West China School of Public Health, West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China; Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Chapel Hill Project-China, University of North Carolina, Guangzhou, China.
Chapel Hill Project-China, University of North Carolina, Guangzhou, China; Shanghai Institute of Nutrition and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Lancet Infect Dis. 2022 Oct;22(10):1484-1492. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(22)00346-2. Epub 2022 Jul 19.
China has low seasonal influenza vaccination rates among priority populations. In this study, we aimed to evaluate a pay-it-forward strategy to increase influenza vaccine uptake in rural, suburban, and urban settings in China.
We performed a quasi-experimental pragmatic trial to examine the effectiveness of a pay-it-forward intervention (a free influenza vaccine and an opportunity to donate financially to support vaccination of other individuals) to increase influenza vaccine uptake compared with standard-of-care user-paid vaccination among children (aged between 6 months and 8 years) and older people (≥60 years) in China. Recruitment took place in the standard-of-care group until the expected sample size was reached and then in the pay-it-forward group in primary care clinics from a rural site (Yangshan), a suburban site (Zengcheng), and an urban site (Tianhe). Participants were introduced to the influenza vaccine by project staff using a pamphlet about influenza vaccination and were either asked to pay out-of-pocket at the standard market price (US$8·5-23·2; standard-of-care group) or to donate any amount anonymously (pay-it-forward group). Participants had to be eligible to receive an influenza vaccine and to have not received an influenza vaccine in the past year. The primary outcome was vaccine uptake. Secondary outcomes were vaccine confidence and costs (from the health-care provider perspective). Regression methods compared influenza vaccine uptake and vaccine confidence between the two groups. This trial is registered with ChiCTR, ChiCTR2000040048.
From Sept 21, 2020, to March 3, 2021, 300 enrolees were recruited from patients visiting three primary care clinics. 55 (37%) of 150 people in the standard-of-care group (40 [53%] of 75 children and 15 [20%] of 75 older adults) and 111 (74%) of 150 in the pay-it-forward group (66 [88%] of 75 children and 45 [60%] of 75 older adults) received an influenza vaccine. People in the pay-it-forward group were more likely to receive an influenza vaccine compared with those in the standard-of-care group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 6·7 [95% CI 2·7-16·6] among children and 5·0 [2·3-10·8] among older adults). People in the pay-it-forward group had greater confidence in vaccine safety (aOR 2·2 [95% CI 1·2-3·9]), importance (3·1 [1·6-5·9]), and effectiveness (3·1 [1·7-5·7]). In the pay-it-forward group, 107 (96%) of 111 participants donated money for subsequent vaccinations. The pay-it-forward group had a lower economic cost (calculated as the cost without subtraction of donations) per person vaccinated (US$45·60) than did the standard-of-care group ($64·67).
The pay-it-forward intervention seemed to be effective in improving influenza vaccine uptake and community engagement. Our data have implications for prosocial interventions to enhance influenza vaccine uptake in countries where influenza vaccines are available for a fee.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK National Institute for Health Research.
在中国,优先人群的季节性流感疫苗接种率较低。本研究旨在评估一种预付款策略,以提高中国农村、郊区和城市地区的流感疫苗接种率。
我们进行了一项准实验性实用试验,以评估预付款干预措施(免费流感疫苗和有机会为支持其他个人接种疫苗而捐款)与标准护理用户付费接种相比,在中国儿童(6 个月至 8 岁)和老年人(≥60 岁)中增加流感疫苗接种率的效果。在标准护理组中进行招募,直到达到预期的样本量,然后在农村(阳山)、郊区(增城)和城市(天河)的基层医疗诊所的预付款组中进行招募。项目工作人员使用关于流感疫苗接种的小册子向参与者介绍流感疫苗,要么按照市场标准价格(8.5-23.2 美元)自掏腰包接种,要么匿名捐赠任何金额(预付款组)。参与者必须有资格接种流感疫苗,并且在过去一年中没有接种过流感疫苗。主要结局是疫苗接种率。次要结局是疫苗信心和成本(从医疗保健提供者的角度来看)。回归方法比较了两组之间的流感疫苗接种率和疫苗信心。这项试验在中国临床试验注册中心注册,注册号为 ChiCTR,ChiCTR2000040048。
从 2020 年 9 月 21 日至 2021 年 3 月 3 日,从三个基层医疗诊所招募了 300 名参与者。标准护理组 150 人中有 55 人(40%为 75 名儿童,15%为 75 名老年人),预付款组 150 人中有 111 人(74%为 75 名儿童,60%为 75 名老年人)接种了流感疫苗。与标准护理组相比,预付款组更有可能接种流感疫苗(儿童的调整优势比[aOR]为 6.7[95%CI 2.7-16.6],老年人为 5.0[2.3-10.8])。预付款组对疫苗安全性(aOR 2.2[95%CI 1.2-3.9])、重要性(3.1[1.6-5.9])和有效性(3.1[1.7-5.7])的信心更高。在预付款组中,111 名参与者中有 107 名(96%)为随后的疫苗接种捐赠了资金。预付款组的人均经济成本(不扣除捐款的成本)低于标准护理组(45.60 美元)(64.67 美元)。
预付款干预措施似乎有效提高了流感疫苗接种率和社区参与度。我们的数据对在有费用的国家实施亲社会干预措施以提高流感疫苗接种率具有启示意义。
比尔和梅琳达·盖茨基金会和英国国家卫生研究院。