Implementation of maternal influenza immunization in El Salvador: Experiences and lessons learned from a mixed-methods study

IntroductionThe World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that countries prioritize pregnant women for influenza vaccination, yet few low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) have implemented maternal influenza immunization programs. To inform vaccine decision-making and operational planning in LMICs, there is a need to document and share experiences from countries that provide seasonal influenza vaccine to pregnant women, particularly those with high coverage, like El Salvador.MethodsIn 2015 and 2016, PATH and country researchers conducted a mixed-methods study to document the experience and lessons learned from maternal influenza immunization delivery and acceptance in El Salvador as part of a collaborative effort between WHO and PATH. Researchers conducted focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews, antenatal clinic exit interviews, and key informant interviews with 326 participants from two municipalities in each of the country’s three regions. Respondents included pregnant and recently pregnant women, family members, community leaders, health personnel, public health managers and partners, and policymakers.ResultsFactors perceived as positively influencing maternal influenza immunization delivery and acceptance in El Salvador include the use of multiple vaccine delivery strategies, targeted education and community engagement efforts, and a high degree of trust between the community and health care providers. Influenza vaccine acceptance by pregnant women is high and has improved over time, largely attributed to education targeting health care advisors. Perceived challenges to pregnant women receiving health care and vaccination include the need for permission to attend services and limited access to health services in insecure areas related to the presence of criminal gang activity.ConclusionsWe identified approaches and barriers perceived to affect maternal influenza vaccine delivery in El Salvador. This information will be useful to public health decision-makers and implementers in El Salvador and other countries considering introduction of new maternal vaccines or striving to increase coverage of vaccines currently provided.     

Determinants of maternal immunization in developing countries

BackgroundMaternal immunization is an effective intervention to protect newborns and young infants from infections when their immune response is immature. Tetanus toxoid vaccination of pregnant women is the most widely implemented maternal vaccine in developing countries where neonatal mortality is the highest. We identified barriers to maternal tetanus vaccination in developing African and Asian countries to identify means of improving maternal immunization platforms in these countries.MethodWe categorized barriers into health system, health care provider and patient barriers to maternal tetanus immunization and conducted a literature review on each category. Due to limited literature from Africa, we conducted a pilot survey of health care providers in Malawi on barriers they experience in immunizing pregnant women.ResultsThe major barriers of the health system are due to inadequate financial and human resources which translate to inadequate vaccination services delivery and logistics management. Health care providers are limited by poor attendance of Antenatal Care and inadequate knowledge on vaccinating pregnant women. Patient barriers are due to lack of education and knowledge on pregnancy immunization and socioeconomic factors such as low income and high parity.ConclusionThere are several factors that affect maternal tetanus immunization. Increasing knowledge in health care providers and patients, increasing antenatal care attendance and outreach activities will aid the uptake of maternal immunization. Health system barriers are more difficult to address requiring an improvement of overall immunization services. Further analyses of maternal immunization specific barriers and the means of addressing them are required to strengthen the existing program and provide a more efficient delivery system for additional maternal vaccines.     

Vaccine implementation factors affecting maternal tetanus immunization in low- and middle-income countries: Results of the Maternal Immunization and Antenatal Care Situational Analysis (MIACSA) project

ObjectivesTo examine the characteristics of existing maternal tetanus immunization programmes for pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to identify and understand the challenges, barriers and facilitators associated with maternal vaccine service delivery that may impact the introduction and implementation of new maternal vaccines in the future.DesignA mixed methods, cross sectional study with four data collection phases including a desk review, online survey, telephone and face-to-face interviews and in country visits.SettingLMICs.ResultsThe majority of countries (84/95; 88%) had a maternal tetanus immunization policy. Countries with high protection at birth (PAB) were more likely to report tetanus toxoid-containing vaccine (TTCV) coverage targets > 90%. Less than half the countries included in this study had a TTCV coverage target of > 90%. Procurement and distribution of TTCV was nearly always the responsibility of the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI), however planning and management of maternal immunization was often shared between EPI and Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (MNCH) programmes. Receipt of TTCV at the same time as the antenatal care visit correlated with high PAB. Most countries (81/95; 85%) had an immunization safety surveillance system in place although only 11% could differentiate an adverse event following immunization (AEFI) in pregnant and non-pregnant women.ConclusionsRecommendations arising from the MIACSA project to strengthen existing services currently delivering maternal tetanus immunization in LMICs include establishing and maintaining vaccination targets, clearly defining responsibilities and fostering collaborations between EPI and MNCH, investing in strengthening the health workforce, improving the design and use of existing record keeping for immunization, adjusting current AEFI reporting to differentiate pregnant women and endeavoring to integrate the provision of TTCV within ANC services where appropriate.     

Preparing to introduce new maternal immunizations in low- and lower-middle-income countries: A report from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation convening “Allies in Maternal and Newborn Care”; May 3–4, 2018

New strategies will be critical to reduce infant mortality and severe morbidity — there are still 5.2 million newborn deaths and stillbirths each year. The decline in newborn mortality has not kept pace with the reduction in under-five deaths and is slowest in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs). Maternal immunization is a promising intervention to protect infants when they are most vulnerable – in utero and their first few months of life, before they can receive their own vaccines. Successfully introducing new vaccines for pregnant women in LMICs will require collaboration between two fields — (1) immunization and (2) maternal, newborn and child health — that use different service delivery approaches, operate under different policy and funding paradigms, and are not always integrated. In May 2018, stakeholders from these distinct communities convened to identify challenges and opportunities associated with delivering new maternal immunizations. Participants agreed that antenatal care is a logical platform. However, in many resource-constrained settings, antenatal care providers are already overburdened, and most women do not receive the recommended number of antenatal visits. Implementing maternal immunization could help increase antenatal care attendance by offering an additional safe and effective intervention that women value. Substantial effort is needed to demonstrate the benefits of maternal immunization to decision-makers and providers, and to ensure that countries and health systems are ready for introduction. To that end, participants identified the following priorities: assure coherence of policies for introducing new vaccines for pregnant women and strengthen maternal health interventions; generate demand for existing, recommended, and new maternal vaccines; conduct socio-behavioral, health systems and implementation research to shape optimal vaccine delivery strategies; and strengthen antenatal and perinatal care quality. To achieve these aims, collaboration across fields will be essential. Given that new maternal vaccines are advancing in clinical development, time is of the essence.     

Factors influencing acceptance of vaccination during pregnancy in The Gambia and Senegal

BackgroundVaccination during pregnancy can protect pregnant women and their babies from infectious diseases. Tetanus vaccine, also known as tetanus toxoid, is the only vaccine given to pregnant women in The Gambia and Senegal, where it is given by antenatal care providers as part of the Expanded Programme on Immunization. A qualitative study was undertaken to explore factors influencing acceptance of vaccination during pregnancy in The Gambia and Senegal.MethodsFocus group discussions and in-depth interviews were conducted across urban and rural settlements of The Gambia and Senegal. We explored the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of 152 women who were either pregnant or with an infant. NVivo 11 Qualitative Data Analysis Software was used for management and thematic analysis of the data.ResultsWomen had sufficient knowledge of the need for tetanus vaccine from different information sources but insufficient knowledge of tetanus causes, signs and symptoms. Tetanus vaccine was perceived to be safe and side effects such as pain and swelling at site of injection did not deter uptake of future doses. Women overall had confidence in their sources of vaccine information and the health care workers who administered maternal vaccinations. Their willingness to accept vaccination during pregnancy was particularly influenced by their husbands and trusted healthcare workers. Women across all sites mentioned they would accept new maternal vaccines if they are sensitized beforehand about any potential risks and benefits to them and their babies.ConclusionVaccine acceptance can be influenced by several factors including contextual, individual or group influences and vaccine or vaccination-specific issues. Women across The Gambia and Senegal are generally vaccine acceptors with confidence in the health care workers who vaccinate them and few concerns about maternal vaccines. Women’s acceptance of vaccination during pregnancy is based on previous vaccination experiences and individual weighing of risks and benefits.     

Antenatal care service delivery and factors affecting effective tetanus vaccine coverage in low- and middle-income countries: Results of the Maternal Immunisation and Antenatal Care Situational analysis (MIACSA) project

ObjectivesTo map the integration of existing maternal tetanus immunization programmes within antenatal care (ANC) services for pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to identify and understand the challenges, barriers and facilitators associated with high performance maternal vaccine service delivery.DesignA mixed methods, cross sectional study with four data collection phases including a desk review, online survey, telephone and face-to-face interviews and in country visits was undertaken between 2016 and 2018. Associations of different service delivery process components with protection at birth (PAB) and with country groups were established. PAB was defined as the proportion of neonates protected at birth against neonatal tetanus. Regression analysis and structural equation modelling was used to assess associations of different variables with maternal tetanus immunization coverage. Latent class analysis (LCA), was used to group country performance for maternal immunization, and to address the problem of multicollinearity.SettingLMICs.ResultsThe majority of LMICs had a policy on recommended number of ANC visits, however most were yet to implement the WHO guidelines recommending eight ANC contacts. Countries that recommended > 4 ANC contacts were more likely to have high PAB > 90%. Passive disease surveillance was the most common form of disease surveillance performed but the maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality indicators recorded differed between countries. The presence of user fees for antenatal care and maternal immunization was significantly associated with lower PAB (<90%).ConclusionsRecommendations include implementing the current WHO ANC guideline to facilitate increased opportunities for vaccination during each pregnancy. Improved utilisation of ANC services by increasing the demand side by increasing the quality of services, reducing any associated costs and supporting user fee exemptions, or the supply side can also enhance utilisation of ANC services which are positioned as an ideal platform for delivery of maternal vaccines.     

Multi-tiered intervention to increase maternal immunization coverage: A randomized,controlled trial

ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of a multi-component intervention package of maternal immunization uptake in obstetric care clinics.MethodsIn a multi-level, cluster- and individually-randomized controlled trial we implemented an evidence-based intervention that targeted practice-, provider- and patient-level barriers to vaccine uptake. Obstetric practices were randomized to receive the practice and provider-level interventions or continue their normal standard of care. We enrolled pregnant women at practices in Georgia and Colorado and randomized women into patient-level intervention and control groups, resulting in four study arms. The primary outcomes were receipt of the influenza and tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines during pregnancy. A sample size of 550 women per arm (2200 total) was planned and enrolled to compare the intervention between the four study arms.ResultsBetween June 2017 and July 2018, 4907 women were screened and 2200 women were randomized, 550 to each of the four study arms. We were unable to follow-up with 108 women, for a final sample size of 2092. Sample characteristics and sample size were similar among study arms. There was no significant increase in Tdap or influenza vaccine uptake overall. Among women who had no intention of or were unsure about receiving the influenza vaccine during pregnancy, those who received just the patient-level intervention were 61% more likely to receive the influenza vaccine than those in the control arm (Relative risk: 1.61; 95% Confidence Interval: 1.18–2.21). There was no significant difference in vaccine uptake for either influenza or tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis between the four arms of the study.ConclusionsThis trial highlights the need for more targeted interventions to improve vaccine uptake. Future work should focus on clinics with low baseline vaccine uptake and the patient-level intervention should be expanded and targeted towards women with low vaccine confidence.     

The crucial role of maternal care providers as vaccinators for pregnant women

Vaccination during pregnancy is increasingly being recognised internationally a useful means of preventing illness in pregnant women and their newborns. It has been used since the 1960s, when it was found that tetanus vaccine was highly effective in preventing neonatal tetanus, but interest has greatly increased over the last few years. As new data become available showing the numerous benefits of maternal immunisation and its potential for improving maternal and neonatal health in relation to a number of infectious conditions, it is being increasingly incorporated into the national vaccination programmes around the world. However, the development of new vaccines, the existence of clinical trials testing the efficacy of vaccinating pregnant women in order to protect newborns against respiratory syncytial virus and group B Streptococcus infections, and the fact that the uptake of influenza and pertussis vaccines during pregnancy is lower than expected in developed countries is making it increasingly clear that existing maternal vaccination programmes need to be strengthened. This reviews addresses the importance of integrating maternal immunisation and standard obstetrical care in order to promote vaccination administration by maternal care providers (MCPs) because the vaccination goals for pregnant women cannot be achieved without appropriate training and extending the role of MCPs as vaccinators. In order to make meaningful progress, it is necessary to develop and refine targeted messages for pregnant women concerning the benefits of maternal immunisation for themselves and their infants.     

Maternal interventions vigilance harmonization in low- and middle-income countries: Stakeholder meeting report; Amsterdam,May 1–2, 2018

Although major reductions in maternal and child mortality were achieved in the Millennium Development Goals era, progress must be accelerated to meet Sustainable Development Goals health targets by 2030. An estimated 2.7 million neonatal deaths and 2.6 million stillbirths still occur annually. Over the past several years there has been renewed global interest in innovative approaches to maternal immunization to potentially decrease mortality and severe morbidity in neonates, and in the pregnant woman and her fetus. Several new vaccines are in clinical development for indications in pregnant women, e.g., vaccines against respiratory syncytial virus, and group B streptococcus. Achieving near-concurrent introduction of new maternal vaccines in high-, middle-, and low-income countries requires that mechanisms are in place for appropriate safety monitoring worldwide.The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation convened a global expert meeting in Amsterdam on May 1–2, 2018, to discuss a framework for appropriate pharmacovigilance for vaccines used during pregnancy based on integrated maternal interventions vigilance (MIV) systems and collection of appropriate data to inform timely decision-making by and for pregnant women. Planning for MIV requires a multi-disciplinary, collaborative approach that fully leverages and builds upon existing resources, and builds new capabilities and capacity where needed. Meeting participants identified priority actions including (1) establishing background rates to better evaluate emerging safety signals and vaccine effectiveness, (2) identifying potential sentinel vaccine surveillance sites, (3) developing data sharing capabilities, (4) creating guidance documents and protocols, and (5) the advanced preparation of culturally-appropriate communication plans and risk management plans.Integrating MIV across the routine obstetric and neonatal health care delivery continuum and all relevant programs and data systems could result in fundamental improvements in maternal, neonatal and child health. Improved pregnancy pharmacovigilance platforms may strengthen other vaccine and drug product safety systems and improve maternal and child research capabilities in LMICs.     

Safety and immunogenicity of seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines in pregnant women

BackgroundIn the United States, seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) is recommended for pregnant women; however, in early 2009, immunization rates were low, partly due to limited prospective data and concerns about vaccine safety.ObjectiveWe conducted a randomized study of two licensed seasonal trivalent IIVs (IIV3) to assess their safety and immunogenicity in pregnant women.Study DesignIn this prospective, randomized clinical study, 100 pregnant women, 18–39 years of age and ≥14 weeks gestation received a single intramuscular dose of 2008–2009 Fluzone® or Fluarix®. Injection site and systemic reactions were recorded for 7 days after vaccination and serious adverse events (SAEs) and pregnancy outcomes were documented. Serum samples collected before and 28 days after vaccination were tested for hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) antibody levels.ResultsThe majority of the injection site and systemic reactions were mild and self-limited after both vaccines. No fever ≥100 °F was reported. There were no vaccine-associated SAEs. Immune responses to influenza vaccine antigens were similar for the two study vaccines, with robust HAI responses against influenza A strains, and relatively lower responses for influenza B strains.ConclusionSeasonal inactivated influenza vaccines were well tolerated and immunogenic in pregnant women.

• ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00905125.

Synopsis: In this prospective clinical trial, we demonstrated that immunization with seasonal trivalent, inactivated influenza vaccine in the second and third trimester of pregnancy is immunogenic and safe.     

Pregnant women & vaccines against emerging epidemic threats: Ethics guidance for preparedness,research, and response

Zika virus, influenza, and Ebola have called attention to the ways in which infectious disease outbreaks can severely – and at times uniquely – affect the health interests of pregnant women and their offspring. These examples also highlight the critical need to proactively consider pregnant women and their offspring in vaccine research and response efforts to combat emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases. Historically, pregnant women and their offspring have been largely excluded from research agendas and investment strategies for vaccines against epidemic threats, which in turn can lead to exclusion from future vaccine campaigns amidst outbreaks. This state of affairs is profoundly unjust to pregnant women and their offspring, and deeply problematic from the standpoint of public health. To ensure that the needs of pregnant women and their offspring are fairly addressed, new approaches to public health preparedness, vaccine research and development, and vaccine delivery are required. This Guidance offers 22 concrete recommendations that provide a roadmap for the ethically responsible, socially just, and respectful inclusion of the interests of pregnant women in the development and deployment of vaccines against emerging pathogens. The Guidance was developed by the Pregnancy Research Ethics for Vaccines, Epidemics, and New Technologies (PREVENT) Working Group – a multidisciplinary, international team of 17 experts specializing in bioethics, maternal immunization, maternal-fetal medicine, obstetrics, pediatrics, philosophy, public health, and vaccine research and policy – in consultation with a variety of external experts and stakeholders.     

A socio-ecological exploration to identify factors influencing the COVID-19 vaccine decision-making process among pregnant and lactating women: Findings from Kenya

The vaccine decision-making process of pregnant and lactating women is complex. Regarding COVID-19, pregnant women are at increased risk for severe disease and poor health outcomes. While pregnant and lactating women were excluded from COVID-19 vaccine trials, available evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and protective during pregnancy. In this study, we used a socio-ecological approach to explore factors influencing the decision-making process for COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant and lactating women in Kenya, for the purpose of informing demand generation strategies. As pregnant and lactating women are influenced by many factors, we conducted 84 in-depth interviews with a variety of stakeholders, including 31 pregnant or lactating women, 20 healthcare workers such as nurses, midwives, doctors, and frontline workers, 25 male family members of pregnant or lactating women, and 8 gatekeepers such as community leaders and faith-based leaders. These individuals were recruited from six communities in Kenya: three urban, and three rural. We applied a grounded theory approach to identify emerging themes and organized emerging themes using the SAGE Vaccine Hesitancy model, which includes three categories of determinants of vaccine acceptance, including contextual influences, individual and group influences, and vaccine and vaccination specific issues. Myths, interpersonal norms, and religion emerged as themes related to contextual influences. Safety, risk perception, and the role of the healthcare worker emerged as themes related to individual and group influences. For vaccine and vaccination specific issues, emerging themes included availability, accessibility, and eligibility. While maternal immunization can substantially reduce the effect of infectious diseases in mothers and infants, vaccine acceptance is critical. However, vaccines do not save lives; vaccination does. We hope the results of this study can be used to tailor communication efforts to increase vaccine demand among pregnant and lactating women.     

Attitudes and Communication Preferences for Vaccines among Pregnant Women Receiving Care at a Safety-net Hospital

ObjectiveWe aimed to understand pregnant women's perceptions of vaccination during pregnancy and to assess their reaction to different vaccine messages.Study DesignEnglish-speaking pregnant women aged 18 years or older who received prenatal care at a safety-net hospital participated in qualitative interviews. Interview topics included attitudes toward vaccinations in general and toward influenza and tetanus–diphtheria–pertussis vaccination in pregnancy. Participants were also queried regarding sources of vaccine information, and were asked to provide feedback on specific messages regarding maternal vaccination.ResultsTwenty-eight pregnant women participated in interviews. Participant age ranged from 18 to 40 years old; 64% were insured through Medicaid. All participants had positive attitudes toward routine vaccinations and had received vaccinations for themselves and their children. Attitudes were less favorable for influenza vaccines than other vaccines. Participants reported receiving vaccine information from multiple sources. Stories about vaccine harms worried participants, even when they did not trust the sources of negative information. All stated that their health care providers were the most trusted source of information. Participants felt that the most important messages to encourage maternal vaccination were that maternal vaccination protects the baby after birth and maternal vaccination is safe for both mother and baby. Participants were not motivated to vaccinate by messages about the severity of maternal disease.ConclusionsMaternal vaccinations are important to protect pregnant women and infants from influenza and pertussis. Focusing on messages related to vaccine safety and protection of the infant are motivating to mothers, especially when delivered by trusted health care providers.     

Patient attitudes toward influenza and tetanus,diphtheria and acellular pertussis vaccination in pregnancy

BackgroundRoutine influenza and tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination of pregnant women to prevent poor maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes is recommended practice; however, actual rates of influenza vaccine acceptance are typically well below the (Healthy People 2020, 2015) goal of 80%.ObjectiveWe sought to identify barriers to accepting either vaccination.Materials and MethodsFrom December 2014 to April 2015 women were given a questionnaire eliciting their experiences, attitudes and history of influenza and Tdap vaccination in pregnancy during their routine prenatal care appointments at a tertiary care center. Patient demographics were included in the questionnaire. A similar questionnaire was administered to prenatal care providers. Patient influenza and Tdap vaccination acceptance rates were compared and predictors of vaccine acceptance were analyzed with bivariate logistic regression.ResultsOut of the 400 patient questionnaires distributed, 338 (84.5%) were completed and returned; 24 of 45 (53.3%) provider questionnaires were returned. Vaccination acceptance rates were 70.7% for the influenza vaccine and 76.3% for the Tdap vaccine. The logistic regression model indicated that predictors of acceptance for either vaccine in pregnancy are patient attitude and previous vaccination history. Patient attitudes were more favorable towards Tdap than influenza vaccination. The combination of healthcare provider recommendation and educational materials was significantly predictive of both Tdap and influenza vaccine acceptance. The most common reasons given for declining the influenza vaccine were safety concerns; the most common reasons given for declining the Tdap vaccine were that patients did not think it was required again when they received the vaccine before pregnancy.ConclusionsOur study suggests that providers can improve Tdap and influenza vaccination acceptance in pregnancy by recommending the vaccination in combination with provision of educational materials on the vaccines.     

“From my phone,I could rule the world”: Critical engagement with maternal vaccine information,vaccine confidence builders and post-Zika outbreak rumours in Brazil

Maternal immunization is key to protecting maternal and newborn health. We interviewed pregnant women in Brazil to identify barriers to and enablers of maternal immunization in the country. In-depth interviews and focus groups were conducted in Brazil with 60 pregnant women from São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro at different stages of their pregnancies. Participants were encouraged to discuss views on safety, efficacy and importance of maternal vaccines, access to vaccines, interactions with healthcare professionals, and sources of information on vaccine-related matters. There was generally a positive regard for maternal immunization among the interviewed women, many of whom associated vaccination with protection of their unborn child. The interviewees cited several reasons for adherence to immunization guidelines, including recommendations from healthcare professionals, targeted communication campaigns, and active use of a vaccination card or booklet. There were no reported barriers for maternal vaccines. Some women using private healthcare services reported not having been asked about vaccines at check-ups, which could adversely affect vaccination rates. A rumour that vaccines caused microcephaly which emerged during the Zika outbreak was the most commonly cited reason for choosing not to vaccinate among the interviewees. This study identified important vaccine confidence builders. Many of the interviewees critically reflected upon information received, placing themselves as the decision makers over their health choices. A prominent barrier to maternal immunization was a rumour linking vaccines to microcephaly. To the best of our knowledge, this has not been previously reported in the literature and requires further investigation into the extent of this issue and how it can be mitigated.     

Psychosocial determinants of pertussis and influenza vaccine uptake in pregnant women: A prospective study

ObjectiveTo identify the psychosocial factors influencing women’s uptake and willingness to receive pertussis and influenza vaccine during pregnancy.MethodsThe study population comprised 1364 healthy nulliparous pregnant women who participated in a prospective cohort study at two obstetric hospitals in South Australia between 2015 and 2017. Information on women's vaccination status, sociodemographic, lifestyle and psychological state were collected at 9–16 weeks’ gestation and medical case notes were checked post-delivery to verify the reported vaccination status. Poisson regression models were used to estimate the crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) to identify psychosocial factors influencing uptake of vaccination during pregnancy.ResultsWillingness to receive the recommended maternal vaccines was high (90%). Overall, 79% and 48% received maternal pertussis and influenza vaccines respectively. There was no evidence to support the influence of psychosocial factors on women’s willingness to receive immunization during pregnancy. High levels of anxiety (aPR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.87–1.09) was not associated with uptake of maternal pertussis vaccine. However, elevated depressive symptoms (aPR 1.14, 95% CI: 1.00–1.30) and very high-perceived stress during pregnancy were significantly associated with receipt of pertussis vaccination (aPR 0.87; 95% CI 0.76–0.99). Women with mild depressive symptoms (aPR 1.21, 95% CI 1.00–1.44) and mild anxiety symptoms (aPR 1.21, 95% CI: 0.99–1.48) were more likely to receive influenza vaccine during pregnancy (aPR 1.27, 95% CI: 1.08–1.49). A history of major depressive disorder was independently associated with receipt of pertussis (aPR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06–1.26) and influenza vaccination during pregnancy (aPR 1.32; 95% CI 1.14–1.58).ConclusionRegardless of psychosocial factors, most women reported a positive willingness to receive the recommended vaccinations during pregnancy. However, psychosocial factors influenced the uptake of pertussis and influenza vaccines during pregnancy. Psychosocial factors should be taken into consideration in designing interventions and implementation of maternal pertussis and influenza immunization programs.     

Safety of immunization during pregnancy: A review of the evidence of selected inactivated and live attenuated vaccines

Vaccine-preventable infectious diseases are responsible for significant maternal, neonatal, and young infant morbidity and mortality. While there is emerging scientific evidence, as well as theoretical considerations, indicating that certain vaccines are safe for pregnant women and fetuses, policy formulation is challenging because of perceived potential risks to the fetus.This report presents an overview of available evidence on pregnant women vaccination safety monitoring in pregnant women, from both published literature and ongoing surveillance programs. Safety data were reviewed for vaccines against diseases which increase morbidity in pregnant women, their fetus or infant as well as vaccines which are used in mass vaccination campaigns against diseases. They include inactivated seasonal and pandemic influenza, mono- and combined meningococcal polysaccharide and conjugated vaccines, tetanus toxoid and acellular pertussis combination vaccines, as well as monovalent or combined rubella, oral poliomyelitis virus and yellow fever vaccines. No evidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes has been identified from immunization of pregnant women with these vaccines.