Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2018 Mar 20;18(1):382.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5278-z.

Assessing the acceptability of incentivising HPV vaccination consent form return as a means of increasing uptake

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Assessing the acceptability of incentivising HPV vaccination consent form return as a means of increasing uptake

Lauren Rockliffe et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is high overall but there are disparities in uptake, particularly by ethnicity. Incentivising vaccination consent form return is a promising approach to increase vaccination uptake. As part of a randomised feasibility trial we qualitatively assessed the acceptability of increasing uptake of HPV vaccination by incentivising consent form return.

Methods: In the context of a two-arm, cluster randomised feasibility trial, qualitative free-text questionnaire responses were collected from adolescent girls (n = 181) and their parents (n = 61), assessing the acceptability of an incentive intervention to increase HPV vaccination consent form return. In the incentive intervention arm, girls who returned a signed consent form (regardless of whether consent was given or refused), had a 1-in-10 chance of winning a £50 shopping voucher. Telephone interviews were also conducted with members of staff from participating schools (n = 6), assessing the acceptability of the incentive. Data were analysed thematically.

Results: Girls and parents provided a mix of positive, negative and ambivalent responses about the use of the incentive to encourage HPV vaccination consent form return. Both girls and parents held misconceptions about the nature of the incentive, wrongly believing that the incentive was dependent on vaccination receipt rather than consent form return. School staff members also expressed a mix of opinions on the acceptability of the incentive, including perceptions of effectiveness and ethics.

Conclusions: The use of an incentive intervention to encourage the return of HPV vaccination consent forms was found to be moderately acceptable to those receiving and delivering the intervention, although a number of changes are required to improve this. In particular, improving communication about the nature of the incentive to reduce misconceptions is vital. These findings suggest that incentivising consent form return may be an acceptable means of improving HPV vaccination rates, should improvements be made.

Trial registration: ISRCTN Registry; ISRCTN72136061 , 26 September 2016, retrospectively registered.

Keywords: Adolescent; Motivation; Papillomavirus vaccines; Prevention; Reward; Vaccination.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical approval was granted by UCL Research Ethics Committee (6615/02). Opt-out consent was gained from parents, for all girls and parents completing the questionnaires. Verbal consent was gained from all school staff members who participated in telephone interviews.

Consent for publication

All participants provided consent for the publication of the research findings.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

    1. Bruni L, Diaz M, Barrionuevo-Rosas L, Herrero R, Bray F, Bosch FX, et al. Global estimates of human papillomavirus vaccination coverage by region and income level: a pooled analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2016;4:e453–e463. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(16)30099-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Public Health England. Annual HPV vaccine coverage 2015 to 2016: by local authority and area team. 2016. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-hpv-vaccine-coverage-201.... Accessed June 2017.
    1. Fisher H, Audrey S, Mytton JA, Hickman M, Trotter C. Examining inequalities in the uptake of the school-based HPV vaccination programme in England: a retrospective cohort study. J Public Health (Oxf) 2013;36:36–45. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdt042. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Roberts SA, Brabin L, Stretch R, Baxter D, Elton P, Kitchener H, et al. Human papillomavirus vaccination and social inequality: results from a prospective cohort study. Epidemiol Infect. 2011;139:400–405. doi: 10.1017/S095026881000066X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Laumann EO, Youm Y. Racial/ethnic group differences in the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases in the United States: a network explanation. Sex Transm Dis. 1999;26:250–261. doi: 10.1097/00007435-199905000-00003. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources