Browsing UA Graduate and Undergraduate Research by Subjects
Now showing items 1-3 of 3
Assessing Barriers to Recommendation of HPV Vaccination in Adolescent FemalesBackground: Cervical cancer ranks as the fourth most common form of cancer in women worldwide. Cervical cancer is caused by a sexually acquired infection with the human papillomavirus (HPV). The HPV vaccine can prevent HPV transmission and protect people against HPV causing diseases. Unfortunately, HPV vaccination rates remain low among adolescent females aged 11-17 years. Influential provider communication and recommendation of the HPV vaccine to adolescent female patients and parents are directly correlated to HPV vaccine uptake rates. A limited body of evidence is available on the topic of nurse practitioner (NP) perceived barriers and facilitators towards recommendation of the HPV vaccine.Objective: The purpose of this quality improvement (QI) project was to determine perceived barriers and facilitators among NPs towards HPV vaccination recommendation in adolescent females aged of 11-17 years. Methods: A descriptive study design was utilized. Participants were 31 NPs recruited through an invitational announcement posted on the Southern Arizona Advanced Practice Nurse Practitioner Council/Nurse Practitioner Society (SAZAPN/NPS) networking group web page. The 10-question HPV Vaccination Recommendation Survey was utilized to assess participant characteristics and perceived facilitators and barriers. Results: The majority of the sample was masters degree prepared NPs (76.7%) in the family NP specialty (87.1%). NPs reported five major facilitator, including organization or practice level, provider knowledge, incorporation into routine visits, guidelines, and sharing personal experiences. Provider knowledge pertaining to HPV and the HPV vaccine was the most frequently perceived facilitator (n=13). In contrast, the most frequently identified barrier was parental fear, assumptions, or misinformation (n=17). Additional barriers included family belief systems or organization/practice level barriers. 32.3% of participants reported no perceived barriers to recommendation. Conclusion: NPs reported various perceived barriers and facilitators to HPV vaccine recommendation. Provider knowledge was the most reported facilitator, while parental assumptions, fear, or misinformation was identified as the greatest barrier to recommendation. To date, minimal research exists on the topic of HPV vaccine recommendation and perceived facilitators and barriers specific to NPs. Future research should focus on development of QI projects and interventions geared at mitigating perceived barriers, as well as supporting the use of facilitators to HPV vaccine recommendation.
Increasing HPV Vaccine Provider Recommendations in a Rural Southwest ClinicHuman papillomavirus (HPV) is one of the most common sexually transmitted infections in the United States, however vaccination uptake remains low. One of the known barriers of low vaccination rates is lack of a health care provider recommendation. The purpose of this project was to implement a practice change to increase the number of HPV vaccine recommendations provided by primary care providers (PCPs) to patients aged 9-26 years. The setting for this project was the Little Colorado Physician’s Office, a primary care clinic in rural northern Arizona. Four PCPs, including three family physicians and one family nurse practitioner, and members of the QI team participated in the project. The project was designed as a quality improvement project, guided by the Model for Improvement framework. The needs of the individual practice and their population were assessed by a quality improvement (QI) team using a fishbone diagram for root-cause analysis. A practice change was then implemented by the QI team and evaluated for its effectiveness in improving HPV vaccination recommendations. Outcome measures included the number of HPV vaccine recommendations made by a primary care provider to eligible patients and the number of HPV vaccines administered to patients. In a four-week period of practice change implementation, eight patients were considered eligible for the HPV vaccine. Of these patients, 100% were offered the HPV vaccine by their healthcare provider. The practice change was successful in promoting HPV vaccination recommendations by PCPs, and the QI team reported the change was beneficial to their practice.
Reducing SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Hesitancy in a Primary Care SettingPurpose: The purpose of this quality improvement project was to increase SARS-CoV-2 vaccination confidence and knowledge in adults who display reluctance or hesitancy through a brief educational discussion and a written pamphlet. Background: In recent history, the world was faced with an unprecedented challenge as a pandemic quickly encompassed the globe. In early 2020, this became commonly known and referred to as the COVID-19 pandemic. The severe health implications of this respiratory virus quickly overfilled hospitals and placed the health of communities at risk. To get ahead of further spread of COVID-19, it was pertinent to quickly develop an effective vaccine. Following rigorous clinical trials, two mRNA vaccines were approved by the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA). What seemed like a solution became a challenge within the US. The population of the US showed reluctance to participate in COVID-19 vaccination programs. Vaccine hesitancy related to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines prolonged communities achieving adequate herd immunity. Understanding why individuals were displaying vaccine hesitancy was pertinent for implementing strategies that would lead to increased mRNA COVID-19 vaccine compliance. Methods: Participants were recruited from Peak Family Practice in Colorado Springs, CO. A pre-survey was administered followed by a short one-on-one educational session reviewing a written pamphlet about mRNA vaccines and common misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccines. A post-survey was administered after the educational intervention. Each survey had the same five questions and assessed participant knowledge and confidence related to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Results: A total of 20 participants completed the pre- and post-survey responses, along with participating in the short educational session. No statistically significant differences were found, however, participants who changed their answers on post-survey showed an increase in confidence of mRNA vaccines as well as indicating they would be more likely to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Conclusion: This educational intervention reviewing a written pamphlet of mRNA vaccine information was effective in increasing the confidence of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in some participants. Participants who changed their post-survey answers indicated an increase in likeliness to receive COVID-19 vaccination and showed improvement in knowledge related to mRNA vaccines. Although there was evidence of clinical significance a larger sample size would be necessary to indicate true statistical significance.