Safety, Usability, and Acceptability of Microarray Patches for Vaccination
Access status:
USyd Access
Type
ThesisThesis type
Doctor of PhilosophyAuthor/s
Berger, Matthew NeilAbstract
Background: Microarray patches (MAPs) are a needle-free vaccine delivery device that targets the epidermis and upper dermis. This thesis aimed to investigate the safety, usability, and acceptability of MAPs for vaccination among older adults, the general public, and healthcare ...
See moreBackground: Microarray patches (MAPs) are a needle-free vaccine delivery device that targets the epidermis and upper dermis. This thesis aimed to investigate the safety, usability, and acceptability of MAPs for vaccination among older adults, the general public, and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Methods: A review was conducted to assess the immunogenicity, safety, usability, and acceptability of MAPs. Semi-structured interviews with older adults explored MAP benefits and challenges. The MAP for Vaccination Scale (MAPVac) was developed through literature reviews, expert assessments, and interviews to evaluate perceptions of MAP safety, usability, and acceptability. Surveys were administered in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Descriptive statistics were used for survey analysis, and thematic analysis was applied to interview data. Results: Clinical trials with influenza and Japanese encephalitis vaccines demonstrated that MAPs were immunogenic, with mild erythema as the only reported side effect. Pain scores were lower for MAPs compared to needle and syringe (N&S). In interviews with older adults (n=44), MAPs were viewed as convenient due to their ease of use, with potential to reduce healthcare burden. Concerns included the safety of unsupervised use and immunisation recording accuracy. The MAPVac scale showed high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha=0.90) and repeatability. Survey results from 403 members of the general public and 184 HCPs indicated that MAPs were considered safe, usable, and acceptable. Thematic analysis of interviews (n=27) revealed that MAPs were beneficial for individuals with needle-related anxiety, and HCPs showed interest in using MAPs in practice. Conclusion: MAPs were generally found to be safe, effective, and user-friendly alternatives to N&S. The availability and accessibility of vaccine MAPs could enhance vaccination rates among key populations and those in low-resource settings.
See less
See moreBackground: Microarray patches (MAPs) are a needle-free vaccine delivery device that targets the epidermis and upper dermis. This thesis aimed to investigate the safety, usability, and acceptability of MAPs for vaccination among older adults, the general public, and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Methods: A review was conducted to assess the immunogenicity, safety, usability, and acceptability of MAPs. Semi-structured interviews with older adults explored MAP benefits and challenges. The MAP for Vaccination Scale (MAPVac) was developed through literature reviews, expert assessments, and interviews to evaluate perceptions of MAP safety, usability, and acceptability. Surveys were administered in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Descriptive statistics were used for survey analysis, and thematic analysis was applied to interview data. Results: Clinical trials with influenza and Japanese encephalitis vaccines demonstrated that MAPs were immunogenic, with mild erythema as the only reported side effect. Pain scores were lower for MAPs compared to needle and syringe (N&S). In interviews with older adults (n=44), MAPs were viewed as convenient due to their ease of use, with potential to reduce healthcare burden. Concerns included the safety of unsupervised use and immunisation recording accuracy. The MAPVac scale showed high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha=0.90) and repeatability. Survey results from 403 members of the general public and 184 HCPs indicated that MAPs were considered safe, usable, and acceptable. Thematic analysis of interviews (n=27) revealed that MAPs were beneficial for individuals with needle-related anxiety, and HCPs showed interest in using MAPs in practice. Conclusion: MAPs were generally found to be safe, effective, and user-friendly alternatives to N&S. The availability and accessibility of vaccine MAPs could enhance vaccination rates among key populations and those in low-resource settings.
See less
Date
2025Rights statement
The author retains copyright of this thesis. It may only be used for the purposes of research and study. It must not be used for any other purposes and may not be transmitted or shared with others without prior permission.Faculty/School
Faculty of Medicine and Health, The Children's Hospital at Westmead Clinical SchoolAwarding institution
The University of SydneyShare