Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Coverage and Confidence in Italy: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study, the OBVIOUS Project.

BACKGROUND: Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates are still below the target due to vaccine refusal or delay, lack of knowledge, and logistical challenges. Understanding these barriers is crucial for developing strategies to improve HPV vaccination rates. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used a questionnaire to investigate social and behavioral factors influencing decision making about the HPV vaccine. The survey was conducted from 11 April to 29 May 2022 and involved 10,000 Italian citizens aged ≥ 18 years. The sample was stratified based on region of residence, gender, and age group. RESULTS: 3160 participants were surveyed about themselves, while 1266 respondents were surveyed about their children's vaccine uptake. Among females aged ≥ 26 years, the national average HPV vaccine uptake was 21.7%, with variations across different regions. In the 18-25 age group, females had a vaccine uptake (80.8%) twice as much as males (38.1%), while vaccine uptake among male and female children aged 9-11 was similar. CONCLUSIONS: The OBVIOUS study in Italy reveals factors influencing low HPV vaccine uptake, suggesting targeted approaches, tailored information campaigns, heightened awareness of eligibility, promoting early vaccination, addressing low-risk perception among males, addressing safety concerns, and enhancing perceived accessibility to improve vaccine uptake and mitigate health risks.

School-Level Variation in Coverage of Co-Administered dTpa and HPV Dose 1 in Three Australian States.

BACKGROUND: Australian adolescents are routinely offered HPV and dTpa (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis) vaccines simultaneously in the secondary school vaccination program. We identified schools where HPV initiation was lower than dTpa coverage and associated school-level factors across three states. METHODS: HPV vaccination initiation rates and dTpa vaccination coverage in 2016 were calculated using vaccine databases and school enrolment data. A multivariate analysis assessed sociodemographic and school-level factors associated with HPV initiation being >5% absolute lower than dTpa coverage. RESULTS: Of 1280 schools included, the median school-level HPV initiation rate was 85% (interquartile range (IQR):75-90%) and the median dTpa coverage was 86% (IQR:75-92%). Nearly a quarter (24%) of all schools had HPV vaccination initiation >5% lower than dTpa coverage and 11 % had >10% difference. School-level factors independently associated with >5% difference were remote schools (aOR:3.5, 95% CI = 1.7-7.2) and schools in major cities (aOR:1.8, 95% CI = 1.0-3.0), small schools (aOR:3.3, 95% CI = 2.3-5.7), higher socioeconomic advantage (aOR:1.7, 95% CI = 1.1-2.6), and lower proportions of Language-background-other-than-English (aOR:1.9, 95% CI = 1.2-3.0). CONCLUSION: The results identified a quarter of schools had lower HPV than dTpa initiation coverage, which may indicate HPV vaccine hesitancy, and the difference was more likely in socioeconomically advantaged schools. As hesitancy is context specific, it is important to understand the potential drivers of hesitancy and future research needs to understand the reasons driving differential uptake.

School-based HPV vaccination positively impacts parents' attitudes toward adolescent vaccination.

INTRODUCTION: This qualitative study aimed to explore parental attitudes, knowledge and decision-making about HPV vaccination for adolescents in the context of a gender-neutral school-based Australian National Immunisation Program (NIP). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with parents of adolescents eligible for HPV vaccination were undertaken as part of an evaluation of a cluster-randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention in 40 schools (2013-2015). In this qualitative study, we purposively recruited a nested sample of parents from 11 schools across two Australian jurisdictions. Interviews explored parent knowledge and understanding of the HPV vaccine program; HPV vaccination decision-making; their adolescent's knowledge about HPV vaccination; and their adolescent's understanding about HPV vaccination, sexual awareness and behaviour. Transcripts were analysed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Parents' of 22 adolescents had positive attitudes towards the program; the school-based delivery platform was the key driver shaping acceptance of and decision-making about HPV vaccination. They had difficulty recalling, or did not read, HPV vaccination information sent home. Some adolescents were involved in discussions about vaccination, with parents' responsible for ultimate vaccine decision-making. All parents supported in-school education for adolescents about HPV and HPV vaccination. Parents' knowledge about HPV vaccination was limited to cervical cancer and was largely absent regarding vaccination in males. CONCLUSIONS: Parents' positive attitudes towards the NIP and inclusion of the HPV vaccine is central to their vaccine decision-making and acceptance. More intensive communication strategies including school education opportunities are required to improve parents' knowledge of HPV-related disease and to promote vaccine decision-making with adolescents.

Immunisation status screening in the emergency department: Why are we forgetting the elderly?

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia is one of the most common reasons patients over the age of 65 years present to the Emergency Department (ED). There is a 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine (23vPPV) available under the National Immunisation Program (NIP) with demonstrated 61-71% effectiveness against Invasive Pneumococcal Disease (IPD), but only 51% of adults aged over 65 years are vaccinated in Australia. METHODS: Short semi-structured interviews were conducted with emergency nurses working across a Local Health District in Sydney New South Wales (n=9) in order to determine their knowledge, behaviour and attitudes towards immunisation status screening in the elderly who present to the ED with pneumonia. Questions were structured to the COM-B Model (capability, opportunity and motivation to change behaviour), and a thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: There were three major themes identified: (1) The importance of routinisation, (2) Low knowledge levels and, (3) The 'vaccination is for children' heuristic, as well as suggestions for future interventions to improve screening. CONCLUSIONS: These findings clarify how to improve vaccine uptake amongst this vulnerable cohort. They suggest that emergency departments should provide education to nurses. In addition, checklists/tick boxes can prompt nurses whilst conducting routine work, which may lead to increased vaccination uptake.

How heuristics and cognitive biases affect vaccination decisions / Cómo los sesgos heurísticos y cognitivos afectan a las decisiones de vacunación / Como as heurísticas e os vieses cognitivos afetam as decisões sobre vacinação

Abstract: Immunization, the most successful public health intervention to date, can only be effective if eligible individuals or their legal representatives have access to vaccines and subsequently comply with their use. Under-vaccination stems from multiple causes: access, affordability, awareness, acceptance and activation. In this paper, we focus on acceptance and, specifically, on factors pertaining to individual or parental compliance, specifically the psychology of judgment and decision making. We describe how heuristics and cognitive biases - a facet of thoughts and feelings - affect vaccination decision making. Additionally, we address when and how social processes play a role and how attitudes towards vaccines might reflect a more general underlying attitude or ideology. The understanding of how decision making, with regards to vaccines occurs, and the role played by heuristics and cognitive biases can help inform more appropriate public health interventions.

Resumen: La inmunización es la intervención en salud pública más exitosa hasta la fecha. No obstante, sólo puede ser efectiva si las personas elegibles, o sus representantes legales, tienen acceso a las vacunas y, consecuentemente, cumplen con su uso. Existen múltiples causas de infravacunación: acceso, asequibilidad, concienciación, aceptación y activación. En este trabajo, nos enfocamos en la aceptación y esceficamente, centrándonos en factores respecto a la conformidad individual o parental, específicamente en cuanto a la psicología de juicio y toma de decisiones. Describimos como sesgos heurísticos y cognitivos -una faceta de pensamientos y sentimientos- que afectan a la toma de decisiones sobre la vacunación. Asimismo, nos centramos en cuándo y cómo los procesos sociales desempeñan un papel y cómo las actitudes hacia las vacunas quizás reflejen una actitud subyacente más general o ideológica. La compresión sobre cómo se toman las decisiones, en relación a cuándo se tienen que tomar las vacunas y el papel desempeñado por sesgos heurísticos y cognitivos puede informarnos más apropiadamente sobre las intervenciones en salud pública.

Resumo: A imunização, a intervenção da saúde pública mais bem sucedida até hoje, só pode ser eficaz se as pessoas elegíveis ou seus representantes legais tiverem acesso às vacinas e aderirem ao seu uso. A subvacinação pode resultar de várias causas: acesso, viabilidade, conscientização, aceitação e ativação. Neste trabalho, focamos na aceitação e, especificamente, nos concentramos nos fatores relativos à cooperação do indivíduo ou de seus pais, especificamente a psicologia do julgamento e da tomada de decisões. Descrevemos como as heurísticas e os vieses cognitivos - um aspecto dos pensamentos e sentimentos - afetam a tomada de decisão quanto à vacinação. Além disso, abordamos quando e como os processos sociais desempenham um papel e como as atitudes em relação às vacinas podem refletir uma atitude ou ideologia subjacente mais geral. A compreensão de como a tomada de decisões em relação às vacinas ocorre e o papel desempenhado pelas heurísticas e pelos vieses cognitivos pode ajudar a informar as intervenções de saúde pública de forma mais adequada.

HPV vaccine coverage in Australia and associations with HPV vaccine information exposure among Australian Twitter users.

Introduction: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine coverage in Australia is 80% for females and 76% for males. Attitudes may influence coverage but surveys measuring attitudes are resource-intensive. The aim of this study was to determine whether Twitter-derived estimates of HPV vaccine information exposure were associated with differences in coverage across regions in Australia. Methods: Regional differences in information exposure were estimated from 1,103,448 Australian Twitter users and 655,690 HPV vaccine related tweets posted between 6 September 2013 and 1 September 2017. Tweets about HPV vaccines were grouped using topic modelling; an algorithm for clustering text-based data. Proportional exposure to topics across 25 regions in Australia were used as factors to model HPV vaccine coverage in females and males, and compared to models using employment and education as factors. Results: Models using topic exposure measures were more closely correlated with HPV vaccine coverage (female: Pearson's R = 0.75 [0.49 to 0.88]; male: R = 0.76 [0.51 to 0.89]) than models using employment and education as factors (female: 0.39 [-0.02 to 0.68]; male: 0.36 [-0.04 to 0.66]). In Australia, positively-framed news tended to reach more Twitter users overall, but vaccine-critical information made up higher proportions of exposures among Twitter users in low coverage regions, where distorted characterisations of safety research and vaccine-critical blogs were popular. Conclusions: Twitter-derived models of information exposure were correlated with HPV vaccine coverage in Australia. Topic exposure measures may be useful for providing timely and localised reports of the information people access and share to inform the design of targeted vaccine promotion interventions.

Face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination.

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.

Mapping information exposure on social media to explain differences in HPV vaccine coverage in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Together with access, acceptance of vaccines affects human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine coverage, yet little is known about media's role. Our aim was to determine whether measures of information exposure derived from Twitter could be used to explain differences in coverage in the United States. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of exposure to information about HPV vaccines on Twitter, derived from 273.8 million exposures to 258,418 tweets posted between 1 October 2013 and 30 October 2015. Tweets were classified by topic using machine learning methods. Proportional exposure to each topic was used to construct multivariable models for predicting state-level HPV vaccine coverage, and compared to multivariable models constructed using socioeconomic factors: poverty, education, and insurance. Outcome measures included correlations between coverage and the individual topics and socioeconomic factors; and differences in the predictive performance of the multivariable models. RESULTS: Topics corresponding to media controversies were most closely correlated with coverage (both positively and negatively); education and insurance were highest among socioeconomic indicators. Measures of information exposure explained 68% of the variance in one dose 2015 HPV vaccine coverage in females (males: 63%). In comparison, models based on socioeconomic factors explained 42% of the variance in females (males: 40%). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of information exposure derived from Twitter explained differences in coverage that were not explained by socioeconomic factors. Vaccine coverage was lower in states where safety concerns, misinformation, and conspiracies made up higher proportions of exposures, suggesting that negative representations of vaccines in the media may reflect or influence vaccine acceptance.

Vaccination uptake by vaccine-hesitant parents attending a specialist immunization clinic in Australia.

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is an issue of global concern. The quality of communication between healthcare providers and parents can influence parental immunization acceptance. We aimed to describe immunization uptake following specialist immunization clinic (SIC) consultation for Australian children of VH parents as a cohort, and according to pre-clinic parental position on immunization. At a single tertiary pediatric SIC (RCH, Melbourne) a retrospective descriptive study classified VH families according to 3 proposed parental positions on immunization at initial clinic attendance. Immunization status at follow up was ascertained via the Australian Children's Immunization Register and National HPV Program Register and compared between groups. Of the VH cohort, 13/38 (34%) families were classified as hesitant, 21 (55%) as late/selective vaccinators and 4 (11%) as vaccine refusers. Mean follow up post-SIC attendance was 14.5 months. For the overall VH cohort, the majority chose selective immunization (42%) following SIC consultation. When analyzed by pre-clinic parental position on immunization, there was a trend for hesitant families to proceed with full immunization, selective families to continue selective immunization and refusing families to remain unimmunised (p < 0.0001). The most commonly omitted vaccines were hepatitis B (66%) and Haemophilus influenzae type B (55%), followed by the meningococcal C conjugate vaccine (53%) and measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (53%). Immunization outcome appears to correlate with pre-clinic parental position on immunization for the majority of families attending a SIC in Australia, with selective immunization the most common outcome. Tailored communication approaches based on parental position on immunization may optimise clinic resources and engagement of families, but require prospective research evaluation.

HPV.edu study protocol: a cluster randomised controlled evaluation of education, decisional support and logistical strategies in school-based human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination of adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The National Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination Program in Australia commenced in 2007 for females and in 2013 for males, using the quadrivalent HPV vaccine (HPV 6,11,16,18). Thus far, we have demonstrated very substantial reductions in genital warts and in the prevalence of HPV among young Australian women, providing early evidence for the success of this public health initiative. Australia has a long history of school-based vaccination programs for adolescents, with comparatively high coverage. However, it is not clear what factors promote success in a school vaccination program. The HPV.edu study aims to examine: 1) student knowledge about HPV vaccination; 2) psycho-social outcomes and 3) vaccination uptake. METHODS/DESIGN: HPV.edu is a cluster randomised trial of a complex intervention in schools aiming to recruit 40 schools with year-8 enrolments above 100 students (approximately 4400 students). The schools will be stratified by Government, Catholic, and Independent sectors and geographical location, with up to 20 schools recruited in each of two states, Western Australia (WA) and South Australia (SA), and randomly allocated to intervention or control (usual practice). Intervention schools will receive the complex intervention which includes an adolescent intervention (education and distraction); a decisional support tool for parents and adolescents and logistical strategies (consent form returns strategies, in-school mop-up vaccination and vaccination-day guidelines). Careful process evaluation including an embedded qualitative evaluation will be undertaken to explore in depth possible mechanisms for any observed effect of the intervention on primary and secondary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to evaluate the relative effectiveness of various strategies to promote best practice in school-based vaccination against HPV. The study aims to improve vaccination-related psychosocial outcomes, including adolescent knowledge and attitudes, decision-making involvement, self-efficacy, and to reduce fear and anxiety. The study also aims to improve school vaccination program logistics including reduction in time spent vaccinating adolescents and increased number of consent forms returned (regardless of decision). Less anxiety in adolescents will likely promote more efficient vaccination, which will be more acceptable to teachers, nurses and parents. Through these interventions, it is hoped that vaccination uptake will be increased. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12614000404628 , 14.04.2014.

Associations Between Exposure to and Expression of Negative Opinions About Human Papillomavirus Vaccines on Social Media: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Groups and individuals that seek to negatively influence public opinion about the safety and value of vaccination are active in online and social media and may influence decision making within some communities. OBJECTIVE: We sought to measure whether exposure to negative opinions about human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines in Twitter communities is associated with the subsequent expression of negative opinions by explicitly measuring potential information exposure over the social structure of Twitter communities. METHODS: We hypothesized that prior exposure to opinions rejecting the safety or value of HPV vaccines would be associated with an increased risk of posting similar opinions and tested this hypothesis by analyzing temporal sequences of messages posted on Twitter (tweets). The study design was a retrospective analysis of tweets related to HPV vaccines and the social connections between users. Between October 2013 and April 2014, we collected 83,551 English-language tweets that included terms related to HPV vaccines and the 957,865 social connections among 30,621 users posting or reposting the tweets. Tweets were classified as expressing negative or neutral/positive opinions using a machine learning classifier previously trained on a manually labeled sample. RESULTS: During the 6-month period, 25.13% (20,994/83,551) of tweets were classified as negative; among the 30,621 users that tweeted about HPV vaccines, 9046 (29.54%) were exposed to a majority of negative tweets. The likelihood of a user posting a negative tweet after exposure to a majority of negative opinions was 37.78% (2780/7361) compared to 10.92% (1234/11,296) for users who were exposed to a majority of positive and neutral tweets corresponding to a relative risk of 3.46 (95% CI 3.25-3.67, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneous community structure on Twitter appears to skew the information to which users are exposed in relation to HPV vaccines. We found that among users that tweeted about HPV vaccines, those who were more often exposed to negative opinions were more likely to subsequently post negative opinions. Although this research may be useful for identifying individuals and groups currently at risk of disproportionate exposure to misinformation about HPV vaccines, there is a clear need for studies capable of determining the factors that affect the formation and adoption of beliefs about public health interventions.

Epidemiology of respiratory viral infections in children enrolled in a study of influenza vaccine effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Influenza-like illness (ILI) confers a high annual morbidity in young children. We report the epidemiology of ILIs in children who participated in an influenza vaccine effectiveness study during the 2010 Southern Hemisphere influenza season in Sydney, Australia. METHODS: Children aged 0·5-3 years were prospectively recruited from child care centres (CCCs). We classified them as fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated and unvaccinated according to their receipt of unadjuvanted vaccines containing influenza A (H1N1)pdm09. For 13 weeks commencing 30 July 2010, parents reported when their children developed an ILI (fever ≥37·8°C/feverishness plus ≥1 respiratory symptom) and collected nose and/or throat swabs for multiplex respiratory virus polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. Health impacts were assessed by telephone interview at enrolment and two weeks after each ILI. RESULTS: There were 124 ILIs reported in 105 of 381 enrolled children. Swabs were taken in 117 ILIs: 175 viruses were identified from 103 swabs. Adeno- and rhinoviruses were most frequently identified; 44% of swabs yielded multiple viruses. No virus was associated with more severe symptoms, although rhinovirus-related ILIs lasted longer. Nose swabs had a higher virus detection rate than throat swabs. Influenza-vaccinated children were 1·6 times (P = 0·001) more likely than unvaccinated children to have a non-influenza ILI. CONCLUSION: Adeno- and rhinoviruses were the most common viruses causing ILI. Swabs taken by parents are an effective method for sample collection. Influenza-like illness was more common in children vaccinated against influenza in this observational study, but prior health-seeking behaviour may have contributed to this difference.

Estimates and determinants of economic impacts from influenza-like illnesses caused by respiratory viruses in Australian children attending childcare: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Influenza and other respiratory infections cause excess winter morbidity in children. This study assessed the economic impact of influenza-like illness (ILI) on families with children attending childcare using a societal perspective. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in 90 childcare centres and one general practitioner clinics in Sydney, Australia, during 2010. Healthy children aged ≥6 months to <3 years were enrolled. Economic impacts of ILI (temperature ≥37·8°C or parental report of fever, plus ≥1 respiratory symptoms) were collected at 2 and 4 weeks after ILI onset by telephone interview. Parent-collected respiratory specimens were tested for respiratory viruses using real-time PCR (RT-PCR). Costs associated with healthcare visits, medication usage, carer time lost (work or recreation) and home care and/or additional childcare were collected. Influenza-like illness costs were described and further analysed using a Tobit model. Zero-inflated Poisson regression was employed to compare the numbers of healthcare visits for each ILI. RESULTS: Of 381 children enrolled and analysed, 105 developed 124 ILIs. Specimens were available for 117 ILIs: five were positive by RT-PCR for A(H1N1)pdm09, 39 for adenovirus, 39 for rhinovirus, 15 for a coronavirus and 27 for a polyomavirus. The mean cost of all ILIs was AU$626 (95% confidence interval: AU$484-768) per ILI with no significant differences observed between viruses. Carers lost on average 13 hours of work and 3 hours of leisure time per ILI. Independent drivers of ILI costs were having both parents in employed work and longer duration of ILI. In multivariate analyses, four variables were significantly associated with an increased number of healthcare visits per ILI: non-Caucasian child, living in a detached house, both parents in employed work and having an ILI with one or more viruses identified. CONCLUSIONS: For families with a child attending childcare, ILIs cause a substantial economic burden. An ILI in a child with working parents and/or with longer duration appears to cost more in monetary terms. Healthcare visits were increased if the child was non-Caucasian, lived in a detached house, had working parents or had a virus-positive ILI. Our findings on the estimates and determinants of economic impacts from respiratory virus infection highlight the importance and feasibility of an interdisciplinary (epidemiology/health economics) approach to such research.

Australian newspaper coverage of human papillomavirus vaccination, October 2006-December 2009.

Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) is now routine practice for adolescent females in Australia. Media information about HPV vaccination is likely to affect girls' and parents' decisions about vaccination. This article reports a content analysis of 131 Australian print media news stories published between October 2006 and December 2009. Each story was coded for main themes of the article; completeness and accuracy of information presented; potential issues and concerns related to HPV vaccination; phrasing, emphasis, and language used; and representation of experts. Resulting themes were as follows: Australian pride in vaccine development; details and progress of the National Vaccination Program; vaccine safety; HPV vaccination's future; whether or not males could and/or should get the vaccine; issues related to sexual activity and the vaccine; and issues about decision making for acceptance of HPV vaccine. To fill gaps that are created by media representations of HPV vaccination, educational interventions should include information about HPV transmission and male vaccination and should promote adolescent involvement in decision making.

National survey of general practitioners' experience of delivering the National Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Program.

BACKGROUND: Between 2007 and 2009, Australian general practitioners (GPs) were involved in implementing a population-based human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination program. We investigated GPs' experiences of delivering the HPV vaccine to women aged 18-26. METHODS: We posted a survey to 1000 GPs. The survey was informed by 12 domains incorporating constructs from psychological theories that focus on individual and environmental barriers and facilitators to effective implementation of evidence-based practice by health professionals. RESULTS: The response rate was 32%. The 298 vaccinating GPs were positive about HPV vaccine implementation as part of their professional role as a worthwhile initiative within existing general practice infrastructure. They had more negative views about some aspects of program organisation, such as the timelines and potential adverse impacts on cervical screening rates. Vaccine safety was not a key concern. Actual levels of knowledge about HPV were moderate (mean score 3.41 out of 6 (s.d. 0.99)) and contrasted with self-rated knowledge, which was high (93% perceived their knowledge to be adequate). Notably, there were unrealistic expectations about the likely reduction in Pap abnormalities due to vaccination, which is important to clarify to avoid loss of confidence in the vaccine when this reduction does not eventuate. CONCLUSIONS: Australian GPs viewed HPV vaccination of women aged 18-26 years as an integrated part of their routine practice, with positive attitudes regarding its benefits and achievability. GPs are well placed to implement mass immunisation programs as long as they are supported by effective and timely communication strategies and resources.

Implementation of the Australian HPV vaccination program for adult women: qualitative key informant interviews.

This study sought to evaluate the early implementation of Australia's national HPV vaccination program for adult women aged 18-26 years. We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with 24 program managers and primary care providers in key roles of implementation across the country. While participants had generally positive beliefs about the vaccine, some questioned the cost-effectiveness for women aged 18-26 years. A short timeframe for implementing a unique and complex program raised particular challenges including ensuring providers and consumers received timely access to information. Media attention helped and hindered implementation. Existing primary care systems and close coordination between players helped overcome these issues. Although challenging, delivery of HPV vaccination to adult women is achievable and the Australian experience provides useful information for countries commencing HPV vaccination programs in this population.

Public opponents of vaccination: a case study.

Opposition to mass childhood vaccination is a world-wide phenomenon, particularly in industrialised countries. Unfounded claims about vaccination are perpetuated by parental lobby groups and individual spokespeople, some of whom have a medical or scientific background. This article focuses on one such spokesperson who has achieved particular notoriety. Dr. Viera Scheibner is a retired micropalaeontologist, without any formal training in health-related sciences, who tours the world claiming that vaccines are ineffective and dangerous and lead to a host of ills such as cancer and asthma. Professionals in public health or the clinical arena are from time to time called upon to publicly respond to her, or similar, claims disseminated during tours of Europe, North America or Australasia and in books and articles. Health professionals have expressed at how such spokespersons misrepresent the evidence on vaccine safety, resulting in the potential to undermine public confidence in immunisation. Media coverage, or proposed coverage, particularly of her more extreme claims, often makes health professionals engaged in immunisation feel obliged to respond. This paper describes Viera Scheibner's approach, which follows a repetitious path and is representative of that taken by other public opponents of immunisation. We conclude by suggesting how health professionals might respond in the public arena.