METHODS: A qualitative study design involving individual both face-to-face and online in-depth interview was used. The topic guide was developed from the Health Belief Model theoretical framework. Seven face-to-face and seven online interviews were conducted with parents in the Klang Valley (an urban area) who had refused childhood vaccination. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and checked. Thematic approach was used to analyze the data. Data was collected until data saturation was reached.
RESULTS: Findings were summarized into two main categories: Personal Health Beliefs and Vaccine Related Concerns. Six personal health beliefs were identified: lack of confidence in modern medicine and health care personnel, pharmaceutical conspiracy to sell medicines, preference to a natural approach to health, personal instincts, religious beliefs and having a partner with similar beliefs. Four main vaccine-related concerns were identified: negative effects and content concerns, doubts of necessity and lack of information and knowledge regarding vaccines. Parents recommended that more empathy from healthcare professionals and evidence on safety and content purity would help them reconsider vaccination.
CONCLUSION: Parents had multiple reasons for refusing childhood vaccinations but felt that communication and empathy from healthcare professionals was lacking. Besides individual consultations with parents, addressing these concerns at multiple levels in the health care system and society may help to increase the uptake of childhood vaccinations in the future.
Materials and Methods: Study design was cross-sectional, in which sociodemographic data of respondents were collected through a validated questionnaire; results were analyzed by using validated data collection tool. The results were concluded on the basis of good, moderate, and poor response, which was evaluated through data analysis by the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, version 20.0. A P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
Results: Respondents were 182 (44.4%) males and 228 (55.6%) females; better knowledge was recognized among the females (P < 0.001) with mean knowledge of 15.55 ± 2.7. Chinese population had good knowledge with statistically strong correlation with mean knowledge of 15.63 (P = 0.006). Likewise, Buddhism was reported to have good knowledge among all the religions. Rural population was underlined with lesser family income and they showed good practice and understanding (P = 0.006). Comparatively positive attitude was noticed among the females (P < 0.001) with mean attitude of 15.55 ± 2.7. The highest level of education in this study was postgraduate, which showed 77.1% good attitude. Postgraduate participants were having varied results with standard deviation of ±6.23. Statistically highly significant association was seen between the religion and attitude of respondents with the P < 0.001. Chinese medicine is widely used, but religious difference was found among the races. Similar difference was found in knowledge and practice among the population of rural side and low family income compared to urban population with higher income and access to allopathic medicine.
Conclusions: Despite having better practice among the Malaysian population, still the knowledge needs to be disseminated among the population for the overall use of traditional Chinese medicine with safety to improve health and quality of life in Malaysia.