Avaliação da situação vacinal e capacidade de adequação à recomendação do protocolo para paciente imunossuprimido pós-transplante de fígado: estudo de intervenção com estratégias educacionais
Data
2023-01-31
Autores
Miranda, Monica Noleto 
Orientadores
Pimentel Mota, Carolina Frade Magalhães Girardin
Tipo
Dissertação de mestrado
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Resumo
OBJETIVO: Avaliar o conhecimento sobre vacinação entre pacientes pós-transplante de fígado e profissionais de saúde ligados ao seu cuidado; assim como
aplicar uma estratégia educacional para imunização e adequação do protocolo de
vacinas para pacientes transplantados de fígado e avaliar eventuais impactos desta
estratégia. MÉTODO: Estudo longitudinal, com amostra de conveniência constituída
por 124 pacientes pós-transplante hepático e 111 profissionais da saúde. Os dados
foram coletados em três fases, entre maio de 2020 a maio de 2021. Os pacientes
foram submetidos à intervenção educacional por meio de acesso à página na
internet contendo vídeos educativos, enquanto os profissionais da saúde por meio
de simpósio e acesso a informações em página virtual do projeto. Para análise de
efeito da intervenção, foram realizadas análises qualitativas de conhecimento por
meio de questionários antes e após as intervenções. RESULTADOS: Entre os
pacientes, o sexo masculino foi predominante (66,9%) e a média de idade foi de
55,2 anos (DP + 15,9). Dos pacientes que procuram as UBS (Unidade Básica de
Saúde) (82,2%) e os CRIE (Centro de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais)
(13,7%) para se vacinar, apenas 46,7% receberam orientações sobre vacinas após
o transplante de fígado. Quanto aos profissionais da saúde, 46,5% não verificam a
carteira de vacinação dos pacientes, 61,3% encaminham pacientes para UBS, e
38,7% direcionam os pacientes para o CRIE. No que se refere à análise pósintervenção, dos 124 pacientes entrevistados, 66,1% assistiram aos vídeos
educativos sobre vacinação e, destes, 62,2% declararam ter melhorado a compreensão sobre vacinas; 91,4% se sentiram mais seguros para vacinar. Após
intervenção educacional 45 profissionais de saúde responderam o questionário;
onde 30,4% afirmaram saber quais vacinas prescrever e 67,4% recomendam vacina
aos familiares e conviventes. CONCLUSÃO: Os dados obtidos neste estudo
sugerem que a estratégia educacional proposta melhorou a adequação ao protocolo de imunização de pacientes pós-transplante de fígado, contudo mais estudos são necessários para esta inferência. Além disso, este estudo alerta para o risco potencial da falta de informações e falha na abordagem sobre vacinação por
profissionais de saúde.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the knowledge on vaccination among post-liver transplant patients and healthcare professionals linked to their care; as well as to apply an educational strategy for immunization and adequacy of the vaccination protocol for liver transplant patients and to evaluate eventual impacts of this approach. METHODS: This was a longitudinal study with a convenience sample consisting of 124 post-liver transplant patients and 111 healthcare professionals. Data were collected in three phases from May 2020 to May 2021. Patients underwent the educational intervention through access to a web page containing educational videos and, for health professionals, through a symposium and access to information on the project's virtual page. To analyze the effect of the intervention, qualitative analyses of knowledge were carried out using questionnaires before and after the interventions. RESULTS: Among the patients, males were predominant (66.9%), and the mean age was 55.2 (SD + 15.9). Of the patients who sought the UBS (Basic Health Units) (82.2%) and CRIE (Reference Center for Special Immunobiologicals) (13.7%) to be vaccinated, only 46.7% received orientation about vaccines after liver transplantation. As for health professionals, 46.5% do not check the patients' vaccination cards, 61.3% refer patients to UBS, and 38.7% direct patients to CRIE. In the post-intervention analysis, of the 124 patients interviewed, 66.1% watched the educational videos about vaccination, and of these, 62.2% said they had improved their understanding about vaccines, and 91.4% feel safer to be vaccinated. After the educational intervention 45 health professionals answered the questionnaire; where 30.4% said they knew which vaccines to prescribe, and 67.4% recommended vaccines to patients’ family members and contacts. CONCLUSION: The data obtained in this study suggest that the proposed educational strategy improved the adequacy to the immunization protocol of post-liver transplant patients, however further studies are necessary for this inference. Furthermore, this study warns of the potential risk of lack of information and failure to address vaccination by healthcare professionals.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the knowledge on vaccination among post-liver transplant patients and healthcare professionals linked to their care; as well as to apply an educational strategy for immunization and adequacy of the vaccination protocol for liver transplant patients and to evaluate eventual impacts of this approach. METHODS: This was a longitudinal study with a convenience sample consisting of 124 post-liver transplant patients and 111 healthcare professionals. Data were collected in three phases from May 2020 to May 2021. Patients underwent the educational intervention through access to a web page containing educational videos and, for health professionals, through a symposium and access to information on the project's virtual page. To analyze the effect of the intervention, qualitative analyses of knowledge were carried out using questionnaires before and after the interventions. RESULTS: Among the patients, males were predominant (66.9%), and the mean age was 55.2 (SD + 15.9). Of the patients who sought the UBS (Basic Health Units) (82.2%) and CRIE (Reference Center for Special Immunobiologicals) (13.7%) to be vaccinated, only 46.7% received orientation about vaccines after liver transplantation. As for health professionals, 46.5% do not check the patients' vaccination cards, 61.3% refer patients to UBS, and 38.7% direct patients to CRIE. In the post-intervention analysis, of the 124 patients interviewed, 66.1% watched the educational videos about vaccination, and of these, 62.2% said they had improved their understanding about vaccines, and 91.4% feel safer to be vaccinated. After the educational intervention 45 health professionals answered the questionnaire; where 30.4% said they knew which vaccines to prescribe, and 67.4% recommended vaccines to patients’ family members and contacts. CONCLUSION: The data obtained in this study suggest that the proposed educational strategy improved the adequacy to the immunization protocol of post-liver transplant patients, however further studies are necessary for this inference. Furthermore, this study warns of the potential risk of lack of information and failure to address vaccination by healthcare professionals.