Search

The risk of unfavourable outcomes for SARS-CoV-2 infection is significant during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Vaccination is a safe and effective measure to lower this risk. This study aims at reviewing the literature concerning the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine's acceptance/hesitancy among pregnant and breastfeeding women attending hospital facilities. A systematic review of literature was carried out. Hospital-based observational studies related to vaccination acceptance, hesitancy, knowledge and attitude among pregnant and breastfeeding women were included. Determinants of acceptance and hesitancy were investigated in detail. Quality assessment was done via the Johann Briggs Institute quality assessment tools. After literature search, 43 studies were included, 30 of which only focused on pregnant women (total sample 25,862 subjects). Sample size ranged from 109 to 7017 people. Acceptance of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine ranged from 16% to 78.52%; vaccine hesitancy ranged between 91.4% and 24.5%. Fear of adverse events for either the woman, the child, or both, was the main driver for hesitancy. Other determinants of hesitancy included religious concerns, socioeconomic factors, inadequate information regarding the vaccine and lack of trust towards institutions. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in hospitalized pregnant women appears to be significant, and efforts for a more effective communication to these subjects are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is recommended for pregnant women due to the high risk of complications. However, pregnancy has been associated with vaccine hesitancy. Our review aims at summarizing the existing literature about anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in pregnant and lactating women. The research was conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, ExcerptaMedica Database (EMBASE), and Scopus, according to PRISMA guidelines. Articles regarding the COVID-19 vaccine's acceptance and/or refusal by pregnant and lactating women were selected. Only observational, population-based studies were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tools were employed. A total of 496 articles were retrieved, and after the selection process, 21 papers were included in the current analysis. All the included studies were cross-sectional, mostly from Europe and North America. The sample sizes ranged between 72 and 25,111 subjects. All of them included pregnant subjects, except one that focused on breastfeeding women only. Vaccine hesitancy rates ranged from 26% to 57% among different studies. Fear of adverse events and lack of knowledge were shown to be the main drivers of hesitancy. Approximately half of the studies (11/21) were classified as low quality, the remaining (9/21) were classified as moderate, and only one study was classified as high quality. Primigravidae were also shown to be more likely to accept anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Our findings confirm significant anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women. Information gaps should be addressed to contain concerns related to adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, was identified at the end of 2019. It swiftly spread all over the world, affecting more than 600 million people and causing over 6 million deaths worldwide. Different COVID-19 vaccines became available by the end of 2020. Healthcare workers and more vulnerable people (such as the elderly and those with comorbidities) were initially prioritized, followed by the entire population, including pregnant and breastfeeding women. Despite the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, a certain level of skepticism was expressed, including among pregnant and breastfeeding women. There were several reasons for this reluctancy, among them, fear of side-effects for both women and fetuses. Nevertheless, acceptance, as well as hesitancy, were time, country and vaccine specific. This review will collect available evidence assessing knowledge, attitudes, behaviour, practice and acceptance/hesitancy of pregnant/breastfeeding women in relation to the COVID-19 vaccination. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE databases will be consulted. A predefined search strategy that combines both free text and MESH terms will be used. The systematic review will adhere to the PRISMA guidelines and the results will be reported in both narrative and summary tables. A meta-analysis will be conducted if data are available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]