Patient vaccine awareness in an obstetric and gynecologic office setting

Thomas M Malone MD , Bernard Gonik MD , Mark Tomlinson MD
{"title":"Patient vaccine awareness in an obstetric and gynecologic office setting","authors":"Thomas M Malone MD ,&nbsp;Bernard Gonik MD ,&nbsp;Mark Tomlinson MD","doi":"10.1016/S1068-607X(02)00117-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The objective of our study was to better understand patient vaccine awareness in different ob/gyn settings. A masked questionnaire was completed by ob/gyn resident teaching clinic patients (CLINIC; <em>n</em> = 228) and private community physician patients (PVT; <em>n</em> = 254) exploring demographic, immunization recollection, and vaccine administration preferences. χ<sup>2</sup> and Student <em>t</em> test were used for statistical analyses. The results demonstrated that those in CLINIC compared with PVT were younger (27.2 ± 10.6 years old versus 38.0 ± 12.6 years old; <em>P</em> &lt; .001) and more often presented for pregnancy-related visits (57.0% versus 21.6%; <em>P</em> &lt; .001). PVT patients more commonly had documentation of childhood (34.3%) and adult (26.8%) vaccine status than those in CLINIC (25.6% and 15.5%, respectively; <em>P</em><span> &lt; .03). Of the vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) surveyed, those in PVT (versus CLINIC) more often reported adequate vaccination<span> or prior exposure to measles (68.5% versus 30.5%; </span></span><em>P</em><span> &lt; .001) and varicella (65.7% versus 48.5%; </span><em>P</em><span><span> &lt; .001). No differences were noted between study groups for hepatitis B, tetanus, and influenza. Those in PVT more often identified a non-ob/gyn provider for vaccine-related needs, as opposed to those in CLINIC, who more often relied on ob/gyn or </span>health department sites for such needs. Over one third of both populations could not identify a provider for vaccine administration. Both groups strongly desired availability of vaccine services through their ob/gyn office. We conclude that PVT patients demonstrate a better awareness of vaccine status compared with those in CLINIC. However, overall both populations report poor documentation and inadequate immunity against most VPDs. A variety of practice sites are currently used for vaccination, although many patients cannot identify a place to go. The majority of patients would like to see this service available as a part of their ob/gyn care.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":80301,"journal":{"name":"Primary care update for Ob/Gyns","volume":"9 6","pages":"Pages 195-198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1068-607X(02)00117-8","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Primary care update for Ob/Gyns","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1068607X02001178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The objective of our study was to better understand patient vaccine awareness in different ob/gyn settings. A masked questionnaire was completed by ob/gyn resident teaching clinic patients (CLINIC; n = 228) and private community physician patients (PVT; n = 254) exploring demographic, immunization recollection, and vaccine administration preferences. χ2 and Student t test were used for statistical analyses. The results demonstrated that those in CLINIC compared with PVT were younger (27.2 ± 10.6 years old versus 38.0 ± 12.6 years old; P < .001) and more often presented for pregnancy-related visits (57.0% versus 21.6%; P < .001). PVT patients more commonly had documentation of childhood (34.3%) and adult (26.8%) vaccine status than those in CLINIC (25.6% and 15.5%, respectively; P < .03). Of the vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) surveyed, those in PVT (versus CLINIC) more often reported adequate vaccination or prior exposure to measles (68.5% versus 30.5%; P < .001) and varicella (65.7% versus 48.5%; P < .001). No differences were noted between study groups for hepatitis B, tetanus, and influenza. Those in PVT more often identified a non-ob/gyn provider for vaccine-related needs, as opposed to those in CLINIC, who more often relied on ob/gyn or health department sites for such needs. Over one third of both populations could not identify a provider for vaccine administration. Both groups strongly desired availability of vaccine services through their ob/gyn office. We conclude that PVT patients demonstrate a better awareness of vaccine status compared with those in CLINIC. However, overall both populations report poor documentation and inadequate immunity against most VPDs. A variety of practice sites are currently used for vaccination, although many patients cannot identify a place to go. The majority of patients would like to see this service available as a part of their ob/gyn care.

在产科和妇科办公室设置患者疫苗的认识
我们研究的目的是更好地了解不同妇产科环境下患者的疫苗意识。对妇产科住院医师教学诊所(clinic;n = 228)和私人社区医生患者(PVT;N = 254),探讨人口统计学、免疫回忆和疫苗施用偏好。采用χ2和Student t检验进行统计学分析。结果表明:与PVT相比,CLINIC组患者年龄更小(27.2±10.6岁比38.0±12.6岁);P & lt;.001),并且更经常出现在与妊娠有关的就诊中(57.0%对21.6%;P & lt;措施)。PVT患者通常有儿童(34.3%)和成人(26.8%)接种疫苗的记录,而门诊患者(分别为25.6%和15.5%);P & lt;03)。在接受调查的疫苗可预防疾病(vpd)中,PVT(与CLINIC相比)的患者更多地报告了充分的疫苗接种或以前接触过麻疹(68.5%对30.5%;P & lt;.001)和水痘(65.7%对48.5%;P & lt;措施)。在乙肝、破伤风和流感的研究组之间没有发现差异。那些在PVT的人更多地确定了非产科/妇科提供者的疫苗相关需求,而那些在诊所,谁更经常依赖于产科/妇科或卫生部门网站这类需求。两国人口中超过三分之一的人无法确定疫苗接种的提供者。这两个群体都强烈希望通过他们的妇产科办公室获得疫苗服务。我们得出结论,PVT患者比门诊患者对疫苗接种状况有更好的认识。然而,总的来说,这两个人群报告缺乏文献记录和对大多数vpd的免疫力不足。目前有各种各样的实践地点用于接种疫苗,尽管许多患者无法确定要去哪里。大多数患者希望看到这项服务可作为他们的妇产科护理的一部分。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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