Preferences of Dutch Parents and Expectant Parents for Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prevention Strategies: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

IF 5.3 3区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Annefleur C Langedijk, Floris van den Dungen, Lisette Harteveld, Lisanne van Leeuwen, Lucy Smit, Jennie van den Boer, Diana Mendes, M Claire Verhage, Elise Kocks, Marlies van Houten
{"title":"Preferences of Dutch Parents and Expectant Parents for Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prevention Strategies: A Discrete Choice Experiment.","authors":"Annefleur C Langedijk, Floris van den Dungen, Lisette Harteveld, Lisanne van Leeuwen, Lucy Smit, Jennie van den Boer, Diana Mendes, M Claire Verhage, Elise Kocks, Marlies van Houten","doi":"10.1007/s40121-025-01214-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of acute lower respiratory tract infection in infants. This study examined the preferences of Dutch parents and expectant parents for two RSV prevention strategies for infant protection: a maternal vaccine versus an infant monoclonal antibody (mAb) injection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey including a discrete choice experiment was conducted. Participants chose between two immunisation options for 'a common virus among infants' that represented RSV. These differed based on six attributes: timing and recipient of the injection, costs, recommended by a healthcare provider (HCP), included in the National Immunisation Programme (NIP), administration location, and co-administered with other injections. The main outcomes were preference weights, conditional relative attribute importance (CRAI), and willingness to be immunised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey was completed by 150 participants (90% female; 49% parents; 51% expectant parents; mean age 31.23 ± 5.61 years). Participants preferred an immunisation option that is administered to pregnant women [mean = 1.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18-1.82)], free of charge [mean = 1.36 (95% CI 1.10-1.67)], recommended by an HCP [mean = 0.50 (95% CI, 0.34-0.66)], and included in the NIP [mean = 0.42 (95% CI, 0.26-0.58)]. The most important attributes were timing and recipient of the injection [CRAI = 32% (95% CI, 28-35%)] and costs [CRAI = 24% (95% CI, 20-28%)]. Willingness to be immunised was higher when the maternal vaccine and infant mAb injection were in the NIP than when only the infant mAb injection was available (89% vs 74%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results suggest that most Dutch parents and expectant parents would prefer a maternal vaccine to an infant mAb injection to immunise their infants against an RSV-like virus. An NIP that incorporates both strategies may enhance uptake and protect the most infants. However, as the attributes were not exhaustively or explicitly presented in the context of RSV prevention, the results may not be completely transferable.</p>","PeriodicalId":13592,"journal":{"name":"Infectious Diseases and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infectious Diseases and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-025-01214-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of acute lower respiratory tract infection in infants. This study examined the preferences of Dutch parents and expectant parents for two RSV prevention strategies for infant protection: a maternal vaccine versus an infant monoclonal antibody (mAb) injection.

Methods: An online survey including a discrete choice experiment was conducted. Participants chose between two immunisation options for 'a common virus among infants' that represented RSV. These differed based on six attributes: timing and recipient of the injection, costs, recommended by a healthcare provider (HCP), included in the National Immunisation Programme (NIP), administration location, and co-administered with other injections. The main outcomes were preference weights, conditional relative attribute importance (CRAI), and willingness to be immunised.

Results: The survey was completed by 150 participants (90% female; 49% parents; 51% expectant parents; mean age 31.23 ± 5.61 years). Participants preferred an immunisation option that is administered to pregnant women [mean = 1.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18-1.82)], free of charge [mean = 1.36 (95% CI 1.10-1.67)], recommended by an HCP [mean = 0.50 (95% CI, 0.34-0.66)], and included in the NIP [mean = 0.42 (95% CI, 0.26-0.58)]. The most important attributes were timing and recipient of the injection [CRAI = 32% (95% CI, 28-35%)] and costs [CRAI = 24% (95% CI, 20-28%)]. Willingness to be immunised was higher when the maternal vaccine and infant mAb injection were in the NIP than when only the infant mAb injection was available (89% vs 74%).

Conclusions: The results suggest that most Dutch parents and expectant parents would prefer a maternal vaccine to an infant mAb injection to immunise their infants against an RSV-like virus. An NIP that incorporates both strategies may enhance uptake and protect the most infants. However, as the attributes were not exhaustively or explicitly presented in the context of RSV prevention, the results may not be completely transferable.

荷兰父母和准父母对呼吸道合胞病毒预防策略的偏好:一个离散选择实验。
呼吸道合胞病毒(RSV)是导致婴幼儿急性下呼吸道感染的主要原因。本研究调查了荷兰父母和准父母对两种RSV预防婴儿保护策略的偏好:母亲疫苗和婴儿单克隆抗体(mAb)注射。方法:采用离散选择实验的在线调查方法。参与者在代表呼吸道合胞病毒的“婴儿常见病毒”的两种免疫方案中进行选择。这些差异基于六个属性:注射的时间和接受者,医疗保健提供者(HCP)推荐的费用,包括在国家免疫规划(NIP)中,给药地点,以及与其他注射共同给药。主要结果是偏好权重、条件相对属性重要性(CRAI)和免疫意愿。结果:共150人完成调查,其中女性占90%,父母占49%,准父母占51%,平均年龄31.23±5.61岁。参与者更倾向于对孕妇进行免疫接种[平均= 1.48(95%可信区间(CI) 1.18-1.82)],免费[平均= 1.36 (95% CI 1.10-1.67)],由HCP推荐[平均= 0.50 (95% CI, 0.34-0.66)],并纳入NIP[平均= 0.42 (95% CI, 0.26-0.58)]。最重要的属性是注射时间和受体[cri = 32% (95% CI, 28-35%)]和费用[cri = 24% (95% CI, 20-28%)]。与仅提供婴儿单抗注射相比,在NIP中提供母亲疫苗和婴儿单抗注射时的免疫意愿更高(89%对74%)。结论:结果表明,大多数荷兰父母和准父母更倾向于使用母亲疫苗,而不是婴儿单克隆抗体注射,以使他们的婴儿免疫对抗rsv样病毒。结合这两种策略的NIP可以提高吸收并保护大多数婴儿。然而,由于在RSV预防的背景下没有详尽或明确地提出这些属性,因此结果可能不完全可转移。
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
Infectious Diseases and Therapy
Infectious Diseases and Therapy Medicine-Microbiology (medical)
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
136
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Infectious Diseases and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of infectious disease therapies and interventions, including vaccines and devices. Studies relating to diagnostic products and diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, bacterial and fungal infections, viral infections (including HIV/AIDS and hepatitis), parasitological diseases, tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases, vaccinations and other interventions, and drug-resistance, chronic infections, epidemiology and tropical, emergent, pediatric, dermal and sexually-transmitted diseases.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信