logo

Public Health Assignment (Docs)

   

Added on  2020-05-16

23 Pages5424 Words104 Views
Running head: PUBLIC HEALTH Public healthName of the studentUniversity nameAuthor’s note

1PUBLIC HEALTH Table of ContentsPart one:.................................................................................................................................2Rationale for the chosen topic....................................................................................................2Part two:.................................................................................................................................4Research recruitment..................................................................................................................4Part three:...............................................................................................................................5Annotated bibliography..............................................................................................................5Part four:...................................................................................................................................14Research study design tool.......................................................................................................14Rationale for the research design methodology.......................................................................15Data collection and analysis.....................................................................................................17Conclusion............................................................................................................................17References............................................................................................................................19

2PUBLIC HEALTH Part one: Rationale for the chosen topic The current topic focuses on the public health system of United States with respect tothe immunization of children. Immunization is one of the crucial steps in ensuring long-termhealth of an individual and community. The immunization is provided to an individual atdifferent stage of their life cycle. However, childhood immunization is crucial with respect todeveloping lifelong immunity. The development of immunization programs at a faster pace inthe developed countries has to lead to a vocal anti-immunization rate. The immunizationprograms have led to the complete eradication of some of the diseases such as smallpox andpolio, chicken pox among the few (Dixon et al., 2017). This has led to the emergence of acommunity who has never had any firsthand experience of the disease and lack sufficientawareness regarding the precautionary methods. Some of them grow up to be least fearing ofthe diseases as they never had an encounter with them (Dunn et al., 2017). Additionally,some of them belonging to a childbearing age often fail to provide required immunization totheir children due to the lack of knowledge. Adequate vaccination is required in order to achieve the herd immunity threshold forvaccine-preventable diseases. Herd immunity threshold is the percentage of vaccinatedindividuals within a population (Seither et al., 2015). As commented by Berezin & Eads(2016), vaccinating a certain portion of the population can prevent the disease fromspreading. This particular threshold level varies from disease to disease and even a small dropin the vaccination rates of the community can lead to an outbreak of the disease. Some of thefactsheets with respect to immunization in US could be reflected upon here for understandingthe gap in establishing 100% immunity at the community level. 84.6 % immunization rateshave been received for the DPT vaccines, 93.75 have been received for poliomyelitis, 91.9 %

3PUBLIC HEALTH rates have been received for MMR, whereas only 82.7 % rates have been received for Hib(Harmsen et al., 2018). In order to understand the gap, we need to understand the psychologyfirst. There are a huge number of doubts in the minds of the parents of children ofimmunization age. As mentioned by Rabinowitz, Latella, Stern & Jost (2016), the generalphysician is the one and only resort the parents have with respect to gathering sufficientinformation regarding the immunization programs. As argued by Martin. Lowery, Brand,Gold & Horlick (2015), the inclination of the new age parents towards the use of digitalmedia for gathering health-related information can often have more negative consequencesthan positive. Some of the rigorously written academic journals often mention the onset of acertain disease as the side-effect of vaccination (Favin, Steinglass, Fields, Banerjee &Sawhney, 2018). As a healthcare practitioner one, therefore, needs to ensure that the healthand safety of the children is not only the sole criterion of the parents but also the healthcareproviders. The parents are also concerned regarding the side effects of the immunizationdoses. Therefore, the healthcare provider needs to emphasize the long-term health benefitsrather than focusing on the short-term goals. Therefore, practicing as a healthcare professional one often have to face situationswhere it will be difficult for them to convince the visiting parents regarding the benefits ofvaccines. They might go one say that the disease no longer exists, therefore there is no needfor immunization. Additionally, they may emphasize that none within their family circle everhad the disease, reducing the chances of the disease. Additionally, evaluating andcategorizing the audience helps in understanding the dilemma faced by them moreeffectively. Cultural beliefs and paradoxes often govern the health behavior of the population(Rabinowitz et al., 2016). For example, many in the developing countries are simplyapprehensive to discuss regarding the benefits of HPV vaccine owing to privacy concerns.

4PUBLIC HEALTH Part two: Research recruitment The recruitment process forms a crucial component of the research. The success of aresearch project is governed a lot by the recruitment process. The sample selection is one ofthe determining steps of the research process (Delaney, 2015). In this respect, the sampleconsists of the parents of the children undergoing immunization programs at number ofhospitals across US. In this respect, sufficient support and cooperation are needed from thehospital administration. In the lack of initiative, such a program may fail to reach its desiredgoals.The immunization education program may be delivered to the target group ofpopulation using a number of resources. The particular resources which will be selected overhere include audio-visual broadcast (Fefferman & Naumova, 2015). The program may bedelivered within the waiting rooms of the hospital with the help of sufficient resources. Thismay be a suitable means of educating the target population along with encouraging questionsand answer sessions. The interactive session will further help in removing the biases from theminds of the participants. The success of the program may be evaluated with the help ofconducting interviews. Therefore, qualitative methods of data collection will be used by theresearcher for analyzing the paradigm brought about within the thought process of the parentsregarding the immunization programs. The sample is designed from amongst parents who have been often visiting the doctorwith a number of queries related to immunization benefits and side effects. Some of themhave been recommended by the consultant physician to attend the immunization educationweek. However, the selection of the participants for the interview will be done on a randombasis. The simple random probability chosen will rule out the chances of biases in setting of

5PUBLIC HEALTH an experimental design (Lewis, 2015). Additionally, the process will provide equal chancesto each and every respondent to participate in the interview process.The respondents will be invited for participating in the interview process wilfully, thatis none of the participants will be forced by the researcher to become a part of the research(Newington & Metcalfe, 2014). In this respect, electronic mail will be used for informing theparticipants regarding the interview process. Part three:Annotated bibliography Journal 1: Berry, N. J., Henry, A., Danchin, M., Trevena, L. J., Willaby, H. W., & Leask, J. (2017).When parents won’t vaccinate their children: a qualitative investigation of australian primarycare providers’ experiences. BMC Pediatrics, 17, 19. http://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-017-0783-2Summary of sourceThe primary aims of the study are to identify the challenges faced and the strategieswhich had been implemented by the general practitioners and nurses working inimmunization centers with parents who choose not to vaccinate their children. In this respect,primary care providers were selected from different regions through Australian ChildhoodImmunization Register (ACIR). Interviews were conducted in order to analyze the challengeshealthcare providers faced in their interactions with the parents unwilling to provide theirchild with immunization doses.

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Immunization And Coronavirus Research 2022
|4
|937
|21

Measles Vaccination (Doc)
|5
|1034
|79

Immunization Coverage in Australia: Evidence based Script for the Poster
|14
|2796
|77

Immunization against Whooping Cough and Measles in Australian Children
|6
|1527
|95

Compulsory Childhood Vaccinations
|4
|813
|476

Immunization Programs for Indigenous Communities in Australia: A Systematic Review
|10
|2063
|81