Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
BMC Infect Dis ; 19(1): 421, 2019 May 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31088376

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Zambian Ministry of Health implemented a reactive one-dose Oral Cholera Vaccine (OCV) campaign in April 2016 in three Lusaka compounds, followed by a pre-emptive second-round in December. Understanding uptake of this first-ever two-dose OCV campaign is critical to design effective OCV campaigns and for delivery of oral vaccines in the country and the region. METHODS: We conducted 12 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with men and women who self-reported taking no OCV doses and six with those self-reporting taking both doses. Simple descriptive analysis was conducted on socio-demographic and cholera-related data collected using a short questionnaire. We analyzed transcribed FGDs using the framework of dose, gender and geographic location. RESULTS: No differences were found by gender and location. All participants thought cholera to be severe and the reactive OCV campaign as relevant if efficacious. Most reported not receiving information on OCV side-effects and duration of protection. Those who took both doses listed more risk factors (including 'wind') and felt personally susceptible to cholera and protected by OCV. Some described OCV side-effects, mostly diarrhoea, vomiting and dizziness, as the expulsion of causative agents. Those who did not take OCV felt protected by their good personal hygiene practices or, thought of themselves and OCV as powerless against the multiple causes of cholera including poor living conditions, water, wind, and curse. Most of those who did not take OCV feared side-effects reported by others. Some interpreted side-effects as 'western' malevolence. Though > 80% discussants reported not knowing duration of protection, some who did not vaccinate, suggested that rather than rely on OCV which could lose potency, collective action should be taken to change the physical and economic environment to prevent cholera. CONCLUSIONS: Due to incomplete information, individual decision-making was complex, rooted in theories of disease causation, perceived susceptibility, circulating narratives, colonial past, and observable outcomes of vaccination. To increase coverage, future OCV campaigns may benefit from better communication on eligibility and susceptibility, expected side effects, mechanism of action, and duration of protection. Governmental improvements in the physical and economic environment may increase confidence in OCV and other public health interventions among residents in Lusaka compounds.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Cólera/imunologia , Cólera/psicologia , Administração Oral , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Cólera/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra Cólera/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Grupos Focais , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores de Risco , Autorrelato , Inquéritos e Questionários , Vacinação , Adulto Jovem , Zâmbia
2.
Vaccine ; 37(32): 4435-4443, 2019 07 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30890383

RESUMO

A promising new delivery technology, the microarray patch (MAPs) consists of an array of small solid-coated or dissolvable needles, up to one mm in length, that administers a dry formulation of a vaccine or pharmaceutical. This study is not a real-life evaluation study but determines the anticipated acceptability of the Nanopatch™, a solid microarray patch device, in Benin, Nepal and Vietnam for vaccine delivery, and identifies factors that could improve the acceptability of the technology to increase measles immunization coverage. This study combined several evaluation methods, including simulation of vaccine administration on children and in-depth interviews with key stakeholders, healthcare workers, community health volunteers, caretakers, and community representatives. A total of 314 people participated in the study. The overall rate of total acceptability of the patch for child immunization was 92.7%. General opinions were very positive, providing clinical studies confirm that MAP administration is demonstrated to be painless, safe and effective for infectious disease prevention. The study participants were asked to consider the best strategy to introduce such vaccine delivery innovation. Firstly, delivery by skilled healthcare workers at the healthcare facilities will be preferred to establish the technology. Following this, administration by selected volunteers and outreach delivery may be possible, though under the supervision of skilled healthcare workers. This study's protocol received approval from the World Health Organization (WHO) Ethical Research Committee (ERC0002813) and the national IRB in Benin, Nepal and Vietnam.


Assuntos
Imunização/métodos , Nanomedicina/métodos , Vacinação/métodos , Vacinas/administração & dosagem , Vacinas/imunologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Benin , Países em Desenvolvimento , Feminino , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Renda , Lactente , Masculino , Sarampo/imunologia , Sarampo/prevenção & controle , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Agulhas , Nepal , Vietnã , Adulto Jovem
3.
Vaccine ; 36(37): 5617-5624, 2018 09 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30087047

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Heterogeneous coverage threatens to compromise the effectiveness of immunization programs in Zambia. Demand-creation initiatives are needed to address this; however, there is incomplete understanding of why vaccine coverage is suboptimal. We investigated overarching perceptions on vaccine acceptability, hesitancy, and accessibility at three informal settlements in Lusaka, Zambia. METHODS: Nested within a cholera vaccination uptake study, we sought to understand overarching perceptions on vaccines' hesitancy in three informal settlements in Lusaka, Zambia. We conducted 48 focus group discussions with a convenience sample of laypersons, lay healthcare workers, neighbourhood health committee members and vaccinators. RESULTS: Both laypersons and community-based health actors reported high vaccine acceptance though several sources of hesitancy were reported. Traditional remedies, alcohol use and religious beliefs emerged as drivers of vaccine hesitancy, likely reinforced by a background of distrust towards western medicine. Also mentioned were previous adverse events, fear of injections and low perceived need for immunization. Limited understanding of how vaccines work and overlapping local terms for vaccine and other medical concepts created confusion and inaccurate views and expectations. Some reported refusing injections to avoid pain and perceived risk of infection. Discussants emphasised the importance of education and preferred mobile immunization campaigns, with weekend to reach those with poor access and delivered by a combination of professional and volunteer workers. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine hesitancy in Zambia is underpinned by many factors including personal experiences with vaccinations, alternative belief models, limited knowledge, deep misunderstanding about how vaccines work, and barriers to access. To overcome these, community-driven models that incorporate factual communication by professionals and operate outside of traditional hours, may help. Better research to understand community preferences for vaccine uptake could inform interventions to improve immunization coverage in Zambia.


Assuntos
Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Recusa de Vacinação/psicologia , Vacinação/psicologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Comunicação , Feminino , Grupos Focais , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Vacinas/administração & dosagem , Adulto Jovem , Zâmbia
4.
Vaccine ; 36(44): 6497-6505, 2018 10 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29174106

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: While planning an immunization campaign in settings where public health interventions are subject to politically motivated resistance, designing context-based social mobilization strategies is critical to ensure community acceptability. In preparation for an Oral Cholera Vaccine campaign implemented in Nampula, Mozambique, in November 2016, we assessed potential barriers and levers for vaccine acceptability. METHODS: Questionnaires, in-depth interviews, and focus group discussions, as well as observations, were conducted before the campaign. The participants included central and district level government informants (national immunization program, logistics officers, public health directors, and others), community leaders and representatives, and community members. RESULTS: During previous well chlorination interventions, some government representatives and health agents were attacked, because they were believed to be responsible for spreading cholera instead of purifying the wells. Politically motivated resistance to cholera interventions resurfaced when an OCV campaign was considered. Respondents also reported vaccine hesitancy related to experiences of problems during school-based vaccine introduction, rumors related to vaccine safety, and negative experiences following routine childhood immunization. Despite major suspicions associated with the OCV campaign, respondents' perceived vulnerability to cholera and its perceived severity seem to override potential anticipated OCV vaccine hesitancy. DISCUSSION: Potential hesitancy towards the OCV campaign is grounded in global insecurity, social disequilibrium, and perceived institutional negligence, which reinforces a representation of estrangement from the central government, triggering suspicions on its intentions in implementing the OCV campaign. Recommendations include a strong involvement of community leaders, which is important for successful social mobilization; representatives of different political parties should be equally involved in social mobilization efforts, before and during campaigns; and public health officials should promote other planned interventions to mitigate the lack of trust associated with perceived institutional negligence. Successful past initiatives include public intake of purified water or newly introduced medication by social mobilizers, teachers or credible leaders.


Assuntos
Atitude Frente a Saúde , Vacinas contra Cólera/administração & dosagem , Cólera/prevenção & controle , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/psicologia , Vacinação/psicologia , Administração Oral , Cólera/epidemiologia , Grupos Focais , Humanos , Programas de Imunização/legislação & jurisprudência , Programas de Imunização/estatística & dados numéricos , Moçambique/epidemiologia , Política , Saúde Pública , Pesquisa Qualitativa , População Rural , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Vacinação/legislação & jurisprudência , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Recusa de Vacinação/psicologia , Recusa de Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos
5.
Vaccine ; 36(44): 6491-6496, 2018 10 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29126808

RESUMO

A reactive campaign using two doses of Shanchol Oral Cholera Vaccine (OCV) was implemented in 2016 in the Lake Chilwa Region (Malawi) targeting fish dependent communities. Three strategies for the second vaccine dose delivery (including delivery by a community leader and self-administration) were used to facilitate vaccine access. This assessment collected vaccine perceptions and opinions about the OCV campaign of 313 study participants, including: fishermen, fish traders, farmers, community leaders, and one health and one NGO officer. Socio-demographic surveys were conducted, In Depth Interviews and Focus Group Discussions were conducted before and during the campaign. Some fishermen perceived the traditional delivery strategy as reliable but less practical. Delivery by traditional leaders was acceptable for some participants while others worried about traditional leaders not being trained to deliver vaccines or beneficiaries taking doses on their own. A slight majority of beneficiaries considered the self-administration strategy practical while some beneficiaries worried about storing vials outside of the cold chain or losing vials. During the campaign, a majority of participants preferred receiving oral vaccines instead of injections given ease of intake and lack of pain. OCV was perceived as efficacious and safe. However, a lack of information on how sero-protection may be delayed and the degree of sero-protection led to loss of trust in vaccine potency among some participants who witnessed cholera cases among vaccinated individuals. OCV campaign implementation requires accompanying communication on protective levels, less than 100% vaccine efficacy, delays in onset of sero-protection, and out of cold chain storage.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Cólera/administração & dosagem , Cólera/prevenção & controle , Surtos de Doenças/prevenção & controle , Vacinação em Massa/métodos , Populações Vulneráveis/psicologia , Administração Oral , Atitude Frente a Saúde , Cólera/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra Cólera/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Grupos Focais , Humanos , Lagos , Malaui/epidemiologia , Masculino , Vacinação em Massa/estatística & dados numéricos , Refrigeração , Autoadministração , Inquéritos e Questionários
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA