Development and validation of a COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale for adults in the United States

COVID-19 vaccines have been rapidly developed. However, widespread uptake remains a hurdle to a successful pandemic response. A simple, user-friendly survey to measure vaccine hesitancy may facilitate development of interventions aimed at maximizing vaccination. We developed a novel 10-item instrument designed to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in adults in the United States. We recruited 232 participants through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, an online crowdsourcing platform. The internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.89) and temporal stability (r = 0.87; p < 0.001) of our survey was strong. Lower hesitancy (high scores) was associated with higher trust in physicians (r = 0.58; p < 0.001), and higher hesitancy (low scores) was reported with higher belief in conspiracies (r = -0.68; p < 0.001). The correlation between low hesitancy and reported intent to receive (or history of receiving) at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine was moderate-strong (r = 0.68; p < 0.001).     

Prayer frequency and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among older adults in Europe

AimDifferences in levels of vaccine uptake have emerged across Europe, and this may partly be explained by religious beliefs. Our aim is to study the association between religiosity, measured by prayer frequency, and vaccine hesitancy, and to examine how this association varies across European countries and regions.MethodsThis study was based on 42,583 adults aged 50 years and above from 27 European countries in the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), waves 1–8, and the 2nd SHARE COVID-19 Survey. Logistic regression models were used to investigate the associations.ResultsParticipants were more likely to be vaccine-hesitant when praying ‘weekly or less’ (odds ratio (OR) 1.32 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.23–1.42) or daily (OR 1.78 95 % CI 1.65–1.92). Praying ‘weekly or less’ was associated with increased vaccine hesitancy in Southern Europe (OR 1.48 95 % CI 1.17–1.87) and Central and Eastern (OR 1.35 95 % CI 1.24–1.47) Europe, while daily praying was associated with vaccine hesitancy in Western (OR 1.77 95 % CI 1.51–2.08), Southern (OR 1.30 95 % CI 1.03–1.64), Central and Eastern (OR 1.89 95 % CI 1.73–2.06) and Northern (OR 2.75 95 % CI 1.54–4.89) Europe.ConclusionsThese findings provide support for an association between daily prayer frequency and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, with a consistent pattern across European regions.     

Prevalence of influenza-specific vaccination hesitancy among adults in the United States, 2018

BackgroundThe role of vaccine hesitancy on influenza vaccination is not clearly understood. Low influenza vaccination coverage in U.S. adults suggests that a multitude of factors may be responsible for under-vaccination or non-vaccination including vaccine hesitancy. Understanding the role of influenza vaccination hesitancy is important for targeted messaging and intervention to increase influenza vaccine confidence and uptake. The objective of this study was to quantify the prevalence of adult influenza vaccination hesitancy (IVH) and examine association of IVH beliefs with sociodemographic factors and early-season influenza vaccination.MethodsA four-question validated IVH module was included in the 2018 National Internet Flu Survey. Weighted proportions and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify correlates of IVH beliefs.ResultsOverall, 36.9% of adults were hesitant to receive an influenza vaccination; 18.6% expressed concerns about vaccination side effects; 14.8% personally knew someone with serious side effects; and 35.6% reported that their healthcare provider was not the most trusted source of information about influenza vaccinations. Influenza vaccination ranged from 15.3 to 45.2 percentage points lower among adults self-reporting any of the four IVH beliefs. Being female, age 18–49 years, non-Hispanic Black, having high school or lower education, being employed, and not having primary care medical home were associated with hesitancy.ConclusionsAmong the four IVH beliefs studied, being hesitant to receiving influenza vaccination followed by mistrust of healthcare providers were identified as the most influential hesitancy beliefs. Two in five adults in the United States were hesitant to receive an influenza vaccination, and hesitancy was negatively associated with vaccination. This information may assist with targeted interventions, personalized to the individual, to reduce hesitancy and thus improve influenza vaccination acceptance.     

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Israeli adults before and after vaccines’ availability: A cross-sectional national survey

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is a major health threat to the efforts to tackle COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. This study’s objectives were to assess COVID-19 VH before and after vaccines' availability and to analyze the associations between COVID-19 VH and participants’ characteristics.A national cross-sectional telephone interview survey among Israeli adults aged 21 and older was conducted from September 2020 through May 2021. Attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines were assessed pre/post vaccines' availability. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify associations between demographic and health-related characteristics and COVID-19 VH.Most study participants (72.0 % of 2,998) were willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19 across the survey period. The COVID-19 VH declined significantly from 45.6 % pre-vaccine availability to 16.3 % post-vaccine availability (P < 0.001). The multivariable analysis demonstrated that post-vaccine availability, COVID-19 VH was associated with younger age, Arab ethnicity, higher level of religiosity, lower education, past diagnosis of COVID-19, and influenza VH. The main reasons for VH after the vaccine availability included insufficient data on the vaccine (37.4 %) and fear of the vaccine's side effects (33.8 %).Despite the significant decrease in COVID-19 VH following vaccine availability, 16.3% of the population still refuses to get vaccinated. As Israel may face additional waves of the COVID-19 pandemic and booster vaccinations, multimedia vaccine promotions targeting the above-mentioned hesitant populations and their reasons for VH are urgently needed.     

Disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake among health care workers

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccine uptake by healthcare workers (HCWs) is critical to protect HCWs, the patients they care for, and the healthcare infrastructure. Our study aims to examine the actual COVID-19 vaccination rate among HCWs and identify risk factors associated with vaccine nonacceptance.Study Design and MethodsA retrospective analysis of COVID-19 vaccinations for HCWs at a large multi-site US academic medical center from 12/18/2020 through 05/04/2021. Comparisons between groups were performed using unpaired student t-test for continuous variables and the chi-square test for categorical variables. A logistic regression analysis was used to assess the associations between vaccine uptake and risk factor(s).ResultsOf the 65,270 HCWs included in our analysis, the overall vaccination rate was 78.6%. Male gender, older age, White and Asian race, and direct patient care were associated with higher vaccination rates (P <.0001). Significant differences were observed between different job categories. Physicians and advanced practice staff, and healthcare professionals were more likely to be vaccinated than nurses and support staff.ConclusionsOur data demonstrated higher initial vaccination rates among HCWs than the general population national average during the study period. We observed significant disparities among different high-risk HCWs groups, especially among different job categories, black HCWs and younger HCWs despite their high risk of contracting the infection. Interventions to address lower vaccination rate and vaccine hesitancy should be built with these disparities and differences in mind to create more targeted interventions.     

Background rates of adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring in the United States, 2019–2020

BackgroundThe U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) Initiative conducts active surveillance of adverse events of special interest (AESI) after COVID-19 vaccination. Historical incidence rates (IRs) of AESI are comparators to evaluate safety.MethodsWe estimated IRs of 17 AESI in six administrative claims databases from January 1, 2019, to December 11, 2020: Medicare claims for adults ≥ 65 years and commercial claims (Blue Health Intelligence®, CVS Health, HealthCore Integrated Research Database, IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Database, Optum pre-adjudicated claims) for adults < 65 years. IRs were estimated by sex, age, race/ethnicity (Medicare), and nursing home residency (Medicare) in 2019 and for specific periods in 2020.ResultsThe study included >100 million enrollees annually. In 2019, rates of most AESI increased with age. However, compared with commercially insured adults, Medicare enrollees had lower IRs of anaphylaxis (11 vs 12–19 per 100,000 person-years), appendicitis (80 vs 117–155), and narcolepsy (38 vs 41–53). Rates were higher in males than females for most AESI across databases and varied by race/ethnicity and nursing home status (Medicare). Acute myocardial infarction (Medicare) and anaphylaxis (all databases) IRs varied by season. IRs of most AESI were lower during March–May 2020 compared with March–May 2019 but returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. However, rates of Bell’s palsy, Guillain-Barré syndrome, narcolepsy, and hemorrhagic/non-hemorrhagic stroke remained lower in multiple databases after May 2020, whereas some AESI (e.g., disseminated intravascular coagulation) exhibited higher rates after May 2020 compared with 2019.ConclusionAESI background rates varied by database and demographics and fluctuated in March–December 2020, but most returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. It is critical to standardize demographics and consider seasonal and other trends when comparing historical rates with post-vaccination AESI rates in the same database to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine safety.     

A behavior change model to address caregiver hesitancy around COVID-19 vaccination in pediatrics

IntroductionMany families express hesitancy around immunizing their children against COVID-19. We sought to better understand the perspectives of vaccine hesitant caregivers, and develop targeted recommendations for health care workers and policymakers to engage in more effective vaccine discussions.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 23 caregivers recruited from a pediatric infectious diseases clinic, including a subset of patients referred to discuss vaccine hesitancy. Thematic analysis of the interviews identified themes that were mapped using behavior change models to identify perceived barriers and facilitators towards COVID-19 immunization.ResultsBarriers and facilitators were mapped to the WHO (World Health Organization) 3C’s (confidence, complacency, convenience) model of vaccine hesitancy as well as the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation) behavior change model. Barriers included mistrust in authorities, misperception of the risk of COVID-19 in children, and perceived health contraindications and negative previous vaccine experiences. Facilitators included positive relationships with healthcare workers, the promise of a “return to normal”, and societal pressures to immunize.ConclusionsEfforts to increase vaccine uptake in the pediatric population must target specific barriers and facilitators to immunization expressed by caregivers. To address these concerns, we suggest: 1. Educating hesitant caregivers by highlighting the long-term pandemic effects on children and the threat of COVID-19 to children’s health, 2. Building on the trust caregivers have in healthcare workers by involving frontline workers in public health policy, and 3. Harnessing the power of peer pressure by mobilization of societal pressures and establishing COVID-19 vaccination as the norm in children.     

Characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: A nationwide survey of 1000 patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

ObjectivesTo identify potential predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (C19-VH) in adults with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID).MethodsA total of 1000 IMID patients were enrolled in this web-based cross-sectional study. A standardised and self-administered survey was designed by members of the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology Steering Committee for Infectious and Endemic diseases and distributed to IMID patients spread across Brazil.ResultsOf the 908 (90.8%) respondents eligible for analysis, 744 (81.9%) were willing to get vaccinated against COVID-19. In our multivariable logistic regression model, concurrent malignancy, fibromyalgia, hydroxychloroquine use, and recent corticosteroid pulse therapy were independently associated with higher odds of C19-VH. The short duration of COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials was the main reason for C19-VH.ConclusionWe identified novel characteristics potentially associated with C19-VH among adults with IMID. Greater awareness on the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines is needed for both IMID patients and attending physicians.     

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in people affected by diabetes and strategies to increase vaccine compliance: A systematic narrative review and meta-analysis

IntroductionPeople affected by diabetes are at higher risk for complications from certain vaccine-preventable diseases. Suboptimal vaccination coverages are reported in this population sub-group. The purpose of this study is to estimate the proportion of diabetic patients who express hesitation to the COVID-19 vaccine worldwide.MethodsSeven studies were included in the meta-analysis and systematic review, selected from scientific articles available in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus databases from 2020 to 2022. The following terms were used for the search strategy: (adherence OR hesitancy OR compliance OR attitude) AND (covid* OR SARS*) AND (vaccin* OR immun*) AND (diabet*).ResultsThe vaccine hesitation rate among persons with diabetes was 27.8 % (95 %CI = 15.6–41.9 %). In the comparison of vaccine hesitancy between sexes and educational status, the RRs were 0.90 (95 %CI = 0.71–1.15) and 0.88 (95 %CI = 0.76–1.02), respectively. The main reasons of unwillingness were lack of information, opinion that the vaccine was unsafe or not efficient, and fear of adverse events.ConclusionsIn order to achieve a high vaccination coverage, multifactorial approach is needed, which requires major social, scientific and health efforts. The success of the vaccination campaign in this population depends on the capillarity and consistency of the interventions implemented.     

COVID-19 vaccine literacy and vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women and mothers of young children in Japan

BackgroundDelays in the spread of vaccination have been recognized as an urgent public health issue in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine literacy (VL) is a critical determinant of vaccine uptake; however, little is known about VL among pregnant women and mothers of young children.MethodsWe analyzed data from a nationwide, cross-sectional internet survey in Japan on VL and vaccine hesitancy, conducted with 1,639 pregnant women and 5,688 mothers of young children who had given birth after July 2019, between July 24 and August 30, 2021.ResultsVaccine hesitancy was observed in 51.1 % of pregnant women and 31.9 % of mothers of young children. The risk of vaccine hesitancy was significantly higher among pregnant women with lower interactive/critical skills (risk ratio [RR] 2.10, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.59, 2.78, p < 0.001), although functional skills did not significantly correlate with vaccine hesitancy. For mothers of young children, we found a significantly higher risk of vaccine hesitancy among those with low VL functional skills (RR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.19, 1.61), p < 0.001) and low interactive/critical skills (RR 1.29, 95 % CI 1.10, 1.50, p = 0.001).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that aiding individuals to correctly evaluate vaccine-related information is critical for improving vaccine acceptance rates among both pregnant women and mothers of young children. Meanwhile, improving the comprehensibility of communication toolkits may be important for women with children but have a limited effect among pregnant women.     

Influenza virus vaccine compliance among pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic (pre-vaccine era) in Israel and future intention to uptake BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine

The influenza virus vaccine, used worldwide as an annual preventive measure, is especially recommended for at-risk populations. Older adults and pregnant women are therefore offered the flu shot free of charge in Israel. The Israel Ministry of Health’s rationale for giving the influenza vaccine to pregnant women is to avoid serious complications that could harm both mother and foetus. In Israel, the winter of 2020/2021 was marked by a third surge of COVID-19, raising the risk of contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the level of fear among the population. The influenza vaccine protects individuals from the flu and thus helps prevent an additional burden on medical centres treating COVID-19 patients. The aim of the present study was to assess compliance of pregnant and postpartum women to influenza vaccine uptake during winter 20/21 period. A survey questionnaire was distributed to examine factors predicting women’s attitudes toward the influenza vaccine. Questionnaire items based on the Heath Belief Model examined participants’ perceptions regarding influenza and the vaccine. The questionnaire also evaluated participants’ hypothetical willingness to get immunized with the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine upon its arrival in Israel. The results showed a higher prevalence of influenza vaccine uptake among Jewish women than Arab women, while level of trust in healthcare providers was stronger among Arab participants than among Jewish participants. The findings indicate that the pregnant and postpartum community needs better information dissemination and education regarding the importance of the influenza vaccine. Decisions regarding uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine upon future availability were found to be unrelated to influenza vaccine perceptions. The results call for raising public awareness regarding influenza immunization in addition to offering the vaccine at routine pregnancy follow-up appointments.     

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among people living with HIV in a low-resource setting: A multi-center study of prevalence,correlates and reasons

BackgroundHesitancy to COVID-19 vaccine may worsen the burden of COVID-19 among people living with HIV (PLHIV), who are at a higher risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death, compared to HIV non-infected individuals. Therefore, we evaluate the predictors and reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among unvaccinated PLHIV in six antiretroviral therapy (ART) clinics across northern Nigeria.MethodologyIn this cross-sectional study, conducted between October 2021 and February 2022 in six hospitals across two geopolitical regions of Nigeria, we utilized interviewer-administered questionnaires to assess COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among a convenience sample of 790 eligible adult PLHIV. Hesitancy was defined as answering ‘no' or ‘maybe’ to a question asking participants their willingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among PLHIV.ResultsOf the total 660 unvaccinated participants included in the analysis (61.82% female, mean age [SD] of 39.76 [10.75]), 381 (57.72%) were hesitant to COVID-19 vaccine. Being 50 years and older (aOR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.21–0.89), being unemployed (aOR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.34–0.95), experiencing the adverse effects of ART (aOR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.15–0.86), and perception of being at high risk of contracting COVID-19 (aOR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.13–0.37) were associated with significantly lower odds of hesitancy. Conversely, being female (aOR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.02–2.61) and attending ART clinics at state administrative capital cities (IIDH Kano [aOR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.10–5.25], MMSH Kano [aOR: 5.59; 95% CI: 1.97–10.66], YSSH Damaturu [aOR: 9.88; 95% CI: 4.02–24.29] vs. GH Gashua) were associated with significantly higher odds of hesitancy. The most common reasons for hesitancy include fear of potential adverse effects, skepticism about vaccine efficacy, the rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine, and the perceived lack of effort to develop a cure or vaccine for HIV/AIDS.ConclusionInterventions aimed at combating misperceptions and misinformation regarding the COVID-19 vaccination program may reduce the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among unvaccinated PLHIV.     

NIH funding for vaccine readiness before the COVID-19 pandemic

Rapid development of vaccines for COVID-19 has relied on the application of existing vaccine technologies. This work examines the maturity of ten technologies employed in candidate vaccines (as of July 2020) and NIH funding for published research on these technologies from 2000–2019. These technologies vary from established platforms, which have been used successfully in approved products, to emerging technologies with no prior clinical validation. A robust body of published research on vaccine technologies was supported by 16,358 fiscal years of NIH funding totaling $17.2 billion from 2000–2019. During this period, NIH funding for published vaccine research against specific pandemic threats such as coronavirus, Zika, Ebola, and dengue was not sustained. NIH funding contributed substantially to the advance of technologies available for rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, suggesting the importance of sustained public sector funding for foundational technologies in the rapid response to emerging public health threats.     

Public opinion on global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys in Germany and the United States

Despite ongoing calls for a more even global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, there remains a great disparity between high- and low-income countries. We conducted representative surveys among the adult populations in the United States (N = 1,000) and Germany (N = 1,003) in June 2021 to assess public opinion in these countries on the distributive justice of COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted two instances of analytic hierarchy processes (AHP) to elicit how the public weighs different principles and criteria for vaccine allocation. In further discrete choice experiments, respondents were asked to split a limited supply of vaccine doses between a hypothetical high-income and a hypothetical low-income country. AHP weights in the United States and Germany were 37.4% (37.2–37.5) and 49.4% (49.2–49.5) for “medical urgency”, 32.7% (32.6–32.8) and 25.4% (25.2–25.5) for “equal access for all”, 13.7% (13.6–13.8) and 13.3% (13.2–13.4) for “production contribution”, and 16.3% (16.2–16.4) and 12.0% (11.9–12.1) for “free market rules”, respectively, with 95% CI shown in parentheses. In the discrete choice experiment, respondents in the United States and Germany split available vaccine doses such that the low-income country, which was three times more populous than the high-income country, on average received 53.9% (95% CI: 52.6–55.1) and 57.5% (95% CI: 56.3–58.7) of available doses, respectively. When faced with a dilemma where a vulnerable family member was waiting for a vaccine, 20.7% (95% CI: 18.2–23.3) of respondents in the United States and 18.2% (95% CI: 15.8–20.6) in Germany reduced the amount they allocated to the low-income country sufficiently to secure a vaccine for their family member. Our results indicate that the public in the United States and Germany favours utilitarian and egalitarian distribution principles of vaccines for COVID-19 over libertarian or meritocratic principles. This implies that political decisions favouring higher levels of redistribution would be supported by public opinion in these two countries.     

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines at preventing emergency department or urgent care encounters and hospitalizations among immunocompromised adults: An observational study of real-world data across 10 US states from August-December 2021

BackgroundImmunocompromised (IC) persons are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes and are less protected by 1–2 COVID-19 vaccine doses than are immunocompetent (non-IC) persons. We compared vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended COVID-19 of 2–3 mRNA and 1–2 viral-vector vaccine doses between IC and non-IC adults.MethodsUsing a test-negative design among eight VISION Network sites, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) events and hospitalizations from 26 August-25 December 2021 was estimated separately among IC and non-IC adults and among specific IC condition subgroups. Vaccination status was defined using number and timing of doses. VE for each status (versus unvaccinated) was adjusted for age, geography, time, prior positive test result, and local SARS-CoV-2 circulation.ResultsWe analyzed 8,848 ED/UC events and 18,843 hospitalizations among IC patients and 200,071 ED/UC events and 70,882 hospitalizations among non-IC patients. Among IC patients, 3-dose mRNA VE against ED/UC (73% [95% CI: 64–80]) and hospitalization (81% [95% CI: 76–86]) was lower than that among non-IC patients (ED/UC: 94% [95% CI: 93–94]; hospitalization: 96% [95% CI: 95–97]). Similar patterns were observed for viral-vector vaccines. Transplant recipients had lower VE than other IC subgroups.ConclusionsDuring B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance, IC adults received moderate protection against COVID-19–associated medical events from three mRNA doses, or one viral-vector dose plus a second dose of any product. However, protection was lower in IC versus non-IC patients, especially among transplant recipients, underscoring the need for additional protection among IC adults.     

Development of an IgG-Fc fusion COVID-19 subunit vaccine,AKS-452

AKS-452 is a biologically-engineered vaccine comprising an Fc fusion protein of the SARS-CoV-2 viral spike protein receptor binding domain antigen (Ag) and human IgG1 Fc (SP/RBD-Fc) in clinical development for the induction and augmentation of neutralizing IgG titers against SARS-CoV-2 viral infection to address the COVID-19 pandemic. The Fc moiety is designed to enhance immunogenicity by increasing uptake via Fc-receptors (FcγR) on Ag-presenting cells (APCs) and prolonging exposure due to neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) recycling. AKS-452 induced approximately 20-fold greater neutralizing IgG titers in mice relative to those induced by SP/RBD without the Fc moiety and induced comparable long-term neutralizing titers with a single dose vs. two doses. To further enhance immunogenicity, AKS-452 was evaluated in formulations containing a panel of adjuvants in which the water-in-oil adjuvant, Montanide™ ISA 720, enhanced neutralizing IgG titers by approximately 7-fold after one and two doses in mice, including the neutralization of live SARS-CoV-2 virus infection of VERO-E6 cells. Furthermore, ISA 720-adjuvanted AKS-452 was immunogenic in rabbits and non-human primates (NHPs) and protected from infection and clinical symptoms with live SARS-CoV-2 virus in NHPs (USA-WA1/2020 viral strain) and the K18 human ACE2-trangenic (K18-huACE2-Tg) mouse (South African B.1.351 viral variant). These preclinical studies support the initiation of Phase I clinical studies with adjuvanted AKS-452 with the expectation that this room-temperature stable, Fc-fusion subunit vaccine can be rapidly and inexpensively manufactured to provide billions of doses per year especially in regions where the cold-chain is difficult to maintain.     

COVID-19 vaccination among different types of US Healthcare Personnel

BackgroundIncreasing vaccine coverage remains the best way to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare personnel (HCP) have long been the most credible and frequently used source of vaccine information for the public, and an HCP recommendation is a strong predictor of vaccination.MethodsA survey of HCP was conducted in September 2021 via a double opt-in network panel. Responses to survey items were summarized and stratified by HCP type and adjusted logistic regression models were fitted.Results>94% of the 1074 HCP surveyed reported receiving at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine or intending to soon, with vaccinating most common among pediatricians (98%), followed by family medicine doctors (96%), pharmacists (94%), and nurses/nurse practitioners/physician assistants (88%). HCP with high trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had 26 times the odds of vaccinating of HCP with low trust (95%CI: 9, 74). Nearly half of unvaccinated HCP (47%) were concerned about side effects, and one third of unvaccinated HCP (33%) were concerned the vaccine was developed too quickly. About three quarters of HCP reported strongly recommending the Pfizer-BioNTech (75%) and Moderna (70%) vaccines to their patients, compared to about one quarter (24%) strongly recommending Johnson & Johnson.ConclusionsAlthough most HCP are vaccinated against COVID-19 and strongly recommend vaccination to their patients, some harbor similar concerns to the public. Additional resources – regularly updated to explain the progressing scientific landscape and address ever evolving public concerns – are needed to further improve vaccine coverage among HCP and aid them in supporting the decision-making of their patients.     

Influenza vaccination uptake among Canadian adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal study on Aging (CLSA)

IntroductionUnderstanding how influenza vaccine uptake changed during the 2020/2021 influenza season compared to previous pre-pandemic seasons is a key priority, as is identifying the relationship between prior influenza vaccination and COVID-19 vaccine willingness.MethodsWe analyzed data from a large, nationally representative cohort of Canadian residents aged 50 and older to assess influenza vaccination status three times between 2015 and 2020. We investigated: 1) changes in self-reported influenza vaccine uptake, 2) predictors of influenza vaccine uptake in 2020/2021, and 3) the association between influenza vaccination history and self-reported COVID-19 vaccine willingness using logistic regression models.ResultsAmong 23,385 participants analyzed for aims 1–2, influenza vaccination increased over time: 14,114 (60.4%) in 2015–2018, 15,692 (67.1%) in 2019/2020, and 19,186 (82.0%; combining those already vaccinated and those planning to get a vaccine) in 2020/2021. After controlling for socio-demographics, history of influenza vaccination was most strongly associated with influenza vaccination in 2020/2021 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 147.9 [95% CI: 120.9–180.9]); this association remained after accounting for multiple health and pandemic-related factors (aOR 140.3 [95% CI: 114.5–171.8]). To a lesser degree, those more concerned about COVID-19 were also more likely to report influenza vaccination in fall 2020, whereas those reporting a very negative impact of the pandemic were less likely to get vaccinated. Among 23,819 participants with information on COVID-19 vaccine willingness during the last quarter of 2020 (aim 3), prior influenza vaccination was most strongly associated with willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine (aOR 15.1 [95% CI: 13.5–16.8] for those who had received influenza vaccine at all previous timepoints versus none).ConclusionsOur analysis highlights the importance of previous vaccination in driving vaccination uptake and willingness. Efforts to increase vaccination coverage for influenza and COVID-19 should target individuals who do not routinely engage with immunization services regardless of demographic factors.