Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Vaccination | Research article

Strategies to improve maternal vaccination acceptance

Authors: R. Wilson, P. Paterson, H. J. Larson

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In England, influenza and pertussis vaccination has been recommended for all pregnant women since 2010 and 2012 respectively. However, in some areas, vaccination uptake rates have been low. A qualitative study was conducted to gain a contextualised understanding of factors influencing vaccination acceptance during pregnancy in Hackney, a borough in north-east London, UK. This paper draws on in-depth insights gained from the above study, to provide recommendations for increasing long-term maternal vaccination acceptance.

Methods

Hackney was chosen as the study site because it has one of the lowest vaccination coverage rates in pregnancy in the UK. A maximum variation sampling method was used to recruit 47 pregnant and recently pregnant women from a wide range of backgrounds, as well as ten healthcare professionals from three general practices; two community antenatal clinics; nine parent-toddler groups; and four community centres. In-depth interviews and a video-recording of a pregnant patient’s consultation, explored experiences of care within the National Health Service during pregnancy, and women’s views about maternal vaccination. In-depth interviews with healthcare professionals explored their views towards, and how they discuss and provide maternal vaccination. Study data were analysed both deductively, through drawing on insights from anthropological works that address diverse conceptualisations and practices around vaccination; and inductively, with a thematic analysis approach.

Results

The findings of this study and the recommendations based on them were divided into five broad themes: access to maternal vaccination; healthcare institution rhetoric and its effect on maternal vaccination acceptance; community and family influences on maternal vaccination decisions; healthcare professionals’ views towards maternal vaccination; and the influence of patient-healthcare professional relationships on maternal vaccination acceptance.

Conclusions

The strategies to improve maternal vaccination acceptance recommended in this paper would engender a more open and democratised healthcare system.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Beck U. Risk society: towards a new modernity. London: SAGE; 1992.
8.
Baker JP. The pertussis vaccine controversy in Great Britain, 1974–1986. Vaccine. 2003;21:25–26–4003–4010.
9.
Leach M, Fairhead J. Vaccine anxieties: global science, child health and society. UK, USA: Earthscan; 2007.
10.
Hilton S, Petticrew M and Hunt K. ‘Combined vaccines are like a sudden onslaught to the body's immune system’: Parental concerns about vaccine ‘overload’ and ‘immune-vulnerability. Vaccine. 2006. 15;24:4321–4327.
11.
Biss E. On immunity: an Innoculation. London: Fitzcarraldo Editions; 2015.
12.
13.
Poltorak M, Leach M and Fairhead J. 'MMR talk' and vaccination choices: an ethnographic study in Brighton. Soc Sci Med. 2005. 61;3:709–719.
14.
Kukla R. The ethics and cultural politics of reproductive risk warnings: A case study of California's Proposition 65. Health, Risk & Society. 2010;12:4.CrossRef
15.
MacDonald NE, Smith J and Appleton M. Risk perception, risk management and safety assessment: what can governments do to increase public confidence in their vaccine system? Biologicals. 2012. 40;5:384–388.
16.
Giddens A. The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Cambridge Polity Press; 1990.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Vitcu A, Lungu E, Vitcu L and Marcu A. Multi-Stage Maximum Variation Sampling in Health Promotion Programs’ Evaluation. J. Prev. Med. 2007. 200;15:5–18.
22.
Braun V and Clarke V. What can thematic analysis offer health and wellbeing researchers? International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being. 2014. 9;26152:26152.
23.
Taylor GW and Ussher JM. Making sense of S&M: A discourse analytic account. Sexualities. 2001. 4;3:293–314.
24.
25.
Wilson, RJ. "I said no for a reason": Understanding factors influencing vaccination acceptance during pregnancy in Hackney, London. PhD thesis, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. 2018. DOI: https://​doi.​org/​10.​17037/​PUBS.​04647005Discussion and Recommendations.
26.
Owkzarzak J. Defining HIV Risk and Determining Responsibility in Postsocialist Poland. Medical Anthropology Quarterly. 2009. 23;4:417–435.
27.
Letley L, Rew V, Ahmed R, Habersaat KB, Paterson P, Chantler T, Saavedra-Campos M, Butler R. Tailoring immunisation programmes: Using behavioural insights to identify barriers and enablers to childhood immunisations in a Jewish community in London, UK. Vaccine. 2018. 36;31:4687–4692.
28.
29.
Bhopal RS. Ethnicity, race, and health in multicultural societies: foundations for better epidemiology, public health, and health care. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press; 2007.CrossRef
30.
Graham J. Ambiguous Capture: Collaborative Capitalism and the Meningitis Vaccine Project. Routledge. 2016. 35;5: 419–432.
31.
Lemke T. Biopolitics: an advanced introduction. New York, London: New York University Press; 2011.
32.
Lupton D. The imperative of health. Public health and the regulated body. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage; 1995.
33.
34.
Bradley S, McCourt C, Rayment J, Parmar D. Disrespectful intrapartum care during facility-based delivery in sub-Saharan Africa: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis of women's perceptions and experiences. Soc Sci Med. 2016;169:157–70.CrossRef
35.
Milligan G, Barrett A. Vaccinology: an essential Guide. UK: John Wiley & Sons ltd.; 2015.
36.
Wilson R, Chantler T, Lees S, Paterson P, Larson H. The patient–healthcare worker relationship: how does it affect patient views towards vaccination during pregnancy? In: Kronenfeld JJ, editor. Health and health care concerns among women and racial and ethnic minorities. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited; 2017. p. 59–77.CrossRef
37.
38.
Ishola DA, Permalloo N, Cordery RJ and Anderson SR. Midwives' influenza vaccine uptake and their views on vaccination of pregnant women. J Public Health (Oxf). 2013. 35;4:570–577.
39.
Mol A. The logic of care: health and the problem of patient choice. London and New York: Routledge; 2008.CrossRef
40.
Sobo EJ. Culture and meaning in health services research. California: Left Coast Press Inc.; 2009.
41.
Opel DJ, Robinson JD, Heritage J, Korfiatis C, Taylor JA and Mangioe-Smith R. Characterizing providers' immunization communication practices during health supervision visits with vaccine-hesitant parents: A pilot study. Vaccine. 2012. 30;7: 1269–1275.
42.
Elwyn G and Charles C. Shared decision making: the principles and the competences. Evidence-based Patient Choice – Inevitable or Impossible? In: Edwards A and Elwyn G, editors. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001. P. 3–16.
43.
Wilson RJ, Paterson P, Jarrett C and Larson HJ. Understanding factors influencing vaccination acceptance during pregnancy globally: A literature review. Vaccine. 2015. 33;47: 6420–6429.
44.
45.
Mayo E. Hawthorne and the Western electric company, the social problems of an industrial civilisation. MA Routledge: Harvard; 1949.
46.
Pringle M and Stewart-Evans C. Does awareness of being video recorded affect doctors' consultation behaviour? Br J Gen Pract. 1990. 40;340:455–458.
47.
Coleman T. Using video-recorded consultations for research in primary care: advantages and limitations. Family Practice. 2000. 17;5:422–427.
Metadata
Title
Strategies to improve maternal vaccination acceptance
Authors
R. Wilson
P. Paterson
H. J. Larson
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Vaccination
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6655-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Public Health 1/2019 Go to the issue

Research article

A review of the impact of financing mechanisms on maternal health care in Australia

Research article

Employment disadvantage and associated factors for informal carers of adults with mental illness: are they like other disability carers?

Research article

In everybody’s interest but no one’s assigned responsibility: midwives’ thoughts and experiences of preventive work for men’s sexual and reproductive health and rights within primary care

Research article

“Why would you want to stand?” an account of the lived experience of employees taking part in a workplace sit-stand desk intervention

Research article

Do four or more antenatal care visits increase skilled birth attendant use and institutional delivery in Bangladesh? A propensity-score matched analysis

Research article

A survey of the prevalence of modifiable health risk behaviours among carers of people with a mental illness