COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in care home staff: A survey of Liverpool care homes

Uptake of COVID-19 vaccine first doses in UK care homes has been higher among residents compared to staff. We aimed to identify causes of lower COVID-19 vaccine uptake amongst care home staff within Liverpool. An anonymised online survey was distributed to all care home managers, between the 21st and the 29th January 2021. 53 % of 87 care homes responded. The overall COVID-19 vaccination rate was 52.6 % (n = 1119). Reasons, identified by care home managers for staff being unvaccinated included: concerns about lack of vaccine research (37.0 %), staff being off-site during vaccination sessions (36.5 %), pregnancy and fertility concerns (5.6 %), and allergic reactions concerns (3.2 %). Care home managers wanted to tackle vaccine hesitancy through conversations with health professionals, and provision of evidence dispelling vaccine misinformation. Vaccine hesitancy and logistical issues were the main causes for reduced vaccine uptake among care home staff. The former could be addressed by targeted training, and public health communication campaigns to build confidence and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.     

Misinformation and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has emerged as a major public health challenge. Although medical and scientific misinformation has been known to fuel vaccine hesitancy in the past, misinformation surrounding COVID-19 seems to be rampant, and increasing evidence suggests that it is contributing to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy today. The relationship between misinformation and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is complex, however, and it is relatively understudied.MethodsIn this article, we report qualitative data from two related but distinct studies from a larger project. Study 1 included semi-structured, open-ended interviews conducted in October–November 2020 via phone with 30 participants to investigate the relationship between misinformation and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Study 1′s results then informed the design of open-ended questions for Study 2, an online survey conducted in May–June 2021 to consider the relationship between misinformation and vaccine hesitancy further. The data were examined with thematic analysis.ResultsStudy 1 led to the identification of positive and negative themes related to attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines. In Study 2, responses from vaccine-hesitant participants included six categories of misinformation: medical, scientific, political, media, religious, and technological. Across both Study 1 and Study 2, six vaccine hesitancy themes were identified from the data: concerns about the vaccines’ future effects, doubts about the vaccines’ effectiveness, commercial profiteering, preference for natural immunity, personal freedom, and COVID-19 denial.ConclusionsThe relationship between misinformation and vaccine hesitancy is complicated. Various types of misinformation exist, with each related to a specific type of vaccine hesitancy-related attitude. Personal freedom and COVID-19 denial are vaccine attitudes of particular interest, representing important yet understudied phenomena. Medical and scientific approaches may not be sufficient to combat misinformation based in religion, media, or politics; and public health officials may benefit from partnering with experts from those fields to address harmful misinformation that is driving COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.     

Hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines on social media in Canada

To effectively end the pandemic, the acceptance of effective vaccines against COVID-19 is critical. Comments posted in online platforms act as a barometer for understanding public concerns regarding vaccination and can be used to inform communication strategies for the ‘moveable middle’. The aim of this exploratory study was to identify online dialogue regarding the nature of vaccine hesitancy related to COVID-19 vaccine(s). We analyzed user comment threads in response to news reports regarding COVID-19 vaccines on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation national news website (with as many as 9.4 million unique visitors per day). User comments (n = 1145) were extracted from 19 articles between March 2020 and June 15th, 2020. Comments were then coded inductively for content to establish a coding framework that was subsequently applied to the dataset. Our data provide empirical support for misrepresentation as a form of misinformation and further demonstrate the utility of social media content as data for social research that informs public health communication materials. The data point to the need for, and value of, rapid communication interventions to foster vaccine acceptance. False information will continue to create challenges for delivering COVID-19 vaccines. Communication strategies to get ahead of the pace of misinformation are critical, particularly in light of boosters and the possibility of COVID-19 vaccination on an annual basis.     

Christian nationalism and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake

Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake is vital for informing public health interventions. Prior U.S. research has found that religious conservatism is positively associated with anti-vaccine attitudes. One of the strongest predictors of anti-vaccine attitudes in the U.S. is Christian nationalism—a U.S. cultural ideology that wants civic life to be permeated by their particular form of nationalist Christianity. However, there are no studies examining the relationship between Christian nationalism and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake. Using a new nationally representative sample of U.S. adults, we find that Christian nationalism is one of the strongest predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and is negatively associated with having received or planning to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Since Christian nationalists make up approximately 20 percent of the population, these findings could have important implications for achieving herd immunity.     

COVID-19 booster vaccination in rural community pharmacies

This study assessed rural community pharmacists’ attitudes about COVID-19 vaccine booster doses and explored whether rural pharmacies offered these booster doses. Of the 80 rural Southeastern U.S. pharmacists who completed the online survey, the majority (n = 68, 85 %) offered boosters and 42 (52.5 %) had received the booster themselves. Alabama and Mississippi offered boosters less often than other states, and pharmacists who had foregone receiving COVID-19 vaccination or booster doses were less likely to offer the booster to their patients. Additionally, many pharmacists reported that they and their patients felt the booster was not needed. Community pharmacies provide access points for the COVID-19 booster in rural areas. Interventions for both pharmacists and patients are needed to address hesitancy and improve booster uptake in these communities.     

Preferences for COVID-19 vaccination information and location: Associations with vaccine hesitancy,race and ethnicity

This study examined the association between preferences for being informed about the COVID-19 vaccine and where to receive it with vaccination intent and race/ethnicity. We conducted an online survey, oversampling Black and Latino panel members. The 1668 participants were 53.2% female, 34.8% White, 33.3% Black, and 31.8% Latino. Participants who were vaccine hesitant (answered “not sure” or “no” to vaccination intent) were more likely to prefer a conversation with their doctor compared to those who answered “yes” (25.0% and 23.4% vs 7.8%, P < .001, respectively). Among participants who responded “not sure”, 61.8% prefer to be vaccinated at a doctor’s office, compared with 35.2% of those who responded “yes” (P < .001). Preferred location differed by race/ethnicity (P < .001) with 67.6% of Black “not sure” participants preferring a doctor’s office compared to 60.2% of Latino and 54.9% of White “not sure” participants. These findings underscore the need to integrate healthcare providers into COVID-19 vaccination programs.     

Vaccine hesitancy against COVID-19 vaccine over time in Nigeria

IntroductionWhile COVID-19 pandemic is an ongoing threat for our lives, the rapid development of effective vaccines against COVID-19 provided us hopes for manageable disease control. However, vaccine hesitancy across the globe is a concern which could attenuate efforts of disease control. This study examined the extent and trend of vaccine hesitancy in Nigeria.MethodsThe COVID-19 National Longitudinal Phone Survey conducted between 2020 and 2021 was used for the analysis. The extent and trend of vaccine hesitancy across different zones within Nigeria, over time, as well as reasons of the hesitancy were evaluated.ResultsVaccine hesitancy was more prevalent in southern zones, which on average have better socioeconomic status than northern zones. Overtime, vaccine hesitancy became more prevalent, and respondents became more resistant to the COVID-19 vaccine across the country.ConclusionWhile the nature of interventions to improve the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine should differ by regions due to differential barriers to vaccination, it might be important to prebunk and debunk any misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccine to mitigate the vaccine hesitancy across the country.     

The correlates and dynamics of COVID-19 vaccine-specific hesitancy

Most work on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has focused on its attitudinal and demographic correlates among individuals, but the characteristics of vaccines themselves also appear to be important. People are more willing to take vaccines with higher reported levels of efficacy and safety. Has this dynamic sparked comparative hesitancy towards specific COVID-19 vaccines? We conduct a series of cross-sectional survey experiments to test for brand-based differences in perceived effectiveness, perceived safety, and vaccination intention. Examining more than 6,200 individuals in a series of cross-sectional surveys, we find considerably more reluctance to take the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines compared to those from Pfizer and Moderna if offered, despite all vaccines being approved and deemed safe and effective by a federal regulator. Comparative hesitancy towards these vaccines grew over the course of fielding as controversy arose over their link to extremely rare, but serious side effects. Comparative vaccine-specific hesitancy is strongest among people who are usually most open to mass vaccination efforts. Its effects are substantial: most respondents reported a willingness to wait months for their preferred vaccine rather than receive either the AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson vaccine immediately. Our findings call for additional research on the determinants and consequences of COVID-19 vaccine-specific hesitancy and communication strategies to minimize this challenge.     

Low COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Brazil

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has affected the entire world, and the vaccine has emerged as a source of hope for return to normal life. Still, various countries have reported high vaccine hesitancy rates. It is important to know the vaccine hesitancy profile in Brazil to help design adequate communication strategies.MethodsA voluntary, anonymous online survey was conducted from January 22 to 29, 2021, including resident Brazilian adults to assess factors related to vaccine hesitancy. Sociodemographic and epidemiological data were analyzed. A bivariate analysis was conducted with the independent variables, with vaccine hesitancy as the outcome variable, and a multivariate logistic model was used to calculated adjusted odds ratios.ResultsThe sample included 173,178 respondents, and vaccine hesitancy was found in 10.5%. The principal factors associated with vaccine hesitancy were the following: assigning importance to the vaccinés efficacy (AOR = 16.39), fear of adverse reactions (AOR = 11.23), and assigning importance to the vaccinés country of origin (AOR = 3.72). Other risk factors were the following: male gender (AOR = 1.62), having children (AOR = 1.29), 9 years of schooling or less (AOR = 1.31), living in the Central-West region (AOR = 1.19), age ≥ 40 years (AOR = 1.17), and monthly income < U$788.68 (AOR = 1.13). The two vaccines available in Brazil, Covishield and CoronaVac, showed similar confidence, 80.13% and 76.36%, respectively, despite the higher rejection of the latter vaccinés Chinese origin.InterpretationThis online survey confirms the low vaccine hesitancy rate among Brazilians and allowed the identification of a profile that can assist the elaboration of communication strategies to increase vaccine adherence.FundingNational Institute of Women, Children and Adolescents Health Fernandes Figueira, FIOCRUZ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.     

Vaccination willingness,vaccine hesitancy,and estimated coverage at the first round of COVID-19 vaccination in China: A national cross-sectional study

BackgroundVaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become an important public health solution. To date, there has been a lack of data on COVID-19 vaccination willingness, vaccine hesitancy, and vaccination coverage in China since the vaccine has become available.MethodsWe designed and implemented a cross-sectional, population-based online survey to evaluate the willingness, hesitancy, and coverage of the COVID-19 vaccine among the Chinese population. 8742 valid samples were recruited and classified as the vaccine-priority group (n = 3902; 44.6%) and the non-priority group (n = 4840; 55.4%).ResultsThe proportion of people’s trust in the vaccine, delivery system, and government were 69.0%, 78.0% and 81.3%, respectively. 67.1% of the participants were reportedly willing to accept the COVID-19 vaccination, while 9.0% refused it. 834 (35.5%) reported vaccine hesitancy, including acceptors with doubts (48.8%), refusers (39.4%), and delayers (11.8%). The current coverage was 34.4%, far from reaching the requirements of herd immunity. The predicted rate of COVID-19 vaccination was 64.9%, 68.9% and 81.1% based on the rates of vaccine hesitancy, willingness, and refusal, respectively.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 vaccine rate is far from reaching the requirements of herd immunity, which will require more flexible and comprehensive efforts to improve the population’s confidence and willingness to vaccinate. It should be highlighted that vaccination alone is insufficient to stop the pandemic; further efforts are needed not only to increase vaccination coverage but also to maintain non-specific prevention strategies.     

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and its socio-demographic and emotional determinants: A multi-country cross-sectional study

BackgroundMultiple COVID-19 vaccines have now been licensed for human use, with other candidate vaccines in different stages of development. Effective and safe vaccines against COVID-19 have been essential in achieving global reductions in severe disease caused by severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but multiple factors, including vaccine supply and vaccine confidence, continue to impact global uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. In this study, we explore determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intent across17 countries worldwide.MethodsIn this large-scale multi-country study, we explored intent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine and the socio-demographic and emotional determinants of uptake for 17 countries and over 19,000 individuals surveyed in June and July 2020 via nationally representative samples. We used Bayesian ordinal logistic regressions to probe the relationship between intent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine and individuals’ socio-demographic status, their confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and their recent emotional status. Gibbs sampling was used for Bayesian model inference, with 95% Bayesian highest posterior density intervals used to capture uncertainty.FindingsIntent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine was found to be highest in India, where 77?8% (95% HPD, 75?5 to 80?0%) of respondents strongly agreeing that they would take a new COVID-19 vaccine if it were available. The Democratic Republic of Congo (15?5%, 12?2 to 18?6%) and France (26?4%, 23?7 to 29?2%) had the lowest share of respondents who strongly agreed that they would accept a COVID-19. Confidence in the safety, importance, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines are the most widely informative determinants of vaccination intent. Socio-demographic and emotional determinants played a lesser role, with being male and having higher education associated with increased uptake intent in five countries and being fearful of catching COVID-19 also a strong determinant of uptake intent.InterpretationBarriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance are found to be country and context dependent. These findings highlight the importance of regular monitoring of COVID-19 vaccine confidence to identify groups less likely to vaccinate.     

“I won’t be a guinea pig”: Rethinking public health communication and vaccine hesitancy in the context of COVID-19

At the beginning of 2021, when Canada started distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, the unprecedented scope and severity of the pandemic led to very high levels of public awareness and attention, with Canadians actively seeking information. We argue that while there was continuous public health communication about COVID-19 and the newly available vaccines, these messages did not address the specific anxieties elicited by the novel vaccines, even as vaccination guidelines changed. Instead, public health messages about COVID-19 vaccines resembled those aimed at reducing vaccine hesitancy for routine immunization and did not sufficiently address the constant changes to COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. In a context of heightened public concern and significant public attention, it is crucial for communicators to acknowledge that hesitancy is vaccine-specific, and that novel diseases and new vaccines produce specific concerns. Long-term strategies should address the novelty of the technology and of the risk, thoroughly explain the reasons for shifting vaccination guidelines, and leverage trusted sources, such as community leaders. Further, as COVID-19 vaccines become less effective against some of the more recent variants of the virus, vaccine messaging needs to be tailored to evolve with shifting realities to not lose productive gains in the COVID-19 vaccination campaign to date.     

Demographic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among U.S. adults: Analysis of household pulse survey data from Jul 21 to Oct 11 in 2021

Monitoring COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy helps design and implement strategies to increase vaccine uptake. Utilizing the large scale cross-sectional Household Pulse Survey data collected between July 21 and October 11 in 2021, this study aims to construct measures of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and identify demographic disparities among U.S. adults (18y+). Factor analysis identified three factors of vaccine hesitancy: safety concerns (prevalence: 70.1 %). trust issues (53.5 %), and not seen as necessary (33.8 %). Among those who did not show willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine, females were more likely to have safety concerns (73.7 %) compared to males (66.7 %), but less likely to have trust issues (female: 49.7 %; male: 57.1 %) or not seen as necessary (female: 23.8 %; male 43.4 %). Higher education was associated with higher prevalence of not seen as necessary. Younger adults and Whites had higher prevalence of having trust issues and not seen as necessary compared to their counter parts.     

Influence of rapid COVID-19 vaccine development on vaccine hesitancy

IntroductionIn the race to deploy vaccines to prevent COVID-19, there is a need to understand factors influencing vaccine hesitancy. Secondary risk theory is a useful framework to explain this, accounting for concerns about vaccine efficacy and safety.MethodsDuring the first week of July, 2020, participants (N = 216) evaluated one of three different hypothetical vaccine scenarios describing an FDA-approved vaccine becoming available “next week,” “in one year,” or “in two years.” Dependent variables were perceived vaccine efficacy, self-efficacy, perceived vaccine risk, and vaccination willingness. Covariates included vaccine conspiracy beliefs, science pessimism, media dependency, and perceived COVID-19 risk. Data analysis employed multiple analysis of covariance (MANCOVA).ResultsPerceived vaccine efficacy was lowest for the next-week vaccine (η²_p = .045). Self-efficacy was higher for the two-year vaccine than the next-week vaccine (η²_p = .029). Perceived vaccine risk was higher for the next-week vaccine than for the one-year vaccine (η²_p = .032). Vaccination willingness did not differ among experimental treatments. In addition, vaccine conspiracy beliefs were negatively related to perceived vaccine efficacy (η²_p = .142), self-efficacy (η²_p = .031), and vaccination willingness (η²_p = .143) and positively related to perceived vaccine risk (η²_p = .216).ConclusionsThe rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine may have heightened public concerns over efficacy, availability, and safety. However, the current findings showed a general willingness to take even the most rapidly developed vaccine. Nonetheless, there remains a need to communicate publicly and transparently about vaccine efficacy and safety and work to reduce vaccine conspiracy beliefs.     

Trust in government,intention to vaccinate and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: A comparative survey of five large cities in the United States,United Kingdom,and Australia

BackgroundThere is widespread hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia.ObjectiveTo identify predictors of willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 in five cities with varying COVID-19 incidence in the US, UK, and Australia.DesignOnline, cross-sectional survey of adults from Dynata’s research panel in July-September 2020.Participants, settingAdults aged 18 and over in Sydney, Melbourne, London, New York City, or Phoenix.Main outcomes and measuresWillingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine; reason for vaccine intention.Statistical methodsTo identify predictors of intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, we used Poisson regression with robust error estimation to produce prevalence ratios.ResultsThe proportion willing to receive a COVID-19 vaccine was 70% in London, 71% NYC, 72% in Sydney, 76% in Phoenix, and 78% in Melbourne. Age was the only sociodemographic characteristic that predicted willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in all five cities. In Sydney and Melbourne, participants with high confidence in their current government had greater willingness to receive the vaccine (PR = 1.24; 95% CI = 1.07–1.44 and PR = 1.38; 95% CI = 1.74–1.62), while participants with high confidence in their current government in NYC and Phoenix were less likely to be willing to receive the vaccine (PR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.72–0.85 and PR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.76–0.96).LimitationsConsumer panels can be subject to bias and may not be representative of the general population.ConclusionsSuccess for COVID-19 vaccination programs requires high levels of vaccine acceptance. Our data suggests more than 25% of adults may not be willing to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, but many of them were not explicitly anti-vaccination and thus may become more willing to vaccinate over time. Among the three countries surveyed, there appears to be cultural differences, political influences, and differing experiences with COVID-19 that may affect willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.     

Effect of the suspension of the J&J COVID-19 vaccine on vaccine hesitancy in the United States

On April 13, 2021, U.S. authorities announced an investigation into potential adverse events associated with the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen, J&J) COVID-19 vaccine and recommended “a pause in the use of this vaccine out of an abundance of caution.” We examined whether public attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination shifted after this recommended suspension using an interrupted time series with data from the Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey, which was fielded bi-weekly between January 6 and April 26, 2021. We found no significant changes in trends of the proportion of the U.S. adult population hesitant about getting a COVID-19 vaccine, but a significant increase in concerns about safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines among the already hesitant population.     

A cross-sectional analysis of the association between social capital and willingness to get COVID-19 vaccine in Ontario,Canada

ObjectiveWe examine the role of social capital in intention to take the vaccine at the end of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis study uses observational, cross-sectional data from the Ontario sample of the fall 2020 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS), a representative sample of the population with added questions relative to symptoms of COVID-19 and intentions to get vaccinated. Questions on social capital were asked to respondents from Ontario only, yielding a sample of 6516. Odds ratios (OR) and marginal effects at sample mean of an index of social capital (at the individual or aggregated level) on changes in intentions to get vaccinated are estimated from logistic regression models.ResultsIndividual-level social capital is associated with greater willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19 (OR 1.09). Associations with aggregated-level social capital are less precisely estimated. Associations are the same for both males and females but vary across age categories: individual-level social capital is associated with higher willingness to get vaccinated among working-age respondents, but aggregate-level social capital is associated with higher willingness to get vaccinated among older adults.ConclusionVaccine hesitancy is not a random phenomenon, nor is it explained by individual characteristics such as education or income only. It also reflects the state of the social environment in which individuals live and public health messaging should take this into account if it is to be successful.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.17269/s41997-023-00746-9.