Individual-level factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among U.S. patients with cancer

IntroductionVaccine hesitancy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is a major public health concern in the US. Cancer patients are especially vulnerable to adverse COVID-19 outcomes and require targeted prevention efforts against COVID-19.MethodsWe used longitudinal survey data from patients seen at Moffitt Cancer Center to identify attitudes, beliefs, and sociodemographic factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among cancer patients. Patients with confirmed invasive cancer diagnosis through Cancer Registry data were asked about vaccine acceptance through the question “Now that a COVID-19 vaccine is available, are you likely to get it?” and dichotomized into high accepters (already received it, would get it when available) and low accepters (waiting for a doctor to recommend it, waiting until more people received it, not likely to get it).ResultsMost patients (86.8% of 5,814) were high accepters of the COVID-19 vaccine. High accepters had more confidence in the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine than low accepters. Multivariable logistic regression showed older individuals (70–89 vs.18–49: OR:2.57, 95% CI:1.33–4.86), those with greater perceived severity of COVID-19 infection (very serious vs. not at all serious: OR:2.55, 95% CI:1.76–3.70), practicing more risk mitigation behaviors (per one standard deviation OR:1.75, 95% CI:1.57–1.95), and history of receiving the flu shot versus not (OR:6.56, 95% CI:5.25–8.20) had higher odds of vaccine acceptance. Individuals living with more than one other person (vs. alone: OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.79) and those who were more socioeconomically disadvantaged (per 10 percentile points: OR: 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.85, 0.93) had lower odds of reporting vaccine acceptance.ConclusionMost patients with cancer have or would receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Those who are less likely to accept the vaccine have more concerns regarding effectiveness and side effects, are younger, more socioeconomically disadvantaged, and have lower perceptions of COVID-19 severity.     

Association of Sources of COVID-19 Information with Vaccine Uptake,Preventive Behaviors,and Perceived Severity of COVID-19

ObjectiveTo investigate the association of using informal sources and reliance on multiple sources of information with actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake, the number of doses of vaccine received, COVID-19 testing, essential preventive measures, and perceived severity of COVID-19.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional study.Setting and ParticipantsOur study sample consisted of 9584 community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries, representing a weighted 50,029,030 beneficiaries from the Winter 2021 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Supplement.MethodsTwo key independent variables were whether a respondent relied on a formal source (ie, traditional news, government guidance, or health care providers) or an informal source (ie, social media, Internet, or friends/family) the most for the COVID-19 information and the total number of information sources a respondent relied on.ResultsCompared with beneficiaries relying on formal sources of information, those relying on informal sources of information were less likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine (odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56–0.75) and COVID-19 testing (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74–0.98), to engage in preventive behaviors (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50–0.74), to have high perception of COVID-19 severity, and were more likely to be unvaccinated vs 2 doses of vaccine (relative risk ratio [RRR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.41–1.91). Relying on more information sources was significantly associated with higher odds of actual vaccine uptake (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17–1.26), COVID-19 testing (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07–1.15), engagement of essential preventive behaviors (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.25–1.42), having high perception of COVID-19 severity, and with lower likelihood of being unvaccinated vs 2 doses of vaccine (RRR, 0.82; 0.79–0.85).Conclusions and ImplicationsThe COVID-19 pandemic has made communicating information about coronavirus more important than ever. Our findings suggest that information from formal sources with expertise and more balanced sources of information were key to effective communication to prevent from COVID-19 infection among older adults.     

Changes in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among recovered critically Ill patients: A 12-month follow-up study

IntroductionWe surveyed a cohort of patients who recovered from severe SARS-CoV-2 infection to determine the COVID-19 vaccination rate. We also compared the willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine before and after its availability to assess changes in perception and attitude towards vaccination.Materials and MethodsRecovered patients with severe hypoxemic respiratory failure from SARS-CoV-2 infection treated in the ICU at Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia between April 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020 were followed up over a 1-year period to assess vaccine acceptability and acceptance rates, and changes in perception towards COVID-19 vaccination before and after vaccine availability.ResultsA total of 98 and 93 patients completed the initial and follow up surveys respectively. During the initial survey, 41% of the patients intended to receive vaccination, 46% responded they would not accept a vaccine against COVID-19 even if it were proven to be ‘safe and effective ‘and 13% undecided. During the follow up survey, 44% of the study cohort had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Major reasons provided by respondents for not accepting COVID-19 vaccine were lack of trust in the effectiveness of the vaccine, pharmaceutical companies, government, vaccine technology, fear of side effects and perceived immunity against COVID-19. Respondents were more likely to be vaccinated if recommended by their physicians (OR 6.4, 95% CI 2.8–8.3), employers (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.9–5.8), and family and friends (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–4.5).ConclusionWe found a suboptimal COVID-19 vaccination rate in a cohort of patients who recovered from severe infection. COVID-19 vaccine information and recommendation by healthcare providers, employers, and family and friends may improve vaccination uptake.     

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.     

Real-world uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among individuals expressing vaccine hesitancy: A registry-linkage study

Introduction Uptake of COVID-19 vaccination remains suboptimal in the United States and other settings. Though early reports indicated that a strong majority of people were interested in receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, the association between vaccine intention and uptake is not yet fully understood. Our objective was to describe predictors of vaccine uptake, and estimate the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of self-reported COVID-19 vaccine status compared to a comprehensive statewide COVID-19 vaccine registry.Methods A cohort of California residents that received a molecular test for SARS-CoV-2 infection during 24 February-5 December 2021 were enrolled in a telephone-administered survey. Survey participants were matched with records in a statewide immunization registry. Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare time to vaccination among those unvaccinated at survey enrollment by self-reported COVID-19 vaccination intention.ResultsAmong 864 participants who were unvaccinated at the time of interview, 272 (31%) had documentation of receipt of COVID-19 vaccination at a later date; including 194/423 (45.9%) who had initially reported being willing to receive vaccination, 41/185 (22.2%) who reported being unsure about vaccination, and 37/278 (13.3%) who reported unwillingness to receive vaccination. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for registry-confirmed COVID-19 vaccination were 0.49 (95% confidence interval: 0.32–0.76) and 0.21 (0.12–0.36) for participants expressing uncertainty and unwillingness to receive vaccination, respectively, as compared with participants who reported being willing to receive vaccination. Time to vaccination was shorter among participants from higher-income households (aHR = 3.30 [2.02–5.39]) and who reported co-morbidities or immunocompromising conditions (aHR = 1.54 [1.01–2.36]). Sensitivity of self-reported COVID-19 vaccination status was 82% (80–85%) overall, and 98% (97–99%) among those referencing vaccination records; specificity was 87% (86–89%).ConclusionWillingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination was an imperfect predictor of real-world vaccine uptake. Improved messaging about COVID-19 vaccination regardless of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection status may help improve uptake.     

浙江省≥60岁人群新冠疫苗接种意愿和影响因素

  目的  了解浙江省≥60岁人群新型冠状病毒疫苗(简称新冠疫苗)的接种意愿及其影响因素。  方法  2020年9月1日—2020年11月30日采用分层抽样法对浙江省≥60岁人群进行问卷调查,收集基本信息、接种意愿、COVID-19风险意识等信息,采用χ2检验比较各组接种意愿率的差异,并用多因素Logistic回归分析模型分析接种意愿的影响因素。  结果  共1 858名≥60岁老年人完成调查,其新冠疫苗免费接种、自费接种的意愿率分别为88.3%和66.1%。多因素Logistic回归分析模型显示,对于免费接种,居住在乡村(OR=1.6,95% CI:1.2~2.2)、无外出(OR=1.6,95% CI:1.1~2.3)、听说过COVID-19(OR=3.7,95% CI:2.4~5.8)、认为COVID-19会造成严重后果(OR=2.3,95% CI:1.6~3.5)的老年人接种意愿更高。愿意自费接种的主要原因是认同新冠疫苗的安全性和有效性;不愿意自费接种的原因主要包括新冠疫苗需要收费和担心新冠疫苗的不良反应。  结论  浙江省≥60岁人群新冠疫苗免费接种意愿较高,但仍应加强关于新冠疫苗知识的宣传教育,并落实全民免费接种政策,以增强该人群接种疫苗的依从性。     

Protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination against long COVID syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThe relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and long COVID has not been firmly established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between COVID-19 vaccination and long COVID.MethodsPubMed and EMBASE databases were searched on September 2022 without language restrictions (CRD42022360399) to identify prospective trials and observational studies comparing patients with and without vaccination before severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We also included studies reporting symptomatic changes of ongoing long COVID following vaccination among those with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Odds ratios (ORs) for each outcome were synthesized using a random-effects model. Symptomatic changes after vaccination were synthesized by a one-group meta-analysis.ResultsSix observational studies involving 536,291 unvaccinated and 84,603 vaccinated (before SARS-CoV-2 infection) patients (mean age, 41.2–66.6; female, 9.0–67.3%) and six observational studies involving 8,199 long COVID patients (mean age, 40.0 to 53.5; female, 22.2–85.9%) who received vaccination after SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Two-dose vaccination was associated with a lower risk of long COVID compared to no vaccination (OR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45–0.92) and one-dose vaccination (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43–0.83). Two-dose vaccination compared to no vaccination was associated with a lower risk of persistent fatigue (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41–0.93) and pulmonary disorder (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.47–0.52). Among those with ongoing long COVID symptoms, 54.4% (95% CI, 34.3–73.1%) did not report symptomatic changes following vaccination, while 20.3% (95% CI, 8.1–42.4%) experienced symptomatic improvement after two weeks to six months of COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination before SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a lower risk of long COVID, while most of those with ongoing long COVID did not experience symptomatic changes following vaccination.     

COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and uptake in a national prospective cohort of essential workers

IntroductionIn a multi-center prospective cohort of essential workers, we assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) by vaccine intention, prior SARS-CoV-2 positivity, and occupation, and their impact on vaccine uptake over time.MethodsInitiated in July 2020, the HEROES-RECOVER cohort provided socio-demographics and COVID-19 vaccination data. Using two follow-up surveys approximately three months apart, COVID-19 vaccine KAP, intention, and receipt was collected; the first survey categorized participants as reluctant, reachable, or endorser.ResultsA total of 4,803 participants were included in the analysis. Most (70%) were vaccine endorsers, 16% were reachable, and 14% were reluctant. By May 2021, 77% had received at least one vaccine dose. KAP responses strongly predicted vaccine uptake, particularly positive attitudes about safety (aOR = 5.46, 95% CI: 1.4–20.8) and effectiveness (aOR = 5.0, 95% CI: 1.3–19.1). Participants’ with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were 22% less likely to believe the COVID-19 vaccine was effective compared with uninfected participants (aOR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64–0.96). This was even more pronounced in first responders compared with other occupations, with first responders 42% less likely to believe in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (aOR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.40–0.84). Between administrations of the two surveys, 25% of reluctant, 56% reachable, and 83% of endorser groups received the COVID-19 vaccine. The reachable group had large increases in positive responses for questions about vaccine safety (10% of vaccinated, 34% of unvaccinated), and vaccine effectiveness (12% of vaccinated, 27% of unvaccinated).DiscussionOur study demonstrates attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and a positive shift in attitudes over time. First responders, despite potential high exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were more vaccine reluctant.ConclusionsPerceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine can shift over time. Targeting messages about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and illness severity may increase vaccine uptake for reluctant and reachable participants.     

广州市居民对新型冠状病毒疫苗的认知与接种意愿调查

目的 调查广州市居民对新冠疫苗的认知、接种意愿及影响因素，为新冠疫苗在居民中的推广提供理论依据和建议。方法 采用简单随机抽样方法对广州市居民进行电话调查，对数据进行χ2检验和多因素logistic回归分析。结果 回收有效问卷1 000份，居民新冠疫苗知晓率为83.60%（836/1 000），79.16%（547/691）愿意接种新冠疫苗；年龄≥40岁（OR = 0.524，95% CI: 0.291～0.943，P = 0.031）、未曾自费接种（OR = 1.456，95% CI: 1.030～2.059，P = 0.033）是影响居民疫苗知晓率的因素；女性（OR = 0.657，95% CI: 0.422～0.978，P = 0.038）、未曾自费接种（OR = 1.850，95% CI: 1.249～2.740，P = 0.002）是影响居民接种意愿的因素，疫苗无副作用（OR = 0.504，95% CI: 0.298～0.853，P = 0.011）和不清楚疫苗有效期（OR = 10.074，95% CI: 4.105～24.724，P = 0.031）是居民不接种新冠疫苗的重要影响因素。结论 广州市居民对新冠疫苗知晓度高、接种意愿强，但疫苗上市后立即接种的积极性低、认知尚匮乏，建议加强新冠疫苗相关知识的宣传教育。     

Receipt of COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines in California (USA) during the 2021–2022 influenza season

BackgroundDespite lower circulation of influenza virus throughout 2020–2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic, seasonal influenza vaccination has remained a primary tool to reduce influenza-associated illness and death. The relationship between the decision to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and/or an influenza vaccine is not well understood.MethodsWe assessed predictors of receipt of 2021–2022 influenza vaccine in a secondary analysis of data from a case-control study enrolling individuals who received SARS-CoV-2 testing. We used mixed effects logistic regression to estimate factors associated with receipt of seasonal influenza vaccine. We also constructed multinomial adjusted marginal probability models of being vaccinated for COVID-19 only, seasonal influenza only, or both as compared with receipt of neither vaccination.ResultsAmong 1261 eligible participants recruited between 22 October 2021–22 June 2022, 43% (545) were vaccinated with both seasonal influenza vaccine and >1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, 34% (426) received >1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine only, 4% (49) received seasonal influenza vaccine only, and 19% (241) received neither vaccine. Receipt of >1 COVID-19 vaccine dose was associated with seasonal influenza vaccination (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.15–6.43); this association was stronger among participants receiving >1 COVID-19 booster dose (aOR = 16.50 [10.10–26.97]). Compared with participants testing negative for SARS- CoV-2 infection, participants testing positive had lower odds of receipt of 2021-2022 seasonal influenza vaccine (aOR = 0.64 [0.50–0.82]).ConclusionsRecipients of a COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to receive seasonal influenza vaccine during the 2021–2022 season. Factors associated with individuals’ likelihood of receiving COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines will be important to account for in future studies of vaccine effectiveness against both conditions. Participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in our sample were less likely to have received seasonal influenza vaccine, suggesting an opportunity to offer influenza vaccination before or after a COVID-19 diagnosis.     

Impact of COVID-19 vaccination in post-COVID cardiac complications

BackgroundAfter the acute infection, COVID-19 can produce cardiac complications as well as long-COVID persistent symptoms. Although vaccination against COVID-19 represented a clear reduction in both mortality and ICU admissions, there is very little information on whether this was accompanied by a decrease in the prevalence of post-COVID cardiac complications. The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between COVID-19 vaccination and the prevalence of post-COVID cardiac injury assessed by echocardiogram, and long-COVID persistent cardiac symptoms. Methods: All patients who consulted for post-COVID evaluation 14 days after discharge from acute illness were included. Patients with heart disease were excluded. The relationship between complete vaccination scheme (at least two doses applied with 14 days or more since the last dose) and pathological echocardiographic findings, as well as the relationship of vaccination with persistent long-COVID symptoms, were evaluated by multivariate analysis, adjusting for age, sex and clinical variables that would have shown significant differences in univariate analysis. Results: From 1883 patients, 1070 patients (56.8%) suffered acute COVID-19 without a complete vaccination scheme. Vaccination was associated with lower prevalence of cardiac injury (1.35% versus 4.11%, adjusted OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.17–0.65, p=0.01). In addition, vaccinated group had a lower prevalence of persistent long-COVID symptoms compared to unvaccinated patients (10.7% versus 18.3%, adjusted OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.40–0.69, p<0.001). Conclusion: Vaccination against COVID-19 was associated with lower post-COVID cardiac complications and symptoms, reinforcing the importance of fully vaccinating the population.     

Association between COVID-19 vaccination status,time elapsed since the last vaccine dose,morbidity, and absenteeism among healthcare personnel: A prospective,multicenter study

AimWe assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination status and time elapsed since the last vaccine dose on morbidity and absenteeism among healthcare personnel (HCP) in the context of a mandatory vaccination policy.MethodsWe followed 7592 HCP from November 15, 2021 through April 17, 2022. Full COVID-19 vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination series plus a booster dose at least six months later.ResultsThere were 6496 (85.6 %) fully vaccinated, 953 (12.5 %) not fully vaccinated, and 143 (1.9 %) unvaccinated HCP. A total of 2182 absenteeism episodes occurred. Of 2088 absenteeism episodes among vaccinated HCP with known vaccination status, 1971 (94.4 %) concerned fully vaccinated and 117 (5.6 %) not fully vaccinated. Fully vaccinated HCP had 1.6 fewer days of absence compared to those not fully vaccinated (8.1 versus 9.7; p-value < 0.001). Multivariable regression analyses showed that full vaccination was associated with shorter absenteeism compared to not full vaccination (OR: 0.56; 95 % CI: 0.36–0.87; p-value = 0.01). Compared to a history of ≤ 17.1 weeks since the last dose, a history of > 17.1 weeks since the last dose was associated with longer absenteeism (OR: 1.22, 95 % CI:1.02–1.46; p-value = 0.026) and increased risk for febrile episode (OR: 1.33; 95 % CI: 1.09–1.63; p-value = 0.004), influenza-like illness (OR: 1.53, 95 % CI: 1.02–2.30; p-value = 0.038), and COVID-19 (OR: 1.72; 95 % CI: 1.24–2.39; p-value = 0.001).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic continues to impose a considerable impact on HCP. The administration of a vaccine dose in less than four months before significantly protected against COVID-19 and absenteeism duration, irrespective of COVID-19 vaccination status. Defining the optimal timing of boosters is imperative.     

COVID-19 vaccine uptake and intention during pregnancy in Canada

ObjectiveTo investigate COVID-19 vaccine uptake and intent among pregnant people in Canada, and determine associated factors.MethodsWe conducted a national cross-sectional survey among pregnant people from May 28 through June 7, 2021 (n = 193). Respondents completed a questionnaire to determine COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (defined as either received or intend to receive a COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy), factors associated with vaccine acceptance, and rationale for accepting/not accepting the vaccine.ResultsOf 193 respondents, 57.5% (n = 111) reported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Among those who did not accept the vaccine, concern over vaccine safety was the most commonly cited reason (90.1%, n = 73), and 81.7% (n = 67) disagreed with receiving a vaccine that had not been tested in pregnant people. Confidence in COVID-19 vaccine safety (aOR 16.72, 95% CI: 7.22, 42.39), Indigenous self-identification (aOR 11.59, 95% CI: 1.77, 117.18), and employment in an occupation at high risk for COVID-19 exposure excluding healthcare (aOR 4.76, 95% CI: 1.32, 18.60) were associated with vaccine acceptance. Perceived personal risk of COVID-19 disease was not associated with vaccine acceptance in the multivariate model.ConclusionVaccine safety is a primary concern for this population. Safety information should be communicated to this population as it emerges, along with clear messaging on the benefits of vaccination, as disease risk is either poorly understood or poorly valued in this population.     

Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people who inject drugs

IntroductionWe studied characteristics of COVID-19 vaccination uptake among people who inject drugs (PWID).MethodsParticipants aged ≥18 years who injected drugs ≤1 month ago were recruited into a community-based cohort from October 2020 to September 2021 in San Diego, California Poisson regression identified correlates of having had ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose based on semi-annual follow-up interviews through March 15, 2022.ResultsOf 360 participants, 74.7% were male, mean age was 42 years; 63.1% were Hispanic/Mexican/Latinx. More than one-third had ≥1 co-morbidity. HIV and HCV seroprevalence were 4.2% and 50.6% respectively; 41.1% lacked health insurance. Only 37.8% reported having ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose. None received ≥3 doses. However, of those vaccinated, 37.5% were previously unwilling/unsure about COVID-19 vaccines. Believing COVID-19 vaccines include tracking devices (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42,0.92) and lacking health insurance (aIRR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40,0.91) were associated with approximately 40% lower COVID-19 vaccination rates). Ever receiving influenza vaccines (aIRR: 2.16; 95%CI: 1.46, 3.20) and testing HIV-seropositive (aIRR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.03, 6.10) or SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive (aIRR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.05, 3.16) independently predicted higher COVID-19 vaccination rates. Older age, knowing more vaccinated people, and recent incarceration were also independently associated with higher COVID-19 vaccination rates.ConclusionsOne year after COVID-19 vaccines became available to U.S. adults, only one third of PWID had received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose. Multi-faceted approaches that dispel disinformation, integrate public health and social services and increase access to free, community-based COVID-19 vaccines are urgently needed.     

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.     

新型冠状病毒肺炎疫苗上市前疫苗犹豫情况及相关影响因素研究

目的 了解新型冠状病毒肺炎(简称新冠肺炎)疫苗上市前的疫苗犹豫发生情况及相关影响因素,为在疫苗上市早期采取针对性的干预措施提供科学依据.方法 自行设计调查问卷并通过网络发放,比较疫苗犹豫者和接受者在社会人口学信息、对新冠肺炎的认知情况、对疫苗的一般性认知情况,以及信心、自满和便利性等维度的差异.采用单因素和多因素log...     

Association of COVID-19 mortality with COVID-19 vaccination rates in Rhineland-Palatinate (Germany) from calendar week 1 to 20 in the year 2021: a registry-based analysis

Vaccination is among the measures implemented by authorities to control the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, real-world evidence of population-level effects of vaccination campaigns against COVID-19 are required to confirm that positive results from clinical trials translate into positive public health outcomes. Since the age group 80?+?years is most at risk for severe COVID-19 disease progression, this group was prioritized during vaccine rollout in Germany. Based on comprehensive vaccination data from the German federal state of Rhineland-Palatinate for calendar week 1–20 in the year 2021, we calculated sex- and age-specific vaccination coverage. Furthermore, we calculated the proportion of weekly COVID-19 fatalities and reported SARS-CoV-2 infections formed by each age group. Vaccination coverage in the age group 80?+?years increased to a level of 80% (men) and 75% (women). Increasing vaccination coverage coincided with a reduction in the age group’s proportion of COVID-19 fatalities. In multivariable logistic regression, vaccination coverage was associated both with a reduction in an age-group’s proportion of COVID-19 fatalities [odds ratio (OR) per 5 percentage points?=?0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI)?=?0.82–0.96, p?=?0.0013] and of reported SARS-CoV-2 infections (OR per 5 percentage points?=?0.82, 95% CI 0.76–0.88, p?<?0.0001). The results are consistent with a protective effect afforded by the vaccination campaign against severe COVID-19 disease in the oldest age group.

     

A safety study evaluating non-COVID-19 mortality risk following COVID-19 vaccination

BackgroundThe safety of COVID-19 vaccines plays an important role in addressing vaccine hesitancy. We conducted a large cohort study to evaluate the risk of non-COVID-19 mortality after COVID-19 vaccination while adjusting for confounders including individual-level demographics, clinical risk factors, health care utilization, and community-level socioeconomic risk factors.MethodsThe retrospective cohort study consisted of members from seven Vaccine Safety Datalink sites from December 14, 2020 through August 31, 2021. We conducted three separate analyses for each of the three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US. Crude non-COVID-19 mortality rates were reported by vaccine type, age, sex, and race/ethnicity. The counting process model for survival analyses was used to analyze non-COVID-19 mortality where a new observation period began when the vaccination status changed upon receipt of the first dose and the second dose. We used calendar time as the basic time scale in survival analyses to implicitly adjust for season and other temporal trend factors. A propensity score approach was used to adjust for the potential imbalance in confounders between the vaccinated and comparison groups.ResultsFor each vaccine type and across age, sex, and race/ethnicity groups, crude non-COVID-19 mortality rates among COVID-19 vaccinees were lower than those among comparators. After adjusting for confounders with the propensity score approach, the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44–0.49) after dose 1 and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.46–0.50) after dose 2 of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 0.41 (95% CI, 0.39–0.44) after dose 1 and 0.38 (95% CI, 0.37–0.40) after dose 2 of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.51–0.59) after receipt of Ad26.COV2.S.ConclusionWhile residual confounding bias remained after adjusting for several individual-level and community-level risk factors, no increased risk was found for non-COVID-19 mortality among recipients of three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US.