首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
《Vaccine》2022,40(26):3713-3719
BackgroundIn response to this extraordinary outbreak, many countries and companies rush to develop an effective vaccine, authorize, and deliver it to all people across the world. Despite these extensive efforts, curbing this pandemic relies highly upon vaccination coverage. This study aimed to determine SARS-COV-2 vaccine uptake among Palestinian healthcare workers, the factors that influence vaccination uptake, and the motivators and barriers to vaccination.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using an online anonymous self-administered questionnaire during April and May 2021, after the Palestinian Ministry of Health launched the COVID-19 vaccination campaign.The questionnaire collected socio-demographic characteristics, vaccination attitude and vaccination uptake status, and motivators and barriers towards vaccination. In addition, multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the influencing factors of vaccination uptake.ResultsThe study included 1018 participants from different professions, including 560 (55.0%) females. Of the participants, 677 (66.5%; 95% CI: 63.5–69.4%) received the vaccine. Higher uptake was observed among males (aOR = 1.5; 95 %CI: 1.1–2.1), single HCWs (aOR = 1.3; 95 %CI: 1.1–1.8), HCWs working in the non-governmental sector (aOR = 1.6; 95 %CI: 1.2–2.4), higher monthly income (aOR = 1.9; 95 %CI: 1.4–2.8) and smoking (aOR = 1.5; 95 %CI: 1.1–3.5). The lower level of negative vaccination attitudes predicted higher intake; mistrust of vaccine belief (aOR = 1.6; 95 %CI: 1.4–1.7) and worries over unforeseen future effects (aOR = 1.2; 95 %CI: 1.1–1.3).ConclusionIn conclusion, the COVID-19 vaccination uptake was comparable to other studies worldwide but still needs to be improved, especially in the context of this ongoing global pandemic. It is imperative to invest resources to promote vaccination uptake and target all the vaccine misconceptions and fears.  相似文献   

2.
《Vaccine》2023,41(1):68-75
BackgroundThe risks of severe outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) are elevated in unvaccinated individuals. It remains crucial to understand patterns of COVID-19 vaccination, particularly in younger and remote populations where coverage often lags. This study examined disparities in COVID-19 vaccine coverage in farm children and adolescents.MethodsA cross-sectional analysis was conducted in patients of the Marshfield Clinic Health System (MCHS) in Wisconsin. The sample included children/adolescents age 5–17 years who were eligible for COVID-19 vaccine initiation for ≥ 90 days (as of September 30, 2022), stratified by those who lived vs did not live on a farm. Outcomes included COVID-19 vaccine initiation, series completion, and booster receipt. Multivariable regression was used to examine associations between COVID-19 vaccination and farm, as well as rural and non-rural, residence.ResultsThere were 47,104 individuals (5% farm residents) in the sample. Overall, 33% of participants initiated and 31% completed the COVID-19 vaccine series. After adjustment, farm residence was associated with significantly lower odds of COVID-19 vaccine initiation (aOR [95% CI] = 0.68 [0.61, 0.75], p < 0.001), series completion (aOR = 0.67 [0.60, 0.75], p < 0.001), and booster receipt (aOR = 0.73 [0.61, 0.88], p = 0.001). Secondary analyses found COVID-19 vaccine coverage was lowest in young children who lived on dairy farms.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccine coverage is low in north-central Wisconsin children and adolescents. Those who live on farms have significantly lower likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine initiation, series completion, and booster receipt compared to non-farm counterparts. Farm families are an underserved group and require more effective public health interventions designed to prevent COVID-19.  相似文献   

3.
《Vaccine》2023,41(10):1649-1656
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.  相似文献   

4.
《Vaccine》2023,41(20):3204-3214
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.  相似文献   

5.
《Vaccine》2023,41(15):2476-2484
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.  相似文献   

6.
《Vaccine》2023,41(15):2596-2604
BackgroundMonitoring the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infections remains important to inform public health responses. Estimation of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against serological evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection might provide an alternative measure of the benefit of vaccination against infection.MethodsWe estimated mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against development of SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid antibodies in March–October 2021, during which the Delta variant became predominant. Participants were enrolled from four participating healthcare systems in the United States, and completed electronic surveys that included vaccination history. Dried blood spot specimens collected on a monthly basis were analyzed for anti-spike antibodies, and, if positive, anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. We used detection of new anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to indicate SARS-CoV-2 infection, and estimated VE by comparing 154 case-participants with new detection of anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to 1,540 seronegative control-participants matched by calendar period. Using conditional logistic regression, we estimated VE ≥ 14 days after the 2nd dose of an mRNA vaccine compared with no receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine dose, adjusting for age group, healthcare worker occupation, urban/suburban/rural residence, healthcare system region, and reported contact with a person testing positive for SARS-CoV-2.ResultsAmong individuals who completed a primary series, estimated VE against seroconversion from SARS-CoV-2 infection was 88.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79.6%–93.9%) after any mRNA vaccine, 87.8% (95% CI, 75.9%–93.8%) after BioNTech vaccine and 91.7% (95% CI, 75.7%–97.2%) after Moderna vaccine. VE was estimated to be lower ≥ 3 months after dose 2 compared with < 3 months after dose 2, and among participants who were older or had underlying health conditions, although confidence intervals overlapped between subgroups.ConclusionsVE estimates generated using infection-induced antibodies were consistent with published estimates from clinical trials and observational studies that used virologic tests to confirm infection during the same period. Our findings support recommendations for eligible adults to remain up to date with COVID-19 vaccination.  相似文献   

7.
《Vaccine》2022,40(46):6664-6669
BackgroundElderly people in long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at higher risk for (severe) COVID-19, yet evidence of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population is scarce. In November 2021 (Delta period), a COVID-19 outbreak occurred at a LTCF in the Netherlands, continuing despite measures and booster vaccination campaign. We investigated the outbreak to assess VE of primary COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and to describe the impact of the booster vaccination.MethodsWe calculated attack rate (AR) and case fatality (CF) per vaccination status (unvaccinated, primarily vaccinated and boostered). We calculated VE – at on average 6 months after vaccination – as 1- risk ratio (RR) using the crude risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between vaccination status (primary vaccination versus unvaccinated) and outcomes (SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality < 30 days after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2).ResultsThe overall AR was 67% (70/105). CF was 33% (2/6) among unvaccinated cases, 12% among primarily vaccinated (7/58) and 0% (0/5) among boostered. The VE of primary vaccination was 17% (95% CI ?28%; 46%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 70% (95% CI ?44%; 96%) against mortality. Among boostered residents (N = 55), there were 25 cases in the first week after receiving the booster dose, declining to 5 in the second and none in the third week.ConclusionVE of primary vaccination in residents of LTCF was very low against SARS-CoV-2 infection and moderate against mortality. There were few cases at 2 weeks after the booster dose and no deaths, despite the presence of susceptible residents. These data are consistent with the positive impact of the booster vaccination in curbing transmission. Timely booster vaccination in residents of LTCF is therefore important.  相似文献   

8.
《Vaccine》2022,40(18):2574-2579
BackgroundReal-world studies showed varying levels of effectiveness of CoronaVac vaccine against COVID-19 disease. This study aimed to assess the association between the vaccination with CoronaVac and the COVID-19 infections among the health care workers in a university hospital and to determine the vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 in a period when alpha variant was dominant.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in a university hospital in Istanbul, Turkey employs 4067 health care workers. The follow-up period was defined as starting 14 days after receiving the second dose for fully vaccinated group. Health care workers were censored when have a positive PCR test result or at the end of the study. Unvaccinated health care workers were censored if they receive any COVID-19 vaccine doses. The incidence rate ratio and Cox regression were used to estimate the unadjusted and adjusted effectiveness of the vaccine.Findings: Seventy-one percent of the health care workers were fully vaccinated whereas 29% percent did not receive any doses. The incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 133.7 vs 70.7 per 100.000 person-days in the unvaccinated and fully vaccinated groups, respectively. The unadjusted effectiveness against COVID-19 infection was 47% (95% CI 31–59%) whereas adjusted effectiveness was 39% (95% CI 20–64%).Interpretation: This real life study conducted in health care workers demonstrated that the effectiveness of two doses of the CoronaVac vaccine (39%) was lower than that determined in clinical trials. Due to reduce in protection over time or against variants, booster doses may be needed.  相似文献   

9.
《Vaccine》2020,38(42):6500-6507
BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic in March 2020. Several prophylactic vaccines against COVID-19 are currently in development, yet little is known about people’s acceptability of a COVID-19 vaccine.MethodsWe conducted an online survey of adults ages 18 and older in the United States (n = 2,006) in May 2020. Multivariable relative risk regression identified correlates of participants’ willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine (i.e., vaccine acceptability).ResultsOverall, 69% of participants were willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Participants were more likely to be willing to get vaccinated if they thought their healthcare provider would recommend vaccination (RR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.49–2.02) or if they were moderate (RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.02–1.16) or liberal (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.07–1.22) in their political leaning. Participants were also more likely to be willing to get vaccinated if they reported higher levels of perceived likelihood getting a COVID-19 infection in the future (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.01–1.09), perceived severity of COVID-19 infection (RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04–1.11), or perceived effectiveness of a COVID-19 vaccine (RR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.40–1.52). Participants were less likely to be willing to get vaccinated if they were non-Latinx black (RR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74–0.90) or reported a higher level of perceived potential vaccine harms (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.92–0.98).ConclusionsMany adults are willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine, though acceptability should be monitored as vaccine development continues. Our findings can help guide future efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccine acceptability (and uptake if a vaccine becomes available).  相似文献   

10.
《Vaccine》2023,41(2):573-580
IntroductionCOVID-19 vaccine uptake has been a major barrier to stopping the pandemic in many countries with vaccine access. This longitudinal study examined the capability to predict vaccine uptake from data collected early in the pandemic before vaccines were available.Methods493 US respondents completed online surveys both at baseline (March 2020) and wave 6 (June 2021), while 390 respondents completed baseline and wave 7 (November 2021) surveys. The baseline survey assessed trust in sources of COVID-19 information, social norms, perceived risk of COVID-19, skepticism about the pandemic, prevention behaviors, and conspiracy beliefs. Multivariable logistic models examined factors associated with the receipt of at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose at the two follow-ups.ResultsIn the adjusted model of vaccination uptake at wave 6, older age (aOR = 1.02, 95 %CI = 1.00–1.04) and greater income (aOR = 1.69, 95 %CI = 1.04–2.73) was associated with positive vaccination status. High trust in state health departments and mainstream news outlets at baseline were positively associated with vaccination at wave 6, while high trust in the Whitehouse (aOR = 0.42, 95 %CI = 0.24–0.74) and belief that China purposely spread the virus (aOR = 0.66, 95 %CI = 0.46–0.96) at baseline reduced the odds of vaccination. In the adjusted model of vaccination uptake at wave 7, increased age was associated with positive vaccination status, and Black race (compared to white) was associated with negative vaccination status. High trust in the CDC and mainstream news outlets at baseline were both associated with being vaccinated at wave 7, while high trust in the Whitehouse (aOR = 0.24, 95 %CI = 0.11–0.51) and belief that the virus was spread purposefully by China (aOR = 0.60, 95 %CI = 0.39–0.93) were negatively associated with vaccination.ConclusionsThese findings indicated that vaccine uptake could be predicted over a year earlier. Trust in specific sources of COVID-19 information were strong predictors, suggesting that future pandemic preparedness plans should include forums for news media, public health officials, and diverse political leaders to meet and develop coherent plans to communicate to the public early in a pandemic so that antivaccine attitudes do not flourish and become reinforced.  相似文献   

11.
《Vaccine》2022,40(22):3046-3054
BackgroundVaccination is an important preventive measure against the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. We aimed to examine the willingness to vaccination and influencing factors among college students in China.MethodsFrom March 18 to April 26, 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional online survey among college students from 30 universities in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. The survey was composed of the sociodemographic information, psychological status, experience during pandemic, the willingness of vaccination and related information. Students’ attitudes towards vaccination were classified as ‘vaccine acceptance’, ‘vaccine hesitancy’, and ‘vaccine resistance’. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the influencing factors associated with vaccine hesitancy and resistance.ResultsAmong 23,143 students who completed the survey, a total of 22,660 participants were included in the final analysis with an effective rate of 97.9% after excluding invalid questionnaires. A total of 60.6% of participants would be willing to receive COVID-19 vaccine, 33.4% were hesitant to vaccination, and 6.0% were resistant to vaccination. Social media platforms and government agencies were the main sources of information vaccination. Worry about the efficacy and adverse effects of vaccine were the top two common reason of vaccine hesitancy and resistance. Multiple multinomial logistic regression analysis identified that participants who worried about the adverse effects of vaccination were more likely to be vaccine hesitancy (aOR = 2.44, 95% CI = 2.30, 2.58) and resistance (aOR = 2.71, 95% CI = 2.40, 3.05).ConclusionMore than half of college students are willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, whereas nearly one-third college students are still hesitant or resistant. It is crucial to provide sufficient and scientific information on the efficacy and safety of vaccine through social media and government agencies platforms to promote vaccine progress against COVID-19 and control the pandemic in China.  相似文献   

12.
BackgroundAdults with disabilities are at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease; whether adults with disabilities are at an increased risk for ongoing symptoms after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown.ObjectivesTo estimate the frequency and duration of long-term symptoms (>4 weeks) and health care utilization among adults with and without disabilities who self-report positive or negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.MethodsData from a nationwide survey of 4510 U.S. adults administered from September 24, 2021–October 7, 2021, were analyzed for 3251 (79%) participants who self-reported disability status, symptom(s), and SARS-CoV-2 test results (a positive test or only negative tests). Multivariable models were used to estimate the odds of having ≥1 COVID-19–like symptom(s) lasting >4 weeks by test result and disability status, weighted and adjusted for socio-demographics.ResultsRespondents who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had higher odds of reporting ≥1 long-term symptom (with disability: aOR = 4.50 [95% CI: 2.37, 8.54] and without disability: aOR = 9.88 [95% CI: 7.13, 13.71]) compared to respondents testing negative. Among respondents who tested positive, those with disabilities were not significantly more likely to experience long-term symptoms compared to respondents without disabilities (aOR = 1.65 [95% CI: 0.78, 3.50]). Health care utilization for reported symptoms was higher among respondents with disabilities who tested positive (40%) than among respondents without disabilities who tested positive (18%).ConclusionsOngoing symptoms among adults with and without disabilities who also test positive for SARS-CoV-2 are common; however, the frequency of health care utilization for ongoing symptoms is two-fold among adults with disabilities.  相似文献   

13.
《Vaccine》2021,39(48):7021-7027
AimHealthcare personnel (HCP) are prioritized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination to protect them and non-disruptive provision of healthcare services. We assessed the impact of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on morbidity and absenteeism among HCP.MethodsWe studied 7445 HCP in five tertiary-care hospitals in Greece from November 15, 2020 through April 18, 2021.ResultsA total of 910 episodes of absenteeism and 9695 days of absence were recorded during the entire study period. Starting from January 4, 2021, 4823/7445 HCP (64.8%) were fully or partially vaccinated. Overall, 535 episodes of absenteeism occurred from January 4, 2021 through April 18, 2021, including 309 (57.76%) episodes among 2622 unvaccinated HCP and 226 (42.24%) episodes among 4823 vaccinated HCP (11.8 versus 4.7 episodes of absenteeism per 100 HCP, respectively; p-value < 0.001). The mean duration of absenteeism was 11.9 days among unvaccinated HCP compared with 6.9 days among vaccinated HCP (p-value < 0.001). Unvaccinated HCP more frequently developed acute respiratory infection, influenza-like illness, and COVID-19 (p-values < 0.001 for all comparisons). Vaccine effectiveness for fully vaccinated HCP was estimated at 94.16% [confidence interval (CI): 88.50%-98.05%) against COVID-19, 83.62% (CI: 73.36%-90.38%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection (asymptomatic or COVID-19), and 66.42% (CI: 56.86%-74.15%) against absenteeism.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic had a considerable impact on healthcare workforce. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine significantly reduced morbidity, COVID-19, absenteeism and duration of absenteeism among HCP during a period of high SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the community. It is expected that HCP vaccination will protect them and healthcare services and contain healthcare costs.  相似文献   

14.
《Vaccine》2023,41(12):1916-1924
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.  相似文献   

15.
《Vaccine》2023,41(4):989-998
BackgroundIt is critical to monitor changes in vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 outcomes for various vaccine products in different population subgroups.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study in patients ≥12 years who underwent testing for SARS-CoV-2 virus from April 14 through October 25, 2021, at urgent care centers in the New York metropolitan area. Patients self-reported vaccination status at the time of testing. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) by comparing odds of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated (n = 474,805), partially vaccinated (n = 87,834), and unvaccinated (n = 369,333) patients, adjusted for demographic factors and calendar time.ResultsVE against symptomatic infection after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine was 96% (95% Confidence Interval: 95%, 97%) in the pre-delta period and reduced to 79% (95% CI: 77%, 81%) in the delta period. In the delta period, VE for 12–15-year-olds (85%; [95% CI: 81%, 88%]) was higher compared to older age groups (<65% for all other age groups). VE estimates did not differ by sex and race/ethnicity. VE against symptomatic infection was the highest for individuals with a prior infection followed by full vaccination. VE against symptomatic infection after the 2-dose mRNA-1273 vaccine (82% [95% CI: 80%, 84%]) was higher compared to the BNT162b2 vaccine (76% [95% CI: 74%, 78%]) in the delta period. VE after 1-dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was the lowest compared to other vaccines (19% [95% CI: 15%, 23%]) in the delta period.ConclusionsVE against infection after two doses of the mRNA vaccines was high initially, but significantly reduced against the delta variant for both FDA-approved vaccines.  相似文献   

16.
《Vaccine》2022,40(41):5856-5859
BackgroundThe majority of healthcare workers (HCW) in the US report being fully vaccinated against COVID-19, yet little is known about vaccine decision-making for their household members, including children.MethodsCross-sectional survey July–August 2021 of HCW and their household members in Minnesota.Results94 % of eligible participants were vaccinated with the most common reasons being wanting to protect oneself, family and loved ones. Safety concerns were the most commonly reported reasons for not being vaccinated; a significantly higher proportion of unvaccinated compared to vaccinated HCW (58 % vs 12 %, p = 0.0035) and household adults (25 % vs 5 %, p = 0.03) reported prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nearly half of unvaccinated adults and two-thirds of unvaccinated children would be vaccinated if a vaccine mandate were in place.ConclusionsDespite high COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among HCWs, more research is required to identify and address the needs and concerns of healthcare workers who decline COVID-19 vaccination despite availability.  相似文献   

17.
《Vaccine》2021,39(27):3602-3607
BackgroundAlthough vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the most desired solution to end the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, there are growing concerns that vaccine hesitancy would undermine its potential. We examined the intention to receive vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and the associated factors in a representative sample of Chinese adults in Hong Kong.MethodsWe did a dual-frame (landline and mobile) cross-sectional survey of a random sample of 1501 Hong Kong residents aged 18 years or older (53.6% females) in April 2020. We collected data on the intention to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccine when it becomes available (yes/ no/ undecided), knowledge and perceptions of COVID-19, smoking, alcohol drinking, and sociodemographic factors. Prevalence estimates were weighted by the sex, age, and education of the general population of Hong Kong.ResultsOverall, 45.3% (95% CI: 42.3–48.4%) of the participants had intentions to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2 when it becomes available, 29.2% (26.5–32.1%) were undecided, and 25.5% (22.9–28.2%) had no intention. The most common reason for vaccine hesitancy (undecided or no intention) was safety concerns (56.5%). Multivariable partial proportional odds model showed higher vaccine hesitancy in males, younger adults, those with no chronic disease, current smokers, and non-alcohol drinkers. After adjusting for sociodemographic and other factors, inadequate knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 transmission (adjusted ORs ranged from 1.27 to 2.63; P < 0.05) and lower perceived danger of COVID-19 (adjusted ORs ranged from 1.62 to 2.47; P < 0.001) were significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy.ConclusionsIn a representative sample of Chinese adults in Hong Kong, only 45.3% of the participants intended to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2 when available. Vaccine hesitancy was associated with inadequate knowledge about SARS-CoV-2 transmission and lower perceived danger of COVID-19, which needed to be addressed to improve vaccination uptake.  相似文献   

18.
《Vaccine》2021,39(50):7300-7307
BackgroundEarly in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, before severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines became available, it was hypothesized that BCG (Bacillus Calmette–Guérin), which stimulates innate immunity, could provide protection against SARS-CoV-2. Numerous ecological studies, plagued by methodological deficiencies, revealed a country-level association between BCG use and lower COVID-19 incidence and mortality. We aimed to determine whether BCG administered in early life decreased the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in adulthood and the severity of COVID-19.MethodsThis case-control study was conducted in Quebec, Canada. Cases were patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test performed at two hospitals between March–October 2020. Controls were identified among patients with non-COVID-19 samples processed by the same microbiology laboratories during the same period. Enrolment was limited to individuals born in Quebec between 1956 and 1976, whose vaccine status was accessible in a computerized registry of 4.2 million BCG vaccinations.ResultsWe recruited 920 cases and 2123 controls. Fifty-four percent of cases (n = 424) and 53% of controls (n = 1127) had received BCG during childhood (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.89–1.21), while 12% of cases (n = 114) and 11% of controls (n = 235) had received two or more BCG doses (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.88–1.46). After adjusting for age, sex, material deprivation, recruiting hospital and occupation there was no evidence of protection conferred by BCG against SARS-CoV-2 (AOR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.84–1.21). Among cases, 77 (8.4%) needed hospitalization and 18 (2.0%) died. The vaccinated were as likely as the unvaccinated to require hospitalization (AOR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.62–1.67) or to die (AOR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.32–2.39).ConclusionsBCG does not provide long-term protection against symptomatic COVID-19 or severe forms of the disease.  相似文献   

19.
《Vaccine》2021,39(48):7074-7081
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.  相似文献   

20.
《Vaccine》2023,41(2):511-518
BackgroundStudies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness show increases in COVID-19 cases within 14 days of a first dose, potentially reflecting post-vaccination behaviour changes associated with SARS-CoV-2 transmission before vaccine protection. However, direct evidence for a relationship between vaccination and behaviour is lacking. We aimed to examine the association between vaccination status and self-reported non-household contacts and non-essential activities during a national lockdown in England and Wales.MethodsParticipants (n = 1154) who had received the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine reported non-household contacts and non-essential activities from February to March 2021 in monthly surveys during a national lockdown in England and Wales. We used a case-crossover study design and conditional logistic regression to examine the association between vaccination status (pre-vaccination vs 14 days post-vaccination) and self-reported contacts and activities within individuals. Stratified subgroup analyses examined potential effect heterogeneity by sociodemographic characteristics such as sex, household income or age group.Results457/1154 (39.60 %) participants reported non-household contacts post-vaccination compared with 371/1154 (32.15 %) participants pre-vaccination. 100/1154 (8.67 %) participants reported use of non-essential shops or services post-vaccination compared with 74/1154 (6.41 %) participants pre-vaccination. Post-vaccination status was associated with increased odds of reporting non-household contacts (OR 1.65, 95 % CI 1.31–2.06, p < 0.001) and use of non-essential shops or services (OR 1.50, 95 % CI 1.03–2.17, p = 0.032). This effect varied between men and women and different age groups.ConclusionParticipants had higher odds of reporting non-household contacts and use of non-essential shops or services within 14 days of their first COVID-19 vaccine compared to pre-vaccination. Public health emphasis on maintaining protective behaviours during this post-vaccination time period when individuals have yet to develop full protection from vaccination could reduce risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号