[Attitudes towards immunization]

Acceptability of COVID-19 vaccine: a cross-sectional study in a Tunisian general hospital

Introduction

the year 2020 was marked by the COVID-19 pandemic that killed more than one million people. Several vaccines have been developed and vaccination campaigns started in December 2020. The objective of our study was to assess the acceptability of the COVID-19 vaccine by hospital staff.

Methods

cross-sectional study conducted on a representative sample drawn at random from the staff of the Military General Hospital of Tunis. Data was collected between August and September 2020 by a clinical psychologist. We studied the associations between the different characteristics of our population and the decision to accept or refuse vaccination against COVID-19.

Results

a total of 398 hospital staff agreed to answer our questionnaire. Our sample was composed of 9% (n=36) physicians, 0.9% (n=3) pharmacists, 41.3% (n=164) paramedics, 16.1% (n=64) cleaning staff and 32.7% (n=131) administrative staff. The rapid discovery of the vaccine was hoped by 97% (n=386). Vaccination was considered a means of collective protection by 84.7% (n=337). However, only 58% (n=231) agreed to be vaccinated by the COVID-19 vaccine. The main factors significantly associated with acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine was previous influenza vaccination (aOR: 2.58, 95% CI 1.69-3.94; p=0.000).

Conclusion

apprehension about vaccination does not appear to be sparing the future COVID-19 vaccine. Fear of vaccine side effects outweighs fear of the disease, even among hospital staff. To achieve vaccination coverage, several awareness and communication activities must be carried out.

Introduction of multi-dose PCV 13 vaccine in Benin: from the decision to vaccinators experience

Background

In 2011, Benin introduced the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugated vaccine (PCV13), in a single-dose vial, into its Expanded Programme for Immunisation (EPI) with support from Gavi. In April 2018, with the support of the Agence de Médecine Préventive Afrique (AMP) and other technical and financial partners, the single-dose vial was transitioned to a four-dose vial. Here we describe the decision-making process and the experience of the vaccinators during the change.

Methods

We carried out semi-structured, individual interviews with 61 participants individuals involved in the EPI: 7 from central level, 5 from regional level, 7 from township level and 42 from district level. The interviews were recorded and transcribed, and the information categorised, using Nvivo software, and then analysed.

Results

The Inter-agency Coordination Committee (ICC), the Benin National Advisory Committee for Vaccines and Vaccination, (BNACVV) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) (i.e., the traditional governance structures involved in vaccination decisions) were not involved in the decision to change to the four-dose vial for PCV13. The decision was taken by the EPI, supported by Gavi.

The vaccination errors observed in the first months following the change in presentation were due to the absence of guidelines for changes in vaccine presentation and the central-level actors’ perception that it was ‘only a change in the vial’, and therefore that the communication and training for a new vaccine were not required since the vaccine itself and its administration mode were unchanged.

Conclusions

It is important that the other countries eligible for Gavi support that are about to change to the multi-dose vial PCV13 presentation learn from Benin’s experience. The main lessons learned are that changes in the presentation of an established vaccine should follow the same process as the introduction of a new vaccine, and that all stakeholders involved in vaccines and vaccination should participate in the decision-making process and implementation.

Barriers and motivations to volunteers' participation in preventive vaccine trials: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The recruitment of volunteers in preventive vaccine trials (PVT) is a challenge, since vaccine hesitancy and debates on vaccines are combined to usual difficulties of enrollment in clinical trials. Areas covered: Current knowledge of the reasons leading to the volunteers' participation or non-participation in PVT mainly focuses on data from preventive HIV vaccine trials. A systematic PubMed search was conducted using PRISMA guidelines to identify articles or reviews that reported barriers and motivations to participation in PVT regardless of the targeted disease or population. Expert commentary: In view of the barriers and motivations reviewed here, improvements in recruitment could be made through a better explanation of the prevented disease, of the expected individual and collective benefit and of all ethical protective principles associated to the trials. Use of decision aids as well as patient and public involvement may improve given information and may enhance comprehension of participants and their participation in PVT. Further prospective and interventional studies are needed to analyze if these leads may improve acceptation level in PVT.

A novel approach to evaluating the UK childhood immunisation schedule: estimating the effective coverage vector across the entire vaccine programme

Background

The availability of new vaccines can prompt policy makers to consider changes to the routine childhood immunisation programme in the UK. Alterations to one aspect of the schedule may have implications for other areas of the programme (e.g. adding more injections could reduce uptake of vaccines featuring later in the schedule). Colleagues at the Department of Health (DH) in the UK therefore wanted to know whether assessing the impact across the entire programme of a proposed change to the UK schedule could lead to different decisions than those made on the current case-by-case basis. This work is a first step towards addressing this question.

Methods

A novel framework for estimating the effective coverage against all of the diseases within a vaccination programme was developed. The framework was applied to the current (August 2015) UK childhood immunisation programme, plausible extensions to it in the foreseeable future (introducing vaccination against Meningitis B and/or Hepatitis B) and a “what-if” scenario regarding a Hepatitis B vaccine scare that was developed in close collaboration with DH.

Results

Our applications of the framework demonstrate that a programme-view of hypothetical changes to the schedule is important. For example, we show how introducing Hepatitis B vaccination could negatively impact aspects of the current programme by reducing uptake of vaccines featuring later in the schedule, and illustrate that the potential benefits of introducing any new vaccine are susceptible to behaviour changes affecting uptake (e.g. a vaccine scare). We show how it may be useful to consider the potential benefits and scheduling needs of all vaccinations on the horizon of interest rather than those of an individual vaccine in isolation, e.g. how introducing Meningitis B vaccination could saturate the early (2-month) visit, thereby potentially restricting scheduling options for Hepatitis B immunisation should it be introduced to the programme in the future.

Conclusions

Our results demonstrate the potential benefit of considering the programme-wide impact of changes to an immunisation schedule, and our framework is an important step in the development of a means for systematically doing so.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12879-015-1299-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Vaccination against serogroup B Neisseria meningitidis: Perceptions and attitudes of parents

BACKGROUND

A vaccine against serogroup B Neisseria meningitidis, major cause of bacterial meningitis in children and adults, has recently been developed. In a context of an increasing parental mistrust against vaccinations, understanding the reason for their choices is crucial in order to improve immunization coverage. Our study aimed at evaluating parental attitudes and perceptions towards serogroup B meningococcal invasive disease vaccination.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted in different French independent-practice medical offices (general practitioners and paediatricians) and nurseries between May 1 and December 31, 2013, using a questionnaire distributed in electronic and paper forms to parents having at least one child between the ages of 2 months and 16 years old.

RESULTS

1270 parents were included, of whom 671 (52.8%) spontaneously stated to be in favour of this vaccination. Their choice was mainly justified by the severity of the disease (63.8%) and the desire to protect their child (51.7%). In multivariate analysis, the young age of parents (OR 0.949 per additional year; p<10(-3)), the history of vaccination against serogroup C meningococcal invasive diseases (OR 6.755; p<10(-3)), and the prior knowledge of the vaccine (OR 2.081; p=0.001) were associated with vaccination acceptance. The main reasons for refusal were the lack of hindsight on this new vaccine (50.6%) and the fear of side effects (45.5%). After objective information on the disease and the vaccine, only 6.3% of the entire responding population would refuse to consider vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

The spontaneous acceptance rate of vaccination against serogroup B meningococcal invasive disease is insufficient. However, after objective information by their physician or public health authorities, only a few parents would in the end be completely resistant.

Determinants of parents' reticence toward vaccination in urban areas in Benin (West Africa)

BACKGROUND

Despite the efforts of health authorities, vaccination coverage of targeted child populations is still poor in many regions. Parents' reticence has been identified as one cause of this situation. However, there is little data to explain the phenomenon that could support decision-making.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to uncover the determinants of this reticence toward vaccination among the religious population of the cities of Parakou and Cotonou in Benin.

METHODS

This was an exploratory study using a qualitative survey of 12 pastors and 30 faithful from churches that are vaccination-reticent and a control group of the same number of faithful belonging to other churches, all Christian. Individual and group interviews were carried out in the local language using a pre-established and pre-tested guide. The data collected underwent discourse content analysis focused on specific themes.

RESULTS

Analysis of the data reveals an erroneous perception of child vaccination. Those who are reticent say vaccination goes against the will of God, that it is a poison from the "white witch doctor", and that those who vaccinate their children are committing a sin. Members of the control group argued against this, but without conviction. They adhere to the principle of obedience to authority, a biblical precept invoked when the vaccinators oblige them to vaccinate their children. Other factors were identified that could explain the reticence, such as the tactlessness of the vaccinators, parents' previous experiences and false rumours about vaccination.

CONCLUSION

The reasons for reticence are mainly related to parents' beliefs in religious principles that are sometimes poorly understood. To limit the spread of this phenomenon, more detailed information and negotiation between the health authorities and the pastors of these churches are essential. ABSTRACT IN FRENCH: See the full article online for a translation of this abstract in French.

[Standpoint and practice concerning the human Papillomavirus vaccine among French family physicians]

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to assess the standpoint of family physicians in the Southern French region Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur concerning human Papillomavirus vaccination and to evaluate the factors associated with a favorable standpoint.

METHODOLOGY

A questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 1,000 family physicians. The survey focused on their profile, their views on vaccination generally and on HPV vaccination, their knowledge of HPV, their standpoint concerning STD prevention and cervical cancer screening. Multivariable linear regression system was used to study the variations associated with a favorable response to HPV vaccination.

OUTCOME

Response was 36.6%. The responses were analyzed taking into account gender of the family physicians, location and size of their practice. There was reasonable similarity amongst those questioned. Around 89.6% of family physicians answers were in favor of HPV. The ideal age for vaccination was between 11 and 13 years of age for 34.4% and between 14 and 15 for 53.9%. The family physicians most in favor of vaccination were those involved in screening for STDs, those who did not think that the vaccine would have a negative effect on the image of sexuality and on screening for cervical cancer, and those who were confident about the vaccine safety.

CONCLUSION

The study identified the negative elements concerning HPV in order to optimize information strategies among family physicians.

Hepatitis B vaccination and French Society ten years after the suspension of the vaccination campaign: how should we raise infant immunization coverage rates?

In 1998, official concerns were first voiced over a possible association between hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination and multiple sclerosis (MS). Despite a number of studies that have demonstrated no such association, ten years on the French population's confidence in the vaccine remains shaken and immunization rates of infants have stagnated beneath 30%. With a chronic carriage of the virus estimated at 0.68%, it seems unlikely that France will be able to control the circulation of the virus. This article analyses attitudes towards HBV vaccination based on recent surveys: not only the public but also the vast majority of "vaccinators" (88%) questions the safety of the vaccine. Physicians opposed to vaccinating infants cite the possibility of adverse events occurring later in life and their lack of trust in the health authorities and the pharmaceutical industry. Both the general public and physicians feel more inclined to vaccinate adolescents and adults, even though it was for these age groups (especially the latter) that neurological adverse events were notified. It appears that above all, the usefulness of the vaccine and its safety profile for young children should be explained in understandable language by all those involved in public health, including the media. However, when opting for public health policies on the basis of statistical estimations, the importance of individual cases (e.g. MS in the family) should not be overlooked both for biological and ethical reasons.

Mandatory immunization: the point of view of the French general population and practitioners

This survey studies the opinion of the French general population, general practitioners and pediatricians regarding mandatory immunization. Data were collected through standardized telephone questionnaires administered to representative samples of the French population (n=4112) and of French general practitioners and pediatricians (1285 general practitioners (GPs) and 742 pediatricians). 56.5% of the general population is in favor of mandatory vaccination. Being in favor of hepatitis B vaccination, agreeing that "it would be important to continue immunizing against diphtheria in case immunization was made optional" or saying that "if immunization against diphtheria was discontinued, the disease would spread again", are some of the main determinants of a favorable opinion regarding mandatory immunization. The percentage of GPs and pediatricians in favor of mandatory immunization is 42%. Female pediatricians and those who would "insist on families in the importance of continuing immunizing all children against diphtheria in case this vaccination was only recommended" more often declare themselves in favor of mandatory immunization. The adoption of the principle of mandatory immunization seems to stem from the adoption of immunization as an individual and collective prevention tool.

The public perception of the value of vaccines - the case of Switzerland

Aim

In this original article, we seek to analyse the environment in which immunisation policies are adopted and, more specifically, the way the public perception of vaccines influences decision-making, by looking more closely at the case of Switzerland.

Subjects and methods

Historical and present-day examples of attitudes towards immunisation and specific vaccines, both on the part of the public and of health-care workers, are reviewed.

Results

Decision-making with regard to vaccine policy implementation has been and is still most often driven by fear: fear of disease (when perceived as rampant and/or dangerous), but also fear of vaccine-associated adverse events (when the disease is less or no longer “visible”). However, methodology for introducing evidence-based immunisation policies exists and can be used by public health authorities, while vaccination information systems (such as the Swiss InfoVac) have proven their usefulness in providing trustworthy, peer-based knowledge to health-care workers.

Conclusion

Only information based on clear, evidence-based data gathered and analysed according to solid methodological criteria coupled with adequate information of health-care workers (and thus patients) can ensure in future the implementation of scientifically coherent, publicly acceptable, and equitable immunisation policies.