Next Article in Journal
Early Management for Fracture-Related Infection: A Literature Review
Previous Article in Journal
Acquisition and Retention Effects of Fundamental Movement Skills on Physical Activity and Health-Related Fitness of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Previous Article in Special Issue
Pharmacists’ Role in Global TB Elimination: Practices, Pitfalls, and Potential
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Demographic Influences on Adult HPV Vaccination: Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey in Tennessee

by
Alina Cernasev
1,*,
Oluwafemifola Oyedeji
2,
Cary M. Springer
3,
Tracy M. Hagemann
1,
Kenneth C. Hohmeier
1 and
Kristina W. Kintziger
4
1
Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Translational Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 301 S. Perimeter Park Dr., Suite 220, Nashville, TN 37211, USA
2
Department of Public Health, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 390 HPER, 1914 Andy Holt Ave., Knoxville, TN 37996, USA
3
Research Computing Support, Office of Innovative Technologies, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 2309 Kingston Pike, Suite 132, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA
4
Department of Environmental, Agricultural & Occupational Health, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Healthcare 2024, 12(13), 1305; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12131305
Submission received: 20 May 2024 / Revised: 19 June 2024 / Accepted: 27 June 2024 / Published: 29 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Pharmacist-Led Interventions in Public Health: A Global Perspective)

Abstract

:
HPV is the most prevalent sexually transmitted infection in the U.S., with more than 80% of all Americans contracting it by age 45. Effective vaccines for HPV exist and were recently approved for adults aged 27–45 years, though uptake remains low in all age groups, particularly in Tennessee where 1089 cancers were attributed to HPV in 2020. Between 29 June and 17 August 2023, we conducted a cross-sectional survey to gain insights about the barriers and facilitators of HPV in 2011 adults aged 18 to 45 years in Tennessee. We developed our survey based on previous instruments to understand predictors of HPV vaccination in adults. Using descriptive statistics and bivariate and logistic regression analyses, we found higher vaccination rates in females, participants aged 18–38 years, participants with a high school education or higher, Hispanic or Latine individuals, and participants identifying as moderate or liberal. These insights highlight the need for public health interventions that consider demographic differences to successfully increase vaccination rates and reduce HPV-associated cancer risk.

1. Introduction

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the leading cause of various cancers, including cervical, oropharyngeal, anal, penile, vaginal, and vulvar cancers. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), it is associated with approximately 37,000 new cancer diagnoses (14.3 cases of cancer per 100,000 adults 18 years or older) annually in the United States (U.S.) [1] Cervical cancer, with 25,689 reported cases among women (19.3 cases of cervical cancer per 100,000 female adults), and oropharyngeal cancer, with 21,022 cases among men (16.4 cases of oropharyngeal cancer per 100,000 male adults), are the most common types of cancers caused by HPV [2,3,4].
Before the approval of the first HPV vaccine, the healthcare team relied on screening as a prevention measure to combat these cancers. Since the approval of the HPV vaccine by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2006, vaccination has become the primary tool to prevent the spread of various forms of HPV-attributable cancers [5]. While there has been some screening for anal cancer among HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM), this is generally restricted to a few areas in a limited number of countries [6,7]. Currently, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends routine HPV vaccination of both females and males at 11–12 years of age, with catch-up vaccination recommended through age 26 years [8]. Per CDC guidelines, the HPV vaccine can be initiated at the age of 9 [9]. For those 27 to 45 years old who were not vaccinated at a younger age, the vaccine might be recommended based on shared decision making [9]. The HPV vaccine is readily available and effective at preventing HPV-associated cancers; however, coverage and completion rates have been historically low despite being included as a Healthy People 2030 objective of 80% coverage of males and females ages 13–15 [10]. Thus, championing efforts to enhance routine vaccination could prevent most HPV-related cancers, given sufficient time to reach adequate coverage [11].
Although there has been an increase in HPV vaccination uptake in the last two decades, disparities continue to exist in the rates of vaccination across the U.S. Rahman et al. showed that women in the South presented with the lowest vaccination rates in the U.S. [12]. Lu et al. examined adult vaccination coverage concerning demographic characteristics and regional variations [13]. The study reported that U.S.-born individuals generally exhibited higher vaccination rates than foreign-born counterparts, with notable disparities observed across different vaccines [13]. The findings also showed that foreign-born adults were less likely to specifically receive HPV vaccination compared to their U.S.-born counterparts, thus reinforcing the need for targeted interventions to address vaccination disparities among diverse population groups [13].
Utilizing data from the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey across eight states, Rahman et al. assessed HPV vaccine adoption among young adults aged 18–26 alongside associated obstacles [14]. Among 3727 respondents, initiation rates were 6.3% for men and 40.4% for women, with completion rates at 1.7% and 27.4%, respectively [14]. Regional disparities were evident, particularly in the South, where uptake was notably lower in both males and females [14]. The study showed that women residing in the West and South faced barriers to initiating and completing vaccination compared to those in the Northeast [14]. In a recent study, Boersma et al. found that vaccination rates for one or more doses of the HPV vaccine in adults 18–26 years old increased from 22.1% to 39.9% from 2013 to 2018 [15]. Women were more likely to receive at least one dose of the HPV vaccine compared to men [15]. However, the situation is more critical in the Southern states where vaccination rates are significantly lower compared to the North. The suboptimal HPV vaccination coverage is more alarming in Tennessee [16]. The CDC reports that 1089 cancers (20.7 cases of cancer per 100,000 adults) were attributed to HPV in Tennessee in 2020 [1].
Multiple barriers fuel vaccine hesitancy, including concerns about the cost of the vaccine, its safety, a lack of perceived benefit, lower resources allocated for rural areas, and a lack of provider recommendation [12,17]. In a qualitative study conducted with stakeholders in North Carolina and South Carolina, Fish et al. provided valuable information about the obstacles faced by rural communities and possibilities for enhancing HPV vaccination rates in rural areas [18]. The study revealed that obstacles to HPV vaccination that are unique to rural populations, including a scarcity of healthcare practitioners and restricted access to high-speed internet [18]. In a cross-sectional survey conducted in the U.S., the respondents were predominantly female, over 26 years old, White, and non-Hispanic [17]. The study reported that willingness to receive the HPV vaccine within the next six months was generally low among participants, with various barriers cited, including doubts about vaccine necessity, safety concerns, uncertainties regarding insurance coverage, and financial constraints [17]. Factors associated with negative vaccine intention included older age, female gender, non-Hispanic White ethnicity, and a lower level of education [17].
Scholars posit that a strong provider recommendation has been the most essential factor in HPV vaccination acceptance [19,20,21]. Yet, a systematic review of studies published between 2012 and 2019 identified age, geographic, socioeconomic, and racial disparities in HPV vaccination recommendation, with fewer recommendations for younger patients living in the South, non-White, low-income, or uninsured [22]. In these studies, the proportion of parents who received provider referrals to obtain the HPV vaccine varied from 24% to 88% [22]. Overall, 13 of the 52 included studies provided single estimates of recommendation prevalence without cross-group or cross-setting comparability, whereas 39 of the 52 studies showed results stratified by the adolescent demographic characteristics highlighted in this analysis [22].
Although the literature contains numerous examples of studies that focused on intervention efforts targeting pediatric and parent populations, factors influencing HPV vaccine uptake among adults residing in Tennessee have yet to be explored in depth [23,24,25,26]. Tennessee is an ideal population on which to focus vaccination efforts, because of its lower adolescent vaccination and higher HPV-associated cancer rates. ACIP recommendations allow the population to make informed health decisions. Thus, this study aimed to better understand the demographic and socioeconomic factors that are important in predicting HPV vaccination status in Tennessee residents, specifically those aged 18–45 years.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design and Population of Interest

Between 29 June and 17 August 2023, we conducted a cross-sectional survey to understand barriers and facilitators of HPV and other recommended vaccinations in adults aged 18 to 45 years who were residents of Tennessee. We developed our survey based on previous theory-based instruments used in HPV and other vaccine studies in adults. Questions included items based on the Health Belief Model, Social Cognitive Theory, and the Theory of Planned Behavior and other questions drawn from our qualitative studies to understand vaccine-related beliefs, attitudes, and intentions in adults [27,28,29,30,31]. Our study team reviewed all relevant literature and collectively agreed on the final measures for inclusion. We first agreed on the constructs or topics that would be included in our survey. Then, we selected survey questions used in previous studies that addressed each construct. Next, we reviewed all identified questions relevant to each construct and ranked them based on clarity, conciseness, response format, item length, and contextual fit with our research questions. We selected the highest ranked items relevant to each construct, and revised wording as needed for consistency across questions and response options. The survey was reviewed by external subject matter experts and members of our population of interest for clarity and relevance. For most of our theoretical constructs, we used a 7-point Likert scale to determine positive and negative vaccine measures, with response options ranging from “completely disagree” to “completely agree”. The focus for most vaccine-related measures was the HPV vaccine; however, we also included questions related to other common vaccines (e.g., influenza, pneumococcal, COVID-19, Tdap). The survey included questions on eligibility criteria and demographic information and the status of HPV vaccination. Other questions included in the survey, but not included in this analysis were other vaccinations; general health status; general vaccine beliefs, attitudes, and barriers; and HPV-specific beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors.
This study was reviewed and approved by the University of Tennessee Health Science Center Institutional Review Board (IRB # 21-08416-XM, approved 3 November 2021) Our survey was built in and administered by QualtricsXM (Provo, UT, USA) whose processes ensured our sample represented the age, gender, race, ethnicity, religious, and residential composition of Tennessee. We included Tennessee residents between the ages of 18 and 45 years in the study. The exclusion criteria were non-Tennessee resident, over 45 years old, under 18 years old, and refusal to participate in the study. We oversampled the 18–26-year-old population to represent the group to whom the vaccine would most likely be promoted. Participants could access the self-administered, online survey from their preferred device. The survey was administered in English and included up to 72 questions, depending on specific responses. Those who had received at least one dose of the HPV vaccine vs. those who had received no doses answered slightly different versions of HPV-related questions. As this was an exploratory observational study, no formal power analyses were conducted. However, our goal was to recruit 2000 survey participants to ensure adequate representation of the population of Tennessee by age, sex, race, religion, and residence.
Age was collected as a continuous variable but analyzed as categorical variable. ZIP code of residence was categorized based on Rural–Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) Codes, based on the 2010 Census (most recent version available at time of survey and analysis) as urban core (RUCA code 1), suburban (codes 2 and 3), large rural (codes 4–6), and small rural (codes 7–10) [32]. There were 27 ZIP codes unable to be classified either because they were new ZIP codes, missing, or entered incorrectly. We collected sex as ‘sex at birth’. Other variables included race, being Hispanic or Latine (inclusive of Latino, Latina, and Latinx), education, sexual orientation, current relationship status, political leanings, and employment status. Categories for each of these variables are provided in the tables (e.g., Table 1). Some variables (i.e., race, sexual orientation, relationship status, and employment status) had to be recategorized after data collection due to small sample sizes in certain categories.

2.2. Statistical Methods

We used descriptive statistics, such as frequencies and percentages, to examine survey items. Next, we conducted bivariate analyses to determine associations between demographic and other characteristics and HPV vaccination status. These included Chi-square tests, with p-values reported, and univariable logistic regression analysis. Finally, we used multivariable logistic regression models, including variables into our full model that were significantly associated with vaccination status in bivariate analysis, to determine associations with HPV vaccination status. Backwards elimination of non-significant variables was used to obtain the final model. We used an α = 0.05 to determine significance. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported for logistic regression results. All analyses were conducted with IBM SPSS Statistics (version 29), and significance testing was based on a Type 1 error (or alpha level) of 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive Statistics

In total, 2011 complete surveys were received from Qualtrics. Demographic descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1. Over half (57.3%) of participants had not received an HPV vaccination. Most participants were female (52.2%), White (81.2%), and non-Hispanic (94.0%). Most participants were aged 18–28 years (49.8%), as we had oversampled this age range. The remainder of respondents were evenly split between 29–38 years and 39–45 years (each 25.1%). The most common categories of educational attainment among respondents were high school diploma (37.4%), associates or bachelor’s degrees (25.4%), and college (23.0%). Political leanings were split relatively evenly across respondents as follows: moderate (37.2%), liberal (32.2%), and conservative (30.6%). Most respondents were employed (68.0%), straight/heterosexual (77.9%), and not in a relationship (56.0%).

3.2. HPV Vaccination Status

HPV vaccination status differed significantly by sex, age, being Hispanic or Latine, education, sexual orientation, political leaning, and employment status (all p-values < 0.05; Table 2). Females were more likely to be vaccinated than males (p < 0.001). The proportion of respondents who were vaccinated increased with educational attainment (26.1% in those with less than a high school degree vs. 58.1% in those with a master’s, doctoral, or professional degree; p < 0.001). Vaccination decreased with age (50.6% in those 18–28 years old vs. 24.6% in those 39–45 years old; p < 0.001). Vaccination was lower for respondents who identified as heterosexual (41.4%) compared to those who identified as gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer, or asexual (47.2%; p = 0.029). The proportion of respondents who were vaccinated was higher for those who identified as Hispanic or Latine (62.5%) vs. non-Hispanic (41.4%; p < 0.001). Conservatives (36.7%) were less likely to be vaccinated than moderates (48.4%) or liberals (47.0%; p < 0.001). Unemployed individuals (35.4%) were less likely to be vaccinated than students (48.9%) or those who were employed (44.8%; p < 0.001). Vaccination rates did not differ relationship status (p = 0.293), race (p = 0.985), or location (p = 0.139).
In the full logistic regression model (Table 3), females were more likely to be vaccinated than males (OR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.15–1.75). Compared to 39–45 year olds, 18–28 year olds were 3.01 (CI: 2.30–3.95) and 29–38 year olds were 2.34 (CI: 1.74–3.15) times as likely to be vaccinated. All education levels were more likely to be vaccinated than individuals without a high school degree. Hispanic or Latine individuals were 2.01 (CI: 1.30–3.09) times as likely to be vaccinated. Compared to conservatives, moderates and liberals were more likely to be vaccinated. Sexual orientation and employment status were not significant factors in the full model. Using backwards elimination to simplify the model, only sexual orientation was removed as non-significant. The final model (Table 4) demonstrated similar associations between potential predictors and HPV vaccination status as the full model, with employment status becoming significant. Specifically, those who were employed were 1.32 times as likely to be vaccinated compared to unemployed individuals (CI: 1.02–1.70).

4. Discussion

Considering the suboptimal HPV vaccine coverage statistics and noting that most hesitancy research has been conducted among children and adolescents, this study aimed to assess barriers to HPV vaccination in Tennessee residents, specifically those aged 18–45 years. Previous research examining HPV vaccine barriers had a national focus among 18–26 year olds, making our study the first to investigate HPV vaccine uptake barriers in Tennessee’s representative adult population of men and women aged 18–45.
We found that females were more likely to be vaccinated (OR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.15–1.75). Our findings are similar to those of other studies that reported that male respondents were 81% less likely to have initiated the HPV vaccination series than females [33]. Another study showed that women were over three times as likely to initiate the vaccine [34]. Therefore, more concerted efforts are needed to enhance HPV vaccine uptake and awareness in both genders, especially in Southern states.
Our findings showed that rates of vaccination increased with education, such as college degree or higher, and decreased with age. Previous U.S.-based studies have reported that the awareness of the HPV vaccine was higher in respondents with a college degree compared to those with a high school degree [35]. Furthermore, a recently published study conducted with adults aged 27–45 showed a low rate of HPV vaccination initiation, with approximately 16% of study participants receiving the vaccine, regardless of race or ethnicity [34].
Our results have significant implications for future public health interventions targeting individuals without college degrees who are near the end of the approved age range. Thus, it is imperative to develop public health interventions to target this age group. Furthermore, healthcare providers, including pharmacists, are in an ideal position to advocate and recommend the HPV vaccine to eligible individuals in the 27–45 age range.
According to our findings, HPV vaccination rates are notably higher among females, individuals aged 18–38, those with at least some college education, moderates and liberals, Hispanic or Latine individuals, and employed respondents, among adult residents in Tennessee. Frietze et al. investigated HPV vaccine acceptance and uptake in a Hispanic community residing in the South and reported a significant association between HPV vaccine uptake, gender identity, and race [36]. The study demonstrated that approximately 65% of respondents had not received the HPV vaccine. Among vaccine recipients, approximately 10% completed the entire series [36]. Public health interventions must carefully consider these demographic differences in order to enhance vaccine coverage and reduce the risk of HPV-associated cancers. Future research should examine how these characteristics influence the facilitators and barriers to HPV vaccination.
Unemployed individuals were less likely to be vaccinated than students or employed individuals. Our findings are not surprising since most young adult students have access to health insurance and may, in fact, take greater responsibility for their own health-related decisions, irrespective of parental skepticism or biases. It is plausible to speculate that these individuals might lack health insurance due to unemployment, which means they might not have access to a healthcare provider, limiting their access to the vaccine. It is essential to develop public health initiatives that address the needs of unemployed individuals who may lack insurance. Whenever healthcare providers make these recommendations, they must be cognizant of these obstacles.
Compared to conservatives, we found that moderates and liberals were more likely to be vaccinated. A recent study determined the association between HPV vaccination awareness and political ideology among adults over 18 [37]. The study encompassed 3418 adults with an even distribution between genders, with most respondents indicating that they were White [37]. Additionally, the respondents were evenly distributed politically, with one-third identifying as moderate, one-third as liberal, and one-third as conservative [37]. The study results reported self-identified liberal respondents had higher odds of HPV and HPV vaccine awareness compared to self-identified conservative respondents [37]. Similarly, a study conducted by Saulsberry et al. among adults aged 18–59 years found that respondents who self-identified as more liberal in political ideology reported greater support for receiving the HPV vaccine [38]. The authors concluded that self-identified conservative participants are less likely to support vaccine requirements than participants who self-identified as liberal [38].

Strength and Limitations

Self-reported data for HPV vaccination limited this analysis. Furthermore, our study included a convenience sample and was conducted over two months, which might limit its generalizability. Despite these limitations, the study also has notable strengths. First, this study uses a large sample of respondents in a Southern state. Second, the sampling strategy used by Qualtrics® was developed to match the demographic characteristics of Tennessee residents, and our results indicate that this was successful. Finally, since the FDA approval for adults 27–45 years of age to receive the HPV vaccine, limited research has aimed to understand characteristics associated with HPV vaccination in this population. Even fewer studies have incorporated men and women, different races, and higher education levels in analyses. Thus, this is the first study in Tennessee to include these demographics.

5. Conclusions

Our results indicate that HPV vaccination status among Tennessee adult residents was higher among females, 18–38 year olds, those with at least some college or more education, those with moderate and liberal political leanings, Hispanic or Latine individuals, and those who were employed at the time of the survey than other demographic characteristics. Public health interventions should take into consideration demographic characteristic differences in order to successfully increase vaccination rates and reduce HPV-associated cancer risk. Future research should consider how these demographic characteristics impact facilitators and barriers to HPV vaccination.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.C., T.M.H., K.C.H. and K.W.K.; methodology, K.W.K. and C.M.S.; software, C.M.S.; validation, K.W.K. and C.M.S.; formal analysis, C.M.S.; investigation, A.C. and K.W.K.; resources, A.C., T.M.H., K.C.H., K.W.K. and O.O.; writing—original draft preparation, A.C., T.M.H., K.C.H., O.O., C.M.S. and K.W.K.; writing—review and editing, A.C., O.O., T.M.H., K.C.H., C.M.S. and K.W.K.; project administration, A.C., T.M.H. and K.W.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

“Supported in part by a research grant from Investigator Initiated Studies Program of Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC”. This research received external funding from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. Grant number A21-0065-001.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of the University of Tennessee Health Science Center (IRB # 21-08416-XM, approved 3 November 2021).

Informed Consent Statement

Participant consent was received from all the participants prior to conducting the study.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. United States Cancer Statistics: Data Visualizations. 2023. Available online: https://gis.cdc.gov/Cancer/USCS/?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fcancer%2Fdataviz%2Findex.htm#/RiskFactors/ (accessed on 27 April 2024).
  2. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. HPV and Oropharyngeal Cancer. 2021. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/hpv/basic_info/hpv_oropharyngeal.htm (accessed on 12 March 2024).
  3. Damgacioglu, H.; Sonawane, K.; Zhu, Y.; Li, R.; Balasubramanian, B.A.; Lairson, D.R.; Giuliano, A.R.; Deshmukh, A.A. Oropharyngeal cancer incidence and mortality trends in all 50 states in the US, 2001–2017. JAMA Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2022, 148, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Deshmukh, A.A.; Suk, R.; Shiels, M.S.; Sonawane, K.; Nyitray, A.G.; Liu, Y.; Gaisa, M.M.; Palefsky, J.M.; Sigel, K. Recent trends in squamous cell carcinoma of the anus incidence and mortality in the United States, 2001–2015. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2020, 112, 829–838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. McLemore, M.R. Gardasil: Introducing the new human papillomavirus vaccine. Clin. J. Oncol. Nurs. 2006, 10, 559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Cuming, T.; Nathan, M. Anal cancer screening: Techniques and guidelines. In Seminars in Colon and Rectal Surgery; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  7. Wieland, U.; Kreuter, A. Anal cancer risk: HPV-based cervical screening programmes. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2019, 19, 799–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Meites, E. Human papillomavirus vaccination for adults: Updated recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 2019, 68, 698–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines. 2021. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/std/treatment-guidelines/hpv-cancer.htm (accessed on 14 March 2024).
  10. Department of Health and Human Services. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Healthy People 2030 Data and Objectives: Increase the Proportion of Adolescents Who Get Recommended Doses of the HPV Vaccine—Iid-08; Department of Health and Human Services: Washington, DC, USA, 2023.
  11. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. About HPV Vaccines. Immunogenicity and Vaccine Efficacy. 2021. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/hpv/hcp/vaccines.html (accessed on 4 April 2024).
  12. Rahman, M.; Laz, T.H.; Berenson, A.B. Geographic variation in human papillomavirus vaccination uptake among young adult women in the United States during 2008–2010. Vaccine 2013, 31, 5495–5499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lu, P.-j.; Rodriguez-Lainz, A.; O’Halloran, A.; Greby, S.; Williams, W.W. Adult vaccination disparities among foreign-born populations in the US, 2012. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2014, 47, 722–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Rahman, M.; Islam, M.; Berenson, A.B. Differences in HPV immunization levels among young adults in various regions of the United States. J. Community Health 2015, 40, 404–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Boersma, P.; Black, L.I. Human Papillomavirus Vaccination among Adults Aged 18−26, 2013−2018; National Center for Health Statistics: Washington, DC, USA, 2020.
  16. Tennessee Department of Health. Immunization Coverage Rate Dashboards. 2022. Available online: https://www.tn.gov/health/cedep/immunization-program/ip/immunization-fact-sheet/coverage-rate-dashboard.html (accessed on 27 April 2024).
  17. Muthukrishnan, M.; Loux, T.; Shacham, E.; Tiro, J.A.; Arnold, L.D. Barriers to human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination among young adults, aged 18–35. Prev. Med. Rep. 2022, 29, 101942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Fish, L.J.; Harrison, S.E.; McDonald, J.A.; Yelverton, V.; Williams, C.; Walter, E.B.; Vasudevan, L. Key stakeholder perspectives on challenges and opportunities for rural HPV vaccination in North and South Carolina. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2022, 18, 2058264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gilkey, M.B.; Calo, W.A.; Moss, J.L.; Shah, P.D.; Marciniak, M.W.; Brewer, N.T. Provider communication and HPV vaccination: The impact of recommendation quality. Vaccine 2016, 34, 1187–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Eun, T.J.; Hanchate, A.; Fenton, A.T.; Clark, J.A.; Aurora, M.N.; Drainoni, M.L.; Perkins, R.B. Relative contributions of parental intention and provider recommendation style to HPV and meningococcal vaccine receipt. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2019, 15, 2460–2465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Fenton, A.T.; Eun, T.J.; Clark, J.A.; Perkins, R.B. Indicated or elective? The association of providers’ words with HPV vaccine receipt. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2018, 14, 2503–2509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Kong, W.Y.; Bustamante, G.; Pallotto, I.K.; Margolis, M.A.; Carlson, R.; Mcree, A.L.; Gilkey, M.B. Disparities in healthcare providers’ recommendation of HPV vaccination for US adolescents: A systematic review. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2021, 30, 1981–1992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Abdullahi, L.H.; Kagina, B.M.; Ndze, V.N.; Hussey, G.D.; Wiysonge, C.S. Improving vaccination uptake among adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2020, CD011895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Chan, D.N.; Li, C.; Law, B.M.; Choi, K.C.; Lee, P.P.; So, W.K. Factors affecting HPV vaccine uptake among ethnic minority adolescent girls: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Asia-Pac. J. Oncol. Nurs. 2023, 10, 100279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Mohamed, R.; Kelly, K.M.; Nili, M.; Kelley, G.A. A systematic review with meta-analysis of parental interventions for human papillomavirus vaccine uptake. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 2022, 62, 1142–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Walling, E.B.; Benzoni, N.; Dornfeld, J.; Bhandari, R.; Sisk, B.A.; Garbutt, J.; Colditz, G. Interventions to improve HPV vaccine uptake: A systematic review. Pediatrics 2016, 138, e20153863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Prochaska, J.O.; Velicer, W.F. The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am. J. Health Promot. 1997, 12, 38–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bandura, A. Social cognitive theory of personality. Handb. Personal. 1999, 2, 154–196. [Google Scholar]
  29. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cernasev, A.; Hohmeier, K.C.; Oyedeji, O.; Hagemann, T.; Kintziger, K.W.; Wisdom, T.; Gatwood, J. Perspectives associated with human papillomavirus vaccination in adults: A qualitative study. Vaccines 2023, 11, 850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Cernasev, A.; Hohmeier, K.C.; Oyedeji, O.; Kintziger, K.W.; Hagemann, T.M. Views of the Pharmacists’ Role in HPV Vaccinations: A Qualitative Study in Tennessee. Pharmacy 2024, 12, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes. 13 December 2022. Available online: https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/rural-urban-commuting-area-codes/ (accessed on 6 March 2024).
  33. Adjei Boakye, E.; Lew, D.; Muthukrishnan, M.; Tobo, B.B.; Rohde, R.L.; Varvares, M.A.; Osazuwa-Peters, N. Correlates of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination initiation and completion among 18–26 year olds in the United States. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2018, 14, 2016–2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Rincon, N.L.; McDowell, K.R.; Weatherspoon, D.; Ritchwood, T.D.; Rocke, D.J.; Adjei Boakye, E.; Osazuwa-Peters, N. Racial and ethnic disparities in human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake among United States adults, aged 27–45 years. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2024, 20, 2313249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Stephens, E.S.; Dema, E.; McGee-Avila, J.K.; Shiels, M.S.; Kreimer, A.R.; Shing, J.Z. Human Papillomavirus Awareness by Educational Level and by Race and Ethnicity. JAMA Netw. Open 2023, 6, e2343325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Frietze, G.; Padilla, M.; Cordero, J.; Gosselink, K.; Moya, E. Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Acceptance (HPV-VA) and Vaccine Uptake (HPV-VU): Assessing the impact of theory, culture, and trusted sources of information in a Hispanic community. BMC Public Health 2023, 23, 1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Chido-Amajuoyi, O.G.; Onyeaka, H.; Amonoo, H.L.; Shete, S. The influence of political ideology on awareness of HPV and HPV vaccine among adults in the United States. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2023, 19, 2232706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Saulsberry, L.; Fowler, E.F.; Nagler, R.H.; Gollust, S.E. Perceptions of politicization and HPV vaccine policy support. Vaccine 2019, 37, 5121–5128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of survey respondents (n = 2011).
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of survey respondents (n = 2011).
CountColumn N %
Vaccination StatusUnvaccinated115357.3%
Vaccinated85842.7%
LocationLarge Rural32716.5%
Small Town/Rural23011.6%
Suburban21510.8%
Urban Core121261.1%
SexMale96147.8%
Female105052.2%
Age18–28 years old100249.8%
29–38 years old50525.1%
39–45 years old50425.1%
RaceWhite155481.2%
Black or African American36018.8%
Hispanic or LatineYes1206.0%
No189194.0%
EducationLess than high school1195.9%
High school graduate75237.4%
Some college46223.0%
Associates or Bachelor’s51125.4%
Master’s, Doctoral, or Professional1678.3%
Heterosexual/StraightYes156677.9%
No44522.1%
RelationshipNo111156.0%
Yes87344.0%
Political LeaningsLiberal55832.2%
Moderate64437.2%
Conservative52930.6%
EmploymentEmployed135268.0%
Unemployed49725.0%
Student1397.0%
Table 2. Vaccination status by demographic characteristics.
Table 2. Vaccination status by demographic characteristics.
UnvaccinatedVaccinatedChi-Square
p-Value
N%N%
LocationLarge Rural19463.6%13336.4%0.139
Small Town/Rural14051.6%9048.4%
Suburban13459.3%8140.7%
Urban Core67360.9%53939.1%
SexMale61162.3%35037.7%<0.001
Female54255.5%50844.5%
Age18–28 years old49549.4%50750.6%<0.001
29–38 years old27855.0%22745.0%
39–45 years old38075.4%12424.6%
RaceWhite89757.7%65742.3%0.985
Black or African American20857.8%15242.2%
Hispanic or LatineYes4537.5%7562.5%<0.001
No110858.6%78341.4%
EducationLess than high school8873.9%3126.1%<0.001
High school graduate45660.6%29639.4%
Some college26256.7%20043.3%
Associates or Bachelor’s 27754.2%23445.8%
Master’s, Doctoral, or Professional 7041.9%9758.1%
Heterosexual/
Straight
Yes91858.6%64841.4%0.029
No23552.8%21047.2%
RelationshipNo65158.6%46041.4%0.293
Yes49156.2%38243.8%
Political LeaningsLiberal29653.0%26247.0%<0.001
Moderate33251.6%31248.4%
Conservative33563.3%19436.7%
EmploymentEmployed74655.2%60644.8%<0.001
Unemployed32164.6%17635.4%
Student7151.1%6848.9%
Table 3. Predictors of HPV vaccination status, full model.
Table 3. Predictors of HPV vaccination status, full model.
OR95% CI
LowerUpper
Sex (ref: Male)1.4171.1511.745
Age (ref: 39–45 years old)
18–28 years old3.0122.2993.947
29–38 years old2.3411.7423.146
Education (ref: Less than high school)
High school graduate1.9601.1613.310
Some college2.0541.1973.523
Associates or Bachelor’s2.3241.3583.976
Master’s, Doctoral, or Professional4.6912.5428.654
Hispanic or Latine (ref: No)2.0061.3043.086
Political Leanings (ref: Conservative)
Liberal1.3011.0011.692
Moderate1.5901.2392.041
Heterosexual/Straight (ref: No)0.9490.7371.223
Employment (ref: Unemployed)
Employed1.3201.0231.703
Student1.4510.9362.249
Table 4. Predictors of HPV vaccination status, final model.
Table 4. Predictors of HPV vaccination status, final model.
OR95% CI
LowerUpper
Sex (ref: Male)1.4261.1601.752
Age (ref: 39–45 years old)
18–28 years old3.0312.3173.965
29–38 years old2.3501.7493.156
Education (ref: Less than high school)
High school graduate1.9491.1553.289
Some college2.0421.1913.500
Associates or Bachelor’s 2.3051.3493.937
Master’s, Doctoral, or Professional 4.6452.5238.554
Hispanic or Latine (ref: No)2.0111.3083.094
Political Leanings (ref:
Conservative)
Liberal1.3161.0171.701
Moderate1.5961.2442.047
Employment (ref: Unemployed)
Employed1.3181.0221.701
Student1.4510.9362.249
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cernasev, A.; Oyedeji, O.; Springer, C.M.; Hagemann, T.M.; Hohmeier, K.C.; Kintziger, K.W. Demographic Influences on Adult HPV Vaccination: Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey in Tennessee. Healthcare 2024, 12, 1305. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12131305

AMA Style

Cernasev A, Oyedeji O, Springer CM, Hagemann TM, Hohmeier KC, Kintziger KW. Demographic Influences on Adult HPV Vaccination: Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey in Tennessee. Healthcare. 2024; 12(13):1305. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12131305

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cernasev, Alina, Oluwafemifola Oyedeji, Cary M. Springer, Tracy M. Hagemann, Kenneth C. Hohmeier, and Kristina W. Kintziger. 2024. "Demographic Influences on Adult HPV Vaccination: Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey in Tennessee" Healthcare 12, no. 13: 1305. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12131305

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop