Building confidence in vaccines.

Despite significant efforts by governments, organizations and individuals to maintain public trust in vaccines, concerns persist and threaten to undermine the effectiveness of immunization programs. Vaccine advocates have traditionally focused on education based on evidence to address vaccine concerns and hesitancy. However, being informed of the facts about immunization does not always translate into support for immunization. While many are persuaded by scientific evidence, others are more influenced by cognitive shortcuts, beliefs, societal pressure and the media, with the latter group more likely to hesitate over immunization. Understanding evidence from the behaviour sciences opens new doors to better support individual decision-making about immunization. Drawing on heuristics, this overview explores how individuals find, process and utilize vaccine information and the role health care professionals and society can play in vaccine decision-making. Traditional, evidence-based approaches aimed at staunching the erosion of public confidence in vaccines are proving inadequate and expensive. Enhancing public confidence in vaccines will be complex, necessitating a much wider range of strategies than currently used. Success will require a shift in how the public, health care professionals and media are informed and educated about vaccine benefits, risks and safety; considerable introspection and change in current academic and vaccine decision-making practices; development of proactive strategies to broadly address current and potential future concerns, as well as targeted interventions such as programs to address pain with immunization. This overview outlines ten such opportunities for change to improve vaccine confidence.

Risk perception, risk management and safety assessment: what can governments do to increase public confidence in their vaccine system?

For decades vaccine program managers and governments have devoted many resources to addressing public vaccine concerns, vaccine risk perception, risk management and safety assessment. Despite ever growing evidence that vaccines are safe and effective, public concerns continue. Education and evidence based scientific messages have not ended concerns. How can governments and programs more effectively address the public's vaccine concerns and increase confidence in the vaccine safety system? Vaccination hesitation has been attributed to concerns about vaccine safety, perceptions of high vaccine risks and low disease risk and consequences. Even when the public believes vaccines are important for protection many still have concerns about vaccine safety. This overview explores how heuristics affect public perception of vaccines and vaccine safety, how the public finds and uses vaccine information, and then proposes strategies for changes in the approach to vaccine safety communications. Facts and evidence confirming the safety of vaccines are not enough. Vaccine beliefs and behaviours must be shaped. This will require a shift in the what, when, how and why of vaccine risk and benefit communication content and practice. A change to a behavioural change strategy such as the WHO COMBI program that has been applied to disease eradication efforts is suggested.

Ill-informed consent? A content analysis of physical risk disclosure in school-based HPV vaccine programs.

OBJECTIVES: This study examines the accuracy, completeness, and consistency of human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine related physical risks disclosed in documents available to parents, legal guardians, and girls in Canadian jurisdictions with school-based HPV vaccine programs. DESIGN AND SAMPLE: We conducted an online search for program related HPV vaccine risk/benefit documents for all 13 Canadian jurisdictions between July 2008 and May 2009 including follow-up by e-mail and telephone requests for relevant documents from the respective Ministries or Departments of Health. The physical risks listed in the documents were compared across jurisdictions and against documents prepared by the vaccine manufacturer (Merck Frosst Canada), the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI), the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC), and a 2007 article in Maclean's Magazine. RESULTS: No jurisdiction provided the same list of vaccine related physical risks as any other jurisdiction. Major discrepancies were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Inaccurate, incomplete, and inconsistent information can threaten the validity of consent/authorization and potentially undermine trust in the vaccine program and the vaccine itself. Efforts are needed to improve the quality, clarity, and standardization of the content of written documents used in school-based HPV vaccine programs across Canada.