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
Comment
. 2024 Feb 15:12:1256337.
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1256337. eCollection 2024.

Promoting informed decision making about maternal pertussis vaccination: the systematic development of an online tailored decision aid and a centering-based group antenatal care intervention

Affiliations
Comment

Promoting informed decision making about maternal pertussis vaccination: the systematic development of an online tailored decision aid and a centering-based group antenatal care intervention

Charlotte Anraad et al. Front Public Health. .

Abstract

Introduction: Maintaining and enhancing vaccine confidence continues to be a challenge. Making an informed decision not only helps to avoid potential future regret but also reduces susceptibility to misinformation. There is an urgent need for interventions that facilitate informed decision-making about vaccines. This paper describes the systematic development of two interventions designed to promote informed decision making and indirectly, acceptance of maternal pertussis vaccination (MPV) in the Netherlands.

Materials and methods: The 6-step Intervention Mapping (IM) protocol was used for the development of an online tailored decision aid and Centering Pregnancy-based Group Antenatal Care (CP) intervention. A needs assessment was done using empirical literature and conducting a survey and focus groups (1), intervention objectives were formulated at the behavior and determinants levels (2), theoretical methods of behavior change were selected and translated into practical applications (3), which were further developed into the two interventions using user-centered design (4). Finally, plans were developed for implementation (5), and evaluation (6) of the interventions.

Results: The needs assessment showed that pregnant women often based their decision about MPV on information sourced online and conversations with their partners, obstetric care providers, and peers. Responding to these findings, we systematically developed two interactive, theory-based interventions. We created an online tailored decision aid, subjecting it to four iterations of testing among pregnant women, including those with low literacy levels. Participants evaluated prototypes of the intervention positively on relevance and usability. In addition, a CP intervention was developed with midwives.

Conclusion: Using IM resulted in the creation of an online decision aid and CP intervention to promote informed decision making regarding MPV. This description of the systematic development of the interventions not only serves to illustrate design rationales, it will also aid the interpretation of the evaluation of the interventions, the development of future interventions promoting informed decision and acceptance of vaccines, and comparisons with other interventions.

Keywords: centering pregnancy; decision aid; informed decision making; intervention mapping; maternal pertussis vaccination; vaccination uptake.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Screenshots of a selection of the website components: an overview of the information topics (A), an example of a “test your knowledge” question and tailored feedback (B), an overview page of the decisional balance with tailored pros and cons (C), the “prepare a conversation” exercise (D), the “make an appointment” page (E).

Comment on

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Schurink-Van’ t Klooster T, De Melker H. The National Immunisation Programme in the Netherlands: surveillance and developments in 2019-2020. Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu. (2020). doi: 10.21945/RIVM-2020-0077 - DOI
    1. McIntyre P, Wood N. Pertussis in early infancy: disease burden and preventive strategies. Curr Opin Infect Dis. (2009) 22:215–23. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0b013e32832b3540, PMID: - DOI - PubMed
    1. Furuta M, Sin J, Ng ESW, Wang K. Efficacy and safety of pertussis vaccination for pregnant women – a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. (2017) 17:390. doi: 10.1186/s12884-017-1559-2, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vygen-Bonnet S, Hellenbrand W, Garbe E, von Kries R, Bogdan C, Heininger U, et al. . Safety and effectiveness of acellular pertussis vaccination during pregnancy: a systematic review. BMC Infect Dis. (2020) 20:136. doi: 10.1186/s12879-020-4824-3, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Richtlijn Uitvoering RVP. 2020: Professionele standaard voor RVP-vaccinaties. RIVM Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu (2019). Available at: https://www.ncj.nl/wp-content/uploads/media-import/docs/75f5763f-2bf7-4e... (Accessed December 18, 2023).

Publication types

Substances