Women's views on accepting COVID-19 vaccination during and after pregnancy, and for their babies: a multi-methods study in the UK

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.

Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and association with hospitalisation due to COVID-19 in pregnancy: Retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To determine demographic and clinical characteristics associated with uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women, and quantify the relationship between vaccine uptake and admission to hospital for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women are at increased risk of severe adverse outcomes from COVID-19. Since April 2021, COVID-19 vaccines were recommended for pregnant women in the UK. Despite this, evidence shows vaccine uptake is low. However, this evidence has been based only on women admitted to hospital, or on qualitative or survey-based studies.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study including all pregnancies ending between 18 June 2021 and 22 August 2022, among adult women registered with a Northwest London general practice. Statistical analyses were mixed-effects multiple logistic regression models. We conducted a nested case-control analysis to quantify the relationship between vaccine uptake by end of pregnancy and hospitalisation for COVID-19 during pregnancy.

RESULTS

Our study included 47,046 pregnancies among 39,213 women. In 26,724 (57%) pregnancies, women had at least one dose of vaccine by the end of pregnancy. Uptake was lowest in pregnant women aged 18-24 (33%; reference group), Black women compared with White (37%; OR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.60), and women in more deprived areas (50%; reference group). Women with chronic conditions were more likely to receive the vaccine than women without (Asthma OR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.29). Patterns were similar for the second dose. Women admitted to hospital were much less likely to be vaccinated (22%) than those not admitted (57%, OR 0.22, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Women who received the COVID-19 vaccine were less likely to be hospitalised for COVID-19 during pregnancy. COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women is suboptimal, particularly in younger women, Black women, and women in more deprived areas. Interventions should focus on increasing uptake in these groups to improve health outcomes and reduce health inequalities.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK parents' attitudes towards routine childhood vaccines: A mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccines were key to controlling the pandemic and vaccination has been discussed extensively by the media and the public since 2020. We aimed to explore parents' attitudes towards routine childhood vaccination since COVID-19 and how the pandemic impacted their experiences of getting their child vaccinated.

METHODS

We used a mixed-methods approach-involving a questionnaire survey followed by focus groups. We partnered with The Mosaic Community Trust, an ethnic minority women's group based in a deprived area of North-West London, United Kingdom (UK) with historically low childhood vaccine uptake. Descriptive findings from the questionnaires were reported and chi-square analyses performed to examine differences by ethnicity. Thematic analysis of the free-text questionnaire responses and focus groups was undertaken, guided by the COM-B model of Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation.

RESULTS

Between Jun-Oct 2022, 518 parents completed the questionnaire (25% from ethnic minorities). Between March-May 2023 we held four focus groups with 22 parents (45% from ethnic minorities). Most parents (>90%) thought routine childhood vaccines for children were important. Over a third (38%) of all parents reported having more questions about childhood vaccines since COVID-19, though among parents belonging to an ethnicity group other than white, 59% said they had more questions compared to those of any white ethnicity group (30%, (p = <0.0001)). Difficulties accessing vaccine appointments were commoner reasons for children's vaccinations being delayed than parents increased concerns about vaccines. Since COVID-19 some parents felt vaccinations were even more important, and a very small minority felt the pandemic had made them mistrust vaccinations.

CONCLUSION

Following COVID-19, we found parents remain confident in childhood vaccines. However, some parents, particularly from ethnic minority groups may have more questions about childhood vaccines than pre-pandemic. Post COVID-19, to address declining vaccine uptake, parents need easy access to healthcare professionals to answer questions about childhood vaccinations.

Freedom for some, but not for Mum: the reproductive injustice associated with pandemic 'Freedom Day' for perinatal women in the United Kingdom

Introduction

Healthcare services for pregnant and postpartum ('perinatal') women were reconfigured significantly at the advent and for the duration of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, and despite the United Kingdom announcing 'Freedom Day' on 19 July 2021 (whereafter all legal lockdown-related restrictions were lifted), restrictions to maternity (antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal) services remained. This study presents data from eight perinatal women about their experiences of psychosocial wellbeing and maternity care in the post-'Freedom Day' epoch.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually, with data recorded, transcribed, and analysed by hand. Grounded theory analysis was employed with the final theory assessing the reproductive injustice of the pandemic 'Freedom Day'.

Results

Analysing iteratively and inductively led to four emergent themes: 'A Failing System, Failing Women'; 'Harm Caused by a State of Difference'; 'The Privileges (Not Rights) of Reproductive Autonomy, Agency, and Advocacy'; and 'Worried Women and Marginalised Mothers'. Together, these themes form the theory of 'Freedom for some, but not for Mum'.

Discussion

Women experienced a lack of high-quality reliable information about the pandemic, vaccination against the virus, and the changes to, and decision-making surrounding, their perinatal care. Women recognised healthcare professionals and maternity services were stretched and that maternity services were failing but often reported hostility from staff and abandonment at times when they were unsure about how to navigate their care. The most singular injustice was the disparity between women having to accept continuing restrictions to their freedom whilst receiving maternity care and the (reckless) freedom being enacted by the general public.

COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance During Pregnancy in Europe

Pregnant women have been shown to have a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination against the infection is the most effective strategy for preventing both severe disease and related complications. Nevertheless, vaccination hesitancy among pregnant women is an important issue affecting vaccine uptake and a major challenge for Public Health, as high rates of hesitancy can lead to complete refusal of vaccination, with health implications not only for the mother but also for the fetus. Based on the above, this review aims to capture the rates of vaccination against COVID-19 in pregnancy among European countries, from August 2020 to May 2022, as well as to highlight the predictive factors of its acceptance among pregnant women in these countries. The review of the available literature found that in Europe the acceptance of vaccination against COVID-19 among pregnant women varies with rates ranging from 21.3% to 87% for at least one dose and from 29.5% to 82.7%, for two doses of vaccine. Higher maternal education level, older age at pregnancy, previous vaccination against influenza and pertussis, positive attitude towards vaccines, and acceptance of vaccines during pregnancy are the most frequently reported positive predictors that are associated with higher vaccination rates. The information obtained from this study can contribute in the future, during epidemics or pandemics that may occur, to the development of targeted medical and communication strategies for the effective promotion of vaccination programs and the greatest possible coverage of the population, especially those belonging to vulnerable groups such as pregnant women.

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

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

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance of Pregnant Women in Thailand

Objective

This study investigated the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women in Thailand and explored factors influencing their willingness to receive the vaccine, to enhance vaccine uptake among hesitant pregnant women in the future.

Methods

A prospective study was conducted at Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital, Chiang Mai, Thailand, in October 2022. The data was collected using face-to-face questionnaires comprising 29 closed-end questions. Pregnant women aged 18 years old or over visiting the antenatal care clinic were included.

Results

The study included 200 participants, revealing a COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate of 17%. Healthcare provider recommendations significantly increased vaccine acceptance by nearly two-fold (30.77%, p-value < 0.01). The major cause of vaccine hesitancy was the concern about vaccine safety that potentially harmed their babies (77.44%).

Conclusion

The COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women in Thailand was low. Healthcare provider recommendations played a pivotal role in positively impacting vaccine acceptance, highlighting their importance in increasing acceptance rates in the future.

Mode of delivery and birth outcomes before and during COVID-19 -A population-based study in Ontario, Canada

There is lack of clarity on whether pregnancies during COVID-19 resulted in poorer mode of delivery and birth outcomes in Ontario, Canada. We aimed to compare mode of delivery (C-section), birth (low birthweight, preterm birth, NICU admission), and health services use (HSU, hospitalizations, ED visits, physician visits) outcomes in pregnant Ontario women before and during COVID-19 (pandemic periods). We further stratified for pre-existing chronic diseases (asthma, eczema, allergic rhinitis, diabetes, hypertension). Deliveries before (Jun 2018-Feb 2020) and during (Jul 2020-Mar 2022) pandemic were from health administrative data. We used multivariable logistic regression analyses to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of delivery and birth outcomes, and negative binomial regression for adjusted rate ratios (aRR) of HSU. We compared outcomes between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Possible interactions between study periods and covariates were also examined. 323,359 deliveries were included (50% during pandemic). One in 5 (18.3%) women who delivered during the pandemic had not received any COVID-19 vaccine, while one in 20 women (5.2%) lab-tested positive for COVID-19. The odds of C-section delivery during the pandemic was 9% higher (aOR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.08-1.11) than pre-pandemic. The odds of preterm birth and NICU admission were 15% (aOR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.87) and 10% lower (aOR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88-0.92), respectively, during COVID-19. There was a 17% reduction in ED visits but a 16% increase in physician visits during the pandemic (aRR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.81-0.84 and aRR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.16-1.17, respectively). These aORs and aRRs were significantly higher in women with pre-existing chronic conditions. During the pandemic, healthcare utilization, especially ED visits (aRR = 0.83), in pregnant women was lower compared to before. Ensuring ongoing prenatal care during the pandemic may reduce risks of adverse mode of delivery and the need for acute care during pregnancy.

Women's experiences of maternity care in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic: A follow-up systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Maternity care services in the United Kingdom have undergone drastic changes due to pandemic-related restrictions. Prior research has shown maternity care during the pandemic was negatively experienced by women and led to poor physical and mental health outcomes in pregnancy. A synthesis is required of published research on women's experiences of maternity care during the latter half of the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM

To update a previous systematic review of maternity care experiences during the pandemic to June 2021, exploring experiences of maternity care specifically within the United Kingdom and how they may have changed, in order to inform future maternity services.

METHODS

A systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted using comprehensive searches of five electronic databases and the Cochrane COVID Study Register, published between 1 June 2021 and 13 October 2022, and further updated to 30 September 2023. Thematic Synthesis was utilised for data synthesis.

FINDINGS

Of 21,860 records identified, 27 studies were identified for inclusion. Findings included 14 descriptive themes across the five core concepts: (1)Care-seeking and experience; (2)Virtual care; (3)Self-monitoring; (4)COVID-19 vaccination; (5)Ethical future of maternity care.

DISCUSSION

Our findings in the UK are consistent with those globally, and extend those of the previous systematic review, particularly about women's perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest the following are important to women for future maternity care: personalisation and inclusiveness; clear and evidence-based communication to facilitate informed decision-making; and achieving balance between social commitments and time spent settling into motherhood.

Assessing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Pregnant Women's Attitudes towards Childhood Vaccinations: A Cross-Sectional Study

The COVID-19 pandemic has globally disrupted immunisation practices, impacting vulnerable populations such as pregnant women (PW), who harbour concerns about future children's immunisations. This study aimed to assess the pandemic's impact on PW's attitudes towards childhood vaccinations. During three consecutive flu seasons from October 2019 to January 2022, a cross-sectional study was conducted in a large Italian teaching hospital using a questionnaire. The chi-square test was performed to compare each season. Across the 2019-2020 to 2021-2022 seasons, course attendance by PW surged from 105 to 340. Significant shifts in vaccination intentions were noted, including a 7.5% decrease in measles vaccination intent (p = 0.02) and a 10% decrease in that of pertussis (p = 0.004) from 2019-2020 to 2020-2021. While perceived contagion risk decreased, disease severity perceptions increased, with few significant differences. A statistically significant reduction was noted in the proportion of participants suspecting economic motives behind NHS workers' promotion of childhood vaccinations. Furthermore, the pandemic period saw an increase in the perceived utility of non-institutional websites and the advice of physicians outside the NHS. These findings will help develop evidence-based, tailored interventions and communication strategies to address vaccine hesitancy and ensure optimal vaccination coverage among children born during and after the pandemic.

Facilitators and barriers to vaccination uptake in pregnancy: A qualitative systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Vaccination during pregnancy protects both the mother and the foetus from vaccine-preventable diseases. However, uptake of the recommended vaccines (influenza, pertussis, COVID-19) by pregnant women remains low in Europe and the USA. Understanding the reasons for this is crucial to inform strategies to increase vaccination rates in pregnant women. This qualitative systematic review aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators to vaccination against influenza, pertussis/whooping cough and COVID-19 during pregnancy and identify possible strategies to increase vaccination rates.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of electronic databases, including Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, WHO database, Embase and grey literature to identify qualitative studies that explored barriers and facilitators to vaccine uptake among pregnant women (PROSPERO CRD42023399488). The search was limited to studies published between 2012 and 2022 conducted in high-income countries with established vaccination programmes during pregnancy. Studies were thematically analysed and underwent quality assessment using the Joanna Briggs Institute validated critical appraisal tool for qualitative research.

RESULTS

Out of 2681 articles screened, 28 studies (n = 1573 participants) were eligible for inclusion. Five overarching themes emerged relating to personal, provider and systemic factors. Barriers to vaccine uptake included concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy, lack of knowledge about vaccines' benefits and necessity, fear of adverse effects on the foetus or mother and low perception of disease severity. Facilitators included recommendations from trusted healthcare providers, easy access to vaccination, clear communication on the benefits and safety of vaccination, and positive social influences from family and friends. Strategies for increasing vaccination uptake included strong and proactive vaccine recommendations by trusted healthcare professionals, provision of vaccines during routine antenatal care, and clear and consistent communication about vaccines addressing pregnant women's concerns.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the need for interventions that address the identified barriers to vaccine uptake among pregnant women. Recommendation from a healthcare provider can play a significant role in promoting vaccine uptake, as can clear risk/benefit communication and convenient access to vaccination. Addressing concerns about vaccine safety and providing accurate information about vaccines is also important.

Socio-demographic determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Ontario: Exploring differences across the Health Region model

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be a worldwide public health concern. Although vaccines against this disease were rapidly developed, vaccination uptake has not been equal across all the segments of the population, particularly in the case of underrepresented groups. However, there are also differences in vaccination across geographical areas, which might be important to consider in the development of future public health vaccination policies. In this study, we examined the relationship between vaccination status (having received the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine), socio-economic strata, and the Health Regions for individuals in Ontario, Canada. Our results show that between October of 2021 and January of 2022, individuals from underrepresented communities were three times less likely to be vaccinated than White/Caucasian individuals across the province of Ontario, and that in some cases, within these groups, individuals in low-income brackets had significantly higher odds of vaccination when compared to their peers in high income brackets. Finally, we identified significantly lower odds of vaccination in the Central, East and West Health Regions of Ontario within certain underrepresented groups. This study shows that there is an ongoing need to better understand and address differences in vaccination uptake across diverse segments of the population of Ontario that the pandemic has largely impacted.

Influence of nutritional supplements on antibody levels in pregnant women vaccinated with inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines

BACKGROUND

Because of the significantly higher demand for nutrients during pregnancy, pregnant women are more likely to have nutrient deficiencies, which may adversely affect maternal and fetal health. The influence of nutritional supplements on the immune effects of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines during pregnancy is not clear.

METHODS

In a multicenter cross-sectional study, we enrolled 873 pregnant women aged 18-45 y in Guangdong, China. The general demographic characteristics of pregnant women and their use of nutritional supplements were investigated, and the serum antibody levels induced by inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were measured. A logistic regression model was used to analyze the association between nutritional supplements and SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels.

RESULTS

Of the 873 pregnant women enrolled, 825 (94.5%) took folic acid during pregnancy, 165 (18.9%) took iron supplements, and 197 (22.6%) took DHA. All pregnant women received at least one dose of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, and the positive rates of serum SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were 44.7% and 46.4%, respectively. After adjustment for confounding factors, whether pregnant women took folic acid, iron supplements, or DHA did not influence NAb positivity or IgG positivity (P > 0.05). Compared with pregnant women who did not take folic acid, the odds ratios (ORs) for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 NAb and IgG antibody in pregnant women who took folic acid were 0.67 (P = 0.255; 95% CI, 0.34-1.32) and 1.24 (P = 0.547; 95% CI, 0.60-2.55), respectively. Compared with pregnant women who did not take iron supplements, the ORs for the presence of NAb and IgG antibody in pregnant women who took iron supplements were 1.16(P = 0.465; 95% CI, 0.77-1.76) and 0.98 (P = 0.931; 95% CI, 0.64-1.49), respectively. Similarly, the ORs for NAb and IgG antibody were 0.71 (P = 0.085; 95% CI, 0.49-1.04) and 0.95 (P = 0.801; 95% CI, 0.65-1.38) in pregnant women who took DHA compared with those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Nutritional supplementation with folic acid, iron, or DHA during pregnancy was not associated with antibody levels in pregnant women who received inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

Determinants of Non-Acceptance of the COVID-19 Vaccine During Pregnancy in Pregnant and Postpartum Women: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study

Objective

The rate of COVID-19 vaccination hesitation among Iranian pregnant women is around 50%. The objective of the present study was to determine the reasons for the refusal of COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant and postpartum women.

Materials and methods

This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed on 304 pregnant and postpartum women in the comprehensive health centers of Yazd, Iran, between October 2022 and April 2023. Researchers collected the data of unvaccinated women through phone calls using a validated questionnaire. Data was collected using a questionnaire consisting of baseline characteristics and reasons for refusing vaccination. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data using SPSS version 22.

Results

The mean age of the pregnant and postpartum women participating in this study was 28.31 ± 6.47 years. The most common reasons for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine included fear of harming the fetus (32.2%), fear of side effects in the mother (25.7%), disbelief in COVID-19 disease and vaccine (13.8%), lack of information about the vaccine (12.8%), and negative opinions of the media and society (12.8%). Less common reasons included husband's disagreement (8.2%), history of COVID-19 infection (6.9%), gynecologists' disagreement (6.3%), history of infertility (5.9%), and underlying disease (3.3%). Astonishingly, among participants who did not inject a booster dose of the vaccine, 76% reported they didn't receive any training and recommendation on booster dose injection from health providers.

Conclusion

Findings highlight that the most common reasons for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine were fear of harming the fetus and fear of side effects in the mother.

Attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy and breastfeeding

Background

Although vaccination is one of the most effective means of controlling the spread of COVID-19, public concerns and indecision about vaccination still continue. Because pregnant and breastfeeding individuals are at high risk for severe outcomes in case of infections, determining their level of hesitation and attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines will guide the management of the disease. This study aimed to determine pregnant and breastfeeding women's levels of hesitation and attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines as well as their related factors.

Methods

The sample of this descriptive research consisted of 103 pregnant or breastfeeding individuals who were seen at the obstetrics and gynecology outpatients clinic of a state hospital in Istanbul, Turkey. The data were collected using a 'demographic data form', the 'Vaccine Hesitancy Scale in Pandemic', and the 'Attitudes toward COVID-19 Vaccine Scale'. The research data were analyzed with appropriate statistical methods.

Results

The mean age of the participants was 29.71 ± 4.75, 51% were pregnant, and 74.8% had received the COVID-19 vaccine. The mean score of the 'Vaccination Hesitancy Scale in Pandemic' was 30.83 ± 6.91, and the mean score for the 'Attitude Scale toward the COVID-19 Vaccine' was 25.50 ± 5.20. A significant difference was found between the total score of the 'Vaccine Hesitation Scale in the Pandemic' and the mean score of the 'Lack of Confidence' sub-dimension between the 'working status' and the 'influenza vaccination' status. In terms of the mean score of the 'Risk' sub-dimension, a significant difference was found between the 'period of vaccination' (p < 0.05). According to the mean total score of the 'Attitude Towards COVID-19 Vaccine Scale', there was a significant difference between the 'smoking' status. There was a significant difference in the 'Positive Attitude' sub-dimension in terms of the 'flu vaccination' status. There was a significant difference in the 'Negative Attitude' sub-dimension in terms of the 'chronic disease' status. A positive correlation was found between the total scores of the scales.

Conclusion

It was concluded that although the participants had a high level of hesitation toward the COVID-19 vaccine, they had a positive attitude. The results obtained will be guided in determining the strategies to be developed for these specific groups in future pandemics.

Neonatal Outcomes After COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnancy

Importance

Better knowledge about neonatal adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy could help address concerns about vaccine safety.

Objective

To evaluate the risks of neonatal adverse events after exposure to COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Population-based cohort study including all infants in Sweden and Norway born from June 2021 to January 2023. Unique personal identity numbers were used to link individual information from different national registers.

Exposure

Administration of any mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 during pregnancy, irrespective of previous vaccination, number of doses during pregnancy, or vaccine manufacturer.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes were neonatal conditions with bleeding/thrombosis or inflammation/infection; disorders of the central nervous system; circulatory, respiratory, or gastrointestinal problems; and neonatal mortality. Statistical methods included logistic regression adjusted for characteristics of the pregnant individuals, with additional restricted and stratified analyses.

Results

Of 196 470 newborn infants included (51.3% male, 93.8% born at term, 62.5% born in Sweden), 94 303 (48.0%) were exposed to COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Exposed infants exhibited no increased odds of adverse neonatal outcomes, and they exhibited lower odds for neonatal nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage (event rate, 1.7 vs 3.2/1000; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.78 [95% CI, 0.61-0.99]), hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (1.8 vs 2.7/1000; aOR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.96]), and neonatal mortality (0.9 vs 1.8/1000; aOR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50-0.91]). Subgroup analyses found a similar association between vaccination during pregnancy and lower neonatal mortality; subgroups were restricted to infants delivered by individuals unvaccinated before pregnancy, individuals vaccinated before pregnancy, individuals vaccinated after a general recommendation of vaccination during pregnancy was issued, and individuals without COVID-19 infection during pregnancy. Analyses restricted to term infants, singleton births, or infants without birth defects yielded similar results. Stratifying the analysis by vaccine manufacturer did not attenuate the association between vaccination and low neonatal mortality.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this large population-based study, vaccination of pregnant individuals with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines was not associated with increased risks of neonatal adverse events in their infants.

A Scoping Review on Gender/Sex Differences in COVID-19 Vaccine Intentions and Uptake in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To explore the empirical literature on gender/sex differences in vaccine acceptance among U.S.-based adults and adolescents in approximately the first 2 years of the pandemic.

DATA SOURCE

Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, EBSCO, CINAHL, Web of Science.

STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Peer-reviewed studies conducted in the U.S. with those aged 12 and older, published in English before January 12, 2022, examining the relationship between gender/sex on COVID-19 vaccine intentions and/or uptake.

DATA EXTRACTION

Three authors screened studies and extracted data.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Univariate and multivariate results are summarized.

RESULTS

A total of 53 studies met inclusion criteria (48 intentions, 7 uptake), using mostly cross-sectional designs (92.5%) and non-random sampling (83.0%). The majority of studies supported men's greater intentions to vaccinate compared to women, and men's greater vaccine uptake in univariate analyses, but most multivariate analyses supported no gender differences in uptake. Few studies examined gender beyond binary categories (women/men), highlighting a gap in the studies inclusive of transgender or gender-diverse populations in analyses.

CONCLUSION

Women may have been more hesitant to get the vaccine than men early in the pandemic, but these differences may not translate to actual behavior. Future research should include non-binary/transgender populations, explore the gender-specific reasons for hesitancy and differences by sub-populations, utilize more rigorous designs, and test gender-sensitive public health campaigns to mitigate vaccine concerns.

Assessing the Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Preterm Birth: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

During the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the safety and efficacy of vaccination during pregnancy, particularly regarding the risk of preterm birth, have been a subject of concern. This systematic review aims to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on preterm birth risk and to inform clinical practice and public health policies. Following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a database search included PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, conducted up until October 2023. Inclusion criteria focused on studies that examined COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and its correlation with preterm birth, defined as a birth before 37 weeks of gestation. Six studies met these criteria, encompassing 35,612 patients. A quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, with the risk of bias evaluated via a funnel plot analysis and an Egger's regression test. The studies demonstrated geographical diversity, mainly from Israel, Romania, and the United States, with a blend of prospective and retrospective designs. The patient cohort's mean age was 31.2 years, with common comorbidities such as gestational diabetes and obesity affecting 9.85% of the total population. The vaccination types varied across the studies, with BNT162b2 being the most used. The results indicated a low heterogeneity among the included studies, evidenced by a Cochran's Q statistic of 2.10 and an I2 statistic of 13%. The meta-analysis yielded a pooled odds ratio (OR) for a preterm birth risk post-vaccination of approximately 1.03 (95% CI: 0.82-1.30), suggesting no significant increase in preterm birth risk was associated with COVID-19 vaccination. Notable findings included a low preterm birth rate (as low as 0.6% and up to 6.1%) with minimal differences in neonatal outcomes, such as birth weight and APGAR (appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration) scores between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. This study concludes that a COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy does not significantly increase the risk of preterm birth. These findings are crucial for reassuring healthcare providers and pregnant women about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines and supporting their use in public health strategies during the pandemic.

Impact of pregnancy vaccine uptake and socio-demographic determinants on subsequent childhood Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccine uptake: A UK birth cohort study

BACKGROUND

We examined the association between socio-demographic determinants and uptake of childhood Measles, Mumps & Rubella (MMR) vaccines and the association between pregnant women's pertussis vaccine uptake and their children's MMR vaccine uptake.

METHODS

We used nationally-representative linked mother-baby electronic records from the United Kingdom's Clinical-Practice-Research-Datalink. We created a birth cohort of children born between 01.01.2000 and 12.12.2020. We estimated the proportion vaccinated with first MMR vaccine by age 2 years and first and second MMR vaccines by age 5 years. We used survival-analysis and Cox proportional hazard models to examine the association between deprivation, ethnicity and maternal age and pertussis vaccination in pregnancy and children's MMR uptake.

RESULTS

Overall, 89.4 % (710,797/795,497) of children had first MMR by age 2 years and 92.6 % (736,495/795,497) by age 5 years. Among children still in the cohort when second MMR was due, 85.9 % (478,480/557,050) had two MMRs by age 5 years. Children from the most-deprived areas, children of Black ethnicity and children of mothers aged < 20 years had increased risk of being unvaccinated compared with children from the least-deprived areas, White children and children of mothers aged 31-40 years: first MMR by 5 years, adjusted Hazard Ratios (HR):0.86 (CI:0.85-0.87), HR:0.87 (CI:0.85-0.88) & HR:0.89 (CI:0.88-0.90) respectively. Deprivation was the determinant associated with the greatest risk of missed second MMR: adjusted HR:0.82 (CI:0.81-0.83). Children of mothers vaccinated in pregnancy were more likely than children of unvaccinated mothers to have MMR vaccines after adjusting for ethnicity, deprivation, and maternal age (First and Second MMRs adjusted HRs:1.43 (CI:1.41-1.45), 1.49 (CI:1.45-1.53).

CONCLUSION

Children from most-deprived areas are less likely to have MMR vaccines compared with children from least-deprived areas. Mothers who take up pregnancy vaccines are more likely to have their children vaccinated with MMR. Healthcare services should promote and facilitate access to both maternal and childhood vaccines during pregnancy.

Interventions to increase vaccination against COVID-19, influenza and pertussis during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women and their babies face significant risks from three vaccine-preventable diseases: COVID-19, influenza and pertussis. However, despite these vaccines' proven safety and effectiveness, uptake during pregnancy remains low.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42023399488; January 2012-December 2022 following PRISMA guidelines) of interventions to increase COVID-19/influenza/pertussis vaccination in pregnancy. We searched nine databases, including grey literature. Two independent investigators extracted data; discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models to estimate pooled effect sizes. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics.

RESULTS

From 2681 articles, we identified 39 relevant studies (n = 168 262 participants) across nine countries. Fifteen studies (39%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs); the remainder were observational cohort, quality-improvement or cross-sectional studies. The quality of 18% (7/39) was strong. Pooled results of interventions to increase influenza vaccine uptake (18 effect estimates from 12 RCTs) showed the interventions were effective but had a small effect (risk ratio = 1.07, 95% CI 1.03, 1.13). However, pooled results of interventions to increase pertussis vaccine uptake (10 effect estimates from six RCTs) showed no clear benefit (risk ratio = 0.98, 95% CI 0.94, 1.03). There were no relevant RCTs for COVID-19. Interventions addressed the 'three Ps': patient-, provider- and policy-level strategies. At the patient level, clear recommendations from healthcare professionals backed by text reminders/written information were strongly associated with increased vaccine uptake, especially tailored face-to-face interventions, which addressed women's concerns, dispelled myths and highlighted benefits. Provider-level interventions included educating healthcare professionals about vaccines' safety and effectiveness and reminders to offer vaccinations routinely. Policy-level interventions included financial incentives, mandatory vaccination data fields in electronic health records and ensuring easy availability of vaccinations.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions had a small effect on increasing influenza vaccination. Training healthcare providers to promote vaccinations during pregnancy is crucial and could be enhanced by utilizing mobile health technologies.

Inside the 'imperfect mosaic': Minority ethnic women's qualitative experiences of race and ethnicity during pregnancy, childbirth, and maternity care in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Persistent, high rates of maternal mortality amongst ethnic minorities is one of the UK's starkest examples of racial disparity. With greater risks of adverse outcomes during maternity care, ethnic minority women are subjected to embedded, structural and systemic discrimination throughout the healthcare service.

METHODS

Fourteen semi-structured interviews were undertaken with minority ethnic women who had recent experience of UK maternity care. Data pertaining to ethnicity and race were subject to iterative, inductive coding, and constant comparison through Grounded Theory Analysis to test a previously established theory: The 'Imperfect Mosaic'.

ANALYSIS & FINDINGS

A related theory emerged, comprising four themes: 'Stopping Short of Agentic Birth'; 'Silenced and Stigmatised through Tick-Box Care'; 'Anticipating Discrimination and the Need for Advocacy'; and 'Navigating Cultural Differences'. The new theory: Inside the 'Imperfect Mosaic', demonstrates experiences of those who received maternity care which directly mirrors experiences of those who provide care, as seen in the previous theory we set-out to test. However, the current theory is based on more traditional and familiar notions of racial discrimination, rather than the nuanced, subtleties of socio-demographic-based micro-aggressions experienced by healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest the need for the following actions: Prioritisation of bodily autonomy and agency in perinatal physical and mental healthcare; expand awareness of social and cultural issues (i.e., moral injury; cultural safety) within the NHS; and undertake diversity training and support, and follow-up of translation of the training into practice, across (maternal) health services.

Accessing health information during the COVID-19 pandemic: the experience of NHS maternity service users

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused various disruptions to NHS maternity services in England. Changes were made to antenatal and postnatal care and the way that information was shared with maternity service users during these times. Fewer face-to-face appointments, increased virtual appointments and changes in guidance about the suitability of the COVID-19 vaccine without appropriate information sharing and evidence caused concern.

METHODS

This study took a blended inductive-deductive approach to secondary data analysis using a population subset of 16 from a wider study that sought to understand the impact of COVID-19 on maternity services in England. Participants of this study were aged 28-44 and gave birth using NHS maternity services in England. The data were collected and coded using Rapid Analysis Procedure sheets, which generated key themes, which are used here to structure the results.

RESULTS

Four main themes were generated from the analysis: 1) service restrictions to antenatal and postnatal appointments 2) access to information and changes to antenatal and postnatal care 3) inconsistencies in the implementation of government and NHS policy and 4) limited information about COVID-19 vaccine provided by NHS trusts and hesitancy in vaccine acceptance.

CONCLUSION

Participants experienced poor communication that affected their understanding of maternity service changes and there was limited general and maternal health information provided. Vaccine information was also inadequate, and participants expressed a desire for clearer guidance. The UK Government, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and NHS must collaborate with maternity service users to ensure that there are evidence-based guidelines and policies that can be understood and standardised across all NHS maternity trusts.

Drivers for COVID 19 vaccine hesitancy among breastfeeding women in Eastern tribal state, India

Background

In the COVID-19 pandemic age, vaccination hesitancy also known as vaccine refusal is a cause for worry since it hinges on the five Cs of confidence, complacency, convenience, calculation, and shared responsibility. The current study was to pinpoint the elements that contribute to breastfeeding women's hesitation to receive the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) vaccine.

Materials and Methods

A cross-sectional observational study was carried out at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Tertiary Care Hospital, Ranchi, Jharkhand.

Result

Out of 365 nursing mothers, 242 (66.3%) were hesitant to get the COVID-19 vaccination. Those who chose not to receive the COVID-19 vaccination mostly belong to those aged 18 to 25 (38.1%), living in rural regions (44.9%), and belonging to non-tribal ethnic groups (41.1%). On application of logistic regression, it was found that rural areas had 3 times higher rate of vaccine hesitancy than urban residents, and that husbands' education levels up to the 12th grade had a 3.55 times higher rate and 5 times agriculture by husband's occupation, which was statistically significant (P value less than 0.05) The most prevalent grounds for rejection were fear of side effects (85.8%) and worry of adverse effects on newborns (83.48%).

Conclusion

Both husband and wife, who had completed high school and were aware of the vaccination, were fearful of the COVID-19 vaccine. Concerns about the side effects and undesirable effects of vaccination on their newborns were the main reasons for refusal.

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.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people with HIV: identifying characteristics associated with vaccine hesitancy

People with HIV (PWH) are at increased risk of COVID-19 infection. Both Canadian (NACI) and US (CDC) guidelines recommend that all PWH receive at least 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine, and a booster. We examined vaccination uptake among PWH in Southern Alberta, Canada. Among adult PWH, we evaluated COVID-19 vaccination uptake between December 2020 and August 2022. Poisson regression models with robust variance (approximating log binomial models) estimated crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for receiving (1) any vs. no vaccine, and (2) primary series with booster (≥ 3 vaccines) versus primary series without booster. Among 1885 PWH, 10% received no COVID-19 vaccinations, 37% < 3 vaccines and 54% received ≥ 3 vaccines. Females (vs. males) were less likely to receive a vaccine booster. Receiving no COVID-19 vaccines was associated with White ethnicity, unsuppressed HIV viral load (> 200 copies/mL), and using illegal substances. Factors associated with decreased booster uptake included being younger, Black (vs. White) ethnicity, substance use, lower educational attainment, and having an unsuppressed HIV viral load. COVID-19 booster uptake among PWH does not meet vaccine guidelines, and receipt of vaccines is unevenly distributed. Booster uptake is lowest among young females and marginalized individuals. Focused outreach is necessary to close this gap.

Reactogenicity, pregnancy outcomes, and SARS-CoV-2 infection following COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy in Canada: A national prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To describe self-reported reactogenicity, pregnancy outcomes, and SARS-CoV-2 infection following COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy.

DESIGN

National, prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Participants across Canada were enrolled from July 2021 until June 2022.

POPULATION

Individuals pregnant during the COVID-19 pandemic, regardless of vaccination status, were included.

METHODS

The Canadian COVID-19 Vaccine Registry for Pregnant and Lactating Individuals (COVERED) was advertised through traditional and social media. Surveys were administered at baseline, following each vaccine dose if vaccinated, pregnancy conclusion, and every two months for 14 months. Changes to pregnancy or vaccination status, SARS-CoV-2 infections, or significant health events were recorded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Reactogenicity (local and systemic adverse events, and serious adverse events) within 1 week post-vaccination, pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, and subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection.

RESULTS

Among 2868 participants who received 1-2 doses of a COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy, adverse events described included: headache (19.5-33.9%), nausea (4.8-13.8%), fever (2.7-10.2%), and myalgia (33.4-42.2%). Reactogenicity was highest after the 2nd dose of vaccine in pregnancy. Compared to 1660 unvaccinated participants, there were no statistically significant differences in adverse pregnancy or infant outcomes, aside from an increased risk of NICU admission ≥ 24 h among the unvaccinated group. During follow-up, there was a higher rate of participant-reported SARS-CoV-2 infection in the unvaccinated compared to the vaccinated group (18[47.4%] vs. 786[27.3%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Participant-reported reactogenicity was similar to reports from non-pregnant adults. There was no increase in adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes among vaccinated vs. unvaccinated participants and lower rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection were reported in vaccinated participants.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

No significant increase in adverse pregnancy or infant outcomes among vaccinated versus unvaccinated pregnant women in Canada.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Maternal and Child COVID-19 Vaccination Intent Among Pregnant and Postpartum Women in the USA (April-June 2020): an Application of Health Belief Model

This study investigated racial/ethnic differences in pregnant and postpartum women's intentions to receive the COVID-19 vaccination (maternal COVID-19 vaccination intent) and intentions to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 (child COVID-19 vaccination intent) during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (April-June 2020). This study also assessed Health Belief Model constructs to examine their influence on maternal and child COVID-19 vaccination intent by race/ethnicity. This study includes 489 US pregnant and postpartum women (18-49 years) recruited via Prolific Academic to complete a 55-item cross-sectional online survey. Crude and adjusted logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the associations between race/ethnicity, maternal COVID-19 vaccination intent, and child COVID-19 vaccination intent. Among pregnant women, the odds of maternal COVID-19 vaccination intent (aOR = 2.20, 95% CI: .862, 5.61) and child COVID-19 vaccination intent (aOR = .194, 95% CI: .066, .565) among NH Black women were statistically significantly lower than that of NH White women after adjustment for demographic, health, and health belief model variables. Among postpartum women, although some racial differences in maternal or child COVID-19 vaccination intent were observed, these differences were not statistically significant in unadjusted and adjusted models. The findings have implications for future research and interventions which should adopt a racial health equity lens and identify strategies grounded in institutional trustworthiness and systems perspectives to address racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccination intent among pregnant and postpartum women during novel pandemics.

Using the COM-B framework to elucidate facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in pregnant women: a qualitative study

Since April 2021, COVID-19 vaccines have been recommended for pregnant women. Despite this, COVID-19 vaccine uptake in this group is low compared to the non-pregnant population of childbearing age. Our aim was to understand barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women in Northern Ireland using the COM-B framework, and so to make recommendations for public health interventions. The COM-B proposes that human behaviour is influenced by the extent to which a person has the capability, opportunity, and motivation to enact that behaviour. Understanding the factors underpinning behaviour through this lens helps discern what needs to change to change behaviour, therefore supporting the development of targeted interventions.This study consisted of eight semi-structured interviews with new/expectant mothers who did not receive a COVID-19 vaccine dose while pregnant since April 2021, and a focus group with five participants who received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose while pregnant. Interview and focus group data were analysed using semi-deductive reflexive thematic analysis framed by a subtle realist approach. The COM-B was used to categorise codes and subthemes were developed within each COM-B construct.Within Psychological Capability, subthemes captured the need for consistent and reliable COVID-19 vaccine information and access to balanced and jargon-free, risk-benefit information that is tailored to the pregnant individual. The behaviour/opinions of family, friends, and local healthcare providers had a powerful influence on COVID-19 vaccine decisions (Social Opportunity). Integrating the COVID-19 vaccine as part of routine antenatal pathways was believed to support access and sense of familiarity (Physical Opportunity). Participants valued health autonomy, however experienced internal conflict driven by concerns about long-term side effects for their baby (Reflective Motivation). Feelings of fear, lack of empathy from healthcare providers, and anticipated guilt commonly underpinned indecision as to whether to get the vaccine (Automatic Motivation).Our study highlighted that the choice to accept a vaccine during pregnancy generates internal conflict and worry. Several participants cited their concern was primarily around the safety for their baby. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play a significant part when it comes to decision making about COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women. HCPs and pregnant women should be involved in the development of interventions to improve the delivery and communication of information.

A Systematic Review of Population-Based Studies Assessing Knowledge, Attitudes, Acceptance, and Hesitancy of Pregnant and Breastfeeding Women towards the COVID-19 Vaccine

The anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is recommended for pregnant women due to the high risk of complications. However, pregnancy has been associated with vaccine hesitancy. Our review aims at summarizing the existing literature about anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in pregnant and lactating women. The research was conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, ExcerptaMedica Database (EMBASE), and Scopus, according to PRISMA guidelines. Articles regarding the COVID-19 vaccine's acceptance and/or refusal by pregnant and lactating women were selected. Only observational, population-based studies were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tools were employed. A total of 496 articles were retrieved, and after the selection process, 21 papers were included in the current analysis. All the included studies were cross-sectional, mostly from Europe and North America. The sample sizes ranged between 72 and 25,111 subjects. All of them included pregnant subjects, except one that focused on breastfeeding women only. Vaccine hesitancy rates ranged from 26% to 57% among different studies. Fear of adverse events and lack of knowledge were shown to be the main drivers of hesitancy. Approximately half of the studies (11/21) were classified as low quality, the remaining (9/21) were classified as moderate, and only one study was classified as high quality. Primigravidae were also shown to be more likely to accept anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Our findings confirm significant anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women. Information gaps should be addressed to contain concerns related to adverse events.

Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines in Pregnant and Lactating Mexican Women and Breastfed Infants: A Survey-Based Study

COVID-19 vaccines' safety has been extensively studied; however, further analysis is required in pregnant women, nursing mothers, and breastfed infants. Our aim was to compare the extension and severity of self-reported COVID-19 vaccine side effects in pregnant and breastfeeding women, and breastfed infants. In this cross-sectional study, COVID-19-vaccinated subjects were enrolled using an online survey in Mexico. Women were classified by pregnancy and breastfeeding status at the time of vaccination (n = 3167). After the first or only dose, there was a trend toward fewer systemic effects in pregnant women (p = 0.06). BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) had a higher frequency of local symptoms in pregnancy. Lactating women experienced fewer local symptoms after the first or single dose (p = 0.04) and the opposite occurred after the second dose (p = 0.001). ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca) increased the chances of developing both local and systemic symptoms after the first dose but decreased them after the second dose. The severity was similar across groups, although the result of lack of association in pregnancy requires studies with a larger sample size. Irritability was the most reported symptom in breastfed infants. This study contributes to the knowledge about the side effects in pregnant and lactating women, and breastfed babies.

"Figuring stuff out myself" - a qualitative study on maternal vaccination in socially and ethnically diverse areas in England

BACKGROUND

Maternal vaccinations against Influenza, Pertussis, and Covid-19 are recommended in the UK, and vaccines against further infections may become available soon. However, many pregnant women, especially in socially and ethnically diverse areas, have low vaccine uptake. Qualitative studies on the reasons and possible solutions are needed that are inclusive of disadvantaged and minority ethnic groups. We therefore aimed to understand the complex interplay between structural and behavioural factors contributing to the low maternal vaccine uptake in socially and ethnically diverse areas in London in the Covid-19 context.

METHODS

In 2022, we conducted semi-structured interviews and a focus group discussion among a purposive sample of 38 pregnant/recently pregnant women and 20 health service providers, including 12 midwives. Participants were recruited in ethnically diverse London boroughs. We followed a critical realist paradigm and used a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

The sample included participants who took all, some or none of the maternal vaccines, with some participants unsure whether they had taken or been offered the vaccines. Decision-making was passive or active, with the expectation for pregnant women to do their 'own research'. Participants described various individual, social and contextual influences on their decision-making as they navigated the antenatal care system. Missing or conflicting information from providers meant knowledge gaps were sometimes filled with misinformation from unreliable sources that increased uncertainties and mistrust. Both pregnant women and providers described structural and organisational factors that hindered access to information and vaccinations, including lack of training, time and resources, and shortcomings of health information systems and apps. Some participants described factors that facilitated vaccination uptake and many made recommendations for improvements.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed how structural and organisational factors can compound uncertainties around maternal vaccination among socially and ethnically diverse populations. Results highlight the need for more reliable resources, streamlined workflows, improved electronic information systems and training in their use. Roles and responsibilities should be clarified with potential greater involvement of nurses and pharmacists in vaccine provision. Education and communication should consider individual (language/digital) skills and needs for information and reassurance. Further research is needed to co-produce solutions with service users and providers.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women: a hospital-based cross-sectional study in Sudan

Introduction

Pregnancy increases the risk of developing a severe illness due to COVID-19 infection. To the best of our knowledge, no previous study has been conducted on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women in Sudan. Hence, this study aimed to determine COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and its predictors among pregnant women.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted among 623 pregnant women attending Gadarif maternity hospital in eastern Sudan through a structured questionnaire. Data were obtained on sociodemographic characteristics, obstetric and health-related characteristics, COVID-19 infection, and vaccination-related information, as well as beliefs about and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination.

Results

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among the pregnant women was 2.7%. The vaccine acceptance was higher if their husband's education was secondary school or higher [adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 4.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-16.65, p = 0.035] and discussion of COVID-19 vaccine with the pregnant women by a health care professional in the hospital (AOR 5.46, 95% CI 1.94-15.35, p < 0.001). The most common reasons for resistance to the vaccine were concerns about the side effects of the vaccine for the mother and her baby.

Conclusion

Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination among the pregnant women was very low. Discussions with pregnant women and their husbands by health care professionals regarding the safety of COVID-19 vaccine for the mother and her baby are highly recommended.

COVID-19 Vaccination Booster Dose: Knowledge, Practices, and Intention among Pregnant/Planning to Get Pregnant and Lactating Women

Pregnant women are at higher risk of developing severe COVID-19 symptoms. Therefore, booster dose against COVID-19 was recommended for this special population in Jordan. However, vaccine hesitancy/refusal remains the main obstacle to providing immunity against the spread of COVID-19. Thus, the aim of this study is to examine the intention of pregnant/planning to get pregnant and lactating women towards receiving a booster dose against COVID-19 and its associated factors. A questionnaire was given to Jordanian pregnant/planning to get pregnant and lactating females. A total of 695 females were enrolled in the study. Older age, having a chronic disease, high education, high income, and high perceived risk of COVID-19 were significantly associated with higher knowledge about COVID-19. High perceived risk of COVID-19 was significantly associated with better practice. Participants who anticipated they might contract COVID-19 in the next six months, had high perceived risk of COVID-19, had high knowledge, had received the COVID-19 vaccine based on conviction, and smokers had higher intention to receive a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccination. In order to increase pregnant and lactating women's intention to receive a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, public health organizations should consider developing comprehensive health education campaigns.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among women planning for pregnancy, pregnant or breastfeeding mothers in Jordan: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Women planning to become pregnant, who are pregnant, and who are breastfeeding are more hesitant to take COVID-19 vaccines compared to other women globally.

AIM

This study investigates COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among women, who are planning for pregnancy, currently pregnant, and breastfeeding women in Jordan.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional study was conducted in the biggest three cities in Jordan, including 874 women.

RESULTS

Women who were planning for pregnancy, pregnant, or breastfeeding reported statistically significant lower levels of perception of the seriousness of COVID-19 (7.12 ± 0.72, 7.53 ± 1.80, 7.2439 ± 7296, respectively), significant lower levels of perceived benefits of the vaccine (8.92 ± 2.15, 8.73 ± 1.93, 9.09 ± 2.10, respectively), significant lower levels of motivation and causes of action (7.15 ± 1.71, 6.7524 ± 1.40, 7.27 ± 1.68, respectively), and significantly higher levels of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy (31.32 ± 6.40, 30.11 ± 4.49, 30.27 ± 6.29, respectively) than other women. Married women, those whoe were previously infected with COVID-19, and those who had chronic diseases reported statistically significant lower levels of perception of COVID-19 seriousness, perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccine, motivation to take COVID-19 vaccine, and causes of action, and significantly higher levels of hesitancy to take COVID-19 vaccine than unmarried women, those who have not been infected with COVID-19, and those who were medically healthy (p<0.001). There were statistically significant positive correlations between perception, perceived benefits, motivation, and cause of action with years of education; and statistically significant negative correlations between perception, perceived benefits, motivation, and cause of action with age (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Women who were planning for pregnancy, pregnant, or breastfeeding in Jordan showed miderate scores in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy despite the current international recommendations for its safety for women and their foetuses or neonates.

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.

Adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women attending primary health centers: An active-surveillance study

Introduction

Vaccine safety is a major barrier to the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine by pregnant women. To bring confidence among pregnant women towards vaccine intake, there is a need to synthesize evidence on safety profile of vaccination.

Objective

To assess adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women.

Materials and methods

A vaccine safety surveillance was conducted at 2 rural primary health centers (PHC) located in Anantapur District, India. A total of 420 pregnant women were monitored for AEs following COVID-19 vaccination for a period of 30 min and followed for 1 month for late reactions through telephonic interviews. All AEs were subjected to causality and severity assessment. Descriptive statistics were used to represent adverse events.

Results

The COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women was 64.4%. A total of 420 pregnant women received 670 vaccine doses (Covishield = 372, Covaxin = 298) against COVID-19. Majority of vaccine intake was observed during the second trimester. The incidence rate of AEs following the COVID-19 vaccine among pregnant women was 93.8%, and the majority include injection site pain (28.4%, 29.6%), fever (25.5%, 19.0%), myalgia (8.21%, 12.3%), and malaise (13.6%, 8.4%). Most AEs notified are probable and mild in nature.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women was 64.4%. A 30 days incidence rate of AEs following COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women was 93.8%, with the most common mild events like injection site pain, and fever. A further follow-up cohort study by taking an adequate sample size was recommended to capture fetal-maternal outcomes.

The impact of COVID-19 on select considerations in patients of reproductive age: Brief talking points for pharmacists

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has elicited many health concerns, including the impact of the infection and vaccine on reproductive health. Although robust evidence demonstrates the safety of all available COVID-19 vaccines, misinformation and disinformation related to the vaccine continue to circulate. As accessible and essential health care workers, it is crucial that pharmacists are informed of the evidence related to effects of the COVID-19 infection and vaccinations on reproductive health care. Menstrual cycle changes have been noted owing to COVID-19 infection, pandemic stress, and COVID-19 vaccination. COVID-19 infection and vaccination have not been shown to influence female fertility, pregnancy rates, and lactation. The use of exogenous estrogen may further contribute to an increased risk of thromboembolism with COVID-19 infection, and differences in the risk of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis appear to exist between the types of vaccines. The benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh any risks. Shared decision-making is necessary when discussing vaccination with patients. Pharmacists play a vital role in dispelling misinformation and disinformation related to the impact of COVID-19 illness and vaccination on reproductive health care.

Intention to take COVID-19 vaccine and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public health facilities in Bahir Dar city, Northwest Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Pregnant mothers are a risky population group for COVID-19 and pregnant mothers with COVID-19 are at increased risk of hospitalization, intensive-care unit admission, invasive ventilation support, and maternal mortality. Vaccination is an essential tool in stopping the effect of the pandemic on maternal and child health. However, there are only limited studies in Ethiopia on the intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine among pregnant women. Thus, this study aimed to assess intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine and associated factors among pregnant women in Bahir Dar city, Northwest Ethiopia.

METHODS

Facility based cross-sectional study was conducted among 590 pregnant women from 23 May to 07 July 2022. The study participants were selected using a systematic sampling technique. Interviewer administrative questionnaire with epicollect5 application was used to collect the data. Both bi-variable and multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was performed. Statistical significance was defined at a 95% CI with a p-value < 0.05.

RESULT

Overall, 19.8% (95% CI: 16.60-23.06%) of pregnant women intend to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Being urban residence (AOR = 3.40, 95% CI: 1.71-6.78), third trimester of gestational age (AOR = 3.11, 95% CI: 1.61-6.03), multipara (AOR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.33-3.97), knowledge of COVID-19 vaccine (AOR = 2.33, 95% CI: 1.44-3.77) and having good attitude towards COVID-19 vaccine (AOR = 2.68, 95% CI: 1.65-4.33) were significantly associated with intention to take COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the pregnant women's intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine in this study area was very low. It was significantly associated with residency, gestational age, parity, knowledge, and attitude toward the vaccine. Therefore, strengthening interventions that improve knowledge and attitude about the COVID-19 vaccine, predominantly among those primipara mothers and mothers from rural residences, may raise the intention to take it.

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

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

Factors associated with receipt of COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare workers in Albania (February 2021-June 2022): secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) have been disproportionally affected by COVID-19. We investigated factors associated with two- and three-dose COVID-19 vaccine uptake and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among 1504 HCWs enrolled (19 February-7 May 2021) in a prospective COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness cohort in Albania through a secondary analysis.

Methods

We collected sociodemographic, occupational, health, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 vaccination data from all HCWs at enrollment. Vaccination status was assessed weekly through June 2022. A serum sample was collected from all participants at enrollment and tested for anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We analyzed HCWs characteristics and outcomes using multivariable logistic regression.

Findings

By 11 June 2022, 1337 (88.9%) HCWs had received two COVID-19 vaccine doses, of whom 255 (19.1%) received a booster. Factors significantly associated with receiving three doses (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 95% CIs) were being ≥35 years (35-44 years: 1.76 (1.05-2.97); 45-54 years: 3.11 (1.92-5.05); ≥55 years: 3.38 (2.04-5.59)) and vaccinated against influenza (1.78; 1.20-2.64). Booster dose receipt was lower among females (0.58; 0.41-0.81), previously infected (0.67; 0.48-0.93), nurses and midwives (0.31; 0.22-0.45), and support staff (0.19; 0.11-0.32). Overall 1076 (72%) were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive at enrollment. Nurses and midwifes (1.45; 1.05-2.02), support staff (1.57; 1.03-2.41), and HCWs performing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) (1.40; 1.01-1.94) had higher odds of being seropositive, while smokers had reduced odds (0.55; 0.40-0.75).

Interpretation

In a large cohort of Albanian HCWs, COVID-19 vaccine booster dose uptake was very low, particularly among younger, female, and non-physician HCWs, despite evidence demonstrating the added benefit of boosters in preventing infection and severe disease. Reasons behind these disparities should be explored to develop targeted strategies in order to promote uptake in this critical population. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was higher among non-physicians and HCWs performing APGs. A better understanding of the factors contributing to these differences is needed to inform interventions that could reduce infections in the future.

Funding

This study was funded by the Task Force for Global Health (US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) cooperative agreement # NU51IP000873) and the World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe.

Pregnant women's knowledge about and beliefs toward COVID-19 vaccine: a cross-sectional study

Purpose

The aim of this study was to determine the scope of knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of pregnant women about the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine.

Materials and Methods

A total of 886 pregnant women were recruited for the study. A cross-sectional questionnaire was conducted on these selected participants. Data about past infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), SARS-CoV-2 infection of closely related people, and deaths due to COVID-19 among their relatives were questioned.

Results

The rate of vaccination was higher (64.1%) in pregnant women with higher education levels. Informing about the vaccine, especially by health professionals, showed that the rates of vaccination (25%) increased (p<0.001). In addition, a significant increase was observed in vaccination rates with increasing age and financial income (p<0.001).

Conclusion

The main limitation of our study is that the vaccine, which was approved for "emergency use", was just started to be administered to pregnant women during the study. Our findings show that our target audience, low-income, low-education, younger pregnant women should be given more attention than those who apply to the doctor for routine follow-up.

Acceptance of vaccination against pertussis, COVID-19 and influenza during pregnancy: a cross-sectional study

Background

This study aims to assess the uptake of maternal pertussis and COVID-19 vaccination and the intention towards accepting the maternal influenza vaccination. Insights into different socio-demographic factors related to maternal vaccination coverage might help to address vaccine acceptance and improve maternal vaccine uptake in the future.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey among pregnant women and recent mothers, up to 6 months post-partum. The primary outcome measures of this study were behaviour for maternal pertussis and COVID-19 vaccination, and maternal influenza vaccination intention. Associations between socio-demographic factors and maternal pertussis vaccination and maternal COVID-19 vaccination behaviour; and socio-demographic factors and maternal influenza vaccination intention were assessed using binary logistic regression analyses.

Results

In total 1361 respondents filled out the questionnaire. Almost all women (95%) were vaccinated against pertussis during pregnancy, while almost two-third were vaccinated against COVID-19 during pregnancy (58%) and almost one-third (28%) had a positive intention towards receiving the maternal influenza vaccination. Results show that young maternal age and low education level were associated with lower maternal vaccination acceptance.

Conclusion

Vaccination campaigns focusing on the severity of diseases that are prevented, are needed to increase maternal vaccine acceptance in younger and low-educated pregnant women. We expect that differences in vaccination coverage between the three maternal vaccinations might partly be explained by existing recommendations, campaigns and whether the vaccination is part of the national immunisation program.

Knowledge and attitudes of pregnant women on maternal immunization against COVID-19 in Croatia

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess pregnant women's knowledge and attitudes regarding maternal COVID-19 immunization during pregnancy.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed in two teaching hospitals between May and October 2021 in Zagreb, Croatia. During antenatal clinic visit pregnant women were approached and asked to fill out a predesigned questionnaire about their knowledge and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination. Collected data was later analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 430 women participated in the study. Only 16% of women expressed their willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 if offered, despite that 71% of them believe that COVID-19 might be a serious illness in pregnant women. The most important obstacle in having better acceptance of the vaccines is in the assumption that the vaccines are not safe for pregnant women (73%) or the fetus (75%), or that the vaccines are not effective (41%). The relationship exists between acceptance of vaccination in general and willingness to get other vaccines in pregnancy and readiness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in pregnancy. Only one out of 55 women who were not adherent to the current vaccination recommendations in Croatia would accept the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy if offered. 21 (5%) women stated that vaccination against influenza and pertussis during pregnancy is necessary and 13 (62%) of them would get vaccinated against COVID-19 if offered.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that the crucial reasons for refusing vaccination against COVID-19 among pregnant women in Croatia are the concerns about the vaccines' effectiveness and safety. All healthcare providers should put more effort into education of pregnant women on risks of COVID-19, as well as on the benefits and safety of the vaccines.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Assessment of COVID-19 vaccines safety during pregnancy is urgently needed.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, including their components and technological platforms used in other vaccines during pregnancy and animal studies to complement direct evidence. We searched literature databases from its inception to September 2021 without language restriction, COVID-19 vaccine websites, and reference lists of other systematic reviews and the included studies. Pairs of reviewers independently selected, data extracted, and assessed the risk of bias of the studies. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. (PROSPERO CRD42021234185).

Results

We retrieved 8,837 records from the literature search; 71 studies were included, involving 17,719,495 pregnant persons and 389 pregnant animals. Most studies (94%) were conducted in high-income countries, were cohort studies (51%), and 15% were classified as high risk of bias. We identified nine COVID-19 vaccine studies, seven involving 309,164 pregnant persons, mostly exposed to mRNA vaccines. Among non-COVID-19 vaccines, the most frequent exposures were AS03 and aluminum-based adjuvants.

A meta-analysis of studies that adjusted for potential confounders showed no association with adverse outcomes, regardless of the vaccine or the trimester of vaccination.

Neither the reported rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes nor reactogenicity exceeded expected background rates, which was the case for ASO3- or aluminum-adjuvanted non-COVID-19 vaccines in the proportion meta-analyses of uncontrolled studies/arms. The only exception was postpartum hemorrhage after COVID-19 vaccination (10.40%; 95% CI: 6.49-15.10%), reported by two studies; however, the comparison with non-exposed pregnant persons, available for one study, found non-statistically significant differences (adjusted OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.56-2.12). Animal studies showed consistent results with studies in pregnant persons.

Conclusion

We found no safety concerns for currently administered COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. Additional experimental and real-world evidence could enhance vaccination coverage. Robust safety data for non-mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are still needed.

Real-world uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among individuals expressing vaccine hesitancy: A registry-linkage study

INTRODUCTION

Uptake of COVID-19 vaccination remains suboptimal in the United States and other settings. Though early reports indicated that a strong majority of people were interested in receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, the association between vaccine intention and uptake is not yet fully understood. Ourobjective was todescribe predictors of vaccine uptake, and estimate the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of self-reported COVID-19 vaccine status compared to a comprehensive statewide COVID-19 vaccine registry.

METHODS

A cohort of California residents that received a molecular test for SARS-CoV-2 infection during 24 February-5 December 2021 were enrolled in a telephone-administered survey. Survey participants were matched with records in a statewide immunization registry. Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare time to vaccination among those unvaccinated at survey enrollment by self-reported COVID-19 vaccination intention.

RESULTS

Among 864 participants who were unvaccinated at the time of interview, 272 (31%) had documentation of receipt of COVID-19 vaccination at a later date; including 194/423 (45.9%) who had initially reported being willing to receive vaccination, 41/185 (22.2%) who reported being unsure about vaccination, and 37/278 (13.3%) who reported unwillingness to receive vaccination.Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for registry-confirmed COVID-19 vaccination were 0.49 (95% confidence interval: 0.32-0.76) and 0.21 (0.12-0.36) for participants expressing uncertainty and unwillingness to receive vaccination, respectively, as compared with participants who reported being willing to receive vaccination. Time to vaccination was shorter among participants from higher-income households (aHR = 3.30 [2.02-5.39]) and who reported co-morbidities or immunocompromising conditions (aHR = 1.54 [1.01-2.36]).Sensitivity of self-reported COVID-19 vaccination status was 82% (80-85%) overall, and 98% (97-99%) among those referencing vaccination records; specificity was 87% (86-89%).

CONCLUSION

Willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination was an imperfect predictor of real-world vaccine uptake. Improved messaging about COVID-19 vaccination regardless of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection status may help improve uptake.

Prevalence and predictive determinants of adherence to vaccination against COVID-19 among mothers who gave birth in the last two years in Morocco

Background and aim

Vaccination against COVID-19 was one of the most important resolute to stop the spread of the pandemic; however, its acceptance was controversial especially by pregnant and lactating women. This study aims to assess the prevalence of vaccination among participants as well as to explore the determinants of reluctance or adherence to vaccination among this population, and to investigate the intention towards vaccination among the unvaccinated.

Method

This is a cross-sectional study conducted among mothers (n = 458) residing in the prefecture of Skhirat-Temara in Morocco, and who have children aged between one month to 2 years, the survey was conducted on the basis of a semi-structured questionnaire.

Result

The prevalence of vaccination among the participants was 61.8%, although they were all vaccinated after their delivery. Among the unvaccinated, 64% wanted to be vaccinated either because they believed the vaccines were useful or because they wanted to get the vaccine pass, while 36% absolutely refused to be vaccinated due to lack of sufficient information on the efficacy and safety of new vaccines against COVID-19. The age of the last child (p < 0.001) and no gestational diabetes during pregnancy (p = 0.016) were found to be positive predictors of vaccination adherence; however, the average or the high monthly income (p = 0.003) and the lack of medical coverage (p = 0.046) were predictive factors limiting adherence to vaccination.

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest that public health decision-makers need to increase awareness of the benefits of vaccination and to address the economic and social factors limiting access to COVID-19 vaccination.

National surveillance data analysis of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in England by women of reproductive age

Women of reproductive age are a group of particular concern with regards to vaccine uptake, related to their unique considerations of menstruation, fertility, and pregnancy. To obtain vaccine uptake data specific to this group, we obtained vaccine surveillance data from the Office for National Statistics, linked with COVID-19 vaccination status from the National Immunisation Management Service, England, from 8 Dec 2020 to 15 Feb 2021; data from 13,128,525 such women at population-level, were clustered by age (18-29, 30-39, and 40-49 years), self-defined ethnicity (19 UK government categories), and index of multiple deprivation (IMD, geographically-defined IMD quintiles). Here we show that among women of reproductive age, older age, White ethnicity and being in the least-deprived index of multiple deprivation are each independently associated with higher vaccine uptake, for first and second doses; however, ethnicity exerts the strongest influence (and IMD the weakest). These findings should inform future vaccination public messaging and policy.

Acceptance and Risk Perception of COVID-19 Vaccination among Pregnant and Non Pregnant Women in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Cross-Sectional Matched-Sample Study

This study aims to evaluate the acceptance and risk perception of pregnant and non pregnant women towards COVID-19 vaccines using a cross-sectional matched-sample study approach. A web-based questionnaire with closed- and open-ended questions was administered to adults older than 18 years in the sub-Saharan African (SSA) region. Respondents (n = 131) were grouped based on their pregnancy status (54 pregnant and 77 non pregnant women) and matched for comparison by age. The matched groups were compared using the chi-square test and the t-test where appropriate. Compared to non pregnant women, pregnant women reported significantly lower risk perception scores of COVID-19 infection (3.74 vs. 5.78, p < 0.001) and were less likely to take the COVID-19 vaccine (odds ratio = 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.27, p < 0.001). A similar proportion of pregnant and non pregnant women believed in false information about the COVID-19 vaccine, and 40% of unvaccinated pregnant women (n = 40) were concerned about the safety of the vaccine. After adjustment, women's education, marital status, belief in misconceptions and risk perception were associated with non-vaccination among pregnant women. The content analysis revealed that pregnant women refused the vaccine due to mistrust of their countries' health systems, concerns about the country where the vaccines were manufactured and a lack of confidence in the production process of the vaccines. This study shows the poor acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women in SSA, who perceived a lower risk of COVID-19 infection. Understanding the reasons for non-acceptance and the motivation to accept the COVID-19 vaccine could guide the development of health education and promotion programmes, and aid governments and policymakers in implementing targeted policy changes.

COVID‑19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women and their reported reasons for vaccine refusal - A prospective study in Tehran, Iran

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of covid‑19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women and their reported reasons for vaccine refusal.

METHODS

This prospective study was performed in Arash women's Hospital, Tehran, Iran, between December 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. All pregnant women who were attended to prenatal care unit were considered eligible for inclusion. A validated questionnaire was used for data gathering. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

RESULTS

Finally, 477 pregnant women were recruited and were divided into two groups according the status of vaccine acceptance (237 accepted and 240 women refused vaccination). The mean age of accepted participants was higher (31.65 ± 5.69 vs 30.39 ± 5.5; P = 0.01). There was a significant statistical difference between the groups regarding education level. Access to internet and social media were also significantly different between the two groups (94.8% in accepted vs 86.6% in refused group; P = 0.002). There was more rate of severe COVID-19 infection in friends or relatives of accepted group (50% vs 38%). we did not find any statistically significant differences in obstetric characteristics and the rate of obstetric complications between the two groups. The most common reasons reported by participants for vaccine refusal, was fear of vaccination side effects on the fetus (86.5%), and the less common reported reasons were husband's disagreement (9.7%), use of traditional medicine (5.6%), religious beliefs (3.7%), and information obtained from social media (2.8%). After advices from medical staff, most of these mothers (86.5%) still refused vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of the present study,rate of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was about 50% and its most common reported reason was fear of probable side effects of vaccine on the fetus.