Will the public take a universal influenza vaccine?: the need for social and behavioral science research.

Every influenza season, uptake of the flu vaccine falls short of the Healthy People 2020 goal of at least 70% of adults being vaccinated. Mixed methods research finds multiple factors associated with this phenomenon including misconceptions about the vaccine, skepticism about an annual vaccine, concerns about efficacy and safety, lack of knowledge, perceived risk, among others. The national goal to develop, test and produce an effective universal influenza vaccine requires a significant scientific and financial investment in research. However, there is no true investment in the social and behavioral science research necessary to ensure that once a universal vaccine is available, the public will take that new vaccine. This article highlights some qualitative and quantitative research results to provide some understanding of the challenges to increasing vaccine uptake. We also identify research questions necessary to ensure adoption of new universal vaccines.

Determinants of influenza vaccination among high-risk Black and White adults.

BACKGROUND: Adults with chronic conditions are at much greater risk of influenza-related morbidity and mortality, yet flu vaccine uptake remains suboptimal. Research focused on the high-risk population has been limited, particularly related to racial disparities in vaccination. We explore a broad range of demographic, racial, and psychosocial factors to identify predictors of vaccination among high-risk adults, with a focus on identify differences between Black and White adults. METHODS: We conducted an online survey in March 2015, utilizing international research firm GfK's KnowledgePanel, for a nationally representative sample of Black and White adults (≥18, USA) and limited analysis adults with high-risk of influenza-related complications. Using two-way ANOVA, we assessed demographic, racial, and psychosocial predictors across vaccine uptake in the past five years and across racial group. RESULTS: 424 (52.2%) Black and 388 (47.8%) White respondents with high-risk complications completed the survey. 383 (47.3%) reported vaccination annually, 99 (12.2%) most years, 104 (12.9%) once/twice, and 223 (27.6%) never.ANOVA confirmed significant differences in vaccine behavior for most demographic predictors (except education), all racial factors (including racial fairness, experiences of discrimination, etc.), and most psychosocial factors (including vaccine attitudes, trust in the vaccine, etc.). ANOVA confirmed significant differences for most factors by race. We observed significant interaction effects between race and vaccine behavior for subjective social status, access to medical care, knowledge of vaccine recommendations, vaccine attitudes, perceived side effect risks, descriptive norms, subjective norms, flu vaccine hesitancy, and flu vaccine confidence, thus implying racial differences in the connection between vaccine uptake and key demographic, racial, and psychosocial factors. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a novel examination of flu vaccine behavior among high-risk Blacks and Whites that identified factors influencing vaccine uptake.We found significant differences by race. Health care professionals can use this information to more effectively target high-risk adults during flu season.

Beyond the cathedral: building trust to engage the African American community in health promotion and disease prevention.

Effective efforts to eliminate health disparities must be grounded in strong community partnerships and trusting relationships between academic institutions and minority communities. However, there are often barriers to such efforts, including the frequent need to rely on time-limited funding mechanisms that take categorical approaches. This article provides an overview of health promotion and disease prevention projects implemented through the Community Outreach and Information Dissemination Core (COID) of the Center for Minority Health, within the Graduate School of Public Health at the University of Pittsburgh. The COID is one of five Cores that comprised the University of Pittsburgh's NIH Excellence in Partnerships for Community Outreach, and Research on Disparities in Health and Training (EXPORT Health) funded from 2002 to 2007 by the National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities. Based in large part on the success of the community engagement activities, in 2007, the National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, designated the CMH as a Research Center of Excellence on Minority Health Disparities. COID major initiatives included the Community Research Advisory Board, Health Disparity Working Groups, Health Advocates in Reach, Healthy Class of 2010, and the Healthy Black Family Project. Lessons learned may provide guidance to other academic institutions, community-based organizations, and health departments who seek to engage minority communities in changing social norms to support health promotion and disease prevention.

Evaluating emergency risk communications: a dialogue with the experts.

Evaluating emergency risk communications is fraught with challenges since communication can be approached from both a systemic and programmatic level. Therefore, one must consider stakeholders' perspectives, effectiveness issues, standards of evidence and utility, and channels of influence (e.g., mass media and law enforcement). Evaluation issues related to timing, evaluation questions, methods, measures, and accountability are raised in this dialogue with emergency risk communication specialists. Besides the usual evaluation competencies, evaluators in this area need to understand and work collaboratively with stakeholders and be attuned to the dynamic contextual nature of emergency risk communications. Sample resources and measures are provided here to aid in this emerging and exciting field of evaluation.

Crisis and emergency risk communication in a pandemic: a model for building capacity and resilience of minority communities.

As public health agencies prepare for pandemic influenza, it is evident from our experience with Hurricane Katrina that these events will occur in the same social, historical, and cultural milieu in which marked distrust of government and health disparities already exist. This article grapples with the challenges of crisis and emergency risk communication with special populations during a pandemic. Recognizing that targeting messages to specific groups poses significant difficulties at that time, this article proposes a model of community engagement, disaster risk education, and crisis and emergency risk communication to prepare minority communities and government agencies to work effectively in a pandemic, build the capacity of each to respond, and strengthen the trust that is critical at such moments. Examples of such engagement and potential strategies to enhance trust include tools familiar to many health educators.