Health professionals and the vaccine narrative: ‘the power of the personal story’ and the management of medical uncertainty

Manca, Terra

doi:10.1080/13698575.2016.1190319

Cited by 11 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nurses were mistrustful of newly developed vaccines as they believed that they underwent fewer tests and had more side-effects than previously developed vaccines. 10 , 13 , 16 , 19 , 20 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health care provider trust in vaccination: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

Ahmad

Akande

Majid

2022

European Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Vaccine hesitancy is a growing issue globally amongst various populations, including health care providers. This study explores the factors that influence vaccine hesitancy amongst nurses and physicians. Methods We performed a qualitative meta-synthesis of 22 qualitative and mixed-method studies exploring the factors that may contribute to vaccine hesitancy amongst nurses and physicians. We included all articles that mentioned any aspect of trust concerning vaccination, including how trust may influence or contribute to vaccine hesitancy in nurses and physicians. Results Our findings revealed that vaccine hesitancy amongst nurses stemmed predominantly from two factors: distrust in health authorities and their employers, and distrust in vaccine efficacy and safety. Both nurses and physicians had a precarious relationship with health authorities. Nurses felt that their employers and health authorities did not prioritize their health over patients’ health, provided inaccurate and inconsistent vaccine information, and were mistrustful of pharmaceutical company motives. Like nurses, physicians were also skeptical of pharmaceutical company motives when it came to vaccination. Additionally, physicians also held doubts regarding vaccine efficacy and safety. Conclusions The relationship health care providers or their patients have with health authorities and other providers regarding vaccination serves as unsystematic clinical experiences that may bolster vaccine hesitancy. Providing accurate and tangible information to emphasize the safety and efficacy of vaccines to health care providers may help address their specific concerns that may ultimately increase vaccine uptake.

show abstract

“…Nurses were mistrustful of newly developed vaccines as they believed that they underwent fewer tests and had more side-effects than previously developed vaccines. 10 , 13 , 16 , 19 , 20 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health care provider trust in vaccination: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

Ahmad

Akande

Majid

2022

European Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, the existence of a power dynamic in these types of situations—situations where there is likely some uncertainty felt by parents (A. Kennedy et al, 2011)—simply points out the increased need for language and the utilization of a communication style that seeks to balance this power (Manca, 2016). As such, to increase vaccine acceptance, providers should acknowledge the underlying power dynamics within the patient–provider relationship and seek to strengthen rapport with patients through empathy and dialogue.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Decision Making Related to Maternal and Childhood Vaccines: Exploring the Role of Trust in Providers Through a Relational Theory of Power Approach

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immunization is one of the most effective ways to prevent infectious diseases. However, vaccination rates are suboptimal in the United States. Obstetric providers are critical in influencing vaccine decision making among pregnant women, as trust between a patient and provider may facilitate willingness to accept vaccination. Little is known about how power between a patient and provider affects vaccine acceptance. This study explored pregnant women’s trust in obstetric providers within the context of vaccines. Using concepts from the relational theory of power, we conducted 40 in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of pregnant women from four Ob-Gyn practices each in Georgia and Colorado. Results suggest that to enhance trust, providers could gain distributive power by conveying empathy. Designated power through medical experience was associated with both trust and distrust, as some women trusted their providers because of their authority and medical credentials, while others viewed authority and experience as reasons to distrust their provider. To increase acceptance, providers should acknowledge the underlying power dynamics within these interpersonal relationships and strengthen rapport with patients through empathy and dialogue.

show abstract

“…Despite the multiple mechanisms of ignorance production that medical discourses incorporate, the redefining of caesarean birth as the safest mode of delivery should be taken seriously rather than being considered an 'illusion of certainty' (Manca, 2016) given that it still serves as a powerful tool for managing childbirth and its risks in many contexts. Doctors' influence in a woman's decision to opt for a caesarean delivery is well documented (Hopkins, 2000;Wagner, 2000).…”

Section: Caesarean Epidemic: Governing Childbirth By Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Caesarean or vaginarean epidemics ? Techno-birth, risk and obstetric practice in Turkey

Topçu

2019

Health, Risk & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Caesarean sections (C-sections) have become a substitute for vaginal birth in a number of developing and emerging economies. Often in these contexts, the promotion of caesarean delivery as a safe or even zero-risk and zero-pain alternative to vaginal birth continues to serve as a powerful discursive tool in governing childbirth, despite growing international evidence on the iatrogenic effects of C-sections. These caesarean 'epidemics' are often explained in terms of obstetricians' individual preferences for C-sections. Drawing on ethnographic research conducted in one private and one public hospital in western Turkey, I argue that there are a wide range of factors influencing obstetricians' risk conceptualisations, discourses and practices. I also contend that the medical justifications for C-sections and their public popularity can best be understood by looking at the ways in which both caesarean and vaginal births are organised. In the settings examined, the processes around caesarean and vaginal births were blurred to such an extent that vaginal delivery was, in its technicised and closely monitored nature, transformed into what I propose to call 'vaginarean' birth. Recent state regulations in Turkey aiming to prevent 'caesarean abuse' had only had limited effects on obstetricians' practices. The notion of risk continued to operate as a major driving force in that an institutional risk colonisation came to compete with medical framings of risk, while deficiencies in the national obstetric care system were made invisible. I conclude that regulations aimed at eradicating a caesarean epidemic, such as those implemented in Turkey since 2012, are unlikely to be effective unless they also aim to combat the vaginarean epidemic.

show abstract

Health professionals and the vaccine narrative: ‘the power of the personal story’ and the management of medical uncertainty

Cited by 11 publications

References 40 publications

Health care provider trust in vaccination: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

Health care provider trust in vaccination: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

Patient Decision Making Related to Maternal and Childhood Vaccines: Exploring the Role of Trust in Providers Through a Relational Theory of Power Approach

Caesarean or vaginarean epidemics ? Techno-birth, risk and obstetric practice in Turkey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About