Parental vaccine hesitancy and influenza vaccine type preferences during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Jiehu Yuan, Lan Li, Meihong Dong, Hau Chi So, Benjamin J Cowing, Dennis Kai Ming Ip, Qiuyan Liao
Author Information
  1. Jiehu Yuan: School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. ORCID
  2. Lan Li: Centre for Digital Public Health in Emergencies, Institute for Risk and Disaster Reduction, University College London, London, UK. ORCID
  3. Meihong Dong: Hospital-Acquired Infection Control Department, Affiliated Foshan Hospital of Southern Medical University, Foshan, Guangdong, China.
  4. Hau Chi So: World Health Organization Collaborating Center for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
  5. Benjamin J Cowing: World Health Organization Collaborating Center for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. ORCID
  6. Dennis Kai Ming Ip: World Health Organization Collaborating Center for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. ORCID
  7. Qiuyan Liao: School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. qyliao11@hku.hk. ORCID

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza vaccine (SIV) greatly reduces disease burden among school-aged children, yet parental vaccine hesitancy remains a persistent challenge. Two types of SIV are available for children in Hong Kong and other locations: inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV), administered through intramuscular injection, and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV), administered via nasal spray. We aimed to understand how vaccine hesitancy shaped parental preference for LAIV versus IIV, particularly amidst important public health events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the massive rollout of COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.
METHODS: We employed a concurrent mixed-methods design. The quantitative part involves longitudinal surveys spanning three years, from pre-pandemic to post-pandemic periods, tracking parental vaccine hesitancy and preference for SIV types. The qualitative part involves 48 in-depth interviews, providing insights into parental preference for SIV types, underlying reasons, and related values.
RESULTS: Our quantitative analyses show an overall increase in parental vaccine hesitancy and preference for LAIV over IIV after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and especially after the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Further logistic regression modelling based on the cohort data shows that higher vaccine hesitancy, coupled with the COVID-19 vaccination campaign rollout, predicts a greater preference for LAIV over IIV. The qualitative analysis complements these results, highlighting that LAIV's non-invasive nature aligns with parental values of prioritizing natural immunity and concerns about overmedication, leading to a more acceptable attitude towards LAIV.
CONCLUSIONS: Leveraging the higher acceptability of LAIV compared to IIV among parents with high vaccine hesitancy could promote childhood vaccination uptake.

References

  1. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004 Jan;158(1):65-73 [PMID: 14706961]
  2. Lancet. 2005 Feb 26-Mar 4;365(9461):773-80 [PMID: 15733718]
  3. Soc Sci Med. 2016 May;157:103-10 [PMID: 27082021]
  4. J Prev Med Hyg. 2020 Oct 06;61(3):E340-E373 [PMID: 33150224]
  5. N Engl J Med. 2001 Mar 22;344(12):889-96 [PMID: 11259722]
  6. Health Psychol. 2018 Apr;37(4):307-315 [PMID: 29389158]
  7. PLoS One. 2017 Jan 26;12(1):e0170550 [PMID: 28125629]
  8. Euro Surveill. 2019 Jan;24(5): [PMID: 30722814]
  9. Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Oct 14;9(10): [PMID: 34696283]
  10. Psychol Med. 2023 Mar;53(4):1185-1195 [PMID: 34112276]
  11. Vaccine. 2011 Jun 10;29(26):4334-40 [PMID: 21510993]
  12. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2015;11(4):956-60 [PMID: 25751608]
  13. Vaccines (Basel). 2023 Jan 07;11(1): [PMID: 36679983]
  14. Health Commun. 2021 Sep;36(10):1188-1199 [PMID: 32264705]
  15. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2021 Dec 16;15:2821-2835 [PMID: 34938071]
  16. Arch Pediatr. 2019 Feb;26(2):71-74 [PMID: 30658873]
  17. Vaccine. 2022 Dec 12;40(52):7526-7537 [PMID: 36283899]
  18. Lancet. 2018 Mar 31;391(10127):1285-1300 [PMID: 29248255]
  19. Vaccine. 2022 Feb 16;40(8):1074-1081 [PMID: 35090777]
  20. J Glob Health. 2023 Jan 27;13:04003 [PMID: 36701368]
  21. WMJ. 2009 Feb;108(1):17-23 [PMID: 19326630]
  22. J Pediatr. 2021 Jan;228:87-93.e2 [PMID: 32771480]
  23. Soc Sci Med. 2019 Oct;238:112407 [PMID: 31366444]
  24. Vaccine. 2021 Aug 9;39(34):4842-4848 [PMID: 34301433]
  25. EClinicalMedicine. 2022 Mar 25;46:101331 [PMID: 35360146]
  26. Lancet Infect Dis. 2010 Oct;10(10):699-711 [PMID: 20883966]
  27. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2010 Aug;29(8):751-5 [PMID: 20308935]
  28. N Engl J Med. 2022 Jun 30;386(26):2531-2532 [PMID: 35704429]
  29. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2022 Nov;16(6):1191-1193 [PMID: 35642605]
  30. Am J Infect Control. 2022 Mar;50(3):262-267 [PMID: 34995722]
  31. J Adolesc Health. 2009 Jul;45(1):91-4 [PMID: 19541255]
  32. Pediatrics. 2023 Nov 1;152(5): [PMID: 37867454]
  33. Vaccine. 2013 Nov 4;31(46):5466-70 [PMID: 24076175]
  34. Vaccine. 2010 Jun 7;28(25):4181-5 [PMID: 20412878]
  35. Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Dec;1(12):873-880 [PMID: 31024188]
  36. BMC Public Health. 2023 Apr 25;23(1):764 [PMID: 37098527]
  37. J Public Health (Oxf). 2023 Aug 28;45(3):e501-e509 [PMID: 37002942]
  38. J Adv Nurs. 2019 Jan;75(1):30-42 [PMID: 30109720]
  39. Nat Hum Behav. 2023 Sep;7(9):1462-1480 [PMID: 37460761]
  40. Hum Immunol. 2012 Aug;73(8):859-66 [PMID: 22504410]
  41. Clin Infect Dis. 2016 Dec 15;63(12):1564-1573 [PMID: 27702768]
  42. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005 May;159(5):470-6 [PMID: 15867122]
  43. Pediatrics. 2011 May;127 Suppl 1:S92-9 [PMID: 21502253]
  44. Vaccine. 2020 Jan 29;38(5):1032-1039 [PMID: 31806534]
  45. Am Psychol. 2022 Sep;77(6):743-759 [PMID: 36074569]

Grants

  1. INF-HKU-2/Food and Health Bureau of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region | Health and Medical Research Fund (HMRF)

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0vaccinehesitancyparentalLAIVCOVID-19IIVpreferenceinfluenzaSIVvaccinationtypesrolloutamongchildrenadministeredpandemicquantitativepartinvolvesqualitativevaluescampaignhigherBACKGROUND:Seasonalgreatlyreducesdiseaseburdenschool-agedyetremainspersistentchallengeTwoavailableHongKonglocations:inactivatedintramuscularinjectionliveattenuatedvianasalsprayaimedunderstandshapedversusparticularlyamidstimportantpublichealtheventsmassivecampaignsMETHODS:employedconcurrentmixed-methodsdesignlongitudinalsurveysspanningthreeyearspre-pandemicpost-pandemicperiodstracking48in-depthinterviewsprovidinginsightsunderlyingreasonsrelatedRESULTS:analysesshowoverallincreaseonsetespeciallylogisticregressionmodellingbasedcohortdatashowscoupledpredictsgreateranalysiscomplementsresultshighlightingLAIV'snon-invasivenaturealignsprioritizingnaturalimmunityconcernsovermedicationleadingacceptableattitudetowardsCONCLUSIONS:LeveragingacceptabilitycomparedparentshighpromotechildhooduptakeParentaltypepreferencesPandemic

Similar Articles

Cited By