Perinatal immunization education improves immunization rates and knowledge: A randomized controlled trial

Saitoh, Aya; Nagata, Satoko; Saitoh, Akihiko; Tsukahara, Yuki; Vaida, Florin; Sonobe, Tomoyoshi; Kamiya, Hajime; Naruse, Takashi; Murashima, Sachiyo

doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.03.003

Cited by 38 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the previous report conducted in Japan, 6 the lowest difference between the intervention and the control groups was the proportion of fully vaccination for vaccines scheduled 12 months. The proportions of fully vaccination were 80% in the control group and 90% in the intervention group, respectively.…”

Section: Sample Sizementioning

confidence: 95%

“…4 Previous studies indicated that early intervention programs such as prenatal vaccination education could improve mother's knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) regarding immunization. 5,6 Beside, a face to face education session may ensure a better understanding and reception of information on practice that have a positive impact on childhood immunization. 7 In contrast, there are very few data available indicating the effectiveness of vaccination education intervention during the prenatal period in China.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prenatal vaccination education intervention improves both the mothers' knowledge and children's vaccination coverage: Evidence from randomized controlled trial from eastern China

Chen

Wang

et al. 2017

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To verify the effectiveness of prenatal vaccination education intervention on improving mother's vaccination knowledge and child's vaccination status in Zhejiang province, eastern China.Methods: Pregnant women with 12 gestational weeks were recruited and randomly assigned into the intervention group and the control group. The intervention group were given a vaccination education session while the control group were not. Two round surveys were performed before and 3 months after the intervention. The vaccination status of child was extracted at 12 months of age from immunization information system. The differences of the vaccination knowledge, the coverage, the completeness and the timeliness of vaccination between 2 groups were evaluated. The effectiveness of vaccination education intervention was assessed, under the control of the other demographic variables.Results: Among the 1252 participants, 851 subjects replied to the post-survey. Significant improvements of vaccination knowledge between the pre-and the post-survey in the intervention group were observed (Mean § S.D:1.8 § 1.1 vs. 3.7 § 1.2 for vaccines score and 2.7 § 1.5 vs. 4.8 § 1.0 for vaccine policy score, respectively). The coverage of fully vaccination was significantly higher in the intervention group (90.0% vs. 82.9%, P<0.01). The timeliness of fully vaccination was significantly higher in the intervention group (51.9% vs. 33.0%, P<0.01). In the intervention group, pregnant women were more likely to be with high score of knowledge (OR D 5.2, 95%CI: 2.6-8.8), and children were more likely to complete the full series of vaccination (OR D 3.4, 95%CI: 2.1-4.8), and children were more likely to complete the full series of vaccination in a timely manner (OR D 2.3, 95%CI: 1.6-3.5).Conclusions: Vaccination education in the pregnant women can effectively improve the knowledge regarding immunization and increase the coverage, the completeness and the timeliness of childhood vaccination. Strong partnership needs to be established between the obstetricians and the vaccination staff to improve the performance of NIP.

show abstract

Section: Sample Sizementioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prenatal vaccination education intervention improves both the mothers' knowledge and children's vaccination coverage: Evidence from randomized controlled trial from eastern China

Chen

Wang

et al. 2017

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These were grouped into six intervention types: (a) postal reminders [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]; (b) telephone reminders [25,26,29,32,34]; (c) combined recall and reminder [25,26,32,35]; (d) education [22,30,31,[36][37][38][39][40][41][42]; (e) education and reminder [30,31,[43][44][45]; and (f) lay health workers (LHWs) [46][47][48][49]. Studies that could not be included in the meta-analysis because of a lack of comparable trials investigated a variety of intervention methods.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Studies Included In the Meta-analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only six studies included a blind outcome assessor. In the majority of studies, blinding was unclear or judged to be of high risk because those administering the intervention also assessed outcomes [22,30,31,[36][37][38]40,44,48]. In the majority of studies, insufficient information was reported to provide a judgement regarding blinding.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias For Individual Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Approximately 10% of studies [36,38,46] were judged to be at high risk of attrition bias owing to high rates of exclusion and loss to follow-up. Only three studies [22,40,42] referred to protocols, so for the majority of studies it was unclear whether selected reporting had been an issue. No evidence of publication bias was found for included studies: for each pooled analysis, funnel plots were symmetrical, with studies published in each quarter of the plot.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias For Individual Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parental reminder, recall and educational interventions to improve early childhood immunisation uptake: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Harvey

Reissland

Mason

2015

Vaccine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vaccination is one of the most effective ways of reducing childhood mortality. Despite global uptake of childhood vaccinations increasing, rates remain sub-optimal, meaning that vaccine-preventable diseases still pose a public health risk. A range of interventions to promote vaccine uptake have been developed, although this range has not specifically been reviewed in early childhood. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of parental interventions to improve early childhood (0-5 years) vaccine uptake. Twenty-eight controlled studies contributed to six separate meta-analyses evaluating aspects of parental reminders and education. All interventions were to some extent effective, although findings were generally heterogeneous and random effects models were estimated. Receiving both postal and telephone reminders was the most effective reminder-based intervention (RD=0.1132; 95% CI=0.033-0.193). Sub-group analyses suggested that educational interventions were more effective in low- and middle-income countries (RD=0.13; 95% CI=0.05-0.22) and when conducted through discussion (RD=0.12; 95% CI=0.02-0.21). Current evidence most supports the use of postal reminders as part of the standard management of childhood immunisations. Parents at high risk of non-compliance may benefit from recall strategies and/or discussion-based forums, however further research is needed to assess the appropriateness of these strategies.

show abstract

Face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination

Kaufman

Ryan

Walsh

et al. 2018

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

149

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEarly childhood vaccination is an essential global public health practice that saves two to three million lives each year, but many children do not receive all the recommended vaccines. To achieve and maintain appropriate coverage rates, vaccination programmes rely on people having sufficient awareness and acceptance of vaccines.Face‐to‐face information or educational interventions are widely used to help parents understand why vaccines are important; explain where, how and when to access services; and address hesitancy and concerns about vaccine safety or efficacy. Such interventions are interactive, and can be adapted to target particular populations or identified barriers.This is an update of a review originally published in 2013.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of face‐to‐face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination on vaccination status and parental knowledge, attitudes and intention to vaccinate.Search methodsWe searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and two trial registries (July and August 2017). We screened reference lists of relevant articles, and contacted authors of included studies and experts in the field. We had no language or date restrictions.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster‐RCTs evaluating the effects of face‐to‐face interventions delivered to parents or expectant parents to inform or educate them about early childhood vaccination, compared with control or with another face‐to‐face intervention. The World Health Organization recommends that children receive all early childhood vaccines, with the exception of human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV), which is delivered to adolescents.Data collection and analysisWe used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently reviewed all search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies.Main resultsIn this update, we found four new studies, for a total of ten studies. We included seven RCTs and three cluster‐RCTs involving a total of 4527 participants, although we were unable to pool the data from one cluster‐RCT. Three of the ten studies were conducted in low‐ or middle‐ income countries.All included studies compared face‐to‐face interventions with control. Most studies evaluated the effectiveness of a single intervention session delivered to individual parents. The interventions were an even mix of short (ten minutes or less) and longer sessions (15 minutes to several hours).Overall, elements of the study designs put them at moderate to high risk of bias. All studies but one were at low risk of bias for sequence generation (i.e. used a random number sequence). For allocation concealment (i.e. the person randomising participants was unaware of the study group to which participant would be allocated), three were at high risk and one was judged at unclear risk of bias. Due to the educational nature of the intervention, blinding of participants and personnel was not possible in any ...

show abstract

Perinatal immunization education improves immunization rates and knowledge: A randomized controlled trial

Abstract: Perinatal immunization education improved the immunization status of infants, increased the women's knowledge on immunization and intention to vaccinate their infants.

Cited by 38 publications

References 22 publications

Prenatal vaccination education intervention improves both the mothers' knowledge and children's vaccination coverage: Evidence from randomized controlled trial from eastern China

Prenatal vaccination education intervention improves both the mothers' knowledge and children's vaccination coverage: Evidence from randomized controlled trial from eastern China

Parental reminder, recall and educational interventions to improve early childhood immunisation uptake: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents about early childhood vaccination

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About