Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
Add more filters










Publication year range
1.
PLoS One ; 18(6): e0286799, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37267399

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Achieving high COVID-19 vaccine booster coverage is an ongoing global challenge. Health authorities need evidence about effective communication interventions to improve acceptance and uptake. This study aimed to test effects of persuasive messages about COVID-19 vaccine booster doses on intention to vaccinate amongst eligible adults in Australia. METHODS: In this online randomised controlled trial, adult participants received one of four intervention messages or a control message. The control message provided information about booster dose eligibility. Intervention messages added to the control message, each using a different persuasive strategy, including: emphasising personal health benefits of booster doses, community health benefits, non-health benefits, and personal agency in choosing vaccination. After the intervention, participants answered items about COVID-19 booster vaccine intention and beliefs. Intervention groups were compared to the control using tests of two proportions; differences of ≥5 percentage points were deemed clinically significant. A sub-group analysis was conducted among hesitant participants. RESULTS: Of the 487 consenting and randomised participants, 442 (90.8%) completed the experiment and were included in the analysis. Participants viewing messages emphasising non-health benefits had the highest intention compared to those who viewed the control message (percentage point diff: 9.0, 95% CI -0.8, 18.8, p = 0.071). Intention was even higher among hesitant individuals in this intervention group compared to the control group (percentage point diff: 15.6, 95% CI -6.0, 37.3, p = 0.150). Conversely, intention was lower among hesitant individuals who viewed messages emphasising personal agency compared to the control group (percentage point diff: -10.8, 95% CI -33.0, 11.4, p = 0.330), although evidence in support of these findings is weak. CONCLUSION: Health authorities should highlight non-health benefits to encourage COVID-19 vaccine booster uptake but use messages emphasising personal agency with caution. These findings can inform communication message development and strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine booster uptake. Clinical trial registration: Registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622001404718); trial webpage: https://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12622001404718.aspx.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Vaccination , Adult , Humans , Australia , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Intention , Vaccination/psychology , Persuasive Communication
2.
Vaccine ; 41(28): 4138-4143, 2023 06 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37246066

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to declines in routine childhood and adolescent vaccination coverage globally. While the declines in Australia have been less, they are a concern, given steady increases in coverage prior to the pandemic. Given limited evidence on how the experiences of parents during the pandemic affected their attitudes about and intentions towards adolescent vaccinations, with this study we aimed to explore these. METHODS: This was a qualitative study. We invited parents of adolescents eligible for school-based vaccinations in 2021 from metropolitan, regional and rural areas of New South Wales and Victoria (the most affected States) and South Australia (less affected) to half hour-long online semi-structured interviews. We analysed data thematically and applied a conceptual model of trust in vaccination. RESULTS: In July 2022 we interviewed 15 accepting, 4 hesitant and two parents who refused adolescent vaccinations. We identified three themes: 1. Pandemic impacting on professional and personal lives and routine immunisations; 2. Pandemic strengthening preexisting vaccine hesitancy, with perceived lack of clarity in governmental information about vaccination and stigma around non-vaccinating as contributing factors; 3. Pandemic raising awareness of the benefits of COVID-19 and routine vaccinations, with communication campaigns and one's trusted doctor's vaccination recommendations as contributing factors. CONCLUSIONS: For some parents, experiences of poor system readiness and growing distrust towards health and vaccination systems strengthened their pre-existing vaccine hesitancy. We offer recommendations on how trust in the health system and immunisation can be optimised post-pandemic to increase uptake of routine vaccines. These include improving access to vaccination services and clear, timely information about vaccines; supporting immunisation providers in their immunisation consultations; working alongside communities, and building capacity of vaccine champions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , Adolescent , Child , Pandemics/prevention & control , Intention , Trust , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination , Parents , Victoria , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
3.
Vaccine X ; 14: 100304, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37091729

ABSTRACT

Background: COVID-19 immunisation providers have been at the forefront of the pandemic, and their ability to communicate effectively with patients is key to encouraging COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake. This study explored providers' perspectives on the factors influencing communication with patients about COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: We used an explanatory-sequential mixed-methods approach to conduct the study between December 2021 and March 2022. Phase I involved a cross-sectional survey with immunisation providers in New South Wales (n = 341; 189 general practitioners, 118 nurses and 34 pharmacists), followed by Phase II: semi-structured, in-depth qualitative interviews (n = 19; 10 nurses, 9 pharmacists). We generated descriptive results for the survey. We analysed the qualitative data thematically using an inductive approach. Results: Almost half of survey participants reported communicating often with people who were hesitant about COVID-19 vaccines (49 %; 166/341), however, 21 % (71/341) reported inadequate time to address concerns during consultations. Interview participants reported communication challenges, including time constraints, difficulties addressing and eliciting patient concerns, and keeping up to date with changing information. Conversely, interview participants reported that easy access to government information resources, time to learn about COVID-19 vaccines proactively, knowing about and being able to use tailored strategies to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and CALD patients were helpful when communicating with patients. Conclusions: Immunisation providers play an important role in patient vaccine acceptance and uptake. Our findings indicate that whilst providers were largely confident in their interactions with patients, further communication support would strengthen providers' skills in communicating with patients who have questions and concerns about COVID-19 vaccines.

4.
J Paediatr Child Health ; 59(4): 686-693, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36807943

ABSTRACT

AIM: Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 5-11 years old in Australia has plateaued. Persuasive messaging is an efficient and adaptable potential intervention to promote vaccine uptake, but evidence for its effectiveness is varied and dependent on context and cultural values. This study aimed to test persuasive messages to promote COVID-19 vaccines for children in Australia. METHODS: A parallel, online, randomised control experiment was conducted between 14 and 21 January 2022. Participants were Australian parents of a child aged 5-11 years who had not vaccinated their child with a COVID-19 vaccine. After providing demographic details and level of vaccine hesitancy, parents viewed either the control message or one of four intervention texts emphasising (i) personal health benefits; (ii) community health benefits; (iii) non-health benefits; or (iv) personal agency. The primary outcome was parents' intention to vaccinate their child. RESULTS: The analysis included 463 participants, of whom 58.7% (272/463) were hesitant about COVID-19 vaccines for children. Intention to vaccinate was higher in the community health (7.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.3% to 21.0%) and non-health (6.9%, 95% CI -6.4% to 20.3%) groups, and lower in the personal agency group (-3.9, 95% CI -17.7 to 9.9) compared to control, but these differences did not reach statistical significance. The effects of the messages among hesitant parents were similar to the overall study population. CONCLUSION: Short, text-based messages alone are unlikely to influence parental intention to vaccinate their child with the COVID-19 vaccine. Multiple strategies tailored for the target audience should also be utilised.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Australia , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Intention , Parents , Vaccination
5.
Public Health Pract (Oxf) ; 5: 100349, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36532098

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a severe impact on people across the world, particularly older adults who have a higher risk of death and health complications. We aimed to explore older adults' intention towards COVID-19 vaccination and factors that influenced their motivation to get vaccinated. Study design: A qualitative study was conducted in New South Wales, Australia (April 2021), involving interviews with older adults (aged 70 years and older). Methods: In-depth interviews were carried out with 14 older adults on their perceptions around COVID-19 vaccination. The COVID-19 vaccination program had just commenced at the time of data collection. We thematically analysed interviews and organised the themes within the Behavioural and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) Framework. Results: We found that most participants were accepting of COVID-19 vaccination. Participants' motivation to get vaccinated was influenced by the way they thought and felt about COVID-19 disease and vaccination (including perceptions of vaccine safety, effectiveness, benefits, COVID-19 disease risk, and vaccine brand preferences) and social influences (including healthcare provider recommendation, and influential others). The uptake of COVID-19 vaccination was also mediated by practical issues such as access and affordability. Conclusions: Efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccination acceptance in this population should focus on highlighting the benefits of vaccination. Support should be given to immunisation providers to enhance efforts to discuss and recommend vaccination to this high-risk group.

6.
Vaccine X ; 12: 100243, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36447620

ABSTRACT

Background: Sustained uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, including booster doses, will continue to be key to minimising morbidity and mortality caused by COVID-19. Because hesitancy can affect people's motivation to get vaccinated, understanding and addressing factors influencing acceptance is critical to achieving high uptake. This is especially the case for adults with underlying health conditions, who are at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19. The aim of this study was to investigate barriers and facilitators of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in adults with underlying health conditions during the initial rollout of COVID-19 vaccines in Australia. Methods: We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 15 adults with underlying health conditions in New South Wales (NSW) in April 2021, focusing on their previous vaccination experiences and feelings about COVID-19 vaccination. We categorised participants as accepting, hesitant or refusing. We analysed interviews thematically, informed by the World Health Organization (WHO) Behavioural and Social Drivers of Vaccination framework. Results: Most (12/15) participants were hesitant about COVID-19 vaccination. Barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance included concerns about vaccine safety and effectiveness; heightened perceptions of risk regarding the vaccines; low perceptions of COVID-19 risk; and negative social influences. Facilitators included perceived benefits of vaccination and positive social influences. Conclusions: For some adults with underlying health conditions, perceptions of heightened vulnerability to COVID-19 vaccine side effects contributed to vaccine hesitancy during the initial rollout of COVID-19 vaccines. We recommend supporting GPs and specialists to proactively reach out and recommend COVID-19 vaccination to this population; encouraging chronic disease organisations to act as trusted advocates of COVID-19 vaccination; and actively communicating evolving knowledge about vaccine safety.

7.
Vaccine ; 40(40): 5814-5820, 2022 09 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36058794

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is little research to understand reasons for suboptimal influenza vaccination uptake among Aboriginal people of different ages in Australia. This study aimed to better understand the communication needs and preferences of Aboriginal families (Phase 2) in New South Wales, Australia, and their health service providers (Phase 1), to inform future interventions to improve influenza immunisation coverage in Aboriginal communities. This paper reports from Phase 1 of the study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal researchers designed and conducted the study, with cultural governance provided by Aboriginal health care professionals and other community members working within health departments or community healthcare settings across Australia. In Phase 1 we conducted interviews and focus groups with 18 Aboriginal immunisation providers and mainstream immunisation co-ordinators from three geographic areas in New South Wales. We used group-based thematic analysis with a cultural lens and sought participants' feedback prior to finalising results. RESULTS: We identified four themes, framed as opportunities for improvement: better supporting Aboriginal Medical Services as providers of influenza vaccinations; improving the accessibility and appropriateness of mainstream services for Aboriginal families; improving health providers' knowledge of Aboriginal people' influenza risk and their willingness to recommend vaccination; and engaging communities to design influenza vaccination resources. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve optimal influenza vaccination coverage, all health services must take responsibility for providing culturally responsive clinical care to Aboriginal families. We suggest that, where possible, mainstream services incorporate elements of the family-centred and broader model of health used by Aboriginal Medical Services. This includes creating a welcoming environment, appropriately identifying and getting to know Aboriginal patients, taking a preventative approach, and opportunistically offering and strongly encouraging influenza vaccination to the individual and their family.


Subject(s)
Health Services, Indigenous , Influenza, Human , Australia , Humans , Immunization Programs , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander , New South Wales , Vaccination
8.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35682466

ABSTRACT

Central to a successful population vaccination program is high uptake of vaccines. However, COVID-19 vaccine uptake may be impeded by beliefs based on misinformation. We sought to understand the prevalence and nature of misbeliefs about COVID-19 vaccines, and identify associated factors, shortly after commencement of Australia's national vaccine rollout. A cross-sectional survey was administered to unvaccinated young adults (n = 2050) in Australia aged 18-49 years (mean age 33 years), 13 July-21 August 2021. This sample was previously under-represented in COVID-19 research but shown to have less willingness to vaccinate. Two thirds of participants agreed with at least one misbelief item. Misperceptions about COVID-19 vaccines were found to be significantly associated with lower health literacy, less knowledge about vaccines, lower perceived personal risk of COVID-19, greater endorsement of conspiracy beliefs, and lower confidence and trust in government and scientific institutions. Misbeliefs were more common in participants with less educational attainment, in younger age groups, and in males, as per previous research. Understanding determinants and barriers to vaccination uptake, such as knowledge and beliefs based on misinformation, can help to shape effective public health communication and inform debunking efforts at this critical time and in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Male , Vaccination , Young Adult
9.
Int J Public Health ; 67: 1604221, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35250430

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Acceptance and high uptake of COVID-19 vaccines continues to be critical for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. This narrative review aimed to summarise findings on factors influencing acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines in the period leading up to the approval and rollout. Methods: We conducted a narrative review of literature published in 2020 on factors influencing acceptance of hypothetical COVID-19 vaccines in adults in high income countries with well-established health systems. Results: Facilitators of acceptance included confidence in vaccine safety and effectiveness, high COVID-19 disease risk perception and trust in health authorities and other vaccine stakeholders, including government. Barriers included safety and effectiveness concerns, perceived scientific uncertainty, low disease risk perception, and low trust in authorities and other stakeholders. Conclusion: Evidence on facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, at a time prior to vaccine rollout, can help health authorities address hesitancy and may inform approaches to support acceptance of novel pandemic vaccines in the future. Future research should include in-depth qualitative research to gather more nuanced evidence.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Developed Countries , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
11.
Pediatrics ; 148(5)2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34635584

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Evidence on repeating vaccination misinformation or "myths" in debunking text is inconclusive; repeating myths may unintentionally increase agreement with myths or help discredit myths. In this study we aimed to compare the effect of repeating vaccination myths and other text-based debunking strategies on parents' agreement with myths and their intention to vaccinate their children. METHODS: For this online experiment we recruited 788 parents of children aged 0 to 5 years; 454 (58%) completed the study. We compared 3 text-based debunking strategies (repeating myths, posing questions, or making factual statements) and a control. We measured changes in agreement with myths and intention to vaccinate immediately after the intervention and at least 1 week later. The primary analysis compared the change in agreement with vaccination myths from baseline, between groups, at each time point after the intervention. RESULTS: There was no evidence that repeating myths increased agreement with myths compared with the other debunking strategies or the control. Posing questions significantly decreased agreement with myths immediately after the intervention compared with the control (difference: -0.30 points, 99.17% confidence interval: -0.58 to -0.02, P = .004, d = 0.39). There was no evidence of a difference between other debunking strategies or the control at either time point, or on intention to vaccinate. CONCLUSIONS: Debunking strategies that repeat vaccination myths do not appear to be inferior to strategies that do not repeat myths.


Subject(s)
Anti-Vaccination Movement , Communication , Parents , Vaccination Refusal , Vaccination , Adult , Dissent and Disputes , Female , Humans , Intention , Male , Socioeconomic Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , Text Messaging , Vaccines/immunology
12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34501545

ABSTRACT

The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has globally caused widespread disruption, morbidity and mortality. The uptake of COVID-19 vaccination is critical for minimising further impacts of the pandemic. Health and aged care workers (HACWs) play a central role in public confidence in vaccines and are one of the priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination in Australia. Qualitative phone interviews with 19 HACWs aged 21-50 years old from New South Wales, Australia, were conducted, and the data were analysed thematically in order to understand the factors influencing HACWs' acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. We found that HACWs reported a continuum of COVID-19 vaccination intentions with 12 enthusiastically accepting and 7 hesitant. Using the Behavioral and Social Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccination (BeSD) Framework, we found that participants' acceptance of vaccination was primarily driven by their perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination (such as safety, risk and benefits) and by the information sources, people and norms they trusted. Informed by study findings, we propose several communication strategies which may be helpful in addressing HACWs vaccination acceptance. We note however that as the pandemic continues, further studies with HACWs from diverse backgrounds are needed in order to provide accurate data on diverse motivational and practical drivers of evolving perceptions and attitudes towards vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adult , Aged , Australia , Friends , Humans , Middle Aged , New South Wales , Perception , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Young Adult
13.
Digit Health ; 6: 2055207620970785, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35173976

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Vaccination misinformation is widespread on social media. Vaccine-promoting organisations are working to curb its influence, but face obstacles. We aimed to analyse their social media strategies and the challenges they encounter. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we purposively sampled 21 participants responsible for social media from vaccine-promoting organisations. We used Framework Analysis to explore the data. RESULTS: Vaccine-promoting organisations faced obstacles using social media, including fast-paced change, limited resources, and insufficient organisational buy-in. They experienced difficulties reaching audiences, exploiting social media listening, and measuring impact. Consequently, they may miss opportunities to counter misinformation, connect with groups low in vaccine confidence, and determine diverse audience responses. They lack strong evidence linking social media strategies with behaviour change, and have difficulty understanding silent audiences. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine-promoting organisations have an opportunity to embrace the participatory nature of social media. They could share listening insights with like-minded groups, and conduct research exploring associations between social media strategies and community attitude/behaviour change. Social media platforms could assist by renewing vaccine-promoting organisations' organic reach, supporting the development of tailored listening and credibility tools, and strengthening collaborations to promote credible content.

14.
BMC Public Health ; 19(1): 1348, 2019 Oct 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31640660

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Vaccination misinformation is associated with serious public health consequences, such as a decrease in vaccination rates and a risk of disease outbreaks. Although social media offers organisations promoting vaccination unparalleled opportunities to promote evidence and counterbalance misinformation, we know relatively little about their internal workings. The aim of this paper is to explore the strategies, perspectives and experiences of communicators working within such organisations as they promote vaccination and respond to misinformation on social media. METHODS: Using qualitative methods, we purposively sampled 21 participants responsible for routine social media activity and strategy from Australian organisations actively promoting vaccination on social media, including government health departments, local health services, advocacy groups, professional associations and technical/scientific organisations. We conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews to explore their perspectives and practices. Applying Risk Communication principles as a lens, we used Framework Analysis to explore the data both inductively and deductively. RESULTS: Organisations promoting vaccination face multiple challenges on social media, including misinformation, anti-science sentiment, a complex vaccination narrative and anti-vaccine activists. They developed a range of sophisticated strategies in response, including communicating with openness in an evidence-informed way; creating safe spaces to encourage audience dialogue; fostering community partnerships; and countering misinformation with care. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that communicators consider directly countering misinformation because of the potential influence on their silent audience, i.e. those observing but not openly commenting, liking or sharing posts. Refutations should be straightforward, succinct and avoid emphasizing misinformation. Communicators should consider pairing scientific evidence with stories that speak to audience beliefs and values. Finally, organisations could enhance vaccine promotion and their own credibility on social media by forming strong links with organisations sharing similar values and goals.


Subject(s)
Communication , Organizations/organization & administration , Social Media , Vaccination , Australia , Humans , Qualitative Research
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...