Search

Abstract Background Equitable access to vaccination remains a concern, particularly among population groups made structurally vulnerable. These population groups reflect the diversity of communities that are confronted with structural barriers caused by systemic racism and oppression and result in them experiencing suffer disadvantage and discrimination based on citizenship, race, ethnicity, ancestry, religion, spiritual beliefs, and/or gender identity. In Canada, Ontario public health units (PHUs) engage with faith-based organizations (FBOs) to improve vaccine confidence among populations made structurally vulnerable. This study explores the factors that facilitate and hinder engagement in the implementation of vaccine confidence promoting interventions, and challenges associated with working with FBOs. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted with 18 of the 34 Ontario PHUs who expressed an interest. Braun and Clarke’s “experiential” approach was used to explore the realities of PHUs’ contextual experiences and perspectives. Results The results showed that receptivity and openness of PHUs to learn from FBOs, previous experience working with religious communities and FBOs, ongoing relations based on respect of different beliefs and opinions on the vaccines, leveraging the support of trusted faith leaders among communities and communications strategy adapted and sensitive to the needs of the community was facilitators to community involvement in the prevention and control of COVID-19. On the other hand, factors both internal and external to the PHUs have often posed challenges to collaboration with the FBOs. Internal factors include low operational capacity of PHU like insufficient human and financial resources, weak analytical capacity, ambiguity in the roles and responsibilities of the different actors. Some external challenges issues were related to the provincial level and the Ministry of Health, while others were related to FBOs. For example, faith-based and collective beliefs promoting vaccine hesitancy have resulted in resistance from some religious communities when PHUs have reached out to collaborate. Conclusions Engaging with faith-based communities is an ongoing process that requires time, flexibility, and patience, but it is necessary to improve vaccine confidence and equity access among population groups made structurally vulnerable. Lessons learned from this research can guide the implementation of future vaccination programs.

ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to explore how Ontario Public Health Units (PHUs) partnered with faith-based organizations (FBOs) and other community-based organizations (CBOs) to promote COVID-19 vaccination among ethnoracial groups made structurally vulnerable during the pandemic, and to understand how PHUs perceive the effectiveness of these partnerships with these organizations.MethodsBetween June to December 2022, we distributed a cross-sectional survey to 34 PHUs in Ontario to explore how PHUs were engaging and partnering with FBOs and CBOs.ResultsResponses were received from 28 of 34 (82.5%) public health units. Across Ontario, 23 (82.1%) respondent PHUs worked with FBOs during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout with activities ranging from informing FBOs of vaccine availability, to using places of worship as sites for vaccine administration and co-creating educational materials on immunization that were faith- and culturally sensitive.ConclusionFBOs can be a valuable community partner as PHUs work to increase the reach and uptake of public health interventions. Ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the impact of FBO engagement on vaccine confidence and uptake among ethnoracial communities is needed to inform future community engaged vaccine programming in Ontario.

Background: In South Africa (SA), despite adoption of international strategies and approaches, maternal, neonatal and child (MNC) morbidity and mortality rates have not sufficiently declined. Objectives: To conduct an umbrella review (UR) that identifies interventions in low- and middle-income countries, with a high-quality evidence base, that improve MNC morbidity and mortality outcomes within the first 1000 days of life; and to assess the incorporation of the evidence into local strategies, guidelines and documents. Methods: We included publications about women and children in the first 1000 days of life; healthcare professionals and community members. Comparators were those who did not receive the intervention. Interventions were pharmacological and non-pharmacological. Outcomes were MNC morbidity and mortality. Authors conducted English language electronic and manual searches (2000–2013). The quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) were reviewed. Interventions were ranked according to level of evidence; and then aligned with SA strategies, policies and guidelines. A tool to extract data was developed and used by two authors who independently extracted data. Summary measures from MAs or summaries of SRs were reviewed and the specificities of the various interventions listed. A search of all local high-level documents was done and these were assessed to determine the specificities of the recommendations and their alignment to the evidence. Results: In total, 19 interventions presented in 32 SRs were identified. Overall, SA’s policymakers have sufficiently included high-quality evidence-based interventions into local policies. However, optimal period of birth spacing (two to five years) is not explicitly promoted nor was ante- and postnatal depression adequately incorporated. Antenatal care visits should be increased from four to about eight according to the evidence. Conclusion: Incorporation of existing evidence into policies can be strengthened in SA. The UR methods are useful to inform policymaking and identify research gaps. RESPONSIBLE EDITOR Nawi Ng, Umeå University, Sweden