Vaccine communication training using the Brief Motivational Interviewing for Maternal Immunization intervention: A PRISM implementation evaluation.

Improving clinician-patient communication can increase uptake of recommended vaccinations during pregnancy. To evaluate adaptations to and pragmatism of the brief Motivational Interviewing for Maternal Immunizations (MI4MI) intervention and to use the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) to describe context and implementation outcomes among clinician and staff participants. We incorporated data from study team members, clinicians and staff participants, pregnant patients at participating clinics, and patient medical records. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected using surveys, chart reviews, study team notes, interviews, and focus groups. Adaptations were evaluated using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME) and pragmatism was measured with PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS-2). MI4MI was effective at improving participants' vaccine communication experiences. Adoption was limited by our recruitment approach. MI4MI implementation was shaped by contextual factors and associated adaptations related to the COVID pandemic and clinic and participant characteristics. Virtual asynchronous intervention delivery had mixed effects on adoption and implementation that varied across clinics and participants. Participants expressed interest in maintaining the MI4MI intervention moving forward; however, identification of sustainability infrastructure was limited. MI4MI was evaluated to be relatively pragmatic. Contextual factors strongly shaped implementation of MI4MI. Future iterations of MI4MI should include training delivery modes and incentives that accommodate a range of participants across job roles and organizational settings. Future studies including control clinics are needed to measure effectiveness for increasing vaccination and comparing virtual versus hybrid implementation strategies.

We studied a training program called Brief Motivational Interviewing for Maternal Immunizations (MI4MI). This program tried to teach doctors and other healthcare workers how to talk with pregnant people about vaccines. We looked at how this training program worked in different clinics. We talked with and gave surveys to the healthcare workers and patients at clinics who participated in this program. Healthcare workers who completed the MI4MI program had better experiences talking about vaccines after the training. This study happened during the early COVID pandemic, so training was done online. Healthcare workers and clinics had mixed responses to the online training approach. COVID made it hard for some people to participate. Many people who did the training said they would like to keep using the MI4MI training and skills in the future. More studies are needed to learn if the MI4MI training increases vaccination rates and to look at ways to improve online training.

Strategies for Improving Vaccine Communication and Uptake.

Vaccines have led to a significant decrease in rates of vaccine-preventable diseases and have made a significant impact on the health of children. However, some parents express concerns about vaccine safety and the necessity of vaccines. The concerns of parents range from hesitancy about some immunizations to refusal of all vaccines. This clinical report provides information about the scope and impact of the problem, the facts surrounding common vaccination concerns, and the latest evidence regarding effective communication techniques for the vaccine conversation. After reading this clinical report, readers can expect to: Understand concepts and underlying determinants of vaccine uptake and vaccine hesitancy.Understand the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and costs of preventable medical care.Recognize and address specific concerns (eg, vaccine safety) with caregivers when hesitancy is present.

Child Health Needs and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Workforce: 2020-2040.

Pediatric infectious diseases (PID) physicians prevent and treat childhood infections through clinical care, research, public health, education, antimicrobial stewardship, and infection prevention. This article is part of an American Board of Pediatrics Foundation-sponsored supplement investigating the future of the pediatric subspecialty workforce. The article offers context to findings from a modeling analysis estimating the supply of PID subspecialists in the United States between 2020 and 2040. It provides an overview of children cared for by PID subspecialists, reviews the current state of the PID workforce, and discusses the projected headcount and clinical workforce equivalents of PID subspecialists at the national, census region, and census division levels over this 2-decade period. The article concludes by discussing the education and training, clinical practice, policy, and research implications of the data presented. Adjusting for population growth, the PID workforce is projected to grow more slowly than most other pediatric subspecialties and geographic disparities in access to PID care are expected to worsen. In models considering alternative scenarios, decreases in the number of fellows and time spent in clinical care significantly affect the PID workforce. Notably, model assumptions may not adequately account for potential threats to the PID workforce, including a declining number of fellows entering training and the unknown impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and future emerging infections on workforce attrition. Changes to education and training, clinical care, and policy are needed to ensure the PID workforce can meet the future needs of US children.

Activities, Motivations and Demographics of Provaccine Advocates.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy is a growing public health concern and has been classified as a major threat to global health by the World Health Organization. While there has been extensive research on the attitudes of vaccine-hesitant individuals, little is known about provaccination advocates. Our objectives were to describe the characteristics, attitudes, activities and motivations of provaccination advocates. METHODS: An internet survey was conducted in July-November 2019. US vaccine advocacy groups were invited to partner in survey distribution. Participants were recruited from a convenience sample of their members. Advocacy activities were categorized as policy related, in-person or online. RESULTS: Respondents (n = 1239) were mostly female (82%), White (87%) and highly educated (90%). Most reported Democratic political affiliation (66%). The most common occupation was health care practitioner (38%). Most respondents (90%) agreed that a policy that did not allow patients to refuse or spread-out vaccines would encourage them to choose that clinic. The most common policy-related activity was contacting an elected official about vaccines. The most common in-person activity was speaking with a friend or family member about vaccines. The most reported online activity was using social media to advocate for vaccines. The most common motivation for vaccine advocacy was a sense of responsibility as a community member. CONCLUSIONS: Provaccine individuals engaged in a variety of advocacy activities and were motivated by responsibility to their community in addition to other factors. Continued work to better understand and motivate vaccine advocates may inform efforts to bolster vaccine confidence and influence those who accept vaccines to become advocates.

Boot Camp Translation using Community-Engaged messaging for adolescent Vaccination: A Cluster-Randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Routine vaccination coverage for adolescents living in the rural US is lower than adolescents living in urban areas. We sought to measure the effect of Boot Camp Translation (BCT), a community-based participatory intervention, on rural adolescent vaccination coverage. METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled trial was performed September 2018-November 2021 involving 16 rural Colorado counties. Intervention county community members engaged in BCT to develop interventions to improve adolescent vaccination locally. Adolescent vaccination coverage was measured using the Colorado Immunization Information System. RESULTS: For 11-12-year-olds, HPV initiation, HPV up-to-date, MenACWY, and Tdap vaccination coverage was lower post- versus pre-intervention in the control and intervention groups. For 11-12-year-olds in the intervention group, there was no significant difference post- versus pre-intervention in the odds of HPV vaccine initiation (adjusted ratio of odds ratios [aROR] = 0.93, 95 %: 0.85-1.02, p = 0.10) or up-to-date HPV vaccination (aROR: 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.98-1.23, p = 0.11) compared with the control group. Among 11-12-year-olds, the decrease in the proportion vaccinated with MenACWY and Tdap in the intervention group was significantly greater than the control group. Among 13-17-year-olds, there were significant increases in HPV initiation, HPV up-to-date, MenACWY, and Tdap vaccination coverage from pre- to post-intervention for both groups, with no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION: 11-12-year-old vaccination coverage decreased slightly from pre- to post-intervention while 13-17-year-old vaccination coverage increased. We saw no effect from the BCT intervention. Our findings about the effectiveness of BCT for improving vaccine uptake may not be generalizable because the study coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03955757.

Awareness of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children Among US Parents: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

Background: Little is known about parental awareness of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a rare but severe sequela of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Methods: Via a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey of US parents conducted via Ipsos KnowledgePanel from October to November 2021, we used bivariate and multivariable analyses to describe and identify demographic variables associated with parental knowledge of and attitudes toward MIS-C and to examine associations with perceived coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity and susceptibility. Results: Response rate was 64.2% (3230/5034). Thirty-two percent of respondents had heard of MIS-C. After adjustment, higher educational level (compared to high school degree; some college: odds ratio [OR], 2.00 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.44-2.77]; bachelor's degree or higher: OR, 3.14 [95% CI, 2.26-4.35]), being a healthcare worker (OR, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.37-2.42]), having a child with a chronic medical condition (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.22-2.14]), and experience with more severe COVID-19 (OR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.14-1.86]) were associated with MIS-C awareness. Respondents with a child aged 12-17 years were less likely to be aware of MIS-C compared to those without (OR, 0.78 [95% CI, .63-.96]), as were male respondents (OR, 0.56 [95% CI, .46-.69]) and respondents aged 18-34 years (OR, 0.72 [95% CI, .54-.94]) compared to those aged 35-44 years. Awareness of MIS-C was associated with higher perceived COVID-19 severity and susceptibility (regression coefficients, 0.18 [95% CI, .10-.25], P < .001; 0.19 [95% CI, .11-.28], P < .001, respectively). Conclusions: This survey highlights the need to increase parental awareness of MIS-C. Future studies should explore how education regarding MIS-C as a complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection could improve understanding of pediatric disease severity and susceptibility.

Outbreak of Invasive Group A Streptococcus in Children-Colorado, October 2022-April 2023.

BACKGROUND: In the fall of 2022, we observed a sharp rise in pediatric Invasive Group A Streptococcus (iGAS) hospitalizations in Colorado. We compared the epidemiology, clinical features, and patient outcomes in this outbreak to prior years. METHODS: Between October 2022 and April 2023, we prospectively identified and reviewed iGAS cases in hospitalized pediatric patients at Children's Hospital Colorado. Using laboratory specimen records, we also retrospectively compared the number of patients with sterile site GAS-positive cultures across three time periods: pre-COVID-19 (January 2015-March 2020), height of COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020-September 2022), and outbreak (October 2022-April 2023). RESULTS: Among 96 prospectively identified iGAS cases, median age was 5.7 years old; 66% were male, 70% previously healthy, 39% required critical care, and four patients died. Almost 60% had associated respiratory viral symptoms, 10% had toxic shock syndrome, and 4% had necrotizing fasciitis. Leukopenia, bandemia, and higher C-reactive protein values were laboratory findings associated with need for critical care. There were significantly more cases during the outbreak (9.9/month outbreak vs 3.9/month pre-pandemic vs 1.3/month pandemic), including more cases with pneumonia (28% outbreak vs 15% pre-pandemic vs 0% pandemic) and multifocal disease (17% outbreak vs 3% pre-pandemic vs 0% pandemic), P < .001 for all. CONCLUSIONS: Outbreak case numbers were almost triple the pre-pandemic baseline. The high percentage of cases with associated viral symptoms suggests a link to coinciding surges in respiratory viruses during this time. Invasive GAS can be severe and evolve rapidly; clinical and laboratory features may help in earlier identification of critically ill children.

Unraveling attributes of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake in the U.S.: a large nationwide study.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are useful tools to combat the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but vaccine reluctance threatens these vaccines' effectiveness. To address COVID-19 vaccine reluctance and ensure equitable distribution, understanding the extent of and factors associated with vaccine acceptance and uptake is critical. We report the results of a large nationwide study in the US conducted December 2020-May 2021 of 36,711 users from COVID-19-focused smartphone-based app How We Feel on their willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. We identified sociodemographic and behavioral factors that were associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake, and we found several vulnerable groups at increased risk of COVID-19 burden, morbidity, and mortality were more likely to be reluctant to accept a vaccine and had lower rates of vaccination. Our findings highlight specific populations in which targeted efforts to develop education and outreach programs are needed to overcome poor vaccine acceptance and improve equitable access, diversity, and inclusion in the national response to COVID-19.

Prevalence and Predictors of Pediatric COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance.

OBJECTIVE: As pediatric COVID-19 vaccine eligibility expands, understanding predictors of vaccine intent is critical to effectively address parental concerns. Objectives included: (1) Evaluate maternal COVID-19 vaccine intent for child(ren) and associated predictors of stated intent; (2) Describe attitudes related to hypothetical vaccination policies; (3) Summarize themes associated with intention to vaccinate child(ren) for COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: Mothers enrolled in Heath eMoms, a longitudinal survey project, were recruited for this electronic COVID-19 survey. Chi-square analysis was used to compare proportions of respondent characteristics based on vaccination intent. Population survey logistic regression was used for multivariable modeling to assess the independent association between vaccine intent and demographics. RESULTS: The response rate was 65.3% (n = 1884); 44.2% would choose vaccination, 20.3% would not choose vaccination, and 35.5% are unsure whether to have their child(ren) vaccinated for COVID-19. Black mothers (AOR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13, 0.54), respondents with less than high school education (AOR 0.26, 95% 0.12, 0.56) and those in rural areas (AOR 0.28, 95% CI 0.16, 0.48) were less likely to choose vaccination. Commonly cited reasons for vaccine hesitancy include the belief that the vaccine was not tested enough, is not safe, and there are concerns regarding its side effects. CONCLUSION: Over 50% of respondents do not intend or are unsure about their intent to vaccinate their child(ren) for COVID-19 with variability noted by demographics. Opportunities exist for perinatal and pediatric providers to educate pregnant people, parents, and caregivers with a focus on addressing concerns regarding vaccine safety and efficacy. KEY POINTS: · COVID-19 vaccination rates remain suboptimal, especially in the pediatric population, with variation across states.. · We found that the prevalence of vaccine acceptance for young children is low.. · We highlight opportunities for providers to educate parents, focusing on addressing vaccine safety and efficacy..

Survey of Physician Practices, Attitudes, and Knowledge Regarding Recombinant Zoster Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Herpes zoster vaccination rates remain low despite longstanding national recommendations to vaccinate immunocompetent adults aged ≥ 50 years. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice (ACIP) updated its recommendations for recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in October 2021 to include immunocompromised adults aged ≥19 years. OBJECTIVE: To assess practices, attitudes, and knowledge about RZV, barriers to recommending RZV, and likelihood of recommending RZV to patients with various immunocompromising conditions. DESIGN: Mail and internet-based survey conducted from May through July 2020. PARTICIPANTS: General internists and family physicians throughout the USA. MAIN MEASURES: Survey responses. KEY RESULTS: The response rate was 66% (632/955). Many physicians were already recommending RZV to immunocompromised populations, including adults ≥50 years with HIV (67% of respondents) and on recombinant human immune modulator therapy (56%). Forty-seven percent of respondents both stocked/administered RZV and referred patients elsewhere, frequently a pharmacy, for vaccination; 42% did not stock RZV and only referred patients. The majority agreed pharmacies do not inform them when RZV has been given (64%). Physicians were generally knowledgeable about RZV; however, 25% incorrectly thought experiencing side effects from the first dose of RZV that interfere with normal activities was a reason to not receive the second dose. The top reported barrier to recommending RZV was experience with patients declining RZV due to cost concerns (67%). Most physicians reported they would be likely to recommend RZV to immunocompromised patients. CONCLUSION: Most primary care physicians welcome updated ACIP RZV recommendations for immunocompromised adults. Knowledge gaps, communication issues, and financial barriers need to be addressed to optimize vaccination delivery.

Motivational interviewing for maternal Immunizations: Intervention development.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Vaccine uptake during pregnancy remains low. Our objectives were to describe 1) development and adaptation of a clinician communication training intervention for maternal immunizations and 2) obstetrics and gynecology (ob-gyn) clinician and staff perspectives on the intervention and fit for the prenatal care context. METHODS: Design of the Motivational Interviewing for Maternal Immunizations (MI4MI) intervention was based on similar communication training interventions for pediatric settings and included presumptive initiation of vaccine recommendations ("You're due for two vaccines today") combined with motivational interviewing (MI) for hesitant patients. Interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with ob-gyn clinicians and staff in five Colorado clinics including settings with obstetric physicians, certified nurse midwives (CNMs), and clinician-trainees. Participants were asked about adapting training to the ob-gyn setting and their implementation experiences. Feedback was incorporated through iterative changes to training components. RESULTS: Interview and focus group discussion results from participants before (n = 3), during (n = 11) and after (n = 25) implementation guided intervention development and adaptation. Three virtual, asynchronous training components were created: a video and two interactive modules. This virtual format was favored due to challenges attending group meetings; however, participants noted opportunities to practice skills through role-play were lacking. Training modules were adapted to include common challenging vaccine conversations and live-action videos. Participants liked interactive training components and use of adult learning strategies. Some participants initially resisted the presumptive approach but later found it useful after applying it in their practices. Overall, participants reported that MI4MI training fit well with the prenatal context and recommended more inclusion of non-clinician staff. CONCLUSIONS: MI4MI training was viewed as relevant and useful for ob-gyn clinicians and staff. Suggestions included making training more interactive, and including more complex scenarios and non-clinician staff.

Pre-implementation evaluation for an HPV vaccine provider communication intervention among primary care clinics.

OBJECTIVES: Interventions to improve health care provider communication about HPV vaccination can increase vaccine acceptance. Our objectives were to (1) identify clinics in locations with high HPV-associated cancer and low HPV-vaccination rates that would potentially benefit from dissemination of a proposed HPV Provider Communication intervention and (2) use qualitative interviews and a dissemination and implementation framework to assess readiness for change and fit of the HPV Provider Communication intervention to the context of these clinics. METHODS: Local HPV-associated cancer and HPV vaccination rates were assigned to Practice-Based Research Network clinics using data from the Colorado Central Cancer Registry, the Colorado Immunization Information System, and the American Community Survey. Staff from 38 clinics located in areas with high numbers of adolescents not up-to-date for HPV vaccine and high rates of HPV-associated cancers were recruited for qualitative interviews. Interview questions used the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) conceptual framework and addressed the proposed intervention, current vaccination practices and prior quality improvement (QI) experience. RESULTS: Twenty-seven interviews were completed with clinicians, clinic managers, and other staff across 17 clinics (9 pediatric, 5 family medicine, 3 public/school-based health). Most clinics had some prior QI experience and there were few thematic differences between sites with more or less foundation for QI/immunization work. Participants were motivated to improve the health of their patients and valued both guidelines and local experience as important evidence to consider adopting an intervention. Interviewees were more interested in implementing the proposed intervention if it aligned with existing priorities and fit within clinic workflows. Facilitation needs included adequate time and external facilitation support for data tracking and analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative interviews to understand clinic context and fit of an HPV Provider Communication intervention can inform implementation in settings with the highest potential for clinical impact.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Among US Parents: A Nationally Representative Survey.

BACKGROUND: Little was known about US parental attitudes, beliefs, and intentions surrounding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines for children before their introduction. METHODS: An online cross-sectional nationally representative survey of US parents/guardians of children < 18 years old via Ipsos KnowledgePanel, fielded from October 26, 2021 to November 30, 2021. RESULTS: Response rate was 64.2% (3230/5034). For children ages 0-4 years, 51.5% of parents were likely to have their children vaccinated, and for ages 5-11 and 12-17, 54.0% and 69.7% of parents, respectively, reported they were likely to vaccinate or had already vaccinated their children. Among respondents with unvaccinated children, 25.2% (ages 0-4) and 22.0% (ages 5-11) reported they would seek COVID-19 vaccination for their children as soon as authorization occurred. Factors associated with willingness to have children receive a COVID-19 vaccine were: belief in benefits of COVID-19 vaccination (odds ratio [OR] = 6.44, 5.68, 4.57 in ages 0-4, 5-11, and 12-17 respectively), acceptance of routine childhood vaccines (OR = 6.42, 5.48, 1.76), parental COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 1.85, 3.70, 6.16), perceptions that pediatric COVID-19 is severe (OR = 1.89, 1.72, 1.35), Hispanic ethnicity (OR = 2.07, 2.29, 2.60), influenza vaccine acceptance (OR = 1.07, 0.88, 1.62), presence of children of another age group in the household (OR = 0.71, 0.71, 0.65), and attitudinal barriers to COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 0.30, 0.26, 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Belief in the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination and acceptance of routine childhood vaccines are the strongest predictors of intention to vaccinate children. Further research is needed to track how parental attitudes change as more data about pediatric COVID-19 vaccines become available and how intentions translate into pediatric vaccine uptake.

Measles Experience, Practice, and Knowledge by Pediatricians in the Context of Resurgent US Outbreaks.

OBJECTIVE: To assess measles experience, practice, and knowledge by pediatricians in the context of resurgent US outbreaks in 2018-2019. STUDY DESIGN: A nationally representative network of pediatricians were surveyed by email and mail from January to April 2020. RESULTS: The response rate was 67% (297 of 444). In the 3 years preceding the survey, 52% of the respondents reported awareness of measles cases in/near their community. Most thought that media reports about recent measles outbreaks had decreased delay/refusal of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine (6% "greatly decreased"; 66% "moderately decreased"). More than 60% of the pediatricians responded correctly for 6 of 9 true/false measles knowledge items. Less than 50% responded correctly for 3 true/false items, including statements about pretravel MMR recommendations for a preschooler and measles isolation precautions. The most common resources that the pediatricians would "sometimes" or "often/always" consult for measles information were those from the American Academy of Pediatrics (72%), a state or local public health department (70%), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (63%). More than 90% of the pediatricians reported correct clinical practice for MMR vaccination of a 9-month-old before international travel. More than one-third of the respondents did not have a plan for measles exposures in their clinic. Pediatricians aware of measles cases in/near their community in the previous 3 years and those working in a hospital/clinic or Health Maintenance Organization setting were more likely to have a plan for measles exposures. CONCLUSIONS: During this time of heightened risk for measles outbreaks, there are opportunities to strengthen the knowledge and implementation of measles pretravel vaccination and infection prevention and control recommendations among pediatricians.

Why Aren't We Achieving High Vaccination Rates for Rotavirus Vaccine in the United States?

BACKGROUND: Rotavirus vaccine (RV) coverage levels for US infants are <80%. METHODS: We surveyed nationally representative networks of pediatricians by internet/mail from April to June, 2019. Multivariable regression assessed factors associated with difficulty administering the first RV dose (RV#1) by the maximum age. RESULTS: Response rate was 68% (303/448). Ninety-nine percent of providers reported strongly recommending RV. The most common barriers to RV delivery overall (definite/somewhat of a barrier) were: parental concerns about vaccine safety overall (27%), parents wanting to defer (25%), parents not thinking RV was necessary (12%), and parent concerns about RV safety (6%). The most commonly reported reasons for nonreceipt of RV#1 by 4 to 5 months (often/always) were parental vaccine refusal (9%), hospitals not giving RV at discharge from nursery (7%), infants past the maximum age when discharged from neonatal intensive care unit/nursery (6%), and infant not seen before maximum age for well care visit (3%) or seen but no vaccine given (4%). Among respondents 4% strongly agreed and 25% somewhat agreed that they sometimes have difficulty giving RV#1 before the maximum age. Higher percentage of State Child Health Insurance Program/Medicaid-insured children in the practice and reporting that recommendations for timing of RV doses are too complicated were associated with reporting difficulty delivering the RV#1 by the maximum age. CONCLUSIONS: US pediatricians identified multiple, actionable issues that may contribute to suboptimal RV immunization rates including lack of vaccination prior to leaving nurseries after prolonged stays, infants not being seen for well care visits by the maximum age, missed opportunities at visits and parents refusing/deferring.

Parental vaccine hesitancy: scope, causes, and potential responses.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We reviewed the literature about parental vaccine hesitancy, focusing on publications from October 2019 to April 2021 to describe patterns and causes of hesitancy and interventions to address hesitancy. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies expand understanding of the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy globally and highlight associated individual and contextual factors. Common concerns underlying hesitancy include uncertainty about the need for vaccination and questions about vaccine safety and efficacy. Sociodemographic factors associated with parental vaccine hesitancy vary across locations and contexts. Studies about psychology of hesitancy and how parents respond to interventions highlight the role of cognitive biases, personal values, and vaccination as a social contract or norm. Evidence-based strategies to address vaccine hesitancy include presumptive or announcement approaches to vaccine recommendations, motivational interviewing, and use of immunization delivery strategies like standing orders and reminder/recall programs. A smaller number of studies support use of social media and digital applications to improve vaccination intent. Strengthening school vaccine mandates can improve vaccination rates, but policy decisions must consider local context. SUMMARY: Vaccine hesitancy remains a challenge for child health. Future work must include more interventional studies to address hesitancy and regular global surveillance of parental vaccine hesitancy and vaccine content on social media.

Rural Adolescent Immunization: Delivery Practices and Barriers to Uptake.

BACKGROUND: Rural adolescent vaccination rates lag behind urban. We sought to assess rural-urban differences in barriers to adolescent vaccination, perceived parental vaccine attitudes, and immunization delivery practices among public health nursing (PHN), pediatric (Peds), and family medicine (FM) clinicians. METHODS: Internet and mail survey of Colorado PHN, Peds, and FM clinicians from June-August 2019. Study population was recruited from local health plans and the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. Rural and urban responses were compared using Cochran Armitage trend, Fisher's exact, and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Response rate was 38% (163/433; 91 rural, 72 urban). Rural respondents were less likely than urban to agree most patients have insurance that covers vaccination (86% vs 97%; P = .02). Rural respondents were less likely than urban to indicate most parents in their practice would agree with statements about vaccine benefits (P = .02) and trust in medical providers (P = .05). Rural respondents were more likely than urban to report adolescents were somewhat/very likely to receive vaccines at public health departments (65% vs 28%; P < .0001) and less likely to report adolescents were somewhat/very likely to receive vaccines at pharmacies (26% vs 45%; P = .02). Fewer providers strongly recommended HPV vaccine (81% for females, 80% for males 11 to 12 years) than other adolescent immunizations (Tdap: 97%, MenACWY at 11 to 12 years: 87%; influenza at 11 to 17 years: 87%; each P < .005, rural-urban responses did not differ). CONCLUSIONS: Rural barriers to adolescent vaccination include logistic issues and parental vaccine attitudes. Efforts to improve rural adolescent vaccination should include public health departments and address vaccine confidence and access barriers.

Pediatricians' Knowledge and Practices Related to Mumps Diagnosis and Prevention.

OBJECTIVES: To assess pediatricians' mumps knowledge and testing practices, to identify physician and practice characteristics associated with mumps testing practices, and to assess reporting and outbreak response knowledge and practices. STUDY DESIGN: Between January and April 2020, we surveyed a nationally representative network of pediatricians. Descriptive statistics were generated for all items. The χ2 test, t tests, and Poisson regression were used to compare physician and practice characteristics between respondents who would rarely or never versus sometimes or often/always test for mumps in a vaccinated 17-year-old with parotitis in a non-outbreak setting. RESULTS: The response rate was 67% (297 of 444). For knowledge, more than one-half of the pediatricians responded incorrectly or "don't know" for 6 of the 9 true/false statements about mumps epidemiology, diagnosis, and prevention, and more than one-half reported needing additional guidance on mumps buccal swab testing. For testing practices, 59% of respondents reported they would sometimes (35%) or often/always (24%) test for mumps in a vaccinated 17-year-old with parotitis in a non-outbreak setting; older physicians, rural physicians, and physicians from the Northeast or Midwest were more likely to test for mumps. Thirty-six percent of the pediatricians reported they would often/always report a patient with suspected mumps to public health authorities. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatricians report mumps knowledge gaps and practices that do not align with public health recommendations. These gaps may lead to underdiagnosis and underreporting of mumps cases, delaying public health response measures and contributing to ongoing disease transmission.

An Examination of Employee Immunization Policies Among Colorado Child Care Providers.

BACKGROUND: Child care employee vaccination policies can protect children and adults from vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) in child care programs. We aimed to understand the prevalence and characteristics of employee immunization policies at child care facilities and support among child care administrators for statewide employee vaccination regulations. METHODS: A postal mail survey was distributed to a cross-sectional sample of 300 center-based and 300 home-based child care programs in Colorado. Programs were asked to report whether they had any type of policy requiring employee immunizations and if they would support statewide regulations mandating employee immunizations for influenza, pertussis, and measles. RESULTS: The response rate was 48% (288/600). About 55% of child care programs reported having an employee immunization policy. Child care centers (73%) were more likely than home-based child care programs (30%, P < .001) to report having a policy. Overall, 62% of respondents reported that they would support one or more statewide regulations requiring child care employees to be vaccinated. Home-based programs (71%) were more likely than center-based programs (53%, P = .001) to support one or more statewide child care employee immunization regulations. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate the variability of employee immunization policies at child care programs across Colorado. These results may be used to inform strategies to increase employee immunization uptake and reduce the incidence of VPDs, including developing comprehensive employee immunization policies at the facility and state level. Future research is needed to understand vaccination knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors among child care employees including their perspectives on employee vaccination policies and regulations.