Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination during June–October 2021: A multi-site prospective study

IntroductionVaccine hesitancy presents a challenge to COVID-19 control efforts. To identify beliefs associated with delayed vaccine uptake, we developed and implemented a vaccine hesitancy survey for the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership.MethodsIn June 2021, we assessed attitudes and beliefs associated with COVID-19 vaccination using an online survey. Self-reported vaccination data were requested daily through October 2021. We compared responses between vaccinated and unvaccinated respondents using absolute standardized mean differences (ASMD). We assessed validity and reliability using exploratory factor analysis and identified latent factors associated with a subset of survey items. Cox proportional hazards models and mediation analyses assessed predictors of subsequent vaccination among those initially unvaccinated.ResultsIn June 2021, 29,522 vaccinated and 1,272 unvaccinated participants completed surveys. Among those unvaccinated in June 2021, 559 (43.9 %) became vaccinated by October 31, 2021. In June, unvaccinated participants were less likely to feel “very concerned” about getting COVID-19 than vaccinated participants (10.6 % vs. 43.3 %, ASMD 0.792). Among those initially unvaccinated, greater intent to become vaccinated was associated with getting vaccinated and shorter time to vaccination. However, even among participants who reported no intention to become vaccinated, 28.5 % reported vaccination before study end. Two latent factors predicted subsequent vaccination—being ‘more receptive’ was derived from motivation to protect one’s own or others’ health and resume usual activities; being ‘less receptive’ was derived from concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. In a Cox model, both factors were partially mediated by vaccination intention.ConclusionThis study characterizes vaccine hesitant individuals and identifies predictors of eventual COVID-19 vaccination through October 31, 2021. Even individuals with no intention to be vaccinated can shift to vaccine uptake. Our data suggest factors of perceived severity of COVID-19 disease, vaccine safety, and trust in the vaccine development process are predictive of vaccination and may be important opportunities for ongoing interventions.     

Unmet need for COVID-19 vaccination coverage in Kenya

COVID-19 has impacted the health and livelihoods of billions of people since it emerged in 2019. Vaccination for COVID-19 is a critical intervention that is being rolled out globally to end the pandemic. Understanding the spatial inequalities in vaccination coverage and access to vaccination centres is important for planning this intervention nationally. Here, COVID-19 vaccination data, representing the number of people given at least one dose of vaccine, a list of the approved vaccination sites, population data and ancillary GIS data were used to assess vaccination coverage, using Kenya as an example. Firstly, physical access was modelled using travel time to estimate the proportion of population within 1 hour of a vaccination site. Secondly, a Bayesian conditional autoregressive (CAR) model was used to estimate the COVID-19 vaccination coverage and the same framework used to forecast coverage rates for the first quarter of 2022. Nationally, the average travel time to a designated COVID-19 vaccination site (n = 622) was 75.5 min (Range: 62.9 – 94.5 min) and over 87% of the population >18 years reside within 1 hour to a vaccination site. The COVID-19 vaccination coverage in December 2021 was 16.70% (95% CI: 16.66 – 16.74) – 4.4 million people and was forecasted to be 30.75% (95% CI: 25.04 – 36.96) – 8.1 million people by the end of March 2022. Approximately 21 million adults were still unvaccinated in December 2021 and, in the absence of accelerated vaccine uptake, over 17.2 million adults may not be vaccinated by end March 2022 nationally. Our results highlight geographic inequalities at sub-national level and are important in targeting and improving vaccination coverage in hard-to-reach populations. Similar mapping efforts could help other countries identify and increase vaccination coverage for such populations.     

COVID-19 vaccination coverage in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease – A cross-sectional study in Hungary

IntroductionCoronavirus infection is a particular risk for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), because they are much more likely to become severely ill due to oxygen supply problems. Primary prevention, including COVID-19 vaccination is of paramount importance in this disease group. The aim of our study was to assess COVID-19 vaccination coverage in COPD patients during the first vaccination campaign of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA cross-sectional observational study (CHANCE) has been conducted in COPD patients in the eastern, western and central regions of Hungary from 15th November 2021. The anthropometric, respiratory function test results and vaccination status of 1,511 randomly selected patients were recorded who were aged 35 years and older.ResultsThe median age was 67 (61–72) years, for men: 67 (62–73) and for women: 66 (60–72) years, with 47.98 % men and 52.02 % women in our sample. The prevalence of vaccination coverage for the first COVID-19 vaccine dose was 88.62 %, whereas 86.57 % of the patients received the second vaccine dose. When unvaccinated (n = 172) and double vaccinated (n = 1308) patients were compared, the difference was significant both in quality of life (CAT: 17 (12–23) vs 14 (10–19); p < 0.001) and severity of dyspnea (mMRC: 2 (2–2) vs 2 (1–2); p = 0.048). The COVID-19 infection rate between double vaccinated and unvaccinated patients was 1.61 % vs 22.67 %; p < 0.001 six months after vaccination. The difference between unvaccinated and vaccinated patients was significant (8.14 % vs 0.08 %; p < 0.001) among those with acute COVID-19 infection hospitalized. In terms of post-COVID symptoms, single or double vaccinated patients had significantly fewer outpatient hospital admissions than unvaccinated patients (7.56 vs 0 %; p < 0.001).ConclusionThe COVID-19 vaccination coverage was satisfactory in our sample. The uptake of COVID-19 vaccines by patients with COPD is of utmost importance because they are much more likely to develop severe complications.     

Influenza vaccination uptake among Canadian adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal study on Aging (CLSA)

IntroductionUnderstanding how influenza vaccine uptake changed during the 2020/2021 influenza season compared to previous pre-pandemic seasons is a key priority, as is identifying the relationship between prior influenza vaccination and COVID-19 vaccine willingness.MethodsWe analyzed data from a large, nationally representative cohort of Canadian residents aged 50 and older to assess influenza vaccination status three times between 2015 and 2020. We investigated: 1) changes in self-reported influenza vaccine uptake, 2) predictors of influenza vaccine uptake in 2020/2021, and 3) the association between influenza vaccination history and self-reported COVID-19 vaccine willingness using logistic regression models.ResultsAmong 23,385 participants analyzed for aims 1–2, influenza vaccination increased over time: 14,114 (60.4%) in 2015–2018, 15,692 (67.1%) in 2019/2020, and 19,186 (82.0%; combining those already vaccinated and those planning to get a vaccine) in 2020/2021. After controlling for socio-demographics, history of influenza vaccination was most strongly associated with influenza vaccination in 2020/2021 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 147.9 [95% CI: 120.9–180.9]); this association remained after accounting for multiple health and pandemic-related factors (aOR 140.3 [95% CI: 114.5–171.8]). To a lesser degree, those more concerned about COVID-19 were also more likely to report influenza vaccination in fall 2020, whereas those reporting a very negative impact of the pandemic were less likely to get vaccinated. Among 23,819 participants with information on COVID-19 vaccine willingness during the last quarter of 2020 (aim 3), prior influenza vaccination was most strongly associated with willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine (aOR 15.1 [95% CI: 13.5–16.8] for those who had received influenza vaccine at all previous timepoints versus none).ConclusionsOur analysis highlights the importance of previous vaccination in driving vaccination uptake and willingness. Efforts to increase vaccination coverage for influenza and COVID-19 should target individuals who do not routinely engage with immunization services regardless of demographic factors.     

People’s perspectives about COVID-19 vaccination certificate: Findings from a representative Italian sample

In Italy, like in other countries, issues still exist regarding how to reach high vaccine coverage and several countries have considered policies to increase vaccine uptake. In the present study, we focused on people who have a favorable attitude towards vaccination. In March-April 2021, we asked a representative sample of Italian participants (N = 1,530) to assess to what extent they would support the adoption of a COVID-19 vaccination certificate, excluding unvaccinated people from participating in public and cultural events. Furthermore, as the vaccination coverage increases, severe forms of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization more likely involve unvaccinated individuals, who might be perceived as those who don’t contribute to ending the pandemic and who constitute a significant health cost for society. We then asked participants to assess to what extent they would favor the idea of requiring people who refuse the vaccine to pay for their own medical expenses in case of hospitalization. We hypothesized that support for the adoption of the vaccination certificate would be predicted by the COVID-19 vaccination status (received, booked, high-, medium-, low-willingness to be vaccinated, or refused) and by the same factors that are known to affect the willingness to get vaccinated. These factors were also tested in a model aimed at investigating if a vaccinated person would favor a measure requiring the unvaccinated individuals to pay for medical expenses. Results confirmed that the support towards the vaccination certificate policy was strongly predicted by the vaccination status and by factors known to affect the willingness to get vaccinated. Interestingly (and surprisingly), a similar pattern was observed for the support of the policy about medical expenses. In conclusion, support for a COVID-19 vaccination certificate was high among the Italian population in the early phases of the vaccination rollout. The findings are discussed considering potential policies to tackle the pandemic.     

Individual factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in between and during pandemic waves (July–December 2020)

BackgroundA year after the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, the global rollout of vaccines gives us hope of ending the pandemic. Lack of vaccine confidence, however, poses a threat to vaccination campaigns. This study aims at identifying individuals’ characteristics that explain vaccine willingness in Flanders (Belgium), while also describing trends over time (July–December 2020).MethodsThe analysis included data of 10 survey waves of the Great Corona Survey, a large-scale online survey that was open to the general public and had 17,722–32,219 respondents per wave. Uni- and multivariable general additive models were fitted to associate vaccine willingness with socio-demographic and behavioral variables, while correcting for temporal and geographical variability.ResultsWe found 84.2% of the respondents willing to be vaccinated, i.e., respondents answering that they were definitely (61.2%) or probably (23.0%) willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine, while 9.8% indicated maybe, 3.9% probably not and 2.2% definitely not. In Flanders, vaccine willingness was highest in July 2020 (90.0%), decreased over the summer period to 80.2% and started to increase again from late September, reaching 85.9% at the end of December 2020. Vaccine willingness was significantly associated with respondents’ characteristics: previous survey participation, age, gender, province, educational attainment, household size, financial situation, employment sector, underlying medical conditions, mental well-being, government trust, knowing someone with severe COVID-19 symptoms and compliance with restrictive measures. These variables could explain much, but not all, variation in vaccine willingness.ConclusionsBoth the timing and location of data collection influence vaccine willingness results, emphasizing that comparing data from different regions, countries and/or timepoints should be done with caution. To maximize COVID-19 vaccination coverage, vaccination campaigns should focus on (a combination of) subpopulations: aged 31–50, females, low educational attainment, large households, difficult financial situation, low mental well-being and labourers, unemployed and self-employed citizens.     

Strategic silences,eroded trust: The impact of divergent COVID-19 vaccine sentiments on healthcare workers' relations with peers and patients

BackgroundPolarized debates about Covid-19 vaccination and vaccine mandates for healthcare workers (HCWs) challenge Belgian HCWs ability to discuss Covid-19 vaccine sentiments with peers and patients. Although studies have identified drivers of HCWs vaccine hesitancy, they do not include effects of workplace interactions and have not addressed consequences beyond vaccine coverage.MethodsInterviews and focus group discussions with 74 HCWs practicing in Belgium addressed Covid-19 vaccine sentiments and experiences of discussing vaccination with peers and patients.ResultsMost participating HCWs reported difficulties discussing Covid-19 vaccination with peers and patients. Unvaccinated HCWs often feared that expressing their vaccine sentiments might upset patients or peers and that they would be suspended. Consequently, they used social cues to evaluate others’ openness to vaccine-skeptical discourses and avoided discussing vaccines. Surprisingly, some vaccine-confident HCWs hid their vaccine sentiments to avoid peer and patient conflicts. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs observed that unvaccinated patients occasionally received suboptimal care. Suboptimal care was central in unvaccinated HCW unwillingness to express their vaccine sentiments to peers. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs described loss of trust and ruptured social relations with peers and patients holding divergent vaccine sentiments.DiscussionBelgian HCW perceived Covid-19 vaccines as a risky discussion topic and engaged in “strategic silences” around vaccination to maintain functional work relationships and employment in health institutions. Loss of trust between HCW and peers or patients, along with suboptimal patient care based on vaccination status, threaten to weaken Belgium’s, and by implication, other health systems, and to catalyze preventable disease outbreaks.     

Barriers to COVID-19 vaccination of migrant populations: A qualitative interview study of immunisation providers in Victoria,Australia

IntroductionThis study aimed to understand barriers and enablers, future strategies, communication approaches and resources needed for COVID-19 vaccination among migrant communities in Melbourne, Australia.Material and methodsWe interviewed 24 immunisation providers who deliver immunisation services to migrant populations in Melbourne. We used the WHO Behavioural and Social Drivers framework (underlined) to organise barriers and enablers to COVID-19 vaccination.ResultsParticipants believed migrants had concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy and saw vaccines as minimally beneficial in the ‘low COVID-19′ environment of Australia (what people think and feel). Healthcare providers with established relationships within migrant communities played key roles in vaccine advocacy (social processes). Migrants’ vaccine motivation was mediated by health literacy, institutional trust and previous experiences with health services. Practical issues included perceived lack of information on vaccine booking process and accessibility challenges.ConclusionsStrategies to increase migrant vaccine coverage should utilise immunisation providers with community links and trusted local vaccine ambassadors to engage and address community vaccine concerns.     

Methodological changes implemented over time to support accurate and timely COVID-19 vaccine coverage estimates: Ontario,Canada

AbstractThe COVID-19 vaccination program implementation in Ontario, Canada has spanned multiple years and is ongoing. To meet the challenges of the program, Ontario developed and implemented a new electronic COVID-19 immunization registry, COVaxON, which captures individual-level data on all doses administered in the province enabling comprehensive coverage assessment. However, the need for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine coverage assessments over a multi-year vaccination program posed challenges necessitating methodological changes. This paper describes Ontario’s COVID-19 immunization registry, the methods implemented over time to allow for the ongoing assessment of vaccine coverage by age, and the impact of those methodological changes.Throughout the course of the vaccination program, four different methodological approaches were used to calculate age-specific coverage estimates using vaccination data (numerator) obtained from COVaxON. Age-specific numerators were initially calculated using age at time of first dose (method A), but were updated to the age at coverage assessment (method B). Database enhancements allowed for the exclusion of deceased individuals from the numerator (method C). Population data (denominator) was updated to 2022 projections from the 2021 national census following their availability (method D). The impact was most evident in older age groups where vaccine uptake was high. For example, coverage estimates for individuals aged 70–79 years of age for at least one dose decreased from 104.9 % (method B) to 95.0 % (method D). Thus, methodological changes improved estimates such that none exceeded 100 %.Ontario’s COVID-19 immunization registry has been transformational for vaccine program surveillance. The implementation of a single registry for COVID-19 vaccines was essential for comprehensive near real-time coverage assessment, and enabled new uses of the data to support additional components of vaccine program surveillance. The province is well positioned to build on what has been achieved as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and expand the registry to other routine vaccination programs.     

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines at preventing emergency department or urgent care encounters and hospitalizations among immunocompromised adults: An observational study of real-world data across 10 US states from August-December 2021

BackgroundImmunocompromised (IC) persons are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes and are less protected by 1–2 COVID-19 vaccine doses than are immunocompetent (non-IC) persons. We compared vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended COVID-19 of 2–3 mRNA and 1–2 viral-vector vaccine doses between IC and non-IC adults.MethodsUsing a test-negative design among eight VISION Network sites, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) events and hospitalizations from 26 August-25 December 2021 was estimated separately among IC and non-IC adults and among specific IC condition subgroups. Vaccination status was defined using number and timing of doses. VE for each status (versus unvaccinated) was adjusted for age, geography, time, prior positive test result, and local SARS-CoV-2 circulation.ResultsWe analyzed 8,848 ED/UC events and 18,843 hospitalizations among IC patients and 200,071 ED/UC events and 70,882 hospitalizations among non-IC patients. Among IC patients, 3-dose mRNA VE against ED/UC (73% [95% CI: 64–80]) and hospitalization (81% [95% CI: 76–86]) was lower than that among non-IC patients (ED/UC: 94% [95% CI: 93–94]; hospitalization: 96% [95% CI: 95–97]). Similar patterns were observed for viral-vector vaccines. Transplant recipients had lower VE than other IC subgroups.ConclusionsDuring B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance, IC adults received moderate protection against COVID-19–associated medical events from three mRNA doses, or one viral-vector dose plus a second dose of any product. However, protection was lower in IC versus non-IC patients, especially among transplant recipients, underscoring the need for additional protection among IC adults.     

A behavior change model to address caregiver hesitancy around COVID-19 vaccination in pediatrics

IntroductionMany families express hesitancy around immunizing their children against COVID-19. We sought to better understand the perspectives of vaccine hesitant caregivers, and develop targeted recommendations for health care workers and policymakers to engage in more effective vaccine discussions.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 23 caregivers recruited from a pediatric infectious diseases clinic, including a subset of patients referred to discuss vaccine hesitancy. Thematic analysis of the interviews identified themes that were mapped using behavior change models to identify perceived barriers and facilitators towards COVID-19 immunization.ResultsBarriers and facilitators were mapped to the WHO (World Health Organization) 3C’s (confidence, complacency, convenience) model of vaccine hesitancy as well as the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation) behavior change model. Barriers included mistrust in authorities, misperception of the risk of COVID-19 in children, and perceived health contraindications and negative previous vaccine experiences. Facilitators included positive relationships with healthcare workers, the promise of a “return to normal”, and societal pressures to immunize.ConclusionsEfforts to increase vaccine uptake in the pediatric population must target specific barriers and facilitators to immunization expressed by caregivers. To address these concerns, we suggest: 1. Educating hesitant caregivers by highlighting the long-term pandemic effects on children and the threat of COVID-19 to children’s health, 2. Building on the trust caregivers have in healthcare workers by involving frontline workers in public health policy, and 3. Harnessing the power of peer pressure by mobilization of societal pressures and establishing COVID-19 vaccination as the norm in children.     

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among people living with HIV in a low-resource setting: A multi-center study of prevalence,correlates and reasons

BackgroundHesitancy to COVID-19 vaccine may worsen the burden of COVID-19 among people living with HIV (PLHIV), who are at a higher risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death, compared to HIV non-infected individuals. Therefore, we evaluate the predictors and reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among unvaccinated PLHIV in six antiretroviral therapy (ART) clinics across northern Nigeria.MethodologyIn this cross-sectional study, conducted between October 2021 and February 2022 in six hospitals across two geopolitical regions of Nigeria, we utilized interviewer-administered questionnaires to assess COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among a convenience sample of 790 eligible adult PLHIV. Hesitancy was defined as answering ‘no' or ‘maybe’ to a question asking participants their willingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLHIV.ResultsOf the total 660 unvaccinated participants included in the analysis (61.82% female, mean age [SD] of 39.76 [10.75]), 381 (57.72%) were hesitant to COVID-19 vaccine. Being 50 years and older (aOR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.21–0.89), being unemployed (aOR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.34–0.95), experiencing the adverse effects of ART (aOR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.15–0.86), and perception of being at high risk of contracting COVID-19 (aOR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.13–0.37) were associated with significantly lower odds of hesitancy. Conversely, being female (aOR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.02–2.61) and attending ART clinics at state administrative capital cities (IIDH Kano [aOR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.10–5.25], MMSH Kano [aOR: 5.59; 95% CI: 1.97–10.66], YSSH Damaturu [aOR: 9.88; 95% CI: 4.02–24.29] vs. GH Gashua) were associated with significantly higher odds of hesitancy. The most common reasons for hesitancy include fear of potential adverse effects, skepticism about vaccine efficacy, the rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine, and the perceived lack of effort to develop a cure or vaccine for HIV/AIDS.ConclusionInterventions aimed at combating misperceptions and misinformation regarding the COVID-19 vaccination program may reduce the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among unvaccinated PLHIV.     

Where are children ages 5–17 years receiving their COVID-19 vaccinations? Variations over time and by sociodemographic characteristics,United States

BackgroundKnowing the settings where children ages 5–17 years received COVID-19 vaccination in the United States, and how settings changed over time and varied by socio-demographics, is of interest for planning and implementing vaccination programs.MethodsData from the National Immunization Survey-Child COVID-19 Module (NIS-CCM) were analyzed to assess place of COVID-19 vaccination among vaccinated children ages 5–17 years. Interviews from July 2021 thru May 2022 were included in the analyses for a total of n = 39,286 vaccinated children. The percentage of children receiving their COVID-19 vaccine at each type of setting was calculated overall, by sociodemographic characteristics, and by month of receipt of COVID-19 vaccine.ResultsAmong vaccinated children ages 5–11 years, 46.9 % were vaccinated at a medical place, 37.1 % at a pharmacy, 8.1 % at a school, 4.7 % at a mass vaccination site, and 3.2 % at some other non-medical place. Among vaccinated children ages 12–17 years, 35.1 % were vaccinated at a medical place, 47.9 % at a pharmacy, 8.3 % at a mass vaccination site, 4.8 % at a school, and 4.0 % at some other non-medical place. The place varied by time among children ages 12–17 years but minimally for children ages 5–11 years. There was variability in the place of COVID-19 vaccination by age, race/ethnicity, health insurance, urbanicity, and region.ConclusionChildren ages 5–17 years predominantly received their COVID-19 vaccinations at pharmacies and medical places. The large proportion of vaccinated children receiving vaccination at pharmacies is indicative of the success in the United States of expanding the available settings where children could be vaccinated. Medical places continue to play a large role in vaccinating children, especially younger children, and should continue to stock COVID-19 vaccine to keep it available for those who are not yet vaccinated, including the newly recommended group of children < 5 years.     

Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine based on the health belief model: A population-based survey in Hong Kong

BackgroundVaccines for COVID-19 are anticipated to be available by 2021. Vaccine uptake rate is a crucial determinant for herd immunity. We examined factors associated with acceptance of vaccine based on (1). constructs of the Health Belief Model (HBM), (2). trust in the healthcare system, new vaccine platforms and manufacturers, and (3). self-reported health outcomes.MethodsA population-based, random telephone survey was performed during the peak of the third wave of COVID-19 outbreak (27/07/2020 to 27/08/2020) in Hong Kong. All adults aged ≥ 18 years were eligible. The survey included sociodemographic details; self-report health conditions; trust scales; and self-reported health outcomes. Multivariable regression analyses were applied to examine independent associations. The primary outcome is the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine.ResultsWe conducted 1200 successful telephone interviews (response rate 55%). The overall vaccine acceptance rate after adjustment for population distribution was 37.2% (95% C.I. 34.5–39.9%). The projected acceptance rates exhibited a “J-shaped” pattern with age, with higher rates among young adults (18–24 years), then increased linearly with age. Multivariable regression analyses revealed that perceived severity, perceived benefits of the vaccine, cues to action, self-reported health outcomes, and trust in healthcare system or vaccine manufacturers were positive correlates of acceptance; whilst perceived access barriers and harm were negative correlates. Remarkably, perceived susceptibility to infection carried no significant association, whereas recommendation from Government (aOR = 10.2, 95% C.I. 6.54 to 15.9, p < 0.001) was as the strongest driving factor for acceptance. Other key obstacles of acceptance included lack of confidence on newer vaccine platforms (43.4%) and manufacturers without track record (52.2%), which are of particular relevance to the current context.ConclusionsGovernmental recommendation is an important driver, whereas perceived susceptibility is not associated with acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine. These HBM constructs and independent predictors inform evidence-based formulation and implementation of vaccination strategies.     

Impact of prior vaccination with CovishieldTM and Covaxin® on mortality among symptomatic COVID-19 patients during the second wave of the pandemic in South India during April and May 2021: a cohort study

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccines were authorised for emergency use to mitigate the impact of the pandemic. This study evaluated the effect of prior vaccination with either Oxford Astra Zeneca’s Covishield? or Bharath Biotech’s Covaxin® on mortality among symptomatic COVID-19 patients during the second wave of the pandemic in India.MethodologyIn this cohort study comprising of RT-PCR confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 patients presenting during April and May 2021, the effect of prior vaccination on mortality (primary outcome), need for hospitalization, oxygen therapy, non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission were assessed and expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsThe mean (SD) age of the cohort (n = 4183) was 46.3 (15.5) years; 17.9% (748/4183) had received at least one dose of Covishield? and 4.8% (201/4183) had received Covaxin®. Mortality was 0.2% (95% CI: 0.2% – 0.7%), 3.5% (1.9–5.2%), 6.2% (0.3–12%) and 12.9% (11.8–14.1%) among fully vaccinated (>2 weeks after two doses), partially vaccinated (>2 weeks after one dose or <2 weeks after two doses), indeterminate (<2 weeks after one dose) and unvaccinated patients respectively. The difference in mortality among unvaccinated vs. fully vaccinated was 12.7% (95% CI: 11.4–13.9%), unvaccinated vs. partially vaccinated was 9.4% (7.4–11.4%) and unvaccinated vs. indeterminate vaccinated was 6.8% (0.8–12.7%). On adjusted analysis, as compared to unvaccinated patients, at least one dose of vaccine reduced the need for hospitalization (RR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.35–0.47), oxygen (0.33; 0.27–0.40), NIV (0.23; 0.17–0.32), ICU admission (0.18; 0.12–0.27) and mortality (0.18; 0.11–0.29).ConclusionAmong symptomatic COVID-19 patients, prior vaccination with Covishield ? or Covaxin® impacted the severity of illness and reduced mortality during a period of widespread delta variant circulation. Full vaccination conferred greater protection than partial vaccination.     

COVID-19 vaccine safety inquiries to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Immunization Safety Office

BackgroundFollowing the authorization and recommendations for use of the U.S. COVID-19 vaccines, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s Immunization Safety Office (ISO) responded to inquiries and questions from public health officials, healthcare providers, and the general public on COVID-19 vaccine safety.MethodsWe describe COVID-19 vaccine safety inquiries, by topic, received and addressed by ISO from December 1, 2020–August 31, 2022.ResultsOf the 1978 COVID-19 vaccine-related inquiries received, 1655 specifically involved vaccine safety topics. The most frequently asked-about topics included deaths following vaccination, myocarditis, pregnancy, and reproductive health outcomes, understanding or interpreting data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome.ConclusionsInquiries about vaccine safety generally reflect issues that receive media attention. ISO will continue to monitor vaccine safety inquiries and provide accurate and timely information to healthcare providers, public health officials, and the general public.     

The connection between COVID-19 vaccine abundance,vaccination coverage,and public trust in government across the globe

This study investigates that how the number of COVID-19 vaccines secured correlates with the vaccination coverage (full and booster) depending on whether or not there is trust in national government across 47 countries. The data are based on global figures as of Nov. 2021 and Feb. 2022 while measures for confidence in government is according to Gallup World Poll, Oct. 2021. The model includes an interaction term of these two predictors, also controls for a range of socio-economic factors and country specific variables. The results indicate a non-linear and mixed relationship between the numbers secured, the public trust, and the vaccination rate. In Feb. 2022, with confidence in government, securing number of vaccines to cover 200% of the population (or more) increased the full vaccination rate by 12.26% (95% CI: 11.70–12.81); where number secured was 300% (or more), the coverage increased by 7.46% (95% CI: 6.95–7.97). Under similar scenarios, rate of booster shots increased by 13.16% (95% CI: 12.62–13.70; p < 0.01) and 14.36% (95% CI: 13.86–14.85; p < 0.01), respectively. Where the number secured fell below 200%, confidence in government had a revers relationship with the rate of full vaccination (?2.65; 95% CI: ?3.32 to ?1.99), yet positive with the rate of booster shots (1.65; 95% CI: 1.18–2.12). These results indicate that better success can be achieved by a combination of factors including securing sufficient number of vaccines as well as improving the public trust. Vaccine abundance, however, cannot be translated into greater success in vaccination coverage. This study highlights the importance of efficiency in acquiring vaccine resources and need for improvement in public belief in immunization programmes rather than stock piling.     

Declining influenza vaccination rates in an underserved pediatric primary care center during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundInfluenza vaccination rates are decreasing in the United States. Disinformation surrounding COVID-related public health protections and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine roll-out may have unintended consequences impacting pediatric influenza vaccination. We assessed influenza vaccination rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in one pediatric primary care center, serving a minoritized population.MethodsA cross-sectional study assessed influenza vaccination rates for children aged 6 months to 12 years over the following influenza seasons (September-May): 1) 2018–19 and 2019–20 (pre-pandemic), and 2) 2020–21 and 2021–22 (intra-pandemic). Demographics and responses to social risk questionnaires were extracted from electronic health records. Total tetanus vaccinations across influenza seasons served as approximations of general vaccination rates. Generalized linear regression models with robust standard errors evaluated differences in demographics, social risks, and influenza vaccination rates by season. Multivariable logistic regression with robust standard errors evaluated associations between influenza season, demographics, social risks, and influenza vaccination.ResultsMost patients were young (mean age ～ 6 years), non-Hispanic Black (～80%), and publicly insured (～90%). Forty-two percent of patients eligible to receive the influenza vaccine who were seen in 2019–20 influenza season received the influenza vaccine, compared to 30% in 2021–22. Influenza and tetanus vaccination rates decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic (p < 0.01). The 2020–21 and 2021–22 influenza seasons, older age, Black race, and self-pay were associated with decreased influenza vaccine administration (p < 0.05).ConclusionsInfluenza vaccination rates within one pediatric primary care center decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic and have not rebounded, particularly for older children, those identifying as Black, and those without insurance.     

Vasovagal reactions after COVID-19 vaccination in Japan

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine administration started in February 2021 in Japan. As of December 2021, approximately 75% of the population aged ≥12 years had received two doses of vaccine. We conducted a study to investigate vasovagal reactions (VVR) after COVID-19 vaccination using data on adverse events following immunization. The crude reporting rate of VVR (cases/1,000,000 doses) after vaccination was 9.6 in all age groups combined, and was more frequent in the younger age groups: 28.6 and 37.2 in individuals aged 10–19 years and 20–29 years, respectively. In individuals aged 10–29 years, the rate was similar in males and females (33.0 and 34.2, respectively, p = 0.53); but was higher after dose 1 than after dose 2 (57.4 and 8.8, respectively, p < 0.001). Based on these results, caution needs to be exercised when vaccinating adolescents and young adults, especially with dose 1 of COVID-19 vaccines.