Search

ImportanceAlthough several predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy have been identified, the role of physical health has not been well-examined, and the association with mental health is unknown.ObjectiveTo examine the association of pre-pandemic mental health, physical health, and shielding with vaccine hesitancy after the announcement of the successful testing of the Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccine.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsWe used individual-level data from a pandemic-focused investigation (COVID Survey), a prospective cohort study nested within the UK Understanding Society (Main Survey) project. In the week immediately following the announcement of successful testing of the first efficacious inoculation (November/December 2020), data on vaccine intentionality were collected in 12,035 individuals aged 16-95 years. Pre-pandemic, study members had responded to enquiries about diagnoses of mental and physical health, completed the 12-item General Health Questionnaire for symptoms of psychological distress (anxiety and depression), and indicated whether they or someone in their household was shielding.Main outcome measuresSelf-reported intention to take up a vaccination for COVID-19. To summarise our results, we computed odds ratios with accompanying 95% confidence intervals for indices of health and shielding adjusted for selected covariates.ResultsIn an analytical sample of 11,955 people (6741 women), 15.4% indicated that they were vaccine hesitant. Relative to their disease-free counterparts, shielding was associated with a 24% lower risk of being hesitant (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval: 0.76; 0.59, 0.96), after adjustment for a range of covariates which included age, education, and ethnicity. Corresponding results for cardiometabolic disease were 22% (0.78; 0.64, 0.95), and for respiratory disease were 26% (0.74; 0.59, 0.93). Having a pre-pandemic diagnosis of anxiety or depression, or a high score on the distress symptom scale, were all unrelated to the willingness to take up a vaccine.Conclusions and relevancePeople who have been prioritised for COVID-19 vaccination owing to a physical condition are more likely to take it up. These effects were not apparent for indices of mental health.

Introduction Vaccination is a key global strategy to mitigate the clinical impact of the COVID-19 virus. As part of local efforts to manage the outbreak, the government of Ghana announced its intention to vaccinate its population starting with essential and high-risk workers including radiographers. However, there were reports of hesitance to receiving the vaccine among the radiography workforce. This study was undertaken prior to the intended vaccination exercise to assess the willingness and concerns of radiographers to undergo the COVID-19 vaccination and to suggest recommendations to improve the vaccine uptake. Methods An ethically-approved online survey strategy was employed for this cross-sectional study conducted between 24th-28th February 2021. The survey employed quantitative questions and open text response options. Quantitative and open text responses were analysed using statistical and thematic analyses, respectively. Results There were 108 responses (response rate of 46.3%). The majority (n = 64, 59.3%) were willing to have the vaccine, however, some (n = 44, 40.7%) were not. The main reason behind their willingness to have the vaccine was its ability to reduce the spread of infections and lower mortality (n = 35, 54.7%). However, doubts about the vaccine's efficacy and side effects (n = 26, 56.8%), conspiracy theory concerns about its effects on the Ghanaian race (n = 4, 9.1%), and fertility concerns (n = 2, 4.5%) were some reasons for their hesitance to receive the vaccine. The open text commentary further revealed that the vaccine was thought of as a lifesaving medication, however, clinical safety concerns, lack of education/information and religious beliefs were affecting peoples' willingness to be vaccinated. Conclusion Our findings demonstrate the need for an urgent public health educational intervention to address the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy concerns raised by radiographers to help increase the vaccine uptake. Implication for practice The study provides pertinent information to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake among radiographers to limit the spread of infections.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic remains a public health priority, and vaccination is important for ending the pandemic. Racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionally affected by COVID-19 yet report high levels of vaccination hesitancy. Objective We conducted virtual Town Halls to address vaccine hesitancy among racial and ethnic minorities in South Florida. Methods Our approach used social influence and persuasion models. A formative phase gathered meeting preferences from our communities and developed and tested our approach. An implementation phase conducted six virtual Town Halls in partnership with minority community-based organizations. Results The Town Halls reached 383 participants (mean age 37.5 years; 63.4% female, 33.9% male, 2.7% nonbinary; 59% racial/ethnic minority), who completed pre- and post-meeting assessments. Among non-vaccinated participants, at the pre poll, 58% reported a high likelihood of seeking vaccination, rising to 63% at post-assessment. Unvaccinated “non-hesitant” and “hesitant” groups were compared on trusted information sources, and reasons and barriers for vaccination. Non-hesitant participants reported significantly greater trust in the COVID-19 Task Force (97.3% vs. 83.3%) as a source of vaccine information than did hesitant participants. Non-hesitant participants were significantly more likely to endorse family safety (82.5% vs. 63.2%), community safety (72.5% vs. 26.3%), personal safety (85% vs. 36.8%), and wanting to return to a normal life (70% vs. 31.6%), as reasons for vaccination than were hesitant participants. Hesitant participants were significantly more likely to endorse concerns about vaccine safety doubts (63.2% vs. 17.5%) and not believing the pandemic is as bad as people say it is (21.1% vs. 5%) as barriers to vaccination than were non-hesitant participants. Qualitative data revealed high consumer satisfaction with the Town Halls. Conclusion This study supports the feasibility, acceptability, and potential impact of virtual Town Halls for addressing vaccine hesitancy among racial/ethnic minorities; however, our approach was very resource intensive, required an extensive community-university collaborative infrastructure, and yielded a small effect.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 vaccines have become the new hope for stemming the pandemic. We aimed to assess pre-launch vaccine acceptance among hospital workers in the Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes Administrative Region of France. METHODS: We performed a cross sectional study involving all hospital workers in 11 Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes hospitals in December 2020. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: We analyzed completed questionnaires from 1,964 respondents (78% women, mean age 42 years, 21.5% physicians, 41% private care centers). A total of 1,048 (53%) hospital workers were in favor of COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccine hesitancy was associated with: female gender; young age; paramedical, technical, and administrative professions (i.e., all non-medical professions); no prior flu vaccination; and employment in the private medical care sector (p

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately impacted lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ+) people. Despite developing safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines, LGBTQ+ communities still faces challenges due to inequitable access and vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy is a delay in the acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite the availability of vaccination services. Various studies have explored and tried to address factors influencing vaccine hesitancy. However, the LGBTQ+ population remains under- and misrepresented in many of these studies. According to the few studies that have focused on the LGBTQ+ population, several factors influencing vaccine hesitancy have been identified, with the most common factors in studies being concern about vaccine safety, vaccine efficacy, and history of bad experiences with healthcare providers. In order to rebuild the confidence of LGBTQ+ people in vaccines, governments, healthcare policymakers, and healthcare providers need to start by acknowledging, and then resolving, these disparities; building trust; dismantling systemic suppression and discrimination; and prioritizing the inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in research studies and public health policies.

Background Vaccine hesitancy is a global problem, carrying significant health risks for extremely vulnerable population as that of preterm infants. Social media are emerging as significant tools for public health promotion. Our aim was to evaluate both the coverage and the timeliness of routine immunizations in a cohort of preterm infants (< 33 weeks of gestational age) at 24 months of age whose families have been subjected to in-hospital and web-based interventions to counteract vaccine hesitancy. Methods For a period of 2 years parents of preterm infants were instructed during their follow up visits by a member of the NICU team to get correct informations about vaccines from a social network page. Vaccination rates of preterm infants were assessed at 24 months of chronological age with an electronic database and compared to both general population and historical cohort. Results Coverage and timeliness of vaccinations at 24 months of age of 170 preterm infants were analyzed in December 2019. Gestational age and birth weight median (IQR) were, respectively, 31.0 (5.0) weeks and 1475.0 (843.8) g. Coverage rates were similar to those of the regional population (p > 0.05), while timeliness of administration was significantly delayed compared to the recommended schedule (p p > 0.05). DTaP-IPV-HBV-Hib 2nd and 3rd doses, MMR and Varicella vaccines coverage data were higher compared to historical cohort (p Conclusion Increasing vaccine confidence through web-based interventions could have a positive impact on vaccination acceptance of parents of preterm infants, although timeliness results still delayed. There is a strong need to develop different and effective vaccination strategies to protect this very vulnerable population.

Background The long history of distrust that characterizes the relationship between the Black/African-American population and the US Medical community makes COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy of great concern. A needs assessment of the Black/African-American community assessed willingness and explored the perceptions of community members regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Methods The study used a mixed-methods approach. Respondents (n = 183) were surveyed with a web-based questionnaire. They were asked whether there would get vaccinated for COVID-19 barring any access or cost-related challenges. Perceptions of community members regarding vaccination were explored through one-on-one interviews (n = 30) and eight focus groups (n = 49), with participants drawn from across various demographic characteristics. Survey responses were summarized using frequencies and proportions. A thematic analysis was conducted on the qualitative data. Results Thirty-four percent of respondents indicated “Yes” (willing to get vaccinated); 26.8% indicated “No”, while 37.1% expressed hesitancy (“Maybe” or “I don’t know”). Themes emerging from the qualitative data are grouped into three broad categories: vaccine accessibility (transportation, information, navigating healthcare system); vaccine hesitancy (with sub-categories of compliance, complacency and confidence); and vaccine “resistance” (conspiracy theories, conflicting beliefs, distrust of Government, trustworthiness of Health care). Conclusion Findings demonstrate a nuanced expansion of “vaccine hesitancy” to delineate groups with varying issues and perspectives. Interventions to enhance vaccination rates in Black/African-American communities should incorporate components that assure accessibility at the minimum, but also address non-access-related issues. Priority should be given to enhancing vaccine literacy, information-sharing as efficacy and safety data emerge, and addressing specific concerns identified through community-engaged outreach efforts.