Article

Vaccine knowledge and practices of primary care providers of exempt vs. vaccinated children

Institute for Vaccine Safety and Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA.
Human vaccines (Impact Factor: 3.64). 03/2008; 4(4):286-91. DOI: 10.4161/hv.4.4.5752
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Compare vaccine knowledge, attitudes and practices of primary care providers for fully vaccinated children and children who are exempt from school immunization requirements.
We conducted a mailed survey of parent-identified primary care providers from four states to measure perceived risks and benefits of vaccination and other key immunization beliefs. Frequencies of responses were stratified by type of provider, identified by exempt versus vaccinated children. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios for responses by provider type.
551 surveys were completed (84.3% response rate). Providers for exempt children had similar attitudes to providers for non-exempt children. However, there were statistically significant increased concerns among providers for exempt children regarding vaccine safety and lack of perceived individual and community benefits for vaccines compared to other providers.
The great majority of providers for exempt children had similar attitudes about vaccine safety, effectiveness and benefits as providers of non-exempt children. Although providers for exempt children were more likely to believe that multiple vaccines weaken a child's immune system and were concerned about vaccine safety and less likely to consider vaccines were beneficial, a substantial proportion of providers of both exempt and vaccinated children have concerns about vaccine safety and believe that CDC underestimates the frequency of vaccine side effects. Effective continuing education of providers about the risks and benefits of immunization and including in vaccine recommendations more information on pre and post licensing vaccine safety evaluations may help address these concerns.

Full-text

Available from: M. Patricia Dehart, May 30, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
207 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rates of delay and refusal of recommended childhood vaccines are increasing in many U.S. communities. Children’s health care providers have a strong influence on parents’ knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about vaccines. Provider attitudes towards immunizations vary and affect their immunization advocacy. One factor that may contribute to this variability is their familiarity with vaccine-preventable diseases and their sequelae. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association of health care provider year of graduation with vaccines and vaccine-preventable disease beliefs. We conducted a cross sectional survey in 2005 of primary care providers identified by parents of children whose children were fully vaccinated or exempt from one or more school immunization requirements. We examined the association of provider graduation cohort (5 years) with beliefs on immunization, disease susceptibility, disease severity, vaccine safety, and vaccine efficacy. Surveys were completed by 551 providers (84.3% response rate). More recent health care provider graduates had 15% decreased odds of believing vaccines are efficacious compared to graduates from a previous 5 year period; had lower odds of believing that many commonly used childhood vaccines were safe; and 3.7% of recent graduates believed that immunizations do more harm than good. Recent health care provider graduates have a perception of the risk-benefit balance of immunization, which differs from that of their older counterparts. This change has the potential to be reflected in their immunization advocacy and affect parental attitudes.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is a debate regarding the effect of cost sharing on immunization, particularly as the Affordable Care Act will eliminate cost sharing for recommended vaccines. This study estimates changes in immunization rates and spending associated with extending first-dollar coverage to privately insured children for four childhood vaccines. We used the 2008 National Immunization Survey and peer-reviewed literature to generate estimates of immunization status for each vaccine by age group and insurance type. We used the Truven Health Analytics 2006 MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database of line-item medical claims to estimate changes in immunization rates that would result from eliminating cost sharing, and we used the Kaiser Family Foundation/Health Research and Educational Trust Employer Health Benefits Survey to determine the prevalence of coverage for patients with first-dollar coverage, patients who face office visit cost sharing, and patients who face cost sharing for all vaccine cost components. We assumed that once cost sharing is removed, coverage rates in plans that impose cost sharing will rise to the level of plans that do not. We estimate that immunization rates would increase modestly and result in additional direct spending of $26.0 million to insurers/employers. Further, these payers would have an additional $11.0 million in spending associated with eliminating cost sharing for children already receiving immunizations. The effects of eliminating cost sharing for vaccines vary by vaccine. Overall, immunization rates will rise modestly given high insurance coverage for vaccinations, and these increases would be more substantial for those currently facing cost sharing. However, in addition to the removal of cost sharing for immunizations, these findings suggest other strategies to consider to further increase immunization rates.
    Public Health Reports 01/2014; 129(1):39-46. · 1.64 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Vaccines are among the most effective public health interventions against infectious diseases. However, there is evidence in the United States for parents either delaying or refusing recommended childhood vaccination. Exemptions to school immunization laws and use of alternative schedule from those recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the American Academy of Pediatrics cannot only increase the risk of children contracting vaccine-preventable diseases but also increases the risk of infecting others who are either too young to be vaccinated, cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons or did not develop a sufficient immunological response to the vaccine. Healthcare providers are cited as the most influential source by parents on vaccine decision-making. Vaccine hesitancy needs to be addressed by healthcare providers and the scientific community by listening to the parental concerns and discussing risks associated with either delaying or refusing vaccines.
    Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics 11/2013; 9(12). DOI:10.4161/hv.27243 · 3.64 Impact Factor