National surveillance data analysis of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in England by women of reproductive age

Women's experiences of maternity care in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic: A follow-up systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Maternity care services in the United Kingdom have undergone drastic changes due to pandemic-related restrictions. Prior research has shown maternity care during the pandemic was negatively experienced by women and led to poor physical and mental health outcomes in pregnancy. A synthesis is required of published research on women's experiences of maternity care during the latter half of the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM

To update a previous systematic review of maternity care experiences during the pandemic to June 2021, exploring experiences of maternity care specifically within the United Kingdom and how they may have changed, in order to inform future maternity services.

METHODS

A systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted using comprehensive searches of five electronic databases and the Cochrane COVID Study Register, published between 1 June 2021 and 13 October 2022, and further updated to 30 September 2023. Thematic Synthesis was utilised for data synthesis.

FINDINGS

Of 21,860 records identified, 27 studies were identified for inclusion. Findings included 14 descriptive themes across the five core concepts: (1)Care-seeking and experience; (2)Virtual care; (3)Self-monitoring; (4)COVID-19 vaccination; (5)Ethical future of maternity care.

DISCUSSION

Our findings in the UK are consistent with those globally, and extend those of the previous systematic review, particularly about women's perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest the following are important to women for future maternity care: personalisation and inclusiveness; clear and evidence-based communication to facilitate informed decision-making; and achieving balance between social commitments and time spent settling into motherhood.

Courage in Decision Making: A Mixed-Methods Study of COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Women of Reproductive Age in the U.K

COVID-19 vaccination rates are lower in women of reproductive age (WRA), including pregnant/postpartum women, despite their poorer COVID-19-related outcomes. We evaluated the vaccination experiences of 3568 U.K. WRA, including 1983 women (55.6%) experiencing a pandemic pregnancy, recruited through the ZOE COVID Symptom Study app. Two staggered online questionnaires (Oct-Dec 2021: 3453 responders; Aug-Sept 2022: 2129 responders) assessed reproductive status, COVID-19 status, vaccination, and attitudes for/against vaccination. Descriptive analyses included vaccination type(s), timing relative to age-based eligibility and reproductive status, vaccination delay (first vaccination >28 days from eligibility), and rationale, with content analysis of free-text comments. Most responders (3392/3453, 98.2%) were vaccinated by Dec 2021, motivated by altruism, vaccination supportiveness in general, low risk, and COVID-19 concerns. Few declined vaccination (by Sept/2022: 20/2129, 1.0%), citing risks (pregnancy-specific and longer-term), pre-existing immunity, and personal/philosophical reasons. Few women delayed vaccination, although pregnant/postpartum women (vs. other WRA) received vaccination later (median 3 vs. 0 days after eligibility, p < 0.0001). Despite high uptake, concerns included adverse effects, misinformation (including from healthcare providers), ever-changing government advice, and complex decision making. In summary, most women in this large WRA cohort were promptly vaccinated, including pregnant/post-partum women. Altruism and community benefit superseded personal benefit as reasons for vaccination. Nevertheless, responders experienced angst and received vaccine-related misinformation and discouragement. These findings should inform vaccination strategies in WRA.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the global prevalence and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake in people living with HIV

People living with HIV (PLHIV) are at higher risk of poor outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here we report the pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance/uptake and determinants among this vulnerable population of PLHIV based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published by 25 August 2023. Among the 54 included studies (N = 167,485 participants), 53 (N = 166,455) provided data on vaccine acceptance rate, while 27 (N = 150,926) provided uptake data. The global prevalences of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake were 67.0% and 56.6%, respectively. Acceptance and uptake rates were 86.6% and 90.1% for the European Region, 74.9% and 71.6% for the Region of the Americas, 62.3% and 78.9% for the South-East Asian Region, 64.6% and 19.3% for the Eastern Mediterranean Region, 58.0% and 35.5% for the African Region, and 57.4% and 44.0% for the Western Pacific Region. The acceptance rate increased from 65.9% in 2020 to 71.0% in 2022, and the uptake rate increased from 55.9% in 2021 to 58.1% in 2022. Men, PLHIV aged ≥40 years and those who had recently received the influenza vaccine were more likely to accept and receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Factors associated with lower uptake included Black race, other races (Latinx/Hispanic/mixed race), low education level and being unemployed. Vaccine-related factors associated with higher acceptance included belief in vaccine effectiveness, vaccine trust, perceived high susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and fear of potential COVID-19 effect in PLHIV. Sustained efforts and targeted interventions are needed to reduce regional disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake among PLHIV.

Inside the 'imperfect mosaic': Minority ethnic women's qualitative experiences of race and ethnicity during pregnancy, childbirth, and maternity care in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Persistent, high rates of maternal mortality amongst ethnic minorities is one of the UK's starkest examples of racial disparity. With greater risks of adverse outcomes during maternity care, ethnic minority women are subjected to embedded, structural and systemic discrimination throughout the healthcare service.

METHODS

Fourteen semi-structured interviews were undertaken with minority ethnic women who had recent experience of UK maternity care. Data pertaining to ethnicity and race were subject to iterative, inductive coding, and constant comparison through Grounded Theory Analysis to test a previously established theory: The 'Imperfect Mosaic'.

ANALYSIS & FINDINGS

A related theory emerged, comprising four themes: 'Stopping Short of Agentic Birth'; 'Silenced and Stigmatised through Tick-Box Care'; 'Anticipating Discrimination and the Need for Advocacy'; and 'Navigating Cultural Differences'. The new theory: Inside the 'Imperfect Mosaic', demonstrates experiences of those who received maternity care which directly mirrors experiences of those who provide care, as seen in the previous theory we set-out to test. However, the current theory is based on more traditional and familiar notions of racial discrimination, rather than the nuanced, subtleties of socio-demographic-based micro-aggressions experienced by healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest the need for the following actions: Prioritisation of bodily autonomy and agency in perinatal physical and mental healthcare; expand awareness of social and cultural issues (i.e., moral injury; cultural safety) within the NHS; and undertake diversity training and support, and follow-up of translation of the training into practice, across (maternal) health services.

Maternal vaccination provision in NHS maternity trusts across England

BACKGROUND

Vaccinations for seasonal influenza and pertussis have been recommended for pregnant women in England since 2010 and 2012, respectively. Uptake rates are suboptimal with large regional variations. To improve uptake, from 2016 onwards maternity trusts were commissioned to offer pertussis (and other) vaccinations in addition to these being available in primary care. Since 2021, Covid-19 vaccination has also been recommended for pregnant women. Overall maternal vaccination rates are routinely available, but not the relative provision by maternity trusts. We aimed to describe the national picture of maternity trust provision of maternal vaccinations, including how the maternity trust vaccination programme has progressed.

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey plus comparisons with 2017-18 figures for maternity trust provision of pertussis vaccination, and with UKHSA data for total pertussis vaccination.

RESULTS

Twelve NHS commissioners participated (from 13/06/22 to 31/03/23) providing data for 120 (of a total 124) maternity trusts across England. All 120 (100%) trusts were commissioned to deliver influenza, and 107 (89%) to deliver pertussis vaccinations, though not all actually administered the vaccines; 29% offered Covid-19 vaccinations. For 2021-22 we found a mean of 25% (range 0-81.3%) women were vaccinated for pertussis (a large increase compared with previous estimates for 2017-18); and 11% (range 0-74.2%) for influenza, via their maternity trust. Commissioners reported a negative impact of the pandemic on routine vaccination provision. There was indication of efficiency by vaccinating women attending for other appointments. There are diverse mechanisms for reporting pertussis and influenza vaccinations administered at maternity trusts back to primary care, which may be inefficient for maternity staff workload and accuracy of data transfer (especially for pertussis).

CONCLUSION

A high proportion of maternity trusts provide both pertussis and influenza vaccinations, despite a negative impact of the pandemic. Reasons for large between-trust variation in vaccination rates should be explored to improve uptake and equity.

Factors associated with uptake of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in a large US health care system

BACKGROUND

Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were developed to provide protection against the original SARS-CoV-2 strain and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 variants, but uptake in the United States has been low. Sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake have been documented, but it is unclear if similar disparities persist among individuals who previously completed a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) including youth aged 5-17 years and adults aged ≥18 years who were KPSC members and had completed a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine. Individuals were followed from index date (date of eligibility for bivalent vaccine) to 03/31/2023 to ascertain receipt of any dose of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine or until disenrollment from KPSC or death. Multivariable robust Poisson regression was conducted to assess the adjusted relative risk and 95 % confidence intervals of factors associated with receipt of bivalent vaccine.

RESULTS

The final cohorts included 305,339 youth and 2,534,619 adults, of whom 19.5 % and 30.7 %, respectively, had received bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. Factors associated with being more likely to receive bivalent COVID-19 vaccine included older age, Asian race, more prior year outpatient and virtual visits, Charlson score ≥1, and immunocompromised status. Factors associated with being less likely to receive a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine included age 12-17 vs 5-11 years, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity, ≥1 prior year inpatient or emergency department visits, prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (adults only), Medicaid insurance, and higher neighborhood deprivation index.

CONCLUSION

Even among youth and adults who had previously received a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine, sociodemographic and clinical disparities were observed in receipt of bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. These findings are critical to inform equitable strategies for the implementation of the updated monovalent COVID-19 vaccine targeting the Omicron XBB strain.

The menstrual cycle and the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The impact of COVID-19 virus on menstrual cycles in unvaccinated women is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the prevalence of changes to menstrual cycle characteristics, hormonal symptoms and lifestyle changes prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A retrospective online cross-sectional survey completed by social media users between July 2020 to October 2020. Participants were living in the United Kingdom (UK), premenopausal status and, or over 18 years of age.

MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURES(S)

The primary outcome was to assess changes to menstrual cycle characteristics during the pandemic following the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). Secondary outcomes included assessment of hormonal and lifestyle changes.

RESULTS

15,611 social media users completed the survey. Of which, 75% of participants experienced a change in their menstrual cycle, with significantly greater proportions reporting irregular menstrual cycles (P<0·001), bleeding duration more than seven days (P<0·001), longer mean cycle length (P<0·001) and overall bleeding duration (P<0·001). Over half the participants reported worsening of premenstrual symptoms including low mood/depression, anxiety and irritability. When stratified according to COVID-19 infection, there was no significant difference in menstrual cycle changes.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in considerable variation in menstrual cycle characteristics and hormonal symptoms. This appears to be related to societal and lifestyle changes resulting from the pandemic, rather than to the virus itself. We believe this may have an impact on the individual, as well as national economy, healthcare, and population levels, and therefore suggest this should be taken into consideration by governments, healthcare providers and employers when developing pandemic recovery plans.

Using the COM-B framework to elucidate facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in pregnant women: a qualitative study

Since April 2021, COVID-19 vaccines have been recommended for pregnant women. Despite this, COVID-19 vaccine uptake in this group is low compared to the non-pregnant population of childbearing age. Our aim was to understand barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women in Northern Ireland using the COM-B framework, and so to make recommendations for public health interventions. The COM-B proposes that human behaviour is influenced by the extent to which a person has the capability, opportunity, and motivation to enact that behaviour. Understanding the factors underpinning behaviour through this lens helps discern what needs to change to change behaviour, therefore supporting the development of targeted interventions.This study consisted of eight semi-structured interviews with new/expectant mothers who did not receive a COVID-19 vaccine dose while pregnant since April 2021, and a focus group with five participants who received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose while pregnant. Interview and focus group data were analysed using semi-deductive reflexive thematic analysis framed by a subtle realist approach. The COM-B was used to categorise codes and subthemes were developed within each COM-B construct.Within Psychological Capability, subthemes captured the need for consistent and reliable COVID-19 vaccine information and access to balanced and jargon-free, risk-benefit information that is tailored to the pregnant individual. The behaviour/opinions of family, friends, and local healthcare providers had a powerful influence on COVID-19 vaccine decisions (Social Opportunity). Integrating the COVID-19 vaccine as part of routine antenatal pathways was believed to support access and sense of familiarity (Physical Opportunity). Participants valued health autonomy, however experienced internal conflict driven by concerns about long-term side effects for their baby (Reflective Motivation). Feelings of fear, lack of empathy from healthcare providers, and anticipated guilt commonly underpinned indecision as to whether to get the vaccine (Automatic Motivation).Our study highlighted that the choice to accept a vaccine during pregnancy generates internal conflict and worry. Several participants cited their concern was primarily around the safety for their baby. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play a significant part when it comes to decision making about COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women. HCPs and pregnant women should be involved in the development of interventions to improve the delivery and communication of information.

The antenatal psychological experiences of women during two phases of the COVID-19 pandemic: A recurrent, cross-sectional, thematic analysis

Initial COVID-19-related social distancing restrictions, imposed in the UK in March 2020, and the subsequent lifting of restrictions in May 2020 caused antenatal disruption and stress which exceeded expected vulnerabilities associated with this lifecourse transition. The current study aimed to explore the antenatal psychological experiences of women during different phases of pandemic-related lockdown restrictions in the UK. Semi-structured interviews were held with 24 women about their antenatal experiences: twelve were interviewed after the initial lockdown restrictions (Timepoint 1; T1), and a separate twelve women were interviewed after the subsequent lifting of those restrictions (Timepoint 2; T2). Interviews were transcribed and a recurrent, cross-sectional thematic analysis was conducted. Two themes were identified for each timepoint, and each theme contained sub-themes. T1 themes were: 'A Mindful Pregnancy' and 'It's a Grieving Process', and T2 themes were: 'Coping with Lockdown Restrictions' and 'Robbed of Our Pregnancy'. COVID-19 related social distancing restrictions had an adverse effect on women's mental health during the antenatal period. Feeling trapped, anxious, and abandoned were common at both timepoints. Actively encouraging conversations about mental wellbeing during routine care and adopting a prevention opposed to cure attitude toward implementing additional support provisions may serve to improve antenatal psychological wellbeing during health crises.