Understanding vaccination communication between health workers and parents: a Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) qualitative study in Serbia

Vaccine communication between health workers and parents affects parental acceptance, so understanding this is particularly important when vaccination rates drop. This paper presents the findings of a qualitative research study conducted in Serbia as part of a Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) project. The aims were to explore the process of vaccination communication between health workers and parents (accepting, indecisive, delaying, refusing), and identify barriers and drivers to effective communication. In-depth interviews with 14 health workers were supplemented and qualified by observations of 40 consultations, using thematic analysis. Study sites were two community health centers in two Belgrade municipalities where a significant drop in childhood vaccination rates had occurred. Key findings were: (1) communication mainly took place between pediatricians and parents, while nurses focused on administering vaccines. (2) Health workers were confident in their skills to communicate and address concerns of accepting and indecisive parents, successfully applying specific strategies. (3) When interacting with delaying and refusing parents, they sometimes agreed to delay vaccination to maintain relationships, confident that most parents would vaccinate in due course. (4) Some refusing parents asked questions grounded in a socio-political agenda regarding vaccines or vaccination. Such questions exceeded the domain of health workers’ expertise, which affected the communication between them. (5) Health workers’ behavior in consultations was sometimes affected by parents’ (dis) trust in their recommendations about vaccination. The study revealed that health workers in Serbia require additional skills and techniques to respond to parents who refuse and wish to delay vaccination, to secure timely vaccination

Tailoring Immunization Programmes: using patient file data to explore vaccination uptake and associated factors.

Vaccination uptake in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH), in Bosnia and Herzegovina, is suboptimal. This study aimed to (1) assess vaccination coverage, timeliness and drop-out for children born in 2015 and 2016 and compare these with official administrative coverage estimates, (2) identify associations between characteristics of children/caregivers and vaccination uptake. This was a cross-sectional study based on patient files for children 12-23 months (n = 1800) and 24-35 months (n = 1800). Methods were adapted from the World Health Organization cluster survey methodology. A two-stage stratified sampling procedure was conducted in urban and rural strata. A structured paper-based form was completed by a pediatrician/nurse from randomly selected primary care centers and patient files. Estimates were based on weighted analysis with a 95% confidence interval to account for the survey sampling design. Vaccination coverage was consistent with administrative coverage levels for BCG, DTP and MMR, and lower for HepB; all considerably lower than regional targets. Children in urban areas had lower vaccination uptake. An assumption that anti-vaccination sentiment prevails among caregivers was not confirmed; only 2% of children were not vaccinated at all, instead challenges related to delays and drop-out. An assumption of caregiver concerns for the MMR vaccine was confirmed with low uptake and delays. The FBiH has experienced vaccination schedule changes due to supply issues; findings confirmed that sustainability in supply and schedule is high priority. These data are new and provide important information for developing strategies to increase uptake

A qualitative interview study with parents to identify barriers and drivers to childhood vaccination and inform public health interventions

Vaccination coverage in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, has been declining since 2014. This qualitative study aimed to identify barriers and drivers to childhood vaccination for parents. The COM-B (capability-opportunity-motivation-behavior) model was the underpinning theoretical framework. Face-to-face interviews with 22 parents of fully (n = 6), delayed/partially vaccinated (n = 9) and unvaccinated (n = 7) children were conducted. Interviews explored individual factors (capability–knowledge and skills; motivation–attitudes, confidence and trust) and context factors (physical opportunity–information, access, health systems; and social opportunity – social support, norms). Data were analyzed in NVivo using content analysis exploring differences in COM factors by vaccination status and location. Parents of fully vaccinated children typically reported individual and context drivers to vaccination. They accepted vaccination, trusted health workers, and were content with services. Parents of delayed/partially vaccinated children fell into two subgroups: (1) Those who accepted vaccination and attributed delays to their organizational skills or frustration with appointment times. (2) Those fitting the profile of “vaccine hesitant” – generally valuing vaccination and health worker advice, yet with concerns often triggered by media/social media. Parents of unvaccinated children mentioned individual and context barriers to vaccination, notably significant concerns about safety, some distrust of health workers and resentment of mandatory vaccination. Urban/rural differences included urban parents being more likely to report experiences with vaccine shortages and very few had received information leaflets. The study identified complex and inter-related barriers and drivers to parents’ childhood vaccination behaviors. These insights have informed the development of tailored interventions to improve coverage

Design and implementation of tailored intervention to increase vaccine acceptance in a Somali community in Stockholm, Sweden - based on the Tailoring Immunization Programmes approach

Objectives: Sweden has had a high and stable vaccination coverage for measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine (>96%) through the national immunization program (NIP), but coverage rates highlight local pockets of lower vaccination coverage. This project addressed low MMR vaccine acceptance among parents in a Somali community, in Stockholm. The objective of the intervention was to increase vaccine confidence and MMR-vaccine uptake and also to inform practices addressing vaccine acceptance. Study design: This paper describes the design and implementation of a multi-component intervention based on the Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) approach, developed by the WHO European Regional Office. Methods: The theoretical underpinning of TIP is the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model (COM-B model) and Behaviour Change Wheel framework (BCW), adapted for vaccination. The COM-model was used to identify barriers and drivers to vaccination and intervention types. The TIP-phases described in this paper are: pre-TIP (planning), three succeeding TIP phases (situational analysis, formative research, intervention design) and the post-TIP phase (implementation). Results: The situation analysis and formative research revealed that parents feared the MMR vaccine due to autism or that their child would stop talking following vaccination, despite lack of scientific evidence for an association between autism and MMR vaccines. Barriers were linked to their associated COM-B factors and mapped to appropriate intervention types for two target groups: Somali parents and nurses at the Child Health Centres (CHC). Selected intervention types targeting parents were education, persuasion and modelling whereas education and training were selected for CHC nurses. The intervention activities included community engagement for parents, while the activities for nurses focused on improving encounters and dialogue with parents having low vaccine acceptance. Following the intervention design the activities were developed, pilot tested and implemented. Conclusion: This study confirm that the TIP approach is valuable for guiding a stepwise working process for a thorough understanding of barriers and drivers for MMR vaccination among parents in this Somali community. It facilitated the design of a theory and evidence-informed intervention targeting parents and nurses

Satisfaction with Health Care Services in the Adult Population of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background and Objectives: Patient satisfaction with health care can influence health care-seeking behavior in relation to both minor or major health problems or influence communication and compliance with medical advice, which is especially important in emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, it is important to continually monitor patient satisfaction with provided care and their dynamics. The aim of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with health care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the adult population of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FB&H) and compare it with levels of satisfaction in the same population before the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: A representative, population-based survey was implemented in the adult population of the FB&H using the EUROPEP instrument, which measures satisfaction with health care using 23 items. The sample included 740 respondents who were 18 years or older residing in the FB&H and was implemented in December 2020. All data were collected using a system of online panels. The survey questions targeted the nine months from the beginning of the pandemic to the time of data collection, i.e., the period of March to December 2020. Results: The mean composite satisfaction score across all 23 items of the EUROPEP tool was 3.2 points in all age groups; the ceiling effect was 22% for the youngest respondents (18–34 years old), 23% for 35–54 years old, and 26% for the oldest group (55+), showing increasing satisfaction by age. The overall composite score for both females and males was 3.2. The ceiling effect was higher in those with chronic disease (29% vs. 23% in those without chronic disease). The composite mean score for respondents residing in rural vs. urban areas was 3.2 with a ceiling effect of 22% in rural and 24% in urban residents. When comparing mean composite scores surveyed at various points in time in the FB&H, it was found that the score increased from 3.3 to 3.5 between 2011 and 2017 and dropped again to 3.3 in this study. Despite these observations in the overall trends of satisfaction scores, we note that no statistically significant differences were observed between most of the single-item scores in the stratified analysis, pointing to the relative uniformity of satisfaction among the analyzed population subgroups. Conclusions: The rate of satisfaction with health care services in the FB&H was lower during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to 2011 and 2017. Furthermore, while an increasing trend in satisfaction with health care was observed in the FB&H during the years prior to 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to the reversal of this trend. It is important to further monitor the dynamics of patient satisfaction with health care, which could serve as a basis for planning, delivering, and maintaining quality services during the COVID-19 pandemic and other emergencies

Psychological well‐being during the COVID‐19 pandemic in Italy assessed in a four‐waves survey

COVID‐19 pandemic had a negative impact on the mental health and well‐being (WB) of citizens. This cross‐sectional study included 4 waves of data collection aimed at identifying profiles of individuals with different levels of WB. The study included a representative stratified sample of 10,013 respondents in Italy. The WHO 5-item well-being scale (WHO‐5) was used for the assessment of WB. Different supervised machine learning approaches (multinomial logistic regression, partial least‐ square discriminant analysis—PLS‐DA—, classification tree—CT—) were applied to identify individual characteristics with different WB scores, first in waves 1–2 and, subsequently, in waves 3 and 4. Forty‐ one percent of participants reported “Good WB”, 30% “Poor WB”, and 28% “Depression”. Findings carried out using multinomial logistic regression show that Resilience was the most important variable able for discriminating the WB across all waves. Through the PLS‐DA, Increased Unhealthy Behaviours proved to be the more important feature in the first two waves, while Financial Situation gained most relevance in the last two. COVID-19 Perceived Risk was relevant, but less than the other variables, across all waves. Interestingly, using the CT we were able to establish a cut‐off for Resilience (equal to 4.5) that discriminated good WB with a probability of 65% in wave 4. Concluding, we found that COVID‐19 had negative implications for WB. Governments should support evidence‐based strategies considering factors that influence WB (i.e., Resilience, Perceived Risk, Healthy Behaviours, and Financial Situation)