Medizinische Universitätsklinik Kantonsspital Baselland, Bruderholz, Switzerland.
University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
BMJ Open. 2022 Feb 28;12(2):e053267. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053267.
The aim of this study was to better understand parental trust in and satisfaction with information sources and medical providers regarding decision making about childhood vaccines.
The study was part of a Swiss national research programme investigating vaccine hesitancy and underimmunisation.
We conducted qualitative interviews with 37 providers and 30 parents, observed 34 vaccination consultations, and then conducted quantitative surveys with 130 providers (both complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) oriented and biomedically oriented) and 1390 parents.
Participants' vaccination information sources used in their decision-making process, parents' trust in and satisfaction with these sources and providers.
Based on the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines scale, we considered 501 parents as vaccine-hesitant (VH) and 889 parents as non-VH. Whereas both groups mentioned providers as the most trusted source of information, VH-parents were less likely to mention paediatricians (N=358 (71%) vs N=755 (85%)) and public health authorities (N=101 (20%) vs N=333 (37%)) than non-VH-parents. VH-parents were more likely to have consulted another provider (N=196 (39%) vs N=173 (19%)) than non-VH-parents, to express less satisfaction with both their primary (N=342 (82%) vs N=586 (91%)) and other providers (N=82 (42%) vs N=142 (82%)) and less trust in their primary (N=368 (88%) vs N=632 (98%)) and other providers (N=108 (55%) vs N=146 (84%)). VH-parents were less likely to be satisfied with their biomedical primary provider than non-VH-parents (100 (69%) vs 467 (91%)). However, when the primary provider was CAM-oriented, there were similar levels of satisfaction among both groups (237 (89%) VH-parents vs 118 (89%) non-VH-parents). All differences were significant (p<0.05).
While the provider remains the main information source, VH parents turn to additional sources and providers, which is likely related to VH parents being rather dissatisfied with and distrusting in obtained information and their provider.
The local ethics committee (Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz, EKNZ; project ID number 2017-00725) approved the study.
本研究旨在深入了解父母在儿童疫苗决策方面对信息来源和医疗服务提供者的信任和满意度。
该研究是瑞士国家研究计划的一部分，旨在调查疫苗犹豫和免疫不足问题。
我们对 37 名提供者和 30 名家长进行了定性访谈，观察了 34 次疫苗接种咨询，然后对 130 名提供者（包括补充和替代医学（CAM）导向和生物医学导向）和 1390 名家长进行了定量调查。
参与者在决策过程中使用的疫苗信息来源、父母对这些来源和提供者的信任和满意度。
根据《儿童疫苗家长态度量表》，我们将 501 名家长视为疫苗犹豫（VH），889 名家长视为非 VH。尽管两组家长都表示提供者是最值得信赖的信息来源，但 VH 家长不太可能提到儿科医生（N=358（71%）与 N=755（85%））和公共卫生当局（N=101（20%）与 N=333（37%）），而非 VH 家长。VH 家长更有可能咨询其他提供者（N=196（39%）与 N=173（19%）），而不是非 VH 家长，他们对主要提供者（N=342（82%）与 N=586（91%））和其他提供者（N=82（42%）与 N=142（82%））的满意度较低，对主要提供者（N=368（88%）与 N=632（98%））和其他提供者（N=108（55%）与 N=146（84%））的信任度较低。VH 家长对其生物医学主要提供者的满意度低于非 VH 家长（100（69%）与 N=467（91%））。然而，当主要提供者是 CAM 导向时，两组家长的满意度相似（VH 家长 237（89%）与非 VH 家长 118（89%））。所有差异均具有统计学意义（p<0.05）。
尽管提供者仍然是主要的信息来源，但 VH 家长转向其他来源和提供者，这可能与 VH 家长对获得的信息和提供者感到相当不满意和不信任有关。
当地伦理委员会（Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz，EKNZ；项目 ID 号 2017-00725）批准了该研究。
