# Differences in Vaccination Consultation Preferred by Primary Health Care Workers and Residents in Community Settings

**Authors:** Tianshuo Zhao, Xianming Cai, Sihui Zhang, Mingting Wang, Linyi Chen, Juan Wang, Yajie Yu, Liandi Tao, Xiaoxia Xu, Jing Luo, Chao Wang, Juan Du, Yaqiong Liu, Qingbin Lu, Fuqiang Cui

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/vaccines12050534 · 2024-05-14

## TL;DR

This study compares how healthcare workers and residents in China prefer to receive vaccination consultations, revealing differences that could help improve vaccine acceptance strategies.

## Contribution

The study identifies distinct preferences for vaccination consultation methods among healthcare workers and residents in community settings.

## Key findings

- Residents prefer HCW-led consultations with specialized content and telephone follow-up.
- Healthcare workers favor face-to-face consultations with specialized content and telephone follow-up.
- Urban and rural HCWs differ in their preference for consultation duration and leadership style.

## Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the preference of primary HCWs and residents on vaccination consultation in community health services to provide evidence for vaccine hesitancy intervention strategies. Methods: A discrete choice model (DCM) was constructed to evaluate the preference difference between primary HCWs and residents on vaccination consultation in community health services in China during May–July 2022. Results: A total of 282 residents and 204 HCWs were enrolled in this study. The residents preferred consulting with an HCW-led approach (β = 2.168), with specialized content (β = 0.954), and accompanied by telephone follow-up (β = 1.552). In contrast, the HCWs preferred face-to-face consultation (β = 0.540) with an HCW-led approach (β = 0.458) and specialized content (β = 0.409), accompanied by telephone follow-up (β = 0.831). College residents and residents with underlying self-reported disease may be near-critically inclined to choose traditional consultation (an offline, face-to-face consultation with standardized content and more prolonged duration) rather than a new-media consulting group (an online consultation with specialized content within 5 min). Urban HCWs preferred long-term consultation groups (the resident-led offline consultation with follow-up lasting more than 5 min). In contrast, rural HCWs preferred efficient consultation (the HCW-led, short-duration, standardized offline consultation mode). Conclusion: The selection preference for vaccine consultation reveals a gap between providers and demanders, with different groups exhibiting distinct preferences. Identifying these targeted gaps can help design more acceptable and efficient interventions, increasing their likelihood of success and leading to better resource allocation for policymakers to develop targeted vaccination policies.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** hypertension (MESH:D006973), infectious diseases (MESH:D003141), immune dysfunction (MESH:D007154), neoplasm (MESH:D009369), injury to people or property (MESH:C000719191), diabetes (MESH:D003920), influenza (MESH:D007251), COVID-19 (MESH:D000086382), lung diseases (MESH:D008171), hyperlipidemia (MESH:D006949), cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases (MESH:D002318), chronic diseases (MESH:D002908), liver diseases (MESH:D008107), obesity (MESH:D009765), DCM (MESH:D021922), chronic kidney disease (MESH:D051436)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]
- **Cell lines:** S2 — Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly), Spontaneously immortalized cell line (CVCL_Z232)

## Figures

4 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11126119/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11126119