Factors influencing women’s decisions about having the pertussis-containing vaccine during pregnancy
Linda Hill 1 , Beverley Burrell 1 , Tony Walls 21 University of Otago Christchurch, Centre for Postgraduate Nursing Studies, Christchurch, New Zealand
2 Department of Paediatrics, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand
Correspondence to: Tony Walls, University of Otago, Department of Paediatrics, Christchurch, New Zealand. Email: tony.walls@otago.ac.nz
Journal of Primary Health Care 10(1) 62-67 https://doi.org/10.1071/HC17040
Published: 19 January 2018
Journal Compilation © Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners 2018.
This is an open access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: New Zealand experienced a major epidemic of pertussis from September 2011 to January 2014. In response to this epidemic, a pertussis-containing tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine was funded for pregnant women of 28–38 weeks’ gestation.
AIM: To investigate the factors influencing women’s decisions regarding having the Tdap vaccine during pregnancy.
METHODS: A retrospective, self-reported postal survey of early postpartum women in Canterbury that assessed participant knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and influencing factors about the Tdap vaccine was conducted from June to October 2013.
RESULTS: Of the 1883 surveys distributed, 596 women completed the survey. The main factors influencing women’s decisions to accept the Tdap vaccine during pregnancy were: the desire to protect their baby, a health professional’s recommendation, the threat of pertussis in the community and the fact that the vaccine was administered at no cost. Conversely, for women who did not receive the Tdap vaccine, the main factors that influenced their decisions were: they did not know the vaccine was available, fear of side-effects and doubt regarding vaccine effectiveness.
CONCLUSION: A clear health professional recommendation for maternal Tdap immunisation was a significant factor influencing pregnant women and would most likely improve the uptake of the vaccine.
KEYWORDS: infectious diseases, maternal immunisation, pertussis, pregnancy, vaccination
References
[1] World Health Organization[2] Amirthalingam G, Gupta S, Campbell H. Pertussis immunisation and control in England and Wales, 1957 to 2012: a historical review. Euro Surveill 2013; 18 19–27.
| Pertussis immunisation and control in England and Wales, 1957 to 2012: a historical review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[3] Cherry JD. Epidemic Pertussis in 2012 — The resurgence of a vaccine-preventable disease. N Engl J Med 2012; 367 785–7.
| Epidemic Pertussis in 2012 — The resurgence of a vaccine-preventable disease.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC38XhtlGkt7fM&md5=57dccb93117eafde1a071dc7084076a0CAS |
[4] Gall SA. Prevention of pertussis, tetanus, and diphtheria among pregnant, postpartum women, and infants. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 55 498–509.
| Prevention of pertussis, tetanus, and diphtheria among pregnant, postpartum women, and infants.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[5] Amirthalingam G, Andrews N, Campbell H, et al. Effectiveness of maternal pertussis vaccination in England: an observational study. Lancet 2014; 384 1521–8.
| Effectiveness of maternal pertussis vaccination in England: an observational study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[6] Grant CC. Recent indication of progress in pertussis hospitalisation rates in NZ. Aust N Z J Public Health 2012; 36 398
| Recent indication of progress in pertussis hospitalisation rates in NZ.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[7] Environmental Science and Research NZ. ESR Pertussis Report; Weeks 50–51: 8 December 2012–4 January 2013. Wellington: ESR; 2013.
[8] Environmental Science and Research NZ. ESR Pertussis Report July-September 2013. Wellington, New Zealand: Environmental Science and Research; 2013.
[9] Ministry of Health NZ. Immunisation Handbook 2014. Wellington: Ministry of Health; 2014.
[10] Christchurch District Health Board and West Coast District Health Board NZ. Maternity Quality and Safety Programme - Annual Report 2014/15. Christchurch: Christchurch District Health Board and West Coast District Health Board, New Zealand, Department WsaCsH; 2015.
[11] Petousis-Harris H, Grant CC, Goodyear-Smith F, et al. What contributes to delays? The primary care determinants of immunisation timeliness in New Zealand. J Prim Health Care 2012; 4 12–20.
[12] Calarco G, Myers A, Jackson MA, et al. Maternal acceptance of Tdap vaccine positively affects infant immunisation at 3 months. Infectious Disease Conference 2013; San Diego, California; 2012. Mercy Hospital and Clinic & Public Health University of South Florida. [cited 2012 November 12]. Available from: https://idsa.confex.com/idsa/2012/webprogram/Paper36472.html
[13] Turner N. . Pertussis immunisation in pregnancy. Best Practice Journal 2014; 34–7.
[14] Eppes C, Wu A, You W, et al. Barriers to influenza vaccination among pregnant women. Vaccine 2013; 31 2874–8.
| Barriers to influenza vaccination among pregnant women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[15] Hayles EH, Cooper SC, Wood N, et al. What predicts postpartum pertussis booster vaccination? A controlled intervention trial. Vaccine 2015; 33 228–36.
| What predicts postpartum pertussis booster vaccination? A controlled intervention trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[16] Tong A, Biringer A, Ofner-Agostini M, et al. A cross-sectional study of maternity care providers’ and women’s knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours towards influenza vaccination during pregnancy. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2008; 30 404–10.
| A cross-sectional study of maternity care providers’ and women’s knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours towards influenza vaccination during pregnancy.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[17] Wiley KE, Massey PD, Cooper SC, et al. Uptake of influenza vaccine by pregnant women: a cross-sectional survey. Med J Aust 2013; 198 373–5.
| Uptake of influenza vaccine by pregnant women: a cross-sectional survey.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[18] Wiley KE, Massey PD, Cooper SC, et al. Pregnant women’s intention to take up a post-partum pertussis vaccine, and their willingness to take up the vaccine while pregnant: A cross sectional survey. Vaccine 2013; 31 3972–8.
| Pregnant women’s intention to take up a post-partum pertussis vaccine, and their willingness to take up the vaccine while pregnant: A cross sectional survey.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3sjjs1Shsw%3D%3D&md5=5fe6270966dfd99b49c28a06d0d083c8CAS |
[19] Vitek WS, Akers A, Meyn LA, et al. Vaccine eligibility and acceptance among ambulatory obstetric and gynaecologic patients. Vaccine 2011; 29 2024–8.
| Vaccine eligibility and acceptance among ambulatory obstetric and gynaecologic patients.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
