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.
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: 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.
METHODS: Patient records were obtained from the Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis-1 (ASLS-1) database, an NIH-sponsored multicenter, prospective study. Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients aged 40-80 years undergoing primary surgeries for ASLS (Cobb angle ≥ 30° and Oswestry Disability Index ≥ 20 or Scoliosis Research Society-22r ≤ 4.0 in pain, function, and/or self-image) with instrumented fusion of ≥ 7 levels that included the sacrum/pelvis. Patients with and without RF were compared to assess risk factors for RF and revision surgery.
RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were met by 160 patients (median age 62 years, IQR 55.7-67.9 years). At a median follow-up of 5.1 years (IQR 3.8-6.6 years), there were 92 RFs in 62 patients (38.8%). The median time to RF was 3.0 years (IQR 1.9-4.54 years), and 73% occurred > 2 years following surgery. Based on Kaplan-Meier analyses, estimated RF rates at 2, 4, 5, and 8 years after surgery were 11%, 24%, 35%, and 49%, respectively. Baseline radiographic, clinical, and demographic characteristics were similar between patients with and without RF. In Cox regression models, greater postoperative pelvic tilt (HR 1.895, 95% CI 1.196-3.002, p = 0.0065) and greater estimated blood loss (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.005-1.036, p = 0.0088) were associated with increased risk of RF. Thirty-eight patients (61% of all RFs) underwent revision surgery. Bilateral RF was predictive of revision surgery (HR 3.52, 95% CI 1.8-6.9, p = 0.0002), while patients with unilateral nondisplaced RFs were less likely to require revision (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18-0.84, p = 0.016).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides what is to the authors' knowledge the highest-quality data to date on RF rates following ASLS surgery. At a median follow-up of 5.1 years, 38.8% of patients had at least one RF. Estimated RF rates at 2, 4, 5, and 8 years after surgery were 11%, 24%, 35%, and 49%, respectively. Greater estimated blood loss and postoperative pelvic tilt were significant risk factors for RF. These findings emphasize the importance of long-term follow-up to realize the true prevalence and cumulative incidence of RF.
METHODS: The authors reviewed data from the Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis 1 trial (ASLS-1), a National Institutes of Health-sponsored prospective multicenter study. Inclusion criteria were an age ≥ 40 years, ASLS (Cobb angle ≥ 30° and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] ≥ 20 or Scoliosis Research Society revised 22-item questionnaire [SRS-22r] score ≤ 4.0 in pain, function, or self-image domains), and primary thoracolumbar fusion/fixation to the sacrum/pelvis of ≥ 7 levels. PJF was defined as a postoperative proximal junctional angle (PJA) change > 20°, fracture of the uppermost instrumented vertebra (UIV) or UIV+1 with > 20% vertebral height loss, spondylolisthesis of UIV/UIV+1 > 3 mm, or UIV screw dislodgment.
RESULTS: One hundred sixty patients (141 women) were included in this analysis and had a median age of 62 years and a mean follow-up of 4.3 years (range 0.1-6.1 years). Forty-six patients (28.8%) had PJF at a median of 0.92 years (IQR 0.14, 1.23 years) following surgery. Based on Kaplan-Meier analyses, PJF rates at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years were 14.4%, 21.9%, 25.9%, and 27.4%, respectively. On univariate analysis, PJF was associated with greater age (p = 0.0316), greater body mass index (BMI; p = 0.0319), worse baseline patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; ODI, SRS-22r, and SF-12 Physical Component Summary [PCS]; all p < 0.04), the use of posterior column osteotomies (PCOs; p = 0.0039), and greater postoperative thoracic kyphosis (TK; p = 0.0031) and PJA (p < 0.001). The use of UIV hooks was protective against PJF (p = 0.0340). On regression analysis (without postoperative measures), PJF was associated with greater BMI (HR 1.077, 95% CI 1.007-1.153, p = 0.0317), lower preoperative PJA (HR 0.607, 95% CI 0.407-0.906, p = 0.0146), and greater preoperative TK (HR 1.362, 95% CI 1.082-1.715, p = 0.0085). Patients with PJF had worse PROMs at the last follow-up (ODI, SRS-22r subscore and self-image, and SF-12 PCS; p < 0.04). Sixteen PJF patients (34.8%) underwent revision, and PJF recurred in 3 (18.8%).
CONCLUSIONS: Among 160 primary ASLS patients with a median age of 62 years and predominant coronal deformity, the PJF rate was 28.8% at a mean 4.3-year follow-up, with a revision rate of 34.8%. On univariate analysis, PJF was associated with a greater age and BMI, worse baseline PROMs, the use of PCOs, and greater postoperative TK and PJA. The use of UIV hooks was protective against PJF. On multivariate analysis (without postoperative measures), a higher risk of PJF was associated with greater BMI and preoperative TK and lower preoperative PJA.