评估健康教育包克服母亲疫苗犹豫的有效性:单盲随机研究。

IF 1.6 Q2 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Mounika Bazar, Kiran N Baliga, Anupama Nayak Panakaje, S R Ravikiran
{"title":"评估健康教育包克服母亲疫苗犹豫的有效性:单盲随机研究。","authors":"Mounika Bazar, Kiran N Baliga, Anupama Nayak Panakaje, S R Ravikiran","doi":"10.1186/s13104-025-07291-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Vaccine Hesitancy (VH) challenges previously perceived attitudes of a simple dichotomy of \"accept\" or \"reject\". This is not just due to people being uninformed or misinformed but rather due to multiple forms of distrust. It is criticized as a vague notion with an uncertain hypothetical background. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the baseline knowledge and immunization practices of postnatal mothers and their hesitancy after intervention with the health education tool 'SuBaDRa' and compare it with those of the control group.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>This hospital-based, single-blinded randomized control study was performed for 2 years with 272 (136 per group) postnatal mothers (booked cases with immunization cards and access to a smartphone) in Karnataka, India. 'SuBaDRa', a tailored health education tool, was used to counsel the intervention group: Presenting Sustainable initiatives by the government; assessing mothers' Baseline immunization knowledge and postintervention revaluations via the 'WHO SAGE questionnaire', Dissipating knowledge via health education and Reinforcement with social media applications. The control group was counseled about essential newborn care. The vaccine delay of infants at birth and at 6, 10, and 14 weeks and 9 months of age was assessed. The secondary outcome measures mothers' attitudes toward immunization postintervention. The vaccine was considered delayed if it was received later than 2 weeks after the recommended age. The characteristics of the study subjects, i.e., postnatal mothers with eligible newborns, were analyzed via descriptive statistics. These characteristics were compared between the intervention and control groups via the Chi-square (χ<sup>2</sup>) test and Fischer's exact test. The results revealed that the intervention group vaccine delays at 6, 10, 14 weeks and 9 months were 5.9%, 3%, 0.7% and 11.9%, respectively, and the control group vaccine delays were 20%, 28.9%, 55.6% and 48.1%, respectively, with p values of 0.001 at 6 weeks and 0 for the rest, all of which were highly significant. Trial registration The study was registered on Clinical Trials Registry - India (CTRI) with the registration number (CTRI/2021/08/035749), registered on (18/08/2021).</p>","PeriodicalId":9234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Research Notes","volume":"18 1","pages":"229"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12102990/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of effectiveness of health education bundle to overcome vaccine hesitancy in mothers: single blinded randomized study.\",\"authors\":\"Mounika Bazar, Kiran N Baliga, Anupama Nayak Panakaje, S R Ravikiran\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13104-025-07291-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Vaccine Hesitancy (VH) challenges previously perceived attitudes of a simple dichotomy of \\\"accept\\\" or \\\"reject\\\". This is not just due to people being uninformed or misinformed but rather due to multiple forms of distrust. It is criticized as a vague notion with an uncertain hypothetical background. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the baseline knowledge and immunization practices of postnatal mothers and their hesitancy after intervention with the health education tool 'SuBaDRa' and compare it with those of the control group.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>This hospital-based, single-blinded randomized control study was performed for 2 years with 272 (136 per group) postnatal mothers (booked cases with immunization cards and access to a smartphone) in Karnataka, India. 'SuBaDRa', a tailored health education tool, was used to counsel the intervention group: Presenting Sustainable initiatives by the government; assessing mothers' Baseline immunization knowledge and postintervention revaluations via the 'WHO SAGE questionnaire', Dissipating knowledge via health education and Reinforcement with social media applications. The control group was counseled about essential newborn care. The vaccine delay of infants at birth and at 6, 10, and 14 weeks and 9 months of age was assessed. The secondary outcome measures mothers' attitudes toward immunization postintervention. The vaccine was considered delayed if it was received later than 2 weeks after the recommended age. The characteristics of the study subjects, i.e., postnatal mothers with eligible newborns, were analyzed via descriptive statistics. These characteristics were compared between the intervention and control groups via the Chi-square (χ<sup>2</sup>) test and Fischer's exact test. The results revealed that the intervention group vaccine delays at 6, 10, 14 weeks and 9 months were 5.9%, 3%, 0.7% and 11.9%, respectively, and the control group vaccine delays were 20%, 28.9%, 55.6% and 48.1%, respectively, with p values of 0.001 at 6 weeks and 0 for the rest, all of which were highly significant. Trial registration The study was registered on Clinical Trials Registry - India (CTRI) with the registration number (CTRI/2021/08/035749), registered on (18/08/2021).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Research Notes\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"229\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12102990/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Research Notes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-025-07291-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Research Notes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-025-07291-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:疫苗犹豫(VH)挑战了以前认为的“接受”或“拒绝”的简单二分法的态度。这不仅仅是因为人们不知情或被误导,而是因为多种形式的不信任。它被批评为具有不确定假设背景的模糊概念。因此,本研究旨在评估产后母亲的基线知识和免疫实践,以及他们在健康教育工具“SuBaDRa”干预后的犹豫,并将其与对照组进行比较。结果:这项基于医院的单盲随机对照研究在印度卡纳塔克邦进行了为期2年的272例(每组136例)产后母亲(使用免疫卡和智能手机预订病例)。“SuBaDRa”是一种量身定制的健康教育工具,用于向干预小组提供咨询:介绍政府的可持续举措;通过“世卫组织SAGE问卷”评估母亲的基线免疫知识和干预后的重新评估,通过健康教育消散知识,并通过社交媒体应用进行强化。对照组接受新生儿基本护理指导。对婴儿出生时、6周、10周、14周和9个月时的疫苗延迟进行了评估。次要结局衡量干预后母亲对免疫接种的态度。如果接种时间晚于推荐年龄2周,则认为是延迟接种。通过描述性统计分析研究对象的特征,即符合条件的新生儿的产后母亲。通过χ2检验和Fischer精确检验比较干预组和对照组的这些特征。结果显示,干预组6周、10周、14周和9个月疫苗延迟分别为5.9%、3%、0.7%和11.9%,对照组疫苗延迟分别为20%、28.9%、55.6%和48.1%,6周p值为0.001,其余p值为0,均具有高度显著性。该研究已在印度临床试验注册中心(CTRI)注册,注册号为(CTRI/2021/08/035749),注册日期为(18/08/2021)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of effectiveness of health education bundle to overcome vaccine hesitancy in mothers: single blinded randomized study.

Objective: Vaccine Hesitancy (VH) challenges previously perceived attitudes of a simple dichotomy of "accept" or "reject". This is not just due to people being uninformed or misinformed but rather due to multiple forms of distrust. It is criticized as a vague notion with an uncertain hypothetical background. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the baseline knowledge and immunization practices of postnatal mothers and their hesitancy after intervention with the health education tool 'SuBaDRa' and compare it with those of the control group.

Result: This hospital-based, single-blinded randomized control study was performed for 2 years with 272 (136 per group) postnatal mothers (booked cases with immunization cards and access to a smartphone) in Karnataka, India. 'SuBaDRa', a tailored health education tool, was used to counsel the intervention group: Presenting Sustainable initiatives by the government; assessing mothers' Baseline immunization knowledge and postintervention revaluations via the 'WHO SAGE questionnaire', Dissipating knowledge via health education and Reinforcement with social media applications. The control group was counseled about essential newborn care. The vaccine delay of infants at birth and at 6, 10, and 14 weeks and 9 months of age was assessed. The secondary outcome measures mothers' attitudes toward immunization postintervention. The vaccine was considered delayed if it was received later than 2 weeks after the recommended age. The characteristics of the study subjects, i.e., postnatal mothers with eligible newborns, were analyzed via descriptive statistics. These characteristics were compared between the intervention and control groups via the Chi-square (χ2) test and Fischer's exact test. The results revealed that the intervention group vaccine delays at 6, 10, 14 weeks and 9 months were 5.9%, 3%, 0.7% and 11.9%, respectively, and the control group vaccine delays were 20%, 28.9%, 55.6% and 48.1%, respectively, with p values of 0.001 at 6 weeks and 0 for the rest, all of which were highly significant. Trial registration The study was registered on Clinical Trials Registry - India (CTRI) with the registration number (CTRI/2021/08/035749), registered on (18/08/2021).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Research Notes
BMC Research Notes Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (all)
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
363
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Research Notes publishes scientifically valid research outputs that cannot be considered as full research or methodology articles. We support the research community across all scientific and clinical disciplines by providing an open access forum for sharing data and useful information; this includes, but is not limited to, updates to previous work, additions to established methods, short publications, null results, research proposals and data management plans.
×
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