Attitudes and Communication Preferences for Vaccines among Pregnant Women Receiving Care at a Safety-net Hospital

Fuss, Taylor L.; Devera, Jean; Pierre-Joseph, Natalie; Perkins, Rebecca B.

doi:10.1016/j.whi.2021.09.004

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies of mothers have found that information focusing on the benefit and safety of vaccines given to pregnant people to protect their infant is beneficial and preferred to information about protecting the pregnant person. 55 , 57 A different approach is to target-specific concerns; an app-based intervention that provided videos based on parent needs was well received by pregnant people, even among those who were vaccine hesitant; this has not yet been shown to increase vaccination rates. 58 Patients use CDC and pregnancy Websites for vaccine information, but they value information from their providers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maternal Vaccination and Vaccine Hesitancy

Rand¹,

Olson-Chen²

2023

Pediatric Clinics of North America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maternal Vaccination and Vaccine Hesitancy

Rand¹,

Olson-Chen²

2023

Pediatric Clinics of North America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Similar to findings from other studies, discussion of vaccine safety during pregnancy and potential risks during pregnancy with a healthcare professional were believed to be essential. 47 The trend of seeking transparency and trustworthiness regarding pregnancy safety was apparent in social media themes during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. 48 This is perhaps no surprise given the torrent of information shared in the lay media simultaneous to the evolution of clinical recommendations, as well as early directives to obstetrician-gynecologists advising caution given the lack of data on pregnancies during clinical trials.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Healthcare workers’ attitudes on mandates, incentives, and strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake: A mixed methods study

Casey

Burrowes

Hall

et al. 2022

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthcare workers are a trusted health information source and are uniquely positioned to reduce the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this sequential exploratory mixed methods study was to understand attitudes of healthcare workers working in Massachusetts during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine utilization, including vaccine mandates and incentives. Fifty-two individuals completed one-on-one interviews between April 22 nd and September 7th, 2021. The survey was developed based on findings from the interviews; 209 individuals completed the online survey between February 17 th and March 23 rd , 2022. Both the interview and survey asked about attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine and booster mandates, incentives, and strategies to improve vaccination rates. Most participants were female (79%-interview, 81%-survey), Caucasian (56%, 73%), and worked as physicians (37%, 34%) or nurses (10%, 18%). Overall, nuanced attitudes regarding vaccine and booster mandates were expressed; many supported mandates to protect their patients’ health, others emphasized personal autonomy, while some were against mandates if job termination was the consequence of declining vaccines. Similarly, views regarding vaccine incentives differed; some considered incentives helpful, yet many viewed them as coercive. Strategies believed to be most effective to encourage vaccination included improving accessibility to vaccination sites, addressing misinformation, discussing vaccine safety, tailored community outreach via trusted messengers, and one-on-one conversations between patients and healthcare workers. Healthcare workers’ experiences with strategies to improve utilization of COVID-19 vaccines and boosters have implications for public health policies. Generally, efforts to improve access and education were viewed more favorably than incentives and mandates.

show abstract

“…Historically, pregnant women have been excluded from pre-licensure vaccine safety studies despite an increasing number of vaccines now being recommended during pregnancy [ 14 , 15 ]. Even post-licensure, pregnant women may hesitate to get vaccinated because of concerns about safety for the fetus and long-term risks to the infant [ 16 , 17 ]. Thus, it is important to evaluate vaccine safety at all stages of pregnancy to provide pertinent information regarding risks and benefits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Tetanus, Diphtheria, Acellular Pertussis Vaccination During Pregnancy and Risk of Congenital Anomalies

Florea

Ackerson³

et al. 2022

Infect Dis Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction This observational retrospective matched cohort study evaluated the safety of a prenatal tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination, Boostrix. We previously reported on the risk of maternal and neonatal outcomes; here we report on the risk of congenital anomalies in infants at birth through 6 months of age. Methods The study included pregnant Kaiser Permanente Southern California members. Women who received the Tdap vaccine on or after the 27th week of pregnancy between January 2018 and January 2019 were matched to women who were pregnant between January 2012 and December 2014 and were not vaccinated with Tdap during pregnancy. Unadjusted and adjusted relative risks (aRRs) with 95% confidence intervals were estimated by Poisson regression. Quantitative secular trend analyses, from 2011 to 2017, were conducted on congenital anomalies with a statistically significant aRR > 1. Results The analysis consisted of 16,350 and 16,088 live-born infants in the Tdap-exposed and unexposed cohorts, respectively. Of the 14 congenital anomaly body systems evaluated, 8 (eye, ear/face/neck, respiratory, upper gastrointestinal, genital, renal, musculoskeletal, integument) had statistically significant elevated aRRs, with point estimates ranging from 1.17 to 2.02. The observed elevated aRRs were consistent with their respective secular increases over time. Conclusion Cautious interpretation of these findings is warranted as these increases may have resulted from improved identification and diagnosis. Furthermore, the biological plausibility of an association between maternal vaccine exposure in the third trimester of pregnancy and birth defects is low. The overall study findings support the safety of maternal immunization with Boostrix during the third trimester of pregnancy. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03463577. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-022-00731-8.

show abstract

Attitudes and Communication Preferences for Vaccines among Pregnant Women Receiving Care at a Safety-net Hospital

Cited by 12 publications

References 29 publications

Maternal Vaccination and Vaccine Hesitancy

Maternal Vaccination and Vaccine Hesitancy

Healthcare workers’ attitudes on mandates, incentives, and strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake: A mixed methods study

Investigating Tetanus, Diphtheria, Acellular Pertussis Vaccination During Pregnancy and Risk of Congenital Anomalies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About