Cargando…

Role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in Israel

BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccination is the most efficient and cost-effective method to prevent influenza. To increase vaccination coverage, health authorities use various intervention programs (IPs), such as cost subsidies or placing vaccination centers in malls to make vaccination more accessible. Ne...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yamin, Dan, Gavious, Arieh, Davidovitch, Nadav, Pliskin, Joseph S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4021634/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24872874
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-4015-3-13
_version_ 1782316272716873728
author Yamin, Dan
Gavious, Arieh
Davidovitch, Nadav
Pliskin, Joseph S
author_facet Yamin, Dan
Gavious, Arieh
Davidovitch, Nadav
Pliskin, Joseph S
author_sort Yamin, Dan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccination is the most efficient and cost-effective method to prevent influenza. To increase vaccination coverage, health authorities use various intervention programs (IPs), such as cost subsidies or placing vaccination centers in malls to make vaccination more accessible. Nevertheless, vaccination coverage has been sub-optimal in most developed countries, including in Israel. METHODS: To determine possible drivers of individual vaccination uptake and to examine the effectiveness of different IPs in increasing vaccination, we analyzed a telephone survey of a representative sample of the Israeli population conducted in March 2011 (n = 470), and paper questionnaires at the work place and at homes during April-July 2011 to several sub-populations : soldiers (n = 81), medical staff (n = 107), ultra-orthodox Jews (n = 72), Israeli Arabs (n = 87) and students (n = 85). RESULTS: The population can be stratified into three sub-groups: Acceptors, who receive vaccination regardless of IPs (22%), Conditional Acceptors, who are only vaccinated because of IP implementation (44%) and Non-Acceptors, who are not vaccinated despite IP implementation (34%). Our analysis shows that the risk perception towards influenza relative to vaccination is higher in the Acceptors than in the Conditional Acceptors, with the Non-Acceptors showing the lowest risk perception (P < 0.01). For Conditional Acceptors, physician recommendation is the most effective IP, regardless of the sub-population tested (P = 0.04). Students and low-income participants were more prone than any others to be persuaded to receive vaccination following IPs. In addition, financial incentives were more effective for ultra-religious orthodox Jews and students; vaccinations in more accessible areas were more effective for the ultra-religious orthodox, soldiers, and medical personnel; and TV and radio advertisements were more effective for people above 50 relative to other age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Risk perception of influenza and vaccination governs the likelihood of successful implementation of IPs. Policy makers in Israel should invest efforts to increase the knowledge regarding influenza and vaccination, and should apply specific interventions customized to the preferences and diverse perceptions among the Israeli sub-populations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4021634
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40216342014-05-28 Role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in Israel Yamin, Dan Gavious, Arieh Davidovitch, Nadav Pliskin, Joseph S Isr J Health Policy Res Original Research Article BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccination is the most efficient and cost-effective method to prevent influenza. To increase vaccination coverage, health authorities use various intervention programs (IPs), such as cost subsidies or placing vaccination centers in malls to make vaccination more accessible. Nevertheless, vaccination coverage has been sub-optimal in most developed countries, including in Israel. METHODS: To determine possible drivers of individual vaccination uptake and to examine the effectiveness of different IPs in increasing vaccination, we analyzed a telephone survey of a representative sample of the Israeli population conducted in March 2011 (n = 470), and paper questionnaires at the work place and at homes during April-July 2011 to several sub-populations : soldiers (n = 81), medical staff (n = 107), ultra-orthodox Jews (n = 72), Israeli Arabs (n = 87) and students (n = 85). RESULTS: The population can be stratified into three sub-groups: Acceptors, who receive vaccination regardless of IPs (22%), Conditional Acceptors, who are only vaccinated because of IP implementation (44%) and Non-Acceptors, who are not vaccinated despite IP implementation (34%). Our analysis shows that the risk perception towards influenza relative to vaccination is higher in the Acceptors than in the Conditional Acceptors, with the Non-Acceptors showing the lowest risk perception (P < 0.01). For Conditional Acceptors, physician recommendation is the most effective IP, regardless of the sub-population tested (P = 0.04). Students and low-income participants were more prone than any others to be persuaded to receive vaccination following IPs. In addition, financial incentives were more effective for ultra-religious orthodox Jews and students; vaccinations in more accessible areas were more effective for the ultra-religious orthodox, soldiers, and medical personnel; and TV and radio advertisements were more effective for people above 50 relative to other age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Risk perception of influenza and vaccination governs the likelihood of successful implementation of IPs. Policy makers in Israel should invest efforts to increase the knowledge regarding influenza and vaccination, and should apply specific interventions customized to the preferences and diverse perceptions among the Israeli sub-populations. BioMed Central 2014-04-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4021634/ /pubmed/24872874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-4015-3-13 Text en Copyright © 2014 Yamin 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 credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Yamin, Dan
Gavious, Arieh
Davidovitch, Nadav
Pliskin, Joseph S
Role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in Israel
title Role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in Israel
title_full Role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in Israel
title_fullStr Role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in Israel
title_full_unstemmed Role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in Israel
title_short Role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in Israel
title_sort role of intervention programs to increase influenza vaccination in israel
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4021634/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24872874
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-4015-3-13
work_keys_str_mv AT yamindan roleofinterventionprogramstoincreaseinfluenzavaccinationinisrael
AT gaviousarieh roleofinterventionprogramstoincreaseinfluenzavaccinationinisrael
AT davidovitchnadav roleofinterventionprogramstoincreaseinfluenzavaccinationinisrael
AT pliskinjosephs roleofinterventionprogramstoincreaseinfluenzavaccinationinisrael