Page 59 - Preventing pertussis in early infancy - Visser
P. 59

   Chapter 4
Quantitative study parents
associations with the intention to accept a pertussis cocooning vaccination for attitude (OR 6.6, p <.001) and anticipated negative affect of non-acceptance (OR 1.65, p <.001), whereas unique negative associations were found for anticipated negative affect of acceptance (OR 0.55, p .040) and decisional uncertainty (OR 0.52, p .002). The Nagelkerke index (pseudo R2) of the final multivariate model was 72%.
Determinants of attitude
Parents evaluated the risk of transmitting pertussis to their infant once infectious as high (77.0%) and would classify this as severe (98.0%). However, only 7.8% reported to feel vulnerable for contracting pertussis themselves. Approximately 70% of the parents indicated to feel morally responsible to prevent transmitting pertussis to infants themselves.
Univariate linear regression showed all beliefs, except perceived susceptibility transmission, to have a significant influence on attitude (Table 3). The final multilinear regression model showed unique contributions to the explanation of attitude for general vaccination beliefs (β 0.58, p <.001), moral norm (β 0.22, p <.001), perceived susceptibility of pertussis in children (β 0.10, p .004), and efficacy outcome expectations (β 0.15, p.011). The explained variance (R2) for the final multivariate model was 65%.
Table 2. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of the determinants of intention to accept pertussis cocooning vaccination in parents of newborns (N=282).
    Determinants
Personal determinants
Mother
Age (years)
High education
High family Income
Children vaccinated in NIP Experience pertussis in adult Work in healthcare
Psychosocial determinants *
Attitude
Social norm Perceived control
Perceived capacity
High perceived autonomy^ Anticipated negative affect
non-acceptance
acceptance Decisional uncertainty
Univariate analysis
OR (95% CI)
2.14 (1.21-3.80) 1.00 (0.95-1.06) 0.82 (0.46-1.44) 1.36 (0.71-2.61) 2.03 (0.87-4.74) 1.73 (0.64-4.70) 1.28 (0.64-2.53)
12.66 (6.29-25.48) 4.77 (3.11-7.32)
2.38 (1.78-3.17) 1.33 (0.56-3.15)
2.38 (1.85-3.06) 0.31 (0.23-0.43) 0.39 (0.30-0.51)
Multivariate analysis~
     n
282 277 280 226 219 256 279
275 251
276 281
281 279 281
p
.009 .984 .485 .349 .101 .282 .484
<.001 <.001
<.001 .521
<.001 <.001 <.001
OR (95% CI)
p
       #
6.62 (3.27-13.38)
1.65 (1.12-2.42) 0.55 (0.32-0.97) 0.52 (0.35-0.78)
<.001
<.001 .040 .002
    # > €3050,- monthly family income
* measured on a 7 point Likert-scale; low-high
^high (≥5.0) vs low (<5.0), dichotomized as single item measure without normal distribution. ~ Pseudo R2 0.722 (n = 275)
58
57

















































   57   58   59   60   61