Evolving perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines among remote Alaskan communities

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and preference for future delivery among language minority, newcomer, and racialized peoples in Canada: a national cross-sectional and longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Despite high COVID-19 vaccine coverage in Canada, vaccine acceptance and preferred delivery among newcomers, racialized persons, and those who primarily speak minority languages are not well understood. This national study explores COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, access to vaccines, and delivery preferences among ethnoculturally diverse population groups.

METHODS

We conducted two national cross-sectional surveys during the pandemic (Dec 2020 and Oct-Nov 2021). Binary logistic regression analysis investigated the association between newcomer, language, and racialized minority respondents' perceptions and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines, experiences of discrimination when accessing health services, and sociodemographic characteristics. McNemar-Bowker tests were used to assess changes in responses collected at two time points.

RESULTS

Among 1630 respondents, 30.8% arrived in Canada within the last five years, 87.4% self-identified as a racialized minority, and 37.2% primarily spoke languages other than English or French. Although single dose COVID-19 vaccine uptake was at 92.7% among respondents, 14.8% experienced difficulty accessing vaccines, citing a need for translated resources or multi-lingual personnel. In longitudinal analysis, respondents were increasingly motivated over time to overcome barriers to accessing vaccines (61.4% to 69.6%, p = <.001). Fifty-nine percent (59.9%) of respondents would accept annual vaccination and over half would accept co-administration with routine (56.2%) or influenza (52.3%) vaccines. Experiences of racism/discrimination upon health service access were reported by 12.3% of respondents, who recommended increasing culturally safe practices and community involvement at vaccination sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding how newcomers, racialized peoples, and minority language speakers perceive and access COVID-19 vaccines will support vaccination campaigns to optimize equitable access.

Social and geographical disparities in adverse birth outcomes in Alaska: a retrospective cohort study

Introduction

Preterm birth (PTB) affects 1 in 10 births in the USA and is associated with near-term and long-term health consequences. This study assesses social and geographical disparities in adverse birth outcomes and associated risk factors in Alaska.

Methods

We examined birth records for 218 222 singleton live births in Alaska between 2000 and 2020. We described the distribution of PTB, very PTB, and low birth weight by geographical region, assessed risk factors for adverse birth outcomes, investigated how racial and ethnic differences in birth outcomes may be related to behavioural and social risk factors, and investigated how the unique transportation network in the state may affect adverse birth outcomes.

Results

There was an increased risk of PTB among births to mothers over 35 years of age (adjusted OR, AOR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.20, 1.33), with prepregnancy diabetes (AOR: 3.42; 95% CI: 3.00, 3.90) or hypertension (AOR: 2.28; 95% CI: 2.08, 2.51), who used tobacco during pregnancy (AOR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.27, 1.40), and who received <11 prenatal care visits (AOR: 2.66; 95% CI: 2.56, 2.77). Racial disparities in PTB persisted after adjustment for behavioural and healthcare-related risk factors. Nearly 40% of births took place outside the mother's community of residence, and there was an increased risk of PTB associated with travelling for birth.

Conclusions

PTB continues to be a persistent issue in Alaska, particularly among non-white mothers. Our findings regarding prenatal care utilisation, pre-existing health conditions, and tobacco use during pregnancy can support public health interventions to decrease the risk of adverse birth outcomes.

Beyond COVID: towards a transdisciplinary synthesis for understanding responses and developing pandemic preparedness in Alaska

Pandemics are regularly occurring events, and there are foundational principles of pandemic preparation upon which communities, regions, states, and nations may draw upon for elevated preparedness against an inevitable future infectious disease threat. Many disciplines within the social sciences can provide crucial insight and transdisciplinary thinking for the development of preparedness measures. In 2023, the National Science Foundation funded a conference of circumpolar researchers and Indigenous partners to reflect on COVID-19-related research. In this article, we synthesise our diverse social science perspectives to: (1) identify potential areas of future pandemic-related research in Alaska, and (2) pose new research questions that elevate the needs of Alaska and its people, pursuant of a specific body of pandemic knowledge that takes into account the ecological and sociocultural contexts of the region. In doing so, we highlight important domains of research in the social sciences from transdisciplinary perspectives, including the centering of Indigenous knowledges and needs, the contexts of risk perception and resilience, food and housing security, and more. We highlight the contributions of social sciences to pandemic knowledge and provide a foundation for future pandemic-related research in Alaska.

Using cluster analysis to explore COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy by levels of medical mistrust in fully vaccinated US adults

BACKGROUND

Underlying causes of vaccine hesitancy could significantly affect successful uptake of the SARS-CoV2 vaccine booster doses during new waves of COVID-19. Booster rates among US adults are far below what is needed for immunity, but little is known about booster hesitancy among fully vaccinated adults and whether medical mistrust exacerbates barriers to uptake.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was completed among 119 adults in Philadelphia, PA who reported having received the primary SARS-CoV2 vaccine series but not a booster dose. Using the LaVeist Medical Mistrust (MM) Index, a k-means cluster analysis showed two clusters (Low MM, High MM) and differences in attitudes and perceptions about COVID-19 booster vaccines were assessed using F-tests.

RESULTS

Respondents were 62% Black and female; mean age was 41; 46% reported earning less than $25,000 and 53% had a high school education or less. Overall intention to get boosted was low (mean 3.3 on 0-10 scale). Differences in COVID-19 booster perceptions between those with High (n = 56) vs. Low (n = 59) MM were found, independent of any demographic differences. Most statements (7/10) related to reasons to not be boosted were significant, with those with High MM indicating more concern about feeling sick from the vaccine (F=-3.91, p≤ .001), beliefs that boosters are ineffective for vaccinated people (F= -3.46, p≤ .001), and long-term side effect worries (F=-4.34, p≤ .001). Those with High MM were also more concerned about the adverse effects of the vaccine (F=-2.48, p=.02), but were more likely to trust getting information from doctors or healthcare providers (F= -2.25, p=.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that medical mistrust is an important independent construct when understanding current COVID-19 booster hesitancy. While much work has looked at demographic differences to explain vaccine hesitancy, these results suggest that further research into understanding and addressing medical mistrust could be important for implementing interventions to increase booster rates.

Recognising the heterogeneity of Indigenous Peoples during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review across Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA

Objectives

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on the health of Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA, as reflected in the growing literature. However, Indigenous Peoples are often homogenised, with key differences often overlooked, failing to capture the complexity of issues and may lead to suboptimal public health policy-making. The objective of this review was to assess the extent to which the heterogeneity of the Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA has been reflected in COVID-19 research.

Design

This study took the form of a scoping review.

Data sources

Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched for studies investigating COVID-19 pandemic outcomes among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA. The search dates included January 2019 to January 2024.

Eligibility criteria

All citations yielded by this search were subjected to title and abstract screening, full-text review and data extraction. We included original, peer-reviewed research investigating COVID-19-related outcomes among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand or the USA.

Data extraction and synthesis

Data extraction was conducted as an iterative process, reaching consensus between two of the study authors. All included studies were analysed through a combination of quantitative descriptive summary and qualitative thematic analysis.

Results

Of the 9795 citations found by the initial search, 428 citations were deemed eligible for inclusion. Of these citations: 72.9% compared Indigenous participants to non-Indigenous participants; 10.0% aggregated Indigenous and non-white participants; and 17.1% provided findings for Indigenous participants exclusively.

Conclusions

By overlooking the heterogeneity that exists among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA, researchers and policy-makers run the risk of masking inequities and the unique needs of groups of Indigenous Peoples. This may lead to inefficient policy recommendations and unintentionally perpetuate health disparities during public health crises.

Risk perception and reappraisal during the COVID-19 pandemic in southeast Alaska: Self-identified determinants of risk and protective health behaviors

Social and cultural context shapes how communities perceive health, well-being, and risk. Risk reappraisal can occur over time as a product of new information and improved understanding. We investigate risk perception and protective behaviors in Lingít Aaní (Southeast Alaska) during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Surveys were circulated at two time points: (1) April-June 2020, before COVID-19 reached epidemic levels in the region, and (2) November 2020-February 2021. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models were used to analyze how demographic characteristics of the respondent population were related to risk perception. OLS models were again used to predict how individuals engaged in protective behaviors while controlling for risk perceptions. Controlling for demographic characteristics, risk perception increased as age increased for perceived risk of getting sick and dying from COVID-19, males perceived lower risk in general for all tested variables, and Alaska Native respondents perceived higher risk than non-Alaska Native respondents. Controlling for risk perception, results for protective behaviors were mixed; however, the strongest association identified was that knowing someone with a positive COVID-19 diagnosis increased protective behaviors. Between the two time points, risk perceptions increased significantly for variables related to oneself, others, and community members becoming infected with COVID-19. Protective behaviors like traveling less than normal, buying more cleaning products, and engaging in more subsistence gathering significantly increased. Identifying patterns of risk perception and protective behaviors, and especially how they change over time, are critical to developing place-specific public health recommendations, action, and preparedness plans against future infectious threats.

Behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation in the US: a longitudinal study March─ October 2021

Many studies have examined behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation, but few have examined these drivers longitudinally. We sought to identify the drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation using the Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) Framework. Participants were a nationally-representative sample of 1,563 US adults who had not received a COVID-19 vaccine by baseline. Participants took surveys online at baseline (spring 2021) and follow-up (fall 2021). The surveys assessed variables from BeSD Framework domains (i.e., thinking and feeling, social processes, and practical issues), COVID-19 vaccination initiation, and demographics at baseline and follow-up. Between baseline and follow-up, 65% of respondents reported initiating COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccination intent increased from baseline to follow-up (p < .01). Higher vaccine confidence, more positive social norms towards vaccination, and receiving vaccine recommendations at baseline predicted subsequent COVID-19 vaccine initiation (all p < .01). Among factors assessed at follow-up, social responsibility and vaccine requirements had the greatest associations with vaccine initiation (all p < .01). Baseline vaccine confidence, social norms, and vaccination recommendations were associated with subsequent vaccine initiation, all of which could be useful targets for behavioral interventions. Furthermore, interventions that highlight social responsibility to vaccinate or promote vaccination requirements could also be beneficial.

COVID-19 vaccine decision-making in remote Alaska between November 2020 and November 2021

Vaccine hesitancy is an ongoing barrier to achieve sufficient COVID-19 vaccination coverage. Although there are many studies globally of vaccine hesitancy based on large survey samples, there are fewer in-depth qualitative studies that explore vaccine hesitancy and acceptance as a spectrum of decision-making. In this paper, we begin to describe vaccination decision-making among 58 adults living in remote Alaska based on three waves of online surveys and follow-up semi-structured interviews conducted between November 2020 and November 2021. The survey question of intention was not a predictor of adoption for about one third of the interviewees who were unvaccinated when they took the survey (n=12, 35%). Over half of all interviewees (n=37, 64%) had vaccine-related concerns, including 25 vaccinated individuals (representing 57% of vaccinated interviewees). Most interviewees reported that they learned about COVID-19 vaccines through interpersonal interactions (n=30, 52%) and/or a variety of media sources (n=29, 50%). The major facilitators of acceptance were trust in the information source (n=20, 48% of the 42 who responded), and learning from the experiences of family, friends, and the broader community (n=12, 29%). Further, trust and having a sense of agency appears to be important to interviewee decision-making, regardless of vaccination status and intention.

Social network, political climate, income inequality, and Americans uptake of monovalent COVID-19 booster

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed an unprecedented impact on Americans for over three years. To control the damage, a booster shot becomes increasingly necessary because the efficacy of the initial vaccine is waning and new variants of the virus are emerging. This study aims to understand factors at both individual and state levels that influence one's decision to take the monovalent booster. We merged data from a national survey administered in the Spring of 2022 with state-level indicators of the political climate, income inequality, and public health conditions. Multilevel logistic regression is adopted for statistical estimation. Findings show contrasting effects of the social network. More vaccinated people in one's network promote booster uptake, while more family members and close friends who contracted the virus in one's network inhibit booster uptake. In addition, residents of states with more votes for the Democratic candidate in the 2020 general election are more likely to take the booster. Meanwhile, residents from states with high income inequality are less likely to become boosted. This study identified multilevel determinants of the individual decision to receive the monovalent COVID-19 booster. The results imply the need to leverage the social network, weaken partisanship salience, and reduce income inequality to encourage booster uptake.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among English-Speaking Pregnant Women Living in Rural Western United States

This mixed-method study investigated vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women living in rural western United States and their response to social media ads promoting COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Thirty pregnant or recently pregnant participants who live in rural zip codes in Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho were interviewed between November 2022 and March 2023. Interviews were transcribed and coded, while the ad ratings were analyzed using linear mixed models. The study identified five main themes related to vaccine uptake, including perceived risk of COVID, sources of health information, vaccine hesitancy, and relationships with care providers. Participants rated ads most highly that used peer-based messengers and negative outcome-based content. Ads with faith-based and elder messengers were rated significantly lower than peer messengers (p = 0.04 and 0.001, respectively). An activation message was also rated significantly less favorably than negative outcome-based content (p = 0.001). Participants preferred evidence-based information and the ability to conduct their own research on vaccine safety and efficacy rather than being told to get vaccinated. Primary concerns of vaccine-hesitant respondents included the short amount of time the vaccine had been available and perceived lack of research on its safety during pregnancy. Our findings suggests that tailored messaging using peer-based messengers and negative outcome-based content can positively impact vaccine uptake among pregnant women living in rural areas of the Western United States.

Incorporating resilience when assessing pandemic risk in the Arctic: a case study of Alaska

The discourse on vulnerability to COVID-19 or any other pandemic is about the susceptibility to the effects of disease outbreaks. Over time, vulnerability has been assessed through various indices calculated using a confluence of societal factors. However, categorising Arctic communities, without considering their socioeconomic, cultural and demographic uniqueness, into the high and low continuum of vulnerability using universal indicators will undoubtedly result in the underestimation of the communities' capacity to withstand and recover from pandemic exposure. By recognising vulnerability and resilience as two separate but interrelated dimensions, this study reviews the Arctic communities' ability to cope with pandemic risks. In particular, we have developed a pandemic vulnerability-resilience framework for Alaska to examine the potential community-level risks of COVID-19 or future pandemics. Based on the combined assessment of the vulnerability and resilience indices, we found that not all highly vulnerable census areas and boroughs had experienced COVID-19 epidemiological outcomes with similar severity. The more resilient a census area or borough is, the lower the cumulative death per 100 000 and case fatality ratio in that area. The insight that pandemic risks are the result of the interaction between vulnerability and resilience could help public officials and concerned parties to accurately identify the populations and communities at most risk or with the greatest need, which, in turn, helps in the efficient allocation of resources and services before, during and after a pandemic. A resilience-vulnerability-focused approach described in this paper can be applied to assess the potential effect of COVID-19 and similar future health crises in remote regions or regions with large Indigenous populations in other parts of the world.

Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic and social media on the behaviour of pregnant and lactating women towards vaccination: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women, foetuses and infants are at risk of infectious disease-related complications. Maternal vaccination is a strategy developed to better protect pregnant women and their offspring against infectious disease-related morbidity and mortality. Vaccines against influenza, pertussis and recently also COVID-19 are widely recommended for pregnant women. Yet, there is still a significant amount of hesitation towards maternal vaccination policies. Furthermore, contradictory messages circulating social media impact vaccine confidence.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aims to reveal how COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination impacted vaccine confidence in pregnant and lactating women. Additionally, this review studied the role social media plays in creating opinions towards vaccination in these target groups.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Articles published between 23 November 2018 and 18 July 2022 that are linked to the objectives of this review were included. Reviews, articles not focusing on the target group, abstracts, articles describing outcomes of COVID-19 infection/COVID-19 vaccination were excluded.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

The PubMed database was searched to select articles. Search terms used were linked to pregnancy, lactation, vaccination, vaccine hesitancy, COVID-19 and social media.

CHARTING METHODS

Included articles were abstracted and synthesised by one reviewer. Verification was done by a second reviewer. Disagreements were addressed through discussion between reviewers and other researchers.

RESULTS

Pregnant and lactating women are generally less likely to accept a COVID-19 vaccine compared with non-pregnant and non-nursing women. The main reason to refuse maternal vaccination is safety concerns. A positive link was detected between COVID-19 vaccine willingness and acceptance of other vaccines during pregnancy. The internet and social media are identified as important information sources for maternal vaccination.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Vaccine hesitancy in pregnant and lactating women remains an important issue, expressing the need for effective interventions to increase vaccine confidence and coverage. The role social media plays in vaccine uptake remains unclear.

Attitudes of Healthcare Workers in Israel towards the Fourth Dose of COVID-19 Vaccine

Attitudes of healthcare workers (HCWs) toward vaccines are extremely important for increasing vaccination coverage. We conducted a cross-sectional study at the beginning of the fourth COVID-19 vaccination dose campaign among 124 HCWs to evaluate attitudes towards the fourth dose and willingness to get vaccinated. At that time, Israel was the first country to approve the fourth vaccine dose. Most women were unwilling to get the fourth vaccine dose compared to men; 53.9% of physicians were unwilling to get vaccinated compared to 83.3% of nurses and 69% of other HCWs professions. The most frequent concerns regarding the vaccine were its efficacy, benefit, and necessity. The perceived risk and perceived severity of the health risk involved with getting vaccinated with the fourth dose were higher among HCWs who stated that they would not get vaccinated compared to those who were vaccinated or intended to get vaccinated. In contrast, HCWs who were vaccinated with the fourth dose, or those who were planning to get vaccinated, gave higher scores to the perceived benefit of the booster, its advantages, its perceived safety, its ability to protect from severe illness, and the perceived extent of scientific information about the risk associated with the booster. A logistic regression model revealed that perception of the fourth dose's benefits and risk significantly predict the willingness of HCWs to get vaccinated. Willingness to vaccinate their own children, acceptance of a hypothetical annual booster vaccine, and having less severe adverse effects after prior vaccination were also associated with willingness to get the fourth dose. These findings could help policy makers in developing strategies to expand the acceptance and coverage of the COVID-19 booster doses.

Risk perception, adaptation, and resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic in Southeast Alaska Natives

Indigenous communities worldwide are at higher risk of negative pandemic outcomes, and communities Indigenous to the Arctic are disproportionately affected compared to national majorities. Despite this, their experiences have scarcely been investigated qualitatively and from their own perspectives. We collected and analyzed 22 structured interviews in three Southeast Alaska island communities (Sitka, Hoonah, and Kake) to learn about their perceptions of and experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews were analyzed with thematic qualitative analysis in Dedoose. Four primary categories were identified within which to discuss risk and resilience in Southeast Alaska: (1) risk perception, (2) socioeconomic impacts, (3) reactions to public health guidelines, and (4) coping. Primary findings indicate that Southeast Alaska Native communities display considerable resilience and adaptive flexibility despite the significant adversity imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Southeast Alaska Native people use historical and traditional knowledge to culturally ground adaptive behaviors to cope with the threat of COVID-19. Interviewees expressed that adaptive, community-centered, and non-individualistic behaviors strongly tied to Native culture minimized the negative epidemiological impacts of the pandemic. Future research can more deeply explore the root causes of the need for adaptiveness and resilience, such as histories of colonialism and marginalization, to emergency situations in Indigenous communities.

Coping strategies and household stress/violence in remote Alaska: a longitudinal view across the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced novel stressors. Remote/rural communities have experienced additional difficulties, while also potentially benefitting from unique sources of resilience against such stressors. However, very little research has been conducted in remote/rural communities regarding coping and stress/violence. This study examines coping strategies and household stress/violence in remote Alaska communities across the pandemic through three online survey waves (November 2020-September 2021) (total n = 1,020). Across all waves, personal care was reported most frequently followed by social activities, religious activities, and traditional/subsistence activities. Substance use combined (alcohol, nicotine, marijuana) and seeking counselling were less frequently reported, with significant differences across gender and age categories. Less than 10% of individuals reported physical violence towards children and/or other adults within the household. Overall, these findings indicate that individuals are primarily relying on positive coping strategies to contend with additional stress brought into their lives by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Multilevel determinants on COVID-19 booster intention among Americans

The pandemic has disrupted public health and social well-being for more than two years. With the vaccine efficacy waning over time and the spread of new variants, a booster becomes increasingly imperative. This study investigates predictors of the American public's COVID-19 booster intention. A national survey was conducted from September 23rd to October 31st, 2021, on a representative sample. The survey data is merged with state-level indicators of vaccination rate, case rate, political context, and economic recovery. Multilevel regression modeling is adopted for statistical estimation. Results show that a higher proportion of vaccinated people in the network is positively related to one's chance of getting the booster (β = 0.593, p = 0.000). In comparison, a higher proportion of infected people in the network is negatively related to one's intention to become boosted (β = -0.240, p = 0.039). Additionally, the higher educated (β = 0.080, p = 0.001) and older (β = 0.004, p = 0.013) were more likely to say they would get the booster than their counterparts. Meanwhile, the odds of people taking the COVID-19 booster decrease by 3.541 points (p = 0.002) for each unit increase in the case rate at the state level. This study articulates that individual intention to take the booster is a function of their personal characteristics and is also rooted in social networks. These findings contribute to the literature and have policy implications. Knowledge of the profiles among people who intend to take/refuse the booster provides essential information to leverage certain factors and maximize booster uptake to mitigate the pandemic's devastating impact.

COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Dose Acceptance: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommended coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) booster dose vaccination after completing the primary vaccination series for individuals ≥18 years and most-at-risk populations. This study aimed to estimate the pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine booster dose uptake and intention to get the booster dose among general populations and healthcare workers (HCWs). We searched PsycINFO, Scopus, EBSCO, MEDLINE Central/PubMed, ProQuest, SciELO, SAGE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect according to PRISMA guidelines. From a total of 1079 screened records, 50 studies were extracted. Meta-analysis was conducted using 48 high-quality studies according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale quality assessment tool. Using the 48 included studies, the pooled proportion of COVID-19 vaccine booster dose acceptance among 198,831 subjects was 81% (95% confidence interval (CI): 75-85%, I2 = 100%). The actual uptake of the booster dose in eight studies involving 12,995 subjects was 31% (95% CI: 19-46%, I2 = 100%), while the intention to have the booster dose of the vaccine was 79% (95% CI: 72-85%, I2 = 100%). The acceptance of the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccines among HCWs was 66% (95% CI: 58-74%), I2 = 99%). Meta-regression revealed that previous COVID-19 infection was associated with a lower intention to have the booster dose. Conversely, previous COVID-19 infection was associated with a significantly higher level of booster dose actual uptake. The pooled booster dose acceptance in the WHO region of the Americas, which did not include any actual vaccination, was 77% (95% CI: 66-85%, I2 = 100%). The pooled acceptance of the booster dose in the Western Pacific was 89% (95% CI: 84-92%, I2 = 100), followed by the European region: 86% (95% CI: 81-90%, I2 = 99%), the Eastern Mediterranean region: 59% (95% CI: 46-71%, I2 = 99%), and the Southeast Asian region: 52% (95% CI: 43-61%, I2 = 95). Having chronic disease and trust in the vaccine effectiveness were the significant predictors of booster dose COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. The global acceptance rate of COVID-19 booster vaccine is high, but the rates vary by region. To achieve herd immunity for the disease, a high level of vaccination acceptance is required. Intensive vaccination campaigns and programs are still needed around the world to raise public awareness regarding the importance of accepting COVID-19 vaccines needed for proper control of the pandemic.

Myocarditis or Pericarditis Following the COVID-19 Vaccination in Adolescents: A Systematic Review

Background: By 16 May 2022, 12,186,798,032 people had been vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines. Our study found that myocarditis/pericarditis may occur in adolescents after COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: In this regard, we conducted a meta-analysis of seven groups of adolescents aged 12–19 years to compare the incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis after vaccination and compare the relative risk incidence after the first and second doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, and between males and females for risk incidence. Results: We analyzed 22,020,997 subjects from seven studies, including 130 cases of confirmed myocarditis/pericarditis. The overall mean incidence rate was 1.69 cases per 100,000 person-years. Of these, 19 of the 12,122,244 people who received a first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine had myocarditis/pericarditis, an incidence rate of 0.0022% (95% CI 0.0001–0.0034), and 111 of the 1,008,753 people who received a second dose had myocarditis/pericarditis, an incidence rate of 0.0107% (95% CI 0.0059–0.0155). The prevalence relative ratio (RR) after the first and second doses was RR = 5.53 (95% CI: 3.01–10.16), with a higher prevalence after the second dose than after the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. After a second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, the RR for males relative to females was RR = 13.91 (95% CI: 4.30–44.95), with a more pronounced risk of disease in males than in females. Conclusions: Our study showed that myocarditis/pericarditis occurred after vaccination with the BNT162b2 or Comirnaty vaccine, especially after the second vaccination in male adolescents, but the incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis after vaccination with the above vaccines was very rare (0.0022%). Therefore, it is recommended that adolescents should be vaccinated with the COVID-19 universal vaccine as soon as possible and closely monitored for subsequent adverse reactions, which can be treated promptly.