Reminders of existing vaccine mandates increase support for a COVID-19 vaccine mandate: Evidence from a survey experiment

BackgroundGovernments are trying various strategies to boost COVID-19 vaccination rates, including vaccine mandates. Popular support for such mandates, however, is in flux in many countries, including the United States. The objective of this study is to evaluate if the wording of public health messages could increase popular support for COVID-19 vaccine mandates.MethodsWe conducted a survey experiment on a sample of 573 registered voters in South Dakota, United States. Participants in the control group (n = 271) read a short message about mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. Respondents in the treatment group (n = 278) read the same message but they were reminded that a variety of vaccine mandates for measles, mumps, rubella, and polio have long been required. Afterwards, both groups were asked about their support for COVID-19 vaccine mandate.ResultsA multivariate ordinary least squares regression analysis revealed that the experimental treatment had a positive and statistically significant impact on support for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination (p < 0.001). We also found that COVID-19 vaccination status, religious identity, and political affiliation have a statistically significant effect.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that a simple intervention—reminding the public of the existing vaccine mandates—increases support for COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Public health authorities who seek to boost COVID-19 vaccination rates could utilize this approach.     

Social inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake for children and adolescents in Montreal,Canada

BackgroundThe success of current and prospective COVID-19 vaccine campaigns for children and adolescents will in part depend on the willingness of parents to accept vaccination. This study examined social determinants of parental COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake for children and adolescents.MethodsWe used cross-sectional data from an ongoing COVID-19 cohort study in Montreal, Canada and included all parents of 2 to 18-year-olds who completed an online questionnaire between May 18 and June 26, 2021 (n = 809). We calculated child age-adjusted prevalence estimates of vaccine acceptance by parental education, race/ethnicity, birthplace, household income, and neighbourhood, and used multinomial logistic regression to estimate adjusted prevalence differences (aPD) and ratios (aPR). Social determinants of vaccine uptake were examined for the vaccine-eligible sample of 12 to 18 year-olds (n = 306).ResultsIntention to vaccinate children against COVID-19 was high, with only 12.4% of parents unlikely to have their child vaccinated. Parents with younger children were less likely to accept vaccination, as were those from lower-income households, racialized groups, and those born outside Canada. Children from households with annual incomes <$100,000 had 18.4 percent lower prevalence of being vaccinated/very likely vaccinated compared to household incomes ≥$150,000 (95% CI: 10.1 to 26.7). Racialized parents reported greater unwillingness to vaccinate vs. White parents (aPD = 10.3; 95% CI: 1.5, 19.1). Vaccine-eligible adolescents from the most deprived neighbourhood were half as likely to be vaccinated compared to those from the least deprived neighbourhood (aPR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.77).Interpretation.This study identified marked social inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake for children and adolescents. Efforts are needed to reach disadvantaged and marginalized populations with tailored strategies that promote informed decision making and facilitate access to vaccination.     

Let's talk about COVID-19 vaccination: Relevance of conversations about COVID-19 vaccination and information sources on vaccination intention in Switzerland

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is known to be more pronounced among young people. However, there are a lack of studies examining determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention in the general population in this young age-group in Switzerland, and in particular, studies investigating the influence of information sources and social networks on vaccination intention are missing.MethodsThe cross-sectional study “COVIDisc – Discussion with young people about the corona pandemic” provided the opportunity to investigate COVID-19 vaccination intention in 893 individuals aged 15–34 years from the cantons of Zurich, Thurgau, and Ticino in Switzerland. An online survey was administered between 10 November 2020 and 5 January 2021. Associations of public information sources and conversations about COVID-19 with COVID-19 vaccination intention were analyzed with multivariable logistic regression and mediation analysis using generalized structural equation modeling.Results51.5% of the participants intended or probably intended to get vaccinated once the vaccine would be available. Using print or online news (AOR 1.50, 95% CI 1.09–2.07) as an information source and having conversations about the COVID-19 vaccine (AOR 2.09, 95% CI 1.52–2.87) increased participants' COVID-19 vaccination intention. The effects of female gender (b = −0.267, p = 0.039) and risk perception (b = 0.163, p = 0.028) were partially mediated by having conversations about the COVID-19 vaccine. The effects of age (b = −0.036, p = 0.016), secondary educational level (b = 0.541, p = 0.010) and tertiary educational level (b = 0.726, p = 0.006) were fully mediated via having conversations about the COVID-19 vaccine.ConclusionsConversations and campaigns should start even before vaccines become available. Our data support interventions for young women and less educated people using social norms and supporting information seeking with news. Trust and risk perceptions are essential foundations for vaccine intentions.     

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

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

COVID-19 vaccine confidence and reasons for vaccination among health care workers and household members

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.     

Predicting COVID-19 vaccination intention using protection motivation theory and conspiracy beliefs

BackgroundWhile COVID-19 vaccine uptake has been encouraging overall, some individuals are either hesitant towards, or refuse, the vaccine. Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) has been applied to influenza vaccine acceptance, but there is a lack of research applying PMT to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Additionally, prior research has suggested that coronavirus conspiracy beliefs and demographic factors may play a role in attitudes towards the vaccine. This study aimed to predict COVID-19 vaccination intention using PMT, coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, and demographic factors. Furthermore, vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals were compared in relation to their coronavirus conspiracy beliefs.MethodsAn online survey was administered to 382 (278 vaccinated, and 104 unvaccinated) individuals in the United Kingdom (77 males, 301 females, one non-binary/third gender, and three unstated). Respondents’ mean age was 43.78 (SD = 12.58).ResultsA hierarchical multiple linear regression was performed in three stages. Initially, four PMT constructs - severity, susceptibility, maladaptive response costs, and self-efficacy - emerged as significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccination intention. The final model accounted for 75% of the variance and retained two significant predictors from PMT - maladaptive response rewards and self-efficacy - alongside coronavirus conspiracy beliefs and age. An independent t-test established that unvaccinated individuals held greater coronavirus conspiracy beliefs than vaccinated ones.ConclusionsInterventions and campaigns addressing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance should employ strategies increasing individuals’ perceived severity of COVID-19, perceived susceptibility, and perceived ability to get vaccinated, while decreasing perceived rewards of not getting vaccinated. Additionally, coronavirus conspiracy beliefs should be addressed, as these appear to play a role for some vaccine-hesitant individuals.     

Experimental pre-tests of public health communications on the COVID-19 vaccine: A null finding for medical endorsement,risk and altruism

ObjectiveVaccination campaigns against COVID-19 will only be successful if enough people want to take the vaccine. We tested a government communications intervention to encourage uptake.DesignA pre-registered randomised controlled trial.MethodsA large, nationally representative sample were randomly assigned to see one of eight posters. The posters varied by image (general practitioner or two hospital doctors) and message (control with public health guidance not related to vaccination, endorsement of the vaccine from the pictured doctor, endorsement with information about COVID-19 risk, endorsement with information about risk and appeal to get vaccinated to protect friends and family). The posters were presented as part of a larger study. The main outcomes were intention to be vaccinated and how soon people would be willing to be vaccinated.ResultsThe posters induced different reactions indicating that participants had engaged with them. The hospital image was generally preferred to the GP image. Perhaps critically, all intervention messages were trusted less than a control message which did not mention the vaccine (Control Poster Mean = 5.65, SE = 0.09 vs. Poster M Mean = 5.18, SE = 0.09, p <.001; vs. Poster M + R Mean = 5.11, SE = 0.09, p <.001; vs. Poster M + R + F Mean = 5.33, SE = 0.09, p =.01). There were no effects of poster type on intention to take the vaccine or how soon people were willing to take it.ConclusionAlthough the intervention messages were based on the strongest correlates of vaccine hesitancy identified by contemporaneous surveys, none was effective. More recent research suggests that focusing on the risk of COVID-19 may be less effective than focusing on the benefits of vaccination. Null findings can be as important as positive findings for designing public health campaigns. This study informed government communications about the COVID-19 vaccine.     

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

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

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

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

Parental attitudes in the pediatric emergency department about the COVID-19 vaccine

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccinations are now recommended in the United States (U.S.) for children ≥ 6 months old. However, pediatric vaccination rates remain low, particularly in the Hispanic/Latinx population.ObjectiveUsing the 4C vaccine hesitancy framework (calculation, complacency, confidence, convenience), we examined parental attitudes in the emergency department (ED) towards COVID-19 vaccination, identified dimensions of parental vaccine hesitancy, and assessed parental willingness to have their child receive the COVID-19 vaccine.MethodsAs part of a larger multi-methods study examining influenza vaccine hesitancy, we conducted interviews that included questions about COVID-19 vaccine authorization for children. We used directed content analysis to extract qualitative themes from 3 groups of parents in the ED: Hispanic/Latinx Spanish speaking (HS), Hispanic/Latinx English speaking (HE), non-Hispanic/non-Latinx White English speaking (WE). Themes were triangulated with the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) survey, where higher scores indicate increased vaccine hesitancy.ResultsFactors influencing vaccine hesitancy were mapped to the 4C framework from 58 sets of interviews and PACVs. HE and HS parents, compared to WE parents, had less knowledge about COVID-19 and its vaccine, and more beliefs in COVID-19 vaccine myths. However, both HS and HE parent groups were more inclined to endorse COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness as a reason to have their children vaccinated. HS parents felt that COVID-19 increased their fear of illnesses in general and were worried about confusing COVID-19 with other infections. Median PACV scores of HS (Mdn = 20) and HE (Mdn = 20) parent groups were higher than of WE parents (Mdn = 10), but parental willingness to have their child receive COVID-19 vaccination was similar across groups.ConclusionsHigher COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HS and HE parents compared to WE parents may be attributed to insufficient knowledge about COVID-19, its vaccine, along with COVID-19 vaccine myths. Efforts to provide targeted vaccine education to different populations is warranted.     

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.     

COVID-19 vaccination intention and activation among health care system employees: A mixed methods study

BackgroundAchieving high COVID-19 vaccination rates among employees is necessary to prevent outbreaks in health care settings. The goal of the study was to produce actionable and timely evidence about factors underlying the intention and decisions to obtain the COVID-19 vaccine by employees.MethodsThe study was conducted from December 2020 – May 2021 with employees from a VA health care system in Southeastern US. The study used a convergent mixed methods design comprising two main activities: a cross-sectional survey conducted prior to COVID-19 vaccine distribution, and semi-structured interviews conducted 4–6 months after vaccine distribution. Data were collected about participant characteristics, vaccination intention prior to distribution, vaccination decision post-distribution, determinants of vaccination intention and decision, activating factors, sources of information and intervention needs. Data from the survey and interviews were analyzed separately and integrated narratively in the discussion.ResultsPrior to vaccine distribution, 77% of employees wanted to be vaccinated. Post vaccine distribution, we identified 5 distinct decision-making groups: 1) vaccine believers who actively sought vaccination and included those sometimes described as “immunization advocates”, 2) go along to get along (GATGA) individuals who got vaccinated but did not actively seek it, 3) cautious acceptors who got the COVID-19 vaccine after some delay, 4) fence sitters who remained uncertain about getting vaccinated, and 5) vaccine refusers who actively rejected the COVID-19 vaccine. Participants identifying with Black or multiple races were more likely to express hesitancy in their vaccination intention.ConclusionThe findings of our study highlight distinct decision-making profiles associated with COVID-19 vaccination among employees of a VA health care system, and provide tailored recommendations to reduce vaccine hesitancy in this population.     

Social cognitive predictors of vaccination status,uptake and mitigation behaviors in the Canadian COVID-19 Experiences survey

Emerging infectious diseases like COVID-19 will remain a concern for the foreseeable future, and determinants of vaccination and other mitigation behaviors are therefore critical to understand. Using data from the first two waves of the Canadian COVID-19 Experiences Survey (CCES; N = 1,958; 66.56 % female), we examined social cognitive predictors of vaccination status, transition to acceptance and mitigation behaviors in a population-representative sample. Findings indicated that all social cognitive variables were strong predictors of mitigation behavior performance at each wave, particularly among unvaccinated individuals. Among those who were vaccine hesitant at baseline, most social cognitive variables predicted transition to fully vaccinated status at follow-up. After controlling for demographic factors and geographic region, greater odds of transitioning from unvaccinated at CCES Wave 1 to fully vaccinated at CCES Wave 2 was predicted most strongly by a perception that one’s valued peers were taking up the vaccine (e.g., dynamic norms (OR = 2.13 (CI: 1.54,2.93)), perceived effectiveness of the vaccine (OR = 3.71 (CI: 2.43,5.66)), favorable attitudes toward the vaccine (OR = 2.80 (CI: 1.99,3.95)), greater perceived severity of COVID-19 (OR = 2.02 (CI: 1.42,2.86)), and stronger behavioral intention to become vaccinated (OR = 2.99 (CI: 2.16,4.14)). As a group, social cognitive variables improved prediction of COVID-19 mitigation behaviors (masking, distancing, hand hygiene) by a factor of 5 compared to demographic factors, and improved prediction of vaccination status by a factor of nearly 20. Social cognitive processes appear to be important leverage points for health communications to encourage COVID-19 vaccination and other mitigation behaviors, particularly among initially hesitant members of the general population.     

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

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

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

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

Trends in COVID-19 vaccination intent and factors associated with deliberation and reluctance among adult homeless shelter residents and staff, 1 November 2020 to 28 February 2021 – King County,Washington

IntroductionLittle is known about COVID-19 vaccination intent among people experiencing homelessness. This study assesses surveyed COVID-19 vaccination intent among adult homeless shelter residents and staff and identifies factors associated with vaccine deliberation (responded “undecided”) and reluctance (responded “no”), including time trends.MethodsFrom 11/1/2020–2/28/21, we conducted repeated cross-sectional surveys at nine shelters in King County, WA as part of ongoing community-based SARS-CoV-2 surveillance. We used a multinomial model to identify characteristics associated with vaccine deliberation and reluctance.ResultsA total of 969 unique staff (n = 297) and residents (n = 672) participated and provided 3966 survey responses. Among residents, 53.7% (n = 361) were vaccine accepting, 28.1% reluctant, 17.6% deliberative, and 0.6% already vaccinated, whereas among staff 56.2% were vaccine accepting, 14.1% were reluctant, 16.5% were deliberative, and 13.1% already vaccinated at their last survey. We observed higher odds of vaccine deliberation or reluctance among Black/African American individuals, those who did not receive a seasonal influenza vaccine, and those with lower educational attainment. There was no significant trend towards vaccine acceptance.ConclusionsStrong disparities in vaccine intent based on race, education, and prior vaccine history were observed. Increased vaccine intent over the study period was not detected. An intersectional, person-centered approach to addressing health inequities by public health authorities planning vaccination campaigns in shelters is recommended.Clinical Trial Registry Number: NCT04141917.     

Acceptability of a COVID-19 vaccine among adults in the United States: How many people would get vaccinated?

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).     

Influenza vaccination in the time of COVID-19: A national U.S. survey of adults

IntroductionDecisions about influenza vaccination for fall-winter 2020 were made against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. During May 2020, the authors examined intended vaccination in the next 12 months in relationship to demographic variables, healthcare attitudes, and personal COVID-19 experiences for two samples of adults--those who did not receive influenza vaccine during the prior 12 months, and those who did.MethodsIn May 2020, a cross-sectional online survey was conducted with a national US sample. Participants reported prior influenza vaccination (yes/no during prior 12 months) and anticipated vaccination (yes/no during next 12 months). Covariates included demographic characteristics (e.g., gender, race-ethnicity, political ideology), general beliefs (e.g., benefits of vaccines, altruistic attitudes), and COVID-19 health beliefs and experiences (COVID-19 worry and severity, perception of COVID-19 as a community threat, knowing someone with COVID-19). For each group, hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was conducted with intent to vaccinate as the outcome.ResultsAmong participants (n = 3502), 47% did not receive influenza vaccine in the prior 12 months and 53% had; 25.5% of non-vaccinators and 91.9% of vaccinators intended future vaccination. For non-vaccinators, odds of intending vaccination was associated with race/ethnicity (Hispanics were more likely to intend than white-NH; AOR = 1.74; 95% CI = 1.23–2.4), greater perceived benefits of vaccination (AOR = 2.19; 95% CI = 1.88–2.54), and perception of COVID-19 as a community threat (AOR = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.49–2.45). For vaccinators, odds of intending vaccination was associated with age (AOR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.03–1.05), race/ethnicity (Black-NH and Other-NH were less likely to intend than white-NH, AOR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.36–0.999; and AOR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.24–0.84, respectively), greater perceived benefits of vaccination (AOR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.45–2.45) and greater perception of collective benefits of vaccines (AOR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.15–1.90).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic may have served as a cue to action for influenza vaccination intention among some prior non-vaccinators whereas intention among prior vaccinators is more related to positive attitudes toward vaccination.