Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Preferences of healthcare professionals regarding hexavalent pediatric vaccines in Italy: a survey of attitudes and expectations.
Icardi, Giancarlo; Orsi, Andrea; Vitali Rosati, Giovanni; Tognetto, Alessia; Checcucci Lisi, Giovanni; Parisi, Salvatore.
Afiliação
  • Icardi G; Department of Health Sciences, University of Genoa, Italy.
  • Orsi A; Interuniversity Research Center on Influenza and Other Transmissible Infections (CIRI-IT), Genoa, Italy.
  • Vitali Rosati G; Department of Health Sciences, University of Genoa, Italy.
  • Tognetto A; Interuniversity Research Center on Influenza and Other Transmissible Infections (CIRI-IT), Genoa, Italy.
  • Checcucci Lisi G; Italian Federation of Pediatricians FIMP, Family Pediatrician, Florence, Italy.
  • Parisi S; Sanofi Pasteur Medical Affairs, Italy.
J Prev Med Hyg ; 61(3): E424-E444, 2020 Sep.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33150231
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

In Italy, three hexavalent pediatric vaccines are available two are ready-to-use (RTU) as pre-filled syringes, while the third must be reconstituted (need-for-reconstitution [NFR]). The formulation is related to the vaccination timing, safety of preparation and administration, and possible errors in immunization. We surveyed Italian healthcare professionals (HCPs) experienced with RTU and NFR vaccines in order to investigate their opinions on key aspects of the vaccines.

METHODS:

In Q1 2018, a qualitative study, ethnographic observations and in-depth interviews were performed in public vaccination settings of three Italian Regions. Data on how the vaccination process was managed and perceptions about the value of the RTU formulation were collected. In Q2 2018, face-to-face interviews were carried out to explore the attitude and preferences of Italian HCPs from nine Regions, assessing advantages and disadvantages of the two formulations from a quantitative point of view. In Q3-Q4 data analysis was carried out, using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies.

RESULTS:

The first phase demonstrated the following advantages of the RTU versus the NFR formulation time-saving, lower probability of needle contamination and needle stick incidents, better handling, simpler procedure, easier disposal of waste. For the survey, 149 HCPs were interviewed; 80% and 40%, respectively, were very satisfied with the RTU and NFR vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our study demonstrated that HCPs prefer the RTU formulation, as it simplifies vaccinations, reduces preparation time and minimizes the risk of errors. This formulation also saves time that can be spent on more in-depth counseling.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Vacinas / Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde / Pessoal de Saúde / Motivação Tipo de estudo: Qualitative_research Limite: Child / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Vacinas / Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde / Pessoal de Saúde / Motivação Tipo de estudo: Qualitative_research Limite: Child / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article