SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Influenza and pertussis vaccination in pregnancy: Portrayal in online media articles and perceptions of pregnant women and healthcare professionals.

Wilcox, CR; Bottrell, K; Paterson, P; Schulz, WS; Vandrevala, T; Larson, HJ; Jones, CE (2018) Influenza and pertussis vaccination in pregnancy: Portrayal in online media articles and perceptions of pregnant women and healthcare professionals. Vaccine, 36 (50). pp. 7625-7631. ISSN 1873-2518 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.10.092
SGUL Authors: Jones, Christine Elizabeth

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (695kB) | Preview
[img] Microsoft Word (.docx) Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (14kB)
[img] Microsoft Word (.docx) Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (263kB)

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Online media may influence women's decision to undergo vaccination during pregnancy. The aims of this mixed-methods study were to: (1) examine the portrayal of maternal vaccination in online media and (2) establish the perceived target of vaccine protection as viewed by pregnant women and maternity healthcare professionals (HCPs). METHODS: Online media articles on maternal vaccination (published July-December 2012 or November 2015-April 2016) were identified through the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine's Vaccine Confidence Database and thematically analysed. Questionnaires for pregnant women and HCPs were distributed within four English hospitals (July 2017-January 2018). RESULTS: Of 203 articles identified, 60% related to pertussis vaccination, 33% to influenza and 6% both. The majority positively portrayed vaccination in pregnancy (97%), but inaccurate, negative articles persist which criticize pertussis vaccination's safety and efficacy. Positively-worded articles about pertussis tended to focus on infant protection and highlight examples of recent cases, whereas positively-worded articles about influenza focused on maternal protection. These themes were reflected in questionnaire responses from 314 pregnant women and 204 HCPs, who perceived pertussis vaccination as protecting the baby, and influenza vaccination as protecting the mother, or mother and baby equally. A minority of the pregnant women surveyed intended to decline influenza (22%) or pertussis (8%) vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of online articles support pertussis and influenza vaccination during pregnancy. The portrayal of pertussis vaccination as primarily benefiting the child, using real-examples, may influence its higher uptake compared with influenza. This approach should be considered by HCPs when recommending vaccination. HCPs should be prepared to provide advice to women hesitant about vaccination, including addressing any negative media, and consider educational strategies to counteract inaccurate information. Future studies should directly assess the influence of media on vaccine decision-making and establish which media platforms are typically used by pregnant women to gather information.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Keywords: Confidence, Decision-making, Maternal, Media, Pregnancy, Vaccination, 06 Biological Sciences, 07 Agricultural And Veterinary Sciences, 11 Medical And Health Sciences, Virology
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Infection and Immunity Research Institute (INII)
Journal or Publication Title: Vaccine
ISSN: 1873-2518
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
29 November 2018Published
3 November 2018Published Online
29 October 2018Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
UNSPECIFIEDMedical Research Councilhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000265
UNSPECIFIEDBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Councilhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000268
OPP1119788Bill and Melinda Gates Foundationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000865
PB-PG-0215-36120National Institute for Health Researchhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272
PubMed ID: 30401620
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/110371
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.10.092

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item