One child, one appointment: how institutional discourses organize the work of parents and nurses in the provision of childhood vaccination for First Nations children.

To effectively support childhood vaccine programs for First Nations Peoples, Canada's largest population of Indigenous Peoples, it is essential to understand the context, processes, and structures organizing vaccine access and uptake. Rather than assuming that solutions lie in compliance with current regulations, our aim was to identify opportunities for innovation by exploring the work that nurses and parents must do to have children vaccinated. In partnership with a large First Nations community, we used an institutional ethnography approach that included observing vaccination clinic appointments, interviewing individuals involved in childhood vaccinations, and reviewing documented vaccination processes and regulations (texts). We found that the 'work' nurses engage in to deliver childhood vaccines is highly regulated by standardized texts that prioritize discourses of safety and efficiency. Within the setting of nursing practice in a First Nations community, these regulations do not always support the best interests of families. Nurses and parents are caught between the desire to vaccinate multiple children and the requirement to follow institutionally authorized processes. The success of the vaccination program, when measured solely by the number of children who follow the vaccine schedule, does not take into consideration the challenges nurses encounter in the clinic or the work parents do to get their children vaccinated. Exploring new ways of approaching the processes could lead to increased vaccination uptake and satisfaction for parents and nurses.

Challenges and opportunities of school-based HPV vaccination in Canada.

Primary prevention of human papillomavirus (HPV) through vaccination is a high priority in Canada's cancer prevention efforts. All Canadian provinces and territories have introduced publicly funded, school-based vaccination programs against HPV, but vaccine uptake remains suboptimal in some jurisdictions. We conducted a descriptive qualitative study to better understand the determinants of low HPV vaccine uptake and identify strategies to enhance vaccine acceptance using the socio-ecological model. In Quebec, interviews and focus groups were held in 2015-2016 with 70 key informants including immunization managers, school nurses, school principals, teachers and parents of Grade 4 students (9 years of age). Our findings showed that HPV vaccine uptake was dependent on many interrelated factors at the individual and interpersonal level (e.g. knowledge and attitudes of the different players involved in the vaccination system), at the community level (e.g. social group values and norms, media coverage around the HPV vaccine), at the organizational level (e.g. allocated resources, information provision, consent process, immunization setting and environment) and at the policy level (e.g. changes in provincial HPV vaccine program). We are using the data collection and interpretation tools and approaches developed by our team and used in Quebec to expand our study to four other provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Nova Scotia). We are conducting environmental scans, semi-structured interviews and a survey to better understand the determinants of low HPV vaccine uptake and identify strategies to enhance vaccine acceptance. Having an in-depth understanding of the determinants of HPV vaccination in school settings is critical in order to identify root causes of the suboptimal vaccine uptake and to develop tailored interventions to address these on both supply- and demand-side issues.

Mixed-methods single-arm repeated measures study evaluating the feasibility of a web-based intervention to support family carers of persons with dementia in long-term care facilities.

BACKGROUND: Following institutionalization of a relative with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD), family carers continue to provide care. They must learn to negotiate with staff and navigate the system all of which can affect their mental health. A web-based intervention, My Tools 4 Care-In Care (MT4C-In Care) was developed by the research team to aid carers through the transitions experienced when their relative/friend with ADRD resides in a long-term care (LTC) facility. The purpose of this study was to evaluate MT4C-In Care for feasibility, acceptability, ease of use, and satisfaction, along with its potential to help decrease carer's feelings of grief and improve their hope, general self-efficacy, and health-related quality of life. METHODS: The study was a mixed-methods single-arm repeated measures feasibility study. Participants accessed MT4C-In Care over a 2-month period. Data were collected at baseline and 1 and 2 months. Using a checklist, participants evaluated MT4C-In Care for ease of use, feasibility, acceptability, and satisfaction. Measures were also used to assess the effectiveness of the MT4C-In Care in improving hope (Herth Hope Index), general self-efficacy (GSES), loss and grief (NDRGEI), and health-related quality of life (SF12v2) of participants. Qualitative data were collected at 2 months and informed quantitative findings. RESULTS: The majority of the 37 participants were female (65%; 24/37), married (73%; 27/37), and had a mean age of 63.24 years (SD = 11.68). Participants reported that MT4C-In Care was easy to use, feasible, and acceptable. Repeated measures ANOVA identified a statistically significant increase over time in participants hope scores (p = 0.03) and a significant decrease in grief (< 0.001). Although significant differences in mental health were not detected, hope (r = 0.43, p = 0.03) and grief (r = - 0.66, p < 0.001) were significantly related to mental health quality of life. CONCLUSION: MT4C-In Care is feasible, acceptable, and easy to use and shows promise to help carers of family members with ADRD residing in LTC increase their hope and decrease their grief. This study provides the foundation for a future pragmatic trial to determine the efficacy of MT4C-In Care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03571165. June 30, 2018 (retrospectively registered).