Design, participants and setting: A purposive sampling strategy and qualitative methods, including observation and face-to-face interviews. Focus groups comprised adolescent girls who were involved in HPV vaccination in 2007 at schools in Sydney, New South Wales. Individual interviews were conducted with parents, teachers and vaccination nurses.
Results: Data from observing vaccination days at three schools and from interviewing 130 adolescents in 20 focus groups, 38 parents, 10 teachers and seven nurses were included in the analysis. All participants discussed the issue of fear and distress experienced by adolescent girls in relation to HPV vaccination. Observations corroborated the focus group and interview data. Our results indicated that fear was promoted by witnessing the fear reactions of peers; perceived judgement by peers; lack of information or misinformation; and being vaccinated later in the day. Fear was moderated by procedural factors, the support of peers, appropriate knowledge, and nurses’ distraction techniques or approach. Fear also affected acceptance of HPV vaccination.
Conclusions: Fear of HPV vaccination was a near universal experience among adolescents in the school setting and was often associated with significant distress that had an adverse impact on the vaccination process. School vaccination could be improved by proactively managing fear and distress.
School-based vaccination programs are an efficient mechanism for offering protection against a variety of vaccine-preventable diseases to large cohorts of adolescents.1 Historically, such programs have demonstrated both higher vaccine uptake and higher completion rates for a three-dose vaccine than are achieved by traditional vaccine delivery.1,2 This is likely to be due to ease of access, as relatively few adolescents routinely attend medical clinics compared with other age groups.2 Currently, Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom are offering school-based delivery of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine to adolescent girls, and European countries are considering or launching school-based programs.3 Some countries have concerns about the acceptability to parents of mass school-based vaccination against HPV.4
During the early implementation phase of HPV vaccination in Australia, reports of fainting and of mass psychogenic reactions were widely publicised internationally.5,6 Fear of vaccination, including fear of pain, was also noted in a pilot study in the UK.7 Fear and collective distress in response to a perceived threat can cause headache, fatigue, hyperventilation and syncope, and females are disproportionately affected.6 Symptoms can spread quickly by “line-of-sight” transmission.6 Such responses are not uncommon in school settings8,9 and could adversely affect attitudes toward and acceptance of HPV vaccination.
Fear and distress caused by vaccination have been assessed in children,10 but not in adolescents. Mass vaccine delivery to adolescents in a school setting presents additional challenges; fear may heighten or spread as a result of rumours distorting the threat of the vaccine.5
As part of a larger study that aimed to examine experiences, decision making and factors influencing consent and vaccination uptake in the 2008 and 2009 HPV school-based vaccination program in New South Wales,11-13we present data pertaining to the experience of and response to fear, among adolescent girls being offered HPV vaccination.
A purposive sampling strategy was used to approach potential participants from a broad range of vaccination experiences, including those fully vaccinated, incompletely vaccinated and not vaccinated. To facilitate this, schools with high and low vaccination uptake, determined by data from the 2007 vaccination program, and schools from different sectors (public, Catholic and independent) across Sydney were approached. Ten schools were contacted and nine elected to participate; the 10th was unable to accommodate our research within the school year. The participating schools had three-dose vaccine completion rates ranging from 64% to 90% of all eligible girls.
The study was formally approved by the human research ethics committee at the Children’s Hospital at Westmead and the NSW Department of Education and Training research approval board. In addition, the study was supported by the Association of Independent Schools in NSW and the relevant local Catholic Diocese.
A subsample of three schools was selected for observation on vaccination days. Two researchers visited two school sites each, conducting a lone and a joint observation each, for a total of three observations. Their observations described the context, which included the environment, procedures and processes, and comments of students, teachers and nurses.
Focus groups were conducted among adolescent girls aged 12–16 years during the school year when they were offered the HPV vaccine, with each group comprising girls of similar age (eg, 12–13 years). All parents of focus group participants had received information about the HPV vaccine and had already consented to or declined vaccination. The girls had been given the opportunity to have at least one vaccine dose.
Individual interviews were conducted with parents, who were not necessarily parents of girls who participated in the focus groups. Interviews were also conducted with teachers and vaccination nurses. Focus group and interview prompts were informed by the literature and, subsequently, by data analysis in a dynamic way to ensure all potential themes were explored.
The following topics were explored in relation to HPV and HPV vaccination: attitudes, decision-making processes, knowledge and understanding, experience of vaccination, discussion with family and friends, and any questions and concerns raised by participants. Examples of prompts used included, for adolescents, “Can you tell me about what happened when you went to have the vaccine?”, and for teachers, “How do the students in your school respond to the vaccine program?”
Focus groups and interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using the qualitative software package QSR NVivo 7 (QSR International, Melbourne, Vic). Two of us (D M B, S C C R) completed the primary analysis, using an inductive approach and constant comparison.14 Conceptual saturation was reached when no new codes were generated.15 Details of our analytical approach have been published previously.11
Data from observing three schools and from interviewing 130 adolescents in 20 focus groups, 38 parents, 10 teachers and seven nurses were included in our analysis (Box 1). Quotations given in the following sections are followed by code letters denoting schools, and the number of the focus group (FG) or nurse interview (N).
Fear was a common emotion experienced with regard to vaccination. The girls’ fear consisted of three main features: fear of pain, fear of having the needle pierce the skin, and fear of vaccine content and possible side effects. Parents were often aware of their daughters’ fear and some had discussed it with their daughters. Other parents did not have a discussion or expected the school to address this issue.
Fear of pain was the most frequent concern mentioned, and this fear was often specific to HPV vaccination. Most girls believed that HPV vaccination hurt more than other vaccinations. This was consistent for vaccinated and non-vaccinated girls.
I really have a phobia of needles. It’s just the way they feel when they go into you and you feel the actual liquid going in . . . (I, FG 2)
Girls, parents, teachers and nurses all discussed the intense fear response of some girls to vaccination. Our observations supported statements that some students experienced a more severe reaction than others, which included sobbing, screaming, and fainting. One adolescent’s intense reaction seemed to lead to others experiencing this same intensity.
We saw these two people . . . pouring their eyes out and so our class got . . . freaked out . . . Like, “Are we going to get hurt?” So we were all . . . really scared and everyone was crying and getting all nervous. (D, FG 2)
Teachers also discussed how girls’ fear responses exacerbated the responses of their peers, suggesting that girls were most stressed when waiting in large groups for vaccination. Teachers explained that some were so anxious while waiting that they intentionally left the vaccination area before being vaccinated. These girls may or may not have received the vaccine at a later time.
Factors both promoting and mitigating fear were identified; some factors influenced fear in more than one direction (Box 2).
When we had the whole year down there, I thought people got more scared, because everyone was talking about how it was and stuff. (C, FG 2)
Lack of privacy screens was observed to exacerbate fear as it provided an opportunity for line-of-sight transmission of anxiety. While girls were generally not permitted into the vaccination area until immediately before being vaccinated, some amount of vaccination preview occurred: either immediately before being vaccinated, or by girls prematurely trying to gain access into the vaccination area.
I know the side effects are, like, good to have on the sheet so it can warn you, but then when girls heard about it they got even more scared. (D, FG 2)
Most girls knew very little about the vaccine, and their fears were often intensified by rumours or misinformation from friends, relatives and the media. Many rumours about extreme side effects and adverse reactions specific to the HPV vaccine circulated among the girls. Parents commented on the rumours they felt triggered their child’s intense fear response: for example, a rumour about someone who had died after having received the HPV vaccine.
Well if I know what it [the vaccine] is, or what it’s actually doing to me and it’s good, then I would take it, like, I would do the dose. (G, FG 2)
Nurses agreed that lack of information played a role in girls’ responses to vaccination. They suggested that parents who discussed the vaccination helped to prepare their adolescent for the experience.
It’s better when [the nurses] talk to you because then you’re distracted . . . They had some balls and they gave you one of those to squeeze and you didn’t feel the needle going in. (E, FG 2)
Schools had different policies about what distraction methods were appropriate. For example, certain schools allowed the use of iPods during vaccination days, while other schools did not. Some nurses used creative puzzles or different distraction tactics to soothe girls’ anxieties.
Our observations indicated that girls who were vaccinated in the morning were calmer on entry to the vaccination room than those vaccinated later in the day. In the afternoon, many girls were sobbing even before entering the room. This appeared to be due to conversations held while they waited: about whether the vaccination was painful, girls having fainted and certain nurses having caused more pain than others. As the day and rumours progressed, many girls’ fear increased. Additionally, the time taken for nurses to vaccinate each girl lengthened over the course of the day.
While anticipatory fear is associated with vaccination in other settings,16 anticipatory and experienced fear may be particularly intense for girls vaccinated in a school setting. Severe responses, such as mass psychogenic reactions that have been seen in mass vaccination settings,6,17-20 were not noted in our study. Our data suggest that when anxiety and fear were at increased levels, the process of vaccination either slowed or did not occur.
In this study, fear seemed to be linked to anticipatory anxiety, which can be an important predictor of perceived pain in children and adolescents.21 Fear of the needle piercing the skin, watching a nurse prepare an injection, and observing others receiving injections have been associated with increased anxiety in other settings.16
Methods of soothing younger children receiving venepuncture include having a parent present,22 but our research suggests that in school-based vaccination, appropriate peer support may assist some girls. Peers are extremely important for adolescent girls as a source of support and as a preferred resource for dealing with health concerns.23,24
Other effective interventions used for management of pain and distress are distraction and cognitive behaviour interventions.25-27 Our research indicated that wider use of distraction methods, such as allowing girls to listen to iPods, could be effective.
A nurse’s approach while providing vaccination can affect a vaccine recipient’s response. An empathic approach elicits more positive behavioural responses than a directive approach.28 This supports our study’s findings that girls’ perceptions of the nurses’ approach contributed to their experience. It may be appropriate for some vaccination nurses to receive training in managing adolescents’ fears related to vaccination.
Preparation for injections and vaccinations can result in lowered perceptions of pain.29 Our data suggest that being informed and well prepared may reduce the propagation of myths, rumours and other fear-promoting factors. This would then reduce fear and, potentially, refusals of vaccination. Appropriate education for girls, either through discussions with parents, teachers and nurses, or through specifically designed educational and self-management strategies, may provide adolescents with a more positive experience of vaccination.
Anticipatory fear is a normal response to a perceived threat,30 but is an unnecessary psychological trauma when no real threat exists. Vaccination providers have a clinical, moral and ethical obligation to minimise the anxiety and pain associated with vaccine delivery.31,32 Guidelines have prioritised preventing and treating procedural pain and anxiety related to medical procedures in children and adolescents.33 Given the nearly universal finding of fear in this study, these should be priorities for school HPV vaccination programs. Mitigating girls’ experience of fear is likely to promote acceptance of the vaccine and improve the efficiency of the vaccination process. Promoting higher levels of understanding, offering peer support, and careful examination of procedural factors that alleviate distress during vaccination at school should be considered, particularly as school-based vaccination becomes more common internationally.
1 Number of study participants in focus groups and interviews, and number of focus groups, by school type
Received 10 August 2010, accepted 19 December 2010
- 1. Dobson S, Scheifele D, Bell A. Assessment of a universal school based hepatitis vaccination program. JAMA 1995; 274: 1209-1213.
- 2. Skinner SR, Imberger A, Lester R, et al. Randomised controlled trial of an educational strategy to increase school-based adolescent hepatitis B vaccination. Aust N Z J Public Health 2000; 24: 298-304.
- 3. European Cervical Cancer Association. HPV vaccination across Europe. Brussels: ECCA, 2009.
- 4. Middleman AB, Tung JS. Urban middle school parent perspectives: the vaccines they are willing to have their children receive using school-based immunization programs. J Adolesc Health 2010; 47: 249-253. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.01.009.
- 5. Bartholomew RE, Victor JS. A socio-psychological theory of collective anxiety attacks: the Mad Gasser re-examined. Soc Q 2004; 45: 229-248.
- 6. Buttery JP, Madin S, Crawford NW, et al. Mass psychogenic response to human papillomavirus vaccination. Med J Aust 2008; 189: 261-262. <MJA full text>
- 7. Brabin L, Roberts SA, Stretch SR, et al. A survey of adolescent experiences of human papilloma virus vaccination in the Manchester study. Br J Cancer 2009; 101: 1502-1504.
- 8. Clements CJ. Gardasil and mass psychogenic illness. Aust N Z J Public Health 2007; 31: 387.
- 9. Tanne JH. Questions over HPV vaccination in the US and Australia. BMJ 2007; 334: 1182-1183.
- 10. MacLaren J, Cohen L, Cohen S. Children’s behaviour during immunisation injections: a principle components analysis. Child Health Care 2007; 36: 237-248.
- 11. Cooper Robbins SC, Bernard D, McCaffery K, Skinner SR. “It’s a logistical nightmare!” Recommendations for optimising HPV school-based vaccination from key stakeholders in Australia. Sex Health 2010; 7: 271-278.
- 12. Cooper Robbins SC, Bernard D, McCaffery K, et al. “Is cancer contagious?”: Australian adolescent girls and their parents: making the most of limited information about HPV and HPV vaccination. Vaccine 2010; 28: 3398-3408.
- 13. Cooper Robbins SC, Bernard D, McCaffery K, et al. “I just signed”: factors influencing decision-making for school based vaccination of adolescent girls. Health Psychology 2010; 29: 618-625.
- 14. Glaser R, Kiecolt-Glaser JK, Bonneau RH, et al. Stress-induced modulation of the immune response to recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. Psychosom Med 1992; 54: 22-29.
- 15. Kendall J. Axial coding and the grounded theory controversy. West J Nurs Res 1999; 21: 743-757.
- 16. Nir Y, Paz A, Sabo E, Potasman I. Fear of injections in young adults: prevalence and associations. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2003; 68: 341-344.
- 17. D’Argenio P, Citarella A, Intorcia M, Aversano G. An outbreak of vaccination panic. Vaccine 1996; 14: 1289-1290.
- 18. Dreger R, Callanan E, Hartford S, et al. Hysteria and adverse reactions to Td in a junior high school setting. BC Health Dis Surv 1992; 1: 50-54.
- 19. Kharabsheh S, Al-Otoum H, Clements J, et al. Mass psychogenic illness following tetanus-diphtheria toxoid vaccination in Jordan. Bull World Health Organ 2001; 79: 764-770.
- 20. Yasmy MT, Bahramnezhad A, Ziaaddini H. Post vaccination mass psychogenic illness in an Iranian rural school. East Med J Health 1999; 5: 710-716.
- 21. Tsao JCI, Myers CD, Craske MG, et al. Role of anticipatory anxiety and anxiety sensitivity in children’s and adolescents’ laboratory pain responses. J Pediatr Psychol 2004; 29: 379-388.
- 22. Wolfram RW, Turner ED. Effects of parental presence during children’s venipuncture. Acad Emerg Med 1996; 3: 58-64.
- 23. Booth M, Bernard D, Quine S, et al. Access to health care among Australian adolescents. Young people’s perspectives and their socio-demographic distribution. J Adolesc Health 2004; 34: 97-103.
- 24. Bernard D, Quine S, Kang M, et al. Access to primary health care for Australian adolescents: congruence between the perspectives of health service providers and young people. Aust N Z J Public Health 2004; 28: 487-492.
- 25. Uman LS, Chambers CT, McGrath PJ, Kisely S. Psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (4): CD005179. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005179 .pub2
- 26. Boivin J, Poupon-Lemarquis L, Iraqi W, et al. A multifactorial strategy of pain management is associated with less pain in scheduled vaccination of children. A study realized by family practitioners in 239 children aged 4-12 years old. Fam Pract 2008; 25: 423-429.
- 27. Fowler-Kerry S, Lander JR. Management of injection pain in children. Pain 1987; 30: 169-175.
- 28. Fernald CD, Corry JJ. Empathic versus directive preparation of children for needles. Child Health Care 1981; 10: 44-47.
- 29. Jacobson RM, Swan A, Adegbenro A, et al; Vaccine Research Group. Making vaccines more acceptable — methods to prevent and minimize pain and other common adverse events associated with vaccines. Vaccine 2001; 19: 2418-2427.
- 30. Gower PL. Special issue. The psychology of fear. New York: Nova Science, 2003.
- 31. Atkinson W, Wolfe C, Hamborsky J, McyIntyre L, editors. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Epidemiology and prevention of vaccine-preventable diseases. 11th ed. Washington, DC: Public Health Foundation, 2009.
- 32. Royal Australasian College of Physicians. Guideline statement. Management of procedure-related pain in children and adolescents. 2005. http://www.racp.edu.au/index.cfm?objectid=D7FAA370-0B87-808A-90C36BD48C54B2D8 (accessed Mar 2011).
- 33. Mackenzie A. Guideline statements on the management of procedure-related pain in neonates, children and adolescents. J Paediatr Child Health 2006; 42: 14-15.
Publication of your online response is subject to the Medical Journal of Australia's editorial discretion. You will be notified by email within five working days should your response be accepted.