Skip to content

Improving Physician Vaccine Recommendation Using Social Norms, Trust, and Presumptive Language

Improving Physician Vaccine Recommendation Using Social Norms, Trust, and Presumptive Language

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05957393
Enrollment
447
Registered
2023-07-24
Start date
2023-09-21
Completion date
2024-04-24
Last updated
2024-05-01

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Healthy

Keywords

Physicians, Vaccination Recommendation, Social Norms, Trust, Presumptive Recommendation

Brief summary

This research examines vaccination recommendation perceptions and behaviors of physicians and advanced practice providers.

Interventions

OTHERQuantity of vaccination recommendations

The survey contains a messaging intervention using a 2x2 randomized factorial design, where the investigators attempt to increase the quantity and/or quality of physician and APP vaccination recommendations (Quantity (present vs. absent) x Quality (present vs. absent)).

OTHERQuality of vaccination recommendations

The survey contains a messaging intervention using a 2x2 randomized factorial design, where the investigators attempt to increase the quantity and/or quality of physician and APP vaccination recommendations (Quantity (present vs. absent) x Quality (present vs. absent)).

OTHERControl

The survey contains a messaging intervention using a 2x2 randomized factorial design, where the investigators attempt to increase the quantity and/or quality of physician and APP vaccination recommendations (Quantity (present vs. absent) x Quality (present vs. absent)).

Sponsors

Duke University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
FACTORIAL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Participants must be physicians, advanced practice providers, medical students, nurses/nurse practitioners, or medical fellows. * Must be in a position to be authorized to recommend vaccines to patients in their official professional capacities/responsibilities.

Exclusion criteria

* Students or employees under the supervision of the PI who meet inclusion criteria for the study

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in self-reported rate of patient vaccine uptakeDay 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90Answer to the following item: Estimate what percentage of your patients is/will be fully vaccinated against \[…\] This item is answered on a scale from 0% to 100%. The question is being asked 8-10 times with the following name inserted for \[...\] in the above question: Flu COVID-19 Tetanus, Diphtheria, Pertussis HPV Hepatitis B Meningitis / Meningococcal Shingles Pneumococcal Other (which can be two other diseases that the respondent indicated)
Change in self-reported patient trustDay 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90Self-reported patient trust = answer to the following item: (1) Thinking about the last/next 30 days I provided care, I can say that my patients (will) trust(ed) me as their healthcare provider. This item is answered on a scale from 0% (completely disagree) to 100% (completely agree).
Change in self-reported utilization of AIMSDay 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90Composite score of the following items: (1) I used/will use direct, declarative language, like: You're due for your flu shot. We'll do that at the end of this visit; (2) If the patient showed/shows hesitancy about getting vaccinated, I (will) ask(ed) about their concerns, and then use(d) active listening to understand their thoughts; (3) If the patient showed/shows hesitancy about getting vaccinated, I (will) listen(ed) to the patient's reasoning and then summarize(d) the patient's reasoning back to them to show that I understood/understand; (4) If the patient still has concerns, I did/will not continue efforts to convince them. Each item is answered on a scale from 0% (never) to 100% (always).
Change in proportion of patients that receive a vaccine recommendationDay 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90Proportion of patients that receive a vaccine recommendation = multiplication of the answer to the following two items: (1) I (will) check(ed) whether a patient has/had gotten all indicated vaccines, (2) If I saw/see a patient had not gotten an indicated vaccine, I (will) discuss(ed) getting it. Both items are answered on a scale from 0% (never) to 100% (always).
Change in self-reported responsibility perceptionDay 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90Self-reported responsibility perception = answer to the following item: (1) Recommending indicated vaccines is within the scope of my professional responsibilities. This item is answered on a scale from 0% (completely disagree) to 100% (completely agree).
Change in self-reported assessment of patient recommendation acceptanceDay 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90Self-reported assessment of patient recommendation acceptance = answer to the following item: (1) If I recommend(ed) an indicated vaccine, my patient (will) accept(ed) that recommendation.. This item is answered on a scale from 0% (never) to 100% (always).

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in proportion of patients that accept a recommendationDay 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90Proportion of patients that accept a recommendation = multiplication of the answer to the following three items: (1) I (will) check(ed) whether a patient has/had gotten all indicated vaccines, (2) If I saw/see a patient had not gotten an indicated vaccine, I (will) discuss(ed) getting it.; (3) If I recommend(ed) an indicated vaccine, my patient (will) accept(ed) that recommendation. All items are answered on a scale from 0% (never) to 100% (always).
Change in belief about patient autonomyDay 1, Day 30, Day 60, Day 90Answer to the following item: I stated / will state the patient's options - to vaccinate or not, and with which vaccine - so that they can make an informed decision. This item is answered on a scale from 0% to 100%.

Countries

Brazil, United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026