File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: What influenza vaccination programmes are preferred by healthcare personnel? A discrete choice experiment

TitleWhat influenza vaccination programmes are preferred by healthcare personnel? A discrete choice experiment
Authors
KeywordsInfluenza vaccine
Health personnel
Vaccination choice
Preference
Decision making
Issue Date2020
PublisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/vaccine
Citation
Vaccine, 2020, v. 38 n. 29, p. 4557-4563 How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives: This study examined the relative importance of factors relating to vaccine characteristics, social normative influence and convenience in access to vaccine for determining decision making for seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) among healthcare personnel (HCP), aiming to optimize existing influenza vaccination programmes for HCP. Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted in HCP working in public hospitals in Hong Kong. The DCE was designed to examine the relative importance of vaccine characteristics (vaccine efficacy and safety), social normative influence reflected by the proportion of HCP colleagues intending to take SIV, and convenience in access to vaccine indicated by vaccination programme duration, vaccination location, vaccination arrangement procedure and service hours in determining influenza vaccination choice among HCP. Mixed logit regression modelling was conducted to examine the preference weight (β) of factors included in the DCE for determining vaccination choice. Results: Vaccination probability increased with increase in vaccine efficacy (β = 0.02 for per 1% increase), vaccination location changing from “designated staff clinic” to “mobile station” (β = 0.37), vaccination arrangement procedure changing from “by appointment” to “by walk-in” (β = 0.99), but decreased with the increase in probability of mild reactions to vaccination (β = −0.05 for per 1% increase). Conclusion: Vaccine safety was judged to be more important than vaccine efficacy for determining vaccination choice. Arranging vaccination service by walk-in and implementing mobile vaccination station should be considered in future SIV programmes to compensate for the effect of perceived low vaccination efficacy and concerns about vaccine safety to promote SIV uptake among HCP.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/288377
ISSN
2020 Impact Factor: 3.641
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.585
PubMed Central ID
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLiao, Q-
dc.contributor.authorNg, TWY-
dc.contributor.authorCowling, BJ-
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-05T12:11:58Z-
dc.date.available2020-10-05T12:11:58Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationVaccine, 2020, v. 38 n. 29, p. 4557-4563-
dc.identifier.issn0264-410X-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/288377-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: This study examined the relative importance of factors relating to vaccine characteristics, social normative influence and convenience in access to vaccine for determining decision making for seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) among healthcare personnel (HCP), aiming to optimize existing influenza vaccination programmes for HCP. Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted in HCP working in public hospitals in Hong Kong. The DCE was designed to examine the relative importance of vaccine characteristics (vaccine efficacy and safety), social normative influence reflected by the proportion of HCP colleagues intending to take SIV, and convenience in access to vaccine indicated by vaccination programme duration, vaccination location, vaccination arrangement procedure and service hours in determining influenza vaccination choice among HCP. Mixed logit regression modelling was conducted to examine the preference weight (β) of factors included in the DCE for determining vaccination choice. Results: Vaccination probability increased with increase in vaccine efficacy (β = 0.02 for per 1% increase), vaccination location changing from “designated staff clinic” to “mobile station” (β = 0.37), vaccination arrangement procedure changing from “by appointment” to “by walk-in” (β = 0.99), but decreased with the increase in probability of mild reactions to vaccination (β = −0.05 for per 1% increase). Conclusion: Vaccine safety was judged to be more important than vaccine efficacy for determining vaccination choice. Arranging vaccination service by walk-in and implementing mobile vaccination station should be considered in future SIV programmes to compensate for the effect of perceived low vaccination efficacy and concerns about vaccine safety to promote SIV uptake among HCP.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/vaccine-
dc.relation.ispartofVaccine-
dc.subjectInfluenza vaccine-
dc.subjectHealth personnel-
dc.subjectVaccination choice-
dc.subjectPreference-
dc.subjectDecision making-
dc.titleWhat influenza vaccination programmes are preferred by healthcare personnel? A discrete choice experiment-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailLiao, Q: qyliao11@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailNg, TWY: tiffnwy@HKUCC-COM.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailCowling, BJ: bcowling@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityLiao, Q=rp02100-
dc.identifier.authorityCowling, BJ=rp01326-
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.05.012-
dc.identifier.pmid32414654-
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC7252056-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85084655917-
dc.identifier.hkuros315259-
dc.identifier.volume38-
dc.identifier.issue29-
dc.identifier.spage4557-
dc.identifier.epage4563-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000537560500010-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-
dc.identifier.issnl0264-410X-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats