Determann Domino, de Bekker-Grob Esther W, French Jeff, Voeten Helene A, Richardus Jan Hendrik, Das Enny, Korfage Ida J
Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands; National Institute for Public Health and The Environment, Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, PO Box 1 (Internal Postal Code 101), 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Vaccine. 2016 Feb 3;34(6):803-8. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.12.035. Epub 2015 Dec 28.
Understanding public opinion and attitudes regarding vaccination is crucial for successful outbreak management and effective communication at the European level.
We explored national differences by conducting focus group discussions in The Netherlands, Poland and Sweden. Discussions were structured using concepts from behavioural models.
Thematic analysis revealed that participants would base their vaccination decision on trade-offs between perceived benefits and barriers of the vaccine also taking into account the seriousness of the new outbreak. Except for those having chronic diseases, participants expected a low infection risk, resulting in a low willingness to get vaccinated. Information about the health status of cases was considered important since this might change perceived susceptibility. Participants displayed concerns about vaccine safety due to the limited available time to produce and test vaccines in the acute situation of a new pandemic. Swedish participants mentioned their tendency of doing the right thing and following the rules, as well as to get vaccinated because of solidarity with other citizens and social influences. This appeared much less prominent for the Dutch and Polish participants. However, Swedish participants indicated that their negative experiences during the Influenza A/H1N1 2009 pandemic decreases their acceptance of future vaccinations. Polish participants lacked trust in their national (public) health system and government, and were therefore sceptical about the availability and quality of vaccines in Poland.
Although participants overall expressed similar considerations, important differences between countries stand out, such as previous vaccination experiences, the degree of adherence to social norms, and the degree of trust in health authorities.
了解公众对疫苗接种的意见和态度对于在欧洲层面成功应对疫情和进行有效沟通至关重要。
我们通过在荷兰、波兰和瑞典开展焦点小组讨论来探究国家间的差异。讨论依据行为模型的概念进行组织。
主题分析表明，参与者会在权衡疫苗的感知益处和障碍的基础上做出接种决定，同时也会考虑新疫情的严重程度。除了患有慢性病的人之外，参与者预计感染风险较低，因此接种意愿也较低。病例健康状况的信息被认为很重要，因为这可能会改变感知到的易感性。由于在新疫情的紧急情况下生产和测试疫苗的可用时间有限，参与者对疫苗安全性表示担忧。瑞典参与者提到他们有做正确的事和遵守规则的倾向，以及出于对其他公民的团结和社会影响而接种疫苗。对于荷兰和波兰的参与者来说，这种情况则不太明显。然而，瑞典参与者表示，他们在2009年甲型H1N1流感大流行期间的负面经历降低了他们对未来疫苗接种的接受度。波兰参与者对其国家（公共）卫生系统和政府缺乏信任，因此对波兰疫苗的可获得性和质量持怀疑态度。
尽管参与者总体上表达了相似的考虑因素，但各国之间的重要差异也很突出，例如以前的疫苗接种经历、对社会规范的遵守程度以及对卫生当局的信任程度。
