Social representations of mandatory vaccination in patients and general practitioners in Moselle, France.

Résumé

Vaccine controversies affect the image of vaccination. At the end of 2014, there was a shortage of tetra- and pentavalent vaccines, although immunization obligation was being discussed. Our objective in this context was to study the social representations of mandatory vaccination in general practitioners and patients. Thirty general practitioners and 30 patients were recruited for this study based on hierarchal evocation. Each provided seven associations, which were revealed spontaneously in response to the evocation of the inductive concept: "mandatory vaccination". An order of importance and a connotation were attributed to them. These associations were classified into subthemes and themes. For each, the frequency of occurrence, the median rank of importance, and the polarity index were calculated and then compared. The image of vaccination was positive (polarity index from doctors and patients: +0.22 and +0.24, respectively). The doctors mentioned first the organization of the vaccine follow-up (21.9%). For patients, the benefits of vaccination predominated (22.38%), although these benefits were considered more important by the doctors. Doctors raised vaccine controversies more frequently than patients and were more concerned with the practical aspects of vaccination (injection, pain). The current controversies have not eroded the representations of mandatory vaccination. However, doctors are critical towards the media and vaccination policy. Patients, on the other hand, are afraid of side effects and do not have complete confidence in vaccination. Immunization obligation does not appear to be challenged by either of the two populations. To sustain immunization, our main asset remains communication and information to patients.