Author
Listed:
- Natalie V. J. Aldhouse
(Clinical Outcomes Assessment)
- Eric K. H. Chan
(Janssen Global Services LLC)
- Tamara Al-zubeidi
(Clinical Outcomes Assessment)
- Stephanie McKee
(Clinical Outcomes Assessment)
- Valérie Oriol Mathieu
(Janssen Vaccines and Prevention B.V.)
- Antoine C. El khoury
(Janssen Global Services LLC)
- Helen Kitchen
(Clinical Outcomes Assessment)
Abstract
Background Despite advances in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention methods, such as the advent of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), the number of people with newly acquired HIV remains high, particularly in at-risk groups. A prophylactic HIV vaccine could contribute to reduced disease prevalence and future transmission and address limitations of existing options, such as suboptimal long-term adherence to PrEPs. Methods This qualitative study aimed to capture perceptions towards and acceptance of prophylactic HIV vaccination in three adult populations in the United States: the general population, ‘at-risk’ individuals (e.g. men who have sex with men, transgender individuals, gender-nonconforming individuals, and individuals in a sexual relationship with a person living with HIV), and parents/caregivers of children aged 9–17 years. Interviews were conducted with 55 participants to explore key drivers and barriers to HIV vaccine uptake, and a conceptual model was developed. Results The sample was diverse; participants were 51% female, aged 20–57 years (mean 37 years), 33% with high school diploma as highest education level, and identified as White (42%), Black or African American (35%), of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin (22%), or other races/ethnicities (8%) [groupings are not mutually exclusive]. Perceptions were influenced by individual, interpersonal, community, institutional, and structural factors. Overall, 98% of participants thought vaccination would be beneficial in preventing HIV. Key considerations/barriers included perceived susceptibility, i.e. whether participants felt there was a risk of contracting HIV (discussed by 90%); the clinical profile of the vaccine (e.g. the adverse effect profile [98%], and vaccine efficacy [85%], cost [73%] and administration schedule [88%]); and concerns around potential vaccine-induced seropositivity (VISP; 62%). Stigma was not found to be an important barrier, with a general view that vaccination status was personal. Participants in the ‘at-risk’ group were the most likely to accept an HIV vaccine (70%). Unique concerns in the subgroups included how a potential vaccine’s clinical profile compared with PrEP, voiced by those receiving/considering PrEP, and considerations of children’s views on the topic, voiced by parents/caregivers. Conclusions Understanding these factors could help develop HIV vaccine research strategies and contribute toward public health messaging to support future HIV vaccination programs.
Suggested Citation
Natalie V. J. Aldhouse & Eric K. H. Chan & Tamara Al-zubeidi & Stephanie McKee & Valérie Oriol Mathieu & Antoine C. El khoury & Helen Kitchen, 2024.
"Perceptions and Acceptance of a Prophylactic Vaccine for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV): A Qualitative Study,"
The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 17(4), pages 457-469, July.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-024-00686-7
DOI: 10.1007/s40271-024-00686-7
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-024-00686-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.