METHODS: 151 adolescent vaccine providers and 118 mothers of adolescent girls aged 9-14 were recruited from five geographically-diverse countries: Argentina, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, and Spain. We assessed providers' preferences for single-purpose human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine versus MPVs (including HPV+herpes simplex virus (HSV)-2, HPV+HIV, or HPV+HSV-2+HIV) via quantitative surveys. Maternal MPV attitudes were assessed in four focus group discussions (FGDs) in each country.
RESULTS: Most providers preferred MPVs over single-purpose HPV vaccination, with preference ranging from 61% in Malaysia to 96% in South Africa. HPV+HSV-2+HIV was the most preferred MPV formulation (56-82%). Overall, 53% of the mothers preferred MPVs over single-purpose HPV vaccines, with strongest support in South Africa (90%) and lowest support in South Korea (29%). Convenience and trust in the health care system were commonly-cited reasons for MPV acceptability. Safety and efficacy concerns were common barriers to accepting MPVs, though specific concerns differed by country. Across FGDs, additional safety and efficacy information on MPVs were requested, particularly from trusted sources like HCPs.
CONCLUSIONS: Though maternal acceptability of MPVs varied by country, MPV acceptability would be enhanced by having HCPs provide parents with additional MPV vaccine safety and efficacy information. While most providers preferred MPVs, future health behavior research should identify acceptability barriers, and targeted provider interventions should equip providers to improve vaccination discussions with parents.
METHODS: Adolescent vaccination providers (N = 151) and mothers of adolescent girls aged 9-14 years (N = 118) were recruited from Argentina, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, and Spain. We assessed providers' preference for a 2- versus 3-dose HPV vaccination schedule via quantitative surveys. Mothers' attitudes towards a 2-dose schedule were assessed through focus group discussions.
RESULTS: Most adolescent providers preferred a 2- over a 3-dose HPV vaccination schedule (overall: 74%), with preference ranging from 45.2% (South Africa) to 90.0% (South Korea). Lower cost, fewer clinic visits, and higher series completion were commonly cited reasons for 2-dose preference among providers and mothers. Safety and efficacy concerns were commonly cited barriers to accepting a 2-dose HPV vaccination schedule among providers and mothers. Mothers generally accepted the reduced schedule, however requested further information from a trusted source.
CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent vaccination providers and mothers preferred the 2-dose over 3-dose HPV vaccination schedule. Acceptability of a 2-dose HPV vaccination could be improved with additional information to providers and mothers on HPV vaccination safety and efficacy.
DESIGN: In-depth interviews of adolescent health care providers, 2013-2014.
SETTING: Five countries where HPV vaccination is at various stages of implementation into national programs: Argentina, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, and Spain.
PARTICIPANTS: Adolescent health care providers (N = 151) who had administered or overseen provision of adolescent vaccinations (N = Argentina: 30, Malaysia: 30, South Africa: 31, South Korea: 30, Spain: 30).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of HPV vaccination recommendation, reasons providers do not always recommend the vaccine and facilitators to doing so, comfort level with recommending the vaccine, reasons for any discomfort, and positive and negative aspects of HPV vaccination.
RESULTS: Over half of providers 82/151 (54%) recommend HPV vaccination always or most of the time (range: 20% in Malaysia to 90% in Argentina). Most providers 112/151 (74%) said they were comfortable recommending HPV vaccination, although South Korea was an outlier 10/30 (33%). Providers cited protection against cervical cancer 124/151 (83%) and genital warts 56/151 (37%) as benefits of HPV vaccination. When asked about the problems with HPV vaccination, providers mentioned high cost 75/151 (50% overall; range: 26% in South Africa to 77% in South Korea) and vaccination safety 28/151 (19%; range: 7% in South Africa to 33% in Spain). Free, low-cost, or publicly available vaccination 59/151 (39%), and additional data on vaccination safety 52/151 (34%) and efficacy 43/151 (28%) were the most commonly cited facilitators of health provider vaccination recommendation.
CONCLUSION: Interventions to increase HPV vaccination should consider a country's specific provider concerns, such as reducing cost and providing information on vaccination safety and efficacy.
METHODS: We identified providers from 5 countries where national HPV vaccination programs were at various stages of implementation: Argentina, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, and Spain. Providers authorized to administer adolescent vaccines completed an in-depth survey, reporting perceptions of barriers and facilitators to initiating and completing HPV vaccination, and logistical challenges to HPV vaccination.
RESULTS: Among 151 providers, common barriers to HPV vaccination initiation across all countries were parents' lack of awareness (39%), concerns about vaccine safety or efficacy (33%), and cost to patients (30%). Vaccination education campaign (70%) was the most commonly cited facilitator of HPV vaccination initiation. Common barriers to series completion included no reminder system or dosing schedule (37%), loss to follow-up or forgetting appointment (29%), and cost to patients (25%). Cited facilitators to completing the vaccine series were education campaigns (45%), affordable vaccination (32%), and reminder/recall systems (22%). Among all countries, high cost of vaccination was the most common logistical challenge to offering vaccination to adolescents (33%).
CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating provider insights into future HPV vaccination programs could accelerate vaccine delivery to increase HPV vaccination rates globally.
METHODS: We conducted a scoping review adhering to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, Global Index Medicus, websites related to HF, and study references for eligible studies. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection and data extraction, including studies describing the use of individual patient records with the aim to improve the quality of care in older people with HF in LMICs.
RESULTS: A total of 222 abstracts were screened, 59 full-text articles were reviewed, and 10 studies regarding 3 registries were included in the analysis. Malaysia and Mexico implemented a HF registry in public hospitals whereas Argentina implemented a registry in the private setting. The Mexican registry, the most recent one, is the only one that publishes annual reports. There was significant variability in data fields between registries, particularly in functional evaluation and follow-up. The Ministry of Health finances the Malaysian registry, while Argentinian and Mexican registries founding was unclear.
CONCLUSION: The adoption of HF registries in LMICs is scarce. The few experiences show promising results but higher support is required to develop more registries. Long-term sustainability remains a challenge.
METHODS: Adolescent providers (n = 151) from Argentina, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, and Spain were surveyed on messages, family decision makers, and sources of communication to best motivate parents to vaccinate their adolescent daughters overall, and against human papillomavirus. Multivariate logistic regression assessed the likelihood of recommending messages specifically targeted at cervical cancer with providers' characteristics: gender, medical specialization, and previous administration of human papillomavirus vaccination.
RESULTS: Mothers were considered the most important human papillomavirus vaccination decision makers for their daughters (range 93%-100%). Television was cited as the best source of information on human papillomavirus vaccination in surveyed countries (range 56.5%-87.1%), except Spain where one-on-one discussions were most common (73.3%). Prevention messages were considered the most likely to motivate parents to vaccinate their daughters overall, and against human papillomavirus, in all five countries (range 30.8%-55.9%). Optimal messages emphasized cervical cancer prevention, and included strong provider recommendation to vaccinate, vaccine safety and efficacy, timely vaccination, and national policy for human papillomavirus vaccination. Pediatricians and obstetricians/gynecologists were more likely to cite that the best prevention messages should focus on cervical cancer (OR: 4.2, 95% CI: 1.17 to 15.02 vs other medical specialists).
CONCLUSIONS: Provider communication messages that would motivate parents to vaccinate against human papillomavirus were based on strong recommendation emphasizing prevention of cervical cancer. To frame convincing messages to increase vaccination uptake, adolescent providers should receive updated training on human papillomavirus and associated cancers, while clearly addressing human papillomavirus vaccination safety and efficacy.