Eurosurveillance - Volume 24, Issue 36, 05 September 2019

Many countries are grappling with growing numbers of parents who delay or refuse recommended vaccinations for their children. This has created a need for strategies to address vaccine hesitancy (VH) and better support parental decision-making regarding vaccination.

To assess vaccination intention (VI) and VH among parents who received an individual motivational-interview (MI) based intervention on infant immunisation during post-partum stay at a maternity ward between March 2014 and February 2015.

This non-controlled pre-/post-intervention study was conducted using the results from parents enrolled in the intervention arm of the PromoVaQ randomised control trial (RCT), which was conducted in four maternity wards across the Province of Quebec. Participants (n = 1,223) completed pre- and post-intervention questionnaires on VI and VH using Opel’s score. Pre-/post-intervention measures were compared using McNemar’s test for categorical variables and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous variables.

Pre-intervention: overall VI was 78% and significantly differed across maternity wards (74%, 77%, 84%, 79%, p = 0.02). Post-intervention: VI rose significantly across maternity wards (89%, 85%, 95%, 93%) and the overall increase in VI was 12% (78% vs 90%, p < 0.0001). VH corroborated these observations, pre- vs post-intervention, for each maternity ward (28% vs 16%, 29% vs 21%, 27% vs 17%, 24% vs 13%). Overall, VH was curbed post-intervention by 40% (27% vs 16%; p < 0.0001).

Compared with pre-intervention status, participants who received the MI-based intervention on immunisation displayed lower hesitancy and greater intention to vaccinate their infant at 2 months of age.

Most evaluations of field epidemiology training programmes (FETP) are limited to process measures, but stakeholders may need evidence of impact.

To ascertain if the United Kingdom (UK) FETP met its objectives to: (i) strengthen capacity and provision of national epidemiology services, (ii) develop a network of highly skilled field epidemiologists with a shared sense of purpose working to common standards and (iii) raise the profile of field epidemiology through embedding it into everyday health protection practice.

The evaluation consisted of: (i) focus groups with training site staff, (ii) individual interviews with stakeholders and (iii) an online survey of FETP fellows and graduates. Findings were synthesised and triangulated across the three evaluation components to identify cross-cutting themes and subthemes.

Eight focus groups were undertaken with 38 staff, ten stakeholders were interviewed and 28 (76%) graduates and fellows responded to the survey. Three themes emerged: confidence, application and rigour. FETP was perceived to have contributed to the development, directly and indirectly, of a skilled workforce in field epidemiology, increasing stakeholders’ confidence in the service. Graduates applied their learning in practice, collaborating with a wide range of disciplines. Fellows and graduates demonstrated rigour by introducing innovations, supporting service improvements and helping supervisors maintain their skills and share good practice.

The UK FETP appears to have met its three key objectives, and also had wider organisational impact. FETPs should systematically and prospectively collect information on how they have influenced changes to field epidemiology practice.