationships, good communication, knowledge about the vaccine leading to confidence in recommending vaccine, electronic vaccination prompts, and presence of national guidelines. However, workload, time constraints, MHCP's perception of pregnant women's concerns, and social/cultural/environmental influences could prevent the likelihood of delivery of influenza vaccine. Knowledgeable MHCPs who were regularly updated about vaccination based on scientific evidence were more confident when discussing and recommending the influenza vaccine to pregnant women. In addition, the presence of national policies and guidelines and electronic prompts for maternal influenza vaccination would enhance the delivery of the vaccine.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that approaches to enhance the vaccination uptake rate in pregnant women include addressing MHCPs barriers to discussing influenza vaccination through education, sufficient time for discussions, and electronic prompts about vaccination, as well as evidence based local and national guidelines.

Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Pregnant Women: Views and Experiences of Obstetrician-Gynecologists

Background: Seasonal influenza vaccination rates among pregnant women remain well below the Healthy People 2020 target of 80%. Obstetrician-gynecologist (OB/GYN) recommendations are a critical means of encouraging pregnant women to get vaccinated, but there are limited data about their views. Materials and Methods: A nationally representative survey of 506 practicing OB/GYNs was completed between October 26, 2015, and May 8, 2016. Analyses included univariate distributions and comparisons based on age, size of practice, and academic affiliation using all-pairs, dependent t-tests. Results: A majority of OB/GYNs report they "strongly recommend" seasonal influenza vaccination for their pregnant patients in the first (79%) or second and third trimesters (81%). Among those who do not strongly recommend the flu vaccine in the first trimester, many say this is because of their own concerns (28%) or their patients' concerns (44%) about safety. Older OB/GYNs, those in smaller practices, and those without academic affiliation were less likely to recommend the vaccine and more likely to have safety concerns. For example, 72% of those age 60+ strongly recommended the vaccine in the second and third trimester, compared with 86% of those ages 30-44 and 83% of those ages 45-59 (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Conclusions: OB/GYNs across the country largely support seasonal flu vaccination among pregnant women. Nonetheless, safety is a concern for them and their patients. Outreach to support clinician decisions and conversations with pregnant patients may be most needed among older physicians, those in smaller practices, and those without academic affiliation.

Vaccination during pregnancy: Canadian maternity care providers' opinions and practices

A number of countries have implemented vaccination in pregnancy as a strategy to reduce the burden of influenza and pertussis. The aim of this study was to assess the involvement of Canadian maternity care providers in administration of vaccines to their pregnant patients. A cross-sectional web-based survey was sent to family physicians, obstetricians-gynecologists, midwives, pharmacists, and nurses. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to determine variables independently associated with offering vaccination services in pregnancy in providers' practice. A total of 1,135 participants participated. Overall, 64% (n = 724) of the participants reported offering vaccines in their practice and 56% (n = 632) reported offering vaccines to pregnant patients. The main reasons reported for not offering vaccination services in pregnancy were the belief that vaccination was outside of the scope of practice; logistical issues around access to vaccines; or lack of staff to administer vaccines. In multivariable analysis, the main factors associated with vaccination of pregnant patients in practices where vaccination services were offered were: providers' confidence in counseling pregnant patients about vaccines, seeing fewer than 11 pregnant patients on average each week, and being a nurse or a family physician. Although the majority of participants expressed strong support for vaccination during pregnancy, half were not offering vaccination services in their practice. Many were not equipped to offer vaccines in their practice or felt that it was not their role to do so. To enhance vaccine acceptance and uptake in pregnancy, it will be important to address the logistical barriers identified in this study.

Understanding barriers and predictors of maternal immunization: Identifying gaps through an exploratory literature review

BACKGROUND

The Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices recommends that all pregnant women receive the seasonal influenza vaccine and the tetanus toxoid, diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine during every pregnancy. However, vaccination coverage rates are suboptimal among pregnant women in the United States, leaving these women and their unborn children at risk of vaccine-preventable diseases and their complications.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to understand the current landscape of published literature regarding maternal immunization, including barriers to and predictors of vaccine acceptance, and identify gaps in the research in order to inform strategies for future programmatic improvement.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search using MEDLINE (OVID), PsychINFO, and CINAHL (Ebsco) databases. The search included published, English-language manuscripts that identified patient, provider, or system-level barriers to, predictors of, or interventions that improved uptake of maternal vaccines among pregnant women in the US. Studies were reviewed using an inductive thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

We included 75 studies in our review. Pregnant women identified 25 different barriers to accepting recommended maternal immunizations; barriers related to vaccine safety perceptions were the most common. Healthcare providers identified 24 different barriers to vaccinating their pregnant patients. The most commonly cited barriers among healthcare providers were financial concerns. Eighteen different predictors of vaccine acceptance were identified. Receipt of a healthcare provider's recommendation was the factor most frequently reported as a reason for vaccination among pregnant women.

CONCLUSIONS

We were able to identify gaps in the literature regarding maternal immunization and make recommendations for future research. Efforts to address the challenges of maternal immunization in the United States should include increasing the focus on Tdap, implementing more high-level assessments of safety perceptions and associated concerns, and determining most effective interventions.

U.S. clinicians' and pharmacists' reported barriers to implementation of the Standards for Adult Immunization Practice

BACKGROUND

The Standards for Adult Immunization Practice (Standards), revised in 2014, emphasize that adult-care providers assess vaccination status of adult patients at every visit, recommend vaccination, administer needed vaccines or refer to a vaccinating provider, and document vaccinations administered in state/local immunization information systems (IIS). Providers report numerous systems- and provider-level barriers to vaccinating adults, such as billing, payment issues, lower prioritization of vaccines due to competing demands, and lack of information about the use and utility of IIS. Barriers to vaccination result in missed opportunities to vaccinate adults and contribute to low vaccination coverage. Clinicians' (physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners) and pharmacists' reported barriers to assessment, recommendation, administration, referral, and documentation, provider vaccination practices, and perceptions regarding their adult patients' attitudes toward vaccines were evaluated.

METHODS

Data from non-probability-based Internet panel surveys of U.S. clinicians (n = 1714) and pharmacists (n = 261) conducted in February-March 2017 were analyzed using SUDAAN. Weighted proportion of reported barriers to assessment, recommendation, administration, referral, and documentation in IIS were calculated.

RESULTS

High percentages (70.0%-97.4%) of clinicians and pharmacists reported they routinely assessed, recommended, administered, and/or referred adults for vaccination. Among those who administered vaccines, 31.6% clinicians' and 38.4% pharmacists' submitted records to IIS. Reported barriers included: (a) assessment barriers: vaccination of adults is not within their scope of practice, inadequate reimbursement for vaccinations; (b) administration barriers: lack of staff to manage/administer vaccines, absence of necessary vaccine storage and handling equipment and provisions; and (c) documentation barriers: unaware if state/city has IIS that includes adults or not sure how their electronic system would link to IIS.

CONCLUSION

Although many clinicians and pharmacists reported implementing most of the individual components of the Standards, with the exception of IIS use, there are discrepancies in providers' reported actual practices and their beliefs/perceptions, and barriers to vaccinating adults remain.

Clinicians' and Pharmacists' Reported Implementation of Vaccination Practices for Adults

INTRODUCTION

Despite the proven effectiveness of immunization in preventing morbidity and mortality, adult vaccines remain underutilized. The objective of this study was to describe clinicians' and pharmacists' self-reported implementation of the Standards for Adult Immunization Practice ("the Standards"; i.e., routine assessment, recommendation, and administration/referral for needed vaccines, and documentation of administered vaccines, including in immunization information systems).

METHODS

Two Internet panel surveys (one among clinicians and one among pharmacists) were conducted during February-March 2017 and asked respondents about their practice's implementation of the Standards. T-tests assessed associations between clinician medical specialty, vaccine type, and each component of the Standards (March-August 2017).

RESULTS

Implementation of the Standards varied substantially by vaccine and provider type. For example, >80.0% of providers, including obstetrician/gynecologists and subspecialists, assessed for and recommended influenza vaccine. However, 24.3% of obstetrician/gynecologists and 48.9% of subspecialists did not stock influenza vaccine for administration. Although zoster vaccine was recommended by >89.0% of primary care providers, <58.0% stocked the vaccine; by contrast, 91.6% of pharmacists stocked zoster vaccine. Vaccine needs assessments, recommendations, and stocking/referrals also varied by provider type for pneumococcal; tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis; tetanus diphtheria; human papillomavirus; and hepatitis B vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

This report highlights gaps in access to vaccines recommended for adults across the spectrum of provider specialties. Greater implementation of the Standards by all providers could improve adult vaccination rates in the U.S. by reducing missed opportunities to recommend vaccinations and either vaccinate or refer patients to vaccine providers.

Evidence-based vaccination strategies in obstetrics and gynecology settings: Current practices and methods for assessment

Obstetrician-gynecologists have the potential to play an important role in the delivery of immunizations to women. However, despite national recommendations, immunization rates among pregnant women and adults in general remain low. Pragmatic immunization delivery trials are needed to demonstrate how best to deliver vaccines in such settings. We report the development and implementation of 2 novel methodologies for immunization delivery research and quality improvement in such settings. The first was the development and application of a 47-point Immunization Delivery Scale that formally assessed variability among practices in their engagement in a variety of evidence-based practices for improving immunization rates. The second was a covariate-constrained randomization technique - a method for achieving balance between study arms in cluster-randomized trials that is especially applicable to pragmatic trials.. To best achieve meaningful and interpretable findings, we recommend use of these or similar techniques in future immunization research and quality improvement projects in OB/GYN settings.

A randomized trial of maternal influenza immunization decision-making: A test of persuasive messaging models

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine the effectiveness of persuasive communication interventions on influenza vaccination uptake among black/African American pregnant women in Atlanta, Georgia.

METHODS

We recruited black/African American pregnant women ages 18 to 50 y from Atlanta, GA to participate in a prospective, randomized controlled trial of influenza immunization messaging conducted from January to April 2013. Eligible participants were randomized to 3 study arms. We conducted follow-up questionnaires on influenza immunization at 30-days post-partum with all groups. Chi-square and t tests evaluated group differences, and outcome intention-to-treat assessment utilized log-binomial regression models.

RESULTS

Of the 106 enrolled, 95 women completed the study (90% retention), of which 31 were randomly assigned to affective messaging intervention ("Pregnant Pause" video), 30 to cognitive messaging intervention ("Vaccines for a Healthy Pregnancy" video), and 34 to a comparison condition (receipt of the Influenza Vaccine Information Statement). The three groups were balanced on baseline demographic characteristics and reported health behaviors. At baseline, most women (63%, n = 60) reported no receipt of seasonal influenza immunization during the previous 5 y. They expressed a low likelihood (2.1 ± 2.8 on 0-10 scale) of obtaining influenza immunization during their current pregnancy. At 30-days postpartum follow-up, influenza immunization was low among all participants (7-13%) demonstrating no effect after a single exposure to either affective messaging (RR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.30-4.01) or cognitive messaging interventions (RR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.11-2.88). Women cited various reasons for not obtaining maternal influenza immunizations. These included concern about vaccine harm (47%, n = 40), low perceived influenza infection risk (31%, n = 26), and a history of immunization nonreceipt (24%, n = 20).

CONCLUSION

The findings reflect the limitations associated with a single exposure to varying maternal influenza immunization message approaches on vaccine behavior. For this population, repeated influenza immunization exposures may be warranted with alterations in message format, content, and relevance for coverage improvement.

Efforts to Improve Immunization Coverage during Pregnancy among Ob-Gyns

Background. Influenza and Tdap vaccines are vital factors for improving maternal and neonatal health outcomes. Methods. A prospective, longitudinal study was conducted to determine whether the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' (ACOG's) efforts to increase ob-gyn use of their immunization toolkits and vaccination administration were successful. Pre- and postintervention questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 1,500 ACOG members between August 2012 and July 2015. Results. Significantly more postintervention survey ob-gyns reported that they received the immunization toolkits than preintervention survey ob-gyns (84.5% versus 67.0%, p < .001). The large majority of ob-gyns from both surveys (76.9% versus 78.9%) reported that they offered or planned to offer influenza vaccinations to their patients for the 2012-2013 and 2014-2015 flu seasons. Postintervention survey respondents were significantly more likely than preintervention survey participants to report that they routinely offer Tdap vaccinations to all patients during pregnancy (76.8% versus 59.3%, p < .001). Conclusion. ACOG's efforts to improve ob-gyn use of immunization toolkits and vaccine administration appear to have been successful in several ways. ACOG's toolkits are an example of an effective intervention to overcome barriers to offering vaccines and help improve influenza and Tdap immunization coverage for pregnant women.