An England-wide survey on attitudes towards antenatal and infant immunisation against respiratory syncytial virus amongst pregnant and post-partum women

IF 4.5 3区医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY

Vaccine Pub Date : 2025-07-12 DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127482

Jonathan Broad, Louise Letley, Georgie Adair, Jemma Walker, Tami Benzaken, Vanessa Saliba, Mary E. Ramsay, Conall H. Watson , Helen Campbell

{"title":"An England-wide survey on attitudes towards antenatal and infant immunisation against respiratory syncytial virus amongst pregnant and post-partum women","authors":"Jonathan Broad, Louise Letley, Georgie Adair, Jemma Walker, Tami Benzaken, Vanessa Saliba, Mary E. Ramsay, Conall H. Watson , Helen Campbell","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes significant morbidity. New immunisations to protect infants have been licensed in the UK including a vaccine in pregnancy and a monoclonal antibody injection in infants. The UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has advised that either could be considered suitable for a national programme. We conducted a survey of pregnant women to understand acceptability and barriers to RSV immunisation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>73,734 women were emailed a Health Security Agency survey on decision making around maternal and baby health via a parent support organisation. The survey collected baseline demographics, expressed likelihood of accepting maternal vaccine or immunisation for their infant, and perceptions of potential barriers, using likert scales and free text questions. Eligibility criteria were: pregnant or with a child up to 6 months of age, living in England, 18 years or older. Responses were quantified descriptively; binary logistic regression was used to measure multivariable associations; thematic analysis was conducted on qualitative data.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>1061 women completed the survey. Respondents were likely to accept maternal RSV vaccination (89.5 %, 95 % CI 87.5–91.3) or infant immunisation (81.4 %, 95 % CI 79.0–83.7). Multivariable analysis showed higher acceptability was associated with having a partner and possible association with ethnicity. No difference was observed by deprivation, or disability status on multivariable analysis. Participants most trusted midwives for information.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Maternal and infant RSV immunisations were both highly acceptable, supporting the roll out of either programme. Ongoing monitoring will support evaluation of programme implementation and equity of access.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"62 ","pages":"Article 127482"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-12","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/S0264410X25007790","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

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes significant morbidity. New immunisations to protect infants have been licensed in the UK including a vaccine in pregnancy and a monoclonal antibody injection in infants. The UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has advised that either could be considered suitable for a national programme. We conducted a survey of pregnant women to understand acceptability and barriers to RSV immunisation.

Methods

73,734 women were emailed a Health Security Agency survey on decision making around maternal and baby health via a parent support organisation. The survey collected baseline demographics, expressed likelihood of accepting maternal vaccine or immunisation for their infant, and perceptions of potential barriers, using likert scales and free text questions. Eligibility criteria were: pregnant or with a child up to 6 months of age, living in England, 18 years or older. Responses were quantified descriptively; binary logistic regression was used to measure multivariable associations; thematic analysis was conducted on qualitative data.

Results

1061 women completed the survey. Respondents were likely to accept maternal RSV vaccination (89.5 %, 95 % CI 87.5–91.3) or infant immunisation (81.4 %, 95 % CI 79.0–83.7). Multivariable analysis showed higher acceptability was associated with having a partner and possible association with ethnicity. No difference was observed by deprivation, or disability status on multivariable analysis. Participants most trusted midwives for information.

Conclusion

Maternal and infant RSV immunisations were both highly acceptable, supporting the roll out of either programme. Ongoing monitoring will support evaluation of programme implementation and equity of access.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在全英格兰范围内进行的一项调查，调查孕妇和产后妇女对产前和婴儿接种呼吸道合胞病毒免疫的态度

呼吸道合胞病毒（RSV）引起严重的发病率。保护婴儿的新免疫接种已在英国获得许可，包括孕期疫苗和婴儿单克隆抗体注射。英国疫苗接种和免疫联合委员会建议，这两种疫苗都可以被认为适合国家规划。我们对孕妇进行了一项调查，以了解RSV免疫的可接受性和障碍。方法通过一个家长支持组织，通过电子邮件向73734名妇女发送了一份健康保障局关于母婴健康决策的调查。该调查收集了基线人口统计数据，表达了接受母亲疫苗或婴儿免疫接种的可能性，以及对潜在障碍的看法，使用李克特量表和自由文本问题。资格标准是：怀孕或有一个6个月大的孩子，住在英格兰，18岁或以上。对反应进行描述性量化；采用二元逻辑回归来衡量多变量相关性；对定性数据进行专题分析。结果1061名女性完成了调查。应答者可能接受母亲RSV疫苗接种（89.5%,95% CI 87.5-91.3）或婴儿免疫接种（81.4%,95% CI 79.0-83.7）。多变量分析表明，较高的可接受性与有伴侣有关，并可能与种族有关。在多变量分析中，剥夺或残疾状况没有观察到差异。参与者最信任助产士提供的信息。结论母婴呼吸道合胞病毒免疫接种均可高度接受，支持任一规划的推广。不断监测将支持评价方案执行情况和公平获得机会。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

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.