美国医疗服务提供者对成人肺炎球菌疫苗的偏好和态度。

IF 5.5 3区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY Expert Review of Vaccines Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-18 DOI:10.1080/14760584.2024.2417393
Salini Mohanty, Jui-Hua Tsai, Ning Ning, Ana Martinez, Rishi P Verma, Bianca Chun, Kelly D Johnson, Nicole Cossrow, M Doyinsola Bailey, Thomas Weiss, Elmira Flem, Jordana K Schmier
{"title":"美国医疗服务提供者对成人肺炎球菌疫苗的偏好和态度。","authors":"Salini Mohanty, Jui-Hua Tsai, Ning Ning, Ana Martinez, Rishi P Verma, Bianca Chun, Kelly D Johnson, Nicole Cossrow, M Doyinsola Bailey, Thomas Weiss, Elmira Flem, Jordana K Schmier","doi":"10.1080/14760584.2024.2417393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>It is important to assess healthcare providers (HCPs) knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and preferences towards new pneumococcal vaccines for adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>HCPs who met eligibility criteria completed an online survey between March - May 2024 that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit preferences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 340 participating HCPs, the average age was 44.9 years old, and the majority were male (55.6%), and White (85.3%). Most HCPs reported that they would support (90.3%) and implement (91.5%) a lower age-based recommendation for pneumococcal vaccines (from adults 65+ years to adults 50+ years). A majority of HCPs would offer a supplemental dose of a pneumococcal vaccine to high-risk adults 19-49 years, at-risk or high-risk adults 50-64 years, and adults 65+ years regardless of risk status to increase protection after completing the recommended series. DCE results showed that coverage of pneumococcal pneumonia and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in adults 65+ years were the two most important attributes in evaluating pneumococcal vaccines.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HCPs preferred a pneumococcal vaccine with increased coverage against pneumococcal pneumonia and IPD, and they supported lowering the age recommendation for pneumococcal vaccination as well as a supplemental vaccine dose to provide additional coverage for adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":12326,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Vaccines","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferences and attitudes of healthcare providers towards pneumococcal vaccines for adults in the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Salini Mohanty, Jui-Hua Tsai, Ning Ning, Ana Martinez, Rishi P Verma, Bianca Chun, Kelly D Johnson, Nicole Cossrow, M Doyinsola Bailey, Thomas Weiss, Elmira Flem, Jordana K Schmier\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14760584.2024.2417393\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>It is important to assess healthcare providers (HCPs) knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and preferences towards new pneumococcal vaccines for adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>HCPs who met eligibility criteria completed an online survey between March - May 2024 that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit preferences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 340 participating HCPs, the average age was 44.9 years old, and the majority were male (55.6%), and White (85.3%). Most HCPs reported that they would support (90.3%) and implement (91.5%) a lower age-based recommendation for pneumococcal vaccines (from adults 65+ years to adults 50+ years). A majority of HCPs would offer a supplemental dose of a pneumococcal vaccine to high-risk adults 19-49 years, at-risk or high-risk adults 50-64 years, and adults 65+ years regardless of risk status to increase protection after completing the recommended series. DCE results showed that coverage of pneumococcal pneumonia and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in adults 65+ years were the two most important attributes in evaluating pneumococcal vaccines.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HCPs preferred a pneumococcal vaccine with increased coverage against pneumococcal pneumonia and IPD, and they supported lowering the age recommendation for pneumococcal vaccination as well as a supplemental vaccine dose to provide additional coverage for adults.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Vaccines\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Vaccines\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2024.2417393\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Vaccines","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2024.2417393","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:评估医疗保健提供者(HCP)对成人新肺炎球菌疫苗的认识、态度、看法和偏好非常重要:方法:符合资格标准的医疗保健提供者(HCPs)在 2024 年 3 月至 5 月期间完成了一项在线调查,其中包括一项离散选择实验(DCE)以了解偏好:在 340 名参与调查的初级保健医生中,平均年龄为 44.9 岁,大多数为男性(55.6%)和白人(85.3%)。大多数保健医生表示,他们将支持(90.3%)并实施(91.5%)降低肺炎球菌疫苗的年龄建议(从 65 岁以上成人降至 50 岁以上成人)。大多数初级保健医生会为 19-49 岁的高风险成人、50-64 岁的高风险或高风险成人以及 65 岁以上的成人(无论其风险状况如何)提供一剂补充肺炎球菌疫苗,以在完成推荐的系列接种后提高保护率。DCE 结果显示,肺炎球菌肺炎和 65 岁以上成人侵袭性肺炎球菌疾病 (IPD) 的覆盖率是评估肺炎球菌疫苗的两个最重要的属性:HCPs更倾向于接种能提高肺炎球菌肺炎和侵入性肺炎球菌疾病覆盖率的肺炎球菌疫苗,他们支持降低肺炎球菌疫苗接种的年龄建议,以及补充疫苗剂量以提高成人的覆盖率。
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
Preferences and attitudes of healthcare providers towards pneumococcal vaccines for adults in the United States.

Objectives: It is important to assess healthcare providers (HCPs) knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and preferences towards new pneumococcal vaccines for adults.

Methods: HCPs who met eligibility criteria completed an online survey between March - May 2024 that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit preferences.

Results: Among 340 participating HCPs, the average age was 44.9 years old, and the majority were male (55.6%), and White (85.3%). Most HCPs reported that they would support (90.3%) and implement (91.5%) a lower age-based recommendation for pneumococcal vaccines (from adults 65+ years to adults 50+ years). A majority of HCPs would offer a supplemental dose of a pneumococcal vaccine to high-risk adults 19-49 years, at-risk or high-risk adults 50-64 years, and adults 65+ years regardless of risk status to increase protection after completing the recommended series. DCE results showed that coverage of pneumococcal pneumonia and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in adults 65+ years were the two most important attributes in evaluating pneumococcal vaccines.

Conclusions: HCPs preferred a pneumococcal vaccine with increased coverage against pneumococcal pneumonia and IPD, and they supported lowering the age recommendation for pneumococcal vaccination as well as a supplemental vaccine dose to provide additional coverage for adults.

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
Expert Review of Vaccines
Expert Review of Vaccines 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
3.20%
发文量
136
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Vaccines (ISSN 1476-0584) provides expert commentary on the development, application, and clinical effectiveness of new vaccines. Coverage includes vaccine technology, vaccine adjuvants, prophylactic vaccines, therapeutic vaccines, AIDS vaccines and vaccines for defence against bioterrorism. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The vaccine field has been transformed by recent technological advances, but there remain many challenges in the delivery of cost-effective, safe vaccines. Expert Review of Vaccines facilitates decision making to drive forward this exciting field.
期刊最新文献
Hookworm vaccines: current and future directions. A descriptive review on the real-world impact of Moderna, inc. COVID-19 vaccines. Estimating the time required to reach HPV vaccination targets across Europe. Vaccination strategies for patients under monoclonal antibody and other biological treatments: an updated comprehensive review based on EMA authorizations to January 2024. Comparison of preclinical efficacy of immunotherapies against HPV-induced cancers.
×
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