Views towards compulsory MMR vaccination in the UK

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is one of the most effective ways to prevent serious illnesses and deaths in children. However, worldwide, many children do not receive all recommended vaccinations, for several potential reasons. Vaccines might be unavailable, or parents may experience difficulties in accessing vaccination services; for instance, because of poor quality health services, distance from a health facility, or lack of money. Some parents may not accept available vaccines and vaccination services. Our understanding of what influences parents' views and practices around childhood vaccination, and why some parents may not accept vaccines for their children, is still limited. This synthesis links to Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to improve coverage or uptake of childhood vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

- Explore parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination, and the factors influencing acceptance, hesitancy, or nonacceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors reduce parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three other databases for eligible studies from 1974 to June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that: utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on parents' or caregivers' views, practices, acceptance, hesitancy, or refusal of routine vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where childhood vaccination is provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a pre-specified sampling frame to sample from eligible studies, aiming to capture studies that were conceptually rich, relevant to the review's phenomenon of interest, from diverse geographical settings, and from a range of income-level settings. We extracted contextual and methodological data from each sampled study. We used a meta-ethnographic approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of criteria used in previous Cochrane Reviews and originally based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We integrated the findings of this review with those from relevant Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. We did this by mapping whether the underlying theories or components of trial interventions included in those reviews related to or targeted the overarching factors influencing parental views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination identified by this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 145 studies in the review and sampled 27 of these for our analysis. Six studies were conducted in Africa, seven in the Americas, four in South-East Asia, nine in Europe, and one in the Western Pacific. Studies included urban and rural settings, and high-, middle-, and low-income settings. Many complex factors were found to influence parents' vaccination views and practices, which we divided into four themes. Firstly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their broader ideas and practices surrounding health and illness generally, and specifically with regards to their children, and their perceptions of the role of vaccination within this context. Secondly, many parents' vaccination ideas and practices were influenced by the vaccination ideas and practices of the people they mix with socially. At the same time, shared vaccination ideas and practices helped some parents establish social relationships, which in turn strengthened their views and practices around vaccination. Thirdly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by wider political issues and concerns, and particularly their trust (or distrust) in those associated with vaccination programmes. Finally, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their access to and experiences of vaccination services and their frontline healthcare workers. We developed two concepts for understanding possible pathways to reduced acceptance of childhood vaccination. The first concept, 'neoliberal logic', suggests that many parents, particularly from high-income countries, understood health and healthcare decisions as matters of individual risk, choice, and responsibility. Some parents experienced this understanding as in conflict with vaccination programmes, which emphasise generalised risk and population health. This perceived conflict led some parents to be less accepting of vaccination for their children. The second concept, 'social exclusion', suggests that some parents, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, were less accepting of childhood vaccination due to their experiences of social exclusion. Social exclusion may damage trustful relationships between government and the public, generate feelings of isolation and resentment, and give rise to demotivation in the face of public services that are poor quality and difficult to access. These factors in turn led some parents who were socially excluded to distrust vaccination, to refuse vaccination as a form of resistance or a way to bring about change, or to avoid vaccination due to the time, costs, and distress it creates. Many of the overarching factors our review identified as influencing parents' vaccination views and practices were underrepresented in the interventions tested in the four related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review has revealed that parents' views and practices regarding childhood vaccination are complex and dynamic social processes that reflect multiple webs of influence, meaning, and logic. We have provided a theorised understanding of the social processes contributing to vaccination acceptance (or not), thereby complementing but also extending more individualistic models of vaccination acceptance. Successful development of interventions to promote acceptance and uptake of childhood vaccination will require an understanding of, and then tailoring to, the specific factors influencing vaccination views and practices of the group(s) in the target setting. The themes and concepts developed through our review could serve as a basis for gaining this understanding, and subsequent development of interventions that are potentially more aligned with the norms, expectations, and concerns of target users.

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.

A cluster randomised feasibility study of an adolescent incentive intervention to increase uptake of HPV vaccination

BACKGROUND

Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is suboptimal among some groups. We aimed to determine the feasibility of undertaking a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of incentives to improve HPV vaccination uptake by increasing consent form return.

METHODS

An equal-allocation, two-arm cluster RCT design was used. We invited 60 London schools to participate. Those agreeing were randomised to either a standard invitation or incentive intervention arm, in which Year 8 girls had the chance to win a £50 shopping voucher if they returned a vaccination consent form, regardless of whether consent was provided. We collected data on school and parent participation rates and questionnaire response rates. Analyses were descriptive.

RESULTS

Six schools completed the trial and only 3% of parents opted out. The response rate was 70% for the girls' questionnaire and 17% for the parents'. In the intervention arm, 87% of girls returned a consent form compared with 67% in the standard invitation arm. The proportion of girls whose parents gave consent for vaccination was higher in the intervention arm (76%) than the standard invitation arm (61%).

CONCLUSIONS

An RCT of an incentive intervention is feasible. The intervention may improve vaccination uptake but a fully powered RCT is needed.

Parental Preferences for the Organization of Preschool Vaccination Programs Including Financial Incentives: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Objective: To establish preferences of parents and guardians of preschool children for the organization of preschool vaccination services, including financial incentives. Design: An online discrete choice experiment. Participants: Parents and guardians of preschool children (up to age 5 years) who were (n = 259) and were not (n = 262) classified as at high risk of incompletely vaccinating their children. High risk of incomplete vaccination was defined as any of the following: aged less than 20 years, single parents, living in one of the 20% most deprived areas in England, had a preschool child with a disability, or had more than three children. Main Outcome Measures: Participant preferences expressed as positive (utility) or negative (disutility) on eight attributes and levels describing the organization of preschool vaccination programs. Results: There was no difference in preference for parental financial incentives compared to no incentive in parents "not at high risk" of incomplete vaccination. Parents who were "at high risk" expressed utility for cash incentives. Parents "at high risk" of incomplete vaccination expressed utility for information on the risks and benefits of vaccinations to be provided as numbers rather than charts or pictures. Both groups preferred universally available, rather than targeted, incentives. Utility was identified for shorter waiting times, and there were variable preferences for who delivered vaccinations. Conclusions: Cash incentives for preschool vaccinations in England would be welcomed by parents who are "at high risk" of incompletely vaccinating their children. Further work is required on the optimal mode and form of presenting probabilistic information on vaccination to parents/guardians, including preferences on mandatory vaccination schemes.

A protocol for a cluster randomised feasibility study of an adolescent incentive intervention to increase uptake of HPV vaccination among girls

BACKGROUND

Uptake of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in the UK is good, but there are pockets of the community who remain unprotected. Immunisation teams usually require written parental consent for a girl to receive the vaccine. Evidence suggests that uptake of the vaccine might be improved by promoting consent form return (if returned, forms are likely to grant consent). Incentivising girls to return consent forms is a promising approach to promoting consent form return. Before testing the efficacy of an incentive intervention in a randomised controlled trial (RCT), we must first establish whether the RCT is feasible. In this randomised feasibility study, we aim to establish the feasibility of conducting a cluster RCT of an adolescent incentive intervention to increase uptake of HPV vaccination.

METHODS

At least six schools will be randomised to either an incentive intervention arm or a standard invitation arm. Girls in standard invitation arm schools will receive the usual HPV vaccine programme invitation materials. Girls attending schools in the incentive intervention arm will receive the standard invitation and will also be told that they will receive an incentive if they return their consent form (regardless of whether consent is granted or denied). The incentive is being entered into a prize draw to win a retail voucher. Feasibility objectives include estimating the schools' and parents' willingness to participate in the study and be randomised; response rates to questionnaires; the extent of missing data; the girls' and parents' attitudes towards the incentive offered; school staff experiences of participating, fidelity to the trial procedures, data on any unintended consequences and the possible mechanisms of action, and proof-of-concept evidence of the effect of the intervention on consent form return rates and uptake of the vaccine. Analysis of feasibility outcomes will primarily be descriptive. Consent form return rates and uptake of the vaccine will be presented by trial arm without comparison.

DISCUSSION

Incentivising HPV vaccine consent form return may promote HPV vaccine uptake. This study will provide the evidence needed to establish whether testing this incentive intervention using a RCT design in the future is feasible.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN72136061.

Effectiveness and acceptability of parental financial incentives and quasi-mandatory schemes for increasing uptake of vaccinations in preschool children: systematic review, qualitative study and discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Uptake of preschool vaccinations is less than optimal. Financial incentives and quasi-mandatory policies (restricting access to child care or educational settings to fully vaccinated children) have been used to increase uptake internationally, but not in the UK.

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence on the effectiveness, acceptability and economic costs and consequences of parental financial incentives and quasi-mandatory schemes for increasing the uptake of preschool vaccinations.

DESIGN

Systematic review, qualitative study and discrete choice experiment (DCE) with questionnaire.

SETTING

Community, health and education settings in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative study - parents and carers of preschool children, health and educational professionals. DCE - parents and carers of preschool children identified as 'at high risk' and 'not at high risk' of incompletely vaccinating their children.

DATA SOURCES

Qualitative study - focus groups and individual interviews. DCE - online questionnaire.

REVIEW METHODS

The review included studies exploring the effectiveness, acceptability or economic costs and consequences of interventions that offered contingent rewards or penalties with real material value for preschool vaccinations, or quasi-mandatory schemes that restricted access to 'universal' services, compared with usual care or no intervention. Electronic database, reference and citation searches were conducted.

RESULTS

Systematic review - there was insufficient evidence to conclude that the interventions considered are effective. There was some evidence that the quasi-mandatory interventions were acceptable. There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on economic costs and consequences. Qualitative study - there was little appetite for parental financial incentives. Quasi-mandatory schemes were more acceptable. Optimising current services was consistently preferred to the interventions proposed. DCE and questionnaire - universal parental financial incentives were preferred to quasi-mandatory interventions, which were preferred to targeted incentives. Those reporting that they would need an incentive to vaccinate their children completely required around £110. Those who did not felt that the maximum acceptable incentive was around £70.

LIMITATIONS

Systematic review - a number of relevant studies were excluded as they did not meet the study design inclusion criteria. Qualitative study - few partially and non-vaccinating parents were recruited. DCE and questionnaire - data were from a convenience sample.

CONCLUSIONS

There is little current evidence on the effectiveness or economic costs and consequences of parental financial incentives and quasi-mandatory interventions for preschool vaccinations. Universal incentives are likely to be more acceptable than targeted ones. Preferences concerning incentives versus quasi-mandatory interventions may depend on the context in which these are elicited.

FUTURE WORK

Further evidence is required on (i) the effectiveness and optimal configuration of parental financial incentive and quasi-mandatory interventions for preschool vaccinations - if effectiveness is confirmed, further evidence is required on how to communicate this to stakeholders and the impact on acceptability; and (ii) the acceptability of parental financial incentive and quasi-mandatory interventions for preschool vaccinations to members of the population who are not parents of preschool children or relevant health professionals. Further consideration should be given to (i) incorporating reasons for non-vaccination into new interventions for promoting vaccination uptake; and (ii) how existing services can be optimised.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003192.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Parental financial incentives for increasing preschool vaccination uptake: systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Financial incentives have been used to promote vaccination uptake but are not always viewed as acceptable. Quasimandatory policies, such as requiring vaccinations for school enrollment, are widely implemented in some countries. A systematic review was conducted to determine the effectiveness, acceptability, and economic costs and consequences of parental financial incentives and quasimandatory schemes for increasing the uptake of preschool vaccinations in high-income countries.

METHODS

Electronic databases and gray literature were searched for randomized controlled trials, controlled before-and-after studies, and time series analyses examining the effectiveness of parental financial incentives and quasimandatory schemes, as well as any empirical studies exploring acceptability. All included studies were screened for information on economic costs and consequences. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed the quality of selected articles by using established instruments. Studies were synthesized in narrative reviews.

RESULTS

Four studies on the effectiveness and 6 on the acceptability of parental financial incentives and quasimandatory interventions met the inclusion criteria. Only 1 study reported on costs and consequences. Studies of effectiveness had low risk of bias but displayed substantial heterogeneity in terms of interventions and methods.

CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to conclude whether these interventions were effective. Studies of acceptability suggested a preference, in settings where this already occurs, for incentives linking vaccinations to access to education. There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on economic costs and consequences.