Characterizing the vaccine knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and intentions of pregnant women in Georgia and Colorado

A latent class analysis of factors influencing preferences for infant respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) preventives among pregnant people in the United States

A maternal vaccine and long-acting monoclonal antibody (mAb) were recently approved to protect infants against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). We identified subgroups of pregnant people with different preferences for RSV preventives and respondent characteristics associated with subgroup membership. An online survey, including a discrete choice experiment (DCE), was conducted among US pregnant people. RSV preventive attributes included effectiveness, duration of protection during RSV season, injection recipient/timing, preventive type (vaccine or mAb), and type of visit required to receive injection. In DCE choice tasks, pregnant people selected between two hypothetical preventive profiles with varying attribute-levels and a no-preventive option. Logistic regression, including latent class analysis (LCA), was used to analyze the data. Of 992 pregnant people (mean age: 30.0 years), 60.3% were expecting their second/later birth. LCA identified three preference subgroups: 'Effectiveness' (preventive choice mostly driven by increases in effectiveness; 51.4% class membership probability), 'Season' (preventive choice mostly driven by improvement in duration of protection during the RSV season; 39.2% class membership probability), and 'No Preventive' (frequently chose no-preventive option; 9.4% class membership probability). 'Effectiveness' and 'Season' preferred maternal vaccine over mAb; mAb was preferred by 'No Preventive.' Perceiving RSV as serious for infants, higher health literacy, and lower household income were associated with 'Effectiveness.' Perceiving RSV as serious for pregnant people was associated with 'Season.' Perceiving RSV to not be serious for pregnant people and not being employed were associated with 'No Preventive.' Subgroups of pregnant people vary in preferences for RSV preventives. Most pregnant people preferred a maternal vaccine, although some may be more willing to accept alternative preventive options.

Healthcare Providers' and Pregnant People's Preferences for a Preventive to Protect Infants from Serious Illness Due to Respiratory Syncytial Virus

We assessed the impact of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) preventive characteristics on the intentions of pregnant people and healthcare providers (HCPs) to protect infants with a maternal vaccine or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Pregnant people and HCPs who treated pregnant people and/or infants were recruited via convenience sample from a general research panel to complete a cross-sectional, web-based survey, including a discrete choice experiment (DCE) wherein respondents chose between hypothetical RSV preventive profiles varying on five attributes (effectiveness, preventive type [maternal vaccine vs. mAb], injection recipient/timing, type of medical visit required to receive the injection, and duration of protection during RSV season) and a no-preventive option. A best-worst scaling (BWS) exercise was included to explore the impact of additional attributes on preventive preferences. Data were collected between October and November 2022. Attribute-level preference weights and relative importance (RI) were estimated. Overall, 992 pregnant people and 310 HCPs participated. A preventive (vs. none) was chosen 89.2% (pregnant people) and 96.0% (HCPs) of the time (DCE). Effectiveness was most important to preventive choice for pregnant people (RI = 48.0%) and HCPs (RI = 41.7%); all else equal, pregnant people (RI = 5.5%) and HCPs (RI = 7.2%) preferred the maternal vaccine over mAbs, although preventive type had limited influence on choice. Longer protection, protection starting at birth or the beginning of RSV season, and use for both pre-term and full-term babies were ranked highest in importance (BWS). Pregnant people and HCPs strongly preferred a preventive to protect infants against RSV (vs. none), underscoring the need to incorporate RSV preventives into routine care.

Impact of the surge of COVID-19 Omicron outbreak on the intention of seasonal influenza vaccination in Hong Kong: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the intention of influenza vaccination during the Omicron pandemic of COVID-19 via a structured cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in 1,813 Hong Kong quota-sampled adults between March and September 2022, when Hong Kong was experiencing an outbreak of Omicron infections. Questions included self-reported medical and vaccination history, and perceptions and intention of influenza vaccine. A multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify significant factors associated with the vaccination intention.

RESULTS

Of the 1,813 participants, 25.8% (95% CI: 23.8%-27.8%) perceived positive impact of COVID-19 pandemic on their influenza vaccine willingness, which was more than two times the proportion of those who feel less likely to take influenza vaccine (11.5%, 95% CI: 10.1%-13.1%). Compared with males, females were less likely to receive influenza vaccine for 2022-23 influenza seasons (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.52-0.95, p = 0.023) and had less impact on their influenza vaccine willingness (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.59-0.99, p = 0.043). Participants older than 60 years old were related to a less positive impact compared with the youngers (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.30-0.93, p = 0.028). Participants with experience of influenza vaccine uptake also showed a higher intention of seasonal influenza vaccination.

CONCLUSION

The public intention of influenza vaccine has been raised in Hong Kong. With the identified subgroups (e.g., female and elderly) and reasons for being reluctant to the influenza vaccination, policy makers should rectify common misperceptions in order to increase influenza vaccination coverage at the post COVID-19 phase.

COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, values, intentions: US parents for their children, September 2021

OBJECTIVES

To compare vaccine-related attitudes and values of parents of children 2-17 years old to other adults, examine intentions to vaccinate their children, and identify factors associated with intending to vaccinate children.

METHODS

A nationally representative survey was conducted in September 2021 (just before the EUA for children 5-11 years old) using Ipsos KnowledgePanel, a probability-based web panel. The survey measured COVID-19 vaccination status, intentions, attitudes, values, and trust in public health authorities among US adults. Scale response options to survey items were dichotomized, and cross-tabulations and logistic regressions were performed.

RESULTS

Parents had lower odds of reporting being vaccinated against COVID-19 than other adults even after adjusting for associated sociodemographic characteristics such as age (aOR: 0.66; 95 %CI: 0.50-0.87). The most prevalent parental concerns about COVID-19 vaccines included the speed of their development (88 %), potential side effects (78 %), suspicion of government (77 %), and suspicion of pharmaceutical companies (72 %). Fewer than half (42 %) of parents intended to vaccinate their children 5-11 years old, while 38 % were uncertain and 20 % were unlikely to ever vaccinate their children. Vaccinated parents had higher odds than unvaccinated parents of intending to vaccinate their children (OR: 675.51; 95 %CI: 106.46-4286.12). Discussions with healthcare providers who encouraged COVID-19 vaccination were positively associated with intent to vaccinate children (OR: 11.29; 95 %CI: 2.60-49.02).

CONCLUSIONS

We found parental vaccination and conversations with providers were positively associated with intent to vaccinate children. Decisions about childhood vaccination need to be supported by healthcare providers and a public health system that makes vaccine access and related information equitable and accessible. Vaccination-related decision making should be guided by healthcare providers and provide information about safety and risk to children.

NICU Visitation Time and Adherence to Safe Sleep Practices Among Mothers of Very Preterm Infants

BACKGROUND

Sleep-associated infant death is the leading cause of postneonatal mortality in the United States. Preterm infants are at higher risk for sleep-associated death, but maternal adherence to safe sleep practices is lower than for mothers of full-term infants. Data are lacking on whether maternal neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) visitation time impacts safe sleep compliance after hospital discharge.

PURPOSE

For mothers of preterm infants, to investigate the association of time days per week spent in the NICU and adherence to safe sleep practices after discharge.

METHODS

A prospective observational study of 109 mothers with infants born at less than 32 weeks from 4 Colorado NICUs who completed a survey at 6 weeks after discharge about infant sleep practices. Maternal time spent in the NICU was defined as the average number of days spent in the NICU per week of infant hospitalization, as documented in the electronic medical record. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the relationship between time in the NICU and safe sleep adherence. Covariates included maternal/infant characteristics significant at P < .2 level in bivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Predictors of compliance with all safe infant sleep practices included public/no insurance compared with private insurance (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.96), some college/associate-level education versus bachelor's degree (AOR 5.88; 95% CI 1.21-28.67), and depression/anxiety symptoms (AOR 0.37; 95% CI 0.14-0.97). NICU visitation days was not associated with adherence to safe sleep practices.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH

Maternal visitation days was not associated with adherence to safe infant sleep practices after discharge, highlighting the need to identify barriers and facilitators to engaging families about SUID risk-reducing behaviors.

Attitudes and Values of US Adults Not Yet Up-to-Date on COVID-19 Vaccines in September 2022

(1) Background: Periodic resurgences in COVID-19 due to more contagious variants highlight the need to increase coverage of booster doses. (2) Methods: Our September 2022 nationally representative survey of US adults measured COVID-19 vaccination status, intentions, attitudes, values, and confidence in information sources. (3) Findings: Although 85% of the weighted sample reported receiving at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, only 63% reported being up-to-date on COVID-19 vaccines (e.g., received a booster dose). Only 12% of those not yet up-to-date indicated they were likely to get up-to-date as soon as possible, whereas 42% were unlikely to ever get up-to-date, and 46% were still uncertain. Most of those not up-to-date on their COVID-19 vaccines were under 45 years of age (58%), without a bachelor's degree (76%), making under $75,000 annually (53%), and Republican or Independent (82%). Prevalent concerns about COVID-19 vaccines among those uncertain about getting up-to-date included: potential side effects that have not been figured out yet (88%), speed of development (77%), newness (75%), ingredients (69%), drug companies making money (67%), allergic reactions (65%), and experimenting on people (63%). (4) Conclusions: Nearly half of adults not yet up-to-date on COVID-19 vaccines were uncertain about doing so, indicating an opportunity to support their decision-making.

A Descriptive Study of Maternal Vaccination Uptake, Attitudes, and Beliefs in Pregnancy Among Persons Delivering at an Urban Safety Net Hospital

Objective

To estimate uptake of influenza, tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap), and COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy and describe vaccine attitudes and beliefs among predominantly racial and ethnic minority individuals delivering at a publicly funded hospital.

Methods

We collected survey and electronic medical record data for English-speaking postpartum individuals who delivered a live-born infant from July 7, 2022, through August 21, 2022, and agreed to participate in our study. The 58-item survey included questions about general vaccine attitudes and beliefs as well as vaccine-specific questions. We calculated rates of influenza, Tdap, and COVID-19 vaccinations and compared distributions of survey responses by number (no vaccines, one vaccine, or two or three of the recommended vaccines) and type of vaccines received during pregnancy.

Results

Of the 231 eligible individuals, 125 (54.1%) agreed to participate. Rates of influenza, Tdap, and COVID-19 vaccination were 18.4%, 48.0%, and 5.6% respectively. A total of 61 (48.8%) did not receive any recommended vaccines during pregnancy, 40 (32.0%) received one vaccine, and 24 (19.0%) received two or three vaccines. Approximately 66.1% of the no vaccine group, 81.6% of the one vaccine group, and 87.5% of the two or three vaccine group strongly agreed or agreed that they trusted the vaccine information provided by their obstetrician or midwife. While most (>69.2%) agreed that the vaccine-preventable diseases were dangerous for pregnant women, only 24.0%, 29.3%, and 40.3% agreed that they were worried about getting influenza, whooping cough, or COVID-19, respectively, while pregnant.

Discussion

Vaccine uptake in our population was low and may be due, in part, to low perceived susceptibility to vaccine-preventable diseases. Obstetricians and midwives were trusted sources of vaccine information, suggesting that enhanced communication strategies could be critical for addressing maternal vaccine hesitancy, particularly in communities of color justifiably affected by medical mistrust.

Maternal Vaccination and Vaccine Hesitancy

The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology recommends influenza vaccine annually, Tdap with each pregnancy, and COVID-19 vaccine for those not previously vaccinated or who are due for boosters. The influenza and COVID-19 vaccines are safe during pregnancy and are effective in reducing morbidity in both the pregnant person and infant. The Tdap vaccine is given primarily to protect the newborn from pertussis through transplacental antibody transfer. Methods to enhance vaccination rates include stocking and giving vaccines in the obstetric office, recommending eligible vaccines at each visit, and focusing on the health of the infant in conversations with patients.

Association Between Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy and Infant Influenza Vaccination

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and infant influenza vaccination.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of individuals aged 15-49 years who were continually privately insured from August 2017 to May 2019 and had singleton live births between September 2017 and February 2018 and their infants. Influenza vaccination coverage was assessed for pregnant people during the 2017-2018 influenza season and for their infants during the 2018-2019 season using the 2017-2019 MarketScan data. Multivariate log-binomial regressions were conducted to examine the association between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and infant influenza vaccination.

RESULTS

Of the 34,919 pregnant people in this analysis, 14,168 (40.6%) received influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Of the infants born to people vaccinated during pregnancy, 90.0% received at least one dose of influenza vaccine during the 2018-2019 season and 75.5% received at least two doses. Of the infants born to those not vaccinated during pregnancy, 66.3% received at least one dose of influenza vaccine and 51.8% received at least two doses. At-least-one-dose coverage was 35.7% higher (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.34, 95% CI 1.33-1.36) and at-least-two-dose coverage was 45.8% higher (aRR 1.43, 95% CI 1.41-1.46) for infants born to people who received influenza vaccination during pregnancy compared with infants born to people who did not.

CONCLUSION

Our results show a positive and statistically significant relationship between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and infant influenza vaccination status in their first season eligible for vaccination. Interventions to increase influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant people may also increase infant influenza vaccination coverage, offering greater protection against serious complications of influenza in both vulnerable populations.

Prevalence and Predictors of Pediatric COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance

OBJECTIVE

As pediatric COVID-19 vaccine eligibility expands, understanding predictors of vaccine intent is critical to effectively address parental concerns. Objectives included: (1) Evaluate maternal COVID-19 vaccine intent for child(ren) and associated predictors of stated intent; (2) Describe attitudes related to hypothetical vaccination policies; (3) Summarize themes associated with intention to vaccinate child(ren) for COVID-19.

STUDY DESIGN

Mothers enrolled in Heath eMoms, a longitudinal survey project, were recruited for this electronic COVID-19 survey. Chi-square analysis was used to compare proportions of respondent characteristics based on vaccination intent. Population survey logistic regression was used for multivariable modeling to assess the independent association between vaccine intent and demographics.

RESULTS

The response rate was 65.3% (n = 1884); 44.2% would choose vaccination, 20.3% would not choose vaccination, and 35.5% are unsure whether to have their child(ren) vaccinated for COVID-19. Black mothers (AOR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13, 0.54), respondents with less than high school education (AOR 0.26, 95% 0.12, 0.56) and those in rural areas (AOR 0.28, 95% CI 0.16, 0.48) were less likely to choose vaccination. Commonly cited reasons for vaccine hesitancy include the belief that the vaccine was not tested enough, is not safe, and there are concerns regarding its side effects.

CONCLUSION

Over 50% of respondents do not intend or are unsure about their intent to vaccinate their child(ren) for COVID-19 with variability noted by demographics. Opportunities exist for perinatal and pediatric providers to educate pregnant people, parents, and caregivers with a focus on addressing concerns regarding vaccine safety and efficacy.

KEY POINTS

· COVID-19 vaccination rates remain suboptimal, especially in the pediatric population, with variation across states.. · We found that the prevalence of vaccine acceptance for young children is low.. · We highlight opportunities for providers to educate parents, focusing on addressing vaccine safety and efficacy..

Motivational interviewing for maternal Immunizations: Intervention development

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Vaccine uptake during pregnancy remains low. Our objectives were to describe 1) development and adaptation of a clinician communication training intervention for maternal immunizations and 2) obstetrics and gynecology (ob-gyn) clinician and staff perspectives on the intervention and fit for the prenatal care context.

METHODS

Design of the Motivational Interviewing for Maternal Immunizations (MI4MI) intervention was based on similar communication training interventions for pediatric settings and included presumptive initiation of vaccine recommendations ("You're due for two vaccines today") combined with motivational interviewing (MI) for hesitant patients. Interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with ob-gyn clinicians and staff in five Colorado clinics including settings with obstetric physicians, certified nurse midwives (CNMs), and clinician-trainees. Participants were asked about adapting training to the ob-gyn setting and their implementation experiences. Feedback was incorporated through iterative changes to training components.

RESULTS

Interview and focus group discussion results from participants before (n = 3), during (n = 11) and after (n = 25) implementation guided intervention development and adaptation. Three virtual, asynchronous training components were created: a video and two interactive modules. This virtual format was favored due to challenges attending group meetings; however, participants noted opportunities to practice skills through role-play were lacking. Training modules were adapted to include common challenging vaccine conversations and live-action videos. Participants liked interactive training components and use of adult learning strategies. Some participants initially resisted the presumptive approach but later found it useful after applying it in their practices. Overall, participants reported that MI4MI training fit well with the prenatal context and recommended more inclusion of non-clinician staff.

CONCLUSIONS

MI4MI training was viewed as relevant and useful for ob-gyn clinicians and staff. Suggestions included making training more interactive, and including more complex scenarios and non-clinician staff.

MomsTalkShots, tailored educational app, improves vaccine attitudes: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Many pregnant women and parents have concerns about vaccines. This analysis examined the impact of MomsTalkShots, an individually tailored educational application, on vaccine attitudes of pregnant women and mothers.

METHODS

MomsTalkShots was the patient-level component of a multi-level intervention to improve maternal and infant vaccine uptake that also included provider- and practice-level interventions. The impact of these interventions was studied using a two-by-two factorial design, randomizing at both the patient- and the practice-level. Study staff recruited pregnant women from a diverse set of prenatal care practices in Colorado and Georgia between June 2017 and July 2018. All participants (n = 2087) received a baseline survey of maternal and infant vaccine intentions and attitudes, and two follow-up surveys at least 1 month and 1 year after their infant's birth, respectively. Half of participants (n = 1041) were randomly assigned to receive educational videos through MomsTalkShots, algorithmically tailored to their vaccine intentions, attitudes, and demographics. Since the practice/provider intervention did not appear impactful, this analysis focused on MomsTalkShots regardless of the practice/provider intervention.

RESULTS

By 1 month post-birth, MomsTalkShots increased perceived risk of maternal influenza disease (61% among MomsTalkShots recipients vs 55% among controls; Odds Ratio: 1.61, 95% Confidence Interval: 1.23-2.09), confidence in influenza vaccine efficacy (73% vs 63%; OR: 1.97, 95%CI: 1.47-2.65), and perceived vaccine knowledge (55% vs 48%; OR: 1.39, 95%CI: 1.13-1.72). Among those intending not to vaccinate at baseline, MomsTalkShots increased perceived risk of maternal influenza disease (38% vs 32%; OR: 2.07, 95%CI: 1.15-3.71) and confidence in influenza vaccine efficacy (44% vs 28%; OR: 2.62, 95%CI: 1.46-4.69). By 1 year post-birth, MomsTalkShots increased perceived vaccine knowledge (62% vs 50%; OR: 1.74, 95%CI: 1.36-2.24) and trust in vaccine information from obstetricians and pediatricians (64% vs 55%; OR: 1.53, 95%CI: 1.17-2.00). Among those uncertain about vaccinating at baseline, MomsTalkShots increased perceived vaccine knowledge (47% vs 12%; OR: 6.89, 95%CI: 1.52-31.25) and reduced infant vaccine safety concerns (71% vs 91%; OR: 0.24, 95%CI: 0.06-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

MomsTalkShots improved pregnant women's and mothers' knowledge and perceptions of maternal and infant vaccines and the diseases they prevent, and offers a scalable tool to address vaccine hesitancy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov on 13/09/2016 (registration number: NCT02898688).

A systematic review to determine the anti-vaccination thoughts of pregnant women and the reasons for not getting vaccinated

The aim of this study was to determine the anti-vaccination thoughts of pregnant women and the reasons for not getting vaccinated. In this study, data was obtained by retrospectively scanning the cross-sectional and qualitative studies published in the databases of 'PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCOhost, ULAKBİM and Google Scholar' in Turkish and English languages between 2011-2021. The PRISMA method was used in the preparation of the systematic review. In the studies reviewed, it was determined that the rate of pregnant women who were against the vaccine ranged from 6.2% to 98.6%, and the opinions of pregnant women against vaccination and the reasons for not getting vaccinated are presented under seven themes. The results of the study were considered important in terms of showing that quality and important studies were carried out in the literature on the subject and that the data were presented.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Today, with the global coronavirus pandemic, vaccines and their effects are on the agenda again. Especially in pregnant women, opposition to vaccination and not getting vaccinated have emerged for various reasons.What do the results of this study add? The anti-vaccine thoughts of the pregnant women and the reasons for not getting vaccinated were mostly as follows: insufficient level of knowledge, mistrust of vaccines, perception of low infection risk, misconceptions and beliefs about the safety, content, side effects and efficacy of vaccines, worry and fear about the side effects of vaccines, the thought that the vaccine will harm herself and the baby, causes arising from healthcare professionals, financial, temporal and logistical barriers.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Scientific studies that can provide comprehensive and strong evidence about vaccine hesitancy and its causes, methods of increasing social approval in vaccination, and solutions should be proposed in the light of these researches in the fight against vaccine rejection.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake and reasons for hesitancy among Canadian pregnant people: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Several vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been developed and approved at an unparalleled speed. Given that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are recommended to pregnant people, our aim was to quantify vaccination uptake, and describe vaccination hesitancy and behavioural attitudes surrounding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy in Canada.

METHODS

The CONCEPTION study is an ongoing international study started in June 2020, evaluating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health of pregnant people and their children. For this study, pregnant people recruited from Apr. 20, 2021, to Feb. 8, 2022, and residing in Canada were invited to complete a Web-based survey. In addition to all CONCEPTION variables, data on vaccine uptake as well as personal knowledge of COVID-19 severity in pregnancy and of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine safety and efficacy were collected. Marginal risk differences and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to assess determinants of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination during pregnancy.

RESULTS

From Apr. 20, 2021, to Feb. 8, 2022, 603 pregnant people were recruited and gave consent, of which 83.7% (n = 505) were vaccinated and 16.3% (n = 98) were not vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Uptake of the influenza vaccine in 2020/21 was a significant predictor of being vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 or intention to be vaccinated (marginal risk difference 3.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.0% to 3.3%, adjusted OR 4.43, 95% CI 2.32 to 9.25), and being employed (marginal risk difference 11.2%, 95% CI 10.6% to 11.9%, adjusted OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.35) increased the likelihood of being vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Self-assessed knowledge of COVID-19 severity and vaccine efficacy was not associated with vaccine uptake.

INTERPRETATION

Among the Canadian pregnant people who responded to this study, vaccine uptake against SARS-CoV-2 was high. However, our results underscore the importance of improving knowledge transfer about the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in pregnancy to guide vaccination efforts.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Maternal Mental Health during Pregnancy: A Comparison between Canada and China within the CONCEPTION Cohort

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal mental health has been described in Canada and China but no study has compared the two countries using the same standardized and validated instruments. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the impact of COVID-19 public health policies on maternal mental health between Canada and China, as we hypothesize that geographical factors and different COVID-19 policies are likely to influence maternal mental health. Pregnant persons >18 years old were recruited in Canada and China using a web-based strategy. All participants recruited between 26 June 2020 and 16 February 2021 were analyzed. Self-reported data included sociodemographic variables, COVID-19 experience and maternal mental health assessments (Edinburgh Perinatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Generalized Anxiety Disorders (GAD-7) scale, stress and satisfaction with life). Analyses were stratified by recruitment cohort, namely: Canada 1 (26 June 2020-10 October 2020), Canada 2 and China (11 October 2020-16 February 2021). Overall, 2423 participants were recruited, with 1804 participants within Canada 1, 135 within Canada 2 and 484 in China. The mean EDPS scores were 8.1 (SD, 5.1) in Canada 1, 8.1 (SD, 5.2) in Canada 2 and 7.7 (SD, 4.9) in China (p-value Canada 2/China: p = 0.005). The mean GAD-7 scores were 2.6 (SD, 2.9) in China, 4.3 (SD, 3.8) in Canada 1 (p < 0.001) and 5.8 (SD, 5.2) in Canada 2 (p < 0.001). When adjusting for stress and anxiety, being part of the Chinese cohort significantly increased the chances of having maternal depression by over threefold (adjusted OR 3.20, 95%CI 1.77-5.78). Canadian and Chinese participants reported depressive scores nearly double those of other crises and non-pandemic periods. Lockdowns and reopening periods have an important impact on levels of depression and anxiety among pregnant persons.

Understanding drivers of vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in Nigeria: A longitudinal study

Vaccine-preventable-diseases are major contributors to disease burden in Sub-Saharan Africa. There is dearth of knowledge on the drivers of childhood vaccine hesitancy in Nigeria and its impact on coverage. Although understudied, pregnant women are a particularly important vulnerable group and very relevant for childhood vaccination decisions. This study’s aims are to adapt Confidence, Complacency, Constraints, Calculation, and Collective Responsibility, also known as the 5C psychological antecedence scale for the Nigerian context and to measure predictors of intention to vaccinate among pregnant women (prenatal) and subsequent vaccination behavior (postnatal). It is a longitudinal study that used multi-stage sampling procedure. One healthcare facility was selected from each district in five regional clusters, from which 255 pregnant women were randomly drawn. A standardized questionnaire was used to collect relevant data, including the 5C and some additional variables. Multiple linear regression using backward elimination analysis was performed to identify intention at prenatal and behavior at postnatal. Pregnant women’s intention to vaccinate unborn children was lower if they were Muslims, had lower confidence in public health system, if husband approval was important, and if they believed in rumor. At postnatal, vaccination behavior was more likely to follow mothers’ religious beliefs, when confidence in vaccine effectiveness was high and when mothers felt responsible for the collective. However, everyday stress (constraints) related to less vaccination behavior, and intention did not predict actual vaccination behavior. The 5C scale needs revision before being widely used in Nigeria. Yet, it is a better tool for measuring vaccination behavior than intention.

Vaccine uptake and barriers to vaccination among at-risk adult populations in the US

To reduce morbidity and mortality associated with vaccine-preventable diseases (VPD), it is imperative that vaccination programs are implemented and prioritized throughout all stages of life across all populations. This study aimed to determine vaccine uptake and barriers to vaccination against VPDs among at-risk adult populations in the United States. We conducted a systematic literature review for articles published between January 2010 and June 2020 and identified 153 publications. The review identified 17 at-risk populations. Vaccine uptake was suboptimal among many populations, with factors including age, gender, and disease severity, associated with uptake. This review identified several barriers that impact vaccine uptake among at-risk populations, with concerns over safety, vaccine costs, lack of insurance, and lack of provider recommendation commonly reported across populations. Embracing a national life-course immunization framework that integrates developing policies, guidelines, and education would be a step to addressing these barriers.

Timing of Vaccine Decision-Making Among First-Time Parents

OBJECTIVE

Decreased childhood vaccination can lead to local outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease. In a pilot study from our group, 72% of parents of newborns reported initiating their vaccine decision-making for that child prior to conception. Since a sound understanding of the timing of parental vaccine decision-making is needed to direct educational efforts, we surveyed a national cohort of first-time parents to extend our preliminary findings.

METHODS

From March 2019 to March 2020, first-time parents of newborns in mother-baby units of the Better Outcomes through Research for Newborns (BORN) network completed the Vaccine Preference Development Survey (VPDS). The VPDS measures intent to vaccinate, timing of vaccine decision-making, and sources of influence. Univariate and multivariate analyses explored associations between intent to vaccinate and timing of vaccine decision-making with demographic variables.

RESULTS

Twenty-three sites provided surveys through site-specific nonrandom systemic sampling; 91% (1393/1524) of surveys were used in the analysis. Most parents planned to fully vaccinate (1191/1380, 86.3%) and started vaccine decision-making prior to conception (850/1378, 61.7%). Maternal age, race and ethnicity, relationship status, and education were all significantly associated with planning to fully vaccinate and preconception decision-making (P < .001). Preconception decision-making correlated strongly with intent to fully vaccinate (P < .001). Parents influenced by personal education, medical professionals, and family/friends were more likely to endorse preconception decision-making; those strongly influenced by internet/social media were less likely to allow all vaccines or start decision-making prior to conception.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine decision-making occurs preconception for most new parents. Initiating vaccine discussions during the birth hospitalization may be too late.

Parental vaccine hesitancy: scope, causes, and potential responses

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We reviewed the literature about parental vaccine hesitancy, focusing on publications from October 2019 to April 2021 to describe patterns and causes of hesitancy and interventions to address hesitancy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies expand understanding of the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy globally and highlight associated individual and contextual factors. Common concerns underlying hesitancy include uncertainty about the need for vaccination and questions about vaccine safety and efficacy. Sociodemographic factors associated with parental vaccine hesitancy vary across locations and contexts. Studies about psychology of hesitancy and how parents respond to interventions highlight the role of cognitive biases, personal values, and vaccination as a social contract or norm. Evidence-based strategies to address vaccine hesitancy include presumptive or announcement approaches to vaccine recommendations, motivational interviewing, and use of immunization delivery strategies like standing orders and reminder/recall programs. A smaller number of studies support use of social media and digital applications to improve vaccination intent. Strengthening school vaccine mandates can improve vaccination rates, but policy decisions must consider local context.

SUMMARY

Vaccine hesitancy remains a challenge for child health. Future work must include more interventional studies to address hesitancy and regular global surveillance of parental vaccine hesitancy and vaccine content on social media.

Determinants of influenza vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in Europe: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women are at high risk for severe influenza. However, maternal influenza vaccination uptake in most World Health Organization (WHO) European Region countries remains low, despite the presence of widespread national recommendations. An influenza vaccination reduces influenza-associated morbidity and mortality in pregnancy, as well as providing newborns with protection in their first months. Potential determinants of vaccine hesitancy need to be identified to develop strategies that can increase vaccine acceptance and uptake among pregnant women. The primary objective of the systematic review is to identify the individual determinants of influenza vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in Europe, and how to overcome the hesitancy.

METHODS

Databases were searched for peer-reviewed qualitative and quantitative studies published between 2009 and 2019 inclusive. Databases included PubMed via MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, SAGE Journals, Taylor and Francis and Springer nature. These covered themes including psychology, medicine, and public health. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach, 11 studies were eligible and analyzed for significant determinants of influenza vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in Europe.

RESULTS

The most commonly reported factors were psychological aspects, for example concerns about safety and risks to mother and child, or general low risk perception of becoming ill from influenza. Doubts about the effectiveness of the vaccine and a lack of knowledge about this topic were further factors. There was also influence of contextual factors, such as healthcare workers not providing adequate knowledge about the influenza vaccine or the pregnant lady stating their antivaccine sentiment.

CONCLUSION

Health promotion that specifically increases knowledge among pregnant women about influenza and vaccination is important, supporting a valid risk judgment by the pregnant lady. The development of new information strategies for dialogue between healthcare providers and pregnant women should form part of this strategy.

Acceptance of Pertussis Vaccination among Pregnant Women in Taiwan

This cross-sectional study assessed prenatal pertussis vaccination acceptance in Taiwan. A sample of pregnant women from five private clinics in Taiwan was recruited. Demographics, experience of prenatal vaccinations, key considerations, knowledge, and attitude about pertussis and its vaccination were measured. Among 505 participants, the vaccination rate, including planned vaccination, was 29.7%. Factors associated with acceptance included clinic location, primary caregiver of the newborn, newborns with siblings, previous influenza vaccination history, knowledge and attitude toward pertussis and its vaccination. Public health agencies should provide free vaccinations, clarify misinformation, and publicize prevention information, to improve prenatal pertussis vaccination acceptance.

Temporal Trends in Undervaccination: A Population-Based Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Monitoring the trends in undervaccination, including that because of parental vaccine refusal or delay, can inform public health responses directed at improving vaccine confidence and vaccination coverage.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. The cohort included all children born in 2004-2017 with ≥3 well-child visits between ages 2 and 23 months. Using electronic health record-based vaccination data, the average days undervaccinated was calculated for each child. Undervaccination patterns were assessed through age 23 months. Temporal trends were inspected for inflection points and were analyzed using linear regression. Nested within the cohort study, a survey was conducted to compare parent reports of vaccine refusal or delay with observed vaccination patterns. Data were analyzed in 2020.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 808,170 children. The percentage of children with average days undervaccinated=0 (fully vaccinated, no delays) rose from a nadir of 47.1% for the birth year 2008 to 68.4% for the birth year 2017 (p_trend<0.001). The percentage with no vaccines rose from 0.35% for the birth year 2004 to 1.28% for the birth year 2017 (p_trend<0.001). Consistent vaccine limiting was observed in 2.04% for the birth year 2017. Omission of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine peaked at 4.76% in the birth year 2007 and declined thereafter (p_trend<0.001). On the parent survey (response rate 60.2%), a high proportion of parents of the most undervaccinated children reported refusing or delaying vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

In a 14-year cohort study, vaccination timeliness has improved. However, the small but increasing number of children who received no vaccines by age 23 months warrants additional attention.