Information needs of ethnically diverse, vaccine-hesitant parents during decision-making about the HPV vaccine for their adolescent child: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The English schools-based human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme has the potential to eliminate HPV-related cancers if high uptake is achieved. However, unmet information needs among some parents may contribute to persisting lower uptake among minority ethnic groups. Through this study we aimed to understand the information needs of vaccine-hesitant, ethnically diverse parents during decision-making about the HPV vaccine for their adolescent child, to inform the future development of tailored communication materials. METHODS: Recruitment was facilitated thorough healthcare and community organisations within London and the South West of England. Semi-structured interviews took place between April and August 2023. Thematic analysis was undertaken, assisted by NVivo software. RESULTS: Of the 29 parents interviewed, the majority were mothers (79%), belonged to a minority ethnic group (88%), and had an adolescent child unvaccinated against HPV (72%). Five of the interviews were undertaken in the participants' primary language with translation support. Most parents interviewed had limited knowledge about the HPV vaccine and appeared conflicted as to whether vaccines could offer benefits to health. Misunderstanding around the potential of developing serious side-effects (e.g. fertility issues, developing cancer) were factors that could negatively impact decision-making by parents. Stigma associated with the sexual transmissibility of HPV did not always negatively impact decision-making. However, some parents chose not to vaccinate on the basis of perceptions of low risk and a preference to provide education about sexual behaviours to their adolescent child. CONCLUSIONS: Tailoring communication materials to address misunderstandings could support informed decision-making by vaccine hesitant parents for their adolescent children to be vaccinated against HPV. Future communication materials about the HPV vaccine should highlight the benefits of protection against cancer to increase parents' motivation for protect their adolescent child; provide accurate convincing information in relation to the excellent safety profile; and emphasise the importance of providing HPV vaccine at the recommended age, all alongside communicating the universality and commonality of HPV infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: N/A.

A new neonatal BCG vaccination pathway in England: a mixed methods evaluation of its implementation.

INTRODUCTION: The introduction of a national evaluation of newborn screening for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID) in England triggered a change to the selective Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccination programme delivery pathway, as this live attenuated vaccine is contraindicated in infants with SCID. The neonatal BCG vaccination programme is a targeted programme for infants at increased risk of tuberculosis and used to be offered shortly after birth. Since September 2021 the BCG vaccine is given to eligible infants within 28 days of birth, when the SCID screening outcome is available. We explore the experiences of those implementing the new pathway, and how they made sense of, engaged with, and appraised the change. METHODS: A mixed-methods evaluation was conducted between October 2022 and February 2023. This involved national online surveys with BCG commissioners and providers and qualitative semi-structured interviews with commissioners, providers, and Child Health Information System stakeholders in two urban areas. Survey data was analysed using descriptive statistics and interview data was analysed thematically. The data was triangulated using Normalization Process Theory as a guiding framework. RESULTS: Survey respondents (n = 65) and qualitative interviewees (n = 16) revealed that making sense of the new pathway was an iterative process. Some expressed a desire for more direction on how to implement the new pathway. The perceived value of the change varied from positive, ambivalent, to concerned. Some felt well-prepared and that improvements to data capture, eligibility screening, and accountably brought by the change were valuable. Others were concerned about the feasibility of the 28-day target, reductions in vaccination coverage, increased resource burden, and the outcome of the SCID evaluation. New collaborations and communities of practice were required to facilitate the change. Three main challenges in implementing the pathway and meeting the 28-day vaccination target were identified: appointment non-attendance; appointment and data systems; and staffing and resourcing. Feedback mechanisms were informal and took place in tandem with implementation. CONCLUSION: The new NHS neonatal BCG service specification has created an effective structure for monitoring and managing the BCG vaccination programme, but further work is required to support delivery of the 28-day vaccination target and improve uptake rates.

Poliovirus outbreak in New York State, August 2022: qualitative assessment of immediate public health responses and priorities for improving vaccine coverage.

In 2022, a case of paralysis was reported in an unvaccinated adult in Rockland County (RC), New York. Genetically linked detections of vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 (VDPV2) were reported in multiple New York counties, England, Israel, and Canada. The aims of this qualitative study were to: i) review immediate public health responses in New York to assess the challenges in addressing gaps in vaccination coverage; ii) inform a longer-term strategy to improving vaccination coverage in under-vaccinated communities, and iii) collect data to support comparative evaluations of transnational poliovirus outbreaks. Twenty-three semi-structured interviews were conducted with public health professionals, healthcare professionals, and community partners. Results indicate that i) addressing suboptimal vaccination coverage in RC remains a significant challenge after recent disease outbreaks; ii) the poliovirus outbreak was not unexpected and effort should be invested to engage mothers, the key decision-makers on childhood vaccination; iii) healthcare providers (especially paediatricians) received technical support during the outbreak, and may require resources and guidance to effectively contribute to longer-term vaccine engagement strategies; vi) data systems strengthening is required to help track under-vaccinated children. Public health departments should prioritize long-term investments in appropriate communication strategies, countering misinformation, and promoting the importance of the routine immunization schedule.

Exploring the impact of mental health conditions on vaccine uptake in high-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is an essential public health intervention to reduce morbidity and mortality from infectious diseases. Despite being at higher at risk of infectious diseases, health inequalities towards vaccine uptake in people with mental health issues have not been systematically appraised. METHODS: We searched 7 databases from 1994 to 26/03/2021. We included all studies with a relative measure of effect comparing a group with a mental health issue to a control group. All studies covering any mental health issue were eligible with no constraints to study population, vaccine type or region, provided in a high-income country for comparability of health care systems. The study outcomes were synthesised by study population, mental health issue and type of vaccine. RESULTS: From 4,069 titles, 23 eligible studies from 12 different countries were identified, focusing on adults (n = 13) or children (n = 4) with mental health issues, siblings of children with mental health issues (n = 2), and mothers with mental health issue and vaccine uptake in their children (n = 6). Most studies focused on depression (n = 12), autism, anxiety, or alcoholism (n = 4 respectively). Many studies were at high risk of selection bias. DISCUSSION: Mental health issues were associated with considerably lower vaccine uptake in some contexts such as substance use disorder, but findings were heterogeneous overall and by age, mental health issue or types of vaccine. Only individuals with mental health issues and physical comorbidities had consistently higher uptake in comparison to other adults. Mental health should be considered as a health inequality for vaccine uptake but more context specific research is needed focusing more on specific mental health issues and subgroups of the population to understand who misses vaccination and why.

Tackling barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in London: a mixed-methods evaluation.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the first vaccine was administered in December 2020 in England. However, vaccination uptake has historically been lower in London than in other English regions. METHODS: Mixed-methods: This comprised an analysis of cumulative percentage uptake across London between 8 December 2020 and 6 June 2021 by vaccine priority cohorts and ethnicity. We also undertook thematic analyses of uptake barriers, interventions to tackle these and key learning from a qualitative survey of 27 London local authority representatives, vaccine plans from London's five Integrated Care Systems and interviews with 38 London system representatives. RESULTS: Vaccine uptake was lower in Black ethnic (57-65% uptake) compared with the White British group (90% uptake). Trust was a critical issue, including mistrust in the vaccine itself and in authorities administering or promoting it. The balance between putative costs and benefits of vaccination created uptake barriers for zero-hour and shift workers. Intensive, targeted and 'hyper-local' initiatives, which sustained community relationships and were not constrained by administrative boundaries, helped tackle these barriers. CONCLUSIONS: The success of the national vaccination programme depended on conceding local autonomy, investing in responsive and long-term partnerships to engender trust through in-depth understanding of communities' beliefs.

Understanding and explaining the link between anthroposophy and vaccine hesitancy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Due to low vaccination uptake and measles outbreaks across Europe, public health authorities have paid increasing attention to anthroposophic communities. Public media outlets have further described these communities as vaccine refusers or "anti-vaxxers". The aim of this review was to understand the scope of the problem and explore assumptions about vaccination beliefs in anthroposophic communities. For the purpose of this review, we define anthroposophic communities as people following some/certain views more or less loosely connected to the philosophies of anthroposophy. The systematic review addresses three research questions and (1) collates evidence documenting outbreaks linked to anthroposophic communities, (2) literature on vaccination coverage in anthroposophic communities, and (3) lastly describes literature that summarizes theories and factors influencing vaccine decision-making in anthroposophic communities. METHODS: This is a systematic review using the following databases: Medline, Web of Science, Psycinfo, and CINAHL. Double-blinded article screening was conducted by two researchers. Data was summarized to address the research questions. For the qualitative research question the data was analysed using thematic analysis with the assistance of Nvivo12.0. RESULTS: There were 12 articles documenting 18 measles outbreaks linked to anthroposophic communities between the years 2000 and 2012. Seven articles describe lower vaccination uptake in anthroposophic communities than in other communities, although one article describes that vaccination coverage in low-income communities with a migrant background was lower than in the anthroposophic community they studied. We found eight articles examining factors and theories influencing vaccine decision making in anthroposophic communities. The qualitative analysis revealed four common themes. Firstly, there was a very broad spectrum of vaccine beliefs among the anthroposophic communities. Secondly, there was a consistent narrative about problems or concerns with vaccines, including toxicity and lack of trust in the system. Thirdly, there was a strong notion of the importance of making individual and well-informed choices as opposed to simply following the masses. Lastly, making vaccine choices different from public health guidelines was highly stigmatized by those outside of the anthroposophic community but also those within the community. CONCLUSION: Continuing to further knowledge of vaccine beliefs in anthroposophic communities is particularly important in view of increasing measles rates and potential sudden reliance on vaccines for emerging diseases. However, popular assumptions about vaccine beliefs in anthroposophic communities are challenged by the data presented in this systematic review.

"Figuring stuff out myself" - a qualitative study on maternal vaccination in socially and ethnically diverse areas in England.

BACKGROUND: Maternal vaccinations against Influenza, Pertussis, and Covid-19 are recommended in the UK, and vaccines against further infections may become available soon. However, many pregnant women, especially in socially and ethnically diverse areas, have low vaccine uptake. Qualitative studies on the reasons and possible solutions are needed that are inclusive of disadvantaged and minority ethnic groups. We therefore aimed to understand the complex interplay between structural and behavioural factors contributing to the low maternal vaccine uptake in socially and ethnically diverse areas in London in the Covid-19 context. METHODS: In 2022, we conducted semi-structured interviews and a focus group discussion among a purposive sample of 38 pregnant/recently pregnant women and 20 health service providers, including 12 midwives. Participants were recruited in ethnically diverse London boroughs. We followed a critical realist paradigm and used a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: The sample included participants who took all, some or none of the maternal vaccines, with some participants unsure whether they had taken or been offered the vaccines. Decision-making was passive or active, with the expectation for pregnant women to do their 'own research'. Participants described various individual, social and contextual influences on their decision-making as they navigated the antenatal care system. Missing or conflicting information from providers meant knowledge gaps were sometimes filled with misinformation from unreliable sources that increased uncertainties and mistrust. Both pregnant women and providers described structural and organisational factors that hindered access to information and vaccinations, including lack of training, time and resources, and shortcomings of health information systems and apps. Some participants described factors that facilitated vaccination uptake and many made recommendations for improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed how structural and organisational factors can compound uncertainties around maternal vaccination among socially and ethnically diverse populations. Results highlight the need for more reliable resources, streamlined workflows, improved electronic information systems and training in their use. Roles and responsibilities should be clarified with potential greater involvement of nurses and pharmacists in vaccine provision. Education and communication should consider individual (language/digital) skills and needs for information and reassurance. Further research is needed to co-produce solutions with service users and providers.

Adapting SARS-CoV-2 vaccination delivery in England to population needs: a thematic analysis of providers and commissioner's perceptions.

BACKGROUND: A national SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programme was implemented in England from 8th December 2020, adopting a series of local level service delivery models to maximise rollout. The evidence base informing service design programme at inception was limited. We examined the real-world implementation of the programme through an assessment of sub-national providers' and commissioners' perspectives on the service delivery models used, to strengthen evidence on the acceptability, effectiveness and efficiency of the service delivery approaches used for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in England or elsewhere. METHODS: Qualitative, cross-sectional analysis based on semi-structured interviews conducted with 87 stakeholders working in SARS-CoV-2 vaccination delivery across four regions in England. Localities were selected according to geography and population socio-economic status. Participants were purposively sampled from health service providers, commissioners and other relevant bodies. Interviews were conducted between February and October 2021, and transcripts were thematically analysed using inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: Various service delivery models were implemented over the course of the programme, beginning with hospital hubs and mass vaccination sites, before expanding to incorporate primary care-led services, mobile and other outreach services. Each had advantages and drawbacks but primary care-led models, and to some extent pharmacies, were perceived to offer a better combination of efficiency and community reach for equitable delivery. Common factors for success included availability of a motivated workforce, predictability in vaccine supply chains and strong community engagement. However, interviewees noted a lack of coordination between service providers in the vaccination programme, linked to differing financial incentives and fragmentated information systems, among other factors. CONCLUSION: A range of delivery models are needed to enable vaccine rollout at pace and scale, and to mitigate effects on routine care provision. However, primary care-led services offer a tried-and-trusted framework for vaccine delivery at scale and pace and should be central to planning for future pandemic responses. Mass vaccination sites can offer delivery at scale but may exacerbate inequalities in vaccination coverage and are unlikely to offer value for money. Policymakers in England should prioritise measures to improve collaboration between service providers, including better alignment of IT systems.

Views and experiences of primary care among Black communities in the United Kingdom: a qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, people with non-white ethnicities are more likely to report being in worse health conditions and have poorer experiences of healthcare services than white counterparts. The voices of those of Black ethnicities are often merged in literature among other non-white ethnicities. This literature review aims to analyse studies that investigate Black participant experiences of primary care in the UK. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review searching Medline, Web of Science, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Social Policy and Practice, CINAHL plus, Psych INFO and Global Health with specific search terms for appropriate studies. No publish date limit was applied. RESULTS: 40 papers (39 articles and 1 thesis) were deemed eligible for inclusion in the review. A number of major themes emerged. Patient expectations of healthcare and the health seeking behaviour impacted their interactions with health systems in the UK. Both language and finances emerged as barriers through which some Black participants interacted with primary care services. (Mis)trust of clinicians and the health system was a common theme that often negatively impacted views of UK primary care services. The social context of the primary care service and instances of a cultural disconnect also impacted views of primary care services. Some papers detail patients recognising differential treatment based on ethnicity. The review included the voices of primary care professionals where descriptions of Black patients were overwhelmingly negative. CONCLUSION: Views and experiences of Black groups may be radically different to other ethnic minorities and thus, should be teased out of broader umbrella terms like Black and Asian Minority Ethnic (BAME) and Black Minority Ethnic (BME). To address ethnicity-based health inequalities, culturally sensitive interventions that engage with the impacted community including co-designed interventions should be considered while acknowledging the implications of being racialised as Black in the UK.

Women's views on accepting COVID-19 vaccination during and after pregnancy, and for their babies: a multi-methods study in the UK.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines are advised for pregnant women in the United Kingdom (UK) however COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women is inadequate. METHODS: An online survey and semi-structured interviews were used to investigate pregnant women's views on COVID-19 vaccine acceptability for themselves when pregnant, not pregnant and for their babies. One thousand one hundred eighty-one women, aged over 16 years, who had been pregnant since 23rd March 2020, were surveyed between 3rd August-11th October 2020. Ten women were interviewed. RESULTS: The majority of women surveyed (81.2%) reported that they would 'definitely' or were 'leaning towards' accepting a COVID-19 vaccine when not pregnant. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was significantly lower during pregnancy (62.1%, p < 0.005) and for their babies (69.9%, p < 0.005). Ethnic minority women were twice as likely to reject a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies compared to women from White ethnic groups (p < 0.005). Women from lower-income households, aged under 25-years, and from some geographic regions were more likely to reject a COVID-19 vaccine when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies. Multivariate analysis revealed that income and ethnicity were the main drivers of the observed age and regional differences. Women unvaccinated against pertussis in pregnancy were over four times more likely to reject COVID-19 vaccines when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies. Thematic analysis of the survey freetext responses and interviews found safety concerns about COVID-19 vaccines were common though wider mistrust in vaccines was also expressed. Trust in vaccines and the health system were also reasons women gave for accepting COVID-19 vaccines. CONCLUSION: Safety information on COVID-19 vaccines must be clearly communicated to pregnant women to provide reassurance and facilitate informed pregnancy vaccine decisions. Targeted interventions to promote COVID-19 vaccine uptake among ethnic minority and lower-income women may be needed.

Assessing equity of access and affordability of care among South Sudanese refugees and host communities in two districts in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of refugees are hosted in low and middle income countries (LMICs), which are already struggling to finance and achieve universal health coverage for their own populations. While there is mounting evidence of barriers to health care access facing refugees, there is more limited evidence on equity in access to and affordability of care across refugee and host populations. The objective of this study was to examine equity in terms of health needs, service utilisation, and health care payments both within and between South Sudanese refugees and hosts communities (Ugandan nationals), in two districts of Uganda. METHODS: Participants were recruited from host and refugee villages from Arua and Kiryandongo districts. Twenty host villages and 20 refugee villages were randomly selected from each district, and 30 households were sampled from each village, with a target sample size of 2400 households. The survey measured condition incidence, health care seeking and health care expenditure outcomes related to acute and chronic illness and maternal care. Equity was assessed descriptively in relation to household consumption expenditure quintiles, and using concentration indices and Kakwani indices (for expenditure outcomes). We also measured the incidence of catastrophic health expenditure- payments for healthcare and impoverishment effects of expenditure across wealth quintiles. RESULTS: There was higher health need for acute and chronic conditions in wealthier groups, while maternal care need was greater among poorer groups for refugees and hosts. Service coverage for acute, chronic and antenatal care was similar among hosts and refugee communities. However, lower levels of delivery care access for hosts remain. Although maternal care services are now largely affordable in Uganda among the studied communities, and service access is generally pro-poor, the costs of acute and chronic care can be substantial and regressive and are largely responsible for catastrophic expenditures, with service access benefiting wealthier groups. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts are needed to enhance access among the poorest for acute and chronic care and reduce associated out-of-pocket payments and their impoverishing effects. Further research examining cost drivers and potential financing arrangements to offset these will be important.

Human papillomavirus vaccine communication materials for young people in English-speaking countries: A content analysis.

Objective: To undertake a content analysis of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine communication materials available to young people. Design: Content analysis. Setting: Majority English-speaking countries. Methods: Between March and April 2020, a web engine was utilised to search for and retrieve relevant communication materials. Content analysis was used to describe how the following key issues were covered: (1) side effects, (2) safety, (3) practicalities related to receiving the HPV vaccine and (4) gender-specific information. Results: A total of 44 separate communication materials were retrieved, predominantly videos, webpages and leaflets. There was a focus on mild side effects of the vaccine (43.2%), with less frequent reference being made to moderate or serious side effects (22.7%). Reassurance concerning the safety profile of vaccine was communicated by referencing the widespread use of the HPV vaccine (31.8%). Information regarding formal criteria for entry into the vaccination programme emphasised country-specific eligibility criteria (59.1%), the setting in which vaccination was offered (38.6%) and the number of doses required (38.6%). Content intended to improve young people's experiences of receiving the HPV vaccine was less often provided (22.7%). Gender-specific content usually related to specific HPV-related diseases (52.3%) and/or the availability of cervical cancer screening programmes (52.3%). Conclusion: A variety of different communication tools were retrieved encompassing a wide variety of formats and content, reflective of different vaccination programmes and the varied priorities of organisations producing the materials. Findings will inform the co-production of a tailored educational package to improve access to information by populations of young people identified as having lower HPV vaccine uptake.

Estimation of Ethiopia's immunization coverage - 20 years of discrepancies.

BACKGROUND: Coverage with the third dose of diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus-containing vaccine (DPT3) is a widely used measure of the performance of routine immunization systems. Since 2015, data reported by Ethiopia's health facilities have suggested DPT3 coverage to be greater than 95%. Yet, Demographic and Health Surveys in 2016 and 2019 found DPT3 coverage to be 53 and 61% respectively for years during this period. This case study reviews the last 20 years of administrative (based on facility data), survey and United Nations (UN) estimates of Ethiopia's nationwide immunization coverage to document long-standing discrepancies in these statistics. METHODS: Published estimates were compiled of Ethiopia's nationwide DPT3 coverage from 1999 to 2018. These estimates come from the Joint Reporting Form submitted annually to WHO and UNICEF, a series of 8 population-based surveys and the annual reports of the WHO/UNICEF Estimates of National Immunization Coverage (WUENIC). Possible reasons for variation in survey findings were explored through secondary analysis of data from the 2012 immunization coverage survey. In addition, selected health officials involved with management of the immunization program were interviewed to obtain their perspectives on the reliability of various methods for estimation of immunization coverage. FINDINGS: Comparison of Ethiopia's estimates for the same year from different sources shows major and persistent discrepancies between administrative, survey and WUENIC estimates. Moreover, the estimates from each of these sources have repeatedly shown erratic year-to-year fluctuations. Those who were interviewed expressed scepticism of Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) statistics. Officials of the national immunization programme have repeatedly shown a tendency to overlook all survey statistics when reporting on programme performance. CONCLUSIONS: The present case study raises important questions, not only about the estimation methods of national and UN agencies, but about the reliability and comparability of widely trusted coverage surveys. Ethiopia provides an important example of a country where no data source provides a truly robust "gold standard" for estimation of immunization coverage. It is essential to identify and address the reasons for these discrepancies and arrive at a consensus on how to improve the reliability and acceptability of each data source and how best to "triangulate" between them.

Responding to measles outbreaks in underserved Roma and Romanian populations in England: the critical role of community understanding and engagement.

Since 2016, the European Region has experienced large-scale measles outbreaks. Several measles outbreaks in England during 2017/18 specifically affected Romanian and Romanian Roma communities. In this qualitative interview study, we looked at the effectiveness of outbreak responses and efforts to promote vaccination uptake amongst these underserved communities in three English cities: Birmingham, Leeds and Liverpool. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 33 providers involved in vaccination delivery and outbreak management in these cities. Interviews were analysed thematically and factors that influenced the effectiveness of responses were categorised into five themes: (1) the ability to identify the communities, (2) provider knowledge and understanding of the communities, (3) the co-ordination of response efforts and partnership working, (4) links to communities and approaches to community engagement and (5) resource constraints. We found that effective partnership working and community engagement were key to the prevention and management of vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks in the communities. Effective engagement was found to be compromised by cuts to public health spending and services for underserved communities. To increase uptake in under-vaccinated communities, local knowledge and engagement are vital to build trust and relationships. Local partners must work proactively to identify, understand and build connections with communities.

What have we learnt from measles outbreaks in 3 English cities? A qualitative exploration of factors influencing vaccination uptake in Romanian and Roma Romanian communities.

BACKGROUND: Since 2016, large scale measles outbreaks have heavily affected countries across Europe. In England, laboratory confirmed measles cases increased almost four-fold between 2017 and 2018, from 259 to 966 cases. Several of the 2017-18 measles outbreaks in England particularly affected Romanian and Roma Romanian communities, with the first outbreaks in these communities occurring in Birmingham, Leeds and Liverpool. This study explored factors influencing vaccination behaviours amongst Romanian and Roma Romanian communities in these three cities. METHODS: Across Birmingham, Leeds and Liverpool, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 33 key providers to explore their experience in delivering vaccinations and managing the outbreak response. We also interviewed 9 Romanian women in one of the cities to explore their vaccination attitudes and behaviours. To categorise factors affecting vaccination we applied the 5As Taxonomy for Determinants of Vaccine Uptake (Access, Affordability, Awareness, Acceptance and Activation) during data analysis. RESULTS: Factors related to access and acceptance, such as language and literacy, ease of registering with a general practice, and trust in health services, were reported as the main barriers to vaccination amongst the communities. Concerns around vaccination safety and importance were reported but these appeared to be less dominant contributing factors to vaccination uptake. The active decline of vaccinations amongst interviewed community members was linked to distrust in healthcare services, which were partly rooted in negative experiences of healthcare in Romania and the UK. CONCLUSION: Access and acceptance, dominant barriers to vaccination, can be improved through the building of trust with communities. To establish trust providers must find ways to connect with and develop a greater understanding of the communities they serve. To achieve this, cultural and linguistic barriers need to be addressed. Better provider-service user relationships are crucial to reducing vaccination inequalities and tackling broader disparities in health service access.

Is partnership the answer? Delivering the national immunisation programme in the new English health system: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: The English national health system experienced a major reorganisation in April 2013. This mixed methods study examined how staff managed to deliver the national immunisation programme within a new health infrastructure and explored the role and contribution of 'partnership working' to programme implementation. METHODS: A cross-sectional online questionnaire survey and a qualitative evaluation of an urban immunisation board were conducted in 2016. The questionnaire included 38 questions about immunisation responsibilities, collaboration, service evaluation and programme support. It was completed by 199 immunisation providers and 70 people involved in the management of the immunisation programme. The evaluation involved 12 semi-structured interviews, 3 observations of forum meetings and the review of forum meeting minutes. Descriptive statistical analysis of the survey data was performed using SPSS version 23 and qualitative data from both study components were uploaded to NVivo 11 and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Screening and Immunisation Teams were cited as responsible for programme leadership by 56% of survey respondents, but concerns were raised about their capacity to oversee larger geographies and a case made for decentralised accountability mechanisms. Only 44% of immunisation managers stated that poor performance was addressed adequately, and half of respondents thought that support given to providers was inadequate. Managers reported that partnership working improved the organisation (83%) and performance (78%) of immunisation, but stated it was more beneficial for information-sharing than implementation. A preference for a "locality working approach" with committees covering smaller health economies rather than larger commissioning areas was voiced. The immunisation board examined in the qualitative evaluation sought to achieve this by forging links with locally based steering committees, but also had to address internal challenges related to the role of the board and contribution of members to programmatic decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Key challenges in delivering the immunisation programme were rooted in the new health infrastructure, which had created greater distance between commissioners and providers and resulted in the fragmentation of programme responsibilities. Partnership working bridged gaps but more needs to be done to strengthen accountability mechanisms and ensure that collaborative activities are outcome oriented and sustainable in the shifting environment of reorganisation.

Health system strengthening-Reflections on its meaning, assessment, and our state of knowledge.

Comprehensive reviews of health system strengthening (HSS) interventions are rare, partly because of lack of clarity on definitions of the term but also the potentially huge scale of the evidence. We reflect on the process of undertaking such an evidence review recently, drawing out suggestions on definitions of HSS and approaches to assessment, as well as summarising some key conclusions from the current evidence base. The key elements of a clear definition include, in our view, consideration of scope (with effects cutting across building blocks in practice, even if not in intervention design, and also tackling more than one disease), scale (having national reach and cutting across levels of the system), sustainability (effects being sustained over time and addressing systemic blockages), and effects (impacting on health outcomes, equity, financial risk protection, and responsiveness). We also argue that agreeing a framework for design and evaluation of HSS is urgent. Most HSS interventions have theories of change relating to specific system blocks, but more work is needed on capturing their spillover effects and their contribution to meeting overarching health system process goals. We make some initial suggestions about such goals, to reflect the features that characterise a "strong health system." We highlight that current findings on "what works" are just indicative, given the limitations and biases in what has been studied and how, and argue that there is need to rethink evaluation methods for HSS beyond finite interventions and narrow outcomes. Clearer concepts, frameworks, and methods can support more coherent HSS investment.

Vaccination in England: a review of why business as usual is not enough to maintain coverage.

BACKGROUND: The vaccine system in England underwent radical changes in 2013 following the implementation of the Health and Social Care Act. There have since been multi-year decreases in coverage of many vaccines. Healthcare professionals have reported finding the new system fragmented and challenging. This study aims to produce a logic model of the new system and evaluate the available evidence for interventions to improve coverage. METHODS: We undertook qualitative document analysis to develop the logic model using process evaluation methods. We performed a systematic review by searching 12 databases with a broad search strategy to identify interventions studied in England conducted between 2006 and 2016 and evaluated their effectiveness. We then compared the evidence base to the logic model. RESULTS: We analysed 83 documents and developed a logic model describing the core inputs, processes, activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts of the new vaccination system alongside the programmatic assumptions for each stage. Of 9,615 unique articles, we screened 624 abstracts, 45 full-text articles, and included 16 studies: 8 randomised controlled trials and 8 quasi-experimental studies. Four studies suggest that modifications to the contracting and incentive systems can increase coverage, but changes to other programme inputs (e.g. human or capital resources) were not evaluated. Four multi-component intervention studies modified activities and outputs from within a GP practice to increase coverage, but were part of campaigns or projects. Thus, many potentially modifiable factors relating to routine programme implementation remain unexplored. Reminder/recall systems are under-studied in England; incentive payments to adolescents may be effective; and only two studies evaluated carer information. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base for interventions to increase immunisation coverage in the new system in England are limited by a small number of studies and by significant risk of bias. Several areas important to primary care remain unexplored as targets for interventions, especially modification to organisational management.

Immunization, urbanization and slums - a systematic review of factors and interventions.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, over half (54%) of the world's population lived in urban areas and this proportion will increase to 66% by 2050. This urbanizing trend has been accompanied by an increasing number of people living in urban poor communities and slums. Lower immunization coverage is found in poorer urban dwellers in many contexts. This study aims to identify factors associated with immunization coverage in poor urban areas and slums, and to identify interventions to improve coverage. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review, searching Medline, Embase, Global Health, CINAHL, Web of Science and The Cochrane Database with broad search terms for studies published between 2000 and 2016. RESULTS: Of 4872 unique articles, 327 abstracts were screened, leading to 63 included studies: 44 considering factors and 20 evaluating interventions (one in both categories) in 16 low or middle-income countries. A wide range of socio-economic characteristics were associated with coverage in different contexts. Recent rural-urban migration had a universally negative effect. Parents commonly reported lack of awareness of immunization importance and difficulty accessing services as reasons for under-immunization of their children. Physical distance to clinics and aspects of service quality also impacted uptake. We found evidence of effectiveness for interventions involving multiple components, especially if they have been designed with community involvement. Outreach programmes were effective where physical distance was identified as a barrier. Some evidence was found for the effective use of SMS (text) messaging services, community-based education programmes and financial incentives, which warrant further evaluation. No interventions were identified that provided services to migrants from rural areas. CONCLUSION: Different factors affect immunization coverage in different urban poor and slum contexts. Immunization services should be designed in collaboration with slum-dwelling communities, considering the local context. Interventions should be designed and tested to increase immunization in migrants from rural areas.