COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Maternal-infant transfer of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies following vaccination in pregnancy: A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To measure and evaluate the impact of receiving severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines in pregnancy on immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin A (IgA) titres in maternal and infant samples.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary obstetric centre.

POPULATION OR SAMPLE

52 pregnant women who received one or more SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses during pregnancy and their neonates.

METHODS

IgG and IgA concentrations against SARS-CoV-2 antigens were measured from samples collected at delivery and 4-6 weeks postpartum and compared using Spearman correlations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Maternal and infant IgG and IgA titres in response to vaccination and infection in pregnancy.

RESULTS

In maternal serum collected at delivery, participants without evidence of prior infection who received 3 + doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine had higher Anti-Spike (S) IgG geometric mean concentrations (log10 AU/mL)(GMC) than those who received 2 doses (3 + Doses = 5.00, 2 Doses = 4.60, p = 0.08). The differences in IgG Anti-S GMC were statistically significant in cord serum, and in postpartum samples of maternal serum, infant serum and breast milk (Cord GMCs: 3 + Doses = 5.32, 2 Doses = 4.98, p < 0.05; Postpartum maternal serum GMCs: 3 + Doses = 5.25, 2 Doses = 4.57, p < 0.001; Postpartum infant serum GMCs: 3 + Doses = 5.10, 2 Doses = 4.72, p = 0.03; Postpartum breast milk GMCs: 3 + Doses = 2.61, 2 Doses = 1.94, p < 0.0001). Among participants with 3 + Doses, those with evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection had statistically significant higher anti-S IgG GMCs than those without prior infection (Maternal serum at delivery: SARS-CoV-2+=5.65, SARS-CoV-2-=5.00, p = 0.004; Cord: SARS-CoV-2+=5.68, SARS-CoV-2-=5.32, p = 0.02; Postpartum maternal serum: SARS-CoV-2+=5.66, SARS-CoV-2-=5.25, p < 0.001; postpartum infant serum: SARS-CoV-2+=5.50, SARS-CoV-2-=5.10, p = 0.003; Postpartum breast milk: SARS-COV-2+=3.25, SARS-COV-2-=2.61, p = 0.009). Significant positive correlations were found for anti-S IgG titres between paired maternal and infant samples at delivery and postpartum (Delivery: R = 0.91, p < 0.001; postpartum: R = 0.86, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 infection elicit strong IgG and IgA antibody responses in pregnant women with evidence of transplacental transfer to the fetus.

Using the Social-Ecological Model to Assess Vaccine Hesitancy and Refusal in a Highly Religious Lower-Middle-Income Country

(1) Background: The aim of this study was to understand the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy and refusal in Indonesia using the Social-Ecological Model (SEM). (2) Methods: Data on demographics, religiosity, family dynamics, and perceptions of public health efforts were collected through an online survey and compared to the rates of vaccine hesitancy and refusal. (3) Results: Income and sex were significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy. Based on a vaccine passport policy to enter public spaces, people who felt inhibited to enter public spaces or perceived privacy threats were twice as likely to exhibit vaccine hesitancy. Participants who believed that religious groups had a difficult time getting vaccinated were nearly twice as likely to exhibit vaccine hesitancy and three times more likely to exhibit vaccine refusal. However, participants who believed in a higher religious power were 58% less likely to exhibit vaccine hesitancy. Religious leaders significantly influenced participants to make the decision regarding vaccination. Individuals with vaccine refusal were more than twice as likely to share information with others without fact-checking. Notably, structural barriers such as distance and transportation were most strongly associated with vaccine hesitancy and refusal. (4) Conclusion: Cultural factors play a significant role in vaccine hesitancy and refusal. The SEM can be used to propose multi-level interventions with collaboration and communication among stakeholders to improve community health.

Factors that influence vaccination communication during pregnancy: provider and patient perspectives using the theoretical domains framework

INTRODUCTION

Vaccination during pregnancy is recommended but uptake is low and evidence on the topic is limited.

AIMS

This study aimed to identify the drivers of current behavior and barriers to change for health care practitioners (HCPs) and pregnant patients in Canada.

METHODS

This study is an in-depth qualitative investigation of the factors influencing HCPs' vaccination communication during pregnancy, as well as factors influencing pregnant patients' vaccination uptake in Canada using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Three data sources were used: (1) perinatal HCP interviews before COVID-19; (2) perinatal HCP interviews regarding vaccine communication after COVID-19; and (3) survey of pregnant or lactating women after COVID-19.

RESULTS

Forty-seven interviews and 169 participant responses were included. Perinatal HCPs reported limited information on vaccine communication or difficulty keeping up-to-date (Environmental context and resources; Knowledge; Beliefs about capabilities). HCPs lacked confidence and struggled with lack of training to address vaccine hesitancy without alienating patients (Beliefs about capabilities; Skills). Pregnant or lactating women struggled with the amount of information they felt was imposed on them, had concerns about the perceived negative consequences of vaccination, and felt pressure to understand what was best for them and their babies (Knowledge; Beliefs about consequences; Social influences).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides a theory-based approach to identify influencing factors that can be mapped to theory-based intervention components, improving the likelihood of intervention effectiveness. The study is the first step in adapting an existing intervention to improve vaccine communication during pregnancy, ultimately, increasing vaccination uptake.

SPANISH ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A260.

The influence of the perception, attitude, and level of trust on the uptake of COVID-19 vaccinations among pregnant women attending antenatal care clinic in mbeya urban, Tanzania

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with adverse effects and death among people with low immunity, including pregnant women. Despite introducing the vaccine as the proper means to curb the spread of the pandemic, vaccine uptake is still low. This study assessed the influence of perception, attitude, and trust toward COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women attending Antenatal Care Clinics.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study design was used, utilizing a quantitative approach with a cross-sectional analytical design conducted in Mbeya urban, distribution of sample size during data collection based on client's volume at three government health facilities (one tertiary health facility, one secondary health facility, and one primary health facility) in Mbeya Urban, Tanzania. Data were collected from 333 pregnant women who attended ANC during the data collection period using a questionnaire with closed-ended questions administered to respondents face-to-face. Data cleaning and analysis were done using Excel and Stata/SE 14.1 software for bivariate and multivariate data; Pearson's chi-squire and Fisher's test were used to analyze the independent determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

RESULTS

The proportion of pregnant women vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine was 27%. There was a statistically significant association between the respondents' vaccine uptake with primary education and < 5 work experience to vaccine uptake P = 0.015 (AOR = 6.58; 95% CI; 1.45-29.85), and P = 0.046 (AOR = 2.45; 95% CI; 1.02-5.89) respectively. The association of attitude influence to COVID-19 vaccine uptake was statistically significant (acceptance of vaccine due to its availability, vaccine acceptance for protection against COVID-19 pandemic to respondent and her baby, experience from other vaccines) was statistically significant at P = 0.011 (AOR = 4.43; 95% CI; 1.41-13.93), P = 0.001 (AOR = 45.83; 95% CI; 18.6-112.89) respectively. The level of trust in the COVID-19 vaccine influenced respondents' association with vaccine uptake in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters of pregnancy (P = 0.633 (AOR = 1.23; 95% CI; 0.53-2.48), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pregnant women's positive attitude and trust in the COVID-19 vaccine influenced them to uptake it; our conclusion supports the WHO guidelines that the COVID-19 vaccine should be administered to pregnant women since it is a safer means to curb COVID-19 pregnancy-related complications.

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.

Risk factors related to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine additional doses hesitancy among pregnant and non-pregnant people of reproductive age and partners: A Brazilian cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the predictors of acceptance and hesitancy of additional doses of any SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine among pregnant or recently pregnant and non-pregnant people of reproductive age and partners in Brazil.

METHODS

We conducted an online cross-sectional study from June 2022 to April 2023 and invited women and partners between 18 and 49 years old to participate. We employed a snowball strategy to reach all potential eligible participants. Our primary outcome was the acceptance rate of the COVID-19 booster vaccine. We estimated the frequency and percentage for the three groups and compared categorical variables using the Chi-square test. Moreover, bivariate, backward stepwise regression, and subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate risk factors and predictors of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy. We reported the effect size as OR with a 95% CI.

RESULTS

We included 1487 participants, and among them, 334 (22.5%) were pregnant or recently pregnant people, 905 (60.8%) were non-pregnant people, and 247 (16.6%) were male partners. Pregnant and recently pregnant people showed greater hesitancy for the COVID-19 vaccine booster than non-pregnant people (28% vs 15%, P < 0.001) and male partners (28% vs 16%, P < 0.001). Non-pregnant women accepted the COVID-19 vaccine more often than pregnant or recently pregnant people (OR 1.75; 95% CI: 1.13-2.70). The associated factors to the reduced COVID-19 vaccine booster acceptance were family income between US$ 566-945.00 (54%), evangelic religion (65%), concern about vaccine safety (80%) and perceived common vaccine importance (93%).

CONCLUSION

Pregnant people were more hesitant than non-pregnant people to accept the COVID-19 booster vaccine. Family income, religious beliefs, vaccine safety concerns, and perceived common vaccine importance were significant barriers to accepting COVID-19 booster vaccines. The impact of these factors was more evident among pregnant or recently pregnant people, emphasizing the harmful effect of misinformation among this vulnerable population.

Optimal Delivery Management for the Prevention of Early Neonatal SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

 Delivery management interventions (DMIs) were recommended to prevent delivery-associated transmission of maternal SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) to infants without evidence of effect on early neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection (ENI) and neonatal death <28 days of life (ND). This systematic review describes different DMI combinations and the frequency of ENI and ND.

STUDY DESIGN

 Individual patient data were collected from articles published from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021 from Cochrane review databases, Medline, and Google Scholar. Article inclusion criteria were: documented maternal SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive status 10 days before delivery or symptomatic at delivery with a positive test within 48 hours, known delivery method, and known infant SARS-CoV-2 PCR result. Primary outcomes were ENI (positive PCR at 12 hours to 10 days) and ND. All characteristics were pooled using the DerSimonian-Laird inverse variance method. Primary outcome analyses were performed using logit transformation and random effect. Pooled results were expressed as percentages (95% confidence intervals). Continuity correction was applied for all pooled results if any included study has 0 event.

RESULTS

 A total of 11,075 publications were screened. 117 publications representing 244 infants and 230 mothers were included. All publications were case reports. ENI and ND were reported in 23.4% (18.2-29.18) and 2.1% (0.67-4.72) of cases, respectively. Among cases with available information, DMIs were reported for physical environment (85-100%), delivery-specific interventions (47-100%), and infant care practices (80-100%). No significant comparisons could be performed between different DMI combinations due to small sample size.

CONCLUSION

 The evidence supporting any DMI in SARS-CoV-2-infected mothers to prevent ENI or ND is extremely limited. Limitations of this meta-analysis include high risk of bias, small sample size, and large confidence intervals. This identifies the need for multinational database generation and specific studies designed to provide evidence of DMI guidelines best suited to prevent transmission from mother to neonate.

KEY POINTS

· In this review we analyzed 2 years of maternal SARS-CoV-2 published cases.. · We assessed association of delivery management interventions with infant SARS-CoV-2 infection.. · We found no evidence supporting any DMI for that purpose..

Pregnant individuals perspectives towards receiving COVID-19 vaccination during their pregnancy: an in-depth qualitative study

Introduction

Pregnant individuals have an increased risk of severe illness from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Vaccination is an effective strategy to prevent severe illness and complications for pregnant individuals. Pregnant individuals are often excluded from research and remain hesitant to receive vaccination against COVID-19. It is pivotal to study factors related to vaccine uptake and hesitancy among pregnant individuals. We studied barriers and facilitators for pregnant individuals choice and motivation regarding vaccination against COVID-19 during pregnancy to aid future pregnant individuals in their decision to vaccinate against various infectious agents.

Methods

In this qualitative study, pregnant individuals were interviewed between October 2021 and January 2022 using a semi-structured approach. A topic list was used to explore their feelings, perceptions and ideas regarding vaccination against COVID-19 during pregnancy. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analyses was performed using MAX QDA.

Results

After nine interviews, saturation was reached. Three main themes were identified that influenced pregnant individuals choice and motivation regarding vaccination: health consequences, ambiguity of information and societal motivation. Health consequences mainly concerned the effect for their offspring, and the unknown long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccination. The advice from the Dutch institute for Public Health and Environment changed from not vaccinating pregnant individuals after release of the developed vaccine, to routinely vaccinating all pregnant individuals after research data were available from the United States of America (USA). This change of policy fuelled doubt and confusion for vaccination. Arguments in favor of vaccination from the social perspective were specific behaviour rules and restrictions due to the pandemic. E.g. without vaccination people were unable to travel abroad and having to take a COVID-19 test every time entering a public place.

Conclusion

Pregnant individuals need clear, unambiguous information concerning health consequences, short- and long-term, particularly for their offspring, in the decision-making process regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Additionally, the societal perspective needs to be addressed. Besides the aforementioned themes, general counselling should focus on misperceptions of vaccine safety and the role of misinformation which are also important in the non-pregnant population. This study underlines the importance of including pregnant individuals in research programs to obtain specific information targeted to their needs.

Safety of COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant risks to pregnant women and those recently pregnant, leading to heightened mortality and morbidity rates. Vaccination has emerged as a pivotal strategy in reducing COVID-19-related deaths and illnesses worldwide. However, the initial exclusion of pregnant individuals from most clinical trials raised concerns about vaccine safety in this population, contributing to vaccine hesitancy. This review aims to consolidate the existing literature to assess the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant populations and neonatal outcomes. Diverse studies were included evaluating various aspects of safety for women and their newborns, encompassing mild to severe symptoms across different vaccines. The findings indicate the overall safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination, with minimal adverse outcomes observed, including mild side effects like pain and fever. Although most studies reported the absence of severe adverse outcomes, isolated case reports have raised concerns about potential associations between maternal COVID-19 vaccination and conditions such as fetal supraventricular tachycardia and immune-mediated diseases. Our review underscores the importance of ongoing surveillance and monitoring to ensure vaccine safety in pregnant women. Overall, COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy remains a safe and effective strategy, emphasizing the need for continued research and vigilance to safeguard maternal and fetal health.

Gendered (SDG5) and other perspectives on COVID-19 vaccination status: a focus on South Africa's Limpopo province

One of the key issues embedded in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is the need for disaggregated data. Given the nature of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), studies on such should respond to this call. This paper investigates gendered and other perspectives on COVID-19 vaccination status in South Africa's Limpopo Province. The work utilises a household survey (n = 4,571), data from Our World in Data and Johns Hopkins University, as well as policy documents and academic literature. The findings are that the government moved away from a goal to attain 67% herd immunity, to the containment strategy. While the country attained 35% of population fully vaccinated, the current study reveals 72.84% of the respondents fully vaccinated in Limpopo (including those receiving a booster). Noteworthy findings include 7.1% of the respondents reporting partial vaccination and 19.8% expressing vaccine hesitancy. Gender differences were significant, with females exhibiting higher vaccination rates than males, and age-related variations were observed, particularly among the youngest participants. Further analysis stratified by gender and age groups unveiled substantial disparities, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions. Additionally, the study highlights patterns in COVID-19 vaccine uptake based on education levels, with higher education associating with increased vaccination rates. Significant gender-based differences in vaccine uptake across education levels indicate potential areas for focused public health efforts. The findings emphasise the complexity of factors influencing vaccination behaviour, providing valuable insights for policymakers, public health practitioners, and researchers aiming to enhance vaccine uptake and address disparities in diverse demographic groups.

Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among refugees and other migrant populations: A systematic scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to map the existing literature to identify predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among refugees, immigrants, and other migrant populations.

METHODS

A systematic search of Medline, Embase, Scopus, APA PsycInfo and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) was conducted up to 31 January 2023 to identify the relevant English peer-reviewed observational studies. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts, selected studies, and extracted data.

RESULTS

We identified 34 cross-sectional studies, primarily conducted in high income countries (76%). Lower vaccine acceptance was associated with mistrust in the host countries' government and healthcare system, concerns about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines, limited knowledge of COVID-19 infection and vaccines, lower COVID-19 risk perception, and lower integration level in the host country. Female gender, younger age, lower education level, and being single were associated with lower vaccine acceptance in most studies. Additionally, sources of information about COVID-19 and vaccines and previous history of COVID-19 infection, also influence vaccine acceptance. Vaccine acceptability towards COVID-19 booster doses and various vaccine brands were not adequately studied.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine hesitancy and a lack of trust in COVID-19 vaccines have become significant public health concerns within migrant populations. These findings may help in providing information for current and future vaccine outreach strategies among migrant populations.

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 ethics: unique aspects and a review as of early 2024

COVID-19 presents a variety of ethical challenges in a set of arenas, arenas not always considered in past pandemics. These challenges include issues related to autonomy, distributive ethics, and the establishment of policies of equity and justice. Methods are a literature review based on regular editing of an online textbook during the COVID-19 outbreak and a literature review using key ethical terms. Patients are confronted with new issues related to autonomy. Providers need to expand their concepts of ethical issues to include decisions based on proportionality and public health ethics. The public health sector needs to assess the beneficence of alternative modes of disease control. The research community needs to redefine the concept of informed consent in emergent conditions. All elements of the medical spectrum-physicians, scientists, and the community-at-large including the pharmaceutical industry-need to consider the multifaceted methods for preventing future pandemics. This will require giving particular emphasis to public health funding and ending the documented discrimination that exists in the provision of proven therapies. The developing world is especially at risk for most of the ethical issues, especially those related to equity and justice. The ethical issues associated with the COVID-19 outbreak are not unique but provide a diverse set of issues that apply to patients, providers, social groups, and investigators. The further study of such issues can help with preventing future outbreaks.

COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy and breastfeeding in women with autoimmune diseases: results from the COVAD study

OBJECTIVES

We investigated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine safety in pregnant and breastfeeding women with autoimmune diseases (AID) in the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study.

METHODS

Delayed-onset (>7 days) vaccine-related adverse events (AE), disease flares and AID-related treatment modifications were analysed upon diagnosis of AID vs healthy controls (HC) and the pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of at least one dose of vaccine.

RESULTS

Among the 9201 participants to the self-administered online survey, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Forty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding patients with AID were identified, of whom the majority had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine (100% and 96.2%, respectively). AE were reported significantly more frequently in pregnant than in non-pregnant patients (overall AE 45% vs 26%, P = 0.01; minor AE 40% vs 25.9%, P = 0.03; major AE 17.5% vs 4.6%, P < 0.01), but no difference was found in comparison with pregnant HC. No difference was observed between breastfeeding patients and HC with respect to AE. Post-vaccination disease flares were reported by 17.5% of pregnant and 20% of breastfeeding patients, and by 18.3% of age- and disease-matched non-pregnant and non-breastfeeding patients (n = 262). All pregnant/breastfeeding patients who experienced a disease flare were managed with glucocorticoids; 28.6% and 20% of them required initiation or change in immunosuppressants, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study provides reassuring insights into the safety of COVID-19 vaccines administered to women with AID during the gestational and post-partum periods, helping overcome hesitant attitudes, as the benefits for the mother and for the fetus by passive immunization appear to outweigh potential risks.

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.

Effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines on maternal and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of COVID-19 vaccines in women before or during pregnancy on SARS-CoV-2 infection-related, pregnancy, offspring and reactogenicity outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Major databases between December 2019 and January 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Nine pairs of reviewers contributed to study selection. We included test-negative designs, comparative cohorts and randomised trials on effects of COVID-19 vaccines on infection-related and pregnancy outcomes. Non-comparative cohort studies reporting reactogenicity outcomes were also included.

QUALITY ASSESSMENT, DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We undertook random-effects meta-analysis and reported findings as HRs, risk ratios (RRs), ORs or rates with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies (1 813 947 women) were included. Overall, in test-negative design studies, pregnant women fully vaccinated with any COVID-19 vaccine had 61% reduced odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.75; 4 studies, 23 927 women; I2=87.2%) and 94% reduced odds of hospital admission (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.71; 2 studies, 868 women; I2=92%). In adjusted cohort studies, the risk of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy was reduced by 12% (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.92; 2 studies; 115 085 women), while caesarean section was reduced by 9% (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.98; 6 studies; 30 192 women). We observed an 8% reduction in the risk of neonatal intensive care unit admission (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.97; 2 studies; 54 569 women) in babies born to vaccinated versus not vaccinated women. In general, vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with increased risk of adverse pregnancy or perinatal outcomes. Pain at the injection site was the most common side effect reported (77%, 95% CI 52% to 94%; 11 studies; 27 195 women).

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and related complications in pregnant women.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020178076.

Validation of the questionnaire "Pregnancy Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (pVHS)" toward COVID-19 vaccine for Malaysian pregnant women

Background

Pregnancy is one of the risks for severe COVID-19 infection, and receiving a vaccination is one of the effective methods to reduce disease severity. However, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women remains an issue. This study aims to develop and validate the pregnancy Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (pVHS) toward COVID-19 vaccine for Malaysian pregnant women.

Method

An 8-item Malay language pregnancy Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (pVHS-M) for COVID-19 was adapted from the adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale and validated using Exploratory Factor Analysis. Six expert panels were involved in content validity, and ten pregnant women were involved in face validity. A cross-sectional study on 200 pregnant women was conducted between October 2022 and March 2023 at the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Clinic, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan.

Result

The item-level content validity index is 1.00, demonstrating good relevance of the eight items used to assess COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The item-level face validity index obtained is 0.99, indicating that the items were clear and comprehensible. The Cronbach alpha score was 0.944, with factor loadings ranging from 0.79 to 0.89.

Conclusion

The pVHS-M demonstrated good internal consistency, indicating that it is a valid and reliable tool for assessing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women.

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

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

Attitudes towards Receiving Monkeypox Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The public's attitude towards Mpox vaccination is a critical factor in the success of immunisation programmes. Understanding the factors contributing to vaccine acceptance or hesitancy is critical for developing effective health communication strategies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to bring together evidence from observational studies on attitudes towards Mpox vaccination, including willingness and rejection.

METHODS

From this review's inception until June 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across four major electronic databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and EBSCO. The inclusion criteria included studies investigating public attitudes towards Mpox vaccination, as defined by acceptance and willingness to be vaccinated versus rejection and unwillingness.

RESULTS

Thirty studies met the inclusion criteria among the screened literature. An analysis of 27 studies involving 81,792 participants revealed that 45,926 (56.14%) were willing to receive the Mpox vaccination. In contrast, ten studies involving 7448 participants revealed that 2156 people (28.94%) were unwilling to receive the Mpox vaccination. Females were less willing to receive the vaccine than males, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.61 (95% CI, 0.43-0.86). Furthermore, homosexuals were found to be more willing than heterosexuals, with an OR of 1.44 (95% CI, 1.14-1.80).

CONCLUSION

Vaccination is emerging as a critical strategy for preventing Mpox infection and fostering herd immunity against potential outbreaks. Improving public awareness and acceptance of vaccination is critical to avoiding a situation similar to the COVID-19 pandemic. Targeted educational and outreach programmes could explain the benefits of vaccination, bridging the information gap and encouraging a proactive public health approach to emerging infectious diseases.

Effects of COVID-19 vaccination on human fertility: a post-pandemic literature review

Although vaccination with the Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine is important and effective in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the public expressed concerns regarding the adverse effects of vaccine on fertility. Some reviews have focused on it, they have been unable to collect sufficient research data because of the earlier publication period. As relevant evidence has gradually increased, we reviewed these studies from the perspectives of males, females with or without pregnancy, and different vaccine types. The results suggest that although males may experience fluctuations in semen parameters within their physiological ranges after receiving the vaccine, it has not yet reached a level of influence on the partner's pregnancy probability. As to female without pregnancy, it is believed that vaccination will not affect fertility; however, more research is needed to explore the short-term impact. Vaccination during any trimester is considered safe in pregnant women.

An investigation of the relationship between the general vaccination attitudes of pregnant women and their attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine

This study aimed to investigate the relationship between the attitudes of pregnant women toward general vaccines based on the Health Belief Model and their attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine. The study, which was designed as a descriptive, cross-sectional, and correlational study, was conducted with 348 pregnant women in three public hospitals in Northern Cyprus between June 24 and November 28, 2022. Data were collected using the "Participant Information Form," "Public Attitude Toward Vaccination Scale-Health Belief Model" (PAVS-HBM), and "Attitudes Toward the COVID-19 Vaccine" (ATV-COVID-19). The COVID-19 vaccination rate among pregnant women was quite high. Pregnant women have a high perception of sensitivity, importance, benefit, and health responsibility for routine vaccines and vaccination programs based on the HBM, and a low perception of barriers to vaccination. These results showed that pregnant women have a determined and positive attitude toward the acceptance of vaccines in general. On the other hand, the attitude of pregnant women toward the COVID-19 vaccine was moderately negative. Despite the reservations about the COVID-19 vaccine, a determined and positive attitude toward vaccines in general has increased acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Review of short-term and long-term adverse effects of covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

The covid-19 pandemic sparked a debate about the safety of vaccines during pregnancy. However, pregnant women were excluded from the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine phase 3 trials. As two years have passed since the first Covid-19 vaccine and more studies have been conducted, we want to evaluate the scientific literature to determine any actual risks in taking the vaccine during pregnancy.

METHODS

We conducted literature research using PubMed and Google Scholar databases from January to April 2023. As the review considers short- and long-term adverse effects it was divided into two parts. The first part was conducted as a systematic review. The second concerning long-term negative effects due to lack of research is a literature review. The inclusion criteria for the systematic review part were singleton pregnancies, women vaccinated during pregnancy, and studies from 2020 and later. The most common short-term pregnancy adverse effects were included in the search: preterm delivery, small gestation age, intrauterine death, congenital defects, stillborn, fetal growth retardation, spontaneous abortion. Maternal immune activation was the primary concern for the long-term adverse effects and whether vaccination could cause it. The search terms included maternal immune activation, fetal neurodevelopment, neuropsychiatric disorders and the studies used were from 2019.

RESULTS

Most studies showed no significant difference in short-term adverse effects between vaccinated and non-vaccinated women and their fetuses. However, the literature is insufficient to evaluate possible long-term adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Available evidence supports the safety of administering SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to pregnant women, but further systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential. Maternal immune activation caused by vaccination may impact a child's neurodevelopment and should be a concern for future studies.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women in Rio De Janeiro City, Brazil

COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy is safe and effective in reducing the risk of complications. However, the uptake is still below targets worldwide. This study aimed to explore the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination uptake among pregnant women since data on this topic is scarce in low-to-middle-income countries. A retrospective cohort study included linked data on COVID-19 vaccination and pregnant women who delivered a singleton live birth from August 1, 2021, to July 31, 2022, in Rio de Janeiro City, Brazil. Multiple logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with vaccination during pregnancy, applying a hierarchical model and describing odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Of 65,304 pregnant women included in the study, 53.0% (95% CI, 52-53%) received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. Higher uptake was observed among women aged older than 34 (aOR 1.21, 95%CI 1.15-1.28), black (aOR 1.10, 1.04-1.16), or parda/brown skin colour (aOR 1.05, 1.01-1.09), with less than eight years of education (aOR 1.09, 1.02-1.17), living without a partner (aOR 2.24, 2.16-2.34), more than six antenatal care appointments (aOR 1.92, 1.75-2.09), and having a previous child loss (OR 1.06, 1.02-1.11). These results highlight the need for targeted educational campaigns, trustful communication, and accessibility strategies for specific populations to improve vaccination uptake during pregnancy.

Understanding COVID-19 Vaccine Knowledge, Beliefs, and Trusted Information Sources Among Black Women in Kentucky: Implications for Vaccine Uptake

To optimize COVID-19 vaccination rates among Black women in the United States, it is crucial to understand their vaccine beliefs and determine the most effective communication sources and messages to encourage vaccination. Consequently, we conducted seven focus groups with 20 Black women from Kentucky (aged 18-37 years) between October and November 2020. We identified five themes reflecting the participants' level of awareness, knowledge of the vaccine and vaccine development process; their uncertainty about vaccine safety and clinical trials; their willingness to get vaccinated, and their preferences for trusted sources and persuasive messages to motivate vaccine uptake. Despite the participants' high level of awareness about the vaccine's development, significant concerns were identified regarding the speed of the vaccine's development and clinical trials, known medical injustices against Black people, political influence, vaccine efficacy, and potential side effects that fed their unwillingness to vaccinate. Based on our findings, we recommend vaccination campaigns targeting Black women should prioritize messaging highlighting the benefits and limitations of the vaccine while emphasizing its protective benefits for self, family, and community. Campaigns should also include Black healthcare providers as sources of messages. The findings have additional implications for encouraging continued confidence in the vaccine and improving uptake.

Preeclampsia to COVID-19: A journey towards improved placental and vascular function using sulforaphane

Excess inflammation and oxidative stress are common themes in many pathologies of pregnancy including preeclampsia and more recently severe COVID-19. The risk of preeclampsia increases following maternal infection with COVID-19, potentially relating to significant overlap in pathophysiology with endothelial, vascular and immunological dysfunction common to both. Identifying a therapy which addresses these injurious processes and stabilises the endothelial and vascular maternal system would help address the significant global burden of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality they cause. Sulforaphane is a naturally occurring phytonutrient found most densely within cruciferous vegetables. It has anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and immune modulating properties via upregulation of phase-II detoxification enzymes. This review will cover the common pathways shared by COVID-19 and preeclampsia and offer a potential therapeutic target via nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor upregulation in the form of sulforaphane.

The relationship between COVID-19 vaccination status in pregnancy and birthweight

BACKGROUND

Despite findings that maternal COVID-19 infection in pregnancy is associated with low birthweight (weight of ≤2500 g), previous studies demonstrate no difference in low birthweight risk between COVID-19 vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant persons. Few studies, however, have examined the association between unvaccinated, incomplete vaccination, and complete vaccination on low birthweight, and they have been limited by small sample sizes and lack of adjustment for covariates.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to address key limitations of prior work and evaluate this association between unvaccinated, incomplete, and complete COVID-19 vaccination status in pregnancy and low birthweight. We predicted a protective association of vaccination on low birthweight that varies by number of doses received.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a population-based retrospective study using the Vizient clinical database, which included data from 192 hospitals in the United States. Our sample included pregnant persons who delivered between January 2021 and April 2022 at hospitals that reported maternal vaccination data and birthweight at delivery. Pregnant persons were categorized into 3 groups as follows: unvaccinated; incompletely vaccinated (1 dose of Pfizer or Moderna); or completely vaccinated (1 dose of Johnson & Johnson or ≥2 doses of Moderna or Pfizer). Demographics and outcomes were analyzed using standard statistical tests. We performed multivariable logistic regression to account for potential confounders between vaccination status and low birthweight in the original cohort. Propensity score matching was used to reduce bias related to the likelihood of vaccination, and the multivariable logistic regression model was then applied to the propensity score-matched cohort. Stratification analysis was performed for gestational age and race and ethnicity.

RESULTS

Of the 377,995 participants, 31,155 (8.2%) had low birthweight, and these participants were more likely to be unvaccinated than those without low birthweight (98.8% vs 98.5%, P<.001). Incompletely vaccinated pregnant persons were 13% less likely to have low birthweight neonates compared to unvaccinated persons (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.04), and completely vaccinated persons were 21% less likely to have low birthweight neonates (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.89). After controlling for maternal age, race or ethnicity, hypertension, pregestational diabetes, lupus, tobacco use, multifetal gestation, obesity, use of assisted reproductive technology, and maternal or neonatal COVID-19 infections in the original cohort, these associations remained significant for only complete vaccination (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.91) and not incomplete vaccination (adjusted odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.04). In the propensity score-matched cohort, pregnant persons who were completely vaccinated against COVID-19 were 22% less likely to have low birthweight neonates compared to unvaccinated and incompletely vaccinated individuals (adjusted odds ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.79).

CONCLUSION

Pregnant persons who were completely vaccinated against COVID-19 were less likely to have low birthweight neonates compared to unvaccinated and incompletely vaccinated individuals. This novel association was observed among a large population after adjusting for confounders of low birthweight and factors influencing the likelihood of receiving the COVID-19 vaccine.

Prospective Attitudes towards Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Vaccination: Validation of a Survey Instrument among Young Females in Jordan Pending Vaccine Authorization

In May 2023, the U.S. FDA advisors endorsed Pfizer's pregnancy-administered vaccine (branded ABRYSVO) to protect infants from respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection. Vaccination can reduce the burden of RSV-related respiratory disease, with previous studies showing its substantial medical and financial burden in Jordan. However, pregnant women may exhibit hesitancy to get vaccinated due to concerns about potential risks to themselves or their fetuses. This study aimed to assess the acceptance of the RSV vaccine among young females and identify the determinants influencing their decision using a newly constructed instrument. A survey instrument was developed and validated, comprising 26 items to measure RSV vaccine acceptance. A cross-sectional study design was employed, with data collection from a sample of females aged 18 to 45 residing in Jordan during 5-6 July 2023, using a convenient approach via an online distributed questionnaire. The final study sample comprised 315 respondents, with 67.6% who have heard of RSV before the study. If the vaccine was safe, effective, and provided freely, 70.2% showed willingness to get the RSV vaccine, 15.2% resisted, and 14.6% were hesitant. Principal component analysis identified six internally consistent sub-scales with the following suggested themes: Advice, Burden, Conspiracy, Dangers, Efficiency, and Fear, comprising 21 items collectively as assigned as the "ABCDEF" scale for RSV vaccine acceptance. RSV vaccine acceptance in this study was associated with the advice and fear constructs. The validated survey instrument successfully captured important determinants of RSV vaccine acceptance among young females. RSV vaccine promotion efforts should focus on the following: enhancing vaccine education, improving trust in healthcare institutions and providers, reducing burdens through resolving cost issues and focusing on the role of social support, addressing safety concerns, and tailoring communication strategies to effectively promote the benefits of the vaccine. These insights can inform public health policies and interventions aiming to promote RSV vaccination and mitigate the burden of RSV-related diseases among infants. Follow-up studies are recommended with pregnant women as the target group to assess their attitude towards RSV vaccination and to confirm the validity of the conceived ABCDEF survey instrument.

How do perceptions of Covid-19 risk impact pregnancy-related health decisions? A convergent parallel mixed-methods study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant people have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 disease. They have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 infection control policies, which exacerbated conditions resulting in intimate partner violence, healthcare access, and mental health distress. This project examines the impact of accumulated individual health decisions and describes how perinatal care and health outcomes changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

Quantitative strand: Describe differences between 2019, 2021, and 2022 birth groups related to maternal vaccination, perinatal care, and mental health care. Examine the differential impacts on racialized and low-income pregnant people.Qualitative strand: Understand how pregnant people's perceptions of COVID-19 risk influenced their decision-making about vaccination, perinatal care, social support, and mental health.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a Canadian convergent parallel mixed-methods study. The quantitative strand uses a retrospective cohort design to assess birth group differences in rates of Tdap and COVID-19 vaccination, gestational diabetes screening, length of post-partum hospital stay, and onset of depression, anxiety, and adjustment disorder, using administrative data from ICES, formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Ontario) and PopulationData BC (PopData) (British Columbia). Differences by socioeconomic and ethnocultural status will also be examined. The qualitative strand employs qualitative description to interview people who gave birth between May 2020- December 2021 about their COVID-19 risk perception and health decision-making process. Data integration will occur during design and interpretation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study received ethical approval from McMaster University and the University of British Columbia. Findings will be disseminated via manuscripts, presentations, and patient-facing infographics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT05663762.

Randomised controlled trials of behavioural nudges delivered through text messages to increase influenza and COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women (the EPIC study): study protocol

BACKGROUND

Influenza and COVID-19 infections during pregnancy may have serious adverse consequences for women as well as their infants. However, uptake of influenza and COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy remains suboptimal. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a multi-component nudge intervention to improve influenza and COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women.

METHODS

Pregnant women who receive antenatal care at five tertiary hospitals in South Australia, Western Australia and Victoria will be recruited to two separate randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Women will be eligible for the COVID-19 RCT is they have received two or less doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. Women will be eligible for the influenza RCT if they have not received the 2023 seasonal influenza vaccine. Vaccination status at all stages of the trial will be confirmed by the Australian Immunisation Register (AIR). Participants will be randomised (1:1) to standard care or intervention group (n = 1038 for each RCT). The nudge intervention in each RCT will comprise three SMS text message reminders with links to short educational videos from obstetricians, pregnant women and midwives and vaccine safety information. The primary outcome is at least one dose of a COVID-19 or influenza vaccine during pregnancy, as applicable. Logistic regression will compare the proportion vaccinated between groups. The effect of treatment will be described using odds ratio with a 95% CI.

DISCUSSION

Behavioural nudges that facilitate individual choices within a complex context have been successfully used in other disciplines to stir preferred behaviour towards better health choices. If our text-based nudges prove to be successful in improving influenza and COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women, they can easily be implemented at a national level.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT05613751. Registered on November 14, 2022.

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant persons

BACKGROUND

Vaccines reduce the risk of contracting and developing complications from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Pregnant people are at increased risk of disease-related complications but have a higher prevalence of vaccine hesitancy (VH) than their nonpregnant counterparts.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe risk factors and COVID-19- and vaccine-related perspectives that lead to VH among pregnant people in Mexico to target strategies to increase vaccine acceptance in this population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey-based study to evaluate risk factors and COVID-19- and vaccine-related perspectives associated with VH among pregnant people was conducted. Respondents were pregnant people of all ages attending a regular follow-up visit or admitted to labor and delivery in a third-level maternity hospital in Mexico. VH was defined as not having received a COVID-19 vaccine and either declining or being undecided to accept a vaccine during their pregnancy. We used bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models to estimate assess the relationship among demographic factors, COVID-19- and vaccine-related perspectives, and VH.

RESULTS

A total of 1475 respondents completed the questionnaire; 216 (18%) were under the age of 18 years, and 860 (58%) had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. In this sample, 264 (18%) were classified as vaccine hesitant. Key factors associated with VH were adolescence, having family as a primary source of information, first pregnancy, and history of vaccines in previous pregnancies. COVID-19 perspectives were also strongly associated with VH.

CONCLUSIONS

Among pregnant people in Mexico, VH is associated with demographic factors, vaccination history, sources of information, and perceived risks to the fetus. This information is relevant to policy makers and health care professionals to identify those more likely to be hesitant and to inform strategies to increase vaccine uptake among pregnant people.

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.

The determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention: a meta-review

Background

A large number of systematic reviews have been published that synthesized various determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention (CVI). However, they reported inconsistent evidence. Therefore, we conducted a meta-review (systematic review of systematic reviews) to provide a comprehensive synthesis of factors influencing CVI.

Methods

This meta-review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL were searched for systematic reviews published from 2020 to 2022 that examined the determinants of CVI. AMSTAR-2 critical appraisal tool was used to ensure the quality of included reviews, and ROBIS tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias.

Results

Globally, the average rate of COVID-19 vaccination intention was 56.97%. We identified 21 main determinants of CVI: socio-demographic, geographical location, social, political, government role, study timeline, attitude, perceived severity, perceived susceptibility, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control, norms, trust, conspiracy theory/propaganda/misinformation, knowledge, information and communication, vaccination recommendation, vaccination history, history of COVID-19 infection, and health status and well-being.

Conclusions

These results suggest that COVID-19 vaccination intention is a complex process and is affected by numerous multidimensional factors. Therefore, integrated communication strategies and multifaceted interventions may be effective for improving vaccination intention against COVID-19.

Fear of fertility side effects is a major cause for COVID-19 vaccine hesitance in infertile patients

Introduction

This study aims to investigate the acceptance, hesitance and attitudes of infertile female patients toward the COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

An anonymous cross-sectional online survey was conducted between 28th of January to 10th of August 2022. The questionnaire consisted of 35 questions on demographics, COVID-19 vaccination status, prior concerns of the vaccinated participants and reasons for not vaccinating among unvaccinated participants, and factors influencing the decision not to vaccinate.

Results

Of 406 participants who answered all questions, 92.1% reported having received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, 7.9% were unvaccinated. Factors associated with the decision for vaccination were full time or part time employment (p = 0.05), high trust in the principle of vaccination (p < 0.001), high willingness for other vaccination during fertility treatment (p < 0.001) and risk factors for severe COVID-19 (p = 0.007). Concerns about directly occurring adverse effects after vaccination (42.0%), about impact on own fertility (21.9%) or on the fertility treatment (27.5%) were the main concerns beforehand of vaccinated participants. Correlations between fertility concerns and mistrust in the general principle of vaccination were found. Beside general health concerns, unvaccinated participants reported fears about fertility impairment as the most important arguments against a COVID-19 vaccination (median of 5.0 on a five-point-Likert scale).

Conclusion

Both vaccinated and unvaccinated participants stated having concerns and fears about side effects of the COVID-19 vaccination on their fertility. To increase patients' trust in medical recommendations, such as vaccination, to avoid mistrust in the medical system and to maintain patient's compliance, there should be additional educational services that address infertile patients and their needs.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and predictors among pregnant women in Ethiopia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives

Despite safe and effective multiple vaccines, the COVID-19 pandemic continued to cause morbidity, mortality, and healthcare burden. Pregnant women are among the high-risk population for COVID-19 infection and bad outcomes. Vaccination is one of the most critical public health interventions to halt the devastating impact of a pandemic. However, hesitancy, unwillingness, and refusal to take the COVID-19 vaccines are global health challenges to vaccination roll-out, especially in Africa, including Ethiopia. Country-specific evidence is essential to take appropriate context-specific actions. Some single studies with inconsistent findings are available in Ethiopia. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to determine pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women in Ethiopia.

Study design

Systematic review and meta-analysis study design was used to synthesize evidence and overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and predictors among pregnant women.

Methods

A search of literature from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was conducted until January 30, 2023. All studies that met eligibility criteria were screened, and eight primary studies with 4419 total subjects were included in the meta-analysis. Two authors (DT and MK) independently extracted all the required data using a standardized form. We analyzed the data using STATA version 17 software. Heterogeneity was checked using Chocrane (Q-test) and I² tests. Finally, the overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and predictors were computed using a random-effect model.

Result

The meta-analysis revealed that a pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women in Ethiopia is 42.46% (95%CI: 28.75-56.18). Further subgroup analysis stratified by region of the primary studies showed that the pooled level of COVID-19 Acceptance among pregnant women in the Amhara region is 35.16% (95% CI: 20.49-49.82), South Nation Nationality and People 50.95% (95%C:12.24-89.67) and Oromia region 62.02% (95%CI: 58.27-65.76). Predictors for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women in Ethiopia were awareness/knowledge of pregnant women to COVID-19 vaccine (OR 3.33, 95%CI:2.13-4.14), maternal education (OR 3.09, 95%CI: 1.67-4.51 and chronic disease (OR 2.81, 95%CI: 1.82-3.79. The lowest level of vaccine acceptance was reported in the Amhara region, while the relatively highest was observed in the Oromia region.

Conclusion

The study found a low level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women in Ethiopia and emphasized the significance of improving awareness and education to increase vaccine uptake. It is crucial to provide interventions that create awareness about the COVID-19 vaccine and promote the importance of vaccination during antenatal care follow-up.

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.

Acceptance of recommended vaccinations during pregnancy: a cross-sectional study in Southern Italy

Background

Vaccine administration is a recommended, safe, and effective measure to protect pregnant women against vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). Despite available guidance, maternal immunization rates for vaccination against influenza and with the reduced antigen content tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) in Italy remain incredibly low. The primary goal of the study was to explore what Italian pregnant women knew about VPDs and immunization during pregnancy and what factors affected their decision to be vaccinated.

Methods

This cross-sectional study took place between October 2021 and April 2022 in the Southern part of Italy. All consecutive pregnant women, from those attending the selected facilities on randomly selected days, were approached to request participation. The inclusion criteria for participation were age ≥18 years, the ability to understand, speak, and read Italian, and being pregnant at any gestational age. The questionnaire, using a combination of checkboxes and free text answers, consisted of 32 items divided into five parts and lasted ~10 min.

Results

The results showed that 61% knew that the influenza vaccine is recommended and 48.7% knew that influenza could be risky during pregnancy; 74.1% wrongly reported that the Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine is recommended during pregnancy. Seven out of 10 pregnant women believed that strong evidence supported the safety of vaccinations during pregnancy, and more than half (55.6%) thought they were at increased risk of severe illness with COVID-19. Women in the sample believed that vaccines received during pregnancy pose a risk of adverse events to the unborn child with a median value of 6 (IQR 3-9), on a scale ranging from 1 to 10. Similarly, the fear of contracting pertussis and influenza during pregnancy showed a median value of 6 (IQR 3-9) and 5 (IQR 3-8), respectively. Only 21.1% and 36.5% of women received influenza and Tdap vaccines during pregnancy.

Conclusion

Unrealistic risk perception with a negative attitude toward vaccines in pregnancy and a low percentage of vaccinated pregnant women confirm the urgency of training women to make informed choices to increase overall vaccine uptake.

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.

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.

Maternal COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among Malaysian pregnant women: A multicenter cross-sectional study

Introduction

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused a global pandemic that resulted in devastating health, economic and social disruption. Pregnant mothers are susceptible to COVID-19 complications due to physiological and immunity changes in pregnancy. We aimed to assess the maternal vaccine acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Methods

A multi-center study across four teaching hospitals in the Klang Valley, Malaysia was conducted between September 2021 and May 2022. A survey was conducted using a self-administered electronic questionnaire. The survey instruments included; (1) maternal perception and attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination, (2) COVID-19 pregnancy-related anxiety, and 3) generalized anxiety disorder.

Results

The response rate was 96.6%, with a final number for analysis of 1,272. The majority of our women were Malays (89.5%), with a mean age (standard deviation, SD) of 32.2 (4.6). The maternal vaccine acceptance in our study was 77.1%. Household income (p < 0.001), employment status (p = 0.011), and health sector worker (p = 0.001) were independent predictors of maternal willingness to be vaccinated. COVID-19 infection to self or among social contact and greater COVID-19 pregnancy-related anxiety were associated with increased odds of accepting the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Women who rely on the internet and social media as a source of vaccine information were more likely to be receptive to vaccination (adjusted odd ratio, AOR 1.63; 95% CI 1.14-2.33). Strong correlations were observed between maternal vaccine acceptance and the positive perception of (1) vaccine information (p < 0.001), (2) protective effects of vaccine (p < 0.001), and (3) getting vaccinated as a societal responsibility (p < 0.001).

Discussion

The high maternal vaccine acceptance rate among urban pregnant women in Malaysia is most likely related to their high socio-economic status. Responsible use of the internet and social media, alongside appropriate counseling by health professionals, is essential in reducing vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women.

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.

The State of Play on COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnant and Breastfeeding Women: Recommendations, Legal Protection, Ethical Issues and Controversies in Italy

To date, extensive research has been conducted on vaccination against COVID-19 during pregnancy to verify the safety and efficacy of the vaccines, despite the fact that pregnant women were excluded from the initial clinical trials. The ever-increasing number of scientific publications has confirmed the absence of biological mechanisms associating mRNA vaccines with adverse effects in pregnancy and breastfeeding, although few studies have been carried out on their effect on fertility. While the Italian legal system provides for maternity protection measures and indemnity for vaccination damages pursuant to law no. 210/1992, it is not exempt from controversy. This contribution describes the state of play on COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant and lactating women, including: current recommendations for pregnant and lactating women; ethical issues related to vaccination hesitancy among pregnant women; the legislative paradox whereby sanctions may be imposed on women in certain professional categories who refuse vaccination because they are pregnant; and the possible legal consequences in the event of harm to the unborn child due to vaccination. All of this is considered in accordance with the principles of medical ethics, taking into account the national legislation.

Monkeypox Virus and Other Emerging Outbreaks: An Overview and Future Perspective

Monkeypox (MPX) is a zoonotic disease caused by the MPX virus from the poxviridae family of orthopoxviruses. Typically, endemic in central and west Africa, it has now become a matter of concern since cases have been reported in non-endemic countries around mid-June 2022, especially in the European region, with the transmission not related to travel. The diagnosis is made by PCR testing of the skin lesions. Even though treatment is symptomatic, antiretrovirals, such as tecovirimat, are used in severe cases. Vaccination with second and third generation vaccines is approved for prophylaxis in high risk individuals. Unfortunately, these options of treatment and prevention are only available in high income countries at the moment. This review, through a thorough literature search of articles from 2017 onward, focuses on epidemiology, clinical manifestations, challenges, treatment, prevention and control of MPX virus and how they can be corelated with other viral outbreaks including COVID-19, Acute Hepatitis of unknown origin, Measles and Dengue, to better predict and therefore prevent its transmission. The previous COVID-19 pandemic increased the disease burden on healthcare infrastructure of low-middle income countries, therefore, this recent MPX outbreak calls for a joint effort from healthcare authorities, political figures, and NGOs to combat the disease and prevent its further spread not only in high income but also in middle- and low-income countries.

The COVID-19 Vaccine and Pregnant Minority Women in the US: Implications for Improving Vaccine Confidence and Uptake

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AGOG) recommends the FDA-approved Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and boosters for all eligible pregnant women in the US. However, COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake among pregnant minority women have been poor. While the underlying reasons are unclear, they are likely to be associated with myths and misinformation about the vaccines. Direct and indirect factors that deter minority mothers in the US from receiving the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines require further investigation. Here, we examine the historical perspectives on vaccinations during pregnancy. We will examine the following aspects: (1) the influenza and tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccinations during pregnancy; (2) the exclusion of pregnant and lactating women from COVID-19 vaccine trials; (3) COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy, obstetric complications associated with symptomatic COVID-19 during pregnancy, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant minority women, and racial disparities experienced by pregnant minority women due to the COVID-19 pandemic as well as their potential impact on pregnancy care; and (4) strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake among pregnant minority women in the US. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among minority mothers can be mitigated by community engagement efforts that focus on COVID-19 vaccine education, awareness campaigns by trusted entities, and COVID-19-appropriate perinatal counseling aimed to improve COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Among Pregnant and Lactating Women in Saudi Arabia

Background The acceptance of vaccines among pregnant and breastfeeding women is vital to alleviate the risk of contracting and transmitting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, we aimed to assess the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant and breastfeeding/lactating women and the factors associated with the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine in Saudi Arabia. Methodology A cross-sectional survey was conducted among pregnant and breastfeeding women living in Saudi Arabia. A 23-item, self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant or lactating women. Results A total of 160 (53.3%) pregnant women and 140 (46.7%) breastfeeding/lactating mothers participated in the study. When the participants were asked, "Have you been vaccinated or are you planning to take the vaccine during pregnancy or breastfeeding/lactation?" 164 (54.7%) responded with "Yes." When compared with breastfeeding/lactating mothers (54, 38.6%), pregnant women had more concerns about the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccination (77 (48.1%); p = 0.043). The probability of rejecting COVID-19 vaccination was higher among breastfeeding/lactating women with a lower education level than those with a tertiary education level (odds ratio = 3.42, confidence interval = 1.24, 9.45, p = 0.018). Conclusions This study reported high acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination in a sample of breastfeeding/lactating women. Concern about vaccine safety among many pregnant women was the major reason for hesitancy. Factors such as low education, concerns regarding the efficacy and safety of the vaccine, and doctors' (e.g., obstetrician and gynecologist) recommendations for the COVID-19 vaccine were associated with vaccine acceptance.

Association of Infection with Different SARS-CoV-2 Variants during Pregnancy with Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim of this study is to review the currently available data, and to explore the association of infection with different severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants during pregnancy with maternal and perinatal outcomes in the real world. Observational cohort studies were analyzed that described the maternal and perinatal outcomes of infection with different SARS-CoV-2 variants during pregnancy. Random-effects inverse-variance models were used to evaluate the pooled prevalence (PP) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for maternal and perinatal outcomes. Random effects were used to estimate the pooled odds ratios (OR) and their 95% CI for different outcomes between Delta and pre-Delta periods, and between Omicron and Delta periods. Eighteen studies, involving a total of 133,058 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy (99,567 cases of SARS-CoV-2 wild type or pre-variant infection and 33,494 cases of SARS-CoV-2 variant infections), were included in this meta-analysis. Among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infections, the PPs for required respiratory support, severe or critical illness, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, maternal death, and preterm birth <37 weeks were, respectively, 27.24% (95%CI, 20.51−33.97%), 24.96% (95%CI, 15.96−33.96%), 11.31% (95%CI, 4.00−18.61%), 4.20% (95%CI, 1.43−6.97%), and 33.85% (95%CI, 21.54−46.17%) in the Delta period, which were higher than those in the pre-Delta period, while the corresponding PPs were, respectively, 10.74% (95%CI, 6.05−15.46%), 11.99% (95%CI, 6.23−17.74%), 4.17% (95%CI, 1.53−6.80%), 0.63% (95%CI, 0.05−1.20%), and 18.58% (95%CI, 9.52−27.65%). The PPs for required respiratory support, severe or critical illness, and ICU admission were, respectively, 2.63% (95%CI, 0.98−4.28%), 1.11% (95%CI, 0.29−1.94%), and 1.83% (95%CI, 0.85−2.81%) in the Omicron period, which were lower than those in the pre-Delta and Delta periods. These results suggest that Omicron infections are associated with less severe maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes, though maternal ICU admission, the need for respiratory support, and preterm birth did also occur with Omicron infections. Since Omicron is currently the predominant strain globally, and has the highest rates of transmission, it is still important to remain vigilant in protecting the vulnerable populations of mothers and infants. In particular, obstetricians and gynecologists should not ignore the adverse risks of maternal ICU admission, respiratory support, and preterm births in pregnant patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections, in order to protect the health of mothers and infants.

Factors Associated with Willingness to Receive a COVID-19 Vaccine in Adult Polish Population-A Cross-Sectional Survey

Vaccinations are proven to be the most efficient in preventing COVID-19 disease. Nonetheless, some people are skeptical and hesitant. The study aimed to determine factors associated with willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in the Polish adult population. An online survey consisting of questions regarding (1) demographic information and (2) health issues (the status of vaccination, comorbidities, receiving the flu vaccine and usage of health monitoring apps) was distributed between 13 January and 14 February 2022. Of the 7018 participants who met the study conditions, 76.89% (n = 5396) were females, 22.44% (n = 1575) were males and 0.67% (n = 47) did not specify gender. The median age was 31 years. Among them, 81.82% (n = 5742) were vaccinated and 18.18% (n = 1276) were not. 46.87% (n = 3289) had no chronic co-morbidities. Factors associated with lower odds to receive the vaccine were: being men (p = 0.02; OR = 0.83), having lower education status (p = 0.001, OR = 0.56−0.77), living in a smaller residence area (p < 0.001, OR = 0.47−0.73.), not receiving flu vaccination (p < 0.001, OR = 24.51) and not using health monitoring applications (p < 0.001, OR = 1.56). Health education and communication strategies are needed to achieve large-scale vaccine acceptability and finally herd immunity.

Relationship between Anti-Spike Antibodies and Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Infants Born to COVID-19 Vaccinated Mothers

The goal of this study was to investigate the relationship between anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike IgG titers passively transferred to the fetus from maternal vaccination during pregnancy and timing of infant SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pregnant, vaccinated individuals (n = 105) and their infants (n = 107) were enrolled in a prospective cohort study from July 2021 to June 2022, linking infant anti-Spike IgG titer at birth to risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first fifteen months of life. Cord blood sera were collected at delivery and infant sera were collected at two and six months of age. Anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike IgG levels were quantified in cord and infant sera using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Infants were followed for SARS-CoV-2 infection through fifteen months of age. Anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike IgG titers in infants declined significantly with increased age (p < 0.001). Infants with higher anti-Spike cord blood levels had significantly longer disease-free intervals prior to infection with SARS-CoV-2 (p = 0.027). While higher anti-Spike IgG titer at two months of age was associated with a longer interval to infection through nine months of age (p = 0.073), infant anti-Spike IgG titers by six months of age had no impact on disease-free interval. This cohort study suggests that passively transferred maternal IgG is protective against infant SARS-CoV-2 infection, with higher antibody levels at birth significantly associated with longer disease-free intervals. Infant antibodies and protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection wane significantly after six months, suggesting that vaccination is needed at this stage to optimize protection against COVID-19.