COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in pregnant and breastfeeding women and strategies to increase vaccination compliance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Influenza vaccination hesitancy and related factors among pregnant and breastfeeding women: A cross-sectional study

Achieving safe influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant and breastfeeding women is a global health goal due to the potential risks of serious influenza for both mother and child. However, vaccine hesitancy remains a significant barrier to vaccination uptake. Since anxiety represents a determinant in vaccine decision-making, this study aimed to assess influenza vaccination hesitancy and anxiety levels in this population and to explore the association between women's characteristics, their reluctance, and anxiety levels. A multicentre, cross-sectional study was conducted between February and June 2022 using structured phone interviews to assess: (1) socio-demographics and clinical history; (2) anti-flu vaccination status, previous anti-flu vaccination, and Sars-CoV-2 infection history; (3) insights into influenza vaccination during pregnancy; (4) attitudes toward anti-flu vaccination, using the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale; (5) anxiety levels, measured by the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS). Among the 387 participants, 22.8% were already vaccinated or expressed willingness to be vaccinated against influenza, and 54% had an anxiety disorder. While anxiety was not significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy, ongoing pregnancy emerged as an independent predictor of anxiety. Higher educational levels, ongoing pregnancy, already being vaccinated or willingness to get vaccinated, and being employed were associated with reduced vaccine hesitancy, while prior SARS-CoV-2 infection with increased hesitancy. Fear of unpredictable events and lack of healthcare professionals' recommendations emerged as reasons for vaccine reluctance. Given the low coverage rates, these findings highlight the need for health services to enhance vaccination efforts and provide clear recommendations to counter misinformation and ensure accurate vaccine safety information.

Pregnant women's choices for preventing respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)

INTRODUCTION

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of bronchiolitis and pneumonia in infants and can lead to severe respiratory distress, especially in very young infants. No specific treatments exist for RSV. However, new preventative strategies have become available including RSV vaccine for pregnant women and monoclonal antibody for infants. This study aimed to identify and understand barriers and facilitators to the uptake of a new RSV vaccine in pregnant women and determine their underlying choices for a maternal RSV immunisation program. Additionally, the study investigated choice for maternal vaccination or administration of a long-lasting monoclonal antibody to infants.

METHODS

Eligible participants were pregnant women residing in Australia and aged 18 years or older. Focus group discussions and individual online interviews were conducted and data were analysed using a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

A total of 34 pregnant women participated in online focus group discussions or interviews, with an average age of 34 years. The identified themes were categorised into four overarching domains: 1) motivators for vaccinating during pregnancy to safeguard their babies and prevent severe diseases, 2) barriers to vaccination including vaccine safety concerns, uncertainties regarding vaccine effectiveness, and vaccine hesitancy arising from COVID-19 vaccination experiences, 3) preferred vaccination promotion strategies, including constant reminders/prompts, personalised messages, campaign focusing on serious outcomes and using diverse/lay languages, recommendations from local obstetricians and health authorities, 4) clear vaccine recommendation policies and a preference for maternal immunisation over infant immunisation.

CONCLUSIONS

The maternal RSV vaccination was generally welcomed and preferred by pregnant women in our study comparing to other strategies. Preferences for RSV program promotion included diversity in languages, "nudge" reminders, and recommendations from healthcare providers.

Role of gastroenterologists and healthcare providers in promoting COVID-19 immunization among individuals with inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis on a global scale

Individuals with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) are more susceptible to experiencing severe complications of COVID-19 if infected. Nevertheless, sub-optimal immunization rates have been reported among these patients. Our study aims to assess COVID-19 VH among a global population of patients with IBD and to investigate the role of healthcare professionals, particularly gastroenterologists, in promoting immunization. Twenty-six studies were systematically selected from scientific articles in the MEDLINE/PubMed, WoK, and Scopus databases from January 1, 2020, to September 15, 2023. The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 VH was 27.2% (95%CI = 20.6-34.2%). A significant relationship was evidenced between COVID-19 vaccine compliance and receiving advice from gastroenterologists or healthcare providers (OR = 2.77; 95%CI = 1.79-4.30). By leveraging their knowledge of IBD, familiarity with patient histories, and trusted patient-doctor relationships, gastroenterologists are pivotal in promoting vaccination. This patient-centered care is crucial in increasing vaccine acceptance among individuals with IBD, contributing to better public health outcomes.

Trimester and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and risk of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy has been linked with an increased risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP). The aim of this study was to examine how both trimester and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection impact HDP.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals during pregnancy (n = 205) and examined the association between trimester and severity of infection with incidence of HDP using modified Poisson regression models to calculate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We stratified the analysis of trimester by severity to understand the role of timing of infection among those with similar symptomatology and also examined timing of infection as a continuous variable.

RESULTS

Compared to a reference cohort from 2018, SARS-CoV-2 infection did not largely increase the risk of HDP (RR: 1.17; CI:0.90, 1.51), but a non-statistically significant higher risk of preeclampsia was observed (RR: 1.33; CI:0.89, 1.98), in our small sample. Among the SARS-CoV-2 cohort, severity was linked with risk of HDP, with infections requiring hospitalization increasing the risk of HDP compared to asymptomatic/mild infections. Trimester of infection was not associated with risk of HDP, but a slight decline in the risk of HDP was observed with later gestational week of infection. Among patients with asymptomatic or mild symptoms, SARS-CoV-2 in the first trimester conferred a higher risk of HDP compared to the third trimester (RR: 1.70; CI:0.77, 3.77), although estimates were imprecise.

CONCLUSION

SARS-CoV-2 infection in early pregnancy may increase the risk of HDP compared to infection later in pregnancy.

Associations between SARS-CoV-2 Infection or COVID-19 Vaccination and Human Milk Composition: A Multi-Omics Approach

BACKGROUND

The risk of contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) via human milk-feeding is virtually nonexistent. Adverse effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination for lactating individuals are not different from the general population, and no evidence has been found that their infants exhibit adverse effects. Yet, there remains substantial hesitation among this population globally regarding the safety of these vaccines.

OBJECTIVES

Herein, we aimed to determine if compositional changes in milk occur following SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination, including any evidence of vaccine components.

METHODS

An extensive multiomics approach was taken using a subset of milk samples obtained as part of our broad studies examining the effects on milk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

We found that compared with unvaccinated individuals, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with significant compositional differences in 67 proteins, 385 lipids, and 13 metabolites. In contrast, COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with any changes in lipids or metabolites, although it was associated with changes in 13 or fewer proteins. Compositional changes in milk differed by vaccine. Changes following vaccination were greatest after 1-6 h for the mRNA-based Moderna vaccine (8 changed proteins), 3 d for the mRNA-based Pfizer (4 changed proteins), and adenovirus-based Johnson and Johnson (13 changed proteins) vaccines. Proteins that changed after both natural infection and Johnson and Johnson vaccine were associated mainly with systemic inflammatory responses. In addition, no vaccine components were detected in any milk sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, our data provide evidence of only minimal changes in milk composition because of COVID-19 vaccination, with much greater changes after natural SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Maternal vaccination against COVID-19 and neonatal outcomes during Omicron: INTERCOVID-2022 study

BACKGROUND

In early 2023, when Omicron was the variant of concern, we showed that vaccinating pregnant women decreased the risk for severe COVID-19-related complications and maternal morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the impact of COVID-19 during pregnancy on newborns and the effects of maternal COVID-19 vaccination on neonatal outcomes when Omicron was the variant of concern.

STUDY DESIGN

INTERCOVID-2022 was a large, prospective, observational study, conducted in 40 hospitals across 18 countries, from November 27, 2021 (the day after the World Health Organization declared Omicron the variant of concern) to June 30, 2022, to assess the effect of COVID-19 in pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes and to assess vaccine effectiveness. Women diagnosed with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 during pregnancy were compared with 2 nondiagnosed, unmatched women recruited concomitantly and consecutively during pregnancy or at delivery. Mother-newborn dyads were followed until hospital discharge. The primary outcomes were a neonatal positive test for COVID-19, severe neonatal morbidity index, severe perinatal morbidity and mortality index, preterm birth, neonatal death, referral to neonatal intensive care unit, and diseases during the neonatal period. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated with adjustment for maternal risk profile.

RESULTS

We enrolled 4707 neonates born to 1577 (33.5%) mothers diagnosed with COVID-19 and 3130 (66.5%) nondiagnosed mothers. Among the diagnosed mothers, 642 (40.7%) were not vaccinated, 147 (9.3%) were partially vaccinated, 551 (34.9%) were completely vaccinated, and 237 (15.0%) also had a booster vaccine. Neonates of booster-vaccinated mothers had less than half (relative risk, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.91) the risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19 when compared with those of unvaccinated mothers; they also had the lowest rates of preterm birth, medically indicated preterm birth, respiratory distress syndrome, and number of days in the neonatal intensive care unit. Newborns of unvaccinated mothers had double the risk for neonatal death (relative risk, 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-4.00) when compared with those of nondiagnosed mothers. Vaccination was not associated with any congenital malformations. Although all vaccines provided protection against neonatal test positivity, newborns of booster-vaccinated mothers had the highest vaccine effectiveness (64%; 95% confidence interval, 10%-86%). Vaccine effectiveness was not as high for messenger RNA vaccines only. Vaccine effectiveness against moderate or severe neonatal outcomes was much lower, namely 13% in the booster-vaccinated group (all vaccines) and 25% and 28% in the completely and booster-vaccinated groups, respectively (messenger RNA vaccines only). Vaccines were fairly effective in protecting neonates when given to pregnant women ≤100 days (14 weeks) before birth; thereafter, the risk increased and was much higher after 200 days (29 weeks). Finally, none of the neonatal practices studied, including skin-to-skin contact and direct breastfeeding, increased the risk for infecting newborns.

CONCLUSION

When Omicron was the variant of concern, newborns of unvaccinated mothers had an increased risk for neonatal death. Neonates of vaccinated mothers had a decreased risk for preterm birth and adverse neonatal outcomes. Because the protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination decreases with time, to ensure that newborns are maximally protected against COVID-19, mothers should receive a vaccine or booster dose no more than 14 weeks before the expected date of delivery.

COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Factors Associated Among Pregnant Women in Mogadishu, Somalia

Background

Pregnant women exhibit COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy due to concerns regarding potential risks to their babies, doubts about vaccine efficacy, and limited access to information. Therefore, this study aims to estimate COVID-19 vaccine uptake and factors associated with pregnant women in Mogadishu, Somalia.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted on pregnant women using a questionnaire covering socio-demographic information, pregnancy-related characteristics, perceptions about the COVID-19 vaccine, and vaccination status. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were utilized to identify factors associated with the outcome variable.

Results

Among the 400 pregnant women who participated in this study, 26.8% had received a COVID-19 vaccine dose, with only 14.9% receiving it during pregnancy. Reasons for not receiving the vaccine included a lack of information about the vaccine (47.4%), concerns about its adverse effects on personal health (33.8%), misconceptions regarding impacts on fertility or menstrual cycles (14.3%), belief in the vaccine's inefficacy (3.4%), and fears about adverse effects on their fetus. In multivariable logistic regression, pregnant women with a history of chronic diseases (AOR=3.27, 95% CI=1.992-6.145), those who perceived themselves at risk of contracting COVID-19 (AOR=3.81, 95% CI=2.11-5.10), those who believed that the vaccine was accessible to them (AOR=4.34, 95% CI=2.915-6.165), and those who discussed the COVID-19 vaccine with their healthcare provider (AOR=3.91, 95% CI=2.123-7.878) were more likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine compared to their counterparts.

Conclusion

Pregnant women in Mogadishu, Somalia, face challenges with sub-optimal covid-19 vaccine uptake. Implementations should improve awareness of COVID-19 risks and facilitate discussions between healthcare providers and pregnant women. In addition, efforts to provide reliable information about the vaccine, alleviate concerns about its adverse effects, and dispel misconceptions about fertility, menstrual cycles, efficacy, and foetal impact are crucial.

The nurse's role in a patient-centered approach for reducing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy during pregnancy: An American Academy of Nursing consensus paper

The evidence shows that COVID-19 vaccines can reduce the risks of poor pregnancy outcomes. Yet, reluctance to vaccinate remains high in pregnant populations. In this paper, we take a precision health and patient-centered approach to vaccine hesitancy. We adopted the society-to-cells vaccine hesitancy framework to identify society, community, family, individual, and physiologic factors contributing to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in pregnancy. Nurses are particularly well-suited to impact the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. Because of their proximity to the patient, nurses are positioned to provide individualized, timely health information, and clinical guidelines to assist patients with decision-making related to vaccinations. Recommendations are provided to bolster nurses' engagement in precision health and patient-centered models of care to mitigate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in pregnancy.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy among People Living with HIV: Review and Meta-Analysis

This study aims to estimate the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among people living with HIV (PLWHA). A search for observational studies was conducted in five databases and preprinted literature. Summary estimates were pooled using a random effects model and meta-regression. Of 150 identified studies, 31 were eligible (18,550 PLWHA). The weighted prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy overall was 29.07% among PLWHA (95%CI = 24.33-34.32; I² = 98%,) and that of vaccine acceptance was 68.66% (95%CI = 62.25-74.43; I² = 98%). Higher hesitancy prevalence was identified in low/lower-middle income countries (35.05; 95% CI = 19.38-54.78). The heterogeneity was explained by the risk of bias, region, and year of data collection. The findings conclude that the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rate remains high, especially in low-income countries. Evidence-informed interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance at the national and individual levels ought to be designed to increase COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among PLWHA.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The unprecedented emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the development and global distribution of vaccines, making the understanding of global vaccine acceptance and hesitancy crucial to overcoming barriers to vaccination and achieving widespread immunization.

OBJECTIVE

This umbrella review synthesizes findings from systematic reviews and meta-analyses to provide insights into global perceptions on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy across diverse populations and regions.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search across major databases to identify systematic reviews and meta-analysis that reported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy. The AMSTAR-2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) criteria were used to assess the methodological quality of included systematic reviews. Meta-analysis was performed using STATA 17 with a random effect model. The data synthesis is presented in a table format and via a narrative.

RESULTS

Our inclusion criteria were met by 78 meta-analyses published between 2021 and 2023. Our analysis revealed a moderate vaccine acceptance rate of 63% (95% CI 0.60%-0.67%) in the general population, with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 97.59%). Higher acceptance rates were observed among health care workers and individuals with chronic diseases, at 64% (95% CI 0.57%-0.71%) and 69% (95% CI 0.61%-0.76%), respectively. However, lower acceptance was noted among pregnant women, at 48% (95% CI 0.42%-0.53%), and parents consenting for their children, at 61.29% (95% CI 0.56%-0.67%). The pooled vaccine hesitancy rate was 32% (95% CI 0.25%-0.39%) in the general population. The quality assessment revealed 19 high-quality, 38 moderate-quality, 15 low-quality, and 6 critically low-quality meta-analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This review revealed the presence of vaccine hesitancy globally, emphasizing the necessity for population-specific, culturally sensitive interventions and clear, credible information dissemination to foster vaccine acceptance. The observed disparities accentuate the need for continuous research to understand evolving vaccine perceptions and to address the unique concerns and needs of diverse populations, thereby aiding in the formulation of effective and inclusive vaccination strategies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023468363; https://tinyurl.com/2p9kv9cr.

Vaccination: Adherence and Hesitancy among Pregnant Women for COVID-19, Pertussis, and Influenza Vaccines

In the realm of antenatal care, vaccinations serve as a cornerstone, crucial for safeguarding the health of both the mother and the fetus, while also extending protection to the newborn against communicable diseases. Nevertheless, vaccine adherence among pregnant women remains very low. The aim of our study was to evaluate the uptake of vaccines (influence, pertussis, and COVID-19) among women during pregnancy and to understand pregnant women's knowledge of vaccines and the diseases they protect against. The purpose was to investigate the reasons why pregnant women chose not to be vaccinated and to develop effective strategies for informing them about the importance of vaccination for both maternal and fetal safety. A prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, "Ospedale Santa Maria della Misericordia" in Udine, from 1 December 2021 to 30 June 2022. During this period, a self-completed paper questionnaire was administered to women at the end of pregnancy or during the puerperium. A total of 161 questionnaires were collected. Higher educational level was found to be significantly associated with influenza vaccination uptake (p = 0.037, OR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.05-4.51). Similarly, for pertussis vaccination, adherence was mainly associated with higher educational level (p = 0.014, OR = 2.83, 95% CI 1.24-6.47), but also with Italian nationality (p = 0.003, OR = 3.36, 95% CI 1.56-8.43) and pregnancy attended by a midwife or private gynecologist (p = 0.028, OR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.90). Regarding the COVID-19 vaccine, the only factor positively influencing uptake was Italian nationality (p = 0.044, OR = 2.66, 95% CI 1.03-6.91). Women's fear that vaccines would endanger the fetus appeared to be the most important reason for refusing vaccinations. Simultaneously, patients also exhibited a desire to receive more information about maternal vaccination, particularly from their general physician or gynecologist. For this reason, it is imperative to enhance maternal vaccination counselling, making it a routine step in prenatal care from the first antenatal visit until the postpartum period.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in the Perinatal Period: A Survey Among Residents of Hawaii

Introduction

This study describes the vaccination status among people in Hawaii who are attempting pregnancy, currently pregnant, recently delivered (<6 months), and/or breastfeeding and documents common concerns and information sources associated with vaccine decision making.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey between April and September 2022 throughout Hawaii. The anonymous surveys were disseminated through flyers and online links posted by physician offices and community partners throughout Hawaii.

Results

Final analyses included 165 responses. Almost half of the respondents (n=75, 45%) were unvaccinated, 38% (n=62) were fully vaccinated, and 17% (n=28) were partially vaccinated. The most influential sources for vaccine decision making for vaccinated respondents were their healthcare providers (n=28, 45%) and official healthcare organizations (n=22, 36%), whereas unvaccinated respondents reported friends/family (n=28, 37%) and their healthcare providers (n=26, 35%) as their most influential sources. Top COVID-19 vaccine concerns for unvaccinated individuals were reactions to vaccine (n=78, 76%) and concerns for safety of the vaccine (n=75, 73%).

Conclusions

Efforts should be made to increase and expand vaccine education about the benefits and safety of vaccines during pregnancy beyond the pregnant person to create more supportive social norms for COVID-19 vaccination in the perinatal period. Consistent and unequivocal support across medical specialties, including obstetrics, pediatrics, and family medicine, is also crucial for encouraging the uptake of the vaccine during pregnancy or when breastfeeding.

Prenatal Vaccination Patterns among Birthing Individuals with History of Preterm Birth in the Pre- and Post-COVID Era

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore vaccination acceptance among individuals with a history of preterm birth between March and June during the pre-COVID (2019), early-COVID (2020), and late-COVID (2021) periods.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a cross-sectional, retrospective cohort study of pregnant individuals with a history of preterm birth (<37 weeks' gestation) who initiated care of a subsequent pregnancy during pre-COVID (March-June 2019), early-COVID (March-June 2020), or late-COVID (March-June 2021). The primary outcome of interest was vaccination status for influenza, Tdap, and COVID-19 vaccines. Fisher's exact and chi-square tests were used to investigate association between vaccination status and time periods, race/ethnicity, and insurance.

RESULTS

Among 293 pregnancies, influenza vaccination rate was highest in early-COVID (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in Tdap or COVID-19 vaccination between time periods. COVID-19 vaccination was highest in individuals with private insurance (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in vaccination status by race/ethnicity.

CONCLUSION

In this study on high-risk pregnant individuals, the majority of our cohort remained unvaccinated against COVID-19 into the late-COVID period. Additionally, their influenza vaccination rates were greater than the national average in early-COVID and substantially lower than the national average in late-COVID. This shift in influenza vaccination acceptance may have been sparked by COVID-19 vaccine distribution beginning in January 2021 leading to overall vaccination hesitancy. Standardized guidelines and counseling concerning prenatal safety in recommended immunizations may serve as important tools of reassurance and health promotion.

KEY POINTS

· Maternal infections during pregnancy are a risk factor for preterm birth.. · High-risk cohort had low influenza vaccination post-COVID possibly due to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.. · Vaccination education may be a uniquely important tool among high-risk pregnant patients..

Evaluating COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among parents in Saudi Arabia: a systematic review examining attitudes, hesitancy, and intentions

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic, affecting adults and children equally, has caused significant disruption to countries worldwide, including Saudi Arabia. In Saudi Arabia, the fast preventative measures and mass vaccine enrollment were vital to contain the devastating impact of the pandemic. However, vaccine hesitancy, especially among parents toward vaccinating their children, was a significant obstacle to vaccine uptake.

Methods

This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines to assess parental willingness to vaccinate their children against COVID-19, determine the key determinants influencing such intention and attitudes, and underline the significant concerns and misconceptions regarding the vaccine among parents. The Joanne Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for prevalence studies was used to assess included studies for risk of bias.

Results

Twenty-three studies were included in this systematic review, representing a total of 20,926 participants, with over 66% of them were female. Over 37% of the participants were willing to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. Parents' age, gender, level of education, and income were the main determinants of their intention to vaccinate their children. The parents' main concerns were the potential vaccine side effects, safety, and efficacy. Major misconceptions about the COVID-19 vaccine included it being dangerous to children and that children are at lower risk of severe infection; hence, vaccines were not needed.

Discussion

This seminal review provides insights to public health policymakers, which should be considered and taken together in light of other studies addressing parental vaccine hesitancy.

The pandemic experiences of Ontario perinatal providers: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has produced widespread disruptions for healthcare systems across Canada. Perinatal care in Ontario, Canada was subject to province-wide public health restrictions, reallocation of hospital beds and human health resources. To better understand the impacts of the pandemic on Ontario perinatal care, this study explored the perspectives of perinatal care providers about their clinical COVID-19 pandemic experiences.

METHODS

Semi-structured key informant virtual interviews were conducted between August 2021 and January 2022 with 15 Ontario-based perinatal care providers. Recorded interviews were transcribed, and thematic content analysis used to identify major themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

Participants were mainly women, practicing in Eastern and Central Ontario as health providers (obstetricians, nurses, midwives), allied regulated health professionals (social worker, massage therapist), and perinatal support workers (doula, lactation consultant). Major themes and subthemes were identified inductively as follows: (1) Impacts of COVID-19 on providers (psychosocial stress, healthcare system barriers, healthcare system opportunities); (2) Perceived impacts of COVID-19 on pregnant people (psychosocial stress, amplification of existing healthcare barriers, influences on reproductive decision making; minor theme- social and emotional support roles); (3) Vaccine discourse (provider empathy, vaccines and patient family dynamics, minor themes- patient vaccine hesitancy, COVID-19 misinformation); and (4) Virtual pregnancy care (benefits, disadvantages, adaptation of standard care practices).

CONCLUSIONS

Perinatal care providers reported significant stress and uncertainty caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and evolving hospital protocols. Providers perceived that their patients were distressed by both the pandemic and related reductions in pregnancy healthcare services including hospital limits to support companion(s). Although virtual pregnancy care impaired patient-provider rapport, most providers believed that the workflow efficiencies and patient convenience of virtual care is beneficial to perinatal healthcare.

COVID-19 Immunization Rates in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Worldwide: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Individuals with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) are characterized by an increased vulnerability to complications stemming from infectious diseases. While these patients do not inherently face a heightened risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the general population, their vulnerability to severe COVID-19 complications and subsequent hospitalization is notably increased. The objective of our study is to quantitatively assess the global coverage of COVID-19 vaccination among individuals with IBD, achieved through a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review. Thirteen studies were systematically selected from scientific articles available in the MEDLINE/PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus databases, spanning from 1 January 2021 to 25 July 2023. The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine uptake was estimated at 72% (95%CI = 59-83%) for at least one dose, 81% (95%CI = 68-91%) for the complete vaccination regimen, and 71% (95%CI = 46-91%) for the third dose. Analysis of the determinants influencing vaccination uptake revealed several significant associations. These encompassed Caucasian ethnicity, female sex, absence of immunosuppressive therapy, advanced age, prior receipt of the anti-influenza vaccine, absence of a history of COVID-19 infection, and the provision of advice from gastroenterologists, all linked to improved compliance. Our study underscores a noteworthy yet not entirely optimal COVID-19 vaccination coverage among individuals with IBD. A multifaceted approach is warranted to enhance vaccination rates. Within this context, the role of gastroenterologists extends beyond direct patient care, encompassing a pivotal responsibility in preventing complications stemming from post-infectious diseases.

Vaccine hesitancy and knowledge regarding maternal immunization among reproductive age women in central Italy: a cross sectional study

Background

Vaccination in pregnancy offers protection to the mother and the newborn. In Italy, influenza, pertussis, and COVID-19 vaccinations are recommended in pregnancy, but vaccination coverage is still far from the National Immunization Plan goals. We aimed to assess knowledge and attitude on maternal immunization in two groups of Italian women, in pregnancy and in reproductive age (non pregnant).

Methods

A cross sectional study on Italian childbearing age women gathering information on their knowledge on maternal immunization and attitudes to receiving influenza and pertussis vaccines in pregnancy was carried out at the University of Rome Tor Vergata, between September 2019 and February 2020. Logistic and multinomial regressions were chosen as statistical tests for our analysis.

Results

1,031 women participated in the survey by answering the questionnaire. Out of these, 553 (53.6%) women were pregnant, and 478 (46.4%) were in the reproductive age. 37% (204/553) of pregnant women and 41% (198/476) of non pregnant women are aware of the existence of an immunization plan for pregnant women in Italy. The group with age between 20 and 30, for both pregnant women and women in the reproductive age, has a better knowledge of vaccination in pregnancy. Working status is a variable associated with more awareness about vaccination during pregnancy only for pregnant women (OR = 2.34, p < 0.00001). Educational status, trimester of pregnancy and knowledge on the topic are associated with vaccine hesitancy in our multivariate analysis for pregnant women. In the reproductive age group women who had a previous pregnancy are more likely to be hesitant towards vaccination in pregnancy, on the other hand the one with a higher knowledge and educational status are more likely to get vaccinated.

Conclusions

The study highlights the persistent vaccine hesitancy among Italian women of reproductive age and pregnant women. Despite healthcare providers being identified as a reliable source of information, their recommendations alone are insufficient to overcome vaccine hesitancy. Factors such as employment status, educational level, pregnancy trimester, and knowledge about vaccinations during pregnancy influence vaccine hesitancy. Tailored educational interventions and communication campaigns targeting these areas can help reduce vaccine hesitancy and promote maternal immunization.

Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy During the Perinatal Period

Nurses play a significant role in addressing vaccine hesitancy, encouraging immunizations, and understanding the evidence base that supports immunization recommendations.

COVID-19 vaccine decision-making among pregnant and lactating women in Bangladesh

Pregnant and lactating women's vaccine decision-making process is influenced by many factors. Pregnant women were at increased risk for severe disease and poor health outcomes from COVID-19 at various time points during the pandemic. COVID-19 vaccines have been found to be safe and protective during pregnancy and while breastfeeding. In this study, we sought to examine key factors that informed the decision-making process among pregnant and lactating women in Bangladesh. We conducted 24 in-depth interviews, with 12 pregnant and 12 lactating women. These women were from three communities in Bangladesh: one urban community, and two rural communities. We used a grounded theory approach to identify emerging themes and organized emerging themes using a socio-ecological model. The socio-ecological model suggests that individuals are influenced by many levels, including individual-level influences, interpersonal-level influences, health care system-level influences, and policy-level influences. We found key factors at each socio-ecological level that influenced the decision-making process of pregnant and lactating women, including perceived benefits of vaccines and vaccine safety (individual-level), the influence of husbands and peers (interpersonal-level), health care provider recommendations and vaccine eligibility (health care system-level), and vaccine mandates (policy-level). As vaccination can reduce the effect of COVID-19 disease in mothers, infants, and unborn children, targeting critical factors that inform the decision-making process is paramount for improving vaccine acceptance. We hope the results of this study will inform vaccine acceptance efforts to ensure that pregnant and lactating women take advantage of this life-saving intervention.

The Interplay of Perceived Risks and Benefits in Deciding to Become Vaccinated against COVID-19 While Pregnant or Breastfeeding: A Cross-Sectional Study in Italy

The present study examined the role of the perception of risks and benefits for the mother and her babies in deciding about the COVID-19 vaccination. In this cross-sectional study, five hypotheses were tested using data from a convenience sample of Italian pregnant and/or breastfeeding women (N = 1104, July-September 2021). A logistic regression model estimated the influence of the predictors on the reported behavior, and a beta regression model was used to evaluate which factors influenced the willingness to become vaccinated among unvaccinated women. The COVID-19 vaccination overall risks/benefits tradeoff was highly predictive of both behavior and intention. Ceteris paribus, an increase in the perception of risks for the baby weighed more against vaccination than a similar increase in the perception of risks for the mother. Additionally, pregnant women resulted in being less likely (or willing) to be vaccinated in their status than breastfeeding women, but they were equally accepting of vaccination if they were not pregnant. COVID-19 risk perception predicted intention to become vaccinated, but not behavior. In conclusion, the overall risks/benefits tradeoff is key in predicting vaccination behavior and intention, but the concerns for the baby weigh more than those for the mother in the decision, shedding light on this previously neglected aspect.

Determinants of Vaccination and Willingness to Vaccinate against COVID-19 among Pregnant and Postpartum Women during the Third Wave of the Pandemic: A European Multinational Cross-Sectional Survey

With COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy at around 50% in the obstetric population, it is critical to identify which women should be addressed and how. Our study aimed to assess COVID-19 vaccination willingness among pregnant and postpartum women in Europe and to investigate associated determinants. This study was a cross-sectional, web-based survey conducted in Belgium, Norway, Switzerland, The Netherlands, and United Kingdom (UK) in June-August 2021. Among 3194 pregnant women, the proportions of women vaccinated or willing to be vaccinated ranged from 80.5% in Belgium to 21.5% in Norway. The associated characteristics were country of residence, chronic illness, history of flu vaccine, trimester of pregnancy, belief that COVID-19 is more severe during pregnancy, and belief that the COVID-19 vaccine is effective and safe during pregnancy. Among 1659 postpartum women, the proportions of women vaccinated or willing to be vaccinated ranged from 86.0% in the UK to 58.6% in Switzerland. The associated determinants were country of residence, chronic illness, history of flu vaccine, breastfeeding, and belief that the COVID-19 vaccine is safe during breastfeeding. Vaccine hesitancy in the obstetric population depends on medical history and especially on the opinion that the vaccine is safe and on the country of residence.

Vaccine intention and hesitancy among Australian women who are currently pregnant or have recently given birth: the Birth in the Time of COVID-19 (BITTOC) national online survey

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination, and factors associated with vaccination intention and hesitancy in pregnant and postnatal women in Australia.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A national online survey was conducted over 6 months between 31 August 2021 and 1 March 2022 and responses to vaccination status were categorised as: 'vaccinated', 'vaccine intended' and 'vaccine hesitant'. The data were weighted to reflect the proportion of women of reproductive age. Potential confounding variables were examined using multinomial logistic regression analyses, and all comparisons were made against vaccinated pregnant and postnatal women.

PARTICIPANTS

2140 women responded to the survey (838 pregnant; 1302 recently post partum).

RESULTS

Amongst pregnant women, 586 (69.9%) were vaccinated, 166 (19.8%) indicated intention and 86 (10.3%) were hesitant. In postnatal women, this was 1060 (81.4%), 143 (11.0%) and 99 (7.6%), respectively. Only 52 (6.2%) of pregnant women stated never wanting a COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine hesitancy increased over time, and for pregnant women was associated with: living in a state other than New South Wales (NSW) (Adjusted Relative Risk (ARR) 2.77, 95%CI: 1.68-4.56 for vaccine intention and ARR=3.31, 95%CI: 1.52-7.20 for vaccine hesitancy), younger age <30 years, not having a university education, income <80K AUD, gestation <28 weeks, having no pregnancy risk factors, and being less satisfied with life (ARR=2.20, 95%CI: 1.04-4.65 for vaccine intention and ARR=2.53, 95%CI: 1.02-6.25 for vaccine hesitancy) . For postnatal women: living in a state other than NSW or Victoria, income <80K AUD and having private obstetric care (ARR=2.06, 95%CI: 1.23-3.46) were significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Around 1 in 10 pregnant women and just over 1 in 13 postnatal women reported vaccine hesitancy in this Australian survey, and hesitancy was higher in the latter 3-month period. Tailored messages to younger mothers and those from lower-middle socioeconomic groups, alongside advice from midwives and obstetricians, could help to reduce hesitancy among pregnant and postnatal women. Financial incentives may help to facilitate COVID-19 vaccine uptake. A real-time surveillance system and additional pregnancy fields added to the Australian immunisation register would support the safety monitoring of multiple vaccines in pregnancy and may build confidence.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Breastfeeding Mothers in Kahta District, Turkey

We aimed to determine the attitudes and behaviors of breastfeeding mothers regarding the vaccine by examining their knowledge of the COVID-19 virus vaccine and their hesitations about it. The research is a cross-sectional and descriptive study conducted in the Kahta district of Adıyaman, a southeastern province in Turkey, between January and May 2022. The study population consisted of 405 mothers who applied to the Kahta State Hospital Pediatrics outpatient clinic. A questionnaire form was used as a data collection tool, and a consent form was obtained from the participants. The vaccination rate (89%) of those who graduated from high school and above was significantly higher than that of those who graduated from secondary school or below (77.7%). As the economic situation worsened, the vaccination rate decreased. The vaccination rate (85.7%) of mothers whose breastfed child was 0-6 months old was found to be significantly higher than that of those with 7-24-month-olds (76.4%) (p:0.02). The rate of being vaccinated (73.3%) of those who had a new type of COVID-19 virus infection was significantly lower than the rate of being vaccinated (86.3%) of those who did not have a COVID-19 virus infection. The vaccination rate of those who received information from their family doctor and the internet was higher than that of those who received information from radio/TV and people around. The rate of mothers thinking babies should stop breastfeeding who graduated from secondary school or below was higher (53.2%) than the rate of mothers who graduated from high school or above (30.2%) to be vaccinated against the COVID-19 virus. To eliminate the hesitancy about vaccination in mothers, it is necessary to inform and educate the whole society correctly, starting with families with low education and economic levels.

Assessing Doubts, Knowledge, and Service Appreciation among Pregnant Women Who Received the COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Research Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Study

The COVID-19 pandemic is considered one of the deadliest pandemics in history. Pregnant women are more susceptible to developing serious diseases during COVID-19 than their non-pregnant peers. Pregnant women often express doubt about accepting the vaccination, especially in regard to their security and safety. This study aims to investigate the appreciation of the vaccination offer, and if there are any determinants impacting vaccine hesitancy. A questionnaire was administered to a sample of pregnant women who had just received their immunization against COVID-19 at the vaccination service of a teaching hospital in Rome, from October 2021 to March 2022. A high appreciation of the vaccination services was found, both for the logistic organization and the healthcare personnel, with mean scores above 4 out of 5. The degree of pre-vaccinal doubt was low (41%) or medium (48%) for the largest part of the sample, while the degree of COVID-19 vaccine knowledge was high for 91% of the participants. Physicians were the most decisive information source for the vaccination choice. Our results highlighted that a supportive approach could increase appreciation and improve the setting of vaccinations. Healthcare professionals should aim for a more comprehensive and integrated role of all figures.

COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy in women with systemic lupus erythematosus

COVID-19 vaccination has been shown to be safe in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but data on vaccine-associated adverse events (AEs) during the antenatal and lactation period are scarce or lacking. We investigated COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs in pregnant SLE patients from the COVAD study, a global esurvey involving 157 collaborators from 106 countries. A total of 9201 complete responses were extracted. Among 6787 (73.8%) women, we identified 70 (1.1%) who were exposed to at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose during pregnancy, 11 with SLE. Delayed onset (>7 days) vaccine-related AEs were triangulated with disease activity, treatment changes due to flare after vaccination, and COVID-19 infections in vaccinated pregnant women. Health-related quality of life and physical function was recorded using PROMIS. Age of patients ranged from 28 to 39 years; 5/11 women were of Asian origin. None of these patients reported major vaccine AEs or change in the status of their autoimmune disease. Although minor AEs were common, they did not impair daily functioning, and the symptoms resolved after a median of 3 (IQR: 2.5-5.0) days. All patients reported good to excellent health status. No adverse pregnancy outcomes were reported. Importantly, none of the patients reported thrombotic events post-vaccination, which provides reassurance in a patient population with a high risk for cardiovascular comorbidity and thrombosis, especially in the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies or the antiphospholipid syndrome, a considerable portion of SLE patients. Our findings provide reassurance and can contribute to informed decisions regarding vaccination in patients with SLE and high-risk pregnancies due to their background autoimmune disease. The risk/benefit ratio of COVID-19 vaccination appears favourable, with vaccines both providing passive immunisation to the fetus and active immunisation to the mother with no signals of exacerbation of the mother's autoimmune disease.

Global Cross-Sectional Study Evaluating the Attitudes towards a COVID-19 Vaccine in Pregnant and Postpartum Women

Pregnant and postpartum women have an increased risk of severe complications from COVID-19. Many clinical guidelines recommend vaccination of these populations, and it is therefore critical to understand their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey in November 2020 of currently pregnant and ≤1-year postpartum women in Brazil, India, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US) that assessed their openness to COVID-19 vaccines and reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to evaluate openness to receiving a vaccine. Out of 2010 respondents, 67% were open to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine themselves. Among pregnant and postpartum participants, 72% and 57% were willing to receive a vaccine, respectively. Vaccine openness varied significantly by country: India (87%), Brazil (71%), UK (59%), and US (52%). Across all participants, among the 33% who were unsure/not open to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, the most common reason cited was safety/side effect concerns (51%). Participants were similarly open to their children/other family members receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. Presence of a comorbidity, a positive COVID-19 test result, and pregnancy were all significantly associated with positive vaccine acceptance. Targeted outreach to address pregnant and postpartum women's concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine is needed.

COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Hesitancy among Pregnant and Lactating Women in Saudi Arabia

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant and breastfeeding women comprise a high-risk group for the development of severe COVID-19. Therefore, vaccination is highly recommended for perinatal women; however, vaccination levels for this group remain inadequate. This study explores the percentage of COVID-19 vaccination among Saudi pregnant and lactating women, as well as their attitudes toward it.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey on a sample of Saudi pregnant and breastfeeding women. The study included pregnant and lactating women.

RESULTS

The percentage of COVID-19 vaccine uptake was 78.2%. A total of 45 (21.8%) out of 206 women did not receive the vaccine. The overall vaccine hesitancy was 21.8%. Breastfeeding women were 2.86 more likely not to receive the vaccine as compared to pregnant women. Being a mother of over five children increased the vaccine uptake among our participating women (n = 20, 90%; p < 0.01). The majority of the subjects had taken the Pfizer vaccine (81.98%, 132/161). The availability of the COVID-19 vaccine was the most common factor for choosing a particular vaccine. Protection from infection (60.2%, 97/161) was reported as the main driver for vaccine uptake. The most common reason perceived for delaying COVID-19 vaccination was being worried about the side effects (176, 85.44%) on one's own body and the effects on the unborn child (130, 63.1%).

CONCLUSION

We uncovered high levels of hesitancy, primarily induced by concerns about adverse effects and social media-related misinformation. These high levels of vaccine uptake are likely due to the large-scale obligatory vaccination program provided in Saudi Arabia, which was well-structured and far reaching. Our results provide further support for the so-called "protection motivation theory" in boosting vaccine acceptance. Counseling and educating pregnant and breastfeeding women about COVID-19 vaccination is the need of the hour.

Breastfeeding women's attitudes towards and acceptance and rejection of COVID-19 vaccination: Implementation research

OBJECTIVE

There are few data on lactating women's concerns about receiving COVID-19 vaccination during breastfeeding. This research investigated breastfeeding women's attitudes towards and acceptance or rejection of vaccination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, descriptive, implementation study was conducted in the postpartum ward of Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. In Phase I, 40 breastfeeding women in the postpartum ward at Siriraj Hospital who were willing to participate in the study were interviewed. Phase II comprised questionnaire development and data validation. The combined multiple choice and scaling questionnaires designed based on the results from comprehensive interviews of phase I were used in the study. The questionnaire was administered to 400 participants in Phase III.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Breastfeeding women's attitudes towards and acceptance and rejection of COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

The vast majority of participants (372/400 [93.0 %]) were vaccinated predelivery. Most of the subgroup of women rejecting vaccination while breastfeeding were unsure whether too frequent vaccination would harm their unborn child (52/99 [52.5 %]; crude odds ratio [cOR], 6.50; 95 % CI, 1.47-28.68; P < 0.001). The level of immunity to the COVID-19 virus did not influence their vaccination decisions (19/99 [19.2 %]; cOR, 2.38; 95 % CI, 1.26-4.47; P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis found a significant association for women agreeing with the proposition that vaccination during pregnancy should not be performed (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.83; 95 % CI, 1.41-16.57; P = 0.043). Most women who rejected vaccination knew its benefits (aOR, 31.84; 95 % CI, 7.16-141.65; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Breastfeeding women generally believed that vaccines reduce infection and disease severity. The women's COVID-19 immunity levels did not affect their acceptance or rejection of vaccination. Some mothers rejected vaccination because of concerns about possible harm to them or their newborns.

Prerequisite for COVID-19 Prediction: A Review on Factors Affecting the Infection Rate

Since the year 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as the dominant topic of discussion in the public and research domains. Intensive research has been carried out on several aspects of COVID-19, including vaccines, its transmission mechanism, detection of COVID-19 infection, and its infection rate and factors. The awareness of the public related to the COVID-19 infection factors enables the public to adhere to the standard operating procedures, while a full elucidation on the correlation of different factors to the infection rate facilitates effective measures to minimize the risk of COVID-19 infection by policy makers and enforcers. Hence, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive and analytical review of different factors affecting the COVID-19 infection rate. Furthermore, this review analyses factors which directly and indirectly affect the COVID-19 infection risk, such as physical distance, ventilation, face masks, meteorological factor, socioeconomic factor, vaccination, host factor, SARS-CoV-2 variants, and the availability of COVID-19 testing. Critical analysis was performed for the different factors by providing quantitative and qualitative studies. Lastly, the challenges of correlating each infection risk factor to the predicted risk of COVID-19 infection are discussed, and recommendations for further research works and interventions are outlined.

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in Italian healthcare workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

As for other vaccines, vaccination hesitancy may be a determining factor in the success (or otherwise) of the COVID-19 immunization campaign in healthcare workers (HCWs).

AREAS COVERED

To estimate the proportion of HCWs in Italy who expressed COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, we conducted a systematic review of the relevant literature and a meta-analysis. Determinants of vaccine compliance and options suggested by these studies to address vaccine hesitancy among HCWs were also analyzed. Seventeen studies were included in the meta-analysis and systematic review, selected from scientific articles available in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus databases between January 1, 2020 and January 25, 2022. The vaccine hesitancy rate among HCWs was 13.1% (95%CI: 6.9-20.9%). The vaccine hesitancy rate among HCWs investigated before and during the vaccination campaign was 18.2% (95%CI=12.8-24.2%) and 8.9% (95%CI=3.4-16.6%), respectively. That main reasons for vaccine hesitation were lack of information about vaccination, opinion that the vaccine is unsafe, and fear of adverse events.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite strategies to achieve a greater willingness to immunize in this category, mandatory vaccination appears to be one of the most important measures that can guarantee the protection of HCWs and the patients they care for.