A feasibility trial of parent HPV vaccine reminders and phone-based motivational interviewing.

Stephanie A S Staras, Eric Richardson, Lisa J Merlo, Jiang Bian, Lindsay A Thompson, Janice L Krieger, Matthew J Gurka, Ashley H Sanders, Elizabeth A Shenkman
Author Information
  1. Stephanie A S Staras: Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. sstaras@ufl.edu. ORCID
  2. Eric Richardson: Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  3. Lisa J Merlo: The Institute for Child Health Policy, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  4. Jiang Bian: Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  5. Lindsay A Thompson: Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  6. Janice L Krieger: Department of Advertising, College of Journalism and Communication, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  7. Matthew J Gurka: Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  8. Ashley H Sanders: Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  9. Elizabeth A Shenkman: Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a sequential approach of parent-targeted HPV vaccine reminders and phone-based Motivation Interviewing (MI).
METHODS: In 2016, we selected all 11- to 12-year-old boys and girls seen in one clinic whose vaccine records did not include the HPV vaccine (n=286). By gender, we individually randomized parents of adolescents to an interactive text message (74 girls and 45 boys), postcard reminder (46 boys and no girls because of previously demonstrated efficacy), or standard care group (75 girls and 46 boys). Reminders were sent with medical director permission and a HIPAA waiver. Two months after reminders, among the adolescents whose vaccine records still did not include the HPV vaccine, we selected a gender-stratified random sample of 20 parents for phone-based MI. We assessed the percentage of deliverable messages, the percentage of parents' responding to the interactive text message, parent acceptability of receiving a text message, and MI parent responsiveness and interviewer competence (MI Treatment Integrity Coding system).
RESULTS: Nearly all messages were deliverable (98% of postcards and 74% of text messages). Six of the 88 parents (7%) receiving text messages scheduled an appointment through our interactive system. The acceptability survey response rate was 37% (38/102). Respondents were favorable toward vaccine reminders for all parents (82%). Among 20 sampled parents, 17 were reached by phone of whom 7 completed MI, 4 had or were getting the HPV vaccine for their child, and 5 expressed disinterest. Across the 7 MI calls, the interviewer was rated 100% MI adherent and scored an average 4.19 rating for Global Spirit.
CONCLUSION: Without providing explicit consent to receive vaccine-related messages, parents nonetheless found postcards and interactive text messages acceptable. Centralizing MI to phone calls with trained staff was acceptable to parents and resulted in highly MI-adherent interviews.

Keywords

References

  1. Vaccine. 2016 Feb 24;34(9):1187-92 [PMID: 26812078]
  2. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2018 Feb;86(2):140-157 [PMID: 29265832]
  3. J Adolesc Health. 2015 May;56(5 Suppl):S27-32 [PMID: 25863551]
  4. J Adolesc Health. 2019 Jun;64(6):753-762 [PMID: 30777636]
  5. J Am Coll Health. 2016 May-Jun;64(4):269-78 [PMID: 26821923]
  6. Nurs Health Sci. 2016 Sep;18(3):400-7 [PMID: 27291137]
  7. Vaccine. 2014 Oct 21;32(46):6163-9 [PMID: 25180815]
  8. J Adolesc Health. 2015 May;56(5 Suppl):S40-6 [PMID: 25863554]
  9. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011 Mar;38(2):65-76 [PMID: 20957426]
  10. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 02;(3):CD006936 [PMID: 25726920]
  11. Acad Pediatr. 2018 Mar;18(2S):S72-S78 [PMID: 29502641]
  12. J Behav Med. 2014 Aug;37(4):768-80 [PMID: 23934180]
  13. J Adolesc Health. 2019 Jul;65(1):116-123 [PMID: 30879881]
  14. Addict Behav. 2017 Oct;73:216-235 [PMID: 28554033]
  15. Sex Transm Dis. 2011 Mar;38(3):197-204 [PMID: 20838362]
  16. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2014 Dec;82(6):1212-8 [PMID: 24841861]
  17. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2019 Jan 15;5:6 [PMID: 30675373]
  18. Pediatr Dent. 2015 May-Jun;37(3):254-65 [PMID: 26063554]
  19. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Jun 28;108(26):10415-20 [PMID: 21670283]
  20. Patient Educ Couns. 2015 Jan;98(1):61-8 [PMID: 25455795]
  21. JAMA Pediatr. 2014 Jan;168(1):76-82 [PMID: 24276343]
  22. BMC Public Health. 2017 Oct 2;17(1):766 [PMID: 28969653]
  23. Prev Med Rep. 2020 Aug 26;20:101188 [PMID: 32953426]
  24. Int J Audiol. 2016;55(3):149-56 [PMID: 26328620]
  25. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2016 Jun 2;12(6):1469-75 [PMID: 27078515]
  26. Pediatrics. 2015 Nov;136(5):e1220-7 [PMID: 26438703]
  27. Patient Educ Couns. 2019 Nov;102(11):2073-2080 [PMID: 31285065]
  28. Pediatrics. 2015 Jan;135(1):e83-91 [PMID: 25548329]
  29. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Aug 21;69(33):1109-1116 [PMID: 32817598]
  30. J Pediatr Health Care. 2014 Nov-Dec;28(6):541-9 [PMID: 25017939]
  31. Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Jul;84(1):16-26 [PMID: 20667432]
  32. Am J Public Health. 2013 Aug;103(8):1419-27 [PMID: 23763402]
  33. Vaccine. 2006 Apr 12;24(16):3087-94 [PMID: 16500736]
  34. Pediatrics. 2020 Dec;146(6): [PMID: 33199466]
  35. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2015;11(1):72-82 [PMID: 25483518]
  36. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2014 Jun;82(3):521-35 [PMID: 24547922]
  37. BMJ. 2016 Oct 24;355:i5239 [PMID: 27777223]
  38. Fam Syst Health. 2015 Dec;33(4):330-8 [PMID: 26214008]
  39. Am J Prev Med. 2015 Apr;48(4):392-401 [PMID: 25812465]
  40. J Health Commun. 2018;23(4):313-320 [PMID: 29474117]
  41. Prev Med. 2015 Aug;77:181-5 [PMID: 26051197]
  42. Vaccine. 2011 Sep 2;29(38):6598-605 [PMID: 21763384]
  43. Prev Med. 2013 Aug;57(2):75-80 [PMID: 23624252]
  44. J Adolesc Health. 2017 Jan;60(1):113-119 [PMID: 27836533]
  45. J Pediatr Nurs. 2011 Oct;26(5):474-9 [PMID: 21930034]
  46. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2016 Jun;65:36-42 [PMID: 26874558]
  47. Pediatrics. 2015 Apr;135(4):649-57 [PMID: 25825539]
  48. J Med Internet Res. 2014 Oct 17;16(10):e222 [PMID: 25326646]
  49. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 18;1:CD003941 [PMID: 29342498]
  50. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Jul;100(7):1280-1286 [PMID: 28209248]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Child
Feasibility Studies
Female
Humans
Male
Motivational Interviewing
Papillomavirus Vaccines
Parents
Reminder Systems
Text Messaging

Chemicals

Papillomavirus Vaccines

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0vaccineMIparentsHPVtextmessagesremindersboysgirlsinteractiveacceptabilityphone-basedmessageparentassessedfeasibilityselectedwhoserecordsincludeadolescents4620percentagedeliverablereceivinginterviewersystempostcardsphone74callsacceptableinterviewingBACKGROUND:sequentialapproachparent-targetedMotivationInterviewingMETHODS:201611-12-year-oldseenoneclinicn=286genderindividuallyrandomized7445postcardreminderpreviouslydemonstratedefficacystandardcaregroup75ReminderssentmedicaldirectorpermissionHIPAAwaiverTwomonthsamongstillgender-stratifiedrandomsampleparents'respondingresponsivenesscompetenceTreatmentIntegrityCodingRESULTS:Nearly98%74%Six887%scheduledappointmentsurveyresponserate37%38/102Respondentsfavorabletoward82%Amongsampled17reachedcompletedgettingchild5expresseddisinterestAcrossrated100%adherentscoredaverage19ratingGlobalSpiritCONCLUSION:Withoutprovidingexplicitconsentreceivevaccine-relatednonethelessfoundCentralizingtrainedstaffresultedhighlyMI-adherentinterviewstrialmotivationalAcceptabilityFeasibilityMotivationalTextmessaging

Similar Articles

Cited By