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
. 2019 Nov 2;9(11):e032218.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032218.

Determinants of vaccine hesitancy in Switzerland: study protocol of a mixed-methods national research programme

Michael J Deml #  1   2 , Kristen Jafflin #  1   2 , Sonja Merten #  1   2 , Benedikt Huber  3 , Andrea Buhl  1   2 , Eleonora Frau  2   4 , Valérie Mettraux  2   4 , Joanna Sonderegger  2   4 , Paulina Kliem  2   4 , Rachele Cattalani  2   4 , Daniel Krüerke  5 , Constanze Pfeiffer  1   2 , Claudine Burton-Jeangros  6 , Philip E Tarr  7   4
Affiliations

Determinants of vaccine hesitancy in Switzerland: study protocol of a mixed-methods national research programme

Michael J Deml et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: Vaccine hesitancy is a complex public health issue referring to concerns about the safety, efficacy or need for vaccination. Relatively little is known about vaccine hesitancy in Switzerland. This ongoing study (2017-2021) focuses on biomedical and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers and their patients since healthcare professionals play important roles in vaccination decision-making. This national research programme seeks to assess the sociocultural determinants of vaccine hesitancy regarding childhood and human papillomavirus vaccines in Switzerland. We aim to provide a detailed characterisation of vaccine hesitancy, including CAM and biomedical perspectives, patient-provider interactions, and sociocultural factors, to establish the mediating effects of vaccine hesitancy on underimmunisation, and to design an intervention to improve vaccination communication and counselling among physicians, parents and adolescents.

Methods and analysis: Our transdisciplinary team employs a sequential exploratory mixed-methods study design. We have established a network of more than 150 medical providers across Switzerland, including more than 40 CAM practitioners. For the qualitative component, we conduct interviews with parents, youth, and biomedical and CAM providers and observations of vaccination consultations and school vaccination information sessions. For the quantitative component, a sample of 1350 parents of young children and 722 young adults (15-26 years) and their medical providers respond to questionnaires. We measure vaccine hesitancy with the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines 15-item survey and review vaccination certificates to assess vaccination status. We administer additional questions based on findings from qualitative research, addressing communication with medical providers, vaccine information sources and perceptions of risk control vis-à-vis vaccine-preventable diseases. The questionnaires capture sociodemographics, political views, religion and spirituality, and moral foundations.

Ethics and dissemination: The study was approved by the local ethics committee. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated to healthcare professionals, researchers and the public via conferences and public presentations.

Keywords: Childhood vaccinations; HPV vaccination; Mixed methods research; Patient-provider communication; Under-immunisation; Vaccination information sources; Vaccine hesitancy; complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study overview. CAM, complementary and alternative medicine; HPV, human papillomavirus.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Network of participating providers. CAM, complementary and alternative medicine.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Centers for Disease C, Prevention Ten great public health achievements- United States, 1900-1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1999;48:241–3. - PubMed
    1. Maglione MA, Das L, Raaen L, et al. . Safety of vaccines used for routine immunization of U.S. children: a systematic review. Pediatrics 2014;134:325–37. 10.1542/peds.2014-1079 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Thompson KM, Odahowski CL, Lewis Odahowski C. Systematic review of health economic analyses of measles and rubella immunization interventions. Risk Analysis 2016;36:1297–314. 10.1111/risa.12331 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Larson HJ, Jarrett C, Eckersberger E, et al. . Understanding vaccine hesitancy around vaccines and vaccination from a global perspective: a systematic review of published literature, 2007–2012. Vaccine 2014;32:2150–9. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.01.081 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Omer SB, Salmon DA, Orenstein WA, et al. . Vaccine refusal, mandatory immunization, and the risks of vaccine-preventable diseases. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1981–8. 10.1056/NEJMsa0806477 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types