#286 Vaccine hesitancy in the office: What can I do?
Reading Tools for Practice Article can earn you MainPro+ CreditsJoin Now
Already a CFPCLearn Member? Log in
- Improvement in vaccine attitude scores:
- Disease risk: 0.25, statistically different.
- Autism risk: 0.08, not statistically different.
- Control: 0.05.
- Reanalysis2 shows biggest change among participants with “neutral” baseline vaccine attitude scores.
- No intervention improved intent to vaccinate.
- In those with least-favorable vaccine attitudes, correction of misinformation decreased intent to vaccinate from 70% (control) to 45%.
- Likelihood of vaccinating child with MMR (on a 100-point scale): 86.3 (control), 91.6
(benefits to child), 86.4 (benefits to society), 90.8 (benefits to child and society).
- Only statements including benefits to the child statistically different from control.
- Studies looked at proxy measures (example: intention to vaccinate) rather than vaccine uptake.
- No study was completed in a primary care office with a trusted healthcare provider.
- No RCTs involved COVID-19 vaccines.
- Vaccine hesitancy is a spectrum, not a binary “pro/anti.”5
- “Strong” physician recommendations are associated with higher likelihood to vaccinate.6-8
- Discussion about vaccination ideally begins during pregnancy and continues in the neonatal period.9-11
- A presumptive approach (example: “Jane is due for her vaccines today.”) is recommended over participatory (example: “Are we going to do Jane’s vaccines today?”).7,12