Why do some Korean parents hesitate to vaccinate their children? / 한국역학회지

OBJECTIVES@#Vaccinations for infectious diseases are opposed despite their achievement, and this opposition has recently been revealed in Korea. However, research in Korea has not been vigorous. The authors studied why some Korean parents hesitate to vaccinate their children by applying the health belief model.@*METHODS@#Parents who hesitate to vaccinate and parents who do not were surveyed in alternative education preschools and elementary schools. They were classified into four types of hesitancy and statistically compared.@*RESULTS@#Among the 129 subjects, 43 vaccinated without hesitancy, 20 vaccinated on time with hesitancy, 32 vaccinated with a deliberate delay of one month or longer, and 34 did not vaccinate. Vaccination increased with an increase in the awareness that severe outcomes can occur when unvaccinated. Concerns about adverse reactions from vaccinations or direct/indirect experiences affected refusal. Furthermore, perceptions of the lack of meaningfulness of vaccinations, distrust of policy and safety management, influence of leaders or activists in joined organizations, and experts of Korean traditional or alternative medicine affected refusal. Explanations by doctors, text messages and mails from institutions, and concerns about disadvantages caused by not complying with government policies increased vaccination.@*CONCLUSIONS@#The reasons for vaccine hesitancy and acceptance were similar to the results of international research. Health authorities and professionals should communicate sufficiently and appropriately with hesitant parents and find ways to rationally resolve social conflicts. However, this sample was small and there is little Korean research, so more in-depth and diverse researchs are needed.

Why do some Korean parents hesitate to vaccinate their children? / 한국역학회지

OBJECTIVES: Vaccinations for infectious diseases are opposed despite their achievement, and this opposition has recently been revealed in Korea. However, research in Korea has not been vigorous. The authors studied why some Korean parents hesitate to vaccinate their children by applying the health belief model. METHODS: Parents who hesitate to vaccinate and parents who do not were surveyed in alternative education preschools and elementary schools. They were classified into four types of hesitancy and statistically compared. RESULTS: Among the 129 subjects, 43 vaccinated without hesitancy, 20 vaccinated on time with hesitancy, 32 vaccinated with a deliberate delay of one month or longer, and 34 did not vaccinate. Vaccination increased with an increase in the awareness that severe outcomes can occur when unvaccinated. Concerns about adverse reactions from vaccinations or direct/indirect experiences affected refusal. Furthermore, perceptions of the lack of meaningfulness of vaccinations, distrust of policy and safety management, influence of leaders or activists in joined organizations, and experts of Korean traditional or alternative medicine affected refusal. Explanations by doctors, text messages and mails from institutions, and concerns about disadvantages caused by not complying with government policies increased vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: The reasons for vaccine hesitancy and acceptance were similar to the results of international research. Health authorities and professionals should communicate sufficiently and appropriately with hesitant parents and find ways to rationally resolve social conflicts. However, this sample was small and there is little Korean research, so more in-depth and diverse researchs are needed.

Why do some Korean parents hesitate to vaccinate their children? / 한국역학회지

OBJECTIVES: Vaccinations for infectious diseases are opposed despite their achievement, and this opposition has recently been revealed in Korea. However, research in Korea has not been vigorous. The authors studied why some Korean parents hesitate to vaccinate their children by applying the health belief model.METHODS: Parents who hesitate to vaccinate and parents who do not were surveyed in alternative education preschools and elementary schools. They were classified into four types of hesitancy and statistically compared.RESULTS: Among the 129 subjects, 43 vaccinated without hesitancy, 20 vaccinated on time with hesitancy, 32 vaccinated with a deliberate delay of one month or longer, and 34 did not vaccinate. Vaccination increased with an increase in the awareness that severe outcomes can occur when unvaccinated. Concerns about adverse reactions from vaccinations or direct/indirect experiences affected refusal. Furthermore, perceptions of the lack of meaningfulness of vaccinations, distrust of policy and safety management, influence of leaders or activists in joined organizations, and experts of Korean traditional or alternative medicine affected refusal. Explanations by doctors, text messages and mails from institutions, and concerns about disadvantages caused by not complying with government policies increased vaccination.CONCLUSIONS: The reasons for vaccine hesitancy and acceptance were similar to the results of international research. Health authorities and professionals should communicate sufficiently and appropriately with hesitant parents and find ways to rationally resolve social conflicts. However, this sample was small and there is little Korean research, so more in-depth and diverse researchs are needed.

MERS epidemiological investigation to detect potential mode of transmission in the 178th MERS confirmed case in Pyeongtaek, Korea / 한국역학회지

Most cases of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) infection in Korea (outbreak: May 11-July 4, 2015) occurred in hospital settings, with uncertain transmission modes in some cases. We performed an in-depth investigation epidemiological survey on the 178th case to determine the precise mode of transmission. A 29-year-old man living in Pyeongtaek presented on June 16 with a febrile sensation, chills, and myalgia. Upon confirmatory diagnosis on June 23, he was treated in an isolation room and discharged on July 2 after cure. An epidemiological investigation of all possible infection routes indicated two likely modes of transmission: exposure to MERS in Pyeongtaek St. Mary's Hospital during a visit to his hospitalized father (May 18-29), and infection through frequent contact with his father between the latter's referral to Pyeongtaek Good Samaritan Bagae Hospital for treatment without confirmatory diagnosis until his death (May 29-June 6). Although lack of clear proof or evidence to the contrary does not allow a definitive conclusion, all other possibilities could be excluded by epidemiological inferences. While it is impossible to trace back the modes of transmission of all cases in a large-scale outbreak, case-by-case tracking and isolation of infected individuals and those in close contact with them is important in preventing the spread. Efforts should be made to establish a methodology for rapid tracking of all possible contacts and elimination-based identification of the precise modes of transmission.

Epidemiological investigation of the 119th confirmed Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus case with an indefinite mode of transmission during the Pyeongtaek outbreak in Korea / 한국역학회지

Since the first case was diagnosed on May 20, 2015, there were 186 confirmed cases of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) until the end of outbreak in South Korea. Although medical institutions were the most identifiable sources of MERS transmission in South Korea, similar to other countries, in-depth epidemiological investigation was required for some confirmed cases with indefinite contact history or hospital visit records. The subject of epidemiological investigation in the present study was a 35 year-old male patient diagnosed with MERS (#119) who lived in Asan-city and worked in Pyeongtaek-city. Various potential sources of transmission were carefully investigated. While he could have been exposed to MERS through a friend from Saudi Arabia or confirmed MERS cases in his workplace, neighboring areas, and medical institutions, as well as contacts in his home, the chances of transmission were low; however, the potential for transmission through his local community could not be excluded. Practically, it was difficult to determine the modes of transmission for all outbreak cases in communicable disease that occurred in this short period of time. The investigation to identify the mode of transmission in this case was ultimately unsuccessful. However, the various data collected and analyzed to reveal modes of transmission provided detailed information that could not be collected using only interview surveys.