MDNews - Minnesota

T HIS PHENOMENON WAS discussed in the March issue of Pediatrics. A study involving 1,759 parents was designed to compare the effectiveness of different health messages about vaccinations. Interventions included: + Text-based information arguing that measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccines have not been proved to cause autism + Text-based information about disease risks associ- ated with the MMR vaccine + A p a r e n t a l n a r r a - tive rega rding a son's measles hospitalization + Images of children who have mea sles, mumps and rubella + A control inter vention describing bird feeding Researchers speculated that the informa- tion combating autism myths would be less effective than messages describing or portraying the dangers of measles, mumps and rubella. However, they found that, contrary to expectations, educational materials successfully corrected parents' misperceptions that MMR vaccines caused autism but still "reduced vaccination intent among parents with the least favorable vaccine attitudes." Meanwhile, the more dramatic parent narrative and images of the disease actually increased misconcep- tions, without budging intent to vaccinate, among those parents with the least positive attitudes toward vaccines. Why? And What Next? "We were surprised by many of our results," says one of the study's authors, Gary L. Freed, MD, MPH, Professor of Pediatrics and Health Policy Administration at the University of Michigan. "We believe that going forward, people need to test their inferences with regard to what the most effective strategies are to … help vaccine- hesitant parents better understand the benefi ts of immunization." While he does not yet know what prompted the vaccination messages to have the effects they did, Dr. Freed would like to test some hypotheses: + Is the messenger more important than the message? Would the information be more persuasive coming from a familiar pediatrician? + What exactly is it that motivates vaccine- hesitant parents? Safety concerns about vaccines, a feeling that vaccines aren't all that important or other unacknowledged philosophical concerns? Would different messages be more effective for each of these constituencies? Meanwhile, Dr. Freed urges physicians to open up frank conversations with parents. "[Physicians] should try to have a discus- sion with parents much more clearly about what their motivations are and what the parents think they need to know [to] help them better understand both the risks and benefi ts of immunizations," he says. "Simply providing the information we think they need isn't necessarily going to be successful. Although we might change their knowledge base, we may not be changing their intention to vaccinate in a commensurate fashion." Dr. Freed does not see it as a case of vaccine-wary p a r e n t s m e r e l y b e i n g irrationally obstinate. " T h e p r o ble m i s n o t with the parents for having motivations," he says. "The issue is, we need to work harder to know what those motivations are." How do you persuade patients to observe public health recommendations? Join the discussion at www.mdnews.com. ■ MESSAGES INTENDED TO COMBAT MYTHS ABOUT VACCINATION ACTUALLY DECREASED SOME PARENTS' INTENT TO HAVE THEIR CHILDREN VACCINATED — EVEN WHEN THE PARENTS ASSENTED TO THE FACTS OF THE MESSAGE. By Jennifer Webster Communication Breakdown: Promoting Benefi ts of Vaccination May Backfi re TROUBLING WARINESS Only 53 percent of Americans are "extremely" or "very" confi dent that childhood vaccines are "safe and effective." — Associated Press survey, March 2014 SPECIAL CLINICAL SECTION: PEDIATRICS 1 6 | Minnesota MD NEWS ■ M D N E W S . CO M

• Cover