4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-paid vaccination intentions for children: a cross-sectional study in China

      research-article
      1 , 1 , * , , 2 , * ,
      BMJ Open
      BMJ Publishing Group
      COVID-19, China, cross-sectional studies, public health, vaccination

      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

          Abstract
          Objectives

          While it is widely accepted that COVID-19 has disrupted routine vaccination globally, the long-term impact of COVID-19 on parental vaccination intentions is uncertain. This study aims to estimate whether COVID-19 impacted parental intentions for self-paid vaccines, and provides suggestions for local vaccination policy and intervention strategies accordingly.

          Methods

          A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey was conducted among 2212 caregivers in Zhejiang province between 22 March and 30 June 2023. The following information was collected: sociodemographic characteristics, self-paid vaccination related intentions and behaviours, and vaccine hesitancy measured by the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale. Multiple multinomial logistic regression models were used to analyse the factors influencing the change in vaccination intentions.

          Results

          In total, 19.32% (n=390) of respondents increased their intention to immunise their children with self-paid vaccines after the COVID-19 epidemic, 9.16% (n=185) decreased their intention, and 71.52% (n=1444) of respondents indicated that the COVID-19 epidemic did not affect their intention. The major reason for increased intentions was ‘Vaccines are effective in preventing diseases’ (83.89%) and for decreased intentions was ‘Worried about the side effects of vaccines’ (65.95%). A higher hesitancy degree (OR=2.208, p=0.0001), reduced trust in vaccines after COVID-19 (OR=16.650, p<0.0001), doctors’ recommendation of Expanded Programme on Immunization vaccines (OR=2.180, p=0.0076), and non-perfect satisfaction with vaccine information (all OR>1, all p<0.05) were considered to be drivers of decreased intention.

          Conclusion

          Although the intentions of self-paid vaccinations were not largely influenced, nearly 30% of caregivers’ vaccination intentions changed after the COVID-19 pandemic and most of them increased their intentions. In addition, vaccination history of self-paid vaccines, vaccine information, vaccine trust and doctors’ recommendations were the active factors for self-paid vaccination. Therefore, education on the knowledge of self-paid vaccines for caregivers should be implemented to increase their vaccination intentions and decrease the threat of infectious diseases to children’s health.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

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

          Measuring vaccine hesitancy: The development of a survey tool.

          In March 2012, the SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy was convened to define the term "vaccine hesitancy", as well as to map the determinants of vaccine hesitancy and develop tools to measure and address the nature and scale of hesitancy in settings where it is becoming more evident. The definition of vaccine hesitancy and a matrix of determinants guided the development of a survey tool to assess the nature and scale of hesitancy issues. Additionally, vaccine hesitancy questions were piloted in the annual WHO-UNICEF joint reporting form, completed by National Immunization Managers globally. The objective of characterizing the nature and scale of vaccine hesitancy issues is to better inform the development of appropriate strategies and policies to address the concerns expressed, and to sustain confidence in vaccination. The Working Group developed a matrix of the determinants of vaccine hesitancy informed by a systematic review of peer reviewed and grey literature, and by the expertise of the working group. The matrix mapped the key factors influencing the decision to accept, delay or reject some or all vaccines under three categories: contextual, individual and group, and vaccine-specific. These categories framed the menu of survey questions presented in this paper to help diagnose and address vaccine hesitancy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            Strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy - A systematic review.

            The purpose of this systematic review is to identify, describe and assess the potential effectiveness of strategies to respond to issues of vaccine hesitancy that have been implemented and evaluated across diverse global contexts.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              Factors associated with uptake of vaccination against pandemic influenza: A systematic review

              In June 2009 a global influenza pandemic was declared by the World Health Organisation. A vaccination programme against H1N1 influenza was introduced in many countries from September 2009, but there was low uptake in both the general population and health professionals in many, though not all, countries. To examine the psychological and demographic factors associated with uptake of vaccination during the 2009 pandemic. A systematic literature review searching Web of Science and PubMed databases up to 24 January 2011. 37 articles met the study inclusion criteria. Using the framework of Protection Motivation Theory the review found that both the degree of threat experienced in the 2009 pandemic influenza outbreak and perceptions of vaccination as an effective coping strategy were associated with stronger intentions and higher uptake of vaccination. Appraisal of threat resulted from both believing oneself to be at risk from developing H1N1 influenza and concern and worry about the disease. Appraisal of coping resulted from concerns about the safety of the vaccine and its side effects. There was evidence of an influence of social pressure in that people who thought that others wanted them to be vaccinated were more likely to do so and people getting their information about vaccination from official health sources being more likely to be vaccinated than those relying on unofficial sources. There was also a strong influence of past behaviour, with those having been vaccinated in the past against seasonal influenza being more likely to be vaccinated against pandemic influenza. Demographic factors associated with higher intentions and uptake of vaccination were: older age, male gender, being from an ethnic minority and, for health professionals, being a doctor. Interventions designed to increase vaccination rates could be developed and implemented in advance of a pandemic. Strategies to improve uptake of vaccination include interventions which highlight the risk posed by pandemic influenza while simultaneously offering tactics to ameliorate this risk (e.g. vaccination). Perceived concerns about vaccination can be tackled by reducing the omission bias (a perception that harm caused by action is worse than harm caused by inaction). In addition, interventions to increase seasonal influenza vaccination in advance of a future pandemic may be an effective strategy. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2024
                9 August 2024
                : 14
                : 8
                : e083056
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Zhejiang University School of Medicine , Hangzhou, China
                [2 ]Tsinghua University , Beijing, China
                Author notes
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9133-8960
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3545-1525
                Article
                bmjopen-2023-083056
                10.1136/bmjopen-2023-083056
                11331887
                39122407
                5cfc891d-e09c-4026-bb10-42e6516ba38b
                Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 13 December 2023
                : 03 July 2024
                Funding
                Funded by: Bill &Melinda Gates Foundation;
                Award ID: INV-035302
                Categories
                Original Research
                Public Health
                1724
                1506

                Medicine
                covid-19,china,cross-sectional studies,public health,vaccination
                Medicine
                covid-19, china, cross-sectional studies, public health, vaccination

                Comments

                Comment on this article