ABSTRACT
COVID-19 is associated with poor maternal and pregnancy outcomes. COVID-19 vaccination is recommended in Spain, yet vaccination rates in pregnancy are suboptimal. This study investigates the perceptions of pregnant women and healthcare workers (HCW) regarding COVID-19 vaccination. A web-based cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted in 2021-2022 among 302 pregnant women and 309 HCWs in the Catalan public health system. Most pregnant women (83%) and HCWs (86%) were aware of COVID-19 maternal vaccines. The recommendation of the COVID-19 vaccination by an HCW was identified as the greatest facilitator for maternal vaccine uptake, while the fear of harming the foetus was the most significant barrier reported for rejecting vaccination. HCWs recognised they received limited information and training about COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy, which hindered them from providing informed recommendations. This study highlights that information and education on COVID-19 vaccines to pregnant women and health professionals are pivotal to ensuring informed decision-making and increasing vaccine uptake.
ABSTRACT
The World Health Organization (WHO) identified vaccine hesitancy as one of the top 10 threats to global health in 2019. Health promotion and education have been seen to improve knowledge and uptake of vaccinations in pregnancy. This qualitative study was conducted based on phenomenology, a methodological approach to understand first-hand experiences, and grounded theory, an inductive approach to analyse data, where theoretical generalisations emerge. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with pregnant women attending antenatal care services and healthcare workers (HCWs) in Barcelona, Spain. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded, and notes were taken. Inductive thematic analysis was performed, and data were manually coded. Pertussis was reported as the most trusted vaccine among pregnant women due to its long-standing background as a recommended vaccine in pregnancy. The influenza vaccine was regarded as less important since it was perceived to cause mild disease. The COVID-19 vaccine was the least trustworthy for pregnant women due to uncertainties about effectiveness, health effects in the mid- and long-term, the fast development of the vaccine mRNA technology, and the perceptions of limited data on vaccine safety. However, the necessity to be vaccinated was justified by pregnant women due to the exceptional circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. The recommendations provided by HCW and the established relationship between the HCW, particularly midwives, and pregnant women were the main factors affecting decision-making. The role of mass media was perceived as key to helping provide reliable messages about the need for vaccines during pregnancy. Overall, vaccines administered during pregnancy were perceived as great tools associated with better health and improved quality of life. Pregnancy was envisioned as a vulnerable period in women's lives that required risk-benefits assessments for decision-making about maternal vaccinations. A holistic approach involving the community and society was considered crucial for health education regarding maternal vaccines in support of the work conducted by HCWs.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Clinical practice guidelines need rigorous and transparent methods for summarizing the evidence, rate its certainty and moving from evidence to recommendations. We describe an intervention to support local efforts to provide optimal and safer care bridging the gap between researchers and local busy clinicians. METHODS: A group of methodologists provided a wide range of research services to the medical community of a local non-teaching general hospital in Italy. Methodological support encompassed synthesis of evidence, rating of uncertainty and moving from evidence to recommendations. Local professionals were asked to judge GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology and its impact on patients' safety, professional liability, and guideline reliability. The research team then reflected on the barriers of implementing GRADE in local settings. RESULTS: Seven clinical recommendations about frequent complex medical conditions were produced. Few local clinicians completed the project. All clinicians found the GRADE methodology a guarantee for defending excellent standards of care. However, we identified a diffuse sense of inability to improve clinical behaviours as negative effects of general poor working conditions, in particular the strained health care workforce. DISCUSSION: Current financial constraints may be impeding the ability of clinicians in improving their clinical practice through adaptation and use of evidence. A successful integration of evidence-based guidelines cannot be separated from an activate promotion by the institutional management.