Improving Physician Vaccine Recommendation Using Social Norms, Trust, and Presumptive Language
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Registration Number
- NCT05957393
- Lead Sponsor
- Duke University
- Brief Summary
This research examines vaccination recommendation perceptions and behaviors of physicians and advanced practice providers.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 447
- Participants must be physicians, advanced practice providers, medical students, nurses/nurse practitioners, or medical fellows.
- Must be in a position to be authorized to recommend vaccines to patients in their official professional capacities/responsibilities.
- Students or employees under the supervision of the PI who meet inclusion criteria for the study
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- FACTORIAL
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Change in self-reported responsibility perception Day 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90 Self-reported responsibility perception = answer to the following item: (1) "Recommending indicated vaccines is within the scope of my professional responsibilities". This item is answered on a scale from 0% (completely disagree) to 100% (completely agree).
Change in self-reported assessment of patient recommendation acceptance Day 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90 Self-reported assessment of patient recommendation acceptance = answer to the following item: (1) "If I recommend(ed) an indicated vaccine, my patient (will) accept(ed) that recommendation.". This item is answered on a scale from 0% (never) to 100% (always).
Change in self-reported patient trust Day 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90 Self-reported patient trust = answer to the following item: (1) "Thinking about the last/next 30 days I provided care, I can say that my patients (will) trust(ed) me as their healthcare provider". This item is answered on a scale from 0% (completely disagree) to 100% (completely agree).
Change in proportion of patients that receive a vaccine recommendation Day 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90 Proportion of patients that receive a vaccine recommendation = multiplication of the answer to the following two items: (1) "I (will) check(ed) whether a patient has/had gotten all indicated vaccines", (2) "If I saw/see a patient had not gotten an indicated vaccine, I (will) discuss(ed) getting it." Both items are answered on a scale from 0% (never) to 100% (always).
Change in self-reported rate of patient vaccine uptake Day 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90 Answer to the following item: "Estimate what percentage of your patients is/will be fully vaccinated against \[...\]" This item is answered on a scale from 0% to 100%.
The question is being asked 8-10 times with the following name inserted for \[...\] in the above question:
Flu COVID-19 Tetanus, Diphtheria, Pertussis HPV Hepatitis B Meningitis / Meningococcal Shingles Pneumococcal Other (which can be two other diseases that the respondent indicated)Change in self-reported utilization of AIMS Day 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90 Composite score of the following items: (1) "I used/will use direct, declarative language, like: "You're due for your flu shot. We'll do that at the end of this visit"; (2) "If the patient showed/shows hesitancy about getting vaccinated, I (will) ask(ed) about their concerns, and then use(d) active listening to understand their thoughts"; (3) "If the patient showed/shows hesitancy about getting vaccinated, I (will) listen(ed) to the patient's reasoning and then summarize(d) the patient's reasoning back to them to show that I understood/understand"; (4) "If the patient still has concerns, I did/will not continue efforts to convince them."
Each item is answered on a scale from 0% (never) to 100% (always).
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Change in belief about patient autonomy Day 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90 Answer to the following item: "I stated / will state the patient's options - to vaccinate or not, and with which vaccine - so that they can make an informed decision." This item is answered on a scale from 0% to 100%.
Change in proportion of patients that accept a recommendation Day 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90 Proportion of patients that accept a recommendation = multiplication of the answer to the following three items: (1) "I (will) check(ed) whether a patient has/had gotten all indicated vaccines", (2) "If I saw/see a patient had not gotten an indicated vaccine, I (will) discuss(ed) getting it."; (3) "If I recommend(ed) an indicated vaccine, my patient (will) accept(ed) that recommendation." All items are answered on a scale from 0% (never) to 100% (always).
Trial Locations
- Locations (3)
(Any and all facilities) - The study team ask(s)/(ed) professional contacts, friends, and family members who are employed at various US Institutions to forward the recruitment announcement message via their respective networks
🇺🇸Durham, North Carolina, United States
Duke University Health System (all locations)
🇺🇸Durham, North Carolina, United States
(Any and all facilities) - Participants are recruited via market research company "Survey Healthcare Global"
🇧🇷Brasília, Brazil
(Any and all facilities) - The study team ask(s)/(ed) professional contacts, friends, and family members who are employed at various US Institutions to forward the recruitment announcement message via their respective networks🇺🇸Durham, North Carolina, United States