TY - JOUR
T1 - Vaccine-hesitant families are more susceptible to verbal communication messaging
AU - Svist, Vitalija
AU - Maciuleviciene, Agne
AU - Naudziunaite, Simona
AU - Petraitiene, Sigita
AU - Del Torso, Stefano
AU - Grossman, Zachi
AU - Magelinskiene, Ginreta
AU - Valiulis, Arunas
PY - 2023/6/1
Y1 - 2023/6/1
N2 - OBJECTIVES: Our survey aims to highlight parents' and healthcare workers' opinions and hesitations regarding children's vaccination, identify the main factors influencing these opinions, and assess the impact of hesitations on immunisation for children, included in the National Immunisation Programme in Lithuania. METHODS: We used the questionnaire developed by the European Academy of Paediatrics Research in Ambulatory Settings Network (EAPRASnet). This questionnaire is designed to assess attitudes toward vaccination. The study involved parents raising children aged 1-4 years and primary healthcare providers (paediatricians, family doctors and nurses). RESULTS: We analysed the completed questionnaires from a total of 329 parents (142 fathers, 187 mothers) and 386 medical personnel (150 physicians, 236 nurses). Most parents expressed positive opinions about vaccines (> 8 points out of 10 possible), with older parents exhibiting more favourable attitudes. Compared to mothers, fathers showed more criticism regarding the information provided by physicians (p = 0.04). Family doctors and paediatricians were more supportive of vaccination than nurses and homoeopaths (p < 0.001). Parents and healthcare providers with higher education showed statistically significantly stronger opinions about the benefits of vaccines than those with lower education levels (p = 0.01 for parents, p < 0.001 for physicians and nurses). The Internet was identified as the primary source of negative information for both parents (69.6%) and healthcare providers (86%). However, verbal information received from medical staff during patient consultations or informal conversations among colleagues had the greatest impact on parents' opinions (17.3%) and medical personnel (35.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Confidential conversations with physicians and nurses remain the most trustworthy sources of information and influential factors shaping opinions. The Internet serves as the primary source of inaccurate information about vaccinations for both parents and medical professionals, although verbal information from primary healthcare providers has a more significant impact on vaccination attitudes. Discrepancies in basic education and specific knowledge about vaccination within the same family can pose additional obstacles to child vaccination.
AB - OBJECTIVES: Our survey aims to highlight parents' and healthcare workers' opinions and hesitations regarding children's vaccination, identify the main factors influencing these opinions, and assess the impact of hesitations on immunisation for children, included in the National Immunisation Programme in Lithuania. METHODS: We used the questionnaire developed by the European Academy of Paediatrics Research in Ambulatory Settings Network (EAPRASnet). This questionnaire is designed to assess attitudes toward vaccination. The study involved parents raising children aged 1-4 years and primary healthcare providers (paediatricians, family doctors and nurses). RESULTS: We analysed the completed questionnaires from a total of 329 parents (142 fathers, 187 mothers) and 386 medical personnel (150 physicians, 236 nurses). Most parents expressed positive opinions about vaccines (> 8 points out of 10 possible), with older parents exhibiting more favourable attitudes. Compared to mothers, fathers showed more criticism regarding the information provided by physicians (p = 0.04). Family doctors and paediatricians were more supportive of vaccination than nurses and homoeopaths (p < 0.001). Parents and healthcare providers with higher education showed statistically significantly stronger opinions about the benefits of vaccines than those with lower education levels (p = 0.01 for parents, p < 0.001 for physicians and nurses). The Internet was identified as the primary source of negative information for both parents (69.6%) and healthcare providers (86%). However, verbal information received from medical staff during patient consultations or informal conversations among colleagues had the greatest impact on parents' opinions (17.3%) and medical personnel (35.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Confidential conversations with physicians and nurses remain the most trustworthy sources of information and influential factors shaping opinions. The Internet serves as the primary source of inaccurate information about vaccinations for both parents and medical professionals, although verbal information from primary healthcare providers has a more significant impact on vaccination attitudes. Discrepancies in basic education and specific knowledge about vaccination within the same family can pose additional obstacles to child vaccination.
KW - EAPRASnet
KW - Lithuania
KW - children
KW - parents
KW - primary health care
KW - vaccination rate
KW - vaccines
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85164758039&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.21101/cejph.a7508
DO - 10.21101/cejph.a7508
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 37451242
AN - SCOPUS:85164758039
SN - 1210-7778
VL - 31
SP - 103
EP - 109
JO - Central European Journal of Public Health
JF - Central European Journal of Public Health
IS - 2
ER -