3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How health care providers should address vaccine hesitancy in the clinical setting: Evidence for presumptive language in making a strong recommendation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          ABSTRACT

          Vaccine hesitancy occurs throughout the world and can result in poor vaccine uptake and vaccine-preventable disease-outbreaks. Vaccine hesitancy dates back to the days of Edward Jenner and the smallpox vaccine. It persists despite the preponderance of evidence supporting vaccine safety and effectiveness. Studies show even among parents of well-vaccinated children that 15–35% of those parents are vaccine-hesitant. Studies have failed to show the efficacy of educational interventions, and, indeed, a number of studies of educational interventions show a contrarian effect leaving the vaccine-hesitant more entrenched in their views. Still dozens of studies support health care provider recommendation as a major factor in achieving high rates of vaccine uptake. Furthermore, studies find those recommendations perceived as stronger are more effective than those perceived as weaker. What makes for a stronger recommendation? Several observational studies indicate that presumptive, announcement language as contrasted with participatory, conversational language makes for a stronger more effective recommendation. Several trials now demonstrate that health care providers and practices can implement this language and obtain higher vaccination uptake. The authors recommend the practice be adopted as a routine practice in the clinical setting for all vaccinations

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found
          Is Open Access

          Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants.

          The SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy concluded that vaccine hesitancy refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. Vaccine hesitancy is complex and context specific, varying across time, place and vaccines. It is influenced by factors such as complacency, convenience and confidence. The Working Group retained the term 'vaccine' rather than 'vaccination' hesitancy, although the latter more correctly implies the broader range of immunization concerns, as vaccine hesitancy is the more commonly used term. While high levels of hesitancy lead to low vaccine demand, low levels of hesitancy do not necessarily mean high vaccine demand. The Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants Matrix displays the factors influencing the behavioral decision to accept, delay or reject some or all vaccines under three categories: contextual, individual and group, and vaccine/vaccination-specific influences.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effective messages in vaccine promotion: a randomized trial.

            To test the effectiveness of messages designed to reduce vaccine misperceptions and increase vaccination rates for measles-mumps-rubella (MMR).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Does correcting myths about the flu vaccine work? An experimental evaluation of the effects of corrective information.

              Seasonal influenza is responsible for thousands of deaths and billions of dollars of medical costs per year in the United States, but influenza vaccination coverage remains substantially below public health targets. One possible obstacle to greater immunization rates is the false belief that it is possible to contract the flu from the flu vaccine. A nationally representative survey experiment was conducted to assess the extent of this flu vaccine misperception. We find that a substantial portion of the public (43%) believes that the flu vaccine can give you the flu. We also evaluate how an intervention designed to address this concern affects belief in the myth, concerns about flu vaccine safety, and future intent to vaccinate. Corrective information adapted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website significantly reduced belief in the myth that the flu vaccine can give you the flu as well as concerns about its safety. However, the correction also significantly reduced intent to vaccinate among respondents with high levels of concern about vaccine side effects--a response that was not observed among those with low levels of concern. This result, which is consistent with previous research on misperceptions about the MMR vaccine, suggests that correcting myths about vaccines may not be an effective approach to promoting immunization. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Hum Vaccin Immunother
                Hum Vaccin Immunother
                Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
                Taylor & Francis
                2164-5515
                2164-554X
                3 April 2020
                2020
                3 April 2020
                : 16
                : 9
                : 2131-2135
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic; , Rochester, MN, USA
                [b ]Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic; , Rochester, MN, USA
                [c ]Department of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic; , Rochester, MN, USA
                Author notes
                CONTACT Robert M. Jacobson jacobson.robert@ 123456mayo.edu Mayo Clinic Desk Ba3b; , 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN55905-0001, USA.
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6355-8752
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9789-8544
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8120-3229
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8241-7587
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7487-9407
                Article
                1735226
                10.1080/21645515.2020.1735226
                7553710
                32242766
                8569d315-ebd2-4489-9a47-8912a52c7e6f
                © 2020 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, References: 36, Pages: 5
                Categories
                Research Article
                Commentary

                Molecular medicine
                vaccination,immunization,vaccination refusal,anti-vaccine movement,patient acceptance of health care,parents,humans,adult,adolescent,child

                Comments

                Comment on this article