Purdue University, Department of Health and Kinesiology, 800 W. Stadium Ave., West Lafayette, IN 47907, United States.
Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Department of Communication Studies, 425 University Boulevard, Indianapolis, IN 46202, United States.
Prev Med. 2019 Oct;127:105798. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105798. Epub 2019 Aug 9.
Many adults in the U.S. do not receive recommended vaccines, and the research literature remains inconclusive on the best communication strategies for increasing this behavior. This study examined the association of message framing (gained-framed vs. loss-framed vs. control), and healthcare provider (HCP) recommendation (offered vs. recommended) on uptake of adult hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination in a high risk population using a 3 × 2 block design randomized controlled trial. Fear of shots, fear of vaccines, and perceived message framing were examined in secondary analyses. Of the 1747 participants, 47.7% (n = 833) received 0 doses of HBV vaccine, 27.8% (n = 485) received 1 dose, 10.4% received 2 doses, and 14.1% received all 3 recommended doses. There was not a significant interaction between message framing and HCP recommendation (p = .59). Mean number of doses received by the gain-framed group (m = 0.96) was not significantly different from the loss-framed group (m = 0.97, RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.88-1.12). However, those receiving any framing message received significantly more doses (m = 0.96) than those in the control condition (m = 0.81, RR = 1.17, 95%CI = 1.06-1.31). Participants who received a HCP recommendation received significantly more vaccine doses (m = 0.95) than those in the vaccine-offered condition (mean = 0.82, RR = 1.16, 95%CI = 1.05-1.28). These results suggest there is no difference in vaccine uptake between gain-frame and loss-frame messages, but both are better than a control message. These results also support advising HCP to provide a strong recommendation for vaccinations beyond merely offering it to patients. This study has implications for vaccine uptake beyond HBV, and can inform future research on effective vaccine communication research. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00739752. Registration date: August 20, 2008.
许多美国成年人未接种推荐疫苗,而医学文献对于提高此类行为的最佳沟通策略仍未有定论。本研究采用 3×2 块设计随机对照试验,以高风险人群为对象,探讨了信息框架(增益框架与损失框架对比,控制组)和医疗服务提供者(HCP)建议(提供与推荐)对成人乙型肝炎病毒(HBV)疫苗接种率的影响。次要分析还考察了对注射的恐惧、对疫苗的恐惧和感知的信息框架。在 1747 名参与者中,47.7%(n=833)未接种 HBV 疫苗,27.8%(n=485)接种 1 剂,10.4%接种 2 剂,14.1%接种了全部 3 剂推荐疫苗。信息框架和 HCP 建议之间无显著交互作用(p=0.59)。增益框架组接种的疫苗剂量均值(m=0.96)与损失框架组(m=0.97,RR=0.99,95%CI=0.88-1.12)无显著差异。然而,接受任何框架信息的人接种的疫苗剂量显著更多(m=0.96),而对照组(m=0.81,RR=1.17,95%CI=1.06-1.31)。接受 HCP 建议的人接种的疫苗剂量显著更多(m=0.95),而仅提供疫苗接种建议的人(m=0.82,RR=1.16,95%CI=1.05-1.28)。这些结果表明,增益框架和损失框架信息在疫苗接种率方面没有差异,但均优于对照组。这些结果还支持建议 HCP 提供关于疫苗接种的强烈建议,而不仅仅是向患者提供建议。本研究对 HBV 以外的疫苗接种具有启示意义,可为未来的有效疫苗接种沟通研究提供信息。临床Trials.gov 标识符:NCT00739752。注册日期:2008 年 8 月 20 日。