Vaccination for Pregnant Women

The central focus of the study was the vaccination for pregnant women and the effectiveness of the calls to vaccinate through media advertisements and civil education (Bhaskar, Thobias, Anthony, & Kumar, 2012). The practice issue affected our nursing practice since it sensitized us about vaccination initiatives in Chennai, South India and the community response towards the activities. Vaccination is one of the important elements of global health meaning that it is a mandatory health exercise especially for children under the age of five years (Ildarabadi, Moonaghi, Heydari, Taghipour, & Abdollahimohammad, 2015). Pregnant mothers need to be vaccinated to protect them together with their unborn children. The purpose of the study was to examine the vaccination rates among pregnant Chennai women following the availability of the influenza vaccine within the area.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

There is no clear statement of the research question or hypothesis. It is believed that by learning about the aim of the study would enable the readers to get to understand the authors' intentions. However, it was important for the authors to list their research questions and hypothesis because it is a necessary key step in producing clinically relevant results that would be used in evidence-based nursing practice (Farrugia, Petrisor, Farrokhyar, & Bhandari, 2010). Research questions help to draw a line between current knowledge and the unknown, thereby shaping the direction of the study. A probable null hypothesis statement for the study could be; there are significant rates of vaccination for pandemic influenza among for pregnant women in Chennai.

Pregnant women living in Chennai, South India, are the target population bearing in mind that pregnancy increases the risks of contracting pandemic influenza. A random sampling method was used to select the study participants, and this was important in eliminating research bias (Ingham-Broomfield, 2014). Females participants were the only group of people included since the research was centered upon their welfare, especially those who were pregnant. There is no exclusive mention of the excluded group but selecting the participants at random meant that any pregnant woman was welcome to take part in the study. A hundred and forty participants took part in the study. In carrying out the study, the researchers divided the Chennai area into three broad regions namely Central, North, and the South. Each of the three regions was later divided into three subdivisions, separated from each other by a margin of 6 kilometers. Although the authors state that all respondents living in each subdivision were interviewed on a similar date, they do not state the exact number of respondents interviewed on a single subdivision. This raises concerns over whether more women participated in some subdivisions as compared to others.

The research variables include age, education, occupation, number of living children, trimester, pre-existing medical co-morbidities, and advice on medication, whether yes or no. The authors described the variables by categorizing them into two. The first was the continuous variables expressed as mean (range) while the second was the categorical variables expressed in the numerical form (%) (Bhaskar et al., 2012). In collecting the data, the researchers interviewed the participants using a uniform questionnaire. A statistically significant P value of <0.05 indicated that the research instrument was valid (Bhaskar et al., 2012). The research questionnaire, being the questionnaire, was described effectively and all respondents were asked the same set of questions. The research period lasted for 15 days, and the researchers collected the data in each of the 15 days. However, the researchers ensured that the participants had lived in Chennai for at least six months before the commencement of the study.

A clear description of the data analysis methods was done. The authors stated that the Chi-Square test or Fisher's exact test was used in analyzing categorical variables while the Mann-Whitney U test or the Student's t-test was used for the continuous variables (Bhaskar et al., 2012). A particular advantage of using the quantitative analysis method is that it was easier to make predictions based on the numerical nature of the data (Nardi, 2018). Given the use of the SPSS analytical tool, the results obtained are objective. Table 1 with the caption "Baseline characteristics of study participants" is a logical representation of the study results (Bhaskar et al., 2012). One of the assumptions for the Chi-Square test is that the two variables must be measured at a nominal or ordinal level. The second assumption is that the two variables have to consist of two or more categorical, independent groups. One assumption for the Student's T-test is that the dependent variables have to follow a normal distribution in the population. The second assumption is that the standard deviation for the dependent variable must be equal in both the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.

The ratio level of measurement has been used to represent the Number of children and the trimester variable. For age, the interval level of measurement has been used. Co-morbidities are represented by the nominal level of measurement, while education and occupation fall under the ordinal measurement level. Statistical tests were appropriate for the different levels of measurement since they helped to reveal the significant differences between the vaccinated and unvaccinated participants. Study results indicated that the statistically significant differences between the unvaccinated and vaccinated were on the lack of education (p=0.02), lack of advice concerning vaccination (P<0.001), and the state of unemployment (P=0.01) among the unvaccinated (Bhaskar et al., 2012). There were no statistically significant differences for age, gestation period, age, number of children, and the presence of co-morbidities. The alpha value for each statistical test was 0.05.

The mean age of the study participants was 25 years, 55% of them were below 26 years, and 65% were homemakers. 32% of the respondents did not have a basic education. Out of the 29 with co-morbidities, 15 had gestational diabetes, seven pre-eclampsia, 13 hypertension, and 7 had bronchial asthma (Bhaskar et al., 2012). Out of the 32 participants who were advised on the importance of the pandemic influenza vaccine, only 18 got vaccinated (Bhaskar et al., 2012). Although the study did not make an exclusive mention of the research questions, it is important to note that the aim of the study was achieved. One of the limitations of the study is that the sample did not represent the whole population of pregnant women in Chennai. Another study limitation relates to the possible geographical bias since the results cannot be used to represent other areas outside the Chennai region.

Unexpected findings were not witnessed although the authors acknowledged that the vaccination rates were not encouraging. In recommendations, the authors suggested that obstetricians and other specialists needed to get more involved so that the vaccination rates for pandemic influenza would increase. Other significant recommendations include educating the spouses of the pregnant women of the importance of vaccination as well as the involvement of private media corporations in sensitization of the public about this important initiative. The study has great implications for nursing practice since it will inform decision making especially through the formulation of a framework that guides improvement of vaccination rates.

References

Bhaskar, E., Thobias, S., Anthony, S., & Kumar, V. (2012). Vaccination rates for pandemic influenza among pregnant women: an early observation from Chennai, South India. Lung India: official organ of Indian Chest Society, 29(3), 232.

Farrugia, P., Petrisor, B. A., Farrokhyar, F., & Bhandari, M. (2010). Practical tips for surgical research: Research questions, hypotheses and objectives. Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie, 53(4), 278-81.

Ildarabadi, E., Karimi Moonaghi, H., Heydari, A., Taghipour, A., & Abdollahimohammad, A. (2015). Vaccination learning experiences of nursing students: a grounded theory study. Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 12, 29. doi:10.3352/jeehp.2015.12.29

Ingham-Broomfield, R. (2014). A nurses' guide to quantitative research. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, The, 32(2), 32.

Nardi, P. M. (2018). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods. London: Routledge.