1
|
Oyo-Ita A, Oduwole O, Arikpo D, Effa EE, Esu EB, Balakrishna Y, Chibuzor MT, Oringanje CM, Nwachukwu CE, Wiysonge CS, Meremikwu MM. Interventions for improving coverage of childhood immunisation in low- and middle-income countries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 12:CD008145. [PMID: 38054505 PMCID: PMC10698843 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008145.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immunisation plays a major role in reducing childhood morbidity and mortality. Getting children immunised against potentially fatal and debilitating vaccine-preventable diseases remains a challenge despite the availability of efficacious vaccines, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. With the introduction of new vaccines, this becomes increasingly difficult. There is therefore a current need to synthesise the available evidence on the strategies used to bridge this gap. This is a second update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2011 and updated in 2016, and it focuses on interventions for improving childhood immunisation coverage in low- and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness of intervention strategies to boost demand and supply of childhood vaccines, and sustain high childhood immunisation coverage in low- and middle-income countries. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Global Index Medicus (11 July 2022). We searched Embase, LILACS, and Sociological Abstracts (2 September 2014). We searched WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov (11 July 2022). In addition, we screened reference lists of relevant systematic reviews for potentially eligible studies, and carried out a citation search for 14 of the included studies (19 February 2020). SELECTION CRITERIA Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised RCTs (nRCTs), controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series conducted in low- and middle-income countries involving children that were under five years of age, caregivers, and healthcare providers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We independently screened the search output, reviewed full texts of potentially eligible articles, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data in duplicate, resolving discrepancies by consensus. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS Forty-one studies involving 100,747 participants are included in the review. Twenty studies were cluster-randomised and 15 studies were individually randomised controlled trials. Six studies were quasi-randomised. The studies were conducted in four upper-middle-income countries (China, Georgia, Mexico, Guatemala), 11 lower-middle-income countries (Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, Nepal, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Zimbabwe), and three lower-income countries (Afghanistan, Mali, Rwanda). The interventions evaluated in the studies were health education (seven studies), patient reminders (13 studies), digital register (two studies), household incentives (three studies), regular immunisation outreach sessions (two studies), home visits (one study), supportive supervision (two studies), integration of immunisation services with intermittent preventive treatment of malaria (one study), payment for performance (two studies), engagement of community leaders (one study), training on interpersonal communication skills (one study), and logistic support to health facilities (one study). We judged nine of the included studies to have low risk of bias; the risk of bias in eight studies was unclear and 24 studies had high risk of bias. We found low-certainty evidence that health education (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 1.62; 6 studies, 4375 participants) and home-based records (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.75; 3 studies, 4019 participants) may improve coverage with DTP3/Penta 3 vaccine. Phone calls/short messages may have little or no effect on DTP3/Penta 3 vaccine uptake (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.25; 6 studies, 3869 participants; low-certainty evidence); wearable reminders probably have little or no effect on DTP3/Penta 3 uptake (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.07; 2 studies, 1567 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Use of community leaders in combination with provider intervention probably increases the uptake of DTP3/Penta 3 vaccine (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.69; 1 study, 2020 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of immunisation outreach on DTP3/Penta 3 vaccine uptake in children under two years of age (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.56; 1 study, 541 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are also uncertain about the following interventions improving full vaccination of children under two years of age: training of health providers on interpersonal communication skills (RR 5.65, 95% CI 3.62 to 8.83; 1 study, 420 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and home visits (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.45; 1 study, 419 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The same applies to the effect of training of health providers on interpersonal communication skills on the uptake of DTP3/Penta 3 by one year of age (very low-certainty evidence). The integration of immunisation with other services may, however, improve full vaccination (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.44; 1 study, 1700 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Health education, home-based records, a combination of involvement of community leaders with health provider intervention, and integration of immunisation services may improve vaccine uptake. The certainty of the evidence for the included interventions ranged from moderate to very low. Low certainty of the evidence implies that the true effect of the interventions might be markedly different from the estimated effect. Further, more rigorous RCTs are, therefore, required to generate high-certainty evidence to inform policy and practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela Oyo-Ita
- Department of Community Health, University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Calabar, Nigeria
| | - Olabisi Oduwole
- Department of Medical Laboratory Science, Achievers University, Owo, Nigeria
| | - Dachi Arikpo
- Cochrane Nigeria, Institute of Tropical Diseases Research and Prevention, University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Calabar, Nigeria
| | - Emmanuel E Effa
- Internal Medicine, College of Medical Sciences, University of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria
| | - Ekpereonne B Esu
- Department of Public Health, College of Medical Sciences, University of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria
| | - Yusentha Balakrishna
- Biostatistics Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Durban, South Africa
| | - Moriam T Chibuzor
- Cochrane Nigeria, Institute of Tropical Diseases Research and Prevention, University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Calabar, Nigeria
| | - Chioma M Oringanje
- GIDP Entomology and Insect Science, University of Tucson, Tucson, Arizona, USA
| | | | - Charles S Wiysonge
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
- Vaccine-Preventable Diseases Programme, World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa, Cité du Djoué, Brazzaville, Congo
| | - Martin M Meremikwu
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Calabar, Nigeria
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Cooper S, Wiysonge CS. Towards a More Critical Public Health Understanding of Vaccine Hesitancy: Key Insights from a Decade of Research. Vaccines (Basel) 2023; 11:1155. [PMID: 37514971 PMCID: PMC10386194 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11071155] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2023] [Revised: 06/20/2023] [Accepted: 06/20/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Vaccine hesitancy has gained renewed attention as an important public health concern worldwide. Against this backdrop, over the last decade, we have conducted various qualitative, social science studies with the broad shared aim of better understanding this complex phenomenon. This has included various Cochrane systematic reviews of qualitative research globally, systematic reviews of qualitative research in Africa, and primary research studies in South Africa. These studies have also explored vaccine hesitancy for various vaccines, including routine childhood vaccination, HPV vaccination and other routine vaccinations for adolescents, and, most recently, COVID-19 vaccination. In this reflective and critical commentary piece we reflect on seven key overarching insights we feel we have gained about this complex phenomenon from the varying studies we have conducted over the past decade. These insights comprise the following: (1) the relationship between vaccine knowledge and hesitancy is complex and may operate in multiple directions; (2) vaccine hesitancy is driven by multiple socio-political forces; (3) vaccine hesitancy may be many things, rather than a single phenomenon; (4) vaccine hesitancy may be an ongoing 'process', rather than a fixed 'stance'; (5) vaccine hesitancy may sometimes be about a 'striving', rather than a 'resisting'; (6) 'distrust' as a driver of vaccine hesitancy needs to be better contextualized and disaggregated; and (7) the 'demand-side' versus 'supply/access-side' distinction of the drivers of suboptimal vaccination may be misleading and unhelpful. In unpacking these insights, we problematize some of the common assumptions within the vaccine hesitancy literature and flag topics that we think could benefit from further scrutiny and debate. Our hope is that this can provide a platform for further engagement on these issues and ultimately contribute towards fostering a more critical public health understanding of vaccine hesitancy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Cooper
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town 7505, South Africa;
- School of Public Health and Family Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town 7935, South Africa
- Department of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town 7505, South Africa
| | - Charles S. Wiysonge
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town 7505, South Africa;
- HIV and Other Infectious Diseases Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Durban 4091, South Africa
- Vaccine Preventable Diseases Programme, Universal Health Coverage/Communicable and Non-Communicable Diseases Cluster, World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa, Brazzaville P.O. Box 06, Congo
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Oketch SY, Ochomo EO, Orwa JA, Mayieka LM, Abdullahi LH. Communication strategies to improve human papillomavirus (HPV) immunisation uptake among adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e067164. [PMID: 37012006 PMCID: PMC10083777 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067164] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/04/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Developing countries face the greatest cervical cancer disease burden and mortality with suboptimal immunisation uptake. This review explores the communication strategies adopted, successes, challenges and lessons learnt in sub-Saharan countries to enhance human papillomavirus (HPV) immunisation. DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES PubMed, Hinari, Cochrane Library, Trip database, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus and seven grey resources were searched through May 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA We included observational studies addressing communication strategies for HPV immunisation uptake. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search, screen and code included studies. Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were done in duplicate to enhance validity of the results. Meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model. Findings were summarised and synthesised qualitatively. RESULTS Communication intervention to facilitate decision-making achieved uptake rate of 100% (95% CI 0.99% to 1.00%), followed by intervention to enable communication, which achieved 92% (95% CI 0.92% to 0.92%). Communication intervention to inform and educate achieved 90% (95% CI 0.90% to 0.90%).Targeting both healthcare workers and community leaders with the communication intervention achieved 95% (95% CI 0.91% to 0.98%), while teachers and school boards achieved 92% (95% CI 0.84% to 1.01%). Targeting policymakers achieved 86% (95% CI 0.78% to 0.93%).Based on the method of communication intervention delivery, use of training achieved an uptake rate of 85% (95% CI 0.84% to 0.87%); similarly, drama and dance achieved 85% (95% CI 0.84% to 0.86%). However, use of information, education and communication materials achieved 82% (95% CI 0.78% to 0.87%). CONCLUSION HPV vaccine communication is critical in ensuring that the community understands the importance of vaccination. The most effective communication strategies included those which educate the population about the HPV vaccine, facilitate decision-making on vaccine uptake and community ownership of the vaccination process immunisation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42021243683.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Y Oketch
- Research Department, African Institute for Development Policy, Nairobi, Kenya
- Center for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Edwin O Ochomo
- Center for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Jeniffer A Orwa
- Department of Resource Development and Knowledge Management, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Lilian M Mayieka
- Department of Resource Development and Knowledge Management, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Leila H Abdullahi
- Research Department, African Institute for Development Policy, Nairobi, Kenya
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zarzycki M, Morrison V, Bei E, Seddon D. Cultural and societal motivations for being informal caregivers: a qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis. Health Psychol Rev 2022; 17:247-276. [PMID: 35081864 DOI: 10.1080/17437199.2022.2032259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
Informal caregiving constitutes the mainstay of a society's care supply. Motivations for caring and continuing to provide care are crucial to understanding the nature of caregiver experiences and their relationship with the person/people they support. This systematic review of qualitative evidence examines determinants of motivations and willingness to provide informal care. 105 qualitative studies published before August 2019 and fitting the inclusion criteria were identified, 84 of them pertaining to cultural and societal motivations for caregiving. Grounded theory-based, thematic synthesis was conducted. Cultural and societal factors strongly underpinned motivations and willingness for informal caregiving. The main cultural motives for caregiving were cultural values and beliefs encompassing the ethnocultural context of the caregiving role, culture-specific norms, cultural and spiritual beliefs, illness beliefs and socialisation. Societal norms and perceived expectations, such as gendered roles, norms and expectations of caregiving, and perceptions of health and social care services further shaped caregiver motivations and willingness to provide care. These meta-synthesis findings contribute towards novel understandings about the cultural and societal aspects shaping informal care provision. These findings bear important implications for theory, research, policy and practice; all of which contributing to the issue of the sustainability of informal care from a 'macro' perspective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mikołaj Zarzycki
- School of Human & Behavioural Sciences, College of Human Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2DG, Wales, United Kingdom; Telephone
| | - Val Morrison
- School of Human & Behavioural Sciences, College of Human Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2DG, Wales, United Kingdom;
| | - Eva Bei
- Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 5290002, Israel;
| | - Diane Seddon
- School of Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor LL57 2DG, Wales, United Kingdom;
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Cooper S, Schmidt BM, Sambala EZ, Swartz A, Colvin CJ, Leon N, Wiysonge CS. Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 10:CD013265. [PMID: 34706066 PMCID: PMC8550333 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013265.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Cooper
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
- Division of Social and Behavioural Sciences, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Bey-Marrié Schmidt
- School of Public Health, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Evanson Z Sambala
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
- School of Public Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi
| | - Alison Swartz
- Division of Social and Behavioural Sciences, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Christopher J Colvin
- Division of Social and Behavioural Sciences, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
| | - Natalie Leon
- Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
| | - Charles S Wiysonge
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
- Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
- Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Glenton C, Carlsen B, Lewin S, Wennekes MD, Winje BA, Eilers R. Healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communicating with people over 50 years of age about vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 7:CD013706. [PMID: 34282603 PMCID: PMC8407331 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013706.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Infectious diseases are a major cause of illness and death among older adults. Vaccines can prevent infectious diseases, including against seasonal influenza, pneumococcal diseases, herpes zoster and COVID-19. However, the uptake of vaccination among older adults varies across settings and groups. Communication with healthcare workers can play an important role in older people's decisions to vaccinate. To support an informed decision about vaccination, healthcare workers should be able to identify the older person's knowledge gaps, needs and concerns. They should also be able to share and discuss information about the person's disease risk and disease severity; the vaccine's effectiveness and safety; and practical information about how the person can access vaccines. Therefore, healthcare workers need good communication skills and to actively keep up-to-date with the latest evidence. An understanding of their perceptions and experiences of this communication can help us train and support healthcare workers and design good communication strategies. OBJECTIVES To explore healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communicating with older adults about vaccination. SEARCH METHODS We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL and Scopus on 21 March 2020. We also searched Epistemonikos for related reviews, searched grey literature sources, and carried out reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies. We searched for studies in any language. SELECTION CRITERIA We included qualitative studies and mixed-methods studies with an identifiable qualitative component. We included studies that explored the perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers and other health system staff towards communication with adults over the age of 50 years or their informal caregivers about vaccination. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data using a data extraction form designed for this review. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of predefined criteria. We extracted and assessed data regarding study authors' motivations for carrying out their study. We used a thematic synthesis approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We examined each review finding to identify factors that may influence intervention implementation and we developed implications for practice. MAIN RESULTS We included 11 studies in our review. Most studies explored healthcare workers' views and experiences about vaccination of older adults more broadly but also mentioned communication issues specifically. All studies were from high-income countries. The studies focused on doctors, nurses, pharmacists and others working in hospitals, clinics, pharmacies and nursing homes. These healthcare workers discussed different types of vaccines, including influenza, pneumococcal and herpes zoster vaccines. The review was carried out before COVID-19 vaccines were available. We downgraded our confidence in several of the findings from high confidence to moderate, low or very low confidence. One reason for this was that some findings were based on only small amounts of data. Another reason was that the findings were based on studies from only a few countries, making us unsure about the relevance of these findings to other settings. Healthcare workers reported that older adults asked about vaccination to different extents, ranging from not asking about vaccines at all, to great demand for information (high confidence finding). When the topic of vaccination was discussed, healthcare workers described a lack of information, and presence of misinformation, fears and concerns about vaccines among older adults (moderate confidence). The ways in which healthcare workers discussed vaccines with older adults appeared to be linked to what they saw as the aim of vaccination communication. Healthcare workers differed among themselves in their perceptions of this aim and about their own roles and the roles of older adults in vaccine decisions. Some healthcare workers thought it was important to provide information but emphasised the right and responsibility of older adults to decide for themselves. Others used information to persuade and convince older adults to vaccinate in order to increase 'compliance' and 'improve' vaccination rates, and in some cases to gain financial benefits. Other healthcare workers tailored their approach to what they believed the older adult needed or wanted (moderate confidence). Healthcare workers believed that older adults' decisions could be influenced by several factors, including the nature of the healthcare worker-patient relationship, the healthcare worker's status, and the extent to which healthcare workers led by example (low confidence). Our review also identified factors that are likely to influence how communication between healthcare workers and older adults take place. These included issues tied to healthcare workers' views and experiences regarding the diseases in question and the vaccines; as well as their views and experiences of the organisational and practical implementation of vaccine services. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is little research focusing specifically on healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communication with older adults about vaccination. The studies we identified suggest that healthcare workers differed among themselves in their perceptions about the aim of this communication and about the role of older adults in vaccine decisions. Based on these findings and the other findings in our review, we have developed a set of questions or prompts that may help health system planners or programme managers when planning or implementing strategies for vaccination communication between healthcare workers and older adults.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Glenton
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
- TRS National Resource Centre for Rare Disorders, Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital, Nesoddtangen, Norway
| | - Benedicte Carlsen
- Department of Health Promotion and Development, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Simon Lewin
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
- Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Manuela Dominique Wennekes
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, Netherlands
- Athena Institute, Free University, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Brita Askeland Winje
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway
| | - Renske Eilers
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Omoniyi OS, Williams I. Realist Synthesis of the International Theory and Evidence on Strategies to Improve Childhood Vaccination in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Developing Strategies for the Nigerian Healthcare System. Int J Health Policy Manag 2020; 9:274-285. [PMID: 32613799 PMCID: PMC7444436 DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2019.120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2019] [Accepted: 11/12/2019] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Childhood vaccination coverage rates in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) vary significantly, with some countries achieving higher rates than others. Several attempts have been made in Nigeria to achieve universal vaccination coverage but with limited success. This study aimed to analyse strategies used to improve childhood vaccine access and uptake in LMICs in order to inform strategy development for the Nigerian healthcare system. METHODS A realist synthesis approach was adopted in order to elucidate the contexts and mechanisms wherewith these strategies achieved their aim (or not). Nine databases were searched for relevant articles and 27 articles were included in the study. Programme theories were generated from the included articles, and data extraction was carried out paying particular attention to context, mechanism and outcomes configurations. RESULTS Interventions used in LMICs to improve vaccination coverage were categorised as follows: communication/ educational, reminder-type, incentives, social mobilisation, provider-directed strategies, health service integration and multi-pronged strategies. The strategies that appeared most likely to be effective in the health contexts of contemporary Nigeria include communication and educational interventions; employing informal change agents, and; monitoring and evaluation to strengthen communication. The programme theories for the use of reminders, social mobilisation, staff training and supportive supervision were observed in practice, and these strategies were generally successful within some contexts. By contrast, the use of monetary incentives in Nigeria is not supported by the evidence, although further research and evaluation is required. The integration of other interventions with routine immunisation (RI) to improve uptake was more effective when the perceived value of the other program was high. Adoption of multipronged interventions for hard to reach communities was beneficial. However, caution should be exercised because of varying levels of published evidence in respect of each intervention type and a relative lack of the rich description required to conduct a full realist analysis. CONCLUSION This paper adds to the evidence base on the adaption of strategies to improve vaccine access and uptake to the context of LMICs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Iestyn Williams
- Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sychareun V, Rowlands L, Vilay P, Durham J, Morgan A. The determinants of vaccination in a semi-rural area of Vientiane City, Lao People's Democratic Republic: a qualitative study. Health Res Policy Syst 2019; 17:2. [PMID: 30626379 PMCID: PMC6325875 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-018-0407-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2018] [Accepted: 12/19/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Immunisation is a cost-effective and highly efficacious public health intervention, saving over 20 million lives in the last two decades due to decreases in childhood bacterial infections. In the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, significant gaps in childhood immunisation coverage rates remain, which are a cause for concern and a barrier to the country reaching its Sustainable Development Goal targets for child health. Efforts to increase coverage have had limited success, with widening inequities being observed between urban and remote and rural areas. Methods The objectives of this study were two-fold; firstly, to describe the knowledge, attitudes and practices of mothers regarding their children’s immunisation status; and, secondly, to identify individual and health system determinants of access to immunisation in five rural villages within a rural district in Lao People’s Democratic Republic. This qualitative research used observation and interviews with healthcare workers (n = 10) and mothers (n = 10) with at least one child aged 12–23 months. Results The study identified several health system barriers that lower community demand for immunisation. These included the use of multiple providers, inconsistent record keeping and an inadequate health information system. At the individual and household level, there was a lack of understanding of the role of immunisation and the role of the different services provided. Conclusions The study suggests that increasing immunisation coverage in Lao People’s Democratic Republic requires clearer immunisation pathways, an integrated or unified information recording system across the different levels of the health system, and strategies to increase demand, including increasing individual and household understanding of the role of immunisation in child health. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-018-0407-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vanphanom Sychareun
- Faculty of Postgraduate Studies, University of Health Sciences, Vinetiane, Lao PDR.
| | - Lucy Rowlands
- Nossal Institute for Global Health, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 5th Floor, 333 Exhibition St, Melbourne, 3000, Australia
| | - Phoutsomphong Vilay
- Faculty of Postgraduate Studies, University of Health Sciences, Vinetiane, Lao PDR
| | - Jo Durham
- School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology , Brisbane, Australia
| | - Alison Morgan
- Nossal Institute for Global Health, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 5th Floor, 333 Exhibition St, Melbourne, 3000, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Factors influencing the performance of routine immunization in urban areas: A comparative case study of two cities in Cameroon: Douala and Yaoundé. Vaccine 2018; 36:7549-7555. [DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.10.048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2018] [Revised: 10/12/2018] [Accepted: 10/15/2018] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|
10
|
Muloliwa AM, Cliff J, Oku A, Oyo-Ita A, Glenton C, Ames H, Kaufman J, Hill S, Cartier Y, Bosch-Capblanch X, Rada G, Lewin S. Using the COMMVAC taxonomy to map vaccination communication interventions in Mozambique. Glob Health Action 2018; 10:1321313. [PMID: 28573937 PMCID: PMC5496065 DOI: 10.1080/16549716.2017.1321313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Improved communication about childhood vaccination is fundamental to increasing vaccine uptake in low-income countries. Mozambique, with 64% of children fully vaccinated, uses a range of communication interventions to promote uptake of childhood immunisation. OBJECTIVES Using a taxonomy developed by the 'Communicate to Vaccinate' (COMMVAC) project, the study aims to identify and classify the existing communication interventions for vaccination in Mozambique and to find the gaps. METHODS We used a qualitative research approach to identify the range of communication interventions used in Mozambique. In-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out with key purposively selected personnel at national level and relevant documents were collected and analysed. These data were complemented with observations of communication during routine vaccination and campaigns in Nampula province. We used the COMMVAC taxonomy, which organises vaccination communication intervention according to its intended purpose and the population targeted, to map both routine and campaign interventions. RESULTS We identified interventions used in campaign and routine vaccination, or in both, fitting five of the seven taxonomy purposes, with informing or educating community members predominating. We did not identify any interventions that aimed to provide support or facilitate decision-making. There were interventions for all main target groups, although fewer for health providers. Overlap occurred: for example, interventions often targeted both parents and community members. CONCLUSIONS We consider that the predominant focus on informing and educating community members is appropriate in the Mozambican context, where there is a high level of illiteracy and poor knowledge of the reasons for vaccination. We recommend increasing interventions for health providers, in particular training them in better communication for vaccination. The taxonomy was useful for identifying gaps, but needs to be more user-friendly if it is to be employed as a tool by health service managers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Julie Cliff
- b Faculdade de Medicina , Universidade Eduardo Mondlane , Maputo , Mozambique
| | - Afiong Oku
- c Community Medicine Department , University of Calabar , Calabar , Nigeria
| | - Angela Oyo-Ita
- c Community Medicine Department , University of Calabar , Calabar , Nigeria
| | - Claire Glenton
- d Global Health Unit , Norwegian Institute of Public Health , Oslo , Norway
| | - Heather Ames
- d Global Health Unit , Norwegian Institute of Public Health , Oslo , Norway
| | - Jessica Kaufman
- e Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health , La Trobe University , Melbourne , Australia
| | - Sophie Hill
- e Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health , La Trobe University , Melbourne , Australia
| | - Yuri Cartier
- f International Union for Health Promotion and Education , Saint-Maurice , France
| | - Xavier Bosch-Capblanch
- g Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute , Basel , Switzerland.,h University of Basel , Basel , Switzerland
| | - Gabriel Rada
- i Evidence-based Healthcare Program , Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile , Santiago , Chile
| | - Simon Lewin
- d Global Health Unit , Norwegian Institute of Public Health , Oslo , Norway.,j Health Systems Research Unit , South African Medical Research Council , Tygerberg , South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kaufman J, Ryan R, Walsh L, Horey D, Leask J, Robinson P, Hill S. Face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 5:CD010038. [PMID: 29736980 PMCID: PMC6494431 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010038.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 82] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early childhood vaccination is an essential global public health practice that saves two to three million lives each year, but many children do not receive all the recommended vaccines. To achieve and maintain appropriate coverage rates, vaccination programmes rely on people having sufficient awareness and acceptance of vaccines.Face-to-face information or educational interventions are widely used to help parents understand why vaccines are important; explain where, how and when to access services; and address hesitancy and concerns about vaccine safety or efficacy. Such interventions are interactive, and can be adapted to target particular populations or identified barriers.This is an update of a review originally published in 2013. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination on vaccination status and parental knowledge, attitudes and intention to vaccinate. SEARCH METHODS We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and two trial registries (July and August 2017). We screened reference lists of relevant articles, and contacted authors of included studies and experts in the field. We had no language or date restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs evaluating the effects of face-to-face interventions delivered to parents or expectant parents to inform or educate them about early childhood vaccination, compared with control or with another face-to-face intervention. The World Health Organization recommends that children receive all early childhood vaccines, with the exception of human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV), which is delivered to adolescents. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently reviewed all search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS In this update, we found four new studies, for a total of ten studies. We included seven RCTs and three cluster-RCTs involving a total of 4527 participants, although we were unable to pool the data from one cluster-RCT. Three of the ten studies were conducted in low- or middle- income countries.All included studies compared face-to-face interventions with control. Most studies evaluated the effectiveness of a single intervention session delivered to individual parents. The interventions were an even mix of short (ten minutes or less) and longer sessions (15 minutes to several hours).Overall, elements of the study designs put them at moderate to high risk of bias. All studies but one were at low risk of bias for sequence generation (i.e. used a random number sequence). For allocation concealment (i.e. the person randomising participants was unaware of the study group to which participant would be allocated), three were at high risk and one was judged at unclear risk of bias. Due to the educational nature of the intervention, blinding of participants and personnel was not possible in any studies. The risk of bias due to blinding of outcome assessors was judged as low for four studies. Most studies were at unclear risk of bias for incomplete outcome data and selective reporting. Other potential sources of bias included failure to account for clustering in a cluster-RCT and significant unexplained baseline differences between groups. One cluster-RCT was at high risk for selective recruitment of participants.We judged the certainty of the evidence to be low for the outcomes of children's vaccination status, parents' attitudes or beliefs, intention to vaccinate, adverse effects (e.g. anxiety), and immunisation cost, and moderate for parents' knowledge or understanding. All studies had limitations in design. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence where we judged that studies had problems with randomisation or allocation concealment, or when outcomes were self-reported by participants who knew whether they'd received the intervention or not. We also downgraded the certainty for inconsistency (vaccination status), imprecision (intention to vaccinate and adverse effects), and indirectness (attitudes or beliefs, and cost).Low-certainty evidence from seven studies (3004 participants) suggested that face-to-face interventions to inform or educate parents may improve vaccination status (risk ratio (RR) 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.37). Moderate-certainty evidence from four studies (657 participants) found that face-to-face interventions probably slightly improved parent knowledge (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.19, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.38), and low-certainty evidence from two studies (179 participants) suggested they may slightly improve intention to vaccinate (SMD 0.55, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.85). Low-certainty evidence found the interventions may lead to little or no change in parent attitudes or beliefs about vaccination (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.27; three studies, 292 participants), or in parents' anxiety (mean difference (MD) -1.93, 95% CI -7.27 to 3.41; one study, 90 participants). Only one study (365 participants) measured the intervention cost of a case management strategy, reporting that the estimated additional cost per fully immunised child for the intervention was approximately eight times higher than usual care (low-certainty evidence). No included studies reported outcomes associated with parents' experience of the intervention (e.g. satisfaction). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggesting that face-to-face information or education may improve or slightly improve children's vaccination status, parents' knowledge, and parents' intention to vaccinate.Face-to-face interventions may be more effective in populations where lack of awareness or understanding of vaccination is identified as a barrier (e.g. where people are unaware of new or optional vaccines). The effect of the intervention in a population where concerns about vaccines or vaccine hesitancy is the primary barrier is less clear. Reliable and validated scales for measuring more complex outcomes, such as attitudes or beliefs, are necessary in order to improve comparisons of the effects across studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Kaufman
- La Trobe UniversityCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public HealthBundooraVICAustralia3086
| | - Rebecca Ryan
- La Trobe UniversityCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public HealthBundooraVICAustralia3086
| | - Louisa Walsh
- La Trobe UniversityCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public HealthBundooraVICAustralia3086
| | - Dell Horey
- La Trobe UniversityCollege of Science, Health and EngineeringBundooraVICAustralia3086
| | - Julie Leask
- The University of SydneySydney Nursing SchoolSydneyNSWAustralia2050
| | - Priscilla Robinson
- La Trobe UniversityDepartment of Public Health, School of Psychology and Public HealthBundooraVICAustralia3086
| | - Sophie Hill
- La Trobe UniversityCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public HealthBundooraVICAustralia3086
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Vouking MZ, Tadenfok CN, Ekani JME. Strategies to increase immunization coverage of tetanus vaccine among women in Sub Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Pan Afr Med J 2017; 27:25. [PMID: 29296160 PMCID: PMC5745987 DOI: 10.11604/pamj.supp.2017.27.3.11535] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2016] [Accepted: 04/16/2017] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
World Health Organization (WHO) estimated in 2013 that 49,000 deaths all over the world were caused by neonatal tetanus. Only as recently as the year 2000, neonatal tetanus was a public health problem in 59 countries, but since then it has been eliminated in 36 of the countries concerned. The objective of this piece of work, therefore, was to investigate which strategies intended to increase demand for vaccination are effective in increasing anti-tetanus vaccination coverage of women in Sub Saharan Africa. We searched the following electronic databases from January 1989 to July 2016: Medline, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica Database), The Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), WHOLIS (World Health Organization Library Database), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences) and contacted experts in the field. There were no restrictions to language or publication status. All study designs that could provide the information we sought were eligible, provided the studies were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Critical appraisal of all identified citations was done independently by two authors to establish the possible relevance of the articles for inclusion in the review. Our search strategy yielded 191 records and after assessment for eligibility, 6 papers met the criteria for inclusion. In Ivory Coast, after reorganization, health workers said they were satisfied with the work environment and the care provided in 91% and 96% of cases, respectively. In Kenya, the main factors contributing to having sufficiently immunized part of the population against tetanus are lower birth order, higher household wealth index, women's employment, making joint health-related decisions with a partner, and higher number of antenatal care visits. Particularly in Ethiopia, compared with other member countries, the size of the unimmunized population, reporting quality, fragileness of the health system, resource limitation, and others deserve further concerted attention. In Nigeria, the prevalence of missed opportunities was 66%. The factors responsible for missed opportunities were; poor history taking, lack of knowledge of the current immunization schedule, dependence on physician referral for immunization and inefficient immunization records keeping system. In Nigeria, socio-logistic variables found to be important in Expanded Programme on Immunization implementations included scheduling, health staff attitude, intersectoral collaboration, and health education. Lack of community participation was also found to be a crucial constraining factor. There are many challenges to increase immunization coverage of tetanus vaccine for women. So far very few interventions addressing these challenges have been evaluated scientifically. Community mobilization interventions to change or impact beliefs and attitudes of women are absolutely needed. Additionally, improving accessibility, affordability, availability and accommodation of vaccination service venues will make them more attractive.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marius Zambou Vouking
- Center for the Development of Best Practices in Health, Yaoundé Central Hospital, Henri-Dunant Avenue, Messa, Yaoundé, Cameroon
- Regional Unit of Expanded Programme on Immunization Centre Regional Delegation of Public Health, Yaoundé, Cameroon
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kaufman J, Ames H, Bosch-Capblanch X, Cartier Y, Cliff J, Glenton C, Lewin S, Muloliwa AM, Oku A, Oyo-Ita A, Rada G, Hill S. The comprehensive 'Communicate to Vaccinate' taxonomy of communication interventions for childhood vaccination in routine and campaign contexts. BMC Public Health 2017; 17:423. [PMID: 28486956 PMCID: PMC5424416 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-017-4320-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2016] [Accepted: 04/26/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Communication can be used to generate demand for vaccination or address vaccine hesitancy, and is crucial to successful childhood vaccination programmes. Research efforts have primarily focused on communication for routine vaccination. However, vaccination campaigns, particularly in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs), also use communication in diverse ways. Without a comprehensive framework integrating communication interventions from routine and campaign contexts, it is not possible to conceptualise the full range of possible vaccination communication interventions. Therefore, vaccine programme managers may be unaware of potential communication options and researchers may not focus on building evidence for interventions used in practice. In this paper, we broaden the scope of our existing taxonomy of communication interventions for routine vaccination to include communication used in campaigns, and integrate these into a comprehensive taxonomy of vaccination communication interventions. METHODS Building on our taxonomy of communication for routine vaccination, we identified communication interventions used in vaccination campaigns through a targeted literature search; observation of vaccination activities in Cameroon, Mozambique and Nigeria; and stakeholder consultations. We added these interventions to descriptions of routine vaccination communication and categorised the interventions according to their intended purposes, building from an earlier taxonomy of communication related to routine vaccination. RESULTS The comprehensive taxonomy groups communication used in campaigns and routine childhood vaccination into seven purpose categories: 'Inform or Educate'; 'Remind or Recall'; 'Enhance Community Ownership'; 'Teach Skills'; 'Provide Support'; 'Facilitate Decision Making' and 'Enable Communication'. Consultations with LMIC stakeholders and experts informed the taxonomy's definitions and structure and established its potential uses. CONCLUSIONS This taxonomy provides a standardised way to think and speak about vaccination communication. It is categorised by purpose to help conceptualise communication interventions as potential solutions to address needs or problems. It can be utilised by programme planners, implementers, researchers and funders to see the range of communication interventions used in practice, facilitate evidence synthesis and identify evidence gaps.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Kaufman
- School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Heather Ames
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
| | - Xavier Bosch-Capblanch
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Yuri Cartier
- International Union for Health Promotion and Education, Saint-Maurice Cedex, France
| | - Julie Cliff
- Eduardo Mondlane University, Maputo, Mozambique
| | | | - Simon Lewin
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
- South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
| | | | | | | | - Gabriel Rada
- Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Sophie Hill
- School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Kaufman J, Ryan R, Glenton C, Lewin S, Bosch-Capblanch X, Cartier Y, Cliff J, Oyo-Ita A, Ames H, Muloliwa AM, Oku A, Rada G, Hill S. Childhood vaccination communication outcomes unpacked and organized in a taxonomy to facilitate core outcome establishment. J Clin Epidemiol 2017; 84:173-184. [PMID: 28238788 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2016] [Revised: 01/11/2017] [Accepted: 02/18/2017] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We present a comprehensive taxonomy of outcomes for childhood vaccination communication interventions. Adding to our earlier map of trial outcomes, we aimed to (1) identify relevant outcomes not measured in trials, (2) identify outcomes from stakeholder focus groups, and (3) organize outcomes into a taxonomy. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We identified additional outcomes from nonvaccination health communication literature and through parent and health care professional focus groups. We organized outcomes into the taxonomy through iterative discussion and informed by organizational principles established by leaders in core outcome research. RESULTS The taxonomy includes three overarching core areas, divided into eight domains and then into outcomes. Core area one is psychosocial impact, including the domains "knowledge or understanding," "attitudes or beliefs," and "decision-making." Core area two is health impact, covering "vaccination status and behaviors" and "health status and well-being." Core area three is community, social, or health system impact, containing "intervention design and implementation," "community participation," and "resource use." CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this taxonomy is the first attempt to conceptualize the range of potential outcomes for vaccination communication. It can be used by researchers selecting outcomes for complex communication interventions. We will also present the taxonomy to stakeholders to establish core outcome domains.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Kaufman
- Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Health Sciences 2 Rm 412, Bundoora, Victoria 3086, Australia.
| | - Rebecca Ryan
- Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Health Sciences 2 Rm 412, Bundoora, Victoria 3086, Australia
| | - Claire Glenton
- Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 4404, Nydalen, Oslo N-0403, Norway
| | - Simon Lewin
- Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 4404, Nydalen, Oslo N-0403, Norway; Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, PO Box 19070, Tygerberg 7505, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Xavier Bosch-Capblanch
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Socinstrasse 57, P.O. Box CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland; Universität Basel, Petersplatz 1, CH-4003, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Yuri Cartier
- International Union for Health Promotion and Education, 42 boulevard de la Libération, Saint-Denis 93203, France
| | - Julie Cliff
- Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo CP 257, Mozambique
| | - Angela Oyo-Ita
- Department of Community Medicine, University of Calabar, Calabar PMB 1115, Cross River State, Nigeria
| | - Heather Ames
- Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 4404, Nydalen, Oslo N-0403, Norway
| | - Artur Manuel Muloliwa
- Provincial Directorate of Health, Av. Samora Machel n(º) 1016 R/C, C.P. N(º) 14, Nampula, Mozambique
| | - Afiong Oku
- Department of Community Medicine, University of Calabar, Calabar PMB 1115, Cross River State, Nigeria
| | - Gabriel Rada
- Evidence Based Health Care Program, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Avda, Libertador Bernardo O'Higgins 340, Santiago, Chile
| | - Sophie Hill
- Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Health Sciences 2 Rm 412, Bundoora, Victoria 3086, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Oku A, Oyo-Ita A, Glenton C, Fretheim A, Eteng G, Ames H, Muloliwa A, Kaufman J, Hill S, Cliff J, Cartier Y, Bosch-Capblanch X, Rada G, Lewin S. Factors affecting the implementation of childhood vaccination communication strategies in Nigeria: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health 2017; 17:200. [PMID: 28202001 PMCID: PMC5311723 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-017-4020-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2016] [Accepted: 01/11/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of health communication in vaccination programmes cannot be overemphasized: it has contributed significantly to creating and sustaining demand for vaccination services and improving vaccination coverage. In Nigeria, numerous communication approaches have been deployed but these interventions are not without challenges. We therefore aimed to explore factors affecting the delivery of vaccination communication in Nigeria. METHODS We used a qualitative approach and conducted the study in two states: Bauchi and Cross River States in northern and southern Nigeria respectively. We identified factors affecting the implementation of communication interventions through interviews with relevant stakeholders involved in vaccination communication in the health services. We also reviewed relevant documents. Data generated were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS We used the SURE framework to organise the identified factors (barriers and facilitators) affecting vaccination communication delivery. We then grouped these into health systems and community level factors. Some of the commonly reported health system barriers amongst stakeholders interviewed included: funding constraints, human resource factors (health worker shortages, training deficiencies, poor attitude of health workers and vaccination teams), inadequate infrastructure and equipment and weak political will. Community level factors included the attitudes of community stakeholders and of parents and caregivers. We also identified factors that appeared to facilitate communication activities. These included political support, engagement of traditional and religious institutions and the use of organised communication committees. CONCLUSIONS Communication activities are a crucial element of immunization programmes. It is therefore important for policy makers and programme managers to understand the barriers and facilitators affecting the delivery of vaccination communication so as to be able to implement communication interventions more effectively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Afiong Oku
- Community Medicine Department, University of Calabar, P.M.B 1115, Calabar Municipality, Cross River State, Nigeria
| | - Angela Oyo-Ita
- Community Medicine Department, University of Calabar, P.M.B 1115, Calabar Municipality, Cross River State, Nigeria
| | - Claire Glenton
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Postboks 4404 Nydalen, 0403, Oslo, Norway
| | - Atle Fretheim
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Postboks 4404 Nydalen, 0403, Oslo, Norway.,Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, P.O box 1130, Blindern, 0318, Oslo, Norway
| | - Glory Eteng
- Sociology Department, University of Calabar, P.M.B 1115, Calabar Municipality, Cross River State, Nigeria
| | - Heather Ames
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Postboks 4404 Nydalen, 0403, Oslo, Norway
| | - Artur Muloliwa
- Departamento de Saúde, Direcção Provincial de Saúde de Nampula, Av. SamoraMachel n° 1016 R/C, C.P. N° 14, Nampula, Mozambique
| | - Jessica Kaufman
- Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Health Sciences 2, Victoria, 3086, Australia
| | - Sophie Hill
- Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Health Sciences 2, Victoria, 3086, Australia
| | - Julie Cliff
- Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, Mozambique
| | - Yuri Cartier
- International Union for Health Promotion and Education, 42 Blvd. de la Libération, 95203, St. Denis, Cedex, France
| | - Xavier Bosch-Capblanch
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Socinstrasse 57, 4051, Basel, Switzerland.,University of Basel, Petersplatz 1, 4003, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Gabriel Rada
- Evidence-based Healthcare Program, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Avda. Libertador Bernardo O'Higgins 340, Santiago, Chile
| | - Simon Lewin
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Postboks 4404 Nydalen, 0403, Oslo, Norway. .,Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Francie van Zijl Drive, Parowvallei, PO Box 19070, 7505, Tygerberg, South Africa.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Ames HMR, Glenton C, Lewin S. Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 2:CD011787. [PMID: 28169420 PMCID: PMC5461870 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011787.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 146] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Childhood vaccination is an effective way to prevent serious childhood illnesses, but many children do not receive all the recommended vaccines. There are various reasons for this; some parents lack access because of poor quality health services, long distances or lack of money. Other parents may not trust vaccines or the healthcare workers who provide them, or they may not see the need for vaccination due to a lack of information or misinformation about how vaccinations work and the diseases they can prevent.Communication with parents about childhood vaccinations is one way of addressing these issues. Communication can take place at healthcare facilities, at home or in the community. Communication can be two-way, for example face-to-face discussions between parents and healthcare providers, or one-way, for instance via text messages, posters or radio programmes. Some types of communication enable parents to actively discuss vaccines and their benefits and harms, as well as diseases they can prevent. Other communication types simply give information about vaccination issues or when and where vaccines are available. People involved in vaccine programmes need to understand how parents experience different types of communication about vaccination and how this influences their decision to vaccinate. OBJECTIVES The specific objectives of the review were to identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative studies exploring: parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences regarding communication about childhood vaccinations and the manner in which it is communicated; and the influence that vaccination communication has on parents' and informal caregivers' decisions regarding childhood vaccination. SEARCH METHODS We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), MEDLINE In-process and Other Non-Index Citations (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EbscoHOST), and Anthropology Plus (EbscoHost) databases for eligible studies from inception to 30 August 2016. We developed search strategies for each database, using guidelines developed by the Cochrane Qualitative Research Methods Group for searching for qualitative evidence as well as modified versions of the search developed for three related reviews of effectiveness. There were no date or geographic restrictions for the search. SELECTION CRITERIA We included studies that utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on the views and experiences of parents and informal caregivers regarding information about vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where information about childhood vaccinations was communicated or distributed. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used maximum variation purposive sampling for data synthesis, using a three-step sampling frame. We conducted a thematic analysis using a constant comparison strategy for data extraction and synthesis. We assessed our confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. High confidence suggests that it is highly likely that the review finding is a reasonable representation of the phenomenon of interest, while very low confidence indicates that it is not clear whether the review finding is a reasonable representation of it. Using a matrix model, we then integrated our findings with those from other Cochrane reviews that assessed the effects of different communication strategies on parents' knowledge, attitudes and behaviour about childhood vaccination. MAIN RESULTS We included 38 studies, mostly from high-income countries, many of which explored mothers' perceptions of vaccine communication. Some focused on the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine.In general, parents wanted more information than they were getting (high confidence in the evidence). Lack of information led to worry and regret about vaccination decisions among some parents (moderate confidence).Parents wanted balanced information about vaccination benefits and harms (high confidence), presented clearly and simply (moderate confidence) and tailored to their situation (low confidence in the evidence). Parents wanted vaccination information to be available at a wider variety of locations, including outside health services (low confidence) and in good time before each vaccination appointment (moderate confidence).Parents viewed health workers as an important source of information and had specific expectations of their interactions with them (high confidence). Poor communication and negative relationships with health workers sometimes impacted on vaccination decisions (moderate confidence).Parents generally found it difficult to know which vaccination information source to trust and challenging to find information they felt was unbiased and balanced (high confidence).The amount of information parents wanted and the sources they felt could be trusted appeared to be linked to acceptance of vaccination, with parents who were more hesitant wanting more information (low to moderate confidence).Our synthesis and comparison of the qualitative evidence shows that most of the trial interventions addressed at least one or two key aspects of communication, including the provision of information prior to the vaccination appointment and tailoring information to parents' needs. None of the interventions appeared to respond to negative media stories or address parental perceptions of health worker motives. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We have high or moderate confidence in the evidence contributing to several review findings. Further research, especially in rural and low- to middle-income country settings, could strengthen evidence for the findings where we had low or very low confidence. Planners should consider the timing for making vaccination information available to parents, the settings where information is available, the provision of impartial and clear information tailored to parental needs, and parents' perceptions of health workers and the information provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heather MR Ames
- Norwegian Institute of Public HealthGlobal Health UnitPilestredet Park 7OsloNorway0130
- University of OsloInstitute of Health and SocietyOsloNorway
| | - Claire Glenton
- Norwegian Institute of Public HealthGlobal Health UnitPilestredet Park 7OsloNorway0130
| | - Simon Lewin
- Norwegian Institute of Public HealthPO Box 4404OsloNorway0403
- Medical Research Council of South AfricaHealth Systems Research UnitPO Box 19070TygerbergSouth Africa7505
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Oyo-Ita A, Wiysonge CS, Oringanje C, Nwachukwu CE, Oduwole O, Meremikwu MM. Interventions for improving coverage of childhood immunisation in low- and middle-income countries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 7:CD008145. [PMID: 27394698 PMCID: PMC4981642 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008145.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 117] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immunisation is a powerful public health strategy for improving child survival, not only by directly combating key diseases that kill children but also by providing a platform for other health services. However, each year millions of children worldwide, mostly from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), do not receive the full series of vaccines on their national routine immunisation schedule. This is an update of the Cochrane review published in 2011 and focuses on interventions for improving childhood immunisation coverage in LMICs. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness of intervention strategies to boost and sustain high childhood immunisation coverage in LMICs. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2016, Issue 4, part of The Cochrane Library. www.cochranelibrary.com, including the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (searched 12 May 2016); MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Daily and MEDLINE 1946 to Present, OvidSP (searched 12 May 2016); CINAHL 1981 to present, EbscoHost (searched 12 May 2016); Embase 1980 to 2014 Week 34, OvidSP (searched 2 September 2014); LILACS, VHL (searched 2 September 2014); Sociological Abstracts 1952 - current, ProQuest (searched 2 September 2014). We did a citation search for all included studies in Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index, 1975 to present; Emerging Sources Citation Index 2015 to present, ISI Web of Science (searched 2 July 2016). We also searched the two Trials Registries: ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov (searched 5 July 2016) SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT), non-RCTs, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series conducted in LMICs involving children aged from birth to four years, caregivers, and healthcare providers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We independently screened the search output, reviewed full texts of potentially eligible articles, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data in duplicate; resolving discrepancies by consensus. We then conducted random-effects meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS Fourteen studies (10 cluster RCTs and four individual RCTs) met our inclusion criteria. These were conducted in Georgia (one study), Ghana (one study), Honduras (one study), India (two studies), Mali (one study), Mexico (one study), Nicaragua (one study), Nepal (one study), Pakistan (four studies), and Zimbabwe (one study). One study had an unclear risk of bias, and 13 had high risk of bias. The interventions evaluated in the studies included community-based health education (three studies), facility-based health education (three studies), household incentives (three studies), regular immunisation outreach sessions (one study), home visits (one study), supportive supervision (one study), information campaigns (one study), and integration of immunisation services with intermittent preventive treatment of malaria (one study).We found moderate-certainty evidence that health education at village meetings or at home probably improves coverage with three doses of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccines (DTP3: risk ratio (RR) 1.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 2.59). We also found low-certainty evidence that facility-based health education plus redesigned vaccination reminder cards may improve DTP3 coverage (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.87). Household monetary incentives may have little or no effect on full immunisation coverage (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.23, low-certainty evidence). Regular immunisation outreach may improve full immunisation coverage (RR 3.09, 95% CI 1.69 to 5.67, low-certainty evidence) which may substantially improve if combined with household incentives (RR 6.66, 95% CI 3.93 to 11.28, low-certainty evidence). Home visits to identify non-vaccinated children and refer them to health clinics may improve uptake of three doses of oral polio vaccine (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.39, low-certainty evidence). There was low-certainty evidence that integration of immunisation with other services may improve DTP3 coverage (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.59). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Providing parents and other community members with information on immunisation, health education at facilities in combination with redesigned immunisation reminder cards, regular immunisation outreach with and without household incentives, home visits, and integration of immunisation with other services may improve childhood immunisation coverage in LMIC. Most of the evidence was of low certainty, which implies a high likelihood that the true effect of the interventions will be substantially different. There is thus a need for further well-conducted RCTs to assess the effects of interventions for improving childhood immunisation coverage in LMICs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela Oyo-Ita
- Department of Community Health, University of Calabar Teaching HospitalCalabar, Nigeria
| | - Charles S Wiysonge
- Centre for Evidence-based Health Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch UniversityCape Town, South Africa
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research CouncilCape Town, South Africa
| | - Chioma Oringanje
- GIDP Entomology and Insect Science, University of TucsonTucson, USA
| | - Chukwuemeka E Nwachukwu
- GIDP Entomology and Insect Science, Excellence & Friends Management Consult (EFMC)Abuja, Nigeria
| | - Olabisi Oduwole
- Institute of Tropical Diseases Research and Prevention, University of Calabar Teaching Hospital (ITDR/P)Calabar, Nigeria
| | - Martin M Meremikwu
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Calabar Teaching HospitalCalabar, Nigeria
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Outcomes mapping study for childhood vaccination communication: too few concepts were measured in too many ways. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 72:33-44. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2015] [Revised: 09/23/2015] [Accepted: 10/02/2015] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
19
|
Oku A, Oyo-Ita A, Glenton C, Fretheim A, Ames H, Muloliwa A, Kaufman J, Hill S, Cliff J, Cartier Y, Bosch-Capblanch X, Rada G, Lewin S. Communication strategies to promote the uptake of childhood vaccination in Nigeria: a systematic map. Glob Health Action 2016; 9:30337. [PMID: 26880154 PMCID: PMC4754015 DOI: 10.3402/gha.v9.30337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2015] [Revised: 12/29/2015] [Accepted: 12/30/2015] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Effective communication is a critical component in ensuring that children are fully vaccinated. Although numerous communication interventions have been proposed and implemented in various parts of Nigeria, the range of communication strategies used has not yet been mapped systematically. This study forms part of the 'Communicate to vaccinate' (COMMVAC) project, an initiative aimed at building research evidence for improving communication with parents and communities about childhood vaccinations in low- and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVE This study aims to: 1) identify the communication strategies used in two states in Nigeria; 2) map these strategies against the existing COMMVAC taxonomy, a global taxonomy of vaccination communication interventions; 3) create a specific Nigerian country map of interventions organised by purpose and target; and 4) analyse gaps between the COMMVAC taxonomy and the Nigerian map. DESIGN We conducted the study in two Nigerian states: Bauchi State in Northern Nigeria and Cross River State in Southern Nigeria. We identified vaccination communication interventions through interviews carried out among purposively selected stakeholders in the health services and relevant agencies involved in vaccination information delivery; through observations and through relevant documents. We used the COMMVAC taxonomy to organise the interventions we identified based on the intended purpose of the communication and the group to which the intervention was targeted. RESULTS The Nigerian map revealed that most of the communication strategies identified aimed to inform and educate and remind or recall. Few aimed to teach skills, enhance community ownership, and enable communication. We did not identify any intervention that aimed to provide support or facilitate decision-making. Many interventions had more than one purpose. The main targets for most interventions were caregivers and community members, with few interventions directed at health workers. Most interventions identified were used in the context of campaigns rather than routine immunisation programmes. CONCLUSIONS The identification and development of the Nigerian vaccination communication interventions map could assist programme managers to identify gaps in vaccination communication. The map may be a useful tool as part of efforts to address vaccine hesitancy and improve vaccination coverage in Nigeria and similar settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Afiong Oku
- Community Medicine Department, University of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria;
| | - Angela Oyo-Ita
- Community Medicine Department, University of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria
| | - Claire Glenton
- Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway
| | - Atle Fretheim
- Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway
- Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Heather Ames
- Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway
| | - Artur Muloliwa
- Departamento de Saúde, Direcção Provincial de Saúde de Nampula, Nampula, Mozambique
| | - Jessica Kaufman
- Department of Human Biosciences, Centre for Health Communication and Participation, College of Science, Health and Engineering La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Sophie Hill
- Department of Human Biosciences, Centre for Health Communication and Participation, College of Science, Health and Engineering La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Julie Cliff
- Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, Mozambique
| | - Yuri Cartier
- International Union for Health Promotion and Education, Cedex, France
| | - Xavier Bosch-Capblanch
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Gabriel Rada
- Evidence-based Healthcare Program, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Simon Lewin
- Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway
- Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Tygerberg, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Ames H, Njang DM, Glenton C, Fretheim A, Kaufman J, Hill S, Oku A, Cliff J, Cartier Y, Bosch-Capblanch X, Rada G, Muloliwa A, Oyo-Ita A, Lewin S. Mapping how information about childhood vaccination is communicated in two regions of Cameroon: What is done and where are the gaps? BMC Public Health 2015; 15:1264. [PMID: 26691846 PMCID: PMC4687068 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-2557-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2015] [Accepted: 12/01/2015] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The ‘Communicate to vaccinate’ (COMMVAC) project builds research evidence for improving communication with parents and communities about childhood vaccinations in low- and middle-income countries. Understanding and mapping the range of vaccination communication strategies used in different settings is an important component of this work. In this part of the COMMVAC project, our objectives were: (1) to identify the vaccination communication interventions used in two regions of Cameroon; (2) to apply the COMMVAC taxonomy, a global taxonomy of vaccination communication interventions, to these communication interventions to help us classify these interventions, including their purposes and target audiences; and identify whether gaps in purpose or target audiences exist; (3) to assess the COMMVAC taxonomy as a research tool for data collection and analysis. Methods We used the following qualitative methods to identify communication strategies in the Central and North West Regions of Cameroon in the first half of 2014: interviews with program managers, non-governmental organizations, vaccinators, parents and community members; observations and informal conversations during routine immunization clinics and three rounds of the National Polio Immunization Campaign; and document analysis of reports and mass media communications about vaccination. A survey of parents and caregivers was also done. We organised the strategies using the COMMVAC taxonomy and produced a map of Cameroon-specific interventions, which we presented to local stakeholders for feedback. Results Our map of the interventions used in Cameroon suggests that most childhood vaccination communication interventions focus on national campaigns against polio rather than routine immunisation. The map also indicates that most communication interventions target communities more broadly, rather than parents, and that very few interventions target health workers. The majority of the communication interventions aimed to inform or educate or remind or recall members of the community about vaccination. The COMMVAC taxonomy provided a useful framework for quickly and simply mapping existing vaccination communication strategies. Conclusions By identifying the interventions used in Cameroon and developing an intervention map, we allowed stakeholders to see where they were concentrating their communication efforts and where gaps exist, allowing them to reflect on whether changes are needed to the communication strategies they are using. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-015-2557-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heather Ames
- Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Boks 7004, St Olavs plass, N/0130, Oslo, Norway.
| | - Diangha Mabel Njang
- Department of Anthropology, University of Yaoundé 1, BP 337, Yaoundé, Central Province, Cameroon, Africa.
| | - Claire Glenton
- Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Boks 7004, St Olavs plass, N/0130, Oslo, Norway.
| | - Atle Fretheim
- Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Boks 7004, St Olavs plass, N/0130, Oslo, Norway. .,Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, P.O box 1130 Blindern 0318, Oslo, Norway.
| | - Jessica Kaufman
- Centre for Health Communication and Participation, C/o Department of Human Biosciences, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne campus, 3086, VIC, Australia.
| | - Sophie Hill
- Centre for Health Communication and Participation, C/o Department of Human Biosciences, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne campus, 3086, VIC, Australia.
| | - Afiong Oku
- University of Calabar, Nigeria, P.M.B 1115, Calabar Municipal, Cross River State, Nigeria.
| | - Julie Cliff
- Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, Mozambique, Africa.
| | - Yuri Cartier
- International Union for Health Promotion and Education, 42 Blvd. de la Libération, 95203 St, Denis, Cedex, France.
| | - Xavier Bosch-Capblanch
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Socinstrasse 57, 4051, Basel, Switzerland. .,University of Basel, Petersplatz 1, 4003, Basel, Switzerland.
| | - Gabriel Rada
- Evidence-based Healthcare Program, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Avda. Libertador Bernardo O'Higgins 340, Santiago, Chile.
| | - Artur Muloliwa
- Direcção Provincial de Saúde de Nampula, Departamento de Saúde, Av. Samora Machel n° 1016 R/C, C.P. N° 14, Nampula-Moçambique, Africa.
| | - Angela Oyo-Ita
- University of Calabar, Nigeria, P.M.B 1115, Calabar Municipal, Cross River State, Nigeria.
| | - Simon Lewin
- Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Boks 7004, St Olavs plass, N/0130, Oslo, Norway. .,Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Francie van Zijl Drive, Parowvallei, Cape Town, PO Box 19070, 7505, Tygerberg, South Africa.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Chachou MJ, Mukinda FK, Motaze V, Wiysonge CS. Electronic and postal reminders for improving immunisation coverage in children: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2015; 5:e008310. [PMID: 26474937 PMCID: PMC4611186 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008310] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Worldwide, suboptimal immunisation coverage causes the deaths of more than one million children under five from vaccine-preventable diseases every year. Reasons for suboptimal coverage are multifactorial, and a combination of interventions is needed to improve compliance with immunisation schedules. One intervention relies on reminders, where the health system prompts caregivers to attend immunisation appointments on time or re-engages caregivers who have defaulted on scheduled appointments. We undertake this systematic review to investigate the potential of reminders using emails, phone calls, social media, letters or postcards to improve immunisation coverage in children under five. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will search for published and unpublished randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Science Citation Index, WHOLIS, Clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Platform. We will conduct screening of search results, study selection, data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment in duplicate, resolving disagreements by consensus. In addition, we will pool data from clinically homogeneous studies using random-effects meta-analysis; assess heterogeneity of effects using the χ(2) test of homogeneity; and quantify any observed heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This protocol does not need approval by an ethics committee because we will use publicly available data, without directly involving human participants. The results will provide updated evidence on the effects of electronic and postal reminders on immunisation coverage, and we will discuss the applicability of the findings to low and middle-income countries. We plan to disseminate review findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at relevant conferences. In addition, we will prepare a policymaker-friendly summary using a validated format (eg, SUPPORT Summary) and disseminate this through social media and email discussion groups. REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER PROSPERO registration number CRD42014012888.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martel J Chachou
- Division of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Fidele K Mukinda
- Division of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Villyen Motaze
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Centre for Evidence-based Health Care, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Charles S Wiysonge
- Division of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Centre for Evidence-based Health Care, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Tygerberg, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Merten S, Martin Hilber A, Biaggi C, Secula F, Bosch-Capblanch X, Namgyal P, Hombach J. Gender Determinants of Vaccination Status in Children: Evidence from a Meta-Ethnographic Systematic Review. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0135222. [PMID: 26317975 PMCID: PMC4552892 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135222] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2015] [Accepted: 07/20/2015] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Using meta-ethnographic methods, we conducted a systematic review of qualitative research to understand gender-related reasons at individual, family, community and health facility levels why millions of children in low and middle income countries are still not reached by routine vaccination programmes. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ERIC, Anthropological Lit, CSA databases, IBSS, ISI Web of Knowledge, JSTOR, Soc Index and Sociological Abstracts was conducted. Key words were built around the themes of immunization, vaccines, health services, health behaviour, and developing countries. Only papers, which reported on in-depth qualitative data, were retained. Twenty-five qualitative studies, which investigated barriers to routine immunisation, were included in the review. These studies were conducted between 1982 and 2012; eighteen were published after 2000. The studies represent a wide range of low- to middle income countries including some that have well known coverage challenges. We found that women's low social status manifests on every level as a barrier to accessing vaccinations: access to education, income, as well as autonomous decision-making about time and resource allocation were evident barriers. Indirectly, women's lower status made them vulnerable to blame and shame in case of childhood illness, partly reinforcing access problems, but partly increasing women's motivation to use every means to keep their children healthy. Yet in settings where gender discrimination exists most strongly, increasing availability and information may not be enough to reach the under immunised. Programmes must actively be designed to include mitigation measures to facilitate women's access to immunisation services if we hope to improve immunisation coverage. Gender inequality needs to be addressed on structural, community and household levels if the number of unvaccinated children is to substantially decrease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonja Merten
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Adriane Martin Hilber
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- * E-mail:
| | - Christina Biaggi
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Florence Secula
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Xavier Bosch-Capblanch
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Pem Namgyal
- Initiative for Vaccines Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Joachim Hombach
- Initiative for Vaccines Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Hemsley B, Balandin S. A metasynthesis of patient-provider communication in hospital for patients with severe communication disabilities: informing new translational research. Augment Altern Commun 2014; 30:329-43. [PMID: 25229213 PMCID: PMC4266100 DOI: 10.3109/07434618.2014.955614] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2013] [Accepted: 06/06/2014] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Poor patient-provider communication in hospital continues to be cited as a possible causal factor in preventable adverse events for patients with severe communication disabilities. Yet to date there are no reports of empirical interventions that investigate or demonstrate an improvement in communication in hospital for these patients. The aim of this review was to synthesize the findings of research into communication in hospital for people with severe communication disabilities arising from lifelong and acquired stable conditions including cerebral palsy, autism, intellectual disability, aphasia following stroke, but excluding progressive conditions and those solely related to sensory impairments of hearing or vision. Results revealed six core strategies suggested to improve communication in hospital: (a) develop services, systems, and policies that support improved communication, (b) devote enough time to communication, (c) ensure adequate access to communication tools (nurse call systems and communication aids), (d) access personally held written health information, (e) collaborate effectively with carers, spouses, and parents, and (f) increase the communicative competence of hospital staff. Currently there are no reports that trial or validate any of these strategies specifically in hospital settings. Observational and evaluative research is needed to investigate the ecological validity of strategies proposed to improve communication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bronwyn Hemsley
- School of Humanities and Social Science, Faculty of Education and Arts, The University of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Susan Balandin
- School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Saeterdal I, Lewin S, Austvoll‐Dahlgren A, Glenton C, Munabi‐Babigumira S. Interventions aimed at communities to inform and/or educate about early childhood vaccination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 2014:CD010232. [PMID: 25408540 PMCID: PMC10880811 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010232.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A range of strategies are used to communicate with parents, caregivers and communities regarding child vaccination in order to inform decisions and improve vaccination uptake. These strategies include interventions in which information is aimed at larger groups in the community, for instance at public meetings, through radio or through leaflets. This is one of two reviews on communication interventions for childhood vaccination. The companion review focuses on face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of interventions aimed at communities to inform and/or educate people about vaccination in children six years and younger. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and five other databases up to July 2012. We searched for grey literature in the Grey Literature Report and OpenGrey. We also contacted authors of included studies and experts in the field. There were no language, date or settings restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA Individual or cluster-randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials, interrupted time series (ITS) and repeated measures studies, and controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies. We included interventions aimed at communities and intended to inform and/or educate about vaccination in children six years and younger, conducted in any setting. We defined interventions aimed at communities as those directed at a geographic area, and/or interventions directed to groups of people who share at least one common social or cultural characteristic. Primary outcomes were: knowledge among participants of vaccines or vaccine-preventable diseases and of vaccine service delivery; child immunisation status; and unintended adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were: participants' attitudes towards vaccination; involvement in decision-making regarding vaccination; confidence in the decision made; and resource use or cost of intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently reviewed the references to identify studies for inclusion. We extracted data and assessed risk of bias in all included studies. MAIN RESULTS We included two cluster-randomised trials that compared interventions aimed at communities to routine immunisation practices. In one study from India, families, teachers, children and village leaders were encouraged to attend information meetings where they received information about childhood vaccination and could ask questions. In the second study from Pakistan, people who were considered to be trusted in the community were invited to meetings to discuss vaccine coverage rates in their community and the costs and benefits of childhood vaccination. They were asked to develop local action plans and to share the information they had been given and continue the discussions in their communities.The trials show low certainty evidence that interventions aimed at communities to inform and educate about childhood vaccination may improve knowledge of vaccines or vaccine-preventable diseases among intervention participants (adjusted mean difference 0.121, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.055 to 0.189). These interventions probably increase the number of children who are vaccinated. The study from India showed that the intervention probably increased the number of children who received vaccinations (risk ratio (RR) 1.67, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.31; moderate certainty evidence). The study from Pakistan showed that there is probably an increase in the uptake of both measles (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.58) and DPT (diptheria, pertussis and tetanus) (RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.29) vaccines (both moderate certainty evidence), but there may be little or no difference in the number of children who received polio vaccine (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.05; low certainty evidence). There is also low certainty evidence that these interventions may change attitudes in favour of vaccination among parents with young children (adjusted mean difference 0.054, 95% CI 0.013 to 0.105), but they may make little or no difference to the involvement of mothers in decision-making regarding childhood vaccination (adjusted mean difference 0.043, 95% CI -0.009 to 0.097).The studies did not assess knowledge among participants of vaccine service delivery; participant confidence in the vaccination decision; intervention costs; or any unintended harms as a consequence of the intervention. We did not identify any studies that compared interventions aimed at communities to inform and/or educate with interventions directed to individual parents or caregivers, or studies that compared two interventions aimed at communities to inform and/or educate about childhood vaccination. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS This review provides limited evidence that interventions aimed at communities to inform and educate about early childhood vaccination may improve attitudes towards vaccination and probably increase vaccination uptake under some circumstances. However, some of these interventions may be resource intensive when implemented on a large scale and further rigorous evaluations are needed. These interventions may achieve most benefit when targeted to areas or groups that have low childhood vaccination rates.'
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ingvil Saeterdal
- Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health ServicesHealth Economics and Drugs UnitPO Box 7004St Olavs PlassOsloNorwayN‐0130
| | - Simon Lewin
- Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health ServicesGlobal Health UnitBox 7004 St OlavsplassOsloNorwayN‐0130
- Medical Research Council of South AfricaHealth Systems Research UnitPO Box 19070TygerbergSouth Africa7505
| | | | - Claire Glenton
- Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health ServicesGlobal Health UnitBox 7004 St OlavsplassOsloNorwayN‐0130
| | - Susan Munabi‐Babigumira
- Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health ServicesGlobal Health UnitBox 7004 St OlavsplassOsloNorwayN‐0130
| | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
García L DA, Velandia-González M, Trumbo SP, Pedreira MC, Bravo-Alcántara P, Danovaro-Holliday MC. Understanding the main barriers to immunization in Colombia to better tailor communication strategies. BMC Public Health 2014; 14:669. [PMID: 24981729 PMCID: PMC4089932 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-669] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2013] [Accepted: 06/19/2014] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) in Colombia has made great advances since its inception in 1979; however, by 2010 vaccination coverage rates had been declining. In 2010, the EPI commissioned a nationwide study on practices on immunization, attitudes and knowledge, perceived service quality, and barriers to childhood immunization in order to tailor EPI communication strategies. Methods Colombia’s 32 geographical departments were divided into 10 regions. Interviewers from an independent polling company administered a survey to 4802 parents and guardians of children aged <5 years in these regions. To better assess barriers to vaccination, the study was designed to have 70% of participants who had children with incomplete vaccination schedules. Explanatory factorial, principal component, and cluster analyses were performed to place participants into a group (segment) representing the primary category of reasons respondents offered for not vaccinating their children. Types of barriers were then compared to other variables, such as service quality, communication preferences, and parental attitudes on vaccination. Results Although all respondents indicated that vaccines have health benefits, and 4738 (98.7%) possessed vaccination cards for their children, attitudes and knowledge were not always favorable to immunization. Six groups of immunization barriers were identified: 1) factors related to caregivers (24.4%), 2) vaccinators (19.7%), 3) health centers (18.0%), 4) the health system (13.4%), 5) concerns about adverse events (13.1%), and 6) cultural and religious beliefs (11.4%); groups 1, 5 and 6 together represented almost half (48.9%) of users, indicating problems related to the demand for vaccines as the primary barriers to immunization. Differences in demographics, communication preferences, and reported service quality were found among participants in the six groups and among participants in the 10 regions. Additionally, differences between how participants reported receiving information on vaccination and how they believed such information should be communicated were observed. Conclusions Better understanding immunization barriers and the users of the EPI can help tailor communication strategies to increase demand for immunization services. Results of the study have been used by Colombia’s EPI to inform the design of new communication strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Martha Velandia-González
- Comprehensive Family Immunization Unit, Pan American Health Organization, 525 23rd St,, NW Washington, DC 20037, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
SHARMA ANUPAMA, MISRA AK. MODELING THE IMPACT OF AWARENESS CREATED BY MEDIA CAMPAIGNS ON VACCINATION COVERAGE IN A VARIABLE POPULATION. J BIOL SYST 2014. [DOI: 10.1142/s0218339014400051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Vaccines are a core component of any preventive strategy designed to ensure the global public health. A major factor influencing the successful implementation of any immunization program is awareness and public acceptance of the vaccine. The present study focuses on potential impacts of awareness created by media campaigns on vaccination coverage of hepatitis B. In this paper, a SIR model with vital dynamics in a population of varying size is investigated, which couples hepatitis B vaccination and awareness created by media within a single framework. It is assumed that media campaigns propagate awareness about measures requisite for escaping the chances of contracting hepatitis B. The awareness created by media motivates people to get vaccinated and attain full immunization against hepatitis B virus. For analyzing the model, stability theory of differential equations is employed. First, equilibria of the system comprising fractions of the population are obtained and their stability behavior is discussed. Then the asymptotic behavior of total population is discussed in detail. Three threshold parameters R0, R1and R2governing the dynamics of infection and total population are also affirmed. The findings of numerical simulations are also in line with analytically obtained results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- ANUPAMA SHARMA
- Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi - 221 005, India
| | - A. K. MISRA
- Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi - 221 005, India
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Arora NK, Lal AA, Hombach JM, Santos JI, Bhutta ZA, Sow SO, Greenwood B. The need for targeted implementation research to improve coverage of basic vaccines and introduction of new vaccines. Vaccine 2014; 31 Suppl 2:B129-36. [PMID: 23598474 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.01.058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2012] [Revised: 01/22/2013] [Accepted: 01/25/2013] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
The Decade of Vaccines Collaboration (DoVC) Research and Development (R&D) Working Group identified implementation research as an important step toward achieving high vaccine coverage and the uptake of desirable new vaccines. The R&D Working Group noted that implementation research is highly complex and requires participation of stakeholders from diverse backgrounds to ensure effective planning, execution, interpretation, and adoption of research outcomes. Unlike other scientific disciplines, implementation research is highly contextual and depends on social, cultural, geographic, and economic factors to make the findings useful for local, national, and regional applications. This paper presents the broad framework for implementation research in support of immunization and sets out a series of research questions developed through a Delphi process (during a DoVC-supported workshop in Sitges, Spain) and a literature review.
Collapse
|
28
|
Machingaidze S, Hussey GD, Wiysonge CS. Trends in the types and quality of childhood immunisations research output from Africa 1970-2010: mapping the evidence base. BMC Health Serv Res 2014; 14:52. [PMID: 24495533 PMCID: PMC3918141 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-52] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2013] [Accepted: 12/19/2013] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Over the past four decades, extraordinary progress has been made in establishing and improving childhood immunization programmes around Africa. In order to ensure effective and sustainable positive growth of these childhood immunisations programmes, the development, adaptation and implementation of all interventions (programme activities, new vaccines, new strategies and policies) should be informed by the best available local evidence. Methods An assessment of the peer-reviewed literature on childhood immunization research published in English from 1970 to 2010 was conducted in PubMed and Africa-Wide databases. All study types were eligible for inclusion. A standard form was used to extract information from all studies identified as relevant and entered into a Microsoft Access database for analysis. Results Our initial search yielded 5436 articles from the two databases, from which 848 full text articles were identified as relevant. Among studies classified as clinical research (417), 40% were clinical trials, 24% were burden of disease/epidemiology and 36% were other clinical studies. Among studies classified as operational research (431), 77% related to programme management, 18% were policy related and 5% were related to vaccine financing. Studies were conducted in 48 African countries with six countries (South Africa, The Gambia, Nigeria, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau and Kenya) accounting for 56% of the total research output. Studies were published in 152 different journals with impact factors ranging from 0.192 to 53.29; with a median impact factor of 3.572. Conclusion A similar proportion of clinical versus operational research output was found. However, an uneven distribution across Africa was observed with only six countries accounting for over half of the research output. The research conducted was of moderate to high quality, with 62% being published in journals with 2010 impact factors greater than two. Urgent attention should be given to the development of research capacity in low performing countries around Africa, with increased focus on the process of turning immunisations programme research evidence into policy and practice, as well as increased focus on issues relating to vaccine financing and sustainability in Africa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shingai Machingaidze
- Vaccines for Africa Initiative (VACFA), Institute of Infectious Diseases and Molecular Medicine (IDM), University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Feldman C, Abdulkarim E, Alattar F, Al Lawati F, Al Khatib H, Al Maslamani M, Al Obaidani I, Al Salah M, Farghaly M, Husain EH, Mokadas E. Pneumococcal disease in the Arabian Gulf: recognizing the challenge and moving toward a solution. J Infect Public Health 2013; 6:401-9. [PMID: 23999349 DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2013.06.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2013] [Revised: 06/06/2013] [Accepted: 06/09/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Pneumococcal disease has substantial incidence, morbidity and mortality in older adults. Decreased birth rates and longer lifespans indicate that the global population is aging, although rates of aging differ between countries [1]. In 2010, the proportion of the population aged >60 years in the general Arab Region was 7%, and this proportion is expected to rise to 19% by 2050 for the region as a whole [2]; the United Nations estimates for the individual countries of the Arabian Gulf by 2050 are 25.7%, 24.9%, 20.7%, 26.7% and 10.5% in the Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Oman, respectively, which are comparable to the 26.9% predicted for the USA and lower than that predicted in European countries, in which the 2050 estimates are 32.7%, 34.0% and 38.1% for France, the UK and Germany, respectively [1]. Globally and in the Gulf Region, pneumococcal disease is an increasingly important public health burden in the elderly. The burden of pneumococcal disease can be reduced by effective vaccination programs, but the recommendations on pneumococcal vaccination in adults vary widely. The major barriers to vaccine implementation among healthcare professionals are an incomplete awareness of pneumococcal disease and the vaccination options in adults. The Gulf Advocate Group calls for healthcare providers in the countries of the Arabian Gulf (Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman) to support awareness and education programs about adult pneumococcal disease, particularly in high-risk groups such as those >65 years of age, those with type 2 diabetes mellitus, hematological malignancy, organ and bone marrow transplantation or chronic kidney or lung diseases and pilgrims undertaking the Hajj to improve pneumococcal disease surveillance and optimize and disseminate recommendations for adult vaccination. The Gulf Advocate Group recommends following the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for pneumococcal vaccination [3,4].
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles Feldman
- Division of Pulmonology, Department of Internal Medicine, Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital and Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Kaufman J, Synnot A, Ryan R, Hill S, Horey D, Willis N, Lin V, Robinson P. Face to face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD010038. [PMID: 23728698 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010038.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Childhood vaccination (also described as immunisation) is an important and effective way to reduce childhood illness and death. However, there are many children who do not receive the recommended vaccines because their parents do not know why vaccination is important, do not understand how, where or when to get their children vaccinated, disagree with vaccination as a public health measure, or have concerns about vaccine safety.Face to face interventions to inform or educate parents about routine childhood vaccination may improve vaccination rates and parental knowledge or understanding of vaccination. Such interventions may describe or explain the practical and logistical factors associated with vaccination, and enable parents to understand the meaning and relevance of vaccination for their family or community. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of face to face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination on immunisation uptake and parental knowledge. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1946 to July 2012); EMBASE + Embase Classic (OvidSP) (1947 to July 2012); CINAHL (EbscoHOST) (1981 to July 2012); PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1806 to July 2012); Global Health (CAB) (1910 to July 2012); Global Health Library (WHO) (searched July 2012); Google Scholar (searched September 2012), ISI Web of Science (searched September 2012) and reference lists of relevant articles. We searched for ongoing trials in The International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (searched August 2012) and for grey literature in The Grey Literature Report and OpenGrey (searched August 2012). We also contacted authors of included studies and experts in the field. There were no language or date restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs evaluating the effects of face to face interventions delivered to individual parents or groups of parents to inform or educate about early childhood vaccination, compared with control or with another face to face intervention. Early childhood vaccines are all recommended routine childhood vaccines outlined by the World Health Organization, with the exception of human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) which is delivered to adolescents. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently reviewed database search results for inclusion. Grey literature searches were conducted and reviewed by a single author. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS We included six RCTs and one cluster RCT involving a total of 2978 participants. Three studies were conducted in low- or middle-income countries and four were conducted in high-income countries. The cluster RCT did not contribute usable data to the review. The interventions comprised a mix of single-session and multi-session strategies. The quality of the evidence for each outcome was low to very low and the studies were at moderate risk of bias overall. All these trials compared face to face interventions directed to individual parents with control.The three studies assessing the effect of a single-session intervention on immunisation status could not be pooled due to high heterogeneity. The overall result is uncertain because the individual study results ranged from no evidence of effect to a significant increase in immunisation.Two studies assessed the effect of a multi-session intervention on immunisation status. These studies were also not pooled due to heterogeneity and the result was very uncertain, ranging from a non-significant decrease in immunisation to no evidence of effect.The two studies assessing the effect of a face to face intervention on knowledge or understanding of vaccination were very uncertain and were not pooled as data from one study were skewed. However, neither study showed evidence of an effect on knowledge scores in the intervention group. Only one study measured the cost of a case management intervention. The estimated additional cost per fully immunised child for the intervention was approximately eight times higher than usual care.The review also considered the following secondary outcomes: intention to vaccinate child, parent experience of intervention, and adverse effects. No adverse effects related to the intervention were measured by any of the included studies, and there were no data on the other outcomes of interest. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The limited evidence available is low quality and suggests that face to face interventions to inform or educate parents about childhood vaccination have little to no impact on immunisation status, or knowledge or understanding of vaccination. There is insufficient evidence to comment on the cost of implementing the intervention, parent intention to vaccinate, parent experience of the intervention, or adverse effects. Given the apparently limited effect of such interventions, it may be feasible and appropriate to incorporate communication about vaccination into a healthcare encounter, rather than conduct it as a separate activity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Kaufman
- Centre forHealth Communication and Participation, Australian Institute for Primary Care&Ageing, La Trobe University, Bundoora,Australia.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Willis N, Hill S, Kaufman J, Lewin S, Kis-Rigo J, De Castro Freire SB, Bosch-Capblanch X, Glenton C, Lin V, Robinson P, Wiysonge CS. "Communicate to vaccinate": the development of a taxonomy of communication interventions to improve routine childhood vaccination. BMC INTERNATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS 2013; 13:23. [PMID: 23663327 PMCID: PMC3655915 DOI: 10.1186/1472-698x-13-23] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2012] [Accepted: 05/05/2013] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Background Vaccination is a cost-effective public health measure and is central to the Millennium Development Goal of reducing child mortality. However, childhood vaccination coverage remains sub-optimal in many settings. While communication is a key feature of vaccination programmes, we are not aware of any comprehensive approach to organising the broad range of communication interventions that can be delivered to parents and communities to improve vaccination coverage. Developing a classification system (taxonomy) organised into conceptually similar categories will aid in: understanding the relationships between different types of communication interventions; facilitating conceptual mapping of these interventions; clarifying the key purposes and features of interventions to aid implementation and evaluation; and identifying areas where evidence is strong and where there are gaps. This paper reports on the development of the ‘Communicate to vaccinate’ taxonomy. Methods The taxonomy was developed in two stages. Stage 1 included: 1) forming an advisory group; 2) searching for descriptions of interventions in trials (CENTRAL database) and general health literature (Medline); 3) developing a sampling strategy; 4) screening the search results; 5) developing a data extraction form; and 6) extracting intervention data. Stage 2 included: 1) grouping the interventions according to purpose; 2) holding deliberative forums in English and French with key vaccination stakeholders to gather feedback; 3) conducting a targeted search of grey literature to supplement the taxonomy; 4) finalising the taxonomy based on the input provided. Results The taxonomy includes seven main categories of communication interventions: inform or educate, remind or recall, teach skills, provide support, facilitate decision making, enable communication and enhance community ownership. These categories are broken down into 43 intervention types across three target groups: parents or soon-to-be-parents; communities, community members or volunteers; and health care providers. Conclusions Our taxonomy illuminates and organises this field and identifies the range of available communication interventions to increase routine childhood vaccination uptake. We have utilised a variety of data sources, capturing information from rigorous evaluations such as randomised trials as well as experiences and knowledge of practitioners and vaccination stakeholders. The taxonomy reflects current public health practice and can guide the future development of vaccination programmes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie Willis
- Centre for Health Communication and Participation, Australian Institute for Primary Care & Ageing, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086, Australia.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Wiysonge CS, Uthman OA, Ndumbe PM, Hussey GD. A bibliometric analysis of childhood immunization research productivity in Africa since the onset of the Expanded Program on Immunization in 1974. BMC Med 2013; 11:66. [PMID: 23497441 PMCID: PMC3599719 DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-66] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2012] [Accepted: 03/14/2013] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The implementation of strategic immunization plans whose development is informed by available locally-relevant research evidence should improve immunization coverage and prevent disease, disability and death in Africa. In general, health research helps to answer questions, generate the evidence required to guide policy and identify new tools. However, factors that influence the publication of immunization research in Africa are not known. We, therefore, undertook this study to fill this research gap by providing insights into factors associated with childhood immunization research productivity on the continent. We postulated that research productivity influences immunization coverage. METHODS We conducted a bibliometric analysis of childhood immunization research output from Africa, using research articles indexed in PubMed as a surrogate for total research productivity. We used zero-truncated negative binomial regression models to explore the factors associated with research productivity. RESULTS We identified 1,641 articles on childhood immunization indexed in PubMed between 1974 and 2010 with authors from Africa, which represent only 8.9% of the global output. Five countries (South Africa, Nigeria, The Gambia, Egypt and Kenya) contributed 48% of the articles. After controlling for population and gross domestic product, The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau and Sao Tome and Principe were the most productive countries. In univariable analyses, the country's gross domestic product, total health expenditure, private health expenditure, and research and development expenditure had a significant positive association with increased research productivity. Immunization coverage, adult literacy rate, human development index and physician density had no significant association. In the multivarable model, only private health expenditure maintained significant statistical association with the number of immunization articles. CONCLUSIONS Immunization research productivity in Africa is highly skewed, with private health expenditure having a significant positive association. However, the current contribution of authors from Africa to global childhood immunization research output is minimal. The lack of association between research productivity and immunization coverage may be an indication of lack of interactive communication between health decision-makers, program managers and researchers; to ensure that immunization policies and plans are always informed by the best available evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles S Wiysonge
- Vaccines for Africa Initiative, Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town, Anzio Road Observatory, Cape Town 7925, South Africa.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Saeterdal I, Glenton C, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Munabi-Babigumira S, Lewin S. Community-directed interventions for informing and/or educating about early childhood vaccination. THE COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 2012. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
|
34
|
Kaufman J, Synnot A, Hill S, Willis N, Horey D, Lin V, Ryan R, Robinson P. Face to face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination. THE COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 2012. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
|