A systematic review of factors that influence the acceptability of vaccines among Canadians.

Canada Healthcare acceptability Systematic review Vaccination Vaccination coverage Vaccine uptake

Journal

Vaccine
ISSN: 1873-2518
Titre abrégé: Vaccine
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8406899

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 01 2021
Historique:
received: 29 11 2019
revised: 09 10 2020
accepted: 11 10 2020
pubmed: 2 12 2020
medline: 28 4 2021
entrez: 1 12 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides guidance on the use of vaccines in Canada. To support the expansion of its mandate to include considerations for vaccine acceptability when making recommendations, the NACI Secretariat developed a matrix of factors that influence acceptability. To inform and validate the matrix, we systematically reviewed evidence for factors that influence vaccine acceptability, and for interventions aimed at improving acceptability. On 10-11 October 2018 we searched four bibliographic databases, the Theses Canada Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two reviewers agreed on the included studies. From each study, we extracted information about the participants, intervention or exposure, comparator, and relevant outcomes. Due to heterogeneity in the reported factors and acceptability indicators we synthesized the findings narratively. We appraised the certainty of evidence using GRADE. For each vaccine-preventable disease we populated a matrix of factors for which there was evidence of an influence on acceptability. One hundred studies (>1 million participants) contributed data relevant to the public, 16 (6191 participants) to healthcare providers, and three (84 participants) to policymakers. There were 43 intervention studies (~2 million participants). Across vaccines, we identified low certainty evidence for 70 factors relevant to the general population, 56 to high-risk groups, and 30 to healthcare providers. The perceived safety and importance of the vaccine, vaccination history, and receiving a recommendation from a healthcare provider were common influential factors. We found low certainty evidence that reminders for childhood vaccines and policies or delivery models for rotavirus vaccines could improve uptake and coverage. Evidence for other interventions was of very low certainty. The NACI vaccine acceptability matrix is useful for categorizing acceptability factors for the general public. Reminder systems may improve the uptake of childhood vaccines. Policies that make the rotavirus vaccine universally available and easily accessible may improve coverage. This systematic review was completed under contract to the Public Health Agency of Canada, Contract #4600001536.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides guidance on the use of vaccines in Canada. To support the expansion of its mandate to include considerations for vaccine acceptability when making recommendations, the NACI Secretariat developed a matrix of factors that influence acceptability. To inform and validate the matrix, we systematically reviewed evidence for factors that influence vaccine acceptability, and for interventions aimed at improving acceptability.
METHODS
On 10-11 October 2018 we searched four bibliographic databases, the Theses Canada Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two reviewers agreed on the included studies. From each study, we extracted information about the participants, intervention or exposure, comparator, and relevant outcomes. Due to heterogeneity in the reported factors and acceptability indicators we synthesized the findings narratively. We appraised the certainty of evidence using GRADE. For each vaccine-preventable disease we populated a matrix of factors for which there was evidence of an influence on acceptability.
RESULTS
One hundred studies (>1 million participants) contributed data relevant to the public, 16 (6191 participants) to healthcare providers, and three (84 participants) to policymakers. There were 43 intervention studies (~2 million participants). Across vaccines, we identified low certainty evidence for 70 factors relevant to the general population, 56 to high-risk groups, and 30 to healthcare providers. The perceived safety and importance of the vaccine, vaccination history, and receiving a recommendation from a healthcare provider were common influential factors. We found low certainty evidence that reminders for childhood vaccines and policies or delivery models for rotavirus vaccines could improve uptake and coverage. Evidence for other interventions was of very low certainty.
CONCLUSIONS
The NACI vaccine acceptability matrix is useful for categorizing acceptability factors for the general public. Reminder systems may improve the uptake of childhood vaccines. Policies that make the rotavirus vaccine universally available and easily accessible may improve coverage.
FUNDING
This systematic review was completed under contract to the Public Health Agency of Canada, Contract #4600001536.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33257103
pii: S0264-410X(20)31332-3
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.10.038
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Rotavirus Vaccines 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

222-236

Informations de copyright

Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Allison Gates (A)

Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Michelle Gates (M)

Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Sholeh Rahman (S)

Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Samantha Guitard (S)

Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Tara MacGregor (T)

Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Jennifer Pillay (J)

Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Shainoor J Ismail (SJ)

Centre for Immunization and Respiratory Infectious Diseases, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.

Matthew C Tunis (MC)

Centre for Immunization and Respiratory Infectious Diseases, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.

Kelsey Young (K)

Centre for Immunization and Respiratory Infectious Diseases, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.

Kendra Hardy (K)

Centre for Immunization and Respiratory Infectious Diseases, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.

Robin Featherstone (R)

Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Lisa Hartling (L)

Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence (ARCHE), Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. Electronic address: hartling@ualberta.ca.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH