COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance is associated with Vaccine Hesitancy, Perceived Risk and Previous Vaccination Experiences

The evolution of vaccine hesitancy through the COVID-19 pandemic: A semi-structured interview study on booster and bivalent doses

We sought in-depth understanding on the evolution of factors influencing COVID-19 booster dose and bivalent vaccine hesitancy in a longitudinal semi-structured interview-based qualitative study. Serial interviews were conducted between July 25th and September 1st, 2022 (Phase I: univalent booster dose availability), and between November 21st, 2022 and January 11th, 2023 (Phase II: bivalent vaccine availability). Adults (≥18 years) in Canada who had received an initial primary series and had not received a COVID-19 booster dose were eligible for Phase I, and subsequently invited to participate in Phase II. Twenty-two of twenty-three (96%) participants completed interviews for both phases (45 interviews). Nearly half of participants identified as a woman (n = 11), the median age was 37 years (interquartile range: 32-48), and most participants were employed full-time (n = 12); no participant reported needing to vaccinate (with a primary series) for their workplace. No participant reported having received a COVID-19 booster dose at the time of their interview in Phase II. Three themes relating to the development of hesitancy toward continued vaccination against COVID-19 were identified: 1) effectiveness (frequency concerns; infection despite vaccination); 2) necessity (less threatening, low urgency, alternate protective measures); and 3) information (need for data, contradiction and confusion, lack of trust, decreased motivation). The data from interviews with individuals who had not received a COVID-19 booster dose or bivalent vaccine despite having received a primary series of COVID-19 vaccines highlights actionable targets to address vaccine hesitancy and improve public health literacy.

How stressful was the COVID-19 vaccination procedure? Comparison between mass vaccination centers and general practices

Negative past experiences with vaccines or unfamiliar environments can be sources of stress during the COVID-19 vaccination procedure. We examined whether the perceived stressfulness of the vaccination procedure differ between mass vaccination centers and general practitioner (GP) practices. A survey was distributed (07/2021-10/2021) among newly vaccinated individuals in ten GP practices (n = 364) and two vaccine centers (n = 474). Stress was low at all sites. The perceived stressfulness of the procedure was higher among younger participants and those in GP practices, and increased with longer waiting time at the site. Stress decreased with better comprehensibility of the procedure and higher satisfaction with patient education. Participants who expressed greater concern about the health risks of COVID-19 vaccines perceived the vaccination procedure as more stressful. Our findings indicate opportunities for improvements in future vaccination campaigns and highlight the important role of healthcare providers in mitigating stress by addressing individual concerns.

Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy and its predictors among diabetic patients on follow-up at public hospitals in Nekemte Town, Western Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Understanding and addressing the concerns of vaccine-hesitant individuals, including those with chronic diseases, is key to increasing vaccine acceptance and uptake. However, in Ethiopia, there is limited evidence on the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and predictor variables among diabetic patients. Hence, the study aimed to assess Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Predictor variables among Diabetic Patients on Follow-Up at Public Hospitals in Nekemte Town, Western Ethiopia.

METHOD

Facility based cross sectional study was conducted among 422 diabetic patients attending public hospitals at Nekemte Town, Western Ethiopia between January, to February, 2023. Study participants were recruited by systematic random sampling. The data were collected interviewee administered pre-tested structured survey questioner. The collected data were entered and cleaned using Epi-Data software 4.6 version. The cleaned data were analyzed using SPSS. 25.0 Statical software. Descriptive statistics like frequency, mean and percentage, and binary logistic regression was applied to identify independent predictors of Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy and association between variables were declared at p-value of 0.05.

RESULT

The overall magnitude of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was 15.2% (95% CI: 11.6-18.7). The top three listed reasons for the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were: negative information about the vaccine (32.90%), lack of enough information (21.80%), and vaccine safety concern (19.40%). The hesitancy of the COVID-19 vaccination uptake among diabetes patients was independently influenced by age between 40-49 (Adjusted Odd Ratio [AOR] = 4.52(1.04-19.66)), having vaccine awareness (AOR = 0.029(0.001-0.86)), having a great deal of trust on vaccine development (AOR = 0.028(0.002-0.52)), and a fear amount trust (AOR = 0.05(0.003-0.79)) on the vaccine preparation, vaccinated for COVID-19 (AOR = 0.13(0.04-0.51)), perceived exposure to COVID-19 infection after having the vaccine as strongly agree/agree (AOR = 0.03(0.01-0.17))and neither agree nor disagree (AOR = 0.07(0.02-0.30)).

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among diabetic patients was relatively low. The identified independent predictors were age, vaccine awareness, COVID-19 vaccination history, awareness on vaccine preparation and exposure status to COVID-19 infection. The relevant agency should focus on efforts to translating these high levels of vaccine acceptance into actual uptake, through targeting identifying predictor variables and vaccine availability for a high-risk diabetes patient.

Knowledge, acceptance and concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women on the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia: A cross-sectional study

Introduction

This prospective cross-sectional study, conducted from 1 April 2022 to 31 October 2022, aimed to assess the knowledge, acceptance and concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women visiting the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department of Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Methods

The study included all pregnant women aged >18 years. Sociodemographic data, information related to COVID-19 and vaccination and information on the knowledge, acceptance and concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccination were collected using a validated questionnaire.

Results

Out of 420 eligible pregnant women, 412 participated in the study, yielding a response rate of 98.1%. Of the respondents, 97.1% had received a COVID-19 vaccine, while 2.9% had not. Approximately 85.2% demonstrated a good understanding of COVID-19 vaccination. Among those vaccinated, 76.8% based their decision on recommendations from healthcare providers or the Ministry of Health. Among those unvaccinated, 91.7% believed that COVID-19 vaccines could harm their pregnancy and baby. Although 51% of the respondents expressed concerns about vaccine safety, 202 still chose to be vaccinated, indicating a willingness to prioritise their health despite apprehensions.

Conclusion

The study found no significant link between acceptance and good knowledge of COVID-19 vaccination. However, income and prior COVID-19 booster vaccination were strongly associated with acceptance. Despite safety concerns, 97.1% of the respondents had received a COVID-19 vaccine. This emphasises the importance of providing comprehensive information and addressing concerns to support informed decision-making among pregnant women. Healthcare providers play a vital role in guiding them through this crucial decision-making process.

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake: evidence from a vulnerable global South setting

OBJECTIVE

Studies are paying increasing attention to complex social determinants in explaining the variation in the rates COVID-19 vaccine uptake. This study examines the influence of various individual, contextual, and vaccine-related factors on COVID-19 vaccine uptake behaviour in a resource-scarce and vulnerable setting using a quantitative research approach. Using a multi-staged cluster sampling approach, 408 individuals from 204 households in Cape Coast, Ghana's tourism hub, were surveyed. Probit and logistic regression models were estimated to test the vaccine-related factors.

RESULTS

A significant difference is observed between wait time and vaccination status (χ2 = 21.17; p = 0.000). Moreover, age and religion, as controlled variables, equally played significant roles in influencing the adoption of the vaccine. Other factors encompass the perceived risk of contracting COVID-19, the perceived benefits of the vaccine in relation to its side effects, and the level of trust individuals have in the concern of vaccine producers for their health. These findings call for targeted campaigns by the Ministry of Health, health facilities and other institutions promoting the COVID-19 vaccine. These actors should emphasize the benefits of vaccination, prioritize trust-building initiatives, and provide clear guidance on vaccination schedules, and manage waiting time.

Digital Gamification Tools to Enhance Vaccine Uptake: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Gamification has been used successfully to promote various desired health behaviors. Previous studies have used gamification to achieve desired health behaviors or facilitate their learning about health.

OBJECTIVE

In this scoping review, we aimed to describe digital gamified tools that have been implemented or evaluated across various populations to encourage vaccination, as well as any reported effects of identified tools.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, the Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Academic Search Premier, PsycInfo, Global Health, and ERIC for peer-reviewed papers describing digital gamified tools with or without evaluations. We also conducted web searches with Google to identify digital gamified tools lacking associated publications. We consulted 12 experts in the field of gamification and health behavior to identify any papers or tools we might have missed. We extracted data about the target population of the tools, the interventions themselves (eg, type of digital gamified tool platform, type of disease/vaccine, type and design of study), and any effects of evaluated tools, and we synthesized data narratively.

RESULTS

Of 1402 records, we included 28 (2%) peer-reviewed papers and 10 digital gamified tools lacking associated publications. The experts added 1 digital gamified tool that met the inclusion criteria. Our final data set therefore included 28 peer-reviewed papers and 11 digital gamified tools. Of the 28 peer-reviewed papers, 7 (25%) explained the development of the tool, 16 (57%) described evaluation, and 2 (7%) reported both development and evaluation of the tool. The 28 peer-reviewed papers reported on 25 different tools. Of these 25 digital gamified tools, 11 (44%) were web-based tools, 8 (32%) mobile (native mobile or mobile-enabled web) apps, and 6 (24%) virtual reality tools. Overall, tools that were evaluated showed increases in knowledge and intentions to receive vaccines, mixed effects on attitudes, and positive effects on beliefs. We did not observe discernible advantages of one type of digital gamified tool (web based, mobile, virtual reality) over the others. However, a few studies were randomized controlled trials, and publication bias may have led to such positive effects having a higher likelihood of appearing in the peer-reviewed literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital gamified tools appear to have potential for improving vaccine uptake by fostering positive beliefs and increasing vaccine-related knowledge and intentions. Encouraging comparative studies of different features or different types of digital gamified tools could advance the field by identifying features or types of tools that yield more positive effects across populations and contexts. Further work in this area should seek to inform the implementation of gamification for vaccine acceptance and promote effective health communication, thus yielding meaningful health and social impacts.

Safety profile of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine in indonesian adults

Background

Vaccines are urgently needed to handle the morbidity and mortality of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. The inactivated vaccine is widely used in Indonesia's national immunization program due to its eligibility of stock, easier to transport, and considered to be more established than newer platforms. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety profile of the inactivated vaccine and analyze the safety profile between adults and the elderly.

Methods

A prospective analytical study was conducted to evaluate the safety profile of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine among healthy adults aged ≥ 18 years from September 2nd to December 28th, 2021, at ten primary health centers from 5 districts in Jakarta, Indonesia. The participants were instructed to record the symptoms after inactivated COVID-19 vaccine injection in the diary card for 28 days. Chi-square tests were carried out to analyze the relationship between the adverse event following immunization (AEFI) in adults and elderly groups.

Results

Four of 1113 participants were not included in this study due to the lack of follow-up. Out of 1109 participants, there were 1044 adults (18-59 years) and 65 elderly (>59 years). There were no serious AEFI cases reported. Most AEFI cases were mild to moderate and resolved after several days of injection. Local pain, myalgia and fatigue were the most frequent adverse events reported. We found that there was no correlation between the adults and elderly age group with the incidence of AEFI (p = 0.924) for local reactions (p = 0.181) and most of the systemic reactions (p = 0.629). However, there is an increased risk of fever in the elderly group compared to the adult group (OR 4.046, 95 % CI 1.794-9.124, p = 0.003) following immunization.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated that the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine is safe, considering that all symptoms experienced were mild to moderate and resolved entirely.

Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccination Decision-Making Behaviors among Pregnant Women in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Scoping Review

Despite the availability of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination, uptake among pregnant women in Sub-Saharan Africa has been low. This scoping review aimed to identify and characterize determinants influencing COVID-19 vaccination decision-making behaviors among pregnant women in Sub-Saharan Africa. We searched five online databases for articles on COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women in Sub-Saharan Africa. We identified studies published in English between March 2020 and April 2023 that assessed vaccine-specific issues, psychosocial constructs, and contextual factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination decision-making behaviors. Of the fourteen studies identified, over half (57.1%) were cross-sectional; three used qualitative research methods; and three involved multi-country participants. Most studies assessed COVID-19 vaccination acceptability and willingness. Overall, 85.7% of the publications examined knowledge, attitudes, or both as critical factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination. The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine uptake during pregnancy was low in Sub-Saharan Africa (14.4-28%). While most current studies assess COVID-19 vaccination knowledge, research on maternal vaccination in Sub-Saharan Africa would benefit from the inclusion of theory-informed and driven studies that measure additional psychosocial factors and contextual constructs. Future studies should also employ study designs that can determine causal pathways of vaccination determinants and vaccination uptake.

Health care workers' self-perceived infection risk and COVID-19 vaccine uptake: A mixed methods study

Vaccination is the most cost-effective way of preventing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) although there was a considerable delay in its institution in Tanzania. This study assessed health care workers' (HCWs) self-perceived infection risk and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. A concurrent embedded, mixed methods design was utilized to collect data among HCWs in seven Tanzanian regions. Quantitative data was collected using a validated, pre-piloted, interviewer administered questionnaire whereas in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) gathered qualitative data. Descriptive analyses were performed while chi-square test and logistic regression were used to test for associations across categories. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the qualitative data. A total of 1,368 HCWs responded to the quantitative tool, 26 participated in the IDIs and 74 in FGDs. About half of the HCW (53.6%) reported to have been vaccinated and three quarters (75.5%) self-perceived to be at a high risk of acquiring COVID-19 infection. High perceived infection risk was associated with increased COVID-19 vaccine uptake (OR 1.535). Participants perceived that the nature of their work and the working environment in the health facilities increased their infection risk. Limited availability and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) was reported to elevate the perceived infection risks. Participants in the oldest age group and from low and mid-level health care facilities had higher proportions with a high-risk perception of acquiring COVID-19 infection. Only about half of the HCWs reported to be vaccinated albeit the majority recounted higher perception of risk to contracting COVID-19 due to their working environment, including limited availability and use of PPE. Efforts to address heightened perceived-risks should include improving the working environment, availability of PPE and continue updating HCWs on the benefits of COVID-19 vaccine to limit their infection risks and consequent transmission to their patients and public.

Healthcare Workers' Attitudes towards Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccine mandates are considered a controversial public health policy both in public debate and among healthcare workers (HCWs). Thus, the objective of this systematic review is to give a deep insight into HCWs' views and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination mandates amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science) was conducted between July 2022 and November 2022. Original quantitative studies that addressed the attitudes of HCWs regarding COVID-19 vaccine mandates were considered eligible for this systematic review. All the included studies (n = 57) were critically appraised and assessed for risk of systematic bias. Meta-analyses were performed, providing a pooled estimate of HCWs' acceptance towards COVID-19 vaccine mandates for: 1. HCWs and 2. the general population.

RESULTS

In total, 64% (95% CI: 55%, 72%) of HCWs favored COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs, while 50% (95% CI: 38%, 61%) supported mandating COVID-19 vaccines for the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 is a highly controversial issue among HCWs. The present study provides stakeholders and policy makers with useful evidence related to the compulsory or non-compulsory nature of COVID-19 vaccinations for HCWs and the general population. Other: The protocol used in this review is registered on PROSPERO with the ID number: CRD42022350275.

A systematic literature review to clarify the concept of vaccine hesitancy

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is considered a top-10 global health threat. The concept of VH has been described and applied inconsistently. This systematic review aims to clarify VH by analysing how it is operationalized. We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases on 14 January 2022. We selected 422 studies containing operationalizations of VH for inclusion. One limitation is that studies of lower quality were not excluded. Our qualitative analysis reveals that VH is conceptualized as involving (1) cognitions or affect, (2) behaviour and (3) decision making. A wide variety of methods have been used to measure VH. Our findings indicate the varied and confusing use of the term VH, leading to an impracticable concept. We propose that VH should be defined as a state of indecisiveness regarding a vaccination decision.

Parental COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among parents of children aged 5-18 years in Thailand: a cross-sectional survey study

BACKGROUND

To promote an acceptance rate of COVID-19 immunization among Thai children, concerns about parental vaccination hesitancy should be urgently studied. This study aimed to examine the parental COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy (PVh) level and influencing factors among Thai parents of children 5-18 years of age.

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey was conducted in Thailand during May and June of 2022. The Google forms for data collection were distributed to parents (a father, a mother, or one who nurtures and raises a child) via various online social media. Data regarding PVh level, relevant attitudes, experiences of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination (EC&V), and family contexts (FC) were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the differences among groups of parents based on EC&V and FC. The factors influencing PVh were assessed by multiple regression analysis.

RESULTS

Four hundred and eighty-eight parents completed the online questionnaire. Their median (IQR) age was 41 (35-47) years. They lived in different provinces from all regions across Thailand. Ninety percent of them were authorized persons to make decision about children vaccination. Fifty-eight percent of the respondents had vaccine hesitancy, defined as PVh level at moderate or above. Parents who had ever refused COVID-19 vaccination for themselves or refused to vaccinate their children against any other diseases had statistically significant higher levels of PVh (p value < 0.001). Conversely, the parents who had finished the initial COVID-19 vaccine had lower PVh levels with statistical significance (p value = 0.001). Attitude towards COVID-19 (AC), attitude towards COVID-19 vaccine (AV), and perceived behavioral control (PC) of the parents negatively influenced PVh with statistical significance, according to the results of the multiple regression analysis (Betas = - 0.307, - 0.123, and - 0.232, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy was commonly found among Thai parents. The factors of the hesitancy were multifaceted. Different experiences regarding COVID-19 vaccination for themselves and any vaccinations for their children were associated with different PVhs. The attitudes especially AC, AV, and PC statistically influenced PVh. These findings should be exploited for national and local policy planning as well as public campaigns.

Factors Associated with the Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccines in Citizens of Northern Peru: Cross-Sectional Study

Purpose

The presence of the COVID-19 coronavirus in Peru, and especially in northern Peru, was very fast and caused many deaths. As a result, vaccination proved to be the most immediate option to control it. However, a sector of the population was reluctant to vaccination. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the factors associated with the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines by citizens of northern Peru.

Patients and Methods

The study was observational, descriptive-correlational and the sample was stratified and consisted of 516 citizens from eight departments of northern Peru, who answered an online questionnaire regarding sociodemographic, cultural and health aspects. The data were analyzed using statistical tests of association and a logistic model was estimated to identify factors predicting vaccine acceptance.

Results

Among the factors associated with vaccine acceptance, sociodemographic factors such as age and family income, cultural factors such as level of knowledge, and health factors such as having another chronic disease and a vaccine with a higher confidence (p<0.05) were found. In addition, 12% of the population do not trust them, 10% are afraid that they may cause thrombosis, 13% disagree with vaccination for children, 7% think that a chip will be implanted and 8% believe that their DNA will be changed. However, most people accept vaccination and consider it necessary. A multivariate analysis was also performed for the acceptance of vaccines, which presented a percentage of 80.2% correct in the prognosis.

Conclusion

The multivariate analysis allowed a conclusion that the predictor variables for vaccine acceptance are household income of less than 1000 Peruvian soles per month, low or medium levels of knowledge, and having another chronic disease.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/b-0wyz42OOY

COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers-A Review

The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated vaccine have highlighted vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCWs). Vaccine hesitancy among this group existed prior to the pandemic and particularly centered around influenza vaccination. Being a physician, having more advanced education, and previous vaccination habits are frequently associated with vaccine acceptance. The relationship between age and caring for patients on COVID-19 vaccination is unclear, with studies providing opposing results. Reasons for hesitancy include concerns about safety and efficacy, mistrust of government and institutions, waiting for more data, and feeling that personal rights are being infringed upon. Many of these reasons reflect previous attitudes about influenza vaccination as well as political beliefs and views of personal autonomy. Finally, several interventions to encourage vaccination have been studied, including education programs and non-monetary incentives with the most effective studies using a combination of methods.

Perceived risk of infection and death from COVID-19 among community members of low- and middle-income countries: A cross-sectional study

Background: Risk perceptions of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are considered important as they impact community health behaviors. The aim of this study was to determine the perceived risk of infection and death due to COVID-19 and to assess the factors associated with such risk perceptions among community members in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa, Asia, and South America. Methods: An online cross-sectional study was conducted in 10 LMICs in Africa, Asia, and South America from February to May 2021. A questionnaire was utilized to assess the perceived risk of infection and death from COVID-19 and its plausible determinants. A logistic regression model was used to identify the factors associated with such risk perceptions. Results: A total of 1,646 responses were included in the analysis of the perceived risk of becoming infected and dying from COVID-19. Our data suggested that 36.4% of participants had a high perceived risk of COVID-19 infection, while only 22.4% had a perceived risk of dying from COVID-19. Being a woman, working in healthcare-related sectors, contracting pulmonary disease, knowing people in the immediate social environment who are or have been infected with COVID-19, as well as seeing or reading about individuals infected with COVID-19 on social media or TV were all associated with a higher perceived risk of becoming infected with COVID-19. In addition, being a woman, elderly, having heart disease and pulmonary disease, knowing people in the immediate social environment who are or have been infected with COVID-19, and seeing or reading about individuals infected with COVID-19 on social media or TV had a higher perceived risk of dying from COVID-19. Conclusions: The perceived risk of infection and death due to COVID-19 are relatively low among respondents; this suggests the need to conduct health campaigns to disseminate knowledge and information on the ongoing pandemic.

Perceived risk of infection and death from COVID-19 among community members of low- and middle-income countries: A cross-sectional study

Background: Risk perceptions of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are considered important as they impact community health behaviors. The aim of this study was to determine the perceived risk of infection and death due to COVID-19 and to assess the factors associated with such risk perceptions among community members in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa, Asia, and South America. Methods: An online cross-sectional study was conducted in 10 LMICs in Africa, Asia, and South America from February to May 2021. A questionnaire was utilized to assess the perceived risk of infection and death from COVID-19 and its plausible determinants. A logistic regression model was used to identify the factors associated with such risk perceptions. Results: A total of 1,646 responses were included in the analysis of the perceived risk of becoming infected and dying from COVID-19. Our data suggested that 36.4% of participants had a high perceived risk of COVID-19 infection, while only 22.4% had a perceived risk of dying from COVID-19. Being a woman, working in healthcare-related sectors, contracting pulmonary disease, knowing people in the immediate social environment who are or have been infected with COVID-19, as well as seeing or reading about individuals infected with COVID-19 on social media or TV were all associated with a higher perceived risk of becoming infected with COVID-19. In addition, being a woman, elderly, having heart disease and pulmonary disease, knowing people in the immediate social environment who are or have been infected with COVID-19, and seeing or reading about individuals infected with COVID-19 on social media or TV had a higher perceived risk of dying from COVID-19. Conclusions: The perceived risk of infection and death due to COVID-19 are relatively low among respondents; this suggests the need to conduct health campaigns to disseminate knowledge and information on the ongoing pandemic.

"Would You Get Vaccinated against COVID-19?" The Picture Emerging from a Study on the Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the General Population of the Veneto Region

COVID-19 disease, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, continues to cause high hospitalization and death rates. Vaccination campaigns have been key to controlling the pandemic, but vaccine hesitancy is on the rise. This study investigated the general population’s attitude to vaccination in Veneto (northeast Italy) in January 2021 as part of a study on the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. An ad hoc questionnaire collected 4467 respondents’ sociodemographic data and propensity to be vaccinated, and findings were analyzed using logistic multivariable regression. The 48.9% of respondents were male, and the mean age was 46.8 ± 16.0 years. Asked whether they would get vaccinated against COVID-19, 84.3% said yes, 5.0% were uncertain, and 10.7% said no. Vaccine acceptance was higher in males than in females (85.8% vs. 82.8%), in people 70+ years old (92.3%), and among people with more than 14 years of schooling (89.6%). Multivariable analysis with adjOR (95% CI) showed a significantly greater vaccine reluctance in females (0.68 (0.57−0.81)), people 30−49 or 50−69 years old (0.69 (0.54−0.87)), and (0.76 (0.58−0.99)); and those with <9 or 9−13 years of schooling (0.62 (0.46−0.82)), and (0.72 (0.57−0.91)). As people refusing vaccination undeniably hinder efforts to control the pandemic, specific strategies are needed to overcome their doubts.