德国和意大利老年人和医生对呼吸道合胞病毒疫苗接种的偏好：一个离散选择实验

IF 4.5 3区医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY

Vaccine Pub Date : 2025-06-20 DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127390

Alen Marijam , Pavo Marijic , Anna Puggina , Olivier Cailloux , Frederik Verelst , Marta Vicentini , Elisa Turriani , Foteini Gkalapi , Indra Jaidhauser , Christina Rieger , Paolo Bonanni , Chiara de Waure , Gernot Rohde , Tommi Tervonen

{"title":"德国和意大利老年人和医生对呼吸道合胞病毒疫苗接种的偏好：一个离散选择实验","authors":"Alen Marijam , Pavo Marijic , Anna Puggina , Olivier Cailloux , Frederik Verelst , Marta Vicentini , Elisa Turriani , Foteini Gkalapi , Indra Jaidhauser , Christina Rieger , Paolo Bonanni , Chiara de Waure , Gernot Rohde , Tommi Tervonen","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127390","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To improve the uptake of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination, we used discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to understand the vaccine attributes most important to older adults receiving RSV vaccines and physicians recommending RSV vaccines in Germany and Italy.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The vaccine attributes assessed included the level of protection from lower respiratory tract disease provided in the first and second year, flexibility in time of administration, the possibility for co-administration with one other vaccine, and if the vaccine was recommended in clinical guidelines and/or a national immunization program (NIP). DCE results were used to derive relative attribute importance, minimum acceptable benefits, and predicted choice probabilities.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 999 older adults and 300 physicians were included. The most important vaccine attributes to both groups were the level of protection provided in the first and second year, and the inclusion of the vaccine in a NIP. Older adults and physicians would only consider a vaccine not included in a NIP if the first-year protection was ≥20–27 % higher than that of a vaccine included in the NIP. Co-administration and time of administration had little to no impact.</div><div>Older adults aged 60–69 years with chronic conditions associated with increased risks of RSV were most likely to accept RSV vaccination (85 %), vs those aged 50–59 years with these conditions (78 %), aged 60–69 years without these conditions (61 %), or aged ≥70 years (65 %) with/without these conditions. Similarly, German and Italian physicians were most likely to recommend a vaccine to adults aged 60–69 years with chronic conditions as well as to those aged ≥70 years.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>These results suggest that, to improve RSV vaccine uptake in Germany and Italy, RSV vaccines should remain included in NIPs, and older and physicians should be informed of vaccine protection levels and benefits.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"61 ","pages":"Article 127390"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Older adults' and physicians' preferences for respiratory syncytial virus vaccination in Germany and Italy: A discrete choice experiment\",\"authors\":\"Alen Marijam , Pavo Marijic , Anna Puggina , Olivier Cailloux , Frederik Verelst , Marta Vicentini , Elisa Turriani , Foteini Gkalapi , Indra Jaidhauser , Christina Rieger , Paolo Bonanni , Chiara de Waure , Gernot Rohde , Tommi Tervonen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127390\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To improve the uptake of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination, we used discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to understand the vaccine attributes most important to older adults receiving RSV vaccines and physicians recommending RSV vaccines in Germany and Italy.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The vaccine attributes assessed included the level of protection from lower respiratory tract disease provided in the first and second year, flexibility in time of administration, the possibility for co-administration with one other vaccine, and if the vaccine was recommended in clinical guidelines and/or a national immunization program (NIP). DCE results were used to derive relative attribute importance, minimum acceptable benefits, and predicted choice probabilities.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 999 older adults and 300 physicians were included. The most important vaccine attributes to both groups were the level of protection provided in the first and second year, and the inclusion of the vaccine in a NIP. Older adults and physicians would only consider a vaccine not included in a NIP if the first-year protection was ≥20–27 % higher than that of a vaccine included in the NIP. Co-administration and time of administration had little to no impact.</div><div>Older adults aged 60–69 years with chronic conditions associated with increased risks of RSV were most likely to accept RSV vaccination (85 %), vs those aged 50–59 years with these conditions (78 %), aged 60–69 years without these conditions (61 %), or aged ≥70 years (65 %) with/without these conditions. Similarly, German and Italian physicians were most likely to recommend a vaccine to adults aged 60–69 years with chronic conditions as well as to those aged ≥70 years.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>These results suggest that, to improve RSV vaccine uptake in Germany and Italy, RSV vaccines should remain included in NIPs, and older and physicians should be informed of vaccine protection levels and benefits.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23491,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vaccine\",\"volume\":\"61 \",\"pages\":\"Article 127390\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-20\",\"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/S0264410X25006875\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X25006875","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

摘要

目的为了提高呼吸道合胞病毒（RSV）疫苗的吸收率，我们采用离散选择实验（DCEs）了解德国和意大利老年人接种RSV疫苗和医生推荐RSV疫苗最重要的疫苗属性。方法评估的疫苗属性包括第一年和第二年提供的下呼吸道疾病保护水平，给药时间的灵活性，与其他疫苗共同给药的可能性，以及该疫苗是否在临床指南和/或国家免疫规划（NIP）中被推荐。DCE结果用于推导相对属性重要性、最小可接受效益和预测选择概率。结果共纳入老年人999人，内科医生300人。两组最重要的疫苗属性是第一年和第二年提供的保护水平，以及疫苗被纳入NIP。老年人和医生只会考虑未纳入NIP的疫苗，如果第一年的保护作用比纳入NIP的疫苗高≥20 - 27%。共同给药和给药时间几乎没有影响。患有与RSV风险增加相关的慢性疾病的60-69岁老年人最有可能接受RSV疫苗接种（85%），而患有这些疾病的50-59岁人群（78%）、没有这些疾病的60-69岁人群（61%）或患有/不患有这些疾病的≥70岁人群（65%）。同样，德国和意大利的医生最有可能向患有慢性疾病的60-69岁成年人以及年龄≥70岁的成年人推荐疫苗。结论这些结果提示，为了提高德国和意大利的RSV疫苗接种率，应继续将RSV疫苗纳入NIPs，并应告知老年人和医生疫苗的保护水平和益处。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

Older adults' and physicians' preferences for respiratory syncytial virus vaccination in Germany and Italy: A discrete choice experiment

查看原文本刊更多论文

Older adults' and physicians' preferences for respiratory syncytial virus vaccination in Germany and Italy: A discrete choice experiment

Objective

To improve the uptake of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination, we used discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to understand the vaccine attributes most important to older adults receiving RSV vaccines and physicians recommending RSV vaccines in Germany and Italy.

Methods

The vaccine attributes assessed included the level of protection from lower respiratory tract disease provided in the first and second year, flexibility in time of administration, the possibility for co-administration with one other vaccine, and if the vaccine was recommended in clinical guidelines and/or a national immunization program (NIP). DCE results were used to derive relative attribute importance, minimum acceptable benefits, and predicted choice probabilities.

Results

A total of 999 older adults and 300 physicians were included. The most important vaccine attributes to both groups were the level of protection provided in the first and second year, and the inclusion of the vaccine in a NIP. Older adults and physicians would only consider a vaccine not included in a NIP if the first-year protection was ≥20–27 % higher than that of a vaccine included in the NIP. Co-administration and time of administration had little to no impact.

Older adults aged 60–69 years with chronic conditions associated with increased risks of RSV were most likely to accept RSV vaccination (85 %), vs those aged 50–59 years with these conditions (78 %), aged 60–69 years without these conditions (61 %), or aged ≥70 years (65 %) with/without these conditions. Similarly, German and Italian physicians were most likely to recommend a vaccine to adults aged 60–69 years with chronic conditions as well as to those aged ≥70 years.

Conclusions

These results suggest that, to improve RSV vaccine uptake in Germany and Italy, RSV vaccines should remain included in NIPs, and older and physicians should be informed of vaccine protection levels and benefits.

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

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.