Katharine Head

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/1805/26676

What is motivating parents' COVID-19 vaccination decisions? A Statewide Survey of Indiana Parents

The COVID-19 vaccine is already available to children over 12 years old, and it will soon be available for children 5- 11 years old. Professor Katharine Head and her research partner, Professor Nir Menachemi, wanted to understand Hoosier parents’ perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and assess their intentions to get their children vaccinated. This sort of information can assist state and local governments, public health agencies, and community organizations in crafting targeted educational campaigns and other strategies that will assure high uptake of the vaccine among children.

They worked with the Indiana Department of Health and the Indiana Department of Education to recruit parents and caregivers across Indiana to fill out a web-based survey that assessed their perceptions about the COVID-19 vaccination. Over 10,000 parents filled out the anonymous survey! Some of the key findings include that only about 45% of parents have or intend to vaccinate their children, while about 42% do not intend to vaccinate. About 13% of parents who said they would “wait and see.” Of those wait and see parents, the researchers found some interesting perceptions about the vaccine that may suggest ways they can develop targeted educational messages to hopefully encourage them to get vaccinated, such as their perceptions of safety, perceptions of what other parents are doing, and perceptions about what their healthcare provider would want them to do. Based on these findings, they have developed a set of evidence-based suggestions for designing parent and family focused COVID-19 vaccination interventions that can be implemented in communities across Indiana.

Professor Head's translation of research into strategies to increase the number of vaccinated children in the fight against COVID-19 is another excellent example of how IUPUI's faculty members are TRANSLATING their RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE.

Browse

Now showing 1 - 10 of 15

Implications for Training on Smartphone Medication Reminder App Use by Adults With Chronic Conditions: Pilot Study Applying the Technology Acceptance Model
(JMIR, 2017) Park, Daniel Y.; Goering, Elizabeth M.; Head, Katharine J.; Bartlett Ellis, Rebecca J.; School of Nursing
Background: The majority of middle-aged to older patients with chronic conditions report forgetting to take medications as prescribed. The promotion of patients’ smartphone medication reminder app (SMRA) use shows promise as a feasible and cost-effective way to support their medication adherence. Providing training on SMRA use, guided by the technology acceptance model (TAM), could be a promising intervention to promote patients’ app use. Objective: The aim of this pilot study was to (1) assess the feasibility of an SMRA training session designed to increase patients’ intention to use the app through targeting perceived usefulness of app, perceived ease of app use, and positive subjective norm regarding app use and (2) understand the ways to improve the design and implementation of the training session in a hospital setting. Methods: A two-group design was employed. A total of 11 patients older than 40 years (median=58, SD=9.55) and taking 3 or more prescribed medications took part in the study on one of two different dates as participants in either the training group (n=5) or nontraining group (n=6). The training group received an approximately 2-hour intervention training session designed to target TAM variables regarding one popular SMRA, the Medisafe app. The nontraining group received an approximately 2-hour control training session where the participants individually explored Medisafe app features. Each training session was concluded with a one-time survey and a one-time focus group. Results: Mann-Whitney U tests revealed that the level of perceived ease of use (P=.13) and the level of intention to use an SMRA (P=.33) were higher in the training group (median=7.00, median=6.67, respectively) than in the nontraining group (median=6.25, median=5.83). However, the level of perceived usefulness (U=4.50, Z=−1.99, P=.05) and the level of positive subjective norm (P=.25) were lower in the training group (median=6.50, median=4.29) than in the nontraining group (median=6.92, median=4.50). Focus groups revealed the following participants’ perceptions of SMRA use in the real-world setting that the intervention training session would need to emphasize in targeting perceived usefulness and positive subjective norm: (1) the participants would find an SMRA to be useful if they thought the app could help address specific struggles in medication adherence in their lives and (2) the participants think that their family members (or health care providers) might view positively the participants’ SMRA use in primary care settings (or during routine medical checkups). Conclusions: Intervention training session, guided by TAM, appeared feasible in targeting patients’ perceived ease of use and, thereby, increasing intention to use an SMRA. Emphasizing the real-world utility of SMRA, the training session could better target patients’ perceived usefulness and positive subjective norm that are also important in increasing their intention to use the app. [JMIR Formativ Res 2017;1(1):e5]
A retrospective and prospective look at strategies to increase adolescent HPV vaccine uptake in the United States
(Taylor & Francis, 2018) Head, Katharine J.; Biederman, Erika; Sturm, Lynne A.; Zimet, Gregory D.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
The HPV vaccine debuted more than ten years ago in the United States and many strategies have been evaluated to increase HPV vaccination rates, which include not only improving current vaccination behaviors but also sustaining these behaviors. Researchers and practitioners from a variety of backgrounds have engaged in this work, which has included efforts directed at public health and government policies, health education and health promotion programs, and clinical and patient-provider approaches, as well as work aimed to respond to and combat anti-HPV vaccination movements in society. Using a previously developed conceptual model to organize and summarize each of these areas, this paper also highlights the need for future HPV vaccine promotion work to adopt a multi-level and, when possible, integrated approach in order to maximize impact on vaccination rates.
Examining the benefits and harms of Alzheimer's disease screening for family members of older adults: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
(BMC, 2020-02-19) Fowler, Nicole R.; Head, Katharine J.; Perkins, Anthony J.; Gao, Sujuan; Callahan, Christopher M.; Bakas, Tamilyn; Suarez, Shelley D.; Boustani, Malaz A.; Medicine, School of Medicine
BACKGROUND: Multiple national expert panels have identified early detection of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) as a national priority. However, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) does not currently support screening for ADRD in primary care given that the risks and benefits are unknown. The USPSTF stresses the need for research examining the impact of ADRD screening on family caregiver outcomes. METHODS: The Caregiver Outcomes of Alzheimer's Disease Screening (COADS) is a randomized controlled trial that will examine the potential benefits or harms of ADRD screening on family caregivers. It will also compare the effectiveness of two strategies for diagnostic evaluation and management after ADRD screening. COADS will enroll 1800 dyads who will be randomized into three groups (n = 600/group): the 'Screening Only' group will receive ADRD screening at baseline and disclosure of the screening results, with positive-screen participants receiving a list of local resources for diagnostic follow-up; the 'Screening Plus' group will receive ADRD screening at baseline coupled with disclosure of the screening results, with positive-screen participants referred to a dementia collaborative care program for diagnostic evaluation and potential care; and the control group will receive no screening. The COADS trial will measure the quality of life of the family member (the primary outcome) and family member mood, anxiety, preparedness and self-efficacy (the secondary outcomes) at baseline and at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Additionally, the trial will examine the congruence of depressive and anxiety symptoms between older adults and family members at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months and compare the effectiveness of two strategies for diagnostic evaluation and management after ADRD screening between the two groups randomized to screening (Screening Only versus Screening Plus). DISCUSSION: We hypothesize that caregivers in the screening arms will express higher levels of health-related quality of life, lower depressive and anxiety symptoms, and better preparation for caregiving with higher self-efficacy at 24 months. Results from this study will directly inform the National Plan to Address Alzheimer's Disease, the USPSTF and other organizations regarding ADRD screening and early detection policies.
A National Survey Assessing SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Intentions: Implications for Future Public Health Communication Efforts
(SAGE Publications, 2020-09-23) Head, Katharine J.; Kasting, Monica L.; Sturm, Lynne A.; Hartsock, Jane A.; Zimet, Gregory D.; Communication Studies, School of Liberal Arts
With SARS-CoV-2 vaccines under development, research is needed to assess intention to vaccinate. We conducted a survey (N = 3,159) with U.S. adults in May 2020 assessing SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions, intentions with a provider recommendation, and sociodemographic and psychosocial variables. Participants had high SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions (M = 5.23/7-point scale), which increased significantly with a provider recommendation (M = 5.47). Hierarchical linear regression showed that less education and working in health care were associated with lower intent, and liberal political views, altruism, and COVID-19-related health beliefs were associated with higher intent. This work can inform interventions to increase vaccine uptake, ultimately reducing COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality.
Public perceptions of the effectiveness of recommended non-pharmaceutical intervention behaviors to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2
(PloS, 2020) Kasting, Monica L.; Head, Katharine J.; Hartsock, Jane A.; Sturm, Lynne; Zimet, Gregory D.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
Background The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health threat, both in scope and response. With no vaccine available, the public is advised to practice non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) including social distancing, mask-wearing, and washing hands. However, little is known about public perceptions of the effectiveness of these measures, and high perceived effectiveness is likely to be critical in order to achieve widespread adoption of NPI. Methods In May 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among U.S. adults (N = 3,474). The primary outcome was a six-item measure assessing perceived effectiveness of recommended behaviors to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection from 1 (not at all effective) to 5 (extremely effective). The sample was divided into “higher” and “lower” perceived effectiveness groups. Covariates included demographics, healthcare characteristics, and health beliefs. Variables that were significant at p<0.01 in bivariate analyses were entered into a multivariable logistic regression and a best-fit model was created using a cutoff of p<0.01 to stay in the model. Results Mean age was 45.5 years and most participants were non-Hispanic White (63%) and female (52.4%). The high perceived effectiveness group was slightly larger than the low perceived effectiveness group (52.7% vs. 47.3%). Almost all health belief variables were significant in the best-fit regression model. COVID-19-related worry (aOR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.64–2.02), and perceived threat to physical health (aOR = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.20–1.45) were positively associated with perceived effectiveness while perceived severity of COVID-19 (0.84; 95% CI = 0.73–0.96) and perceived likelihood of infection (0.85; 95% CI = 0.77–0.94) switched directions in the adjusted model and were negatively associated with perceived effectiveness. Conclusions This research indicates people generally believe NPI are effective, but there was variability based on health beliefs and there are mixed rates of engagement in these behaviors. Public health efforts should focus on increasing perceived severity and threat of SARS-CoV-2-related disease, while promoting NPI as effective in reducing threat.
Are Health Care Professionals Prepared to Implement Human Papillomavirus Testing? A Review of Psychosocial Determinants of Human Papillomavirus Test Acceptability in Primary Cervical Cancer Screening
(Liebert, 2020-03) Tatar, Ovidiu; Wade, Kristina; McBride, Emily; Thompson, Erika; Head, Katharine J.; Perez, Samara; Shapiro, Gilla K.; Waller, Jo; Zimet, Gregory; Rosberger, Zeev; Communication Studies, School of Liberal Arts
Background: Guidelines for cervical cancer screening have been updated to include human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, which is more sensitive compared to cytology in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Because of its increased sensitivity, a negative HPV test is more reassuring for a woman that she is at low risk for precancerous cervical lesions than a negative Pap test. Prompted by the inadequate translation of HPV test-based screening guidelines into practice, we aimed to synthesize the literature regarding health care providers (HCPs) knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to HPV testing and the influence of psychosocial factors on HCPs acceptability of HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Materials and Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Global Health, and Web of Science for journal articles from January 1, 1980 to July 25, 2018. A narrative synthesis of HCPs knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to HPV testing is provided. Informed by the Patient Pathway framework, we used deductive thematic analysis to synthesize the influence of psychosocial factors on HCPs acceptability of HPV testing. Results: The most important HCP knowledge gaps are related to the superior sensitivity of the HPV test and age-specific guideline recommendations for HPV testing. Thirty to fifty percent of HCPs are not compliant with guideline recommendations for HPV testing, for example, screening at shorter intervals than recommended. Barriers, facilitators, and contradictory evidence of HCPs' acceptability of the HPV test are grouped by category: (1) factors related to the HCP; (2) patient intrinsic factors; (3) factors corresponding to HCP's practice environment; and (4) health care system factors. Conclusions: HCP's adherence to guidelines for HPV testing in cervical cancer screening is suboptimal and could be improved by specialty organizations ensuring consistency across guidelines. Targeted educational interventions to address barriers of HPV test acceptability identified in this review may facilitate the translation of HPV testing recommendations into practice.
Associations between HPV vaccination among women and their 11–14-year-old children
(Taylor & Francis, 2019-01-07) Kornides, Melanie; Head, Katharine J.; Feemster, Kristen; Zimet, Gregory D.; Panozzo, Catherine A.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been available in the United States for over a decade. We sought to examine the associations between self-reported receipt of HPV vaccination among women and their 11–14-year-old children in 27 low-coverage states. Among the 3,261 mothers we surveyed, 18% reported receiving ≥1 dose of HPV vaccine. A significantly higher proportion of vaccinated women reported vaccination of their children compared to unvaccinated women (83% vs. 56%, p < .001). In multivariable logistic regression, vaccinated women (vs. unvaccinated) had 3.58 (95% CI: 2.81–4.56) times the adjusted-odds of vaccinating their children (≥1 dose HPV vaccine). Among unvaccinated children, vaccinated mothers (vs. unvaccinated) had 3.32 (95% CI: 2.09–5.26) times the adjusted odds of high intention to vaccinate their children in the next 12 months. We did not observe associations between mothers’ vaccination confidence and their vaccination status. We conclude that mothers who received ≥1 dose of HPV vaccine may be more likely to initiate or highly intend to initiate the HPV vaccine series for their children. This may have important implications for meeting population goals for HPV vaccination coverage as an increasing proportion of mothers are likely to be vaccinated over time.
Public perceptions of the effectiveness of recommended non-pharmaceutical intervention behaviors to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2
(Public Library of Science (PLOS), 2020-11-04) Kasting, Monica L.; Head, Katharine J.; Hartsock, Jane A.; Sturm, Lynne; Zimet, Gregory D.; Medicine, School of Medicine
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health threat, both in scope and response. With no vaccine available, the public is advised to practice non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) including social distancing, mask-wearing, and washing hands. However, little is known about public perceptions of the effectiveness of these measures, and high perceived effectiveness is likely to be critical in order to achieve widespread adoption of NPI. Methods: In May 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among U.S. adults (N = 3,474). The primary outcome was a six-item measure assessing perceived effectiveness of recommended behaviors to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection from 1 (not at all effective) to 5 (extremely effective). The sample was divided into "higher" and "lower" perceived effectiveness groups. Covariates included demographics, healthcare characteristics, and health beliefs. Variables that were significant at p<0.01 in bivariate analyses were entered into a multivariable logistic regression and a best-fit model was created using a cutoff of p<0.01 to stay in the model. Results: Mean age was 45.5 years and most participants were non-Hispanic White (63%) and female (52.4%). The high perceived effectiveness group was slightly larger than the low perceived effectiveness group (52.7% vs. 47.3%). Almost all health belief variables were significant in the best-fit regression model. COVID-19-related worry (aOR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.64-2.02), and perceived threat to physical health (aOR = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.20-1.45) were positively associated with perceived effectiveness while perceived severity of COVID-19 (0.84; 95% CI = 0.73-0.96) and perceived likelihood of infection (0.85; 95% CI = 0.77-0.94) switched directions in the adjusted model and were negatively associated with perceived effectiveness. Conclusions: This research indicates people generally believe NPI are effective, but there was variability based on health beliefs and there are mixed rates of engagement in these behaviors. Public health efforts should focus on increasing perceived severity and threat of SARS-CoV-2-related disease, while promoting NPI as effective in reducing threat.
The Influence of Everyday Interpersonal Communication on the Medical Encounter: An Extension of Street’s Ecological Model
(Taylor & Francis, 2018-06-03) Head, Katharine J.; Bute, Jennifer J.; Communication Studies, School of Liberal Arts
Street’s ecological model has shaped the research-examining communication during medical encounters for over a decade. Although the model accounts for the variety of contexts that shape the conversations in which patients and health-care providers engage, the model does not adequately address the way that everyday conversations about health carry over into patient–provider interactions. In this essay, we propose an extension of Street’s model that adds the context of everyday communication about health as a contributing factor in the medical encounter. We support the need for this extension by discussing research that points to the ways these conversations with our social network influence communication during the medical encounter and propose new areas for research based on this extension.
Influenza vaccination in the time of COVID-19: A national U.S. survey of adults
(Elsevier, 2021) Sturm, Lynne; Kasting, Monica L.; Head, Katharine J.; Hartsong, Jane A.; Zimet, Gregory D.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
Introduction Decisions about influenza vaccination for fall-winter 2020 were made against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. During May 2020, the authors examined intended vaccination in the next 12 months in relationship to demographic variables, healthcare attitudes, and personal COVID-19 experiences for two samples of adults--those who did not receive influenza vaccine during the prior 12 months, and those who did. Methods In May 2020, a cross-sectional online survey was conducted with a national US sample. Participants reported prior influenza vaccination (yes/no during prior 12 months) and anticipated vaccination (yes/no during next 12 months). Covariates included demographic characteristics (e.g., gender, race-ethnicity, political ideology), general beliefs (e.g., benefits of vaccines, altruistic attitudes), and COVID-19 health beliefs and experiences (COVID-19 worry and severity, perception of COVID-19 as a community threat, knowing someone with COVID-19). For each group, hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was conducted with intent to vaccinate as the outcome. Results Among participants (n = 3502), 47% did not receive influenza vaccine in the prior 12 months and 53% had; 25.5% of non-vaccinators and 91.9% of vaccinators intended future vaccination. For non-vaccinators, odds of intending vaccination was associated with race/ethnicity (Hispanics were more likely to intend than white-NH; AOR = 1.74; 95% CI = 1.23–2.4), greater perceived benefits of vaccination (AOR = 2.19; 95% CI = 1.88–2.54), and perception of COVID-19 as a community threat (AOR = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.49–2.45). For vaccinators, odds of intending vaccination was associated with age (AOR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.03–1.05), race/ethnicity (Black-NH and Other-NH were less likely to intend than white-NH, AOR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.36–0.999; and AOR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.24–0.84, respectively), greater perceived benefits of vaccination (AOR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.45–2.45) and greater perception of collective benefits of vaccines (AOR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.15–1.90). Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic may have served as a cue to action for influenza vaccination intention among some prior non-vaccinators whereas intention among prior vaccinators is more related to positive attitudes toward vaccination.

Browse

Browsing Katharine Head by browse.metadata.dateaccessioned

Results Per Page

Sort Options