Benefits, challenges, and strategies related to using presumptive recommendations for HPV vaccination: A qualitative study with rural and non-rural-serving primary care professionals.

HPV vaccination coverage remains far below the national target of 80% among US adolescents, particularly in rural areas, which have vaccine uptake rates that are 10% points lower than non-rural areas on average. Primary care professionals (PCPs) can increase coverage by using presumptive recommendations to introduce HPV vaccination in a way that assumes parents want to vaccinate. Through semi-structured interviews, we explored PCPs' experiences and perceptions of using presumptive recommendations in rural- and non-rural-serving primary care clinics in North Carolina. Thematic analysis revealed that most PCPs in rural and non-rural contexts used presumptive recommendations and felt the strategy was an effective and concise way to introduce the topic of HPV vaccination to parents. At the same time, some PCPs raised concerns about presumptive recommendations potentially straining relationships with certain parents, including those who had previously declined HPV vaccine or who distrust medical authority due to their past experiences with the healthcare system. PCPs dealt with these challenges by using a more open-ended approach when introducing HPV vaccination to parents. In conclusion, our findings suggest that PCPs in both rural and non-rural settings see value in using presumptive recommendations to introduce HPV vaccination, but to adequately address concerns and ensure increased HPV vaccine uptake, PCPs can use simple and culturally sensitive language to ensure fully informed consent and to maintain parental trust. And to further strengthen HPV vaccine discussions, PCPs can utilize other effective HPV communication techniques, like the Announcement Approach, in discussing HPV vaccinations with hesitant parents.

Policy Approaches for Increasing Adolescent HPV Vaccination Coverage: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: US jurisdictions have enacted a wide range of policies to address low human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage among adolescents, but it is unclear which policies are effective. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the impact of governmental policies on adolescent HPV vaccination coverage. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies, published from 2009 to 2022, evaluated the impact of governmental policies on HPV vaccination coverage among adolescents ages 9 to 18. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently extracted data on study sample, study design and quality, policy characteristics, and HPV vaccination outcomes. We summarized findings by policy type: school-entry requirements (SERs), federally-funded policies related to the Vaccines for Children program and Medicaid, educational requirements, and others. RESULTS: Our search yielded 36 eligible studies. A majority of studies evaluating HPV vaccine SERs found positive associations between SERs and HPV vaccination coverage (8 of 14), particularly for SERs in Rhode Island and Washington, DC. All studies evaluating SERs for other adolescent vaccines observed positive spillover effects for HPV vaccination (7 of 7). Federally-funded policies related to Vaccines for Children and Medicaid were consistently associated with higher HPV vaccination coverage (7 of 9). Relatively few studies found associations between educational requirements and HPV vaccination coverage (2 of 8). LIMITATIONS: Studies used limited vaccination data sources and non- or quasi-experimental designs. Some studies had no or poorly matched comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest promise for SERs and federally-funded policies, but not educational requirements, for increasing HPV vaccination coverage among adolescents.

Identifying effective vaccine champions: Findings from a national survey of primary care professionals.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine champions are common in primary care, but little is known about which champions are effective. METHODS: In 2022, we surveyed 2,144 US primary care professionals (PCPs) who reported working with vaccine champions. Respondents rated the champion with whom they worked most closely on their effectiveness at improving vaccination rates. RESULTS: About half (49 %) of PCPs perceived their closest champion as highly effective. PCPs perceived advanced practice providers and nursing staff as highly effective somewhat more often than physicians (52 % and 58 % vs 43 %, p <.001). Other correlates of perceived effectiveness included being a formally appointed versus informal champion, working extremely versus less closely with PCPs, and using a high (4-5) versus low (0-1) number of implementation strategies to improve vaccination rates (all p <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest vaccine champions may benefit from having formal roles and opportunities to work closely with colleagues to improve vaccination rates using multiple strategies.

Who are vaccine champions and what implementation strategies do they use to improve adolescent HPV vaccination? Findings from a national survey of primary care professionals.

BACKGROUND: Implementation science researchers often cite clinical champions as critical to overcoming organizational resistance and other barriers to the implementation of evidence-based health services, yet relatively little is known about who champions are or how they effect change. To inform future efforts to identify and engage champions to support HPV vaccination, we sought to describe the key characteristics and strategies of vaccine champions working in adolescent primary care. METHODS: In 2022, we conducted a national survey with a web-based panel of 2527 primary care professionals (PCPs) with a role in adolescent HPV vaccination (57% response rate). Our sample consisted of pediatricians (26%), family medicine physicians (22%), advanced practice providers (24%), and nursing staff (28%). Our survey assessed PCPs' experience with vaccine champions, defined as health care professionals "known for helping their colleagues improve vaccination rates." RESULTS: Overall, 85% of PCPs reported currently working with one or more vaccine champions. Among these 2144 PCPs, most identified the champion with whom they worked most closely as being a physician (40%) or nurse (40%). Almost all identified champions worked to improve vaccination rates for vaccines in general (45%) or HPV vaccine specifically (49%). PCPs commonly reported that champion implementation strategies included sharing information (79%), encouragement (62%), and vaccination data (59%) with colleagues, but less than half reported that champions led quality improvement projects (39%). Most PCPs perceived their closest champion as being moderately to extremely effective at improving vaccination rates (91%). PCPs who did versus did not work with champions more often recommended HPV vaccination at the earliest opportunity of ages 9-10 rather than later ages (44% vs. 33%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Findings of our national study suggest that vaccine champions are common in adolescent primary care, but only a minority lead quality improvement projects. Interventionists seeking to identify champions to improve HPV vaccination rates can expect to find them among both physicians and nurses, but should be prepared to offer support to more fully engage them in implementing interventions.

Identifying Healthcare Professionals With Lower Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Recommendation Quality: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Strengthening healthcare professionals' (HCPs) communication is an evidence-based approach to increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake among adolescents. To better target future interventions, we sought to synthesize evidence on HCP subgroups who most need to improve their HPV vaccine recommendation quality. METHODS: We searched five databases for quantitative studies published from 2012 to 2022 on HPV vaccine recommendation quality, including recommendation consistency and strength, for United States adolescents. Two coders independently abstracted data from each eligible study, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We summarized variation in recommendation quality by clinical and HCP characteristics. RESULTS: The 28 eligible studies indicated that relatively low proportions of HCPs used higher-quality recommendation practices (median: 61% across 30 measures) and that recommendation quality varied across HCP subgroups. The most consistent findings were that more pediatric HCPs used higher-quality recommendations than family medicine HCPs (8 of 11 studies, 2-60 percentage point difference) and that HPV-related knowledge was associated with higher recommendation quality (four of seven studies). Most studies observed no differences in recommendation quality by clinical role (e.g., provider vs. nurse) or HCP demographics (e.g., gender, age, race/ethnicity). DISCUSSION: Studies suggest a substantial need to improve HCPs' recommendation quality, with opportunities for targeting future interventions.

The Use of Social Media to Express and Manage Medical Uncertainty in Dyskeratosis Congenita: Content Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Social media has the potential to provide social support for rare disease communities; however, little is known about the use of social media for the expression of medical uncertainty, a common feature of rare diseases. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the expression of medical uncertainty on social media in the context of dyskeratosis congenita, a rare cancer-prone inherited bone marrow failure and telomere biology disorder (TBD). METHODS: We performed a content analysis of uncertainty-related posts on Facebook and Twitter managed by Team Telomere, a patient advocacy group for this rare disease. We assessed the frequency of uncertainty-related posts, uncertainty sources, issues, and management and associations between uncertainty and social support. RESULTS: Across all TBD social media platforms, 45.98% (1269/2760) of posts were uncertainty related. Uncertainty-related posts authored by Team Telomere on Twitter focused on scientific (306/434, 70.5%) or personal (230/434, 53%) issues and reflected uncertainty arising from probability, ambiguity, or complexity. Uncertainty-related posts in conversations among patients and caregivers in the Facebook community group focused on scientific (429/511, 84%), personal (157/511, 30.7%), and practical (114/511, 22.3%) issues, many of which were related to prognostic unknowns. Both platforms suggested uncertainty management strategies that focused on information sharing and community building. Posts reflecting response-focused uncertainty management strategies (eg, emotional regulation) were more frequent on Twitter compared with the Facebook community group (χ21=3.9; P=.05), whereas posts reflecting uncertainty-focused management strategies (eg, ordering information) were more frequent in the Facebook community group compared with Twitter (χ21=55.1; P<.001). In the Facebook community group, only 36% (184/511) of members created posts during the study period, and those who created posts did so with a low frequency (median 3, IQR 1-7 posts). Analysis of post creator characteristics suggested that most users of TBD social media are White, female, and parents of patients with dyskeratosis congenita. CONCLUSIONS: Although uncertainty is a pervasive and multifactorial issue in TBDs, our findings suggest that the discussion of medical uncertainty on TBD social media is largely limited to brief exchanges about scientific, personal, or practical issues rather than ongoing supportive conversation. The nature of uncertainty-related conversations also varied by user group: patients and caregivers used social media primarily to discuss scientific uncertainties (eg, regarding prognosis), form social connections, or exchange advice on accessing and organizing medical care, whereas Team Telomere used social media to express scientific and personal issues of uncertainty and to address the emotional impact of uncertainty. The higher involvement of female parents on TBD social media suggests a potentially greater burden of uncertainty management among mothers compared with other groups. Further research is needed to understand the dynamics of social media engagement to manage medical uncertainty in the TBD community.

Impact of visit characteristics on intention to recommend HPV vaccine: An experiment with US health care professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Presumptive recommendations that assume parents want to vaccinate can increase human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake. We sought to examine how visit characteristics affect health care professionals' (HCPs) intention to use this evidence-based recommendation style. METHODS: In 2022, we conducted an online experiment with 2527 HCPs who had a role in adolescent vaccination in the United States. Participants read 1 of 8 randomly assigned vignettes about a well-child visit. Using a 2 × 2 × 2 between-subjects factorial design, the vignettes varied the following visit characteristics: patient age (9 vs. 12-year-old), prior parental vaccine refusal (yes vs. no), and time pressure on the HCP (low vs. high). HCPs reported on their intention to use a presumptive HPV vaccine recommendation, as well as on related attitudes, subjective norms, and self-efficacy. Analyses used 3-way analysis of variance and parallel mediation. RESULTS: Participants were pediatricians (26%), family/general medicine physicians (22%), advanced practitioners (24%), and nursing staff (28%). Overall, about two-thirds of HCPs (64%) intended to use a presumptive recommendation. Intentions were higher for older children (b = 0.23) and parents without prior vaccine refusal (b = 0.39, both p < 0.001). Time pressure had no main effect or interactions. HCPs' attitudes and self-efficacy partially mediated effects of patient age and prior vaccine refusal (range of b = 0.04-0.28, all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: To better support visits with younger children and parents who have refused vaccines, HCPs may need more training for making presumptive recommendations for HPV vaccine. Reinforcing positive attitudes and self-efficacy can help HCPs adopt this evidence-based recommendation style.

Using Cost Conversations to Address Financial Toxicity in Pediatric Asthma Care: Findings From a Survey of Caregivers.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma care teams are well-positioned to help caregivers address financial toxicity in pediatric asthma care, although discussing cost can be challenging. We sought to characterize cost conversations in pediatric asthma specialty care. METHOD: We surveyed 45 caregivers of children aged 4-17 with asthma. Eligible caregivers reported costs concerns and had accompanied their child to a multisite asthma specialty practice in North Carolina. RESULTS: About one-third of caregivers reported a cost conversation (36%). Cost conversations were less common among caregivers whose child had public versus private health insurance (16% vs. 56%), who attended a telehealth versus in-person visit (6% vs. 52%), or who did not versus did want a conversation (19% vs. 77%, all p < .05). Common cost conversation topics were medications and equipment like spacers. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest cost conversations may be relatively uncommon in pediatric asthma care, particularly for publicly insured patients and telehealth visits.

"You Have to Rob Peter to Pay Paul So Your Kid Can Breathe": Using Qualitative Methods to Characterize Trade-Offs and Economic Impact of Asthma Care Costs.

BACKGROUND: Economic analyses often focus narrowly on individual patients' health care use, while overlooking the growing economic burden of out-of-pocket costs for health care on other family medical and household needs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore intrafamilial trade-offs families make when paying for asthma care. RESEARCH DESIGN: In 2018, we conducted telephone interviews with 59 commercially insured adults who had asthma and/or had a child with asthma. We analyzed data qualitatively via thematic content analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Our purposive sample included participants with high-deductible and no/low-deductible health plans. We recruited participants through a national asthma advocacy organization and a large nonprofit regional health plan. MEASURES: Our semistructured interview guide explored domains related to asthma adherence and cost burden, cost management strategies, and trade-offs. RESULTS: Participants reported that they tried to prioritize paying for asthma care, even at the expense of their family's overall financial well-being. When facing conflicting demands, participants described making trade-offs between asthma care and other health and nonmedical needs based on several criteria: (1) short-term needs versus longer term financial health; (2) needs of children over adults; (3) acuity of the condition; (4) effectiveness of treatment; and (5) availability of lower cost alternatives. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that cost-sharing for asthma care often has negative financial consequences for families that traditional, individually focused economic analyses are unlikely to capture. This work highlights the need for patient-centered research to evaluate the impact of health care costs at the family level, holistically measuring short-term and long-term family financial outcomes that extend beyond health care use alone.

Human papillomavirus vaccination at the first opportunity: An overview.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has recommended human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for adolescents in the United States since 2006. Though recommended at a similar time to the routine recommendations for adolescent tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccination (Tdap) and quadrivalent meningococcal vaccination (MCV4), HPV vaccine uptake has consistently lagged behind these other adolescent vaccines. The ACIP recommends HPV vaccination at 11-12 y, with vaccination starting at 9 y of age included as an option that is routinely encouraged by the American Academy of Pediatrics and American Cancer Society. To support efforts to increase HPV vaccination at the first opportunity, this commentary summarizes the current HPV vaccination recommendations and available evidence regarding HPV vaccination starting at 9 y - including recent studies and trials documenting the effectiveness of HPV vaccination at 9 in supporting vaccine series completion, while providing future directions for research and implementation to improve HPV vaccination.

How to make effective HPV vaccine recommendations starting at age 9.

This article provides best and promising practices for recommending HPV vaccination at age 9 as a way to ensure high uptake. An effective method for recommending HPV vaccination is the Announcement Approach, which consists of 3 evidence-based steps. The first step, Announce, involves noting that the child is 9 years old, saying they are due for a vaccine that prevents 6 HPV cancers, and saying you'll vaccinate today. This adapted version of the Announce step simplifies the bundled approach used at ages 11-12 that emphasizes the prevention of meningitis and whooping cough in addition to HPV cancers. For hesitant parents, the second step, Connect and Counsel, involves finding common ground with the parent and communicating the value of starting HPV vaccination at the first opportunity. Finally, for parents who decline, the third step is to Try Again at a later visit. Using the Announcement Approach at age 9 stands to increase HPV vaccine uptake, save time, and lead to high family and provider satisfaction.

Feasibility of using an app-based coaching intervention to improve provider communication about HPV vaccination.

Provider communication training is effective for increasing HPV vaccination rates among U.S. adolescents. However, such trainings often rely on in-person meetings, which can be burdensome for providers and costly to implement. To evaluate the feasibility of Checkup Coach, an app-based coaching intervention, to improve provider communication about HPV vaccination. In 2021, we offered Checkup Coach to providers in 7 primary care clinics in a large integrated delivery system. Participating providers (n = 19) attended a 1-h interactive virtual workshop that taught 5 high-quality practices for recommending HPV vaccination. Providers then had 3 months of access to our mobile app, which offered ongoing communication assessments, tailored tips for addressing parents' concerns, and a dashboard of their clinic's HPV vaccination coverage. Online surveys assessed pre-/post-intervention changes in providers' perceptions and communication behaviors. Compared to baseline, more providers reported high-quality HPV vaccine recommendation practices at 3-month follow-up (47% vs. 74%, p < .05). Providers' knowledge, self-efficacy, and shared commitment to improving HPV vaccination also improved (all p < .05). Although we found improvements in several other cognitions after the workshop, these changes did not retain statistical significance at 3 months. About three-quarters (78%) of providers used the mobile app, logging 2.3 sessions on average. Most providers agreed the app was easy to use (mean = 4.7/5.0), a convenient way to get vaccination data (mean = 4.6/5.0), and a tool they would recommend (mean = 4.3/5.0). Our app-based coaching intervention demonstrated feasibility and warrants additional evaluation as a novel mode for training providers to improve their HPV vaccine communication.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of Checkup Coach, an app-based coaching intervention to improve provider communication about HPV vaccination, by offering the app to providers in 7 primary care clinics in a large integrated delivery system. Participating providers attended a 1-h interactive virtual workshop that taught high-quality HPV vaccine recommendation practices. For the following 3 months, providers used the app for ongoing communication assessments, tailored tips for addressing parents' concerns, and a dashboard of their clinic's HPV vaccination rates. Online surveys assessed pre- and post-intervention changes in providers' perceptions and communication practices. The percentage of providers reporting high-quality HPV vaccine recommendation practices increased from baseline to follow-up. Providers also reported higher HPV vaccine-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and shared commitment at 3 months. Providers agreed that the app was easy to use, a convenient way to get vaccination data, and a tool they would recommend. Our app-based coaching intervention demonstrated feasibility and warrants additional evaluation as a novel mode for training providers to improve their HPV vaccine communication.

Getting Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Back on Track: A National Survey.

PURPOSE: Adolescent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake in the United States dropped during the COVID-19 pandemic due to a decrease in well visits. This study sought to identify opportunities for primary care professionals (PCPs) to get adolescent vaccination back on track. METHODS: In early 2021, we recruited 1,047 PCPs (71% physicians) who provided adolescent vaccines in the United States from an existing panel. Participants completed an online survey about changes in adolescent HPV vaccine uptake and actions taken to promote vaccination during the pandemic, as well as intentions to engage in activities to increase adolescent vaccination in the next 3 months. RESULTS: A substantial proportion of PCPs (43%) reported that HPV vaccine uptake decreased in the first year of the pandemic; few (7%) PCPs reported an increase in uptake. PCPs reporting increased uptake were more likely to have used nurse-only vaccination visits, held drop-in and drive-through vaccination clinics, and used telehealth visits to recommend vaccination (all p < .05). Nearly two-thirds (62%) of all PCPs planned to promote adolescent vaccine uptake in the next 3 months. Planning was more common among PCPs who believed HPV vaccine uptake at their clinics increased during the pandemic, who saw more than 10 adolescent patients per week, who had ever reviewed their clinic's vaccination rates, and were nurses (all p < .05). DISCUSSION: Many PCPs saw HPV vaccination drop during the pandemic. Several interventions could help clinics get HPV vaccination back on track, including increasing the availability of nurse-only vaccination visits and vaccination-only clinics.

Framing of national HPV vaccine recommendations and willingness to recommend at ages 9-10.

Proactive HPV vaccination at age 9 better prevents infection and improves vaccine series completion. Because national organizations recommend starting the vaccine at different ages, we sought to understand the impact of these recommendation frames. In 2022, we surveyed 2,527 US clinical staff (45% physicians) who provide HPV vaccine for children. We randomized respondents to one of three frames based on HPV vaccine recommendations of national organizations or a no-recommendation control, and assessed willingness to recommend HPV vaccine for children ages 9-10. Respondents also reported perceived benefits of HPV vaccination at ages 9 or 12. Recommending HPV vaccination "at ages 11-12" led to lower willingness to vaccinate at ages 9-10 than control (37% vs. 54%, p < .05). Recommending vaccination "at ages 9-12" led to similar willingness as control. However, "starting at age 9" led to higher willingness than control (63% vs. 54%, p < .05). Results were similar across respondents' training, specialty, or years in practice, or their clinic's rurality or healthcare system membership. More common benefits of recommending at age 9 than 12 were avoiding the topic of sex (24% vs. 10%, OR = 2.78, 95%CI: 2.23, 3.48) and completing the vaccine series before age 13 (56% vs. 47%, OR = 1.44, 95%CI: 1.23, 1.68). Less common benefits for age 9 were having parents ready to talk about HPV vaccine and agreeing to vaccination (both p < .05). An effective way to encourage proactive HPV vaccination is to say that it starts at age 9. Aligning national recommendations to start at age 9 can promote timely vaccination.

Strategies commercially-insured families use to manage the cost of asthma care: a qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: Families affected by asthma report difficulty adhering to care regimens because of high medication costs, coupled with increased cost sharing required by some insurance plans. To inform efforts to support adherence, we conducted a qualitative study to explore how families manage asthma care costs. METHODS: We conducted phone interviews with commercially-insured, US adults (n = 59) who had asthma and/or a child with asthma. Our purposive sample included participants with high- and low/no-deductible health plans. We analyzed data using thematic content analysis to identify strategies for managing asthma care costs and to assess strategies' implications for adherence. RESULTS: Our analysis identified four overarching strategies for managing asthma care costs. First, participants used prevention strategies to avoid costly acute care by minimizing exposure to asthma triggers and adhering strictly to preventive medication regimens. Second, participants used shopping strategies to reduce costs, including by comparing medication prices across pharmacies, using medication coupons or free samples, and switching to lower-cost medications. Third, budgeting strategies involved putting aside funds, including in tax-exempt health savings accounts, or taking on debt to pay for care. Finally, some participants sought to reduce costs by forgoing recommended care, including by skipping medication doses or replacing prescribed medications with alternative therapies. CONCLUSION: Commercially-insured families use a wide range of strategies to manage asthma care costs, with both positive and negative implications for adherence. Our typology of asthma cost management strategies can inform insurance redesign and other interventions to help families safely reduce costs and maximize adherence to recommended care.

Job loss, return to work, and multidimensional well-being after breast cancer treatment in working-age Black and White women.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer survivorship has improved in recent decades, but few studies have assessed the patterns of employment status following diagnosis and the impact of job loss on long-term well-being in ethnically diverse breast cancer survivors. We hypothesized that post-treatment employment status is an important determinant of survivor well-being and varies by race and age. METHODS: In the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, 1646 employed women with primary breast cancer were longitudinally evaluated for post-diagnosis job loss and overall well-being. Work status was classified as "sustained work," "returned to work," "job loss," or "persistent non-employment." Well-being was assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) instrument. Analysis of covariance was used to evaluate the association between work status and well-being (physical, functional, social, and emotional). RESULTS: At 25 months post-diagnosis, 882 (53.6%) reported "sustained work," 330 (20.1%) "returned to work," 162 (9.8%) "job loss," and 272 (16.5%) "persistent non-employment." Nearly half of the study sample (46.4%) experienced interruptions in work during 2 years post-diagnosis. Relative to baseline (5-month FACT-G), women who sustained work or returned to work had higher increases in all well-being domains than women with job loss and persistent non-employment. Job loss was more common among Black than White women (adjusted odds ratio = 3.44; 95% confidence interval 2.37-4.99) and was associated with service/laborer job types, lower education and income, later stage at diagnosis, longer treatment duration, and non-private health insurance. However, independent of clinical factors, job loss was associated with lower well-being in multiple domains. CONCLUSIONS: Work status is commonly disrupted in breast cancer survivors, but sustained work is associated with well-being. Interventions to support women's continued employment after diagnosis are an important dimension of breast cancer survivorship. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Our findings indicate that work continuation and returning to work may be a useful measure for a range of wellbeing concerns, particularly among Black breast cancer survivors who experience greater job loss.

Recommending COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents in primary care.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines are available for adolescents in the United States, but many parents are hesitant to have their children vaccinated. The advice of primary care professionals strongly influences vaccine uptake. OBJECTIVE: We examined the willingness of primary care professionals (PCPs) to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents. METHODS: Participants were a national sample of 1,047 US adolescent primary care professionals. They participated in an online survey in early 2021, after a COVID-19 vaccine had been approved for adults but before approval for adolescents. Respondents included physicians (71%), advanced practice providers (17%), and nurses (12%). We identified correlates of willingness to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents using logistic regression. RESULTS: The majority (89%) of respondents were willing to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents, with advanced practice providers and nurses being less likely than paediatricians to recommend vaccination (84% vs. 94%, aOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23-0.92). Respondents who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to recommend adolescent vaccination (92% vs. 69%, aOR 4.20, 95% CI 2.56-6.87) as were those with more years in practice (94% vs. 88%, aOR 2.93, 95% CI 1.79-4.99). Most respondents (96%) said they would need some measure of support in order to provide COVID-19 vaccination to adolescents, with vaccine safety and efficacy information being the most commonly cited need (80%). CONCLUSION: Adolescent primary care professionals were generally willing to recommend COVID-19 vaccination. However, most indicated a need for additional resources to be able to administer COVID-19 vaccines at their clinic.

Impact of Brief Quality Improvement Coaching on Adolescent HPV Vaccination Coverage: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Health departments in the United States routinely conduct quality improvement (QI) coaching to help primary care providers optimize vaccine delivery. In a prior trial focusing on multiple adolescent vaccines, this light-touch intervention yielded only short-term improvements in HPV vaccination. We sought to evaluate the impact of an enhanced, HPV vaccine-specific QI coaching intervention when delivered in person or virtually. METHODS: We partnered with health departments in three states to conduct a pragmatic cluster randomized trial in 2015 to 2016. We randomized 224 primary care clinics to receive no intervention (control), in-person coaching, or virtual coaching. Health department staff delivered the brief (45-60 minute) coaching interventions, including HPV vaccine-specific training with assessment and feedback on clinics' vaccination coverage (i.e., proportion of patients vaccinated). States' immunization information systems provided data to assess coverage change for HPV vaccine initiation (≥1 doses) at 12-month follow-up, among patients ages 11 to 12 (primary outcome) and 13 to 17 (secondary outcome) at baseline. RESULTS: Clinics served 312,227 patients ages 11 to 17. For ages 11 to 12, coverage change for HPV vaccine initiation was higher in the in-person and virtual coaching arms than in the control arm at 12-month follow-up (1.2% and 0.7% point difference, both P < 0.05). For ages 13 to 17, coverage change was higher for virtual coaching than control (1.4% point difference, P < 0.001), but in-person coaching did not yield an intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Our brief QI coaching intervention produced small long-term improvements in HPV vaccination. IMPACT: Health departments may benefit from targeting QI coaching to specific vaccines, like HPV vaccine, that need them most.

"Pick a Plan and Roll the Dice": A qualitative study of consumer experiences selecting a health plan in the non-group market.

Background: For consumers without access to employer-sponsored or public insurance, health plan choices in the non-group (individual) insurance market that do not meet consumer needs have the potential for negative downstream implications for health and financial well-being. Objective: This qualitative interview study sought to understand consumers' experiences and challenges with choosing a non-group health plan, among those who later had negative experiences with the plan they chose. Methods: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of 36 participants from a large regional health insurance carrier in three states who enrolled in non-group plans in 2017 (21 in Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace plans and 15 enrolled off-Marketplace). Participants were included if they reported negative experiences using their plan after enrollment, such as higher-than-expected medical costs. Interviews explored challenges choosing a plan; information needed for choosing; usefulness of available tools; and preferred format for interventions to improve plan choice experiences. We analyzed interview transcripts using thematic content analysis. Results: Study participants reported experiencing substantial challenges to choosing an insurance plan. Key barriers included understanding insurance terms, finding relevant information, and making comparisons across plans. Participants valued the ability to make comparisons across carriers when using the Marketplace websites but were less satisfied with customer service. Suggestions for improvement included greater standardization of plans and language and availability of customized one-on-one assistance. Conclusion: Findings from this study suggest that health plan selection in the non-group market presents challenges to consumers that may be addressed through enrollment assistance and improved presentation of information. Personalized assistance to find and choose coverage may lead to plan choices that better meet consumer needs and increase confidence choosing a plan in subsequent enrollment periods.