Influenza and pneumococcal immunization in the elderly: knowledge, attitudes, and practices among general practitioners in Italy

The purpose of the study was to evaluate general practitioners' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours related to influenza and pneumococcal vaccination in the elderly. A random sample of 500 general practitioners in Calabria, Italy, received a questionnaire focusing on demographics and practice characteristics, their knowledge of the main groups to whom influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations were recommended, and attitudes and behaviours relating to disease prevention by influenza and pneumococcal immunization programs. Only 17.1% of the 148 respondents indicated every main group for whom influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations were recommended, whereas 84.5 and 65.5% were aware that influenza and pneumococcal vaccine respectively should be administered to the elderly. Knowledge that the elderly were the likely beneficiaries of both vaccinations was significantly greater in older general practitioners and those with fewer years of professional activity. A positive attitude was reported by a large majority, who believed that these vaccines might reduce the seriousness of influenza (91.2%) and pneumococcal disease (87.9%), as well as the risk of hospitalization (95.2 and 89.2%, respectively). This attitude was significantly more common in those with fewer years of professional activity, those who worked more hours per week, and those who relied on scientific journals as a source of information. Almost all administered or recommended influenza vaccine (95.2%), whereas the use of pneumococcal vaccine was less widespread (46.9%); recommending or administering both vaccines to the elderly was significantly more prevalent in those who knew that this group were the likely beneficiaries of these vaccines. Our study thus showed that there is a great need for efforts to improve general practitioners' knowledge of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines and their adherence to vaccination policies. (C) 2003 The Royal Institute of Public Health. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.