Changes in childhood immunization decisions in the United States: Results from 2012 & 2014 National Parental Surveys

ObjectiveUnderstanding the current status of parents’ vaccine decision making is crucial to inform public policy. We sought to assess changes in vaccine decisions among parents of young children.MethodsWe conducted a web-based national poll of parents of children <7 years in 2012 and 2014. Participants reported vaccine decisions for their youngest child. We calculated survey-weighted population estimates of overall immunizations decisions, and delay/refusal rates for specific vaccines.ResultsIn 2012, 89.2% (95% CI, 87.3–90.8%) reported accepting or planning to accept all recommended non-influenza childhood vaccines, 5.5% (4.5–6.6%) reported intentionally delaying one or more, and 5.4% (4.1–6.9%) reported refusing one or more vaccines. In 2014, the acceptance, delay, and refusal rates were 90.8% (89.3–92.1%), 5.6% (4.6–6.9%), and 3.6% (2.8–4.5%), respectively. Between 2012 and 2014, intentional vaccine refusal decreased slightly among parents of older children (2–6 years) but not younger children (0–1 years). The proportion of parents working to catch up on all vaccines increased while those refusing some but not all vaccines decreased. The South experienced a significant increase in estimated acceptance (90.1–94.1%) and a significant decrease in intentional ongoing refusal (5.0–2.1%). Vaccine delay increased in the Northeast (3.2–8.8%).ConclusionsNationally, acceptance and ongoing intentional delay of recommended non-influenza childhood vaccines were stable. These findings suggest that more effort is warranted to counter persistent vaccine hesitancy, particularly at the local level. Longitudinal monitoring of immunization attitudes is also warranted to evaluate temporal shifts over time and geographically.     

Parent perspectives on childhood vaccination: How to deal with vaccine hesitancy and refusal?

Background

The aims of the study are to evaluate attitudes about childhood vaccines and vaccine refusal or delay among parents and to assess the role played by the variables mapped as potential determinants to suggest strategies that could improve childhood vaccination rates.

The associations between medical,allied and complementary medicine practitioner visits and childhood vaccine uptake

BackgroundVaccination rates have remained steady for a number of years in Australia, however geographical areas of lower vaccine coverage remains a day-to-day challenge. The study explores parental attitudes, beliefs and intentions in relation to vaccination and examines the early effects of recent No Jab No Pay legislation.MethodsA national survey of was conducted, using an online questionnaire. Parents from all states in Australia with at least one child aged <6 years were invited to participate.ResultsA total of 429 parents participated in the study. The substantial majority of participants reported having their youngest child's vaccination status up to date (n = 401, 93.5%). A child’s vaccinations were more likely to be up to date if they had consulted a paediatrician in the previous 12-months (OR 5.01; 95%CI 1.05, 23.92; p = .043). Conversely they were less likely to be vaccinated if they were influenced by information from a complementary medicine (CM) practitioner (OR 0.03; 95%CI 0.01, 0.15; p < .001) or had visited a CM-practitioner (OR 0.09; 95%CI 0.02, 0.33; p < .001) in the previous 12-months. A total of 2.6% of parents had immunised their child as a result of the No Jab No Pay legislation, while 3.9% stated the legislation had no effect, and 1.2% said it had made them less likely to vaccinate. A further 1.2% of parents stated they are considering vaccination as a result of the legislative changes.ConclusionParents who have not vaccinated their children appear to trust non-mainstream sources of information such as CM-practitioners. Further research is required to determine how to manage the challenges and opportunities of CM-practitioners as a source of vaccine information.     

An assessment of parental knowledge,attitudes, and beliefs regarding influenza vaccination

IntroductionSeasonal influenza imposes a significant clinical and economic burden. Despite the availability of an annual vaccine to prevent influenza infection and reduce disease severity, influenza vaccination rates remain suboptimal. Research suggests personal experience, perceived effectiveness, and concerns regarding vaccine safety and side effects are the most influential factors in predicting a parent’s decision to vaccinate. However, current literature is primarily focused on the vaccine decision-making of healthcare workers and those at high risk for influenza complications.MethodsTo assess parental attitudes and beliefs regarding the influenza vaccine, a brief mixed-methods survey was developed and optimized for an electronic platform. The Health Belief Model informed survey design and data analysis. Questions were classified into five core concepts: knowledge, barriers, benefits, experience, and severity. Participants were solicited from a population of parents whose children had participated in a school-based influenza surveillance study (n = 244, 73% response rate). We tested associations between responses and children’s influenza vaccination status the prior season. Categorical questions were tested using Pearson's chi-squared tests and numerical or ordered questions using Mann-Whitney tests. P-values were corrected using the Bonferroni method.ResultsDoubting effectiveness, concerns about side effects, inconvenience, and believing the vaccine is unnecessary were barriers negatively associated with parents’ decision to vaccinate their children during the 2017–18 flu season (p < 0.001). Knowledge that the vaccine is effective in lowering risk, duration, and severity of influenza; receiving the influenza vaccine as an adult; and recognizing the importance of vaccination to prevent influenza transmission in high-risk populations were positively associated with parents’ decision to vaccinate (p < 0.001).ConclusionUnderstanding barriers and motivators behind parents’ decision to vaccinate provides valuable insight that has the potential to shape vaccine messaging, recommendations, and policy. The motivation to vaccinate to prevent influenza transmission in high-risk populations is a novel finding that warrants further investigation.     

Parental experiences with vaccine information statements: Implications for timing,delivery, and parent-provider immunization communication

ObjectiveWe examined Vaccine Information Statements (VIS) dissemination practices and parental use and perceptions.MethodsWe conducted a national online panel survey of 2603 US parents of children aged <7. Primary outcomes included reported VIS receipt, delivery timing, reading experiences, and perceived utility.ResultsMost parents received a VIS (77.2%; [95% CI: 74.5–79.7%]), 59.7% [56.6–62.7%] before vaccination but 14.5% [12.5–16.8%] reported receiving it after their child’s immunization; 15.1% [13.0–17.6%] were unsure of receipt status or timing; another 10.7% [9.0–12.6%] reported non-receipt of a VIS. Less than half who received a VIS before vaccination completed it before vaccination (46.2% [42.4, 50.0%]), but most who read at least some found the information useful (95.7% [93.8–97.0%]). Parents who delayed or refused at least one recommended non-influenza vaccine reported fewer opportunities to ask providers VIS questions.ConclusionsMost parents report receiving VIS before vaccination as per federal guidelines. Continued effort is needed to enhance VIS distribution practice and parent-provider VIS content communication.     

Spatial distribution and determinants of childhood vaccination refusal in the United States

Parental refusal and delay of childhood vaccination has increased in recent years in the United States. This phenomenon challenges maintenance of herd immunity and increases the risk of outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. We examine US county-level vaccine refusal for patients under five years of age collected during the period 2012–2015 from an administrative healthcare dataset. We model these data with a Bayesian zero-inflated negative binomial regression model to capture social and political processes that are associated with vaccine refusal, as well as factors that affect our measurement of vaccine refusal. Our work highlights fine-scale socio-demographic characteristics associated with vaccine refusal nationally, finds that spatial clustering in refusal can be explained by such factors, and has the potential to aid in the development of targeted public health strategies for optimizing vaccine uptake.     

Effective interventions to increase routine childhood immunization coverage in low socioeconomic status communities in developed countries: A systematic review and critical appraisal of peer-reviewed literature

ObjectivesChildhood immunization coverage rates are known to be disproportionate according to population’s socioeconomic status (SES). This systematic review examined and appraised quality of interventions deemed effective to increase routine childhood immunization uptake in low SES populations in developed countries.MethodsA literature search was conducted using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, EBMR, PsycInfo, PubMed, and Health STAR. We systematically searched and critically appraised articles published between January 1990 and December 2019 using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tool. This systematic review provides a synthesis of the available evidence for childhood immunization interventions deemed effective for low SES parents or families of children ≤ 5 years of age.SynthesisThe search yielded 3317 records, of which 2975 studies met the inclusion criteria. From the 100 relevant studies, a total of 40 were included. The majority of effective and strongly rated studies synthesized consisted of multi-component interventions. Such interventions addressed access, community-based mobilization, outreach, appointment reminders, education, clinical tracking and incentives, and were language and health literacy appropriate to support low SES parents. Improving access to low SES parents was deemed effective in the vast majority of strongly rated studies. Incorrect contact information of low SES parents due to increased social mobility (i.e. household moves) rendered reminders ineffective, and therefore, updating contact information should be pursued proactively by front-line healthcare providers. In addition, plain language communication with low SES parents regarding immunization was deemed effective in improving immunization uptake.ConclusionComprehensive multi-component interventions including improved access, appointment reminders, education and precision health communication are effective for addressing health inequities in immunization coverage amongst marginalized populations. Most low SES parents still believe that the benefits of immunization outweigh the risks.     

Vaccine sentiments and under-vaccination: Attitudes and behaviour around Measles,Mumps, and Rubella vaccine (MMR) in an Australian cohort

ObjectiveThe study aimed to examine the consistency in factors associated with attitudes towards vaccination and MMR vaccination status.MethodsUsing the nationally representative Longitudinal Study of Australian Children matched with the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register, 4,779 children were included from 2004–2005 to 2010–11. Different MMR vaccine dosages and general attitude towards vaccination were modelled individually with multinomial logit regressions, controlling for demographic, socioeconomic, and health related factors of the children and their primary carers.ResultsThe group with non-vaccination and negative attitudes was characterised by more siblings and older parents; the group with under-vaccination but positive attitudes was characterised by younger parental age; and the group with under-vaccination and neutral attitudes was characterised by less socioeconomically advantaged areas. The presence of parental medical condition(s), being private or public renters, and higher parental education were associated with under-vaccination but not with attitudes towards vaccination, whilst parental religion was associated with attitudes towards vaccination but not reflected in the vaccine uptake.ConclusionsVaccine attitudes were largely consistent with MRR vaccine outcomes. However, there was variation in the associations of factors with vaccine attitudes and uptake. The results have implications for different policy designs that target subgroups with consistent or inconsistent vaccination attitudes and behaviour. Parents with intentional and unintentional under-vaccination are of policy concern and require different policy solutions.     

Mandatory immunization and vaccine injury support programs: A survey of 28 GNN countries

BackgroundDespite the proposed ethical link between mandatory immunization and Vaccine Injury Support Programs (VISPs), relatively few jurisdictions, even those with mandatory immunization, have implemented such programs. Although it may be assumed that individuals injured by a vaccine in a non-VISP country receive less support than in countries possessing such programs, the extent of the discrepancy is not clear; nor is the nature of any discrepancy.MethodsIn our 2018 survey of 28 Global NITAG (National Immunization Technical Advisory Group) Network (GNN) countries, we asked respondents about mandatory immunization and the availability of VISPs. Responses were supplemented with desktop research and review of scholarly literature for further information regarding VISP availability and details.ResultsAlthough only two of 14 (14%) surveyed jurisdictions with mandatory immunization had formal VISPs, responses from additional countries suggested the presence of less formal avenues of compensation for serious Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFIs); similarly, we found five of 15 (33%) of countries without mandatory immunization had implemented formal VISPs, but another three such countries suggested similar informal methods of compensation.ConclusionsFrom our data, it is evident that at least some countries with mandatory immunization may discharge their (perceived or actual) ethical obligation to provide financial assistance to vaccine-injured individuals through more informal avenues rather than structured VISPs, although the extent and impact of this practice is by its nature difficult to assess. Further, the nature of VISPs may vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and simple VISP/non-VISP classification of jurisdiction may fail to capture nuance in support for AEFI victims in many jurisdictions. Future assessments of VISPs should consider the possibility of these more informal avenues of support for vaccine injuries.     

Evaluating the effects of vaccine messaging on immunization intentions and behavior: Evidence from two randomized controlled trials in Vermont

The effectiveness of vaccines in reducing child morbidity and mortality worldwide relies on public acceptance. However, relatively little is known about the effects of vaccine communication on vaccine attitudes and immunization behavior. Previous research suggests that common communication approaches may be ineffective or even counterproductive, especially among vaccine-hesitant parents. However, these studies typically rely on observational data or self-reported measures of vaccination intention. Using novel research designs, we tested the attitudinal and behavioral effects of messages encouraging vaccination in both a survey experiment conducted among a large sample of parents in Vermont who expressed hesitancy about childhood immunizations and a field experiment among parents whose children were overdue for vaccines. We find that neither a message promoting immunization as a social norm nor a message correcting common misperceptions about vaccines was measurably more effective than a standard public health message at improving parents’ attitudes toward vaccines, intention to vaccinate their children, or compliance with the recommended vaccine schedule. Our results highlight the need for more research on approaches to successfully reducing vaccine hesitancy among parents.     

Association of vaccine hesitancy and immunization coverage rates in the European Union

While previous studies have validated vaccine hesitancy scales with uptake behavior at the individual level, the conditions under which aggregated survey data are useful are less clear. We show that vaccine public opinion data aggregated at the subnational level can serve as a valid indicator of aggregate vaccine behaviour. We use a public opinion survey (Eurobarometer EB 91.2) with data on vaccine hesitancy for the EU in 2019. We link this information to (subnational) regional immunization coverage rates for childhood vaccines – DTP3, MCV1, and MCV2 -- obtained from the WHO for 2019. We conduct multilevel regression analyses with data for 177 regions in 20 countries. Given the variation in vaccine hesitancy and immunization rates between countries and within countries, we affirm the valuable role that surveys can play as a public health surveillance tool when it comes to vaccine behavior. We find statistically significantly lower regional vaccine immunization rates in regions where vaccine hesitancy is more pronounced. Our results suggest that different uptake rates across subnational regions are due, at least in part, to differences in attitudes towards vaccines and vaccination. The results are robust to several alternative specifications.     

Vaccine hesitancy in pregnant Women: A narrative review

Pregnant women are often at higher risk for morbidity and mortality due to contracting vaccine-preventable diseases that result in adverse pregnancy outcomes such as spontaneous abortion, preterm births, and congenital fetal defects. For example, health care provider recommendation is correlated with maternal acceptance of influenza vaccination, however, up to 33 % of pregnant women remain unvaccinated irrespective of provider recommendation. Vaccine hesitancy is a multifactorial problem that both the medical and public health systems need to address synergistically. Vaccine education should incorporate balanced perspectives to deliver vaccine education. This narrative review addresses four questions: 1) what are the primary concerns of pregnant women that lead them to be hesitant about receiving vaccinations; 2) to what extent does the source (e.g. provider, friend, family) of vaccine advice and information influence a pregnant person’s decision to accept a vaccine; 3) how does the delivery method of vaccine education influence their decision; 4) how can categorizing patients into four distinct groups based on their opinions and behavior regarding vaccines be used to improve provider-patient communication and increase vaccine acceptance. Results from the literature show that the three most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy include: i.) fear of side effects or adverse events; ii.) lack of confidence in vaccine safety; iii.) low perception of being at high risk of infection during pregnancy and/or not having previously received the vaccination when not pregnant. We conclude that vaccine hesitancy is dynamic therefore people do not always hold a static level of vaccine hesitancy. People may move between a continuum of vaccine hesitancy for a multifactorial reasons. A framework, characterized by levels of vaccine hesitancy before and during pregnancy, was constructed to help providers find balance between promoting individual health and public health while providing vaccine education.     

MomsTalkShots: An individually tailored educational application for maternal and infant vaccines

IntroductionThe development and initial assessment in a clinical setting of a theory-driven, individually tailored educational application (app), MomsTalkShots, focused on increasing uptake of maternal and infant vaccines is described.MethodsMomsTalkShots algorithmically tailored videos based on parent needs to deliver an intervention that was specifically responsive to individual vaccine attitudes, beliefs and intentions, demographics, and source credibility. MomsTalkShots was evaluated among 1103 pregnant women recruited from 23 geographically and socio-demographically diverse obstetrician-gynecologist offices in Georgia and Colorado in 2017. Self-reported information needs were assessed pre-and post-videos and participants self-reported factors related to usability and analyzed in 2018.ResultsThe vast majority of women reported MomsTalkShots was helpful (95%), trustworthy (94%), interesting (97%) and clear to understand (99%), none of which varied by demographics or parity. Reported usability was slightly lower among vaccine hesitant women, yet the majority reported MomsTalkShots was helpful (91%), trustworthy (85%), interesting (97%) and clear (99%). The majority of women (72%) who did not have enough vaccine information pre-videos reported enough information post-videos.ConclusionsMomsTalkShots was designed to provide individually tailored vaccine information to pregnant women from a population with varied vaccine intentions, confidence and vaccine concerns. MomsTalkShots was extremely well-received among pregnant women, even among women who were initially vaccine hesitant and did not intend to vaccinate themselves and their infants according to the recommended immunization schedule. Next steps include evaluation to assess impact on vaccine uptake and expansion to adolescent and adult vaccines.     

Measuring vaccine acceptance and knowledge within health professions education

BackgroundRecent rises in the incidence of vaccine-preventable illnesses and suboptimal vaccine acceptance are considered a consequence of accumulating misinformation. Evidence-based approaches to patient-provider communication are key to addressing vaccine hesitancy.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess vaccination attitudes and foundational knowledge among healthcare professions students.MethodsA 72-item survey was developed to assess vaccine attitudes and knowledge about vaccination among health professions students. The survey incorporated 14 demographics questions, 41 attitude questions, and 17 knowledge questions. 16 of the attitude questions, derived from a set of core questions used to diagnose vaccine hesitancy from the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix, were analyzed together to derive a vaccine acceptance score.Results295 anonymous survey responses were collected between July 2019 and November 2020. Respondents represented students enrolled in medical, dental, pharmacy, optometry, and biomedical science health professions programs. Respondents scored 82.0% ± 0.8% (mean ± standard error of the mean) on questions that gauged vaccine acceptance. The mean vaccine acceptance score was 85.4% ± 1.0% for medical students and 88.0% ± 1.6% for biomedical science students. The mean knowledge score across all programs was 67.7% ± 1.1%. The greatest proficiency in knowledge scores was seen amongst medical students (79.0% ± 1.3%).ConclusionsAmongst the different health professions, students in the fields of medicine and biomedical sciences had the highest levels of vaccine acceptance attitudes and knowledge. The vaccine acceptance score can be utilized by health professions educators to guide vaccine education for future health professionals to better prepare them to address vaccine hesitancy and educate patients on vaccination.     

The 2017 Italian reform on mandatory childhood vaccinations: Analysis of the policy process and early implementation

BackgroundThe data on vaccination coverage for the year 2016 were a cause of concern for the Italian government. For some years, in fact, there has been a growing mistrust of vaccines in the Italy, and consequently vaccination coverage rates have been decreasing. The number of cases of measles has been particularly high.AimThe purpose of this article is to examine the content and the preliminary outcomes of the Lorenzin Decree, which was passed in 2017. This reform embodies a ‘hard’ approach to the issue of childhood vaccinations, based on their mandatory nature and on the intensification of the sanctions against non-compliant subjects.ResultsThe Lorenzin decree provides for an increase in mandatory infant vaccines from four to ten. Following the reform, unvaccinated children are denied access to nurseries and kindergartens. Parents who do not have their children vaccinated are liable to pay a financial penalty. Data on the preliminary outcomes of the reform show an increase in vaccination coverage.ConclusionThe Italian experience provides some policy recommendations, and could be a source of inspiration for European countries that are tackling vaccine hesitancy and declining vaccination coverage rates. At least for the short term, the 'hard' approach adopted by the Italian government is, in fact, bearing fruit, having reversed the negative trend in vaccination coverage rates.     

Vaccine exemption requirements and parental vaccine attitudes: an online experiment

Increases in vaccine hesitancy and vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks have focused attention on state laws governing school-entry vaccine mandates and the allowable exemptions (medical and nonmedical) from those mandates. There is substantial variation in the type of exemptions available in each state, and states with more rigorous or burdensome exemption requirements generally have lower exemption rates. States have little evidence, however, about how vaccine-hesitant parents respond to different requirements. Despite recent efforts to formulate “model legislation” templates for states to follow, policy evidence about optimal exemption regimes is limited to observational studies in states that have changed exemption laws. We conducted two online experiments to explore how parental attitudes and intentions responded to different school-entry vaccine mandate exemption requirements. We randomly assigned online participants to one of four hypothetical vaccine exemption application scenarios: parental signature only, a checklist of vaccines for which an exemption is requested, a lengthy (10–30+ min) video-based vaccine education module, and a requirement to write a statement justifying the exemption. Among parents with high vaccine hesitancy, a required vaccine education module led to significant decreases in vaccine hesitancy, while checklist and justification requirements increased vaccine hesitancy slightly. Among parents with low vaccine hesitancy, we observed a potential backfire effect when parents were required to write a justification statement. Our findings warrant replication in a larger, fully-powered trial to accelerate knowledge about how parents across the vaccine hesitancy spectrum respond to exemption regimes.     

Older adolescents and young adults willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine: Implications for informing public health strategies

ImportanceThe success in ending the COVID-19 pandemic rests partly on the mass uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. Little work has been done to understand vaccine willingness among older adolescents and young adults. This is important since this age group may be less likely to adhere to public health guidelines.ObjectiveTo understand willingness of getting a vaccine and reasons for vaccine hesitancy among a sample of older adolescents and young adults.DesignData were from the Well-Being and Experiences study (The WE Study), a longitudinal community-based sample of older adolescents and young adults collected from Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada from 2017 to 2020 (n = 664).SettingThe study setting was a community-based observational longitudinal study.ParticipantsParticipants for the study were aged 14 to 17 years old at baseline in 2016–17 (n = 1000). Data were also collected on one parent/caregiver. Waves 2 (n = 747) and 3 (n = 664) were collected in 2019 and 2020, respectively.ExposuresThe main exposures were sociodemographic factors, health conditions, COVID-19 knowledge, and adversity history.Main OutcomesThe main outcomes were COVID-19 vaccine willingness, hesitancy, and reasons for hesitancy.ResultsWillingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine was 65.4%. Willingness did not differ by age, sex, or mental health conditions, but did differ for other sociodemographic characteristics, physical health conditions, COVID-19 knowledge, practicing social/physical distancing, and adversity history. The most common reasons for not wanting a vaccine were related to safety, knowledge, and effectiveness. Sex differences were noted.Conclusions and RelevanceIncreasing uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine among older adolescents and young adults may rely on targeting individuals from households with lower income, financial burden, and adversity history, and generating public health messaging specifically aimed at vaccine safety, how it works to protect against illness, and why it is important to protect oneself against a COVID-19 infection.     

A cluster randomized trial to determine the effectiveness of a novel,digital pendant and voice reminder platform on increasing infant immunization adherence in rural Udaipur,India

BackgroundFive hundred thousand children under the age of 5 die from vaccine preventable diseases in India every year. More than just improving coverage, increasing timeliness of immunizations is critical to ensuring infant health in the first year of life. Novel, culturally appropriate community engagement strategies are worth exploring to close the immunization gap. In our study, a digital NFC (Near Field Communication) pendant worn on black thread and voice call reminder system was tested for the effectiveness in improving DTP3 adherence within 2 monthly camps from DTP1 administration.MethodA cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in which 96 village health camps were randomized to 3 arms: NFC sticker, NFC pendant, and NFC pendant with voice call reminder in local dialect. Randomization was done across 5 blocks in the Udaipur District serviced by Seva Mandir from August 2015 to April 2016.ResultsIn terms of our three primary outcomes related to DTP3 adherence, point estimates show conflicting results. Two outcomes presented adherence in the control. DTP3 completion within two camps after DTP1 showed higher adherence in the Control (Sticker) (74.2%) arm compared to the Pendant (67.2%) and Pendant and Voice arms (69.3%). Likewise, the estimate for DTP3 completion within 180 days of birth in the Control (Sticker) (69.4%) arm was higher than estimates in the Pendant (57.4%) and Pendant and Voice arms (58.7%). However, one outcome displayed higher adherence in the intervention. DTP3 completion within two months from the time of registration was higher in the Pendant (37.7%) and Pendant and Voice arms (38.7%) compared to the Control (Sticker) arm (27.4%). In all primary outcomes, differences in adherence were statistically insignificant both before and after controlling for confounding factors. In terms of secondary outcomes, our results suggest that providing a necklace generated significant community discussion (H = 8.8796, df = 2, p = .0118), had strong satisfaction among users (χ2=26.039, df = 4, p < .0001), and resulted in increased visibility within families (grandmothers: χ2=34.023, df = 2, p < .0001, fathers: χ2 = 34.588, df = 2, p < .0001).ConclusionNeither the NFC necklace nor the necklace with additional voice call reminders in the local dialect directly resulted in an increase in infant immunization timeliness through DTP3, the primary outcome. Still our process outcomes suggest that our culturally symbolic necklace has potential to be an assistive tool in immunization campaigns. Follow-on work will seek to examine whether positive behavior change towards vaccines can be fostered with earlier engagement of this platform beginning in the prenatal stage, under a continuum of care framework.     

COVID-19 vaccine uptake before and after a vaccine mandate at a major academic hospital: Trends by race/ethnicity and level of patient contact

ObjectivesTo assess vaccine coverage rates before and after implementation of a COVID-19 vaccine mandate among Health care Personnel (HCP) and demographic characteristics associated with vaccine uptake Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study conducted among 10,889 hospital employees followed from Dec 16, 2020 - October 31, 2021, at a large academic hospital in Philadelphia. Main Outcome and Measures: Time to COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine series completion rates before and after implementation of a COVID-19 vaccine mandate based on age, gender, race/ethnicity, and level of patient contact/occupational group.ResultsThe vaccination series completion rate was 86.0% prior to mandate announcement, and increased to 98.7% after mandate implementation. Rates before mandate announcement were highest among Asians (96.2%), Whites (94.0%), males (89.7%), employees ≥ 65 years of age (95.2%), and employees with direct patient care (physicians, 99.0%, and nurses, 93.3%). Hospital educational initiatives (including Town Halls and discussions with Black and Hispanic employees with the lowest vaccination rates) appeared to improve uptake. The largest increase in series completion after mandate announcement occurred among Blacks, those of other/multiracial backgrounds, and Hispanics (35.6%, 22.4%, and 10.8%, respectively) as well as those with some or no direct patient contact (24.5% and 18.3%, respectively). Medical or religious exemptions were approved for 64 (<0.6%) employees and 38 (<0.4%) left their positions (8 voluntary, 30 involuntary) specifically due to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate. No clinically meaningful differences by age, gender, or race/ethnicity for those who were vaccinated under the mandate versus those who left their positions were noted.Conclusions and RelevanceThese results suggest that while mandates may be challenging to institutions and enforcement unpopular, they play an important role in reducing hesitancy and securing high vaccination rates among HCP, a group at high risk of COVID-19 given their employment and who can be a source of disease transmission to patients.