Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 13;13(6):e0197374. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197374. eCollection 2018.
Decisions regarding which vaccines are funded in the United Kingdom (UK) are increasingly informed by cost-effectiveness analyses. Such analyses use Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) as a measure of effectiveness and assume that QALYs are equal regardless of where and in whom they occur in the population. However, there is increasing debate about whether this QALY approach is appropriate and whether societal preferences for childhood vaccinations should be used to help inform childhood immunisation policy.
To gauge the general public's preferences for prioritising certain characteristics of childhood vaccination, to help inform future policy making decisions in the UK.
Qualitative design using individual face-to-face interviews, with data analysed using an inductive thematic framework approach.
Two counties in England, UK.
Adult members of the general public were recruited using the Bristol and South Gloucestershire open electoral registers, using gender and deprivation quotas for each area.
21 members of the public participated in qualitative interviews.
The qualitative research identified three major themes and several key attributes that influences participant's opinions about priority setting for childhood vaccinations: (1) population segment (i.e. age group, carer impact and social group), (2) vaccine preventable diseases preferences (i.e. disease severity, disease incidence and declining infection) and (3) risks and benefits associated with childhood vaccinations (i.e. vaccine associated side-effects, herd protection and peace of mind).
Evidence from this qualitative study suggests that some members of the UK general public have more nuanced views than the health-maximisation approach when considering how childhood vaccines should be prioritised. This is not necessarily captured by the current economic approaches for assessing the benefits from childhood vaccinations in the UK, but is an important area for future research to ensure appropriate decision making.
英国(UK)的疫苗资助决策越来越多地受到成本效益分析的影响。此类分析使用质量调整生命年(QALYs)作为有效性的衡量标准,并假设 QALYs 是平等的,无论它们在人群中的何处以及在何人身上发生。然而,对于这种 QALY 方法是否合适以及社会对儿童疫苗接种的偏好是否应该用于帮助制定儿童免疫政策的问题,存在越来越多的争议。
衡量公众对优先考虑某些儿童疫苗接种特征的偏好,以帮助为英国未来的政策制定决策提供信息。
使用个体面对面访谈的定性设计,使用归纳主题框架方法分析数据。
英国英格兰的两个县。
使用每个地区的性别和贫困配额,从英国布里斯托尔和南格洛斯特郡的公开选举登记册中招募普通公众的成年成员。
21 名公众参加了定性访谈。
定性研究确定了三个主要主题和几个关键属性,这些属性影响了参与者对儿童疫苗接种优先事项的看法:(1)人群部分(即年龄组、照顾者影响和社会群体),(2)疫苗可预防疾病偏好(即疾病严重程度、疾病发病率和感染率下降)和(3)与儿童疫苗接种相关的风险和益处(即疫苗相关副作用、群体保护和安心)。
这项定性研究的证据表明,当考虑儿童疫苗接种应如何优先考虑时,英国公众中的一些人比健康最大化方法具有更细致的观点。这不一定被英国目前评估儿童疫苗接种效益的经济方法所捕捉,但这是未来研究的一个重要领域,以确保做出适当的决策。