“It's a risk-benefit analysis”: Qualitative perspectives on barriers and enablers to post-treatment vaccination from adults affected by a haematological malignancy in Australia

IF 4.5 3区 医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
Holly Chung , Meinir Krishnasamy , Trish Joyce , Tracey Dryden , Ashley Whitechurch , Paul Baden , Simon Harrison , Benjamin W. Teh
{"title":"“It's a risk-benefit analysis”: Qualitative perspectives on barriers and enablers to post-treatment vaccination from adults affected by a haematological malignancy in Australia","authors":"Holly Chung ,&nbsp;Meinir Krishnasamy ,&nbsp;Trish Joyce ,&nbsp;Tracey Dryden ,&nbsp;Ashley Whitechurch ,&nbsp;Paul Baden ,&nbsp;Simon Harrison ,&nbsp;Benjamin W. Teh","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.126826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>People affected by haematological malignancies are at high risk of morbidity and mortality caused by vaccine-preventable infections. However, vaccination commencement and completion following anti-cancer treatment is sub-optimal for this population. Innovation relating to vaccination delivery and schedules, informed by the needs and preferences of the target population, may improve uptake of vaccinations. This study explored barriers and enablers to vaccinations, novel vaccines and vaccination schedules, from the perspectives of this cohort.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A qualitative exploratory study at an Australian specialist cancer hospital. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients via telephone or videoconferencing, exploring experiences of, and views regarding, vaccination after anti-cancer treatment, and barriers and enablers to vaccination. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected prior to interviews and analysed descriptively. Qualitative data were analysed inductively using template analysis, then mapped to the COM-B model of behaviour change, and barriers and enablers identified.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty blood cancer patients participated. Participants described barriers including poor care coordination, travel, time, and financial costs, concerns regarding potential side effects and injury, intervention and appointment fatigue, and concerns regarding vaccine development processes. Enablers included: consultative conversations, information available in various formats, automated appointments and reminders, hybrid and shared models of care, being linked-in with trusted health professionals, confidence in public health advice and vaccine development processes, and seeing vaccinations as central to their recovery.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Barriers and enablers to vaccination identified suggest ways in which vaccination services for this population can be improved. While patients receiving vaccinations at their treating centre reported coordinated care that made access straightforward, other participants described being hampered by lack of coordinated care and continuity. A lack of condition-specific information coupled with common vaccine misconceptions resulted in concerns regarding vaccinations. These findings offer opportunities to address barriers to vaccination uptake through targeted service innovation and education and information interventions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"50 ","pages":"Article 126826"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X25001239","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

People affected by haematological malignancies are at high risk of morbidity and mortality caused by vaccine-preventable infections. However, vaccination commencement and completion following anti-cancer treatment is sub-optimal for this population. Innovation relating to vaccination delivery and schedules, informed by the needs and preferences of the target population, may improve uptake of vaccinations. This study explored barriers and enablers to vaccinations, novel vaccines and vaccination schedules, from the perspectives of this cohort.

Methods

A qualitative exploratory study at an Australian specialist cancer hospital. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients via telephone or videoconferencing, exploring experiences of, and views regarding, vaccination after anti-cancer treatment, and barriers and enablers to vaccination. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected prior to interviews and analysed descriptively. Qualitative data were analysed inductively using template analysis, then mapped to the COM-B model of behaviour change, and barriers and enablers identified.

Results

Twenty blood cancer patients participated. Participants described barriers including poor care coordination, travel, time, and financial costs, concerns regarding potential side effects and injury, intervention and appointment fatigue, and concerns regarding vaccine development processes. Enablers included: consultative conversations, information available in various formats, automated appointments and reminders, hybrid and shared models of care, being linked-in with trusted health professionals, confidence in public health advice and vaccine development processes, and seeing vaccinations as central to their recovery.

Conclusion

Barriers and enablers to vaccination identified suggest ways in which vaccination services for this population can be improved. While patients receiving vaccinations at their treating centre reported coordinated care that made access straightforward, other participants described being hampered by lack of coordinated care and continuity. A lack of condition-specific information coupled with common vaccine misconceptions resulted in concerns regarding vaccinations. These findings offer opportunities to address barriers to vaccination uptake through targeted service innovation and education and information interventions.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Vaccine
Vaccine 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
5.50%
发文量
992
审稿时长
131 days
期刊介绍: Vaccine is unique in publishing the highest quality science across all disciplines relevant to the field of vaccinology - all original article submissions across basic and clinical research, vaccine manufacturing, history, public policy, behavioral science and ethics, social sciences, safety, and many other related areas are welcomed. The submission categories as given in the Guide for Authors indicate where we receive the most papers. Papers outside these major areas are also welcome and authors are encouraged to contact us with specific questions.
×
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