Strategies to improve maternal vaccination acceptance

"I try to take all the time needed, even if i do not have it!": Knowledge, attitudes, practices of perinatal care providers in canada about vaccination

Objective

Successful clinical conversations about vaccination in pregnancy (pertussis, COVID-19, and influenza) are key to improving low uptake rates of both vaccination in pregnancy and infancy. The purpose of this study was to understand Canadian perinatal care providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices around vaccination in pregnancy.

Methods

Qualitative interviews with 49 perinatal care providers (nurse practitioner, general practitioner, registered nurse, registered midwife, obstetrician-gynecologist, and family physicians) in 6 of 13 provinces and territories were deductively coded using directed content analysis [1] and analyzed according to key themes.

Results

Participants detailed their professional training and experiences, patient community demographics, knowledge of vaccines, views and beliefs about vaccination in pregnancy, and attitudes about vaccine counselling. Providers generally described having a good range of information sources to keep vaccine knowledge up to date. Some providers lacked the necessary logistical setups to administer vaccines within their practice. Responses suggest diverging approaches to vaccine counselling. With merely hesitant patients, some opted to dig in and have more in-depth discussions, while others felt the likelihood of persuading an outright vaccine-refusing patient to vaccinate was too low to be worthwhile.

Conclusion

Provider knowledge, attitudes, and practices around vaccination varied by professional background. To support perinatal providers' knowledge and practices, clinical guidelines should detail the importance of vaccination relative to other care priorities, emphasize the positive impact of engaging hesitant patients in vaccine counselling.

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.

Protecting infants against RSV disease: an impact and cost-effectiveness comparison of long-acting monoclonal antibodies and maternal vaccination

Background

Two new products for preventing Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) in young children have been licensed: a single-dose long-acting monoclonal antibody (la-mAB) and a maternal vaccine (MV). To facilitate the selection of new RSV intervention programmes for large-scale implementation, this study provides an assessment to compare the costs of potential programmes with the health benefits accrued.

Methods

Using an existing dynamic transmission model, we compared maternal vaccination to la-mAB therapy against RSV in England and Wales by calculating the impact and cost-effectiveness. We calibrated a statistical model to the efficacy trial data to accurately capture their immune waning and estimated the impact of seasonal and year-round programmes for la-mAB and MV programmes. Using these impact estimates, we identified the most cost-effective programme across pricing and delivery cost assumptions.

Findings

For infants under six months old in England and Wales, a year-round MV programme with 60% coverage would avert 32% (95% CrI 22-41%) of RSV hospital admissions and a year-round la-mAB programme with 90% coverage would avert 57% (95% CrI 41-69%). The MV programme has additional health benefits for pregnant women, which account for 20% of the population-level health burden averted. A seasonal la-mAB programme could be cost-effective for up to £84 for purchasing and administration (CCPA) and a seasonal MV could be cost-effective for up to £80 CCPA.

Interpretation

This modelling and cost-effectiveness analysis has shown that both the long-acting monoclonal antibodies and the maternal vaccine could substantially reduce the burden of RSV disease in the infant population. Our analysis has informed JCVI's recommendations for an RSV immunisation programme to protect newborns and infants.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research.

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.

"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.

Towards a More Critical Public Health Understanding of Vaccine Hesitancy: Key Insights from a Decade of Research

Vaccine hesitancy has gained renewed attention as an important public health concern worldwide. Against this backdrop, over the last decade, we have conducted various qualitative, social science studies with the broad shared aim of better understanding this complex phenomenon. This has included various Cochrane systematic reviews of qualitative research globally, systematic reviews of qualitative research in Africa, and primary research studies in South Africa. These studies have also explored vaccine hesitancy for various vaccines, including routine childhood vaccination, HPV vaccination and other routine vaccinations for adolescents, and, most recently, COVID-19 vaccination. In this reflective and critical commentary piece we reflect on seven key overarching insights we feel we have gained about this complex phenomenon from the varying studies we have conducted over the past decade. These insights comprise the following: (1) the relationship between vaccine knowledge and hesitancy is complex and may operate in multiple directions; (2) vaccine hesitancy is driven by multiple socio-political forces; (3) vaccine hesitancy may be many things, rather than a single phenomenon; (4) vaccine hesitancy may be an ongoing 'process', rather than a fixed 'stance'; (5) vaccine hesitancy may sometimes be about a 'striving', rather than a 'resisting'; (6) 'distrust' as a driver of vaccine hesitancy needs to be better contextualized and disaggregated; and (7) the 'demand-side' versus 'supply/access-side' distinction of the drivers of suboptimal vaccination may be misleading and unhelpful. In unpacking these insights, we problematize some of the common assumptions within the vaccine hesitancy literature and flag topics that we think could benefit from further scrutiny and debate. Our hope is that this can provide a platform for further engagement on these issues and ultimately contribute towards fostering a more critical public health understanding of vaccine hesitancy.

Characteristics associated with influenza vaccination uptake in pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women are at increased risk from influenza, yet maternal influenza vaccination levels remain suboptimal.

AIM

To estimate associations between sociodemographic and health characteristics and seasonal influenza vaccination uptake among pregnant women, and to understand trends over time to inform interventions to improve vaccine coverage.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective cohort study using linked electronic health records of women in North West London with a pregnancy overlapping an influenza season between September 2010 and February 2020.

METHOD

A multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to identify associations between characteristics of interest and the primary outcome of influenza vaccination.

RESULTS

In total, 451 954 pregnancies, among 260 744 women, were included. In 85 376 (18.9%) pregnancies women were vaccinated against seasonal influenza. Uptake increased from 8.4% in 2010/11 to 26.4% in 2017/18, dropping again to 21.1% in 2019/20. Uptake was lowest among women aged 15-19 years (11.9%; reference category) or ≥40 years (15.2%; odds ratio [OR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10 to 1.24); of Black (14.1%; OR 0.55, 95% CI = 0.53 to 0.57) or unknown ethnicity (9.9%; OR 0.42, 95% CI = 0.39 to 0.46); who lived in more deprived areas (OR least versus most deprived [reference category] 1.16, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.21); or with no known risk factors for severe influenza.

CONCLUSION

Seasonal influenza vaccine uptake in pregnant women increased in the decade before the COVID-19 pandemic, but remained suboptimal. Targeted approaches are recommended to reducing inequalities in access to vaccination and should focus on women of Black ethnicity, younger and older women, and women living in deprived areas.

Maternal vaccination-current status, challenges, and opportunities

AIM

Maternal vaccination is a promising strategy for protecting pregnant women and newborns against severe infections. This review aims to describe the current status and challenges associated with maternal vaccination against seasonal influenza, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap/DTaP), and novel coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) in Japan and other countries, mainly the United States and the United Kingdom.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed and other public websites (e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) to obtain information on maternal vaccination.

RESULTS

Inactivated vaccines are recommended for pregnant women by gynecologic societies in Japan, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Among pregnant Japanese women, the influenza and COVID-19 (two doses) vaccine coverage rates were 27.0%-53.5% (six studies) and 73.6% (one study), respectively; there are no studies on maternal vaccination with DTaP. Concerns regarding vaccine safety are a major barrier to maternal vaccination across countries. Maternal vaccination is effective in preventing severe disease in pregnant women and protecting infants aged <6 months, is generally safe, and does not increase the risk of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Providing accurate information regarding vaccination through healthcare providers and the government and government funding for vaccines may help improve maternal vaccination rates in Japan.

CONCLUSION

Current coverage for maternal vaccination is still low globally mainly because of vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women. The government, drug-regulatory authorities, and healthcare professionals must educate pregnant women about the effectiveness and safety of maternal vaccines and encourage vaccination when the benefits outweigh the risks.

Factors influencing healthcare professionals' confidence in vaccination in Europe: a literature review

Health-care professionals (HCPs) have a fundamental role in vaccination, their own beliefs and attitudes affecting both their uptake and recommendation of vaccines. This literature review (n = 89) summarises evidence on HCPs’ perceptions of the risks and benefits of vaccination, trust, and perceptions of mandatory vaccination in Europe. HCPs across studies believed that vaccination is important to protect themselves and their patients. However, beliefs that some diseases such as influenza are less risky were reported by some HCPs as a reason for not getting vaccinated. Concerns about both short- and long-term side effects were identified among HCPs in most studies, such as those affecting the immune or neurological system. Mistrust toward health authorities and pharmaceutical industry was reported in some studies. The question of mandatory vaccination revealed mixed opinions, with some favoring self-determination and others viewing vaccination as a duty. This review highlights key factors influencing HCPs’ confidence in vaccination in Europe.

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

Introduction

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Discussion

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

Supplementary Information

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

Women's views and experiences of accessing pertussis vaccination in pregnancy and infant vaccinations during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multi-methods study in the UK

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 changed access to healthcare, including vaccinations, in the United Kingdom (UK). This study explored UK women's experiences of accessing pertussis vaccination during pregnancy and infant vaccinations during COVID-19.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional survey was completed, between 3rd August-11th October 2020, by 1404 women aged 16+ years who were pregnant at some point after the first UK lockdown from March 23rd, 2020. Ten follow-up semi-structured interviews were conducted.

RESULTS

Most women surveyed were pregnant (65.7%) and a third postnatal (34.3%). Almost all women (95.6%) were aware that pertussis vaccination is recommended in pregnancy. Most pregnant (72.1%) and postnatal women (84.0%) had received pertussis vaccination; however, access issues were reported. Over a third (39.6%) of women had a pregnancy vaccination appointment changed. COVID-19 made it physically difficult to access pregnancy vaccinations for one fifth (21.5%) of women and physically difficult to access infant vaccinations for almost half of women (45.8%). Nearly half of women (45.2%) reported feeling less safe attending pregnancy vaccinations and over three quarters (76.3%) less safe attending infant vaccinations due to COVID-19. The majority (94.2%) felt it was important to get their baby vaccinated during COVID-19. Pregnant women from ethnic-minorities and lower-income households were less likely to have been vaccinated. Minority-ethnicity women were more likely to report access problems and feeling less safe attending vaccinations for both themselves and their babies. Qualitative analysis found women experienced difficulties accessing antenatal care and relied on knowledge from previous pregnancies to access vaccines in pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

During the ongoing and future pandemics, healthcare services should prioritise equitable access to routine vaccinations, including tailoring services for ethnic-minority families who experience greater barriers to vaccination.

What to Expect from COVID-19 and from COVID-19 Vaccine for Expecting or Lactating Women

Recent studies identified pregnancy as a high-risk condition for the development of maternal-fetal complications in the case of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, the scientific community is now considering pregnant women a "fragile" category that should be vaccinated with high priority. The number of pregnant women undergoing hospitalization since summer 2021, including Intensive Care Unit admission, is growing, as well as the risk of preterm birth. Evidence from both animals and humans suggest that, similarly to other vaccines routinely administered in pregnancy, COVID-19 vaccines are not crossing the placenta, do not increase the risk of miscarriage, preterm birth, stillbirth, the birth of small gestational age neonates, as well as the risk of congenital abnormalities. To date, the World Health Organization and scientific literature are promoting and encouraging the vaccination of all pregnant and lactating women. The aim of our narrative review is to present the available literature regarding this issue with the aim to provide appropriate answers to the most frequent requests, doubts, and fears that have led many expecting and lactating women not to become vaccinated during this pandemic period.

Views and experiences of maternal healthcare providers regarding influenza vaccine during pregnancy globally: A systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that pregnant women receive influenza vaccination; however, uptake of the vaccine remains low. Maternity health care professionals (MHCPs) play an important role in motivating pregnant women to receive the influenza vaccine. However, factors such as MHCPs' views and knowledge about the vaccine, and time constraints due to workload may influence MHCPs' practices and opinions about women receiving the influenza vaccine during pregnancy. To date, the qualitative evidence exploring MHCPs' views and experiences around influenza vaccine uptake in pregnant women has not been synthesised.

AIM

To systematically review and thematically synthesise qualitative evidence that explores the views and experiences of MHCPs involved in the provision of the maternal influenza vaccine worldwide.

METHODS

Five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science) were searched, supplemented with searches of included paper reference lists and grey literature. Study selection was conducted by up to three researchers applying pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria. Quality assessment was undertaken, data were extracted, coded and synthesised to develop descriptive and analytical themes.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 277 participants were included. Seventeen descriptive themes were interpreted, embedded within six analytical themes. MHCPs perceived that maternal influenza vaccination delivery can be facilitated by trusting relationships, good communication, knowledge about the vaccine leading to confidence in recommending vaccine, electronic vaccination prompts, and presence of national guidelines. However, workload, time constraints, MHCP's perception of pregnant women's concerns, and social/cultural/environmental influences could prevent the likelihood of delivery of influenza vaccine. Knowledgeable MHCPs who were regularly updated about vaccination based on scientific evidence were more confident when discussing and recommending the influenza vaccine to pregnant women. In addition, the presence of national policies and guidelines and electronic prompts for maternal influenza vaccination would enhance the delivery of the vaccine.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that approaches to enhance the vaccination uptake rate in pregnant women include addressing MHCPs barriers to discussing influenza vaccination through education, sufficient time for discussions, and electronic prompts about vaccination, as well as evidence based local and national guidelines.

Is the pre-natal period a missed opportunity for communicating with parents about immunizations? Evidence from a longitudinal qualitative study in Victoria, British Columbia

Background

Growing evidence shows that many parents begin the decision-making process about infant vaccination during pregnancy and these decisions – once established – may be resistant to change. Despite this, many interventions targeting vaccination are focused on communicating with parents after their baby is born. This suggests that the prenatal period may constitute a missed opportunity for communicating with expectant parents about infant vaccination.

Methods

Using a longitudinal qualitative design, we conducted two interviews (prepartum and postpartum) with women (n = 19) to explore the optimal timing of vaccination information. The data were analyzed thematically, and examined across all sets of pre- and post-partum interviews as well as within each individual participant to draw out salient themes.

Results

Most participants formed their intentions to vaccinate before the baby was born and indicated that they would welcome information about vaccination from their maternity care providers. However, few individuals recalled their maternity care providers initiating vaccination-related conversations with them.

Conclusion

The prenatal period is an important time to begin conversations with expectant parents about vaccinating their infants, particularly if these conversations are initiated by trusted maternity care providers. More information is needed on how maternity care providers can be better supported to have these conversations with their patients.

Influences on Pregnant Women's and Health Care Professionals' Behaviour Regarding Maternal Vaccinations: A Qualitative Interview Study

The uptake of maternal influenza and pertussis vaccinations is often suboptimal. This study explores the factors influencing pregnant women's and health care professionals' (HCPs) behaviour regarding maternal vaccinations (MVs). Pregnant/recently pregnant women, midwives, pharmacists and general practice staff in Waikato, New Zealand, were interviewed. The analysis used the behaviour change wheel model. Interviews of 18 women and 35 HCPs revealed knowledge about MVs varied with knowledge deficiencies hindering the uptake, particularly for influenza vaccination. HCPs, especially midwives, were key in raising women's awareness of MVs. Experience with vaccinating, hospital work (for midwives) and training increased HCPs' knowledge and proactivity about MVs. A "woman's choice" philosophy saw midwives typically encouraging women to seek information and make their own decision. Women's decisions were generally based on knowledge, beliefs, HCPs' emphasis and their perceived risk, with little apparent influence from friends, family, or online or promotional material. General practice's concentration on children's vaccination and minimal antenatal contact limited proactivity with MVs. Busyness and prioritisation appeared to affect HCPs' proactivity. Multi-pronged interventions targeting HCPs and pregnant women and increasing MV access are needed. All HCPs seeing pregnant women should be well-informed about MVs, including how to identify and address women's questions or concerns about MVs to optimise uptake.

Validity of maternal recall for estimating childhood vaccination coverage - Evidence from Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Vaccination coverage surveys in low- and middle-income countries typically estimate vaccination coverage using data from vaccination cards, parental recall, or a combination of the two. However, these surveys are often complicated by the pervasive absence of vaccination cards, forcing researchers to rely on parental recall. We assessed the validity of mothers' recall against home-based vaccination cards using data from a community-based household survey in Nigeria.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of 1,254 mothers of children aged 12-23 months was performed in Enugu State, Nigeria in July 2020. Data on vaccination status for BCG, OPV, DPT, Measles, Yellow fever, and Vitamin A supplement were collected using two data sources: home-based vaccination cards and mothers' recall. We evaluated the level of agreement between the two data sources; estimated the sensitivity and specificity of mothers' recalls; and computed multivariable regression models to identify socio-demographic factors associated with mothers' recall bias.

RESULTS

Out of 1,254 mothers interviewed, 578 (46.1%) mothers with vaccination cards were included in this analysis. Vaccination coverage levels were generally similar across data sources, though recall-based data generally underestimated the coverage. The level of agreement between the two data sources was high (≥91.0% for all vaccine types) with recall bias due to under-reporting generally higher than recall bias due to over-reporting. The sensitivity of parental recalls was high for all vaccine types, while the specificity was low across vaccine types. Across all vaccines, mothers recall bias was significantly associated with the rural residence and not receiving postnatal care.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of vaccination cards, mothers' recall of their children' vaccination status for BCG, OPV, DPT, Measles, Yellow fever and Vitamin A is a valid instrument for estimating childhood vaccination coverage in this setting in Nigeria. However, additional research is needed to confirm these findings at higher sub-national and national levels.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance of Pregnant and Lactating Women (PLW) in Czechia: An Analytical Cross-Sectional Study

Pregnant and lactating women (PLW) represent a particular population subset with increased susceptibility for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, even though the evidence about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines was delayed due to their initial exclusion from development trials. This unclear situation could have led to increased COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy levels among PLW; therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of Czech PLW towards COVID-19 vaccines and the determinants of their attitudes. An analytical cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out in the University Hospital Brno (South Moravia, Czechia) between August and October 2021. The study utilised a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) adapted from previous instruments used for the same purpose. The SAQ included closed-ended items covering demographic characteristics, clinical and obstetric characteristics, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, and potential psychosocial predictors of vaccine acceptance. Out of the 362 included participants, 278 were pregnant (PW) and 84 were lactating women (LW). The overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (immediate and delayed) level was substantially high (70.2%), with a significant difference between PW (76.6%) and LW (48.8%). Out of the 70.2% who agreed to receive the vaccine, 3.6% indicated immediate acceptance, and 66.6% indicated delayed acceptance. Only 13.3% of the participants indicated their acceptance of their physician's vaccination recommendation during pregnancy or while lactating, and 62.2% were against it. Our results agreed with the recent studies that revealed that PW tended to have a high level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, and they were also inclined to resist professional recommendations because they predominantly preferred to delay their vaccination. The pregnancy trimester, education level, employment status, and previous live births were significant determinants for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. The most commonly preferred vaccine type was mRNA-based vaccines, followed by viral vector-based and inactivated virus vaccines. The first top priority of PLW was vaccine safety for their children, followed by vaccine safety for the PLW and vaccine effectiveness. Regarding psychosocial predictors, media/social media, trust in the government, the pharmaceutical industry, and healthcare professionals, partners, and a positive risk-benefit ratio were significant promoters for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Findings from this study suggest that promotional interventions targeting PLW should use web platforms and focus on vaccine safety evidence, the expected benefits of vaccines and potential harms of the infection.

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is one of the most effective ways to prevent serious illnesses and deaths in children. However, worldwide, many children do not receive all recommended vaccinations, for several potential reasons. Vaccines might be unavailable, or parents may experience difficulties in accessing vaccination services; for instance, because of poor quality health services, distance from a health facility, or lack of money. Some parents may not accept available vaccines and vaccination services. Our understanding of what influences parents' views and practices around childhood vaccination, and why some parents may not accept vaccines for their children, is still limited. This synthesis links to Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to improve coverage or uptake of childhood vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

- Explore parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination, and the factors influencing acceptance, hesitancy, or nonacceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors reduce parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three other databases for eligible studies from 1974 to June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that: utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on parents' or caregivers' views, practices, acceptance, hesitancy, or refusal of routine vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where childhood vaccination is provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a pre-specified sampling frame to sample from eligible studies, aiming to capture studies that were conceptually rich, relevant to the review's phenomenon of interest, from diverse geographical settings, and from a range of income-level settings. We extracted contextual and methodological data from each sampled study. We used a meta-ethnographic approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of criteria used in previous Cochrane Reviews and originally based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We integrated the findings of this review with those from relevant Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. We did this by mapping whether the underlying theories or components of trial interventions included in those reviews related to or targeted the overarching factors influencing parental views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination identified by this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 145 studies in the review and sampled 27 of these for our analysis. Six studies were conducted in Africa, seven in the Americas, four in South-East Asia, nine in Europe, and one in the Western Pacific. Studies included urban and rural settings, and high-, middle-, and low-income settings. Many complex factors were found to influence parents' vaccination views and practices, which we divided into four themes. Firstly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their broader ideas and practices surrounding health and illness generally, and specifically with regards to their children, and their perceptions of the role of vaccination within this context. Secondly, many parents' vaccination ideas and practices were influenced by the vaccination ideas and practices of the people they mix with socially. At the same time, shared vaccination ideas and practices helped some parents establish social relationships, which in turn strengthened their views and practices around vaccination. Thirdly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by wider political issues and concerns, and particularly their trust (or distrust) in those associated with vaccination programmes. Finally, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their access to and experiences of vaccination services and their frontline healthcare workers. We developed two concepts for understanding possible pathways to reduced acceptance of childhood vaccination. The first concept, 'neoliberal logic', suggests that many parents, particularly from high-income countries, understood health and healthcare decisions as matters of individual risk, choice, and responsibility. Some parents experienced this understanding as in conflict with vaccination programmes, which emphasise generalised risk and population health. This perceived conflict led some parents to be less accepting of vaccination for their children. The second concept, 'social exclusion', suggests that some parents, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, were less accepting of childhood vaccination due to their experiences of social exclusion. Social exclusion may damage trustful relationships between government and the public, generate feelings of isolation and resentment, and give rise to demotivation in the face of public services that are poor quality and difficult to access. These factors in turn led some parents who were socially excluded to distrust vaccination, to refuse vaccination as a form of resistance or a way to bring about change, or to avoid vaccination due to the time, costs, and distress it creates. Many of the overarching factors our review identified as influencing parents' vaccination views and practices were underrepresented in the interventions tested in the four related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review has revealed that parents' views and practices regarding childhood vaccination are complex and dynamic social processes that reflect multiple webs of influence, meaning, and logic. We have provided a theorised understanding of the social processes contributing to vaccination acceptance (or not), thereby complementing but also extending more individualistic models of vaccination acceptance. Successful development of interventions to promote acceptance and uptake of childhood vaccination will require an understanding of, and then tailoring to, the specific factors influencing vaccination views and practices of the group(s) in the target setting. The themes and concepts developed through our review could serve as a basis for gaining this understanding, and subsequent development of interventions that are potentially more aligned with the norms, expectations, and concerns of target users.

Influenza vaccine uptake among at-risk adults (aged 16-64 years) in the UK: a retrospective database analysis

Background

In the UK, annual influenza vaccination is currently recommended for adults aged 16–64 years who are in a clinical at-risk group. Despite recommendations, rates of vaccine uptake in the UK have historically been low and below national and international targets. This study aims to analyse vaccine uptake among adults in clinical at-risk groups from the 2015–2016 influenza season to the present.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of influenza vaccine coverage in the UK was conducted using data extracted from publicly available sources. Clinically at-risk individuals (as defined by Public Health England), including pregnant women, aged 16–64 years, were included in this study.

Results

Influenza vaccination coverage rates across the UK in adults aged 16–64 years in a clinical at-risk group have been consistently low over the past 5 years, with only 48.0, 42.4, 44.1 and 52.4% of eligible patients in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland receiving their annual influenza vaccination during the 2018–2019 influenza season. Influenza vaccine coverage was lowest in patients with morbid obesity and highest in patients with diabetes in 2018–2019. Coverage rates were below current national ambitions of ≥75% in all clinical risk groups. In these clinical at-risk groups, influenza vaccine coverage decreased between 2015 and 2019, and there was considerable regional variation.

Conclusions

Uptake of the influenza vaccine by adults aged 16–64 years in a clinical at-risk group was substantially below the national ambitions. As a result, many individuals in the UK remain at high risk of developing severe influenza or complications. Given that people who are vulnerable to COVID-19 are also at increased risk of complications from influenza, during the 2020–2021 season, there is a heightened need for healthcare professionals across the UK to address suboptimal vaccine uptake, particularly in at-risk patients. Healthcare professionals and policymakers should consider measures targeted at increasing access to and awareness of the clinical benefits of the influenza vaccine.

'My primary purpose is to protect the unborn child': Understanding pregnant women's perceptions of maternal vaccination and vaccine trials in Europe

Despite the important benefits of maternal vaccination for pregnant women and newborns, vaccination uptake is low in many European countries. Differences in vaccination policies and recommendations, as well as concerns about vaccine safety can partly explain inadequate coverage rates and women's hesitancy to get vaccinated during pregnancy. This study aims to explore pregnant women's experiences, decision-making processes and perceptions towards maternal vaccination and maternal vaccine trials in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom. Qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted with 258 pregnant women identified through local research panels and snowballing. Topic guides translated in local languages were designed to explore women's awareness and perceptions of maternal vaccination, and willingness to participate in vaccine trials during pregnancy. A thematic analysis was conducted. Pregnant women were found to have low awareness about maternal vaccination, with many reporting not having received a recommendation to vaccinate from their doctors. Strong trust in health professionals indicate that strengthened recommendations could improve vaccination uptake. Vaccination decision-making in pregnancy was described in the context of a highly emotional period, generating anxiety and fears around the safety of vaccines. Pregnancy was also discussed as a period during which women develop nurturing and protective identities. However, depending on the information they received as well as influences from experts, families and peers, women either perceived vaccination as a threat to their babies' safety or as a means to protect them. Attitudes towards maternal vaccine trials were less ambiguous, with most pregnant women strongly rejecting the notion of taking part in trials. While strategies to improve pregnant women's awareness and perceptions of maternal vaccination are needed, it is equally important to understand why healthcare professionals may not be recommending vaccination. More coordinated strategies across Europe could help strengthen communication and trust in maternal vaccination.

Acceptance of Pertussis Vaccination among Pregnant Women in Taiwan

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

A qualitative study of the views of healthcare professionals on providing vaccines information to patients

Background Healthcare professionals (HCPs) such as pharmacists, general practitioners and practice nurses are a trusted source of vaccines information for patients in primary care. Global regulators have highlighted the key role of HCPs in fostering confidence in COVID-19 vaccines. Objective This study aims to gain insight into the views and experiences of HCPs on providing vaccines information to patients. Setting Primary care general practice surgeries and community pharmacies in Ireland. Methods Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 HCPs (five General practitioners [GPs], four practice nurses and five community pharmacists) identified through purposive and convenience sampling. The interviews were analysed by inductive thematic analysis. Main outcome measure Participants’ views and experiences of providing vaccines information to patients. Results Five key themes were identified: roles and responsibilities, perception of risk, perception of the public, building a relationship, and emotion. HCPs were motivated by duty and care for their patients. They respected patient autonomy and were driven by their concern for public health. HCPs were influenced by their perception of risk and their perceptions of the public. HCPs practiced patient-centred care by providing tailored vaccines information. They favoured an approach of providing patients with information and support to make their own decision. The topic was emotive; HCPs empathised with patients but were also frustrated by their perceived inability to change some patients’ views. Conclusion The provision of vaccines information by HCPs to patients is multifactorial with participants mindful of patient autonomy and the HCP role to support vaccinations as a public health priority. Participants suggested that education and support on vaccines communication would enable them to support the vaccines uptake in their practice.

One "misunderstood" health issue: demonstrating and communicating the safety of influenza a vaccination in pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) makes certain recommendations including the annual influenza vaccination of pregnant and pre-pregnant women during influenza (flu) season with an inactivated influenza vaccine as soon as it becomes available. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in association with ACOG state that the vaccine is safe to be given any trimester during pregnancy. However, due to a lack of communication, the public is unaware of the effects of influenza A vaccination in pregnancy. Since this is a vital public health concern, we aimed to communicate with evidence, the safety of influenza A vaccination in pregnancy in order to improve the rate of influenza A vaccines in pregnant women.

Methods

This health communication issue was based on the impact of influenza vaccine on fetal outcomes. Therefore, a search was carried out through medical-based online databases including: Cochrane Central, EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google scholar for relevant English-based publications. Adverse fetal outcomes were considered as the endpoints of this analysis. The most specific RevMan 5.3 (latest version) software was used to carry out this analysis. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were involved in data and results representation and interpretation.

Results

A total number of 679, 992 pregnant women participated in this analysis. Based on this current analysis, premature/preterm birth (< 37 weeks) was significantly reduced in pregnant women who were vaccinated for influenza A (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69–0.92; P = 0.002) as compared to those women who were not vaccinated. Similarly, influenza A vaccination decreased the risk for very preterm birth (< 32 weeks) (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.58–0.84; P = 0.0001). The risks for infants with low birth weight (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.49–1.04; P = 0.08), very low birth weight (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.23–2.11; P = 0.52) and infants small for gestational age (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.83–1.05; P = 0.26) were not increased with the vaccine. Influenza A vaccination was not associated with increased risks of stillbirth (RR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.38–1.03; P = 0.07), birth defects (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.26–1.72; P = 0.41), admission to neonatal intensive care unit or Apgar score < 7 in 5 min.

Conclusion

Influenza vaccine is completely safe in pregnancy. It significantly lowers premature birth and is not associated with any serious adverse neonatal outcome. Hence, this important piece of information should be communicated and conveyed to all pregnant women, for a safer and healthier pregnancy. At last, this public health issue should further be addressed to the population through media and other communication means in order to improve the rate of influenza A vaccines in pregnant women for a healthier and more productive population.

Vaccination in pregnancy: Challenges and evidence-based solutions

Vaccination in pregnancy (VIP) is dually beneficial - it protects the mother and the baby from tetanus, influenza, and pertussis. VIP uptake is low in many countries. Vaccine hesitancy, defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a "delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite the availability of vaccination services" is one of WHO's ten threats to global health per 2019. According to extensive research, mostly from high-income countries (HIC) and limited to tetanus, influenza and pertussis vaccines, lack of provider recommendations, safety concerns, and limitations in access are the main barriers to VIP. Health care provider recommendation is the leading facilitator for VIP across various socioeconomic status groups. Data on strategies to overcome patient, provider, and system barriers to VIP are inconsistent, contradictory, or lacking. Patient-focused research on evidence-based strategies to overcome provider and system barriers is needed. Furthermore, VIP programs require embedded continuous quality improvement to ensure sustainability.

Evaluation of a midwife-led, hospital based vaccination service for pregnant women

Background: Vaccines against whooping cough (pertussis) and seasonal-influenza are recommended for pregnant women in England. Uptake however varies regionally and by ethnicity. Pregnant women are traditionally vaccinated in primary care, though some hospitals now offer vaccines through antenatal clinics. This mixed-methods evaluation describes the demographic characteristics of women seen in a hospital midwife-led antenatal vaccine clinic and explores vaccine decision making. Methods: Descriptive statistics of women seen in a London hospital's midwife-led vaccine clinic were generated from electronic routine maternity records, including data on ethnicity, parity, age and deprivation indices. Reasons for vaccine decline given by women to midwives were categorized by themes. Qualitative interviews of women seen in the clinic were also undertaken. Results: Between 1st April 2017 and 31st March 2018 the vaccine clinic saw 1501 pregnant women. Of these, 83% received pertussis vaccine and (during flu season) 51% received influenza vaccine, from the clinic. Fewer Black Afro-Caribbean women seen by the clinic were vaccinated, compared to other ethnicities with only 68% receiving pertussis and 34% flu vaccines respectively (p < .05). Among all women delivering at the hospital over the year, 42%, (1334/3147) were vaccinated by the clinic. Qualitative interviews found that reassurance from healthcare professionals, particularly midwives, was the most important factor influencing maternal vaccine decisions. Conclusions: Midwife-led hospital clinics can offer an effective alternative to primary care provision for vaccines in pregnancy. Consistent with previous work, vaccine uptake varied by ethnicity. Midwives play a key role in the provision of vaccine services and influence women's vaccine decisions.

Maternal immunization country readiness: a checklist approach

Prior to the addition of a maternal vaccine onto the National Immunization Programme, it is important for a country to evaluate their capacity and readiness. This checklist has been developed that is deliberately not restricted to any particular vaccine so it can be applied by national-level stakeholders during the decision-making stage for the introduction of any additional or new maternal vaccine. It is suggested that a team consisting of representatives from the Ministry of Health, including the National Immunization Programme (NIP) and Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (MNCH) programs complete and review the checklist together. This checklist enables countries to assess their capacity, strengths and weaknesses and identify a list of priorities to allow for smooth implementation of maternal vaccines.

Lessons from past epidemics and pandemics and a way forward for pregnant women, midwives and nurses during COVID-19 and beyond: A meta-synthesis

OBJECTIVE

To consolidate qualitative research studies that examined the experiences and needs of pregnant women, midwives, and nurses of maternity units to provide a way forward for future research and practices during the current pandemic and future epidemics and pandemics.

DESIGN

Qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis.

DATA SOURCE

Four electronic databases-PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL).

REVIEW METHODS

Qualitative studies with samples of pregnant women, midwives, and/or nurses of maternity units who experienced epidemics and/or pandemics were searched from 1 January 2000 to 4 April 2020. The included studies were critically appraised using the ten-item Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool.

FINDINGS

Eight studies were included in this review. Four themes emerged from the synthesis: (1) psychological responses, (2) challenges faced, (3) coping strategies, and (4) sources of support and support needs.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant women, midwives, and nurses experienced negative psychological responses during epidemics and pandemics. Challenges, such as limited available information and public stigma, were faced. Various coping strategies, such as actively looking for more information and seeking solace in religions, were practiced by pregnant women, midwives, and nurses. Families were both sources of support and stress and they expressed needs for more informational, emotional, and financial support during pandemics.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

More culturally diverse research in the future that includes the development of technology-based programs, trained community volunteer-led programs, psychosocial interventions, and anti-stigma and awareness initiatives are needed to combat the current pandemic and future public health crises.

Health care providers perspectives about maternal immunization in Latin America

BACKGROUND

Antenatal care providers have a key role in providing appropriate information and immunization recommendations to improve pregnant women's vaccine uptake. The objective of this study is to describe health care providers' perspectives and experience regarding the implementation of maternal immunization programs in Latin America.

METHODS

We conducted 33 in-depth interviews of health care providers from Argentina, Brazil, Honduras, Mexico, and Peru (6-7 per country). Qualitative data analysis was conducted using a combination of both manual techniques and the computer software program NVivo. We identified and coded main themes related to maternal immunization.

RESULTS

The main themes identified in this analysis were practices related to maternal immunization, knowledge and training, resource availability and interactions with pregnant women. Healthcare providers knew that recommendations exists but some did not know their content; they expressed concerns about insufficient training. Providers from all five countries expressed the need for additional human resources and supplies. They also expressed a desire for women to be more proactive and ask more questions during the health visits.

CONCLUSION

This is the first multi-country study assessing the perspectives of health care providers about maternal immunization practices at the facility level in Latin America. Recommendations based on the results from this study include implementing additional trainings around maternal immunization, especially targeting obstetricians and midwives. These trainings should be conducted in coordination with improvements to supply chain and other structural issues.

Enablers and barriers of maternal and neonatal immunization programs in Latin America

BACKGROUND

The Region of the Americas has a long history of implementing maternal and neonatal immunization (MNI) programs. Our study aimed to understand the state of MNI policies, strategies and implementation practices in Latin America (LA).

METHODS

Study conducted in 5 middle-income countries: Argentina, Brazil, Honduras, Mexico and Peru. The methods included a desk review, interviews with national stakeholders and health care providers, focus groups with pregnant women and observations in health facilities. Enablers and barriers were identified and categorized as individual, societal or related to the health system.

RESULTS

All 5 participating countries had similar MNI policies and high access to antenatal care. Key enablers were the high acceptability of vaccination during pregnancy, high-level of political will and a national legal framework ensuring free access to vaccines. At the health system level, implementation was facilitated by the existence of immunization advisory committees, a pooled vaccine procurement mechanism, complementary vaccine delivery strategies, conditional cash transfer to users and performance incentives to health facilities. The main programmatic barriers were the lack of adequate MNI information; limited coordination between antenatal and immunization services; inadequate supply, resources and infrastructure; high staff turnover; insufficient training for health care providers; and weak monitoring and reporting systems.

CONCLUSION

Middle-income countries in LA have successfully implemented MNI programs and several enablers were identified. To overcome remaining barriers, there is a need to focus on improving the "immunization journey" for pregnant women through providing more clear and timely information to users and providers; removing barriers to access; ensuring adequate supply, human resources and infrastructure; making the health service experience positive; and establishing integrated information systems that allow for monitoring the progress toward achieving MNI goals. Strengthening the MNI programs can also improve equitable access to health services and prepare for the introduction of future vaccines for pregnant women.

Impact of Vaccines; Health, Economic and Social Perspectives

In the 20th century, the development, licensing and implementation of vaccines as part of large, systematic immunization programs started to address health inequities that existed globally. However, at the time of writing, access to vaccines that prevent life-threatening infectious diseases remains unequal to all infants, children and adults in the world. This is a problem that many individuals and agencies are working hard to address globally. As clinicians and biomedical scientists we often focus on the health benefits that vaccines provide, in the prevention of ill-health and death from infectious pathogens. Here we discuss the health, economic and social benefits of vaccines that have been identified and studied in recent years, impacting all regions and all age groups. After learning of the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 virus in December 2019, and its potential for global dissemination to cause COVID-19 disease was realized, there was an urgent need to develop vaccines at an unprecedented rate and scale. As we appreciate and quantify the health, economic and social benefits of vaccines and immunization programs to individuals and society, we should endeavor to communicate this to the public and policy makers, for the benefit of endemic, epidemic, and pandemic diseases.

Unvaccinated children as community parasites in National Qualitative Study from Turkey

Background

This national qualitative study explores (1) the experiences, observations, and opinions of health care workers (HCWs) about beliefs, socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental characteristics of parents refusing vaccination and (2) regional differences in the identified risk factors; (3) recommended solutions to improve vaccine acceptance in each of 12 regions in Turkey.

Methods

In total, we carried out 14 individual semi-structured in-depth interviews and 10 focus group discussions with 163 HCWs from 36 provinces. A thematic analysis was performed to explore HCWs’ observations about the parents’ decisions to reject vaccination and possible solutions for vaccine advocacy.

Results

Within the analyzed data framework, vaccine refusal statements could be defined as vaccine safety, the necessity of vaccines, assumptions of freedom of choice, health workers’ vaccine hesitancy, lack of information about national vaccination schedule and components, not trusting the health system, anti-vaccine publications in social media and newspapers, and refugees. Suggestions based on the HCWs suggestions can be summarized as interventions including (1) creating visual cards with scientific data on vaccine content and disease prevention and using them in counseling patients, (2) writing the vaccine components in a way understandable to ordinary people, (3) highlighting the national quality control and production in the vaccine box and labels, (4) conducting interviews with community opinion leaders, (5) training anti-vaccine HCWs with insufficient scientific knowledge and (6) reducing the tax of parents whose children are fully and punctually vaccinated.

Conclusions

The solution to vaccine rejection begins with the right approaches to vaccination during pregnancy. Prepared written and visual information notes should present the information as “vaccination acceptance” rather than “vaccination refusal”. Further studies on vaccine refusal rates should be carried out in various regions of the world so that region-specific actions are implemented to decrease the anti-vaxxer movement and to prevent an outbreak of infectious diseases.

Influenza Vaccination Experiences of Pregnant Women as a Predictor of the Intention to Become Vaccinated in Future Pregnancies in Spain

A good perception of the vaccines administered during pregnancy favors immunization coverage, which is still not optimal for the influenza vaccine. To understand the predisposition towards vaccination in future pregnancies, a study was performed that evaluated the experiences of women with the vaccine or influenza. A cross-sectional study was conducted through telephone interviews given to a total of 683 postpartum women in two health departments from the Valencia Community (Spain). This interview asked about their intention of becoming vaccinated in future pregnancies and whether they were favor or against vaccination. Most of them, 98.5% (n = 673 [95% CI: 97.6–99.4]) (p < 0.001) declared having received the systematic vaccines throughout their lives. The ones who were vaccinated against influenza, 91.9% (n = 387 [95% CI: 89.2–94.6]) (p < 0.001) manifested they would do so in future pregnancies. The probability of future non-vaccination was modeled, which was related to an unfavorable opinion towards vaccines (OR = 4.07 [95% CI: 2.01–8.24]) (p < 0.001), having suffered from influenza during pregnancy (OR = 3.84 [95% CI: 1.41–10.42]) (p < 0.05), and not having been vaccinated during previous pregnancies (OR = 38.47 [95% CI: 23.58–62.76]) (p < 0.001). Vaccination during pregnancy increases the intent of vaccination in the future.

Perinatal health care providers' approaches to recommending and providing pertussis vaccination in pregnancy: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

In 2018, the Canadian National Advisory Committee on Immunization and the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada recommended a single dose of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and reduced acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine in every pregnancy. To understand how perinatal health care providers in Canada are translating recent recommendations for universal antenatal Tdap vaccine into routine clinical practice, we examined health care providers' perceptions of what influences their ability to recommend and provide Tdap vaccine consistently to pregnant women.

METHODS

Between June 2018 and July 2019, we conducted semistructured telephone interviews with perinatal health care providers (nurses, midwives, family physicians and obstetricians) from 5 provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia) representing diverse educational experiences, practice settings and models of care. We analyzed the data using interpretive description.

RESULTS

We interviewed 44 perinatal health care providers (13 family physicians, 12 midwives, 10 obstetricians and 9 nurses) practising in a variety of settings. Health care providers' ability to recommend and provide antenatal Tdap vaccine was strongly influenced by structural constraints in the Canadian perinatal health care system. The participants' clinical training varied, which resulted in different knowledge and practices. Participants felt hindered by a lack of lay information resources. Consistent and convenient vaccine access was perceived to be key to promoting confidence and encouraging uptake, yet antenatal Tdap vaccine was not easily accessible for all women.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings suggest that Canada's fragmented health care model has a detrimental effect on health care providers' ability to recommend and ensure access to antenatal Tdap vaccine. Lessons from this study are pertinent to the implementation of successful pertussis vaccine programs and future pregnancy vaccination initiatives.

A Qualitative Study of Views and Experiences of Women and Health Care Professionals about Free Maternal Vaccinations Administered at Community Pharmacies

Background: A policy to extend funding of maternal pregnancy influenza and pertussis vaccinations to community pharmacies could address low pregnancy vaccine uptake. The policy has been implemented in one region in New Zealand. This study explored the views and experiences of women eligible for the vaccines and health care professionals regarding funded maternal vaccinations in pharmacy. Methods: Women in late pregnancy or with an infant, and midwives, pharmacists, and general practice staff were selected purposively and interviewed regarding maternal vaccinations and the new policy, including their awareness and views of the funded vaccinations in pharmacies, and how this policy worked in practice. Enablers and barriers to vaccination by pharmacists were explored. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using a framework approach. Results: Fifty-three interviews were conducted. Most women and health care professionals viewed funded maternal vaccinations in pharmacies positively with respect to increasing awareness and providing delivery options. Many women received messages from pharmacies. Most pharmacies used posters, leaflets and/or verbal explanation to pregnant women to raise awareness of the vaccinations. Not all pharmacies provided these vaccinations, and frontline staff could help to raise awareness. Conclusion: Funded maternal vaccinations in pharmacies are generally well accepted and provide an opportunity to increase uptake and prevent disease.

Qualitative Assessment of Vaccine Hesitancy in Romania

Background and objectives: Health systems all over the world are confronted with an alarming rise of cases in which individuals hesitate, delay, and even refuse vaccination, despite availability of quality vaccine services. In order to mitigate and combat this phenomenon, which are now defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as vaccine hesitancy (VH), we must first understand the factors that lead to its occurrence in an era characterized by wide access to safe and effective vaccines. To achieve this, we conducted field testing of the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS), as it was developed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts Working Group (SAGE WG), in Cluj-Napoca city, Cluj County, Romania. The scale is designed to quantify VH prevalence in a population, establish which vaccines generate the highest percentage of hesitancy, and allow a qualitative assessment of the individual’s reasons for hesitance. Materials and Methods: We conducted an observational cross-sectional survey, which was comprised of descriptive, analytical, and qualitative elements regarding VH. The necessary sample size was 452 individuals. The VHS and Matrix of Determinants (recommended by SAGE WG) for reasons people gave to justify their hesitance, was interpreted by qualitative thematic analysis (QTA) to ensure the validity and reliability in detecting hesitancy across various cultural settings and permit global comparisons. Results: We found a VH of 30.3% and 11.7% of parents reported refusing to vaccinate their child. Among the VH responders, the varicella vaccine generated 35% hesitancy, measles vaccine 27.7%, Human Papillomavirus (HPV) 24.1%, and mumps vaccine 23.4%, respectively. The QTA values for percent agreement ranged from 91% to 100%. Cohen’s Kappa values ranged from 0.45 to 0.95. Contextual influences identified for VH were “media,” “leaders and lobbies,” and “perception of the pharmaceutical industry.” Individual and group influences for VH were “beliefs,” “knowledge,” and “risk/benefits (perceived).” Vaccine and vaccination specific issues for VH were “risk/benefit (rational)” and “health care practitioners (trustworthiness, competence).” Conclusions: One-third of the investigated population had expressed VH, and a further one-third of these had refused a vaccine for their child. Chicken Pox, Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR), and HPV vaccines generated the most hesitation. Negative information from the media was the most frequently evoked reason for VH.