You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Vaccines
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open Access

31 May 2025

A Cross-Sectional Study to Understand HPV Vaccine Hesitancy and Influencing Factors in Italian Adults

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy
2
Department of Public Health and Paediatric Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Turin, Italy
3
Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, 27100 Pavia, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vaccines2025, 13(6), 599;https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines13060599
This article belongs to the Section Human Papillomavirus Vaccines
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Review Reports

Abstract

Objectives: The Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is a cornerstone of cancer prevention, yet uptake remains suboptimal in many countries. This study analyzed the factors influencing HPV vaccine acceptance among adults, including a focused analysis of parental behaviors. Methods: Data were collected through a web-based survey using a questionnaire. We performed univariable analysis and three logistic regression analyses to investigate the determinants in the overall sample and among parents. Results: A total of 1821 participants were surveyed. HPV vaccination uptake was low, with only 6.9% of the total sample and 7.6% of young adults (18–35 yo) vaccinated. Among parents, 47.9% had vaccinated children aged 12–17, and 21.1% those aged 18 and over. Higher health literacy was associated with positive attitudes (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48–2.79), while receiving information from pediatricians or gynecologists was linked to children’s vaccination status (OR 7.30, 95% CI 2.29–23.31) and parents’ intentions for future HPV vaccination (OR 5.86, 95% CI 1.85–18.50). Adequate knowledge emerged as a strong predictor of positive attitudes (OR 6.50, 95% CI 4.91–8.61) and parents’ intentions (OR 4.89, 95% CI 2.21–10.84). Vaccination status was a key factor influencing parental decisions and overall vaccine acceptance. Conclusions: These findings highlight the critical role of health professionals and the need for targeted communication to address persistent knowledge gaps and promote HPV vaccine confidence within general population.

1. Introduction

The Human papillomavirus (HPV) is one of the most prevalent sexually transmitted infections globally. It poses a significant public health concern due to its established association with various cancers []. HPV vaccination has demonstrated a substantial impact in reducing the incidence of HPV-related malignancies and the prevalence of high-risk HPV types [,]. Despite its inclusion in national immunization programs, vaccination uptake remains suboptimal in several regions [], potentially due to the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of the target population and their caregivers [,]. Successful immunization initiatives, such as those implemented in Australia and the United Kingdom, have shown the potential of widespread vaccination to reduce HPV-related morbidity markedly [,,,].
Italy launched its HPV vaccination program in 2007 for 12-year-old girls. It expanded in 2017 to include boys starting with the 2006 birth cohort, aiming to reduce transmission and disease burden among both sexes []. The vaccine is free of charge to girls and boys aged 11, as well as specific high-risk groups, and there are catch-up programs for females up to age 26 and males up to age 18 []. Nonetheless, vaccination coverage remains below both national and international targets. Recent surveillance data from 2023 reports coverage rates of only 45.4% among 12-year-old girls and 39.4% among boys of the same age, significantly below the 95% target set by the Italian National Immunization Plan []. These statistics highlight a critical gap in HPV vaccine uptake in Italy and emphasize the urgent need to evaluate awareness of HPV infection and vaccination among both parents and the general population to support comprehensive prevention efforts effectively.
Addressing low vaccine uptake requires a thorough analysis of the factors underlying vaccine hesitancy (VH) [], a phenomenon shaped by individual beliefs, social norms, and structural barriers []. Vaccine hesitancy, whether general or vaccine-specific, threatens public health efforts, including the global initiative to eliminate cervical cancer []. Numerous studies have explored HPV-vaccine hesitancy in adolescents, parents, young adults, and healthcare professionals, identifying determinants such as gender, education level, sexual behaviors, and informational needs [,,,,,,,,,,]. Building on this literature, the present study assesses the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of the Italian adult population regarding HPV infection and vaccination, to identify determinants to inform targeted, evidence-based public health strategies [].

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Participants

The study used a cross-sectional design following the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) model []. Data were collected between February and March 2024 through a web survey. A random sample of Italian adults (≥18 years) was recruited through a stratified sampling strategy based on age, gender, and geographical area, using Norstat’s web panel. The questionnaire was based on the scientific literature and designed to take approximately five to six minutes. A pilot test was conducted for clarity and usability.

2.2. Survey Instrument

The first section of the questionnaire focused on socio-demographic data, including age, gender, nationality, geographical area, marital status, educational level, parenthood status, cohabitants with disabilities, occupation, presence of chronic diseases, monthly income, and financial resources. Political orientation, religious affiliation, and perception of the quality of the National Health System (NHS) were also assessed.
The second section included sources of information about HPV vaccination, self-efficacy (SE), and health literacy (HL). HL was measured using the validated Italian version of the Single-Item Literacy Screener (SILS) [,]. SE was assessed through three items rated on a 10-point Likert scale: perceived health self-management skills, perceived health status, and inclination to minimize healthcare utilization.
The third and fourth sections focused on HPV-specific knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. Seven questions, rated on a 10-point Likert scale, investigated knowledge and attitudes regarding the perceived risk and severity of infection, the perceived safety of the vaccine, and its effectiveness and utility in cancer prevention. We collected data on vaccination status for participants and their children, including reasons for non-vaccination.
The internal consistency of the attitude and knowledge scales was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha. The results showed a value of 0.82 for the knowledge scale (3 items) and 0.61 for the attitudes scale (4 items). Although the alpha coefficient for attitudes was slightly below the conventional 0.70 threshold, it was deemed acceptable given the small number of items and the complexity of the construct. Consistent with the prior literature [], values above 0.60 are considered adequate in such contexts. Item analysis showed no benefit from item removal; thus, all were retained.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

2.3.1. Variables and Measures

Certain variables were recategorized for analysis. Financial status, based on the ability to manage household financial resources and assessed on a 5-point Likert scale, was dichotomized into medium–high and low. Political orientation was assessed initially on a 10-point scale and then categorized into four groups: left (1–3), moderate (4–7), right (8–10), and I prefer not to answer. Participants’ religious beliefs were classified as follows: Catholic, other religions (Orthodox, Jewish, Islamic, Jehovah’s Witness, others), none, and I prefer not to answer. The perception of NHS quality was categorized into three levels: poor (low quality), average (medium quality), and good (high quality). HL level was dichotomized as high and low, based on whether help was needed to understand medical information. Finally, based on their first preference, information sources were organized into four groups: pediatricians/gynecologists, HCWs besides pediatricians/gynecologists, other sources, and no information received. The category “other sources” included friends, family, acquaintances, mass media, and the internet.
Knowledge and attitudes, initially encompassing multiple categories assessed on a 0–10 scoring scale, were collapsed into two levels: those who agreed with all the three correct responses about HPV vaccination (showing good knowledge) versus all others; those who demonstrated positive attitudes in at least three of four items assessing attitudes (indicating positive attitudes) compared to all others.
Vaccination status was categorized into vaccinated and unvaccinated. Parental intention to vaccinate children aged 0–11 years was dichotomized using a 90-point threshold on a 0–100 scale.
To guide the interpretation of the results, we drew on the 5C model of psychological antecedents of vaccination behavior []. According to this model, the decision-making process that guides vaccination behavior is influenced by Confidence (trust in the efficacy and safety of vaccines, as well as in the health system), Complacency (perceived risk of vaccine-preventable diseases), Constraints (perceived or real barriers to vaccination), Calculation (deliberation and information seeking), and Collective Responsibility (willingness to protect others through vaccination).

2.3.2. Statistical Methods

Descriptive statistics summarized categorical and continuous variables. For continuous variables, results were expressed as mean and standard deviation (SD) or median and interquartile range (IQR), depending on distribution. Categorical variables were reported as frequencies and percentages.
Each variable was analyzed using univariable analysis: Pearson’s chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test for dichotomous and categorical variables, and the Student’s t-test or Mann–Whitney U test for comparing continuous variables.
Three multivariable logistic regression models were developed based on the strategy suggested by Hosmer and Lemeshow [] to identify predictors of (1) positive attitudes (general population), (2) children’s vaccination status (parents of children aged 12–17), and (3) intention to vaccinate children (parents of children under 12). Variables with a p-value ≤ 0.25 in univariable analysis were included in logistic regression models, alongside variables selected based on the literature and expert opinions. Goodness of fit was assessed using the Hosmer–Lemeshow test, and multicollinearity was checked using a variance inflation factor of 2.5 and a tolerance of 0.5. In Model 1, the gender category “I prefer not to answer” included only three observations. In Model 2, the gender category “I prefer not to answer” and the occupational category “students” comprised a single observation each. In Model 3, the occupational categories “students” and “retired” each included two observations. Due to the minimal sample sizes, these categories were excluded from regression analyses to avoid statistical and methodological issues.

2.3.3. Study Size

The sample size was calculated based on the perception of HPV vaccine safety, a key determinant in vaccine hesitancy. Perceived vaccine safety is a well-established predictor of vaccine uptake and plays a central role in immunization decision-making. This approach aligns with the WHO’s Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants Matrix, which identifies safety concerns as a critical barrier to vaccine acceptance. Trust in vaccine safety also defines the “confidence” dimension of the widely recognized “3 Cs” model []. By prioritizing this variable, we ensured that our study could address HPV attitudes and identify the most critical and modifiable barriers to vaccine uptake and acceptance, thereby informing public health strategies aimed at improving vaccination coverage []. To calculate the appropriate sample size, we referenced data from a recent Italian study on young adults, which indicated that 32% of participants strongly agreed that the HPV vaccine is safe []. Assuming an expected proportion of 37%, an alpha error of 0.05, and a study power of 80%, we determined that a minimum of 718 participants would be required to detect statistically significant differences. The survey was initially designed to address multiple research objectives beyond the scope of the present analysis. Therefore, a larger sample size was targeted to ensure sufficient statistical power across different planned investigations and to allow for subgroup analyses. Ultimately, 1821 participants were included, providing a robust dataset for statistical analyses and allowing for more precise estimation of factors associated with VH in the Italian adult population.
All statistical calculations were performed using Stata version 18.0 software (StataCorp LLC, 4905 Lakeway Drive, College Station, TX, USA). A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Description of the Study Population

The main characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1 and Table 2. A total of 1821 participants completed the survey: 32.8% from the South/Islands, 27.5% from the Northwest, 20.4% from the Center, and 19.2% from the Northeast of Italy; 44% were female. Most participants were Italian (98.7%) and married (53.4%), with a mean age of 54 years (SD 17.2). Approximately one-third of the respondents had no children, while among parents, 46.1% had children aged 18 and over. In terms of education, around one-third had at least a university degree. Most participants were employed in non-healthcare sectors, and 29.2% were retired. Among HWCs (n = 55), 23.6% were physicians and 31% were nurses. Regarding financial status, 42% reported making ends meet fairly well, while 30.6% did so with some difficulty. Participants were also asked about their political orientation and religious affiliation, with about one-third identifying as politically moderate and 73.6% as Catholic. Most participants rated the quality of the NHS as medium. In the SE assessment, the highest-rated dimension was perceived health self-management skills. In terms of HL, it was reported that 30.5% and 37.6% of participants never or rarely needed assistance in understanding medical materials.
Table 1. Demographic and professional characteristics of the respondents.
Table 2. Information sources, health literacy, and self-efficacy.

3.2. Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors Towards the HPV Vaccine

Knowledge about the usefulness of the HPV vaccine showed a mean value of 7 (±2.4) for cervical cancer prevention and 6 (±2.6) for both oral cancer prevention and disease prevention in males (Table 3). Overall, 35% of participants demonstrated good knowledge about HPV vaccination (Table S1). Positive attitudes were reported regarding both the safety and efficacy of the HPV vaccine, with a mean score of 7 (±2.3). A similarly positive, though slightly lower, score was observed for perceived risk of HPV infection (mean value 6 ± 2.7) (Table 3). The overall attitude level, calculated from five items, indicated that 19% of respondents had an overall positive attitude (Table S1). The most frequently cited primary source of information was HCWs (30.8%)—which included general practitioners, NHS vaccination outpatient clinics, and others—followed by the mass media/internet (17.3%), and pediatricians/gynecologists (10.3%). Notably, over one-third of the sample (37.3%) reported never having received information about or heard of HPV vaccination (Table 2). HPV vaccination coverage in our study population was 6.9%, with the majority having received the full schedule. Among participants aged 18–35 years, coverage was 7.6% (Table 4). Among those unvaccinated at the time of the survey, the most frequently cited reasons included the unavailability of the vaccine and a lack of awareness about the opportunity, either on their part or that of their parents (Table 4). Among parents with children aged 12–17, 47.9% reported vaccinating them, compared to 21.1% of those with children aged 18 and over (Table 4). Among parents who had not vaccinated their children (n = 760), the most cited reasons were a lack of awareness about the vaccination and having only male children (Table S3). The mean probability of future vaccination for parents with children aged 0–11 years (n = 269) was 52% (±38.2) (Table 4).
Table 3. Knowledge and attitudes towards HPV vaccination (assessed on a 0–10 scoring scale).
Table 4. HPV vaccination practices of the respondents.

3.3. Univariable Analysis

Based on the univariable analyses (Table S5), no socio-demographic characteristics—including gender, nationality, age, marital status, number of children, geographical area, or educational level—were significantly associated with positive attitudes toward HPV. Similarly, no significant differences were observed in personal monthly income or perceived financial resources between participants with and without positive attitudes. However, occupation was significantly associated (p = 0.002), with higher proportions of HCWs, retired individuals, and students among those reporting positive attitudes. Significant differences also emerged in two of the three SE items. These referred, respectively, to the individual’s confidence in effectively managing their health and to a tendency to deal with health problems independently, without frequently turning to healthcare services. The HL was found to be significantly higher (p < 0.001) among those with positive attitudes (81%) compared with those without (65%). Similarly, participants with a positive attitude reported a good perception of the NHS quality (49% vs. 37%). Those with a positive attitude were more inclined to have good knowledge than those without (73% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). Notably, sources of information showed significant variation by attitude level (p < 0.001): a greater proportion of participants with positive attitudes reported receiving information from pediatricians, gynecologists, or other healthcare providers, whereas those with negative attitudes more frequently reported having received no information at all. HPV vaccination coverage—both personal and in children (aged 12–17, and aged 18 and over)—was higher among subjects with positive attitudes (p < 0.001). Furthermore, a statistically significant association of positive attitudes was found with the intention to vaccinate children under 12 years of age in the future.

3.4. Multivariable Logistic Regression

3.4.1. General Population (Model 1)

The model was developed using the entire survey sample (n = 1818), with the positive attitude level defined as the outcome of interest (Table 5). Results from the multivariable logistic regression analysis identified four independent variables significantly associated with this outcome. Positive attitudes were statistically significantly higher among individuals who reported receiving information from pediatricians or gynecologists (OR = 1.68; 95% CI 1.06–2.62, p = 0.026) as well as from other HCWs (OR = 1.56; 95% CI 1.11–2.19, p = 0.011), compared to those who had not received any information. Participants previously vaccinated against HPV, those with a high level of HL, and those with adequate knowledge had a more positive attitude.
Table 5. Results of the binary logistic regression (Model 1). Factors associated with positive attitudes towards HPV vaccination *.

3.4.2. Parents (Model 2)

This model focused on parents with children aged 12 to 18 (n = 232), using children’s HPV vaccination status as the outcome of interest (Table 6). Results from the multivariable logistic regression model identified three independent variables significantly associated with this outcome. Parents who received information from their pediatrician/gynecologist vaccinated their children (OR = 7.30, 95% CI 2.29–23.31, p = 0.001) more than those without information. Parents who had themselves received the HPV vaccine were significantly more likely to have their children vaccinated (OR = 29.43, 95% CI: 3.34–259.41, p = 0.002). Finally, positive attitudes were associated with vaccinating their children (OR = 4.56; 95% CI: 1.65–12.60, p = 0.003).
Table 6. Results of the binary logistic regression (Model 2). Factors associated with HPV vaccination of children aged 12 to 17 *.

3.4.3. Parents (Model 3)

The third model examined the intention to vaccinate one’s child as the outcome of interest among the parents with children under 12 years of age (n = 265) (Table 7). Parents who received information from pediatricians/gynecologists (OR = 5.86; 95% CI 1.85–18.50, p = 0.003), as well as those who had received the HPV vaccine (OR = 4.07; 95% CI 1.48–11.19, p = 0.006), were more likely to be willing to vaccinate their child in the future. Left political orientation (OR = 0.22; 95% CI 0.07–0.86, p = 0.007) was negatively associated with the vaccination status of children compared to those with a moderate orientation. Additionally, a more favorable perception of NHS quality was associated with an increased willingness to vaccinate their children (OR = 4.09; 95% CI: 1.04–16.00, p = 0.043). Finally, both adequate knowledge (OR = 4.89; 95% CI 2.21–10.84, p < 0.001) and positive attitudes (OR = 4.90; 95% CI 2.02–11.84, p < 0.001) resulted as positive predictors.
Table 7. Results of the binary logistic regression (Model 3). Factors associated with the intention to vaccinate children <12 yo *.

4. Discussion

This large-scale study provides insights into HPV vaccine acceptance both within the general population and among parents, emphasizing the need for targeted, multifactorial interventions to raise awareness of HPV and vaccination uptake. Our findings contribute to the existing scientific literature by exploring knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors, mainly focusing on the specific factors influencing these dimensions. We align with the existing literature while identifying context-specific challenges that require specific public health interventions. Additionally, the subgroup analysis allowed for a comprehensive review of the specific characteristics influencing parents’ practices, underscoring their pivotal role in initiating and adhering to HPV vaccination schedules. As primary health decision-makers for their children, they significantly affect vaccine acceptance and uptake.
Not surprisingly, knowledge about the HPV vaccine’s role in cancer prevention was higher for cervical cancer than for other HPV-related diseases, such as those in males. This aligns with prior research emphasizing female-focused vaccination strategies [,,,] and the limited recognition of HPV’s association with conditions [,,,,] such as oropharyngeal cancer and genital warts. Improving public understanding of the broader health implications of HPV is critical—not only to reduce VH but also to support vaccination programs aimed at eliminating all HPV-related diseases in high-income countries [,]. These findings contrast with the substantial burden of HPV infections affecting both sexes [], reinforcing the need for campaigns that communicate the full scope of HPV-related morbidity and mortality []. Indeed, our findings regarding perceived risk and severity suggest that HPV vaccination campaigns should further address complacency, one of the recognized key aspects of VH []. While our findings are consistent with some studies [,,,], they diverge from others [,,] in which the severity of HPV was more widely acknowledged. Risk perception is shaped by individual and contextual factors and should be interpreted accordingly []. These dimensions are well-established in the Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants Matrix developed by the SAGE Working Group [] and should be considered by public health authorities.
Our findings highlight HL’s essential role in shaping attitudes towards HPV. Health literacy refers to people’s ability to obtain, process, and understand basic information and services to make informed health decisions []. Recent literature has explored its role as a health determinant, noting, for example, its association with lower utilization of health services and the development of specific health outcomes [,]. In recent years, the scientific community has increasingly explored HL in the context of HPV infection and vaccination, and several findings are consistent with studies conducted in Italy and internationally [,,,,,]. For instance, our results corroborate those of Kitur et al. [], who identified a strong association between HL and vaccine confidence, highlighting the role of educational strategies to enhance understanding of vaccination benefits. Furthermore, the existing literature about HL and vaccine uptake, as reported by Falluca et al. [] and Bhoopathi et al. [], indicated that individuals with higher HL were significantly more likely to have received the HPV vaccine.
In our sample, HCWs were the most frequently cited primary source of information, consistent with numerous studies identifying their central role [,,,,], particularly pediatricians among parent samples [,,], as the primary source. Participants who received HPV information from pediatricians and/or gynecologists were significantly more likely to show positive attitudes, to have vaccinated children, and to vaccinate their children in the future. Our results reinforce this notion, especially those directly engaged with HPV-targeted populations. Previous studies have reported associations between these sources and positive perceptions about HPV and its vaccination [,,,]. Trucchi et al. [], for example, found higher knowledge scores among individuals informed by obstetricians, and higher attitude scores among those citing pediatricians or general practitioners. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis also demonstrated the impact of provider communication on HPV vaccination initiation, completion, and follow-through []. Once again, these findings emphasize the importance of information campaigns led by adequately trained HCWs as a potentially effective strategy for achieving immunity goals and disseminating evidence-based information.
The internet and media also emerged as key information sources following HCWs and should not be underestimated, as they have been identified as primary sources in several previous studies [,,,]. Finally, nearly one-third of respondents reported receiving no information about HPV at all. This is concerning, as a lack of information is a known driver of vaccine hesitancy []. Public health authorities must address this gap, as awareness and understanding of HPV vaccination are closely tied to uptake [,,,]. Additionally, we observed that greater knowledge correlates with more favorable attitudes among the general population and with stronger parental intentions to vaccinate their children in the future.
Among parents, reported vaccination coverage for children was low, and uncertainty about future decisions was shared. The main reasons for not vaccinating included limited awareness and the belief that vaccination is unnecessary for boys—findings that are aligned with other studies [,,]. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report on unvaccinated adolescents similarly found that parental refusal was mainly due to insufficient recommendations, limited knowledge, and doubts about necessity []. To address these issues, school-based educational programs are crucial, as such initiatives can simultaneously increase awareness and acceptance among adolescents—the primary target group—and their parents, who are responsible for vaccination decisions []. Community Health Nurses (CHNs) could also be pivotal in providing direct care and supporting public health objectives through tailored educational initiatives []. These community interventions would improve access to vaccination services, a key component of the Immunization Agenda 2030 [], and advance broader public health goals [].
Finally, although potentially relevant, we found no significant overall results regarding religious and political orientation. For instance, a recent meta-analysis suggests that religious beliefs may influence HPV vaccination decisions []. In our study, political orientation significantly predicted intentions only among parents of children under 12, with liberal-leaning parents reporting lower intentions—a finding that contrasts with previous research [,] and may reflect the influence of unmeasured confounding variables.
In conclusion, the findings of our study appear consistent with the theoretical construct of the 5C model []. The relevance of Confidence is evident, particularly in the central role played by trusted HWCs, such as pediatricians and gynecologists, in influencing vaccination behavior. The limited perception of risk—especially concerning male susceptibility—highlights the dimension of Complacency. Moreover, the associations between HL, knowledge, and vaccination intentions underscore the relevance of Calculation. Although not all model dimensions were directly assessed, the 5C framework provides a valuable lens through which to interpret the multifaceted nature of VH.
Several limitations should be considered. First, the cross-sectional design limits causal inference, and future longitudinal studies could explore how vaccine attitudes evolve and how interventions affect behaviors. Second, respondents may have provided socially acceptable answers, especially regarding vaccination status. Future research should incorporate qualitative methods like focus groups to gain deeper insights into decision-making processes. Third, there is a potential selection bias, as only individuals from the recruitment panel were included in the study. Additionally, while the large sample size increased the statistical power of our analyses, it may also heighten the chance of detecting statistically significant associations that lack substantial practical importance. Therefore, interpretation of results, especially those with borderline significance, should be cautiously approached. Finally, parents are underrepresented, since this population’s sample size was not statistically powered. Therefore, the findings related to parental vaccine decision-making may not fully reflect the perspectives of the broader parental population. We also acknowledge the limitation of using a validated single-item measure of HL, although more comprehensive tools may yield more profound insights. Despite these limitations, this study is based on a large sample and remains one of the few investigations exploring HPV-related attitudes in the general Italian population.

5. Conclusions

Our findings underscore the critical role of health literacy and competent healthcare professionals in influencing attitudes and behaviors related to HPV vaccination. We identified significant issues related to gaps in attitudes, knowledge, and practices and their underlying determinants, reinforcing the existing scientific literature. Future health programs should prioritize enhancing the dissemination of evidence-based information through trusted sources like pediatricians and gynecologists to improve HPV vaccine acceptance and uptake.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/vaccines13060599/s1, Table S1. HPV knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of respondents towards HPV infection and vaccination. Table S2. Main barriers to HPV vaccination reported by respondents. Table S3. Reported reasons for HPV non-vaccination of all children. Table S4. Reported reasons for HPV non-vaccination of some children. Table S5. Univariable analysis. Results are expressed as mean (SD) or frequency (%).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.R., A.M. and C.D.V.; Data curation, M.R., A.M., E.R. and M.I.; Formal analysis, F.B. and A.O.; Investigation, E.R. and M.I.; Methodology, M.R., A.M., F.B., A.O., C.M. and P.V.; Supervision, P.V., C.D.V. and R.S.; Writing—original draft, M.R., A.M. and C.D.V.; Writing—review and editing, R.S., C.M., P.V. and C.D.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca (Italy), Piano Nazionale di Ripresa e Resilienza, and the EU within the Extended Partnership Initiative on Emerging Infectious Diseases project number PE00000007 (One Health Basic and Translational Actions Addressing Unmet Needs on Emerging Infectious Diseases).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was performed as per the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Participants were asked for their consent and anonymity was assured. The institutional ethics board of the Umberto I Teaching Hospital/Sapienza University of Rome approved this study (ref. 6416 prot. 0637/2021, amended in ref. 6416 0477/2024).

Data Availability Statement

The dataset generated and analyzed during the current study includes sensitive information on participants’ socio-demographic characteristics and personal attitudes and behaviors towards HPV vaccination. According to the informed consent obtained from participants, data were to be used exclusively in aggregated form for research purposes. Anonymized data may be made available by the corresponding author upon reasonable request and subject to approval by the appropriate ethics committee.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
HPVHuman papillomavirus
HCWsHealthcare workers
VHVaccine hesitancy
HLHealth literacy
NHSNational Health System

References

  1. Wolf, J.; Kist, L.F.; Pereira, S.B.; Quessada, M.A.; Petek, H.; Pille, A.; Maccari, J.G.; Mutlaq, M.P.; Nasi, L.A. Human papillomavirus infection: Epidemiology, biology, host interactions, cancer development, prevention, and therapeutics. Rev. Med. Virol. 2024, 34, e2537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Drolet, M.; Bénard, É.; Pérez, N.; Brisson, M. HPV Vaccination Impact Study Group. Population-level impact and herd effects following the introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination programmes: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2019, 394, 497–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. National Cancer Institute. Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccines. Available online: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/infectious-agents/hpv-vaccine-fact-sheet (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  4. Shapiro, G.K. HPV Vaccination: An Underused Strategy for the Prevention of Cancer. Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29, 3780–3792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Karafillakis, E.; Simas, C.; Jarrett, C.; Verger, P.; Peretti-Watel, P.; Dib, F.; De Angelis, S.; Takacs, J.; Ali, K.A.; Pastore Celentano, L.; et al. HPV vaccination in a context of public mistrust and uncertainty: A systematic literature review of determinants of HPV vaccine hesitancy in Europe. Hum. Vaccin. Immunother. 2019, 15, 1615–1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Achimaș-Cadariu, T.; Pașca, A.; Jiboc, N.M.; Puia, A.; Dumitrașcu, D.L. Vaccine Hesitancy among European Parents—Psychological and Social Factors Influencing the Decision to Vaccinate against HPV: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Vaccines 2024, 12, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tung, I.L.Y.; Machalek, D.A.; Garland, S.M. Attitudes, Knowledge and Factors Associated with Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Uptake in Adolescent Girls and Young Women in Victoria, Australia. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0161846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Falcaro, M.; Castañon, A.; Ndlela, B.; Checchi, M.; Soldan, K.; Lopez-Bernal, J.; Elliss-Brookes, L.; Sasieni, P. The effects of the national HPV vaccination programme in England, UK, on cervical cancer and grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia incidence: A register-based observational study. Lancet 2021, 398, 2084–2092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. The Public Health Agency of Sweden. Statistics on HPV Vaccinations 2007–2017. Available online: https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/folkhalsorapportering-statistik/statistikdatabaser-och-visualisering/vaccinationsstatistik/statistik-for-hpv-vaccinationer (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  10. Checchi, M.; Mesher, D.; Panwar, K.; Anderson, A.; Beddows, S.; Soldan, K. The impact of over ten years of HPV vaccination in England: Surveillance of type-specific HPV in young sexually active females. Vaccine 2023, 41, 6734–6744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. National Institute of Health. HPV Infections and Cervical Cancer. Available online: https://www.epicentro.iss.it/hpv/#:~:text=In%20Italia%20nel%20dicembre%202007,12%20anni)%20%5B9%5D (accessed on 20 October 2024).
  12. Ministero della Salute. Piano Nazionale di Prevenzione Vaccinale. Available online: https://www.salute.gov.it/new/it/tema/vaccinazioni/piano-nazionale-prevenzione-vaccinale/ (accessed on 20 October 2024).
  13. Ministero della Salute. Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination-Vaccination Coverage. Available online: https://www.salute.gov.it/portale/documentazione/p6_2_8_1_1.jsp?lingua=italiano&id=39 (accessed on 21 October 2024).
  14. MacDonald, N.E.; SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants. Vaccine 2015, 33, 4161–4164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Let’s Talk About Hesitancy; ECDC: Stockholm, Sweden, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  16. Word Health Organization. Cervical Cancer Elimination Initiative. Available online: https://www.who.int/initiatives/cervical-cancer-elimination-initiative (accessed on 20 October 2024).
  17. Del Giudice, G.M.; Sansone, V.; Della Polla, G.; Angelillo, I.F. Understanding the Reasons for Receiving HPV Vaccination among Eligible Adults in Italy. Vaccines 2024, 12, 728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bianco, A.; Pileggi, C.; Iozzo, F.; Nobile, C.G.A.; Pavia, M. Vaccination against Human Papilloma Virus infection in male adolescents: Knowledge, attitudes, and acceptability among parents in Italy. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2014, 10, 2536–2542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Mascaro, V.; Pileggi, C.; Currà, A.; Bianco, A.; Pavia, M. HPV vaccination coverage and willingness to be vaccinated among 18–30 year-old students in Italy. Vaccine 2019, 37, 3310–3316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Montalti, M.; Salussolia, A.; Capodici, A.; Scognamiglio, F.; Di Valerio, Z.; La Fauci, G.; Soldà, G.; Fantini, M.P.; Odone, A.; Costantino, C.; et al. Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Coverage and Confidence in Italy: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study, the OBVIOUS Project. Vaccines 2024, 12, 187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Musella, G.; Liguori, S.; Cantile, T.; Adamo, D.; Coppola, N.; Canfora, F.; Blasi, A.; Mignogna, M.; Amato, M.; Caponio, V.C.A.; et al. Knowledge, attitude and perception of Italian dental students toward HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer and vaccination: A cross-sectional study. BMC Oral Health 2024, 24, 1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Cantile, T.; Leuci, S.; Blasi, A.; Coppola, N.; Sorrentino, R.; Ferrazzano, G.F.; Mignogna, M.D. Human Papilloma Virus Vaccination and Oropharyngeal Cancer: Knowledge, Perception and Attitude among Italian Pediatric Dentists. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Fallucca, A.; Immordino, P.; Riggio, L.; Casuccio, A.; Vitale, F.; Restivo, V. Acceptability of HPV Vaccination in Young Students by Exploring Health Belief Model and Health Literacy. Vaccines 2022, 10, 998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Paduano, G.; Sansone, V.; Pelullo, C.P.; Angelillo, S.; Gallè, F.; Di Giuseppe, G. Recommended Vaccinations During Adolescence: Parents’ Knowledge and Behaviors. Vaccines 2024, 12, 1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Della Polla, G.; Pelullo, C.P.; Napolitano, F.; Angelillo, I.F. HPV vaccine hesitancy among parents in Italy: A cross-sectional study. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2020, 16, 2744–2751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. von Elm, E.; Altman, D.G.; Egger, M.; Pocock, S.J.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Vandenbroucke, J.P.; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2008, 61, 344–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bonaccorsi, G.; Grazzini, M.; Pieri, L.; Santomauro, F.; Ciancio, M.; Lorini, C. Assessment of Health Literacy and validation of single-item literacy screener (SILS) in a sample of Italian people. Ann. Ist. Super. Sanità 2017, 53, 205–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Morris, N.S.; MacLean, C.D.; Chew, L.D.; Littenberg, B. The Single Item Literacy Screener: Evaluation of a brief instrument to identify limited reading ability. BMC Fam. Pract. 2006, 7, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. CNunnally, J.C.; Bernstein, I.H. Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  30. Betsch, C.; Schmid, P.; Heinemeier, D.; Korn, L.; Holtmann, C.; Böhm, R. Beyond confidence: Development of a measure assessing the 5C psychological antecedents of vaccination. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0208601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Hosmer, D.W.; Lemeshow, S. Applied Logistic Regression; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  32. Trucchi, C.; Amicizia, D.; Tafuri, S.; Sticchi, L.; Durando, P.; Costantino, C.; Varlese, F.; Di Silverio, B.; Bagnasco, A.M.; Ansaldi, F.; et al. Assessment of Knowledge, Attitudes, and Propensity towards HPV Vaccine of Young Adult Students in Italy. Vaccines 2020, 8, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. López, N.; de la Cueva, I.S.; Taborga, E.; de Alba, A.F.; Cabeza, I.; Raba, R.M.; Marès, J.; Company, P.; Herrera, B.; Cotarelo, M. HPV knowledge and vaccine acceptability: A survey-based study among parents of adolescents (KAPPAS study). Infect Agents Cancer 2022, 17, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Paduano, G.; Vaienna, S.; Maisto, G.; Di Giuseppe, G.; Pavia, M. Investigating women’s awareness and perceptions on human papillomavirus infection and oropharyngeal cancer in Italy. Front. Public Health 2023, 11, 1195588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Nadarzynski, T.; Smith, H.; Richardson, D.; Jones, C.J.; Llewellyn, C.D. Human papillomavirus and vaccine-related perceptions among men who have sex with men: A systematic review. Sex. Transm. Infect. 2014, 90, 515–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. European Cancer Organisation. Eliminating HPV-Caused Cancers and Diseases in Europe. 2019. Available online: https://www.europeancancer.org/resources/51:eliminating-hpv-caused-cancers-and-diseases-in-europe-case-for-action.htm (accessed on 21 January 2025).
  37. Giuliano, A.R.; Anic, G.; Nyitray, A.G. Epidemiology and pathology of HPV disease in males. Gynecol. Oncol. 2010, 117, S15–S19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ward, G.; Mehta, V.; Moore, M. Morbidity, mortality and cost from HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer: Impact of 2-, 4- and 9-valent vaccines. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2016, 12, 1343–1347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Jradi, H.; Bawazir, A. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Saudi women regarding cervical cancer, human papillomavirus (HPV) and corresponding vaccine. Vaccine 2019, 37, 530–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Gauna, F.; Verger, P.; Fressard, L.; Jardin, M.; Ward, J.K.; Peretti-Watel, P. Vaccine hesitancy about the HPV vaccine among French young women and their parents: A telephone survey. BMC Public Health 2023, 23, 628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Naoum, P.; Athanasakis, K.; Zavras, D.; Kyriopoulos, J.; Pavi, E. Knowledge, Perceptions and Attitudes Toward HPV Vaccination: A Survey on Parents of Girls Aged 11–18 Years Old in Greece. Front. Glob. Women’s Health 2022, 3, 871090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Yin, J.D.C.; Lui, J.N.M. Factors influencing risk perception during Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEIC): A scoping review. BMC Public Health 2024, 24, 1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. A Rapid Evidence Review of Interventions for Improving Health Literacy: Insights into Health Communication. Available online: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2900/20189 (accessed on 21 January 2025).
  44. Berkman, N.D.; Sheridan, S.L.; Donahue, K.E.; Halpern, D.J.; Crotty, K. Low health literacy and health outcomes: An updated systematic review. Ann. Intern. Med. 2011, 155, 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. DeWalt, D.A.; Hink, A. Health Literacy and Child Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Pediatrics 2009, 124 (Suppl. S3), S265–S274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Jones, N.C.; Fusani, A.U.; Cox, K.M.; Martinez, V.P.; Guerra, L.; Gonzalez, E. Assessing Spanish Health Literacy and Cervical Cancer Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors in a Student-Run Free Clinic. J. Cancer Educ. 2023, 38, 1383–1390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Best, A.L.; Logan, R.G.; Vázquez-Otero, C.; Fung, W.; Chee, V.; Thompson, E.L.; Villalona, S.; Thompson, L.M.A.; Gwede, C.K.; Daley, E.M. Application of a Health Literacy Framework to Explore Patients’ Knowledge of the Link between HPV and Cancer. J. Health Commun. 2018, 23, 695–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kitur, H.; Horowitz, A.M.; Beck, K.; Wang, M.Q. HPV Knowledge, Vaccine Status, and Health Literacy Among University Students. J. Cancer Educ. 2022, 37, 1606–1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Bhoopathi, V.; Bhagavatula, P.; Singh, M. Health literacy and its association with human papilloma virus vaccination among adults: Findings from the behavioral risk factor surveillance system. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2022, 18, 2135930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Galvin, A.M.; Garg, A.; Griner, S.B.; Moore, J.D.; Thompson, E.L. Health Literacy Correlates to HPV Vaccination Among US Adults Ages 27–45. J. Cancer Educ. 2023, 38, 349–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kops, N.L.; Hohenberger, G.F.; Bessel, M.; Horvath, J.D.C.; Domingues, C.; Maranhão, A.G.K.; de Souza, F.M.A.; Benzaken, A.; Pereira, G.F.; Wendland, E.M. Knowledge about HPV and vaccination among young adult men and women: Results of a national survey. Papillomavirus Res. 2019, 7, 123–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mari, A.; Gianolio, L.; Edefonti, V.; Khaleghi Hashemian, D.; Casini, F.; Bergamaschi, F.; Sala, A.; Verduci, E.; Calcaterra, V.; Zuccotti, G.V.; et al. HPV Vaccination in Young Males: A Glimpse of Coverage, Parental Attitude and Need of Additional Information from Lombardy Region, Italy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. 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] [PubMed]
  54. Oh, N.L.; Biddell, C.B.; Rhodes, B.E.; Brewer, N.T. Provider communication and HPV vaccine uptake: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Prev. Med. 2021, 148, 106554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Rosen, B.L.; Shew, M.L.; Zimet, G.D.; Ding, L.; Mullins, T.L.K.; Kahn, J.A. Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Sources of Information and Adolescents’ Knowledge and Perceptions. Glob. Pediatr. Health 2017, 4, 2333794X17743405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Troha, M.; Šterbenc, A.; Mlaker, M.; Poljak, M. Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and vaccination: Knowledge and attitudes among healthcare professionals and the general public in Slovenia. Acta Dermatovenerol. Alp. Pannonica Adriat. 2018, 27, 59–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Cadeddu, C.; Castagna, C.; Sapienza, M.; Lanza, T.E.; Messina, R.; Chiavarini, M.; Ricciardi, W.; de Waure, C. Understanding the determinants of vaccine hesitancy and vaccine confidence among adolescents: A systematic review. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2021, 17, 4470–4486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Runngren, E.; Eriksson, M.; Blomberg, K. Parents’ reasoning about HPV vaccination in Sweden. Scand. J. Caring Sci. 2022, 36, 1113–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Sonawane, K.; Lin, Y.Y.; Damgacioglu, H.; Zhu, Y.; Fernandez, M.E.; Montealegre, J.R.; Cazaban, C.G.; Li, R.; Lairson, D.R.; Lin, Y.; et al. Trends in Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Safety Concerns and Adverse Event Reporting in the United States. JAMA Netw. Open 2021, 4, e2124502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Flood, T.; Wilson, I.M.; Prue, G.; McLaughlin, M.; Hughes, C.M. Impact of school-based educational interventions in middle adolescent populations (15–17yrs) on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination uptake and perceptions/knowledge of HPV and its associated cancers: A systematic review. Prev. Med. 2020, 139, 106168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. World Health Organization. Enhancing the Role of Community Health Nursing for Universal Health Coverage; Human Resources for Health Observer Series No. 18; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017; Available online: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/enhancing-the-role-for-community-health-nursing-or-universal-health-coverage (accessed on 3 February 2025).
  62. World Health Organization. Immunization Agenda 2030: A Global Strategy to Leave No One Behind. 2020. Available online: https://www.immunizationagenda2030.org/ (accessed on 3 February 2025).
  63. Chido-Amajuoyi, O.G.; Onyeaka, H.; Amonoo, H.; 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]
  64. Manganello, J.A.; Chiang, S.C.; Cowlin, H.; Kearney, M.D.; Massey, P.M. HPV and COVID-19 vaccines: Social media use, confidence, and intentions among parents living in different community types in the United States. J. Behav. Med. 2023, 46, 212–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
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.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Coverage of HPV Vaccination and Influencing Factors Among Female College Students in Northern China
Previous
Orally Dissolving Film-Based Influenza Vaccines Confer Superior Protection Compared to the Oral Administration of Inactivated Influenza Virus
Next