Improving COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: Including insights from human decision-making under conditions of uncertainty and human-centered design

Determinants of vaccination decisions and lived experiences of Ghanaians with the COVID-19 pandemic; a qualitative study

Background

Two years after the WHO declared a state of emergency as a result of the rapid spread of the COVID-19 virus from Wuhan, China, the rate of new infections experienced intermittent flare-ups globally, with vaccinations still ongoing in countries such as Ghana. One year after the implementation of Ghana's COVID-19 vaccine deployment program, Ghanaians have had the opportunity to reflect on their vaccination decisions, albeit the initial vaccine hesitancy.

Objectives

The current paper examined the knowledge and lived experiences of Ghanaians during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the factors influencing their vaccination decisions, one year after COVID-19 vaccinations commenced in Ghana, with special focus on the social and geographical histories which influenced their vaccination decisions.

Methodology

A qualitative approach using a case study design was used to conduct in-depth interviews among 25 respondents who were 18 years and above, not pregnant, and willing to participate in the study, between 5th and 23rd September 2022. Data was collected in 5 hotspot areas in Ghana with the highest cumulative case counts. A semi-structured interview guide was used to collect data which was analyzed using a thematic approach.

Findings

Respondents demonstrated a good level of knowledge on COVID-19 and related vaccines. Fear, panic, and anxiety were some of the experiences lived by respondents during the pandemic. The factors influencing vaccination decisions included conspiracy theories about COVID-19 and related vaccines, subjective notions about the COVID-19 disease, and subjective notions about the vaccine. The type of community one lived in, taboos, and previous successful vaccination programs in the community were geographic factors that informed respondents' decision to vaccinate or not. Social circles, religion, opinion leaders, and media-based campaigns were the social factors that influenced respondents' decision to vaccinate or not.

Strengthening scientific credibility in the face of misinformation and disinformation: Viable solutions

Despite numerous attempts to mitigate their spread, misinformation and disinformation are rampant on social media and other public networks, posing a substantial risk to public health and individual well-being. A concerted, multi-channel approach is required to effectively tackle this evolving problem. This paper outlines potential strategies and actionable plans to improve the response to misinformation and disinformation by stakeholders from various healthcare ecosystems.

"Figuring stuff out myself" - a qualitative study on maternal vaccination in socially and ethnically diverse areas in England

BACKGROUND

Maternal vaccinations against Influenza, Pertussis, and Covid-19 are recommended in the UK, and vaccines against further infections may become available soon. However, many pregnant women, especially in socially and ethnically diverse areas, have low vaccine uptake. Qualitative studies on the reasons and possible solutions are needed that are inclusive of disadvantaged and minority ethnic groups. We therefore aimed to understand the complex interplay between structural and behavioural factors contributing to the low maternal vaccine uptake in socially and ethnically diverse areas in London in the Covid-19 context.

METHODS

In 2022, we conducted semi-structured interviews and a focus group discussion among a purposive sample of 38 pregnant/recently pregnant women and 20 health service providers, including 12 midwives. Participants were recruited in ethnically diverse London boroughs. We followed a critical realist paradigm and used a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

The sample included participants who took all, some or none of the maternal vaccines, with some participants unsure whether they had taken or been offered the vaccines. Decision-making was passive or active, with the expectation for pregnant women to do their 'own research'. Participants described various individual, social and contextual influences on their decision-making as they navigated the antenatal care system. Missing or conflicting information from providers meant knowledge gaps were sometimes filled with misinformation from unreliable sources that increased uncertainties and mistrust. Both pregnant women and providers described structural and organisational factors that hindered access to information and vaccinations, including lack of training, time and resources, and shortcomings of health information systems and apps. Some participants described factors that facilitated vaccination uptake and many made recommendations for improvements.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed how structural and organisational factors can compound uncertainties around maternal vaccination among socially and ethnically diverse populations. Results highlight the need for more reliable resources, streamlined workflows, improved electronic information systems and training in their use. Roles and responsibilities should be clarified with potential greater involvement of nurses and pharmacists in vaccine provision. Education and communication should consider individual (language/digital) skills and needs for information and reassurance. Further research is needed to co-produce solutions with service users and providers.

Adolescents with ADHD are at increased risk for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

Identifying factors that influence adolescent intentions for COVID-19 vaccination is essential for developing strategic interventions to increase uptake, particularly in subgroups of at-risk adolescents. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adolescence is characterized by difficulties regulating attention and behavior, social impairment, and impulsive risk-taking behaviors, which may impact vaccine hesitancy and vaccine uptake. This study examined hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccines among adolescents with and without ADHD, and explored how ADHD status interacted with malleable social mechanisms and other social determinants of health in predicting vaccine hesitancy. Participants were 196 U.S. adolescents (44.4% male), 45.6% diagnosed with ADHD. Adolescents reported their confidence and willingness toward COVID-19 vaccines from March to May 2021. Adolescents with ADHD reported greater hesitancy and less confidence in COVID-19 vaccine safety compared to adolescents without ADHD (p < .01). Only 61.8% of adolescents with ADHD reported vaccine acceptance, compared to 81.3% of adolescents without ADHD. For all adolescents, those who identified as Black or Latinx and with lower family income had greater hesitancy and reduced confidence, whereas greater COVID-19 concerns, media use, and perceived negative impact on relationships was associated with greater vaccination willingness. Social contextual processes significantly interacted with ADHD status such that for adolescents without ADHD, concerns about COVID-19 were associated with increased confidence in vaccine safety. Being noncompliant with social distancing guidelines was associated with greater vaccine hesitancy, only for adolescents with ADHD. A concerted effort is needed to increase trust, confidence, and social relevance among adolescents, especially those with ADHD and from lower socio-economic backgrounds.

Vaccine hesitancy and health care providers: Using the preferred cognitive styles and decision- making model and empathy tool to make progress

Low vaccination rates among health care providers (HCPs) pose a risk to themselves, their colleagues, their patients, and the general public. This paper seeks to frame the issues surrounding health care provider vaccine hesitancy and vaccination rates, as well as explore factors influencing respective decision-making, including health care occupation and demographic characteristics. This paper will then propose the use of the Preferred Cognitive Style and Decision-Making (PCSDM) Model and the Empathy Tool to increase health care provider vaccination rates, and will end by discussing several recommendations. It is important while discussing HCP vaccination rates to not view them as a monolithic group or apply “one-size-fits-all” approaches, and thus it is essential to present information and engage in conversations in ways that align with how the HCP takes in and processes information and decisions. Furthermore, it is vital to increase health literacy across the spectrum of HCP programs and professions. To this end, it is important to teach and incorporate the PCSDM Model and Empathy Tool, along with information about how individuals think and make decisions, into vaccine education programs and training sessions.

Distorted Human Decision-Making as a Critical Aspect of Pandemic Planning and Preparedness

The United States continues to experience lower than expected vaccination rates against COVID-19 due to a variety of barriers such as lack of trust, lack of planning, cultural perspectives and issues, suboptimal communication, and political/economic conflicts of interest. In this paper issues of human behavior and decision-making are highlighted as integral to understanding the generally poor US response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. In particular, the US pandemic response was significantly distorted through a combination of cultural and human behavior issues related to conflicting leadership, cultural individualism, the prevalent idea of the democratization of expertise, and a false epistemological lens for decision-making. Including experts from multiple disciplines reveals how to address the human behavioral side of pandemic planning and operations to increase vaccine coverage rates. Including content experts from psychology and the social sciences allows the explicit recognition and preparation for distorted human behavior in planning for future pandemic response.

Canine and feline core vaccinations: US veterinarians’ concerns and perceived impact of COVID-19 antivaccination views on veterinary medicine

OBJECTIVE

Assess US veterinarians’ perceptions regarding vaccine concerns (their own and owners’) and the association between owners’ vaccine concerns and COVID-19 antivaccination sentiments.

SAMPLE

Members of the Veterinary Information Network.

PROCEDURES

An electronic survey distributed via the Veterinary Information Network data collection portal.

RESULTS

1,341 US veterinarians completed the survey. Top veterinarian concerns for vaccinating a healthy adult dog were anaphylaxis, soreness at injection site, and lethargy; for cats, these concerns included vaccine-associated sarcoma, lethargy, and soreness at injection site. Veterinarians reported that the most common concerns mentioned by owners included that the pet does not go outside, that vaccinations are unnecessary, that vaccinations can lead to chronic or severe illness, and cost. Veterinarians reported an increased number of dog and cat owners reluctant about or resistant to the idea of rabies vaccines and core vaccines since the time that COVID-19 vaccines became widely available. There was an association between veterinarians’ perceptions of local COVID-19 antivaccination sentiments and the increase in the number of vaccine-resistant or -concerned clients.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

There appears to be little overlap between veterinarians’ primary concerns related to vaccinations and their perception of dog and cat owners’ primary concerns. The fact that the number of resistant clients is positively associated with the presence of veterinarians’ perceptions of a local COVID-19 antivaccination sentiment suggests that human antivaccination sentiments impact pet owners’ views of companion animal vaccinations. A better understanding of the cognitive biases that impact owners’ vaccine decisions can help veterinarians better communicate with vaccine-reluctant clients and increase vaccination compliance rates.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers in India: Results from a cross-sectional survey

Remarkable scientific progress has enabled expeditious development of effective vaccines against COVID-19. While healthcare workers (HCWs) have been at the frontline of the pandemic response, vaccine acceptance amongst them needs further study. We conducted a web-based survey to assess vaccine acceptance among HCWs in India between January and February 2021, shortly after the launch of India's vaccination campaign. Descriptive statistics were used to examine respondent demographics and Likert scale responses. Binomial logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with vaccine acceptance. The survey yielded 624 respondents from 25 states and five union territories in India; 53.5% were male, and median age was 37 years (IQR 32-46). Amongst all respondents, 84.1% (525/624) supported COVID-19 vaccines, and 63.2% (141/223) of those unvaccinated at the time of survey administration were willing to accept a vaccine. Trust in government sources, healthcare providers or scientific journal articles for COVID-19 related information was reported by 66.8%, while confidence in social media for this information was reported by only 4.5%. Amongst those who had not yet received a COVID-19 vaccine, factors independently associated with vaccine acceptance included age (aOR 3.50 [95% CI, 1.04-11.76] for those above 45 years compared to younger HCWs aged 18-29 years), belief in vaccine effectiveness and safety (aOR 3.78 [95% CI 1.15-12.38]), and provision of free/no-cost vaccine (aOR 2.63 [95% CI, 1.06-6.50]). Most respondents (80%) were confident about their hospital being equipped to efficiently rollout COVID-19 vaccines to the general population. While overall attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination were positive among HCWs in India, acceptance was lower among healthier and younger HCWs. Data availability on vaccine safety and effectiveness, and cost considerations were important for acceptance. Targeted interventions are needed to improve vaccine acceptance amongst HCWs, since they are critical in promoting vaccine acceptance amongst the general population.

Validity and Reliability of a Brief Scale of Intention to Vaccinate Against COVID-19 in a Peruvian Sample

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the psychometric properties of a brief scale measuring intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 in a Peruvian sample in the context of the current pandemic.

METHODS

A cross-sectional and instrumental study was carried out. A total of 547 Peruvian citizens selected through non-probability convenience sampling participated. Considering existing theories of vaccination hesitancy, 12 items were proposed that evaluate the intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 and the internal structure was evaluated through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Reliability was analyzed with the ordinal alpha coefficient.

RESULTS

The exploratory factor analysis yielded a structure of 2 oblique factors that explain 69% of the total variance and the items saturated between 0.52 and 0.97. The confirmatory factor analysis showed that, of 4 models analyzed, the fourth model that was composed of 6 items presented optimal indices of goodness-of-fit (X² = 11.089, P = .197, CFI = 0.999, TLI = 0.999, RMSEA = 0.034 [IC 90%, 0.000-0.077], SRMR = 0.016). Reliability analysis through the ordinal alpha coefficient yielded that the brief scale of intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 has adequate internal consistency (α = .91).

CONCLUSIONS

The brief scale of intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 presents adequate psychometric properties that demonstrate validity and reliability and can be used in future research and clinical practice.

The Impact of a Single Educational Lecture on the Vaccine Confidence among Pregnant Women and Young Mothers

Background: We investigated the impact of a single unstructured educational lecture about vaccinations on the vaccine confidence in volunteer participants. Methods: We conducted a survey-based study during a series of open meetings related to pregnancy and parenting. Before and after the pediatrician’s lecture related to vaccinations, listeners completed the visual analogue scales (VAS, 0–15 cm), evaluating (1) self-declared knowledge on vaccinations and (2) how they perceive the safety and efficacy of this preventive method. Results: In total, 484 women aged 30 ± 4 years participated in the lecture (pregnant = 68%; ≥1 children = 56%). Participants declared to have more comprehensive knowledge on preventive vaccinations and perceived vaccines to be safer and more useful (the role for the immunity) after vs. before the lecture (median VAS: 10.4 vs. 7.2, 10.8 vs. 8.7, and 11.0 vs. 10.4 cm, all p < 0.001). Importantly, the prevalence of vaccine-related adverse events was also assessed as being higher after the lecture (median VAS: 9.9 vs. 8.0 cm, p < 0.001). The increase in self-declared knowledge on vaccinations and perceived need for vaccinations (delta VAS—VAS after minus before the lecture, expressed as % of baseline) was lower among participants who rated the lecture less vs. more useful. Importantly, both participants who liked vs. did not like the lecture comparably rated vaccines safer after vs. before the lecture (delta VAS (median, interquartile range): 16% (0–39%) vs. 18% (2–42%), p = 0.39). Conclusions: An educational lecture on vaccinations positively impacts vaccine confidence in young adult women. Irrespective of the subjective rating of the lecture, all listeners perceived vaccinations to be safer after vs. before the speech.

Royal society of Canada COVID-19 report: Enhancing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Canada

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance exists on a continuum from a minority who strongly oppose vaccination, to the “moveable middle” heterogeneous group with varying uncertainty levels about acceptance or hesitancy, to the majority who state willingness to be vaccinated. Intention for vaccine acceptance varies over time. COVID-19 vaccination decisions are influenced by many factors including knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs; social networks; communication environment; COVID-19 community rate; cultural and religious influences; ease of access; and the organization of health and community services and policies.

Reflecting vaccine acceptance complexity, the Royal Society of Canada Working Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance developed a framework with four major factor domains that influence vaccine acceptance (people, communities, health care workers; immunization knowledge; health care and public health systems including federal/provincial/territorial/indigenous factors)—each influencing the others and all influenced by education, infection control, extent of collaborations, and communications about COVID-19 immunization. The Working Group then developed 37 interrelated recommendations to support COVID vaccine acceptance nested under four categories of responsibility: 1. People and Communities, 2. Health Care Workers, 3. Health Care System and Local Public Health Units, and 4. Federal/Provincial/Territorial/Indigenous. To optimize outcomes, all must be engaged to ensure co-development and broad ownership.