Jana Kaden, Julia Peper, Anne C Rahn, Birte Berger-Höger
{"title":"Informed Decision-Making About COVID-19 Vaccination - Development and Feasibility of a Decision Support Intervention: A Mixed-Methods Study.","authors":"Jana Kaden, Julia Peper, Anne C Rahn, Birte Berger-Höger","doi":"10.1080/10810730.2025.2515533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many people, particularly from vulnerable groups, experienced decisional conflict regarding COVID-19 vaccination. To support informed decision-making, we developed and pilot-tested a decision support intervention consisting of a patient decision aid and non-directive decision coaching led by a trained health professional. We developed a training program to prepare healthcare professionals to implement the intervention. To assess the decisional needs of unvaccinated individuals, a literature review and a focus group with community health workers were conducted. The results informed the development of the intervention and the associated training for health professionals, which were then tested regarding their comprehensibility, feasibility, and acceptance. Fourteen health professionals completed a 540-minute training and participated in guided focus groups. The decision support intervention was subsequently tested with laypeople through guided interviews. Data were analyzed via qualitative content analysis. The training was feasible and well accepted, and the competencies to provide decision coaching were acquired. The decision coaching offer was tested in two real and seven simulated sessions. The patient decision aid, comprising an evidence-based COVID-19 information sheet and a decision guidance, was comprehensible and highly accepted by all participants. While the intervention proved feasible, access to vulnerable groups and their willingness to participate remained low.</p>","PeriodicalId":16026,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2025.2515533","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Many people, particularly from vulnerable groups, experienced decisional conflict regarding COVID-19 vaccination. To support informed decision-making, we developed and pilot-tested a decision support intervention consisting of a patient decision aid and non-directive decision coaching led by a trained health professional. We developed a training program to prepare healthcare professionals to implement the intervention. To assess the decisional needs of unvaccinated individuals, a literature review and a focus group with community health workers were conducted. The results informed the development of the intervention and the associated training for health professionals, which were then tested regarding their comprehensibility, feasibility, and acceptance. Fourteen health professionals completed a 540-minute training and participated in guided focus groups. The decision support intervention was subsequently tested with laypeople through guided interviews. Data were analyzed via qualitative content analysis. The training was feasible and well accepted, and the competencies to provide decision coaching were acquired. The decision coaching offer was tested in two real and seven simulated sessions. The patient decision aid, comprising an evidence-based COVID-19 information sheet and a decision guidance, was comprehensible and highly accepted by all participants. While the intervention proved feasible, access to vulnerable groups and their willingness to participate remained low.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Health Communication: International Perspectives is the leading journal covering the full breadth of a field that focuses on the communication of health information globally. Articles feature research on: • Developments in the field of health communication; • New media, m-health and interactive health communication; • Health Literacy; • Social marketing; • Global Health; • Shared decision making and ethics; • Interpersonal and mass media communication; • Advances in health diplomacy, psychology, government, policy and education; • Government, civil society and multi-stakeholder initiatives; • Public Private partnerships and • Public Health campaigns. Global in scope, the journal seeks to advance a synergistic relationship between research and practical information. With a focus on promoting the health literacy of the individual, caregiver, provider, community, and those in the health policy, the journal presents research, progress in areas of technology and public health, ethics, politics and policy, and the application of health communication principles. The journal is selective with the highest quality social scientific research including qualitative and quantitative studies.