Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Maternal Vaccine Knowledge, Attitudes, and Intentions

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

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

Influenza vaccine during pregnancy, recommendations from healthcare providers, and race/ethnicity in the United States

OBJECTIVES

We examined racial/ethnic differences in the association between influenza vaccine recommendations from healthcare providers and maternal vaccination uptake.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study examined data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System. We categorized respondents as non-Hispanic (NH) Whites, NH-Blacks, NH-Asians, American Indians/Alaska Natives, NH Other non-Whites, and Hispanics. We conducted multivariable logistical regression models to evaluate adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Covariates included maternal age, marital status, education, insurance status before pregnancy, the number of previous live births, the number of prenatal care visits, and smoking status during pregnancy.

RESULTS

The prevalences of receiving influenza vaccine recommendations from healthcare providers and maternal vaccine were 80.01% and 50.42%, respectively. NH-Blacks are less likely to receive provider recommendations (AOR = 0.82; 95%CI 0.77-0.87) and be vaccinated (AOR = 0.76; 95%CI 0.72-0.80) than NH-Whites. Receiving provider recommendations was significantly associated with increased maternal influenza vaccine uptake (AOR = 15.50; 95% CI 14.51-16.55). The associations were significant for all racial/ethnic groups, with the highest among NH-Asians (AOR = 22.04; 95% CI 17.88-27.16) and the lowest among NH Other non-Whites (AOR = 11.07; 95% CI 8.25-14.86). Within NH-Asians, effectiveness among Chinese was highest (AOR = 29.39; 95% CI 18.10-47.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Racial/ethnic disparities in maternal influenza vaccine uptake and receiving vaccine recommendations from healthcare providers persisted. Further studies on the racial/ethnic disparities in maternal vaccination were warranted and tailored strategies are required to reduce this health disparity.

A Review of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Epidemiology Among Children: Linking Effective Prevention to Vulnerable Populations

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the greatest contributor to lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) in children less than 5 years of age and the leading cause for infant hospitalizations in the United States (US). The burden of severe disease disproportionately impacts racial and ethnic minority groups, highlighting the need for interventions that promote health equity. Recent advancements in effective prophylactic agents have the potential to drastically alter the landscape of RSV disease among all young children. The effectiveness of prophylaxis, however, will rely on a clear understanding of RSV epidemiology. The purpose of this review is to discuss key aspects of RSV epidemiology while focusing on efforts to support equitable distribution of prophylactic agents to mitigate existing health disparities.

Factors in COVID-19 vaccine uptake in five racial/ethnic Colorado communities: A report from the Colorado CEAL project

PURPOSE

To understand motivators, concerns, and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine initiation for adults in five racial/ethnic communities across Colorado.

METHODS

Community-based data collectors surveyed participants from five Colorado communities (urban and rural Latina/o/x, urban Black, rural African American immigrant, and urban American Indian) about vaccine attitudes, intentions, and uptake from September to December 2021. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated with the primary outcome of COVID-19 vaccine "initiation."

RESULTS

Most participants (71.1%) reported having initiated COVID-19 vaccination; vaccine series completion was 65.1%. Both motivators and concerns about COVID-19 vaccines were prevalent. Vaccine hesitancy (OR: 0.41, 95% CI:0.32-0.53; p < .001) and low perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination social norms (OR: 0.48, 95% CI:0.27-0.84; p = .01) were associated with vaccine initiation.

CONCLUSION

Despite the limitation of a moderate sample size, our findings support the need for further interventions to increase vaccination against COVID-19 by reducing vaccine hesitancy and improving perceived social norms of vaccination in underserved Colorado communities.

IMPLICATIONS

To improve trust in vaccines and promote vaccine uptake, community messaging should be tailored to vaccination motivators and concerns and demonstrate COVID-19 vaccination as the community default.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy prevalence in Mexico: A systematic review and metanalysis

Background

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is a recognized threat to public health that undermines efforts to mitigate disease burden. This study aims to gather available evidence regarding COVID-19 VH in Mexico, estimate the prevalence of VH, and its determinants to inform policymaking in this country.

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of the MEDLINE literature, articles that estimated the prevalence of COVID-19 VH in Mexico were included in the analysis to obtain a pooled estimate. We used a binomial-normal model for meta-analysis of proportions (i.e., generalized linear mixed model) to perform the metanalysis. We then performed a narrative review of COVID-19 VH in Mexican subpopulations.

Results

Seven studies met inclusion criteria. We estimated a pooled prevalence of COVID-19 VH of 16 % (95 % CI: 11-23 %) in Mexico. We found an association between VH and demographic characteristics, intrinsic vaccine factors, and beliefs. Subgroup analyses from specific studies suggested that patients with clinical conditions such as breast cancer or rheumatologic diseases had a higher prevalence of VH.

Conclusions

VH is a highly complex and dynamic phenomenon in Mexico. Characterizing and understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the Mexican population helps target future policy interventions to mitigate the spread and impact of infectious diseases. The implications of VH differ among groups that may be at higher risk of severe disease, underscoring the importance of prompt research among these groups as well as targeted interventions to address VH.

RSV Vaccination Intention Among People Who Are or Plan to Become Pregnant

OBJECTIVES

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a common pediatric infection, with young infants being at the highest risk of hospitalization and long-term sequela. New preventive agents have been recommended to prevent severe RSV illness in infants, including a vaccine administered during pregnancy. The current rates of recommended vaccination in pregnancy are suboptimal. Our objective was to characterize interest in RSV vaccination during pregnancy among people across the United States who were pregnant or planning to become pregnant.

METHODS

In March 2023, we conducted a national cross-sectional online survey of individuals 18 to 45 years old who were currently pregnant or trying to become pregnant on their perceptions of RSV-related illness and intentions to get vaccinated against RSV. We performed logistic regression analyses to determine the odds and predicted proportions of the likelihood of RSV vaccination during pregnancy, controlling for sociodemographic factors.

RESULTS

Of 1619 completed surveys, 1528 were analyzed. 54% of respondents indicated that they were "very likely" to get vaccinated against RSV during pregnancy. The perception of RSV as a serious illness was the strongest predictor of vaccination likelihood. In the full regression model, predicted proportions of "very likely" to vaccinate against RSV followed a similar pattern (63% if RSV infection was perceived as serious and likely, 55% if serious and unlikely, 35% if not serious; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Raising awareness of RSV infection as likely and potentially serious for infants may be an influential component of targeted communications that promote RSV vaccine uptake during pregnancy.

Racial and ethnic disparities in influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women in the United States: The contribution of vaccine-related attitudes

OBJECTIVE

Racial and ethnic disparities in influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women in the United States have been documented. This study assessed the contribution of vaccine-related attitudes to coverage disparities.

METHODS

Surveys were conducted following the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 influenza seasons in a US research network. Using electronic health record data to identify pregnant women, random samples were selected for surveying; non-Hispanic Black women and influenza-unvaccinated women were oversampled. Regression-based decomposition analyses were used to assess the contribution of vaccine-related attitudes to racial and ethnic differences in influenza vaccination. Data were combined across survey years, and analyses were weighted and accounted for survey design.

RESULTS

Survey response rate was 41.2% (721 of 1748) for 2019-2020 and 39.3% (706 of 1798) for 2020-2021. Self-reported influenza vaccination was higher among non-Hispanic White respondents (79.4% coverage, 95% CI 73.1%-85.7%) than Hispanic (66.2% coverage, 95% CI 52.5%-79.9%) and non-Hispanic Black (55.8% coverage, 95% CI 50.2%-61.4%) respondents. For all racial and ethnic groups, a high proportion (generally >80%) reported being seen for care, recommended for influenza vaccination, and offered vaccination. In decomposition analyses, vaccine-related attitudes (e.g., worry about vaccination causing influenza; concern about vaccine safety and effectiveness) explained a statistically significant portion of the observed racial and ethnic disparities in vaccination. Maternal age, education, and health status were not significant contributors after controlling for vaccine-related attitudes.

CONCLUSIONS

In a setting with relatively high influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women, racial and ethnic disparities in coverage were identified. Vaccine-related attitudes were associated with the disparities observed.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

What matters to us: Bridging research and accurate information through dialogue (BRAID) to build community trust and cultivate vaccine confidence

Despite higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infections and mortality, vaccine uptake in Black and Latinx populations remained disproportionately low, including in the Bronx, New York. In response, we used the Bridging Research, Accurate Information, and Dialogue (BRAID) model to elicit community members' COViD-19 vaccine-related perspectives and informational needs and inform strategies to improve vaccine acceptance. We conducted a longitudinal qualitative study over 13 months (May 2021-June 2022), with 25 community experts from the Bronx including community health workers, and representatives from community-based organizations. Each expert participated in 1-5 of the 12 conversation circles conducted via Zoom. Clinicians and scientists, attended circles to provide additional information in content areas identified by the experts. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyze the conversations. Five overarching themes, related to trust, emerged: (1) disparate and unjust treatment from institutions; (2) the impact of rapidly changing COVID messages in the lay press (a different story every day); (3) influencers of vaccine intention; (4) strategies to build community trust; and (5) what matters to community experts [us]. Our findings highlighted the influence of factors, such as health communication, on trust (or lack thereof) and vaccine intention. They also reinforce that creating safe spaces for dialogue and listening and responding to community concerns in real time are effective trust-building strategies. The BRAID model fostered open discussion about the factors that influence vaccine uptake and empowered participants to share accurate information with their community. Our experience suggests that the model can be adapted to address many public health issues.

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

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

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Discussion

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

Influenza Vaccination Among Pregnant Women: Self-report Compared With Vaccination Data From Electronic Health Records, 2018-2020 Influenza Seasons

OBJECTIVES

Having accurate influenza vaccination coverage estimates can guide public health activities. The objectives of this study were to (1) validate the accuracy of electronic health record (EHR)-based influenza vaccination data among pregnant women compared with survey self-report and (2) assess whether survey respondents differed from survey nonrespondents by demographic characteristics and EHR-based vaccination status.

METHODS

This study was conducted in the Vaccine Safety Datalink, a network of 8 large medical care organizations in the United States. Using EHR data, we identified all women pregnant during the 2018-2019 or 2019-2020 influenza seasons. Surveys were conducted among samples of women who did and did not appear vaccinated for influenza according to EHR data. Separate surveys were conducted after each influenza season, and respondents reported their influenza vaccination status. Analyses accounted for the stratified design, sampling probability, and response probability.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 50.5% (630 of 1247) for 2018-2019 and 41.2% (721 of 1748) for 2019-2020. In multivariable analyses combining both survey years, non-Hispanic Black pregnant women had 3.80 (95% CI, 2.13-6.74) times the adjusted odds of survey nonresponse; odds of nonresponse were also higher for Hispanic pregnant women and women who had not received (per EHR data) influenza vaccine during current or prior influenza seasons. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of EHR documentation of influenza vaccination compared with self-report were ≥92% for both survey years combined. The negative predictive value of EHR-based influenza vaccine status was 80.5% (95% CI, 76.7%-84.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

EHR-based influenza vaccination data among pregnant women were generally concordant with self-report. New data sources and novel approaches to mitigating nonresponse bias may be needed to enhance influenza vaccination surveillance efforts.

Prenatal tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine effectiveness at preventing infant pertussis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of the tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine containing five pertussis components (Tdap5; Adacel®, Sanofi) when given during pregnancy at preventing pertussis in infants less than 2 months of age.

METHODS

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in collaboration with the Emerging Infections Program (EIP) Network, undertook a case-control study evaluating the effectiveness of Tdap vaccination in pregnancy against pertussis in infants less than 2 months of age based on data collected by the EIP Network from 2011 through 2014. The dataset from the CDC/EIP Network study was used to conduct this product-specific vaccine effectiveness analysis of Tdap5 vaccination in pregnancy to prevent disease in young infants. The main outcome of interest was vaccine effectiveness in infants whose pregnant parents were vaccinated with Tdap5 between 27 and 36 weeks' gestation, in accordance with the ideal timing for Tdap vaccination in pregnancy recommended by the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Odd ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using conditional logistic regression, and vaccine effectiveness was calculated as (1-OR) × 100 %.

RESULTS

There were 160 infant pertussis cases and 302 matched controls included in this Tdap5-specific study. Tdap5 effectiveness in preventing pertussis in infants whose pregnant parents were vaccinated between 27 and 36 weeks' gestation was 92.5 % (95 % CI, 38.5 %-99.1 %). Effectiveness of Tdap5 against pertussis-related hospitalization in infants whose pregnant parents were vaccinated between 27 and 36 weeks' gestation could not be calculated due to lack of discordance among matched cases and controls. Vaccination of the parents after pregnancy or less than 14 days before delivery did not protect infants from pertussis.

CONCLUSIONS

Tdap5 vaccination in pregnancy between 27 and 36 weeks' gestation is highly effective at protecting young infants from pertussis.

STUDY REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05040802.

Maternal Vaccination and Vaccine Hesitancy

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

The association between maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes in the United States: Pregnancy risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS)

OBJECTIVE

Influenza vaccination during pregnancy is highly recommended. We examined the association between maternal influenza vaccination and adverse birth outcomes.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) during 2012-2017. The primary exposure was the receipt of influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth (PTB), and small for gestational age (SGA) were the primary outcomes. We conducted multivariable logistic regression models to estimate the adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Covariates used to adjust confounding included maternal age, marital status, education, race and ethnicity, insurance status before pregnancy, and smoking status. For a subgroup in 2012-2015, we analyzed the association between influenza vaccination in each trimester and adverse birth outcomes.

RESULTS

During 2012-2017, compared with unvaccinated women, women vaccinated during pregnancy had a lower risk of LBW and PTB. During 2012-2015, maternal influenza vaccination in the 1st and 3rd trimesters was associated with a reduced risk of LBW and PTB, and vaccination in the 3rd trimester had a greater protective effect than in the 1st trimester. Influenza vaccination was not associated with SGA regardless of trimester.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that influenza vaccination during pregnancy is a safe and effective way to protect newborns.

Tetanus, Diphtheria, and Acellular Pertussis Vaccination Coverage Among Publicly Insured Pregnant Women, U.S., 2016-2019

Introduction

Vaccination with tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccine during pregnancy is highly effective against Bordetella pertussis in young infants. We aimed to evaluate the uptake of maternal tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccination during the recommended gestation period of 27 through 36 weeks among women enrolled in a public medical insurance plan in the U.S.

Methods

In this analysis using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services insurance claims data, we identified women aged 15 through 49 years who delivered a live-born infant from 2016 through 2019. We identified claims for tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccination to calculate the proportion of women who were vaccinated during Weeks 27 through 36 of gestation in each calendar year. We also assessed the average annual maternal tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis coverage by age group, race and ethnicity, U.S. Census region of residence, and plan type. Data were analyzed in 2021.

Results

Among 4,318,823 deliveries, the 4-year national average for tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccination was 26%, improving from 22% in 2016 to 31% in 2019 (p<0.001). Within subgroups, the lowest 4-year average coverage was among women aged 15 through 18 years (22%); Black, non-Hispanic (23%) and Hispanic women (24%); those residing in the South (18%); those enrolled in a Children's Health Insurance Program plan (22%); and those covered by a fee-for-service plan (19%). Coverage increased across all subgroups from 2016 through 2019.

Conclusions

Although maternal tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis coverage among publicly insured women in the U.S. increased from 2016 through 2019, it remained considerably lower than estimated national coverage, with notable differences by race and ethnicity.

Protecting pregnant people & infants against influenza: A landscape review of influenza vaccine hesitancy during pregnancy and strategies for vaccine promotion

Before COVID-19, influenza vaccines were the most widely recommended vaccine during pregnancy worldwide. In response to immunization during pregnancy, maternal antibodies offer protection against potentially life-threatening disease in both pregnant people and their infants up to six months of age. Despite this, influenza vaccine hesitancy is common, with few countries reporting immunization rates in pregnant people above 50%. In this review, we highlight individual, institutional, and social factors associated with influenza vaccine hesitancy during pregnancy. In addition, we present an overview of the evidence evaluating interventions to address influenza vaccine hesitancy during pregnancy. While some studies have indicated promising results, no single intervention has consistently effectively increased influenza vaccine uptake during pregnancy. Using a social-ecological model of health framework, future strategies addressing multiple levels of vaccine hesitancy will be needed to realize the potential health benefits of prenatal immunization programs.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

Understanding Barriers and Facilitators to Maternal Immunization: A Systematic Narrative Synthesis of the Published Literature

Introduction

Vaccines are being developed against Group B Streptococcus and respiratory syncytial virus. These vaccines are designed to be given to pregnant women to protect infants; thus, their success depends on uptake in this population. Maternal immunization programs have struggled to achieve target coverage rates. This systematic narrative synthesis aims to define the most important barriers and facilitators for maternal immunization and to identify priority areas for future research.

Methods

A search strategy was developed in Medline and adapted according to the requirements of additional search engines. Two reviewers independently reviewed the studies, using pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results sections of included studies were coded, and thematic analysis was used to identify prominent themes.

Results

321 studies were included in the final review. Most studies came from North America (37%), Europe (26%) or East Asia, Australia and New Zealand (22%). Low-and middle-income countries were under-represented. Five percent of studies came from Sub-Saharan Africa, and 2% came from South Asia. The prominent factors impacting maternal immunization were provider recommendation, perceived risks and benefits of maternal vaccines for the infant, race, birthplace, and access to healthcare. Few studies explored reasons behind racial and socioeconomic disparities in maternal immunization rates.

Discussion

A strong provider recommendation, equitable access to prenatal care and messaging that focuses on vaccine safety and infant benefits emerged as the key components for optimising vaccine uptake among pregnant women. Research among healthcare providers, minority groups and in low- and-middle-income countries was lacking. In anticipation of the expansion of maternal immunization programmes, focused research is needed to address these gaps and inform a successful public health strategy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10995-022-03508-0.

Preventable Disease, the Case of Colorado: School District Demographics and Childhood Immunizations

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of selected sociodemographic factors on childhood vaccination hesitancy and to define their role according to specific exemptions. This population-based cohort study utilized vaccination rate and sociodemographic data from 1st to 12th grade from 2017 to 2021 for all school districts in Colorado. Data included immunization status and exemptions for each vaccine, race, ethnicity, and free and reduced meal status. Data were evaluated through dimensional analysis and Generalized Linear Mixed Models. School districts with a higher representation of White students had lower immunization rates and use more personal exemptions while school districts with larger Hispanic populations and higher proportions of free and reduced lunches had higher vaccination rates and used more religious exemptions. Black and Pacific Islander populations had higher rates of incomplete vaccination records while Asian American population displayed increased vaccination compliance. Colorado is a robust example of how socioeconomic and cultural differences are important factors with a direct influence on vaccination rates. Future childhood vaccination campaigns and legislation should consider complex socioeconomic and cultural factors.

Influenza and Pertussis Maternal Vaccination Coverage and Influencing Factors in Spain: A Study Based on Primary Care Records Registry

The purpose was to determine the coverage of maternal vaccination against influenza and pertussis, and the characteristics associated with being vaccinated, in a health area of Catalonia, Spain. Some 36,032 anonymized and computerized clinical records registries of pregnant women from Primary Care Centres (e-CAP database) were analysed, from between 2015 and 2018. Vaccination coverage and the association with sociodemographic variables and clinical conditions were estimated using a Poisson regression model. Maternal vaccination coverage against influenza ranged between 11.9% in 2015 and 6.8% in 2018, following a decreasing trend (p < 0.001). Coverage with the tetanus toxoid, diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccine varied between 49.8% in 2016 and 79.4% in 2018, following an increasing trend (p < 0.001). Having living children and suffering from obesity were factors associated with not being vaccinated against both infections. The predictive variables of vaccination against influenza were diabetes (IRR: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.42−3.30) and asthma (IRR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.76−2.38); and for pertussis, it was asthma (IRR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.03−1.17). Different socio-demographic factors and chronic conditions in pregnant women were associated with maternal vaccination, and which will have to be taken into account in clinical practice when implementing strategies to improve the coverage of the programme.

Factors Influencing Health Equity of Influenza Vaccination in Pediatric Patients

Social factors can be a determinate for multiple health outcomes. We evaluated the association of numerous social factors on rates of influenza nonvaccination in a large pediatric primary and subspecialty care system.

Vaccine exposure during pregnancy among privately and publicly insured women in the United States, 2016-2018

BACKGROUND

Vaccine use during pregnancy affects maternal and infant health. Many women do not receive vaccines recommended during pregnancy; conversely, inadvertent exposure to vaccines contraindicated or not recommended during pregnancy may occur. We assessed exposure to two recommended vaccines and two vaccines not recommended during pregnancy among privately and Medicaid-insured women in the United States.

METHODS

This study includes a retrospective cohort of pregnancies in women aged 12-55 years resulting in live birth, spontaneous abortion, or stillbirth identified in the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial, Blue Health Intelligence® (BHI®) Commercial, and IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid Databases from August 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. Gestational age at vaccination was determined using a validated algorithm. We examined vaccines (1) recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) (tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis [Tdap]; inactivated influenza) and (2) not recommended (human papillomavirus [HPV]) or contraindicated (measles, mumps, and rubella [MMR]).

RESULTS

We identified 496,771 (MarketScan Commercial), 858,961 (BHI), and 289,573 (MarketScan Medicaid) pregnancies (approximately 75% aged 20-34 years). Across these three databases, 52.1%, 50.3%, and 31.3% of pregnancies, respectively, received Tdap, most often at a gestational age of 28 weeks, and influenza vaccination occurred in 32.1%, 30.8%, and 18.0% of pregnancies, respectively. HPV vaccination occurred in < 0.2% of pregnancies, mostly in the first trimester among women aged 12-19 years, and MMR was administered in < 0.1% of pregnancies. Use of other contraindicated vaccines per ACIP (e.g., varicella, live attenuated influenza) was rare.

CONCLUSION

Maternal vaccination with ACIP-recommended vaccines was suboptimal among privately and Medicaid-insured patients, with lower vaccination coverage among Medicaid-insured pregnancies than their privately insured counterparts. Inadvertent exposure to contraindicated vaccines during pregnancy was rare. This study evaluated only vaccinations reimbursed among insured populations and may have limited generalizability to uninsured populations.

Descriptive Observational Study of Tdap Vaccination Adhesion in Pregnant Women in the Florentine Area (Tuscany, Italy) in 2019 and 2020

Background: Tdap (Tetanus-Diphtheria-acellular Pertussis) vaccination is nowadays a worldwide-recommended practice to immunize pregnant women. The vaccine administration at the third trimester of pregnancy (as recommended by the WHO) would ensure antibody protection to both the mother and the newborn and has contributed to the significant drop of pertussis cases in infants. The aim of this observational study was to describe for the first time the socio-demographic characteristics and determinants of Tdap vaccination adhesion of pregnant women in the Florentine area. Methods: Information about parents’ vaccination status, their citizenship, employment type and mothers’ previous pregnancies and/or abortions were collected at the time of birth through the assistance birth certificates (CedAP) both for the years 2019 and 2020. This archive and the regional SISPC (Collective Prevention Healthcare Information System) linked using an anonymous unique personal identifier to retrieve the mother’s vaccination status. Results: We found an overall Tdap vaccination adhesion of 43% in 2019 and 47.3% in 2020. Several socio-demographic parameters would determine an increased vaccination adhesion, including parents’ geographical origin, mothers’ age and educational background, as well as the number of previous deliveries, abortions or voluntary termination of pregnancy. Conclusions: Since not much data are available on this topic in Italy, this study may constitute the baseline information for Tdap vaccination adhesion in pregnant women in the Florentine area (Italy). Thus, future successful vaccination strategies may be designed accordingly.