Provider Preference, Logistical Challenges, or Vaccine Hesitancy? Analyzing Parental Decision-Making in School Vaccination Programs: A Qualitative Study in Sydney, Australia.

IF 5.2 3区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY
Vaccines Pub Date : 2025-01-17 DOI:10.3390/vaccines13010083
Leigh McIndoe, Alexandra Young, Cristyn Davies, Cassandra Vujovich-Dunn, Stephanie Kean, Michelle Dives, Vicky Sheppeard
{"title":"Provider Preference, Logistical Challenges, or Vaccine Hesitancy? Analyzing Parental Decision-Making in School Vaccination Programs: A Qualitative Study in Sydney, Australia.","authors":"Leigh McIndoe, Alexandra Young, Cristyn Davies, Cassandra Vujovich-Dunn, Stephanie Kean, Michelle Dives, Vicky Sheppeard","doi":"10.3390/vaccines13010083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> School-based immunization programs are crucial for equitable vaccine coverage, yet their success depends on parental consent processes. This study investigates patterns of vaccine decision-making within Australia's school-based immunization program, specifically focusing on human papillomavirus (HPV) and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (dTpa) vaccines offered free to adolescents aged 12-13. <b>Methods:</b> This qualitative study was conducted in the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District (2022-2023). Semi-structured interviews were held with school staff (<i>n</i> = 11) across government, Catholic, and independent schools, parents whose children were not vaccinated at school (<i>n</i> = 11) and a focus group with public health unit staff (<i>n</i> = 5). Data were analyzed to identify key barriers and patterns in vaccine decision-making. <b>Results:</b> Analysis revealed three distinct groups of parents whose children were not vaccinated through the school program: (1) those favoring general practitioners for vaccination, driven by trust in medical providers and a preference for personalized care; (2) those intending to consent but facing logistical barriers, including communication breakdowns and online consent challenges; and (3) vaccine-hesitant parents, particularly regarding HPV vaccination, influenced by safety concerns and misinformation. These findings demonstrate that non-participation in school vaccination programs should not be automatically equated with vaccine hesitancy. <b>Conclusions:</b> Tailored interventions are necessary for addressing vaccine non-participation. Recommendations include strengthening collaboration with general practitioners, streamlining consent processes and providing targeted education to counter misinformation. This study provides valuable insights into social determinants of vaccine acceptance and offers actionable strategies for improving vaccine uptake in school-based programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":23634,"journal":{"name":"Vaccines","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11768876/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccines","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines13010083","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: School-based immunization programs are crucial for equitable vaccine coverage, yet their success depends on parental consent processes. This study investigates patterns of vaccine decision-making within Australia's school-based immunization program, specifically focusing on human papillomavirus (HPV) and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (dTpa) vaccines offered free to adolescents aged 12-13. Methods: This qualitative study was conducted in the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District (2022-2023). Semi-structured interviews were held with school staff (n = 11) across government, Catholic, and independent schools, parents whose children were not vaccinated at school (n = 11) and a focus group with public health unit staff (n = 5). Data were analyzed to identify key barriers and patterns in vaccine decision-making. Results: Analysis revealed three distinct groups of parents whose children were not vaccinated through the school program: (1) those favoring general practitioners for vaccination, driven by trust in medical providers and a preference for personalized care; (2) those intending to consent but facing logistical barriers, including communication breakdowns and online consent challenges; and (3) vaccine-hesitant parents, particularly regarding HPV vaccination, influenced by safety concerns and misinformation. These findings demonstrate that non-participation in school vaccination programs should not be automatically equated with vaccine hesitancy. Conclusions: Tailored interventions are necessary for addressing vaccine non-participation. Recommendations include strengthening collaboration with general practitioners, streamlining consent processes and providing targeted education to counter misinformation. This study provides valuable insights into social determinants of vaccine acceptance and offers actionable strategies for improving vaccine uptake in school-based programs.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Vaccines
Vaccines Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
1853
审稿时长
18.06 days
期刊介绍: Vaccines (ISSN 2076-393X) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal focused on laboratory and clinical vaccine research, utilization and immunization. Vaccines publishes high quality reviews, regular research papers, communications and case reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信