Cargando…
Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals
BACKGROUND: A critical factor shaping parental attitudes to vaccination is the parent’s interactions with health professionals. An effective interaction can address the concerns of vaccine supportive parents and motivate a hesitant parent towards vaccine acceptance. Poor communication can contribute...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3480952/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22998654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-12-154 |
_version_ | 1782247666265096192 |
---|---|
author | Leask, Julie Kinnersley, Paul Jackson, Cath Cheater, Francine Bedford, Helen Rowles, Greg |
author_facet | Leask, Julie Kinnersley, Paul Jackson, Cath Cheater, Francine Bedford, Helen Rowles, Greg |
author_sort | Leask, Julie |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A critical factor shaping parental attitudes to vaccination is the parent’s interactions with health professionals. An effective interaction can address the concerns of vaccine supportive parents and motivate a hesitant parent towards vaccine acceptance. Poor communication can contribute to rejection of vaccinations or dissatisfaction with care. We sought to provide a framework for health professionals when communicating with parents about vaccination. METHODS: Literature review to identify a spectrum of parent attitudes or ‘positions’ on childhood vaccination with estimates of the proportion of each group based on population studies. Development of a framework related to each parental position with determination of key indicators, goals and strategies based on communication science, motivational interviewing and valid consent principles. RESULTS: Five distinct parental groups were identified: the ‘unquestioning acceptor’ (30–40%), the ‘cautious acceptor’ (25–35%); the ‘hesitant’ (20–30%); the ‘late or selective vaccinator’ (2–27%); and the ‘refuser’ of all vaccines (<2%). The goals of the encounter with each group will vary, depending on the parents’ readiness to vaccinate. In all encounters, health professionals should build rapport, accept questions and concerns, and facilitate valid consent. For the hesitant, late or selective vaccinators, or refusers, strategies should include use of a guiding style and eliciting the parent’s own motivations to vaccinate while, avoiding excessive persuasion and adversarial debates. It may be necessary to book another appointment or offer attendance at a specialised adverse events clinic. Good information resources should also be used. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals have a central role in maintaining public trust in vaccination, including addressing parents’ concerns. These recommendations are tailored to specific parental positions on vaccination and provide a structured approach to assist professionals. They advocate respectful interactions that aim to guide parents towards quality decisions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3480952 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-34809522012-10-27 Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals Leask, Julie Kinnersley, Paul Jackson, Cath Cheater, Francine Bedford, Helen Rowles, Greg BMC Pediatr Correspondence BACKGROUND: A critical factor shaping parental attitudes to vaccination is the parent’s interactions with health professionals. An effective interaction can address the concerns of vaccine supportive parents and motivate a hesitant parent towards vaccine acceptance. Poor communication can contribute to rejection of vaccinations or dissatisfaction with care. We sought to provide a framework for health professionals when communicating with parents about vaccination. METHODS: Literature review to identify a spectrum of parent attitudes or ‘positions’ on childhood vaccination with estimates of the proportion of each group based on population studies. Development of a framework related to each parental position with determination of key indicators, goals and strategies based on communication science, motivational interviewing and valid consent principles. RESULTS: Five distinct parental groups were identified: the ‘unquestioning acceptor’ (30–40%), the ‘cautious acceptor’ (25–35%); the ‘hesitant’ (20–30%); the ‘late or selective vaccinator’ (2–27%); and the ‘refuser’ of all vaccines (<2%). The goals of the encounter with each group will vary, depending on the parents’ readiness to vaccinate. In all encounters, health professionals should build rapport, accept questions and concerns, and facilitate valid consent. For the hesitant, late or selective vaccinators, or refusers, strategies should include use of a guiding style and eliciting the parent’s own motivations to vaccinate while, avoiding excessive persuasion and adversarial debates. It may be necessary to book another appointment or offer attendance at a specialised adverse events clinic. Good information resources should also be used. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals have a central role in maintaining public trust in vaccination, including addressing parents’ concerns. These recommendations are tailored to specific parental positions on vaccination and provide a structured approach to assist professionals. They advocate respectful interactions that aim to guide parents towards quality decisions. BioMed Central 2012-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3480952/ /pubmed/22998654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-12-154 Text en Copyright ©2012 Leask et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Correspondence Leask, Julie Kinnersley, Paul Jackson, Cath Cheater, Francine Bedford, Helen Rowles, Greg Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals |
title | Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals |
title_full | Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals |
title_fullStr | Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals |
title_full_unstemmed | Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals |
title_short | Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals |
title_sort | communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals |
topic | Correspondence |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3480952/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22998654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-12-154 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leaskjulie communicatingwithparentsaboutvaccinationaframeworkforhealthprofessionals AT kinnersleypaul communicatingwithparentsaboutvaccinationaframeworkforhealthprofessionals AT jacksoncath communicatingwithparentsaboutvaccinationaframeworkforhealthprofessionals AT cheaterfrancine communicatingwithparentsaboutvaccinationaframeworkforhealthprofessionals AT bedfordhelen communicatingwithparentsaboutvaccinationaframeworkforhealthprofessionals AT rowlesgreg communicatingwithparentsaboutvaccinationaframeworkforhealthprofessionals |