Search

Objective: Investigate relationships between pediatric COVID-19 vaccination and social processes of healthcare provider recommendations and school encouragement to provide insights into social processes that may support pediatric COVID-19 vaccination among hesitant mothers., Methods: We analyzed survey data from a subsample (n = 509) of vaccine-hesitant mothers to child patients (ages 2 to 17) in regional clinics across Arkansas. Data were collected between September 16th and December 6th, 2022. Full information maximum likelihood multivariable logistic regression was conducted to evaluate associations with pediatric COVID-19 vaccination., Results: Adjusted odds of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination were more than three times greater when a child's healthcare provider recommended vaccination compared to when they did not (aOR = 3.52; 95% CI[2.06, 6.01]). Adjusted odds of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination were 85% greater when a child's school encouraged parents to vaccinate compared to when the school did not (aOR = 1.85; 95% CI[1.13, 3.03])., Conclusions: For pediatric COVID-19 vaccination, having a personal healthcare provider is not significantly different from having no personal healthcare provider if they do not recommend the child be vaccinated., Practice Implications: Clinical and public health interventions should consider social processes of healthcare provider recommendations and school encouragement., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

The main objective of this study was to assess whether hesitancy toward receiving the initial COVID-19 vaccine was associated with uptake of the COVID-19 booster several months after it became available to all US adults. We ask whether hesitancy toward the initial COVID-19 vaccine was significantly associated with lower odds of COVID-19 booster uptake among adults. We test this association within the context of the highly rural state of Arkansas. By January 2022, the US had set a global record of nearly 1 million daily cases. The purpose of this study was to advance our understanding of vaccine hesitancy among those who have already received a dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and how that hesitancy may shape COVID-19 booster uptake. We analyzed data from a random sample survey of Arkansan adults ( N  = 2,201) between March 1 and March 28, 2022 and constrained our analytical sample to those who had received a vaccine ( N  = 1,649). Nearly two-thirds of vaccinated Arkansas residents had received a COVID-19 booster. Hesitancy was common even among vaccinated individuals and was significantly associated with reduced odds of COVID-19 booster uptake, even after controlling for other factors. Findings provide further support for conceptualizing vaccine hesitancy as an attitude related to-but separate from-the behavior of vaccination, as opposed to conflating vaccination with being nonhesitant. Public health interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 booster uptake should pay attention to vaccine hesitancy indicated at the initiation of the series and should not ignore the vaccinated as an important population to target for intervention.

Introduction: COVID-19 vaccination coverage among children remains low, and many parents report being hesitant to get their children vaccinated. This study explores factors influencing hesitancy and the facilitators that helped hesitant adopter parents choose to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 despite their hesitancy., Method: We use a qualitative descriptive design with individual interviews (n = 20) to explore COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and facilitators of vaccination among hesitant adopter parents. The Increasing Vaccination Model domains (thoughts and feelings, social processes, and practical issues) provided the framework for initial coding, and the research team identified nine emergent themes., Results: Findings document the factors influencing hesitancy and the facilitators motivating COVID-19 vaccination among hesitant adopter parents., Discussion: Findings fill the gap in the literature by providing hesitant adopters' lived experience, perspectives on vaccine hesitancy, and the influential factors that helped participants overcome their hesitancy and choose to vaccinate their children against COVID-19., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None to report., (Copyright © 2024 National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Bivalent COVID-19 vaccine boosters have been recommended for all Americans 12 years of age and older. However, uptake remains suboptimal with only 17% of the United States (US) population boosted as of May 2023. This is a critical public health challenge for mitigating the ongoing effects of COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 booster uptake is not currently well understood, and few studies in the US have explored the vaccination process for booster uptake in a 'post-pandemic' context. This study fills gaps in the literature through qualitative analysis of interviews with a racially/ethnically diverse sample of Arkansans who received the COVID-19 vaccine main series and expressed intent to receive a booster (n = 14), but had not yet received the COVID-19 booster at the time we recruited them. All but one did not receive the booster by the time of the interview. Participants described influences on their vaccination behavior and uptake of boosters including reduced feelings of urgency; continued concerns about the side effects; social contagion as a driver of urgency; increasing practical barriers to access and missing provider recommendations. Our findings highlight the importance of considering vaccination as an ongoing, dynamic process drawing on past/current attitudes, prior experience, perceptions of risk and urgency and practical barriers. Based on these findings, healthcare providers should continue to provide strong, consistent recommendations for COVID-19 boosters to patients, even among those with histories of vaccine uptake., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives. To evaluate the effect of COVID-19 on Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) receipt among pregnant individuals overall and by race/ethnicity. Methods. We measured changes in WIC receipt among Medicaid-covered births (n = 10 484 697) from the US National Center for Health Statistics Natality Files (2016-2022). Our interrupted time series logistic model included a continuous monthly variable, a binary post-COVID variable, and a continuous slope shift variable. We additionally fit separate models for each race/ethnicity relative to White individuals, using interaction terms between the time series variables and race/ethnicity. Results. We found decreases in WIC receipt (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.899; P  < .001) from before COVID (66.6%) to after COVID (57.9%). There were larger post-COVID decreases for American Indian/Alaska Native (AOR = 0.850; P  < .001), Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (AOR = 0.877; P  = .003), Black (AOR = 0.974; P  < .001), and Hispanic (AOR = 0.972, P  < .001) individuals relative to White individuals. Conclusions. The greater reductions in WIC receipt among minoritized individuals highlights a pathway through which the pandemic may have widened gaps in already disparate maternal and infant health. Public Health Implications. Continued efforts to increase WIC utilization are needed overall and among minoritized populations. ( Am J Public Health . 2023;113(S3):S240-S247. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307525).

We assessed COVID-19 vaccination (≥1 dose) status as influenced by sociodemographic factors (i.e., age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, and parent or guardian status), healthcare provider recommendation, and personal vaccine hesitancy among Arkansas residents in October 2022. We asked: did the likelihood of vaccination differ across sociodemographic groups of Arkansas during this period of the pandemic? Is COVID-19 vaccination associated with recommendations from healthcare providers and/or COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy? We analyzed data from a random sample survey of adults in Arkansas (N = 2,201). Three in four adults self-reported vaccination against COVID-19 in October 2022. We found both positive and negative association between COVID-19 vaccination and age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, healthcare provider recommendation, and vaccine hesitancy. We highlight racial differences in COVID-19 coverage and the higher odds of COVID-19 vaccination among Black adults compared to White adults in particular, which has broad implications for the study of vaccine coverage and hesitancy. We also discuss implications of our findings regarding healthcare provider recommendations to be vaccinated against COVID-19., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

COVID-19 vaccines effectively protect against COVID-19-related hospitalization or death, and 67.1% of the US population is fully vaccinated. However, the disparity in COVID-19 vaccination persists among minority and rural populations who often report greater hesitancy about COVID-19 vaccines. This exploratory study aimed to understand and document trusted sources of information about the COVID-19 vaccine among a diverse sample of hesitant adopters with in-depth interviews. Participants ( n  = 21) described how information from trusted sources influenced their decision to get a COVID-19 vaccine despite being hesitant. Participants reported health care professionals, family members, friends, coworkers, community leaders, public health experts, government officials, and the mainstream media as trusted sources of information about the COVID-19 vaccines. Participants discussed obtaining trusted information from multiple modes, including direct conversations with trusted messengers and public health communications from public influencers who reinforced the information shared with trusted messengers. Notably, participants discussed having multiple conversations with trusted messengers during their decision-making process, and these trusted messengers often facilitated the participants' vaccination process. Study findings highlight the continued need for clear, understandable information about vaccine side effects, safety, and efficacy to address concerns that contribute to vaccine hesitancy.

Introduction: The purpose of this study is to examine relationships between COVID-19 vaccination, social processes, and the practical issues of healthcare coverage and workplace requirements. We examine these relationships among individuals who expressed some degree of hesitancy towards receiving the vaccine. Assessing relationships between COVID-19 vaccination, social processes, and practical issues among vaccine-hesitant individuals has implications for public health policy and intervention., Methods: We analyzed weighted data from a random sample phone survey of Arkansas adults (N = 2,201) between March 1st and March 28th, 2022 and constrained our analytical sample to those who had reported some degree of vaccine hesitancy (N = 1,251). Statistical analyses included weighted and unweighted descriptive statistics, weighted bivariate logistic regressions, and a weighted multivariate logistic regression to obtain adjusted odds ratios for COVID-19 vaccination., Results: More than two-thirds (62.5 %) of respondents were vaccinated, despite their hesitancy. Adjusted odds of COVID-19 vaccination were greater among Black (OR = 2.55; 95 % CI[1.63, 3.97]) and Hispanic respondents (OR = 2.46; 95 % CI[1.53, 3.95]), respondents whose healthcare provider recommended vaccination (OR = 2.50; 95 % CI[1.66, 3.77]), and as perceptions of vaccination coverage (OR = 2.04; 95 % CI[1.71, 2.43]) and subjective social status increased (OR = 1.10; 95 % CI[1.01, 1.19]). Adjusted odds of COVID-19 vaccination were greater among respondents with a workplace that recommended (OR = 1.96; 95 % CI[1.03, 3.72]) or required vaccination (OR = 12.62; 95 % CI[4.76, 33.45]) and among respondents who were not employed (OR = 1.82; 95 % CI[1.10, 3.01]) compared to those whose workplace did not recommend or require COVID-19 vaccination., Conclusions: Some hesitant individuals become vaccinated despite their hesitancy-a group we refer to as "hesitant adopters." Social processes and practical issues are important correlates of vaccination among those who are hesitant. Workplace requirements appear to be of particular importance for vaccination among hesitant individuals. Provider recommendations, norms, social status, and workplace policies may be effective points of intervention among those who express vaccine hesitancy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was the third leading cause of death in 2021 in the United States and has led to historic declines in life expectancy for Americans. While vaccination is an effective mitigation strategy for COVID-19, vaccine hesitancy remains a major barrier to individual and population-level protection. An emerging literature on hesitant adopters of COVID-19 vaccines highlights co-occurrence of hesitancy and vaccine uptake as an understudied phenomenon, with the potential to provide insight into factors that lead hesitant individuals to become vaccinated despite their hesitancy. We use qualitative interviews among hesitant adopters in Arkansas to examine vaccine hesitancy among this understudied group. Drawing on the Increasing Vaccination Model, we find that the most frequently reported motivations of hesitant adopters were within the domain of social processes, pointing to a critical focal point for targeted health communications intervening in this domain (e.g. social norms, social networks, and altruistic behavior). We find that recommendations from health care workers (HCWs) other than physicians/providers may serve as an effective influence to vaccinate. We also demonstrate negative effects of low provider and HCW confidence and weak recommendations on motivations to vaccinate among individuals expressing vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, we find individual information-seeking behaviors among hesitant adopters bolstered confidence in the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine. Based on these findings, clear, accessible, and authoritative health communication has a role in combatting the COVID-19 misinformation/disinformation infodemic.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to determine the relation between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) death exposure and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccine uptake among Arkansans, controlling for sociodemographic factors., Methods: Data were collected from a telephone survey administered in Arkansas between July 12 and July 30, 2021 (N = 1500) via random digit dialing of telephone landlines and cellular telephones. Weighted data were used to estimate regressions., Results: Controlling for sociodemographic variables, COVID-19 death exposure was not a significant predictor of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy ( P = 0.423) or COVID-19 vaccine uptake ( P = 0.318). Younger individuals, those with lower levels of education, and those who live in rural counties were more likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant. Older individuals, Hispanic/Latinx individuals, those who reported higher levels of education, and those who reported living in urban counties were more likely to have reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccine., Conclusions: Many efforts to promote COVID-19 vaccines have focused on prosocial norms, including encouraging vaccination to protect the community from COVID-19 infection and death; however, COVID-19 death exposure was not related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy or uptake in the present study. Future research should examine whether prosocial messaging is effective in decreasing hesitancy or motivating some individuals to receive the vaccine among those who have been exposed to COVID-19 deaths.

Early in the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, Black adults consistently reported more hesitancy than White adults, but few studies have examined variation in hesitancy among Black adults or its associations with racial discrimination. Data were collected from Black Arkansas residents age 18 and older (n = 350) between July 12 th and July 30 th , 2021, as part of a larger survey of Arkansans (N = 1500). Participants were recruited through random digit dialing of both landline and cell phones, with oversampling of Black and Hispanic residents. Respondents reported COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, sociodemographic information, influenza vaccination history, pandemic-related experiences, and experiences of racial discrimination. Almost half (48.9%) of Black adults in Arkansas were not hesitant towards COVID-19 vaccines, while the remainder reported some level of hesitancy. Nearly a quarter were very hesitant (22.4%), while fewer reported being somewhat (14.0%) and a little (14.7%) hesitant. Using an ordered logistic regression with partial proportional odds, we find odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy decreased as age and influenza vaccination increased. Odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were 1.70 times greater for Black adults who experienced the death of a close friend/family member due to COVID-19 and 2.61 times greater for individuals reporting discrimination with police or in the courts. Within-group analysis revealed nearly half of Black adults did not report any COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and heterogeneity among those who were hesitant. Findings suggest there may be an important link between racial discrimination in the criminal justice system and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Black adults., (© 2022. W. Montague Cobb-NMA Health Institute.)

Despite widespread availability of vaccines, COVID-19 is a leading cause of death in the United States (US), and sociodemographic disparities in vaccine uptake remain. Race/ethnicity, partisanship, and perception of peer vaccination status are strong predictors of vaccine uptake, but research is limited among some racial/ethnic groups with small populations. The current study used an online survey to examine the relationship between these factors among a diverse sample of US adults (n = 1,674), with oversampling of racial and ethnic minorities. Respondents provided sociodemographic information and answered questions regarding COVID-19 vaccination status, political affiliation, perception of peers' vaccination status, COVID-19 death exposure, and previous COVID-19 infection. Respondents who identified as Asian American had higher odds of being vaccinated, whereas those who identified as Black/African American or American Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN) had lower odds. Respondents who identified as Independent/Other or Republican had lower vaccination odds. Respondents who perceived anything less than nearly all of their peers were vaccinated had lower vaccination odds. Further, lack of a primary care provider, younger age, and lower educational attainment were associated with lower vaccination odds. Findings may help to determine where additional work is needed to improve vaccine uptake in the US. Results indicate the need for intentional and tailored vaccination programs in Black/African American and AIAN communities; the need to understand how media and political actors develop vaccination messaging and impact vaccine uptake; and the need for additional research on how people estimate, understand, and form decisions around peer vaccination rates., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

We administered a survey during the fifteen-minute wait time after the COVID-19 vaccine was given (N = 1475) to examine attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines among adults who were vaccinated in Arkansas between April 22nd and July 6th, 2021. We found 60% of those who had just been vaccinated reported some level of hesitancy, including 10% who reported being "very hesitant." Hesitancy was not evenly distributed across sociodemographic groups (age, sex, race/ethnicity, and education) and was associated with whether a non-English language is spoken in the home, health care coverage, and flu vaccination over the past five years in bivariate analysis. Generalized ordered logistic regression results reveal associations between the log-ordered odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and age, sex, race/ethnicity, health care coverage, health literacy, and flu vaccination over the past five years. Surprisingly, a prior COVID-19 diagnosis was not significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. These results can inform health care and communication strategies. Further attention to "hesitant adopters" can provide insights into the process of overcoming vaccine hesitancy that are critical to vaccine uptake., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Vaccination is a strategy for mitigating the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at both the individual and population levels. Vaccine hesitancy is identified as a significant threat to global health by the World Health Organization (WHO). Vaccine hesitancy has been theorized as a continuum encompassing a range of attitudes, beliefs, emotional orientations, ideologies, and health-seeking behaviors. Individuals who received the COVID-19 vaccine but also indicated some level of hesitancy about vaccination, or "hesitant adopters," remain an understudied group. This study uses a qualitative descriptive design to understand motivations to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among hesitant adopters at various self-reported levels of hesitancy. We conducted interviews with hesitant adopters (n = 49) to analyze the elements of vaccine hesitancy corresponding to reported levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (i.e., "little hesitant," "somewhat hesitant," and "very hesitant"). Concerns about side effects are shared across the continuum but are articulated differently at each level of hesitancy. The "little hesitant" relate fears of side effects to their health and a lack of clear information to inform their health decision making, whereas the "very hesitant" articulate the risks of side effects within the frame of conspiracies related to the development, approval, and economics of the COVID-19 vaccine. Additionally, conspiracy theories generally increase in salience across the continuum, with the "very hesitant" reporting conspiracy theories as the most salient element of vaccine hesitancy. This research presents opportunities for developing targeted interventions for different levels of vaccine hesitancy., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Background: Understanding the relationship between physical activity, diet, and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic may help inform resources encouraging healthy lifestyle choices during the time of an increased threat to health and wellbeing. Aim: Our objective was to examine how self-rated mental health was associated with engagement in physical activity and consumption of fruits and vegetables during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The study utilized cross-sectional survey data from adults (≥18 years of age) living, working, and/or receiving healthcare in Arkansas (n  =  754). Multivariable regression models were used to examine the associations between self-rated mental health and the number of days respondents engaged in 30 min of physical activity and the number of days respondents consumed five or more servings of fruits and vegetables. Results: Respondents who reported somewhat poor/poor mental health reported engaging in at least 30 min of physical activity fewer days per week (β  =  -.77, p  =  .018) compared with those reporting excellent mental health, after controlling for sociodemographic factors and self-rated health. The significant association observed in the first two models between mental health and number of days consuming five or more servings of fruits and vegetables became non-significant after inclusion of self-rated health. Conclusion: The relationship between mental health and physical activity and diet reaffirms a need for healthcare providers to promote the importance of maintaining both a healthy physical activity level and a nutrient-rich diet in the face of challenging circumstances, such as a global pandemic.

Vaccination is critical for protecting adults and children from COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death. Analyzing subsamples of parent/guardians of children age 0-11 (n = 343) and 12-17 (n = 322) from a larger national survey of US adults (n = 2,022), we aimed to assess intentions to vaccinate children and how intentions might vary across parent/guardian sociodemographic characteristics, healthcare coverage, vaccination status, political affiliation, prior COVID-19 infection, exposure to COVID-19 death(s) of family or friends, perceived norms of vaccination, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. We also report the prevalence of vaccinated children for parents whose oldest child was eligible for vaccination at the time of the survey. More than one third of parents whose oldest child was not yet eligible for vaccination (11 or younger) planned to get them vaccinated right away when a vaccine became available to them. Among parents whose child was eligible to be vaccinated (age 12-17 years), approximately a third reported their child had already been vaccinated and approximately a third planned to do so right away. Intentions to vaccinate children age 0 to 11 were significantly associated with age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, COVID-19 vaccination, political affiliation, social norms, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Intentions to vaccinate children age 12 to 17 were significantly associated with age, education, healthcare coverage, COVID-19 vaccination, political affiliation, social norms, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. We discuss implications for public health officials and for future research.

Increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake is crucial to managing the endemic. In this qualitative study, we examine factors influencing the decision-making process of COVID-19 hesitant adopters - those who reported some level of hesitancy and are vaccinated. Using interviews with 49 participants, we documented multiple factors influencing the decision-making process to get the COVID-19 vaccine among a racially and ethnically diverse sample of hesitant adopters in the US. Participants described influences related to sociocultural context and personal and group influences, which affected their decision to get the COVID-19 vaccine despite being hesitant. We find politics, culture, healthcare professionals, employment, vaccine attitudes and beliefs, social networks, and the media influence the decision to get vaccinated. Our findings provide nuanced and in-depth information in their own words. This study expands on prior literature on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, especially among hesitant adopters. These findings can inform future interventions and research targeting vaccine-hesitant populations to increase vaccine uptake.

Aims: To understand the associations between sociodemographic factors, self-rated health, and COVID-19-related changes in physical activity and diet and the reported number of days per week participants engaged in physical activity and consumed fruits and vegetables for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)., Methods: Respondents from Arkansas primary care clinics completed a survey between October 2020 and January 2021. Multivariable regression determined associations between sociodemographic factors, self-rated health, and COVID-19-related changes in physical activity and diet and the reported number of days per week participants engaged in physical activity and consumed fruits and vegetables., Results: Respondents exercised for at least 30 min on a mean of 2.09 days and consumed five or more fruit and vegetable servings on a mean of 3.57 days. Males engaged in one additional day of physical activity compared to women. Respondents with a college degree or higher ate 5 or more fruit and vegetable servings on fewer days per week than those with a high school education or less., Conclusions: Results reaffirm a need for diabetes education programs and health care providers to provide information on the importance of maintaining physical activity and a healthy diet as part of a self-care plan for T2DM, especially during public health emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Primary Care Diabetes Europe. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The purpose of this study was to explore the prevalence of basic needs insecurity and to examine the association between education and basic needs insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic for Marshallese living in the USA., Methods: Survey data describing Marshallese experiences during the pandemic were analyzed using descriptive statistics and complementary log-log regression to test the association between education and basic needs insecurity., Results: Marshallese respondents reported no usual source of care (46%), less healthcare (22.3%), and difficulty obtaining medication (34.8%). Nearly 80% reported being food insecure, and 47.5% reported being housing insecure. Marshallese with a high school education or less had higher odds of reporting being food and housing insecure., Discussion: Basic needs insecurities are a serious threat to the health of Marshallese during the pandemic. Results from this study can inform interventions addressing food and housing insecurity, access to healthcare, and medication access for Marshallese communities., (© 2021. W. Montague Cobb-NMA Health Institute.)

Recent research suggests people who report vaccine hesitancy may still get vaccinated; however, little is known about hesitancy among those who chose to vaccinate. The current study focused on individuals who received the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine despite their hesitancy, whom we refer to as "hesitant adopters." With the understanding that vaccine attitudes and vaccine behaviors may or may not be correlated, we examined the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among those who have been vaccinated, how COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy varies across sociodemographic groups, and how COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy relates to other factors (prior health care access and influenza vaccination behavior over the past 5 years). Random digit dialing of telephone landlines and cell phones was used to contact potential survey respondents, rendering a sample of 1500 Arkansan adults. Approximately one-third of those who received a COVID-19 vaccine also reported some level of hesitancy. Among hesitant adopters, 5.3% said they were "very hesitant," 8.8% said they were "somewhat hesitant," and 17.1% said they were "a little hesitant." Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx respondents reported more hesitancy than White respondents, and female respondents reported greater hesitancy compared to male respondents. Greater hesitancy was associated with non-metro/rural residence, forgoing health care due to cost, and lower influenza vaccination rates over the past 5 years. Findings suggest those who are hesitant may get vaccinated despite their hesitancy, illustrating the complexity of vaccination behaviors. Prevalence of hesitancy among the vaccinated has implications for communication strategies in vaccine outreach programs and may help to reduce stigmatization of hesitant adopters., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

COVID-19 disparities exposed health inequity across socioeconomic status, with community members of color experiencing higher rates of COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and death. Racial/ethnic differences were especially disparate in Benton and Washington counties in northwest Arkansas, a region in the United States that experienced high COVID-19 infection rates. To address these disparities and support families with COVID-19, the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences and Community Clinic (a federally qualified health center) worked with the Arkansas Department of Health and community partners to develop systematic Care Navigation and Enhanced Case Management. During an initial screening process, contact tracers offered Care Navigation and Enhanced Case Management services to individuals who tested positive for COVID-19 within Washington and Benton counties. Bilingual community health navigators, social workers, and nurses began providing enhanced case management to households that accepted services. Between September 9, 2020 and June 19, 2021, 3,502 households representing ∼13,000 individuals were offered services, and 1,511 (43.1%) households requested/accepted services. Based on our experience, we provide four recommendations for practice: (a) provide contact tracing in community members' preferred language, (b) incorporate assessments into the contact tracing process to ensure community members have necessary resources for quarantine, (c) implement comprehensive care navigation and case management services for those who need additional support, and (d) integrate bilingual health navigators who are part of the target community into the process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The goal of this study was to conduct an exploratory assessment of COVID-19 mitigation steps and compare workplace experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic with Marshallese workers in other occupations. Marshallese adults residing in the continental United States (US) and Hawaii took part in an online survey. The sample was divided into two categories: food processing workers and workers in all other occupations. To examine differences between food processing workers and workers from all other occupations, we used Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U tests and Fisher's Exact tests. Of those employed at the time of the survey (n = 113), 31 were employed in food processing plants, and 82 were employed in another occupation. Food processing workers and workers in other occupations differed significantly on level of education, length of residence in the US, English-speaking ability, and health literacy. More food processing workers reported that their employers installed barriers or provided shields (45%), provided temperature screenings (71%), and tested for COVID-19 (61%) compared with those in other occupations. A larger proportion of food processing workers reported having no sick leave compared with workers in other occupations, although they reported COVID-19 testing and being insured at similar rates. This is the first study to examine Marshallese food processing workers' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings show that while some food processing employers implemented government-recommended guidelines to prevent the spread of COVID-19, preventative and protective measures were not comprehensively applied across the food processing industry, despite efforts by public health agencies and community partners.

Vaccination is a critical means for mitigating the worst effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (US). However, the initial high demand for COVID-19 vaccines has not persisted, and the rate of vaccination slowed significantly in the summer of 2021. This study seeks to understand the motivations to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among hesitant adopters. Hesitant adopters are individuals who express some level of hesitancy about the vaccine but have also received at least one dose of the vaccine. Using a qualitative descriptive design, three loci for motivation emerged during analysis: extrinsic motivators, intrinsic motivators, and structural motivators. Extrinsic motivations, such as protecting one's community, family, and friends, were reported as driving vaccination behavior. Among intrinsic motivators, the desire to protect themselves from COVID-19 was the most frequently reported. Structural motivators were also identified, indicating that vaccine mandates also serve to motivate hesitant adopters of the COVID-19 vaccine. These findings have important implications in ongoing efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the US and highlight the multi-dimensional motivations for vaccination among hesitant adopters. Additionally, we provide recommendations for practice based on our findings., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The United States leads the world in confirmed COVID-19 cases; Arkansas ranks fifth in average daily cases per 100,000. Historically, Americans relied on health communications from governmental sources and the news media. However, there has been a documented decline of trust in these sources. The present study seeks to understand trusted sources of information about COVID-19 to improve health messaging because research shows the level of trust is associated with adherence to recommendations., Methods: Data were collected using an online survey from participants (N = 1221) who were 18 years of age or older and residing, employed, or accessing health care in Arkansas. A qualitative descriptive design was used to summarize participants' experiences and perceptions related to trusted sources of COVID-19 information., Results: Two primary themes related to participants' perceptions of sources of information about COVID-19 are reported: 1) trusted sources of information and 2) distrust or lack of trust in sources of information. Several subthemes emerged within each primary theme. Results showed high trust in the academic medical center, federal and state public health agencies, and local health care providers. The study also documents diverging voices of distrust and uncertainty in making sense of contradictory information. Participants reported the main reason for their lack of trust was the rapidly changing information and the lack of consistency in information provided across sources., Conclusions: This finding provides insight into the importance of coordination between national, state, and local communications to bolster trust. Personal recommendations and testimonies from trusted health care providers and professionals could inform public health messaging interventions to increase vaccine uptake., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

The purpose of this evaluation is to describe COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among a sample of youth aged 12-15 and inform efforts to increase vaccination uptake among youth populations. We used data collected in May 2021 through a health education program for 9 th graders (N = 345). We used Spearman correlations and chi-square tests to assess the statistical significance of bivariate relationships. Less than half of students (42%) reported they are not hesitant at all about getting a COVID-19 vaccine. The remainder reported they were "a little hesitant" (22%), "somewhat hesitant" (21%), or "very hesitant" (15%). There were no statistically significant differences across age, gender, race/ethnicity, parental education, self-reported grades, or hours playing video games during school days. There was a statistically significant relationship between COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and hours of TV watched during school days. The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in this sample is high, but more research is needed to estimate its prevalence for youth at the state or national level. Correlates of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adult populations may not match those found in youth populations. Research which recognizes youth as agentic rather than passive participants in decision-making opens opportunities for developing age-appropriate health communication and interventions for vaccination.

To end the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to increase vaccine coverage in the United States (U.S.). In this study, we examine the facilitators that helped hesitant adopters - those who are both vaccinated and report some degree of hesitancy - overcome barriers to vaccination. Drawing on a sample of 867 hesitant adopters in Arkansas, we find social networks, individual actions, health care organizations and professionals, employers, religious communities and leaders, and the media all play a role in helping the vaccine hesitant overcome barriers to vaccination. Our findings demonstrate vaccine hesitancy and uptake occur simultaneously, and overcoming hesitancy in the U.S. population requires multifaceted strategies from multiple entities. We provide recommendations for overcoming barriers, including hesitancy, based on our findings.

Understanding and minimizing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy is critical to population health and minimizing health inequities, which continue to be brought into stark relief by the pandemic. We investigate questions regarding vaccine hesitancy in a sample (n = 1205) of Arkansas adults surveyed online in July/August of 2020. We examine relationships among sociodemographics, COVID-19 health literacy, fear of COVID-19 infection, general trust in vaccines, and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy using bivariate analysis and a full information maximum likelihood (FIML) logistic regression model. One in five people (21,21.86%) reported hesitancy to take a COVID-19 vaccine. Prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was highest among Black/African Americans (50.00%), respondents with household income less than $25K (30.68%), some college (32.17%), little to no fear of infection from COVID-19 (62.50%), and low trust in vaccines in general (55.84%). Odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were 2.42 greater for Black/African American respondents compared to White respondents (p < 0.001), 1.67 greater for respondents with some college/technical degree compared to respondents with a 4-year degree (p < 0.05), 5.48 greater for respondents with no fear of COVID-19 infection compared to those who fear infection to a great extent (p < 0.001), and 11.32 greater for respondents with low trust in vaccines (p < 0.001). Sociodemographic differences in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy raise concerns about the potential of vaccine implementation to widen existing health disparities in COVID-19 related infections, particularly among Black/African Americans. Fear of infection and general mistrust in vaccines are significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy., (© 2021 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Marshallese and Latino communities in Benton and Washington counties, Arkansas, were disproportionately affected by COVID-19. We evaluated the effectiveness of a comprehensive community-based intervention to reduce COVID-19 disparities in these communities. We examined all laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases in the 2 counties reported from April 6, 2020, through December 28, 2020. A 2-sample serial t test for rate change was used to evaluate changes in case rates before and after implementation of the intervention. After implementation, the proportions of cases among Marshallese and Latino residents declined substantially and began to align more closely with the proportions of these 2 populations in the 2 counties. Infection rates remained lower throughout the evaluation period, and weekly incidence also approximated Marshallese and Latino population proportions. Leveraging community partnerships and tailoring activities to specific communities can successfully reduce disparities in incidence among populations at high-risk for COVID-19 .

Aims: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is a prevalent chronic condition that can lead to significant complications if not well controlled. The COVID-19 pandemic created disruptions in daily life; however, it is unknown whether the pandemic's disruptions affected the ability for adults with T2DM to control their condition. This study aims to fill the knowledge gap with the experiences of adults with T2DM in Arkansas, U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: This study analyzed cross-sectional, observational survey data collected from adults (≥18 years) who live, work, or receive healthcare in Arkansas; self-reported a diagnosis of T2DM; and completed the diabetes module of the Impact of COVID-19 online survey (n = 131) fielded in July-August 2020. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the sample and survey responses, and multivariate regression was used to identify demographics, self-care behaviors, and access issues associated with uncontrolled T2DM (HbA1c ≥ 9% or 74.9 mmol/mol) or with an increase in HbA1c., Results: 28.2% reported an increase in their HbA1c since the pandemic began, and 18.2% had uncontrolled T2DM. Educational level, eating healthily, and weight gain were negatively associated with uncontrolled T2DM. Eating less healthily and having difficulty accessing diabetes related medication were positively associated with an increase in HbA1c., Conclusions: Adults with T2DM in Arkansas were reasonably able to maintain control of their T2DM during the five months post the first case of COVD-19 diagnosed in the state. However, T2DM self-management interventions targeting those with lower educational levels that are focused on eating habits and/or that improve access to diabetes medication should be considered for future public health emergencies., (Copyright © 2021 Primary Care Diabetes Europe. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The purpose of this study was to describe the thoughts and feelings of individuals expressing concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine. A qualitative descriptive study was conducted in order to examine the thoughts and feelings of participants who are hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine. Data were collected from 754 participants using an online instrument. Emergent themes included a lack of knowledge about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine; concerns over the speed of development, testing, and approval of these vaccines; reluctance to be among the first vaccinated; concerns about the motivations of government actors, pharmaceutical companies, and others involved in producing the COVID-19 vaccine; and hesitancy about vaccines generally.

COVID-19 and subsequent social distancing guidelines have changed many aspects of people's daily lives including the way that they interact within their social environment. Pandemics are inherently social phenomena, and public health measures intended to curtail transmission of COVID-19 (e.g., quarantine and social distancing) have consequences for individuals with anxiety and depression. Using qualitative methods, respondents with previously diagnosed anxiety or depression identified ways in which COVID-19 affected their symptoms at multiple levels of the social ecological model (SEM). Key themes reported were organized following the SEM. Emergent themes at the individual level are isolation/loneliness, fear of contracting COVID-19, and uncertainty about the future. Themes at the interpersonal level are: fears of family contracting COVID-19, separation from family members, and domestic relationships. Themes at the level of community and societal stressors are: employment, community and societal systems, media, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings demonstrate the ways that mental health, physical health/safety, and social environments are interrelated in the experience of COVID-19 for individuals diagnosed with anxiety or depression. These findings make a significant contribution to the literature as this is the first article to document mental health stressors related to the COVID-19 pandemic among individuals with diagnosed anxiety and depressive disorders.

(1) Background: Prior studies have documented that access to testing has not been equitable across all communities in the US, with less testing availability and lower testing rates documented in rural counties and lower income communities. However, there is limited understanding of the perceived barriers to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing. The purpose of this study was to document the perceived barriers to COVID-19 testing. (2) Methods: Arkansas residents were recruited using a volunteer research participant registry. Participants were asked an open-ended question regarding their perceived barriers to testing. A qualitative descriptive analytical approach was used. (3) Results: Overall, 1221 people responded to the open-ended question. The primary barriers to testing described by participants were confusion and uncertainty regarding testing guidelines and where to go for testing, lack of accessible testing locations, perceptions that the nasal swab method was too painful, and long wait times for testing results. (4) Conclusions: This study documents participant reported barriers to COVID-19 testing. Through the use of a qualitative descriptive method, participants were able to discuss their concerns in their own words. This work provides important insights that can help public health leaders and healthcare providers with understanding and mitigating barriers to COVID-19 testing.

Introduction: A contributing factor to racial and ethnic disparities during the COVID-19 pandemic may be the accessibility and acceptability of COVID-19 testing. Previous studies found that access to testing has not been equitable across several sociodemographic indicators. This study documents the preferred testing locations and examines differences across sociodemographic factors with a specific focus on race and ethnicity., Methods: This study includes a primary analysis of cross-sectional data using a self-administered digital survey distributed to Arkansas residents using ARresearch, a volunteer research participant registry. The survey had 1288 responses, and 1221 met eligibility criteria for inclusion in the survey. Participants provided sociodemographic information and were asked to select up to 3 preferred testing locations from 12 options. Chi-square tests assessed differences in testing site preference across relevant sociodemographic groups., Results: Participants preferred drive-through clinics as their top location for COVID-19 testing, with 55% reporting this was their preferred method of testing. This pattern was consistent across all comparison groups (ie, age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, insurance status). Significant differences in testing location preference were observed across age, race and ethnicity, and education, with the most differences observed across race and ethnicity., Conclusion: This study reveals that race and ethnicity are important to consider when deciding where to offer COVID-19 testing. The preferences for testing locations among the most vulnerable demographics will be used to develop targeted responses aimed at eliminating disparities in COVID-19 in Arkansas.

Objectives: Arkansas COVID-19 vaccine uptake has been lower than the national average. This study examined associations between sociodemographic factors and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, fear of infection, and protection self-efficacy., Methods: Adults either residing, having employment, or receiving health care in Arkansas (n = 754) participated in an online survey between October 30, 2020 and January 16, 2021. Participants were recruited in both rural and urban areas from 6 Arkansas primary care clinics. Survey questions addressed sociodemographic factors, COVID-19 infection fear, protection self-efficacy, and COVID-19 vaccine attitudes. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess associations between dependent variables and respondents' sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19 infection fear, and COVID-19 protection self-efficacy., Results: About 38% of participants reported COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Age, sex, race, and education were significantly associated with COVID-19 and general vaccine attitudes. Odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy decreased as age increased (OR = 0.98; P  < .01). Women had higher odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy than men (OR = 1.52; P  < .05). Respondents with a high school diploma and below and respondents with some college or a technical degree had greater odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (OR = 2.58; P  < .001; and OR = 1.97; P  < .01, respectively) compared to respondents with a 4-year college degree. Black/African American respondents had greater odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy compared to White respondents (OR = 3.08; P  < .001). No significant difference was observed among rural and urban respondents regarding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy; however, respondents in rural areas were more likely to report low general vaccine trust compared to those in urban areas (OR = 1.87; P  < .01). Respondents reporting no fear (OR = 5.51; P  < .001) and very little fear (OR = 1.95; P  < .05) of COVID-19 had greater odds of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy compared to respondents who feared COVID-19 infection to a great extent., Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and general trust in vaccines differ significantly among age, sex, race, and education. These trust and hesitancy patterns are challenges for achieving population immunity and follow similar patterns of vulnerability to COVID-19. Vaccination programs and interventions must consider these differences in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and general vaccine trust to alleviate COVID-19 disparities. Findings make a significant contribution in evaluating vaccine hesitancy among a large, diverse sample from a rural state.