Author(s): Santos, Ana João ; Kislaya, Irina ; Machado, Ausenda ; Matias, Carlos Matias ; Neto, Mariana
Date: 2023
Persistent ID: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.18/9157
Origin: Repositório Científico do Instituto Nacional de Saúde
Subject(s): Influenza; Vaccine; High-risk Group; Gripe; Vacina da Gripe; Razões para não Toma da Vacinca; Grupos de Risco; Determinantes da Saúde e da Doença; Portugal
Background & objective: In Portugal, the Influenza Vaccine (IV) coverage remains bellow the coverage goals proposed by the European Union. Understanding motives for IV non-uptake, particularly for high-risk groups is essential for intervention purposes. The Health Belief Model (HBM) has been one of the most used theoretical frameworks to understand vaccination. This study aims to describe the Portuguese non-uptake and differences between HBM dimensions (susceptibility, severity, benefits, barriers and cues for action) frequency for high-risk and non-high-risk groups. Methods: A cross-sectional study was developed using the panel of families, a probabilistic dual-sampling frame telephone household panel of Portugal. The survey was conducted between June and September 2021-2013, with data collected by questionnaire applied to one element of each household unit with 18+ years (n=1050). Content thematic analysis was conducted in one open question about the reasons for IV non-uptake and included in HBM dimensions. Statistical analysis focused on estimating non-adherence to IV and frequency of the HBM categories stratified by target group recommended for vaccination. Results were weighted by age group and region Results: The response rate was 68%. Of the total sample (n=1050), 671 individuals did not uptake the IV (69.3%, CI95%:64.8-73.5). For the population recommended for the IV, non-uptake was 49.8 (CI95%:43.6-55.9). The perception of low Susceptibility was more common in individuals who did not belong to the target group (74%, CI95%:63.4-82.3 vs. 26%, CI95%:17.7-36.6). By contrast, the Barriers dimension was more frequently mentioned by the target population (45%, CI95%:32.4-58.2 vs. 55%, CI95%:41.8-67.6), namely due to unavailability of stock. Conclusion: IV non-uptake was lower for high-risk group of the Portuguese population, compared to the general population. Differences between the reasons not to take the IV, suggest that the group to whom the IV is recommended, due to increased risk of complications, is aware of increased susceptibility. Overall, these results indicate that vaccination campaign seem to be successfully targeting high-risk group, even then efforts need to be maintained to decrease non-uptake.
