立陶宛家长对儿童接种疫苗态度的决定因素:在线调查

Q3 Medicine Acta Medica Lituanica Pub Date : 2024-05-07 DOI:10.15388/amed.2024.31.1.7
Kamilė Čeponytė, Eglė Narkevičiūtė, Aušra Beržanskytė, Sigita Burokiene
{"title":"立陶宛家长对儿童接种疫苗态度的决定因素:在线调查","authors":"Kamilė Čeponytė, Eglė Narkevičiūtė, Aušra Beržanskytė, Sigita Burokiene","doi":"10.15388/amed.2024.31.1.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Data from recent years show that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly reduced the scope of child immunisation worldwide. If the numbers continue to fall, we may have a vaccination crisis. In order to understand the local factors of this phenomenon, we studied parents‘ viewpoint towards childhood vaccination in Lithuania. Therefore, the aim of our study was to determine the impact of parental attitudes on children’s vaccination.Materials and Methods: A web-based cross-sectional study was made in Lithuania from October 20th to November 3rd, 2020, using Google Forms. An anonymous questionnaire included both quantitative and qualitative questions. The questionnaire was distributed to the general population in Lithuania via social media and a snowball sampling. Only parents who have at least one child under 18 years old were involved in the study. We analysed the parents’ attitudes towards vaccination by their socioeconomic and demographic determinants using MS Excel and OpenEpi tools. The respondents were considered vaccine supporters if they vaccinated all their children with state-reimbursed vaccines or only vaccinated some of their children, and vaccine sceptics if they did not vaccinate their children with state-reimbursed vaccines.Results: The population of our research consisted of 775 parents. There were more males against vaccination than females, respectively, 59.6% and 33.2%. 65.0% of all respondents stated that they vaccinated their children with the full course of vaccines, while the remaining 35.0% did not vaccinate. University-level education dominated in both pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine groups. We found that 16.9% of parents who were unvaccinated as children themselves tend not to vaccinate their children. However, in the pro-vaxx group, only 0.7% of parents were unvaccinated during childhood. 50.8% of vaccine sceptics were not fully informed by healthcare professionals about the benefits and risks of vaccination, while only 31.6% of vaccine supporters were not informed. Social environment did not have an impact on the decision whether to vaccinate or not to vaccinate a child among both vaccine advocates and vaccine deniers (accordingly, 51.2% and 42.9%). 29.3% of respondents stated that the cost of paid vaccinations was too high. Open-text survey responses gave us more in-depth insight about the parental decision-making process. Protection of children and society from infectious diseases (31.7%) was mentioned as the main reason for vaccination. Whereas vaccine-hesitant parents were mostly concerned about already-occurring side effects or their risk (43.4%).Conclusions: Our findings confirmed that vaccine hesitancy was associated with not being vaccinated in childhood themselves, lack of information from medical practitioners and male gender. The price of vaccines also had an impact on immunisation rates – more than one-third of the vaccine supporting parents indicated that the cost of paid vaccinations was too high. The main incentive for vaccine compliance was parents’ desire to protect their children and society from infectious diseases. Whereas vaccine-hesitant parents were mostly concerned about already occurring side effects or their risk. There was no consensus, whether vaccination of children should be mandatory in Lithuania, as the answers to the question were almost evenly distributed. The formation of parents‘ attitudes towards children‘s vaccination is a complex process that is determined by parents‘ attitudes towards the health care system, lack of trust in doctors, and gaps in communication about the benefits and risks of vaccination. All of this information should be taken into account in health policy-making.","PeriodicalId":34365,"journal":{"name":"Acta Medica Lituanica","volume":"88 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determinants of Parental Attitudes towards Children’s Vaccination in Lithuania: An Online Survey\",\"authors\":\"Kamilė Čeponytė, Eglė Narkevičiūtė, Aušra Beržanskytė, Sigita Burokiene\",\"doi\":\"10.15388/amed.2024.31.1.7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Data from recent years show that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly reduced the scope of child immunisation worldwide. If the numbers continue to fall, we may have a vaccination crisis. In order to understand the local factors of this phenomenon, we studied parents‘ viewpoint towards childhood vaccination in Lithuania. Therefore, the aim of our study was to determine the impact of parental attitudes on children’s vaccination.Materials and Methods: A web-based cross-sectional study was made in Lithuania from October 20th to November 3rd, 2020, using Google Forms. An anonymous questionnaire included both quantitative and qualitative questions. The questionnaire was distributed to the general population in Lithuania via social media and a snowball sampling. Only parents who have at least one child under 18 years old were involved in the study. We analysed the parents’ attitudes towards vaccination by their socioeconomic and demographic determinants using MS Excel and OpenEpi tools. The respondents were considered vaccine supporters if they vaccinated all their children with state-reimbursed vaccines or only vaccinated some of their children, and vaccine sceptics if they did not vaccinate their children with state-reimbursed vaccines.Results: The population of our research consisted of 775 parents. There were more males against vaccination than females, respectively, 59.6% and 33.2%. 65.0% of all respondents stated that they vaccinated their children with the full course of vaccines, while the remaining 35.0% did not vaccinate. University-level education dominated in both pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine groups. We found that 16.9% of parents who were unvaccinated as children themselves tend not to vaccinate their children. However, in the pro-vaxx group, only 0.7% of parents were unvaccinated during childhood. 50.8% of vaccine sceptics were not fully informed by healthcare professionals about the benefits and risks of vaccination, while only 31.6% of vaccine supporters were not informed. Social environment did not have an impact on the decision whether to vaccinate or not to vaccinate a child among both vaccine advocates and vaccine deniers (accordingly, 51.2% and 42.9%). 29.3% of respondents stated that the cost of paid vaccinations was too high. Open-text survey responses gave us more in-depth insight about the parental decision-making process. Protection of children and society from infectious diseases (31.7%) was mentioned as the main reason for vaccination. Whereas vaccine-hesitant parents were mostly concerned about already-occurring side effects or their risk (43.4%).Conclusions: Our findings confirmed that vaccine hesitancy was associated with not being vaccinated in childhood themselves, lack of information from medical practitioners and male gender. The price of vaccines also had an impact on immunisation rates – more than one-third of the vaccine supporting parents indicated that the cost of paid vaccinations was too high. The main incentive for vaccine compliance was parents’ desire to protect their children and society from infectious diseases. Whereas vaccine-hesitant parents were mostly concerned about already occurring side effects or their risk. There was no consensus, whether vaccination of children should be mandatory in Lithuania, as the answers to the question were almost evenly distributed. The formation of parents‘ attitudes towards children‘s vaccination is a complex process that is determined by parents‘ attitudes towards the health care system, lack of trust in doctors, and gaps in communication about the benefits and risks of vaccination. All of this information should be taken into account in health policy-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Medica Lituanica\",\"volume\":\"88 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Medica Lituanica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15388/amed.2024.31.1.7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Medica Lituanica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/amed.2024.31.1.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:近年来的数据显示,COVID-19 大流行大大缩小了全球儿童免疫接种的范围。如果数量继续下降,我们可能会面临疫苗接种危机。为了了解造成这一现象的当地因素,我们研究了立陶宛家长对儿童疫苗接种的看法。因此,我们的研究旨在确定家长的态度对儿童接种疫苗的影响:2020 年 10 月 20 日至 11 月 3 日,我们使用谷歌表格在立陶宛开展了一项基于网络的横断面研究。匿名问卷包括定量和定性问题。问卷通过社交媒体和滚雪球式抽样向立陶宛的普通民众发放。只有至少有一名 18 岁以下子女的父母参与了研究。我们使用 MS Excel 和 OpenEpi 工具,根据家长的社会经济和人口统计决定因素分析了他们对疫苗接种的态度。如果受访者为其所有子女接种了国家报销的疫苗或仅为部分子女接种了疫苗,则被视为疫苗支持者;如果受访者未为其子女接种国家报销的疫苗,则被视为疫苗怀疑者:我们的研究对象包括 775 名家长。反对接种疫苗的男性多于女性,分别为 59.6% 和 33.2%。65.0%的受访者表示他们为孩子接种了全套疫苗,其余 35.0%的受访者没有接种疫苗。在支持接种疫苗和反对接种疫苗的群体中,受过大学教育的人都占多数。我们发现,16.9% 的父母在自己的孩子小时候没有接种过疫苗,他们倾向于不给孩子接种疫苗。然而,在支持接种疫苗组中,只有 0.7% 的家长在儿童时期未接种过疫苗。50.8%的疫苗怀疑者没有从医疗保健专业人员那里充分了解接种疫苗的益处和风险,而只有 31.6% 的疫苗支持者没有了解相关信息。在疫苗支持者和疫苗否定者中,社会环境对决定是否给孩子接种疫苗没有影响(分别为 51.2% 和 42.9%)。29.3%的受访者表示付费疫苗接种的费用太高。开放文本的调查回答让我们对家长的决策过程有了更深入的了解。保护儿童和社会免受传染病侵害(31.7%)被认为是接种疫苗的主要原因。而对疫苗犹豫不决的家长则主要担心已经出现的副作用或其风险(43.4%):我们的研究结果证实,疫苗接种犹豫与儿童时期未接种疫苗、缺乏医生提供的信息以及男性性别有关。疫苗的价格对免疫接种率也有影响--三分之一以上支持接种疫苗的家长表示,付费接种疫苗的费用太高。鼓励家长接种疫苗的主要原因是他们希望保护自己的孩子和社会免受传染病的侵害。而不愿意接种疫苗的家长则主要担心已经出现的副作用或风险。对于在立陶宛是否应强制儿童接种疫苗的问题没有达成共识,因为对这一问题的回答几乎是平均分布的。家长对儿童疫苗接种态度的形成是一个复杂的过程,取决于家长对医疗保健系统的态度、对医生缺乏信任以及在疫苗接种的益处和风险方面的沟通不足。在制定卫生政策时应考虑到所有这些信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Determinants of Parental Attitudes towards Children’s Vaccination in Lithuania: An Online Survey
Background: Data from recent years show that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly reduced the scope of child immunisation worldwide. If the numbers continue to fall, we may have a vaccination crisis. In order to understand the local factors of this phenomenon, we studied parents‘ viewpoint towards childhood vaccination in Lithuania. Therefore, the aim of our study was to determine the impact of parental attitudes on children’s vaccination.Materials and Methods: A web-based cross-sectional study was made in Lithuania from October 20th to November 3rd, 2020, using Google Forms. An anonymous questionnaire included both quantitative and qualitative questions. The questionnaire was distributed to the general population in Lithuania via social media and a snowball sampling. Only parents who have at least one child under 18 years old were involved in the study. We analysed the parents’ attitudes towards vaccination by their socioeconomic and demographic determinants using MS Excel and OpenEpi tools. The respondents were considered vaccine supporters if they vaccinated all their children with state-reimbursed vaccines or only vaccinated some of their children, and vaccine sceptics if they did not vaccinate their children with state-reimbursed vaccines.Results: The population of our research consisted of 775 parents. There were more males against vaccination than females, respectively, 59.6% and 33.2%. 65.0% of all respondents stated that they vaccinated their children with the full course of vaccines, while the remaining 35.0% did not vaccinate. University-level education dominated in both pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine groups. We found that 16.9% of parents who were unvaccinated as children themselves tend not to vaccinate their children. However, in the pro-vaxx group, only 0.7% of parents were unvaccinated during childhood. 50.8% of vaccine sceptics were not fully informed by healthcare professionals about the benefits and risks of vaccination, while only 31.6% of vaccine supporters were not informed. Social environment did not have an impact on the decision whether to vaccinate or not to vaccinate a child among both vaccine advocates and vaccine deniers (accordingly, 51.2% and 42.9%). 29.3% of respondents stated that the cost of paid vaccinations was too high. Open-text survey responses gave us more in-depth insight about the parental decision-making process. Protection of children and society from infectious diseases (31.7%) was mentioned as the main reason for vaccination. Whereas vaccine-hesitant parents were mostly concerned about already-occurring side effects or their risk (43.4%).Conclusions: Our findings confirmed that vaccine hesitancy was associated with not being vaccinated in childhood themselves, lack of information from medical practitioners and male gender. The price of vaccines also had an impact on immunisation rates – more than one-third of the vaccine supporting parents indicated that the cost of paid vaccinations was too high. The main incentive for vaccine compliance was parents’ desire to protect their children and society from infectious diseases. Whereas vaccine-hesitant parents were mostly concerned about already occurring side effects or their risk. There was no consensus, whether vaccination of children should be mandatory in Lithuania, as the answers to the question were almost evenly distributed. The formation of parents‘ attitudes towards children‘s vaccination is a complex process that is determined by parents‘ attitudes towards the health care system, lack of trust in doctors, and gaps in communication about the benefits and risks of vaccination. All of this information should be taken into account in health policy-making.
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
Acta Medica Lituanica
Acta Medica Lituanica Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Successful Endovascular Management of Recurrent Hemoptysis due to Multiple Rasmussen Aneurysms in a Case of Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Rare Case Scenario Knee Extensor Apparatus Reconstruction with Allograft after Patellar Resection: A Case Report Accidental Intravenous Administration of Simethicone in a 4-Year-Old Patient: A Case Report Evaluation of Blood Culture Results in Patients with Malignancy in Erzurum Province, Turkey Prediction of Poor Outcome Using the Urea to Albumin Ratio in Thoracic Empyema
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1