Search

Vaccination policies have shifted dramatically during COVID-19 with the rapid emergence of population-wide vaccine mandates, domestic vaccine passports and differential restrictions based on vaccination status. While these policies have prompted ethical, scientific, practical, legal and political debate, there has been limited evaluation of their potential unintended consequences. Here, we outline a comprehensive set of hypotheses for why these policies may ultimately be counterproductive and harmful. Our framework considers four domains: (1) behavioural psychology, (2) politics and law, (3) socioeconomics, and (4) the integrity of science and public health. While current vaccines appear to have had a significant impact on decreasing COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality burdens, we argue that current mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable and are likely to cause more societal harm than good. Restricting people's access to work, education, public transport and social life based on COVID-19 vaccination status impinges on human rights, promotes stigma and social polarisation, and adversely affects health and well-being. Current policies may lead to a widening of health and economic inequalities, detrimental long-term impacts on trust in government and scientific institutions, and reduce the uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines as well as routine immunisations. Mandating vaccination is one of the most powerful interventions in public health and should be used sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in institutions. We argue that current COVID-19 vaccine policies should be re-evaluated in light of the negative consequences that we outline. Leveraging empowering strategies based on trust and public consultation, and improving healthcare services and infrastructure, represent a more sustainable approach to optimising COVID-19 vaccination programmes and, more broadly, the health and well-being of the public., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Within the past 2 years, AdF was involved in Vaccine Confidence Project collaborative grants with Janssen Pharmaceutica outside of the submitted work and holds a Merck grant to investigate COVID-19 vaccine attitudes., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of COVID-19 vaccine intention among Bangladeshi adults., Methods: Secondary data from the COVID-19 Beliefs, Behaviors & Norms Survey conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Facebook were analyzed. Data were collected from 2,669 adult Facebook users in Bangladesh and was collected between February 15 and February 28, 2021. Binomial logistic regression examined the relationship between COVID-19 vaccination intent and demographic variables, risk perception, preventive behaviors, COVID-19 knowledge, and likelihood of future actions., Results: Seventy-nine percent of respondents reported intent to get the COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available. Intent to get vaccinated was highest among females, adults aged 71-80, individuals with college or graduate-level degrees, city dwellers, and individuals who perceived that they were in excellent health. Results of the binomial logistic regression indicated that predictors of vaccination intent include age (OR = 1.39), high risk perception of COVID-19 (OR = 1.47), and intent to practice social distancing (OR = 1.22)., Discussion: Findings suggest that age, perceived COVID-19 risk, and non-pharmaceutical COVID-19 interventions may predict COVID-19 vaccination intent among Bangladeshi adults. Findings can be used to create targeted messaging to increase demand for and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in Bangladesh., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Background: Maximizing vaccination uptake is crucial in generating herd immunity and preventing infection incidence (Quach et al., Am J Infect Control 11:1017-23, 2013). Vaccination of healthcare personnel (HCP) against influenza is vital to influenza infection control in healthcare settings, given the consistent exposure of HCP to high-risk patients like: those with compromised immune systems, children, and the elderly (Johnson & Talbot, Curr Opin Infect Dis 24: 363-369, 2011). Influenza vaccination uptake among HCP remains suboptimal: in 2017-18, 47.6% of HCP who worked in settings where influenza vaccination was not mandatory were vaccinated against influenza in United States (Black et al., Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 67: 1050, 2018). Mandatory vaccination policies result in HCP influenza vaccination uptake rates substantially higher than opt-in influenza vaccination campaigns (94.8% vs. 47.6%) (Black et al., Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 67: 1050, 2018)., Goals: The Israel Journal of Health Policy Research has published articles focused on the issues of influenza vaccination (Yamin et al., Isr J Health Policy Res 3: 13, 2014), improving influenza vaccination coverage of HCP (Weber et al., Isr J Health Policy Res 5: 1-5, 2016), influenza vaccination motivators among HCP (Nutman and Yoeli, Isr J Health Policy Res 5: 52, 2016), legal imposition of vaccination (Kamin-Friedman, Isr J Health Policy Res 6:58, 2017), and mandatory vaccination (Gostin, Cell Biosci 8: 1-4, 2018). Each article explores factors influencing disease prevention from different angles within an Israeli context. This article attempts to fuse these topics by investigating how to apply aspects of American mandatory influenza vaccination policy targeted at HCP in an Israeli context., Methods: Critical document analysis was conducted on relevant literature and policy discussing influenza prevention interventions among HCP within the United States. Mandatory vaccination policies were highlighted. A discussion of the professional responsibility of HCP to vaccinate against influenza serves as background. Case studies of hospitals in the United States that implemented mandatory vaccination policies for their employees are analyzed. The article concludes with analysis exploring how qualities of mandatory influenza vaccination policy of HCP could take shape in Israel, giving contextual limitations, urging Israeli health policy makers to reflect on lessons learned from the American case study., Main Findings and Conclusion: Mandatory HCP influenza vaccination policies in comparison to non-mandatory interventions are most effective in obtaining maximum influenza vaccination uptake among HCP (Black et al., Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 67: 1050, 2018). Many HCP cite individual objections to influenza vaccination rooted in personal doubts and ethical concerns. The ethical responsibility of HCP to their patients and work environments to prevent and lower influenza infection incidence arguably overrules such individual objections. Mandatory HCP influenza vaccination policies are an effective method of maximizing HCP influenza vaccine uptake and minimizing the spread of the influenza virus within healthcare settings. Still, cultural, social and political sensitivity must be taken into consideration when implementing both full-on mandatory HCP influenza vaccination policies and/or aspects of mandatory policies, especially within an Israeli context.

Background: The Study of Healthcare Personnel with Influenza and other Respiratory Viruses in Israel (SHIRI) prospectively follows a cohort of healthcare personnel (HCP) in two hospitals in Israel. SHIRI will describe the frequency of influenza virus infections among HCP, identify predictors of vaccine acceptance, examine how repeated influenza vaccination may modify immunogenicity, and evaluate influenza vaccine effectiveness in preventing influenza illness and missed work., Methods: Cohort enrollment began in October, 2016; a second year of the study and a second wave of cohort enrollment began in June 2017. The study will run for at least 3 years and will follow approximately 2000 HCP (who are both employees and members of Clalit Health Services [CHS]) with routine direct patient contact. Eligible HCP are recruited using a stratified sampling strategy. After informed consent, participants complete a brief enrollment survey with questions about occupational responsibilities and knowledge, attitudes, and practices about influenza vaccines. Blood samples are collected at enrollment and at the end of influenza season; HCP who choose to be vaccinated contribute additional blood one month after vaccination. During the influenza season, participants receive twice-weekly short message service (SMS) messages asking them if they have acute respiratory illness or febrile illness (ARFI) symptoms. Ill participants receive follow-up SMS messages to confirm illness symptoms and duration and are asked to self-collect a nasal swab. Information on socio-economic characteristics, current and past medical conditions, medical care utilization and vaccination history is extracted from the CHS database. Information about missed work due to illness is obtained by self-report and from employee records. Respiratory specimens from self-collected nasal swabs are tested for influenza A and B viruses, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus, and coronaviruses using validated multiplex quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays. The hemagglutination inhibition assay will be used to detect the presence of neutralizing influenza antibodies in serum., Discussion: SHIRI will expand our knowledge of the burden of respiratory viral infections among HCP and the effectiveness of current and repeated annual influenza vaccination in preventing influenza illness, medical utilization, and missed workdays among HCP who are in direct contact with patients., Trial Registration: NCT03331991 . Registered on November 6, 2017.