ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Lack of information has been
associated with couples anxiety or concern in a number of healthcare areas.
OBJECTIVES: (1) Identify the proportion of
parents who agreed, were neutral, and disagreed that they had access to enough
information to make a decision about immunizing their child; (2) examine how
parents who agreed and disagreed differed with respect to sociodemographic
characteristics, and their attitudes about immunizations, their child's
healthcare provider, immunization requirements/exemptions, and immunization
policymakers; and (3) identify if differences exist in specific immunization
concerns.
METHODS: A sample of parents with at least
one child aged < or =6 years (n=642) was analyzed using data from the Health
Styles survey conducted during July and August 2003. Odds ratios and the
Mantel-Haenszel chi-square test were used for analysis.
RESULTS: Response rate for Health Styles
was 69% (4035/5845). The largest proportion of parents agreed they had access
to enough information (67%) compared to parents who were neutral (20%) or who
disagreed (13%). Compared to parents who agreed, parents who disagreed were
more likely to be less confident in the safety of childhood vaccines (odds
ratio [OR]=5.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]=3.3-8.9), and to disagree that
their child's main healthcare provider is easy to talk to (OR=10.3, 95%
CI=3.7-28.1). There was a significant linear trend in the percentage of parents
expressing immunization concerns among those who agreed, were neutral, and who
disagreed they had access to enough information (p<0.05; df=1).
CONCLUSIONS: While most parents agreed
that they had access to enough immunization information, approximately a third
did not. Perceived lack of information was associated with negative attitudes
about immunizations and toward healthcare providers. Basic information about
the benefits and risks of vaccines presented by a trusted provider could go a
long way toward maintaining and/or improving confidence in the immunization
process.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
ONE
INTRODUCTION
DESCRIPTION OF THE
PROJECT
OBJECTIVES
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
DEFINITIONS
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
REVIEW OF IMMUNOLOGY
NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS OF IMMUNIZATION
DELAYING IMMUNIZATION
SIDE EFFECTS OF IMMUNIZATION
CONVINCING COUPLES TO IMMUNIZE THEIR
CHILDREN
ROLE OF FATHERS IN IMMUNIZATION
COMMUNICATION DURING PREGNANCY:
KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PREGNANCY AND DELIVERY.
TRADITIONAL PRACTICES THAT MAY LEAD
TO DELIVERING OUTSIDE THE HEALTH FACILITY.
CHILDHOOD IMMUNIZATION
THE IMMUNIZATION SCHEDULE
FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT
SIGNS OF EARLY PREGNANCY.
TRUST AMONG SPOUSES:
TEST FOR PATERNITY
REASONS FOR NOT ATTENDING ANTENATAL CARE IN THE FIRST THREE MONTHS.
CHAPTER
THREE
MATERIAL AND METHOD
STUDY AREA
DATA COLLECTION METHODS
DATA ANALYSIS
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
DISCUSSION OF
FINDINGS
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS
SUMMARY
RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERENCES
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Immunization is recognized as a safe and
effective method of preventing disease (National Advisory Committee on
Immunization, 1998); however, not all parents choose to immunize their children
and not all couples choose to maintain or update their own immunization status.
The goal of this thesis is to understand why young couples (parents or future
parents) make the decisions they do and how they arrive at those decisions.
Health scientists need to acquire an understanding of the experience of people
in relation to their environments for the purpose of increasing their potential
for health. Improved health policies may be developed if we can understand how
to serve our populations better as a whole. It is more useful to put into place
policy that will be meaningful and followed, than blanket statements that do
not put the population's needs first. This study contributes to a better
understanding of the thought processes behind persons who choose to delay or
refuse immunizations irrespective of the policy environment. The area of
immunization is as complex as a mosaic, and true to this metaphor, every tile
of information contributes to the overall picture while remaining distinct.
This thesis is presented as another tile. Currently in Amuzi community
in Obowo L.G.A, mainstream immunization is voluntary, though strongly
encouraged and freely dispensed to all citizens. Changes are on-going in
mandatory immunization policy provincially. Alberta and Saskatchewan pride
themselves in not having moved to mandatory laws due to the public health
delivery systems in place. (Personal communication, P. Hasselback, January,
2002). As long as most people comply, the herd immunity remains strong and the
risk for developing vaccine reventable diseases remains low. However, certain
groups in the population do not agree with immunization for a variety of
reasons. Some of these reasons include theological constraints, belief
structures that favor "natural" immunity, beliefs that immunization
is dangerous to children, mistrust in pharmaceutical companies and a belief in
alternative health therapies such as provided by naturopaths and chiropractors.
What about apathy? Funk and Wagnells (1982)
describe this as indifference and lack of interest. Do couples feel
immunization is important? Do they think about it during their daily lives?
What will our future generation of parents do to contribute to herd immunity
when they have never seen the diseases the vaccines are designed to prevent?
What will happen when the next generation feels overly confident that they will
not be touched by these diseases because they are perceived as a "Third
World problem" or when they do not understand the ramifications of the
diseases? Lack of knowledge of our own immune systems in the general population
is high. Because of the complexity of interactions between anatomical
structures and biochemistry most laypersons shrug their shoulders when asked
how basic immunological functions occur.
Policies encouraging health education may
emphasize the importance of citizens taking a pro-active role in understanding
their bodies and what they can do to remain healthy. In this day of reduced health care budgets more
emphasis needs to be placed on prevention of disease. Immunization is an
integral cog to the wheel. An analysis of this issue indicates a need for more
knowledge to guide health care workers and policy-makers in contributing to
immunization.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The purpose of this project is to ascertain
the beliefs of young couples regarding immunization for their children or
future children.
The overall objectives of this qualitative
study are to:
a. Determine the theological constructs of
young couples who refuse or delay immunization among their children or future
children for religious beliefs.
b. Determine the beliefs of young couples who
engage in alternative health practices and refuse or delay their children's or
future children's immunizations.
c. Determine whether youngcouples (non-parents)
are thinking ahead regarding immunization.
d. Determine if there are gender differences between
perspectives regarding immunization.
e. Determine if there are vocational/academic
differences between groups regarding immunization.
f. Determine the relationship between various
groups who do not immunize regarding their decision-making.
OBJECTIVES
The main objective of the study was
to deepen our understanding of the knowledge, attitudes, practices, fears and
beliefs about immunization among children.
Specifically the objectives were:
1) To identify myths and misconceptions
about immunization among couples.
2) To identify knowledge, attitudes,
practices, fears and beliefs (KAPBF) about childhood immunization.
3) To determine motivating and
de-motivating factors in parents seeking immunization amoung couples.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The aim of this study was to answer the following research questions
in order to describe and explain:
a. What are the theological constructs of young couples who choose not
to immunize their children or future children? What is the relationship between
these beliefs and the young couples' decision-making regarding immunization?
b. What are the beliefs of young couples who engage in alternative
health practices and choose not to immunize their children or future children?
What is the relationship between these beliefs and the young couples'
decision-making regarding immunization?
c. What are the beliefs of young couples who are concerned about
vaccine safety and choose not to immunize their children or future children?
What is the relationship between these beliefs and the young couples'
decision-making regarding immunization?
DEFINITIONS
In the context of this study, the following theoretical definitions
were used:
• Understanding is
the process of interpreting, knowing and comprehending the meaning that is
felt, intended and expressed by another (Denzin, 1989, p. 120);
• Immunization is
the process of being immunized against a particular disease;
• Health care workers include
individuals from the disciplines of medicine, public health, physical and
social science and nursing;
• Health scientists are
researchers concerned with aspects of health science and health care from
multiple disciplines of medicine, public health, physical and social science,
education and nursing; and,
• Informants are
defined as the people interviewed in this study who provided information about
personal immunization experiences.
Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects
FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!
+(234) 0814 780 1594
Buyers has the right to create
dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when
you experience issue with the file received.
Dispute can only be created when
you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of
contents and content of the file you received.
ProjectShelve.com shall either
provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or
send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and
Conditions are applied.
Buyers are expected to confirm
that the material you are paying for is available on our website
ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone
through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE
BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.
In case of payment for a
material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of
ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that
is available on our website within 48 hours.
You cannot change topic after
receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.
Login To Comment