COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and acceptance among individuals with cancer, autoimmune diseases, and other serious comorbid conditions: A cross-sectional internet-based survey

Vaccine hesitancy in patients with solid tumors: a cross-sectional single-center survey

BACKGROUND

Vaccination rates are still suboptimal in cancer patients. Oncologists play a central role in recommending vaccines to their patients. Our goal was to investigate vaccine acceptance among cancer patients and understand the factors shaping their choices, thereby aiding physicians in better supporting their patients' vaccination decisions.

METHODS

We designed a prospective cross-sectional survey exploring vaccination status, attitudes, and reasons for hesitancy towards vaccinations against the main vaccine preventable diseases (VPDs) among patients undergoing active cancer treatment. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the proportion of vaccinated subjects in our cohort of cancer patients. The secondary endpoints were to assess the proportion of vaccinated subjects against different types of VPDs: flu, COVID-19, pneumococcal disease, Herpes Zoster (HZ).

RESULTS

Between 12 February and 01 March 2024, a total of three hundred and seventeen patients with cancer were invited to respond to the survey, 309 of whom (97%) agreed to do it. Two hundred seventy-three patients (0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.91) had received at least one vaccination. Two hundred thirty-one patients (74.76%) reported that at their first oncology visit their oncologist recommended vaccinations, primarily anti-flu (92.21%) and anti-SARS-CoV-2 (83.55%) vaccinations, while less frequently the anti-pneumococcal (42.42%) and anti-HZ (37%) vaccines were recommended. On the univariate analysis, age over 75 years (p = 0.041), marital status (p = 0.003) and the oncologist's vaccine recommendation during the first visit (p < 0.001) were significantly associated to vaccine acceptance. At the multivariable analysis, these variables were independently associated with vaccine willingness. Overall in our cancer population, the two main reasons for vaccine hesitancy were the lack of recommendation by the oncologist (55.41%, n = 128) and the lack of awareness of the importance of vaccination in the context of oncological care (49.35%, n = 114).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey emphasizes the importance of vaccine counseling by the oncologist to their patients. Oncologists can motivate patients to receive the correct vaccine schedule by addressing doubts and concerns about the potential negative impact of the vaccine on cancer and cancer therapies.

Patient, Care Partner, and Physician Voices in Treatment Decision-Making for Multiple Myeloma

Introduction

Treatment decision-making for multiple myeloma (MM) is complex. Individuals involved in decision-making may value treatment attributes differently based on their role as a patient, care partner, or physician. This study describes those attributes, and what is most important by role.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with consenting adult patients with MM, MM care partners, and physicians treating MM. Respondents were recruited from US panels (Inspire and M3 Global Research) between September and December 2022. Survey items were informed by a targeted literature review, qualitative interviews, and a steering committee comprising clinical experts, a patient advocate, patient, and care partner. Descriptive statistics were generated and reported in aggregate.

Results

Email invitations were sent to 8071 Inspire members interested in or posting about MM. Of these, 4427 viewed the invitation, 941 responded, and 156 patients and care partners completed the survey (17% of respondents). For physicians, 5588 were invited via Email by M3 Global Research, with 761 viewing the invitation, 214 accessing the survey link, and 137 completing the survey (64% of respondents). Duration of response, side effects, and patients' quality-of-life (QoL) were the top three treatment attributes selected across the three cohorts; alignment of these attributes was consistent among patients regardless of disease severity. Separately, patients rated QoL and the amount of caregiving needed during/after treatment as the most important factors for future treatment decisions. If more effective MM treatments were offered, care partners were more willing to assume greater family burden (77%) compared to patients (49%), and patients were more accepting of potential serious side effects (50%) than were care partners (34%).

Conclusion

Patients with MM, care partners, and physicians consider and value various treatment decision-making factors. Recognizing and addressing these differences is critical to meeting patients' preferences, needs, and optimizing patient outcomes.

Factors Associated with COVID-19 Testing, Vaccination, and Use of Digital Contact Tracing Apps among Black and Latinx MSM (BLMSM) in Los Angeles

This study examines the factors associated with COVID-19 testing, vaccination intent (both individually and jointly), and willingness to use contact tracing digital apps among a cohort of Black and Latinx men who have sex with men (BLMSM) living in Los Angeles during the initial peak (July 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic. A questionnaire detailing participants COVID-19 experiences was sent to 300 primarily BLMSM after the first state-wide COVID-19 lockdown. Logistic regression models with random cluster effects were used for analyses. Forty-two percent (42%) tested for COVID-19, 27% were willing to get vaccinated, and about 45% reported willingness to use contact tracing digital apps. Controlling for intervention participation, age, education, marital status, employment, health, tobacco, binge drinking, and self-reported anxiety, those who were depressed had 33% (95% CI: 0.13 to 0.82) odds of using a prevention strategy (either test for COVID-19 or vaccination intent) as the group who were not depressed. Those who had high school diploma or less had 23% (95% CI: 0.11 to 0.48) odds to use digital contact tracing apps as the group with education level of at least Associate's or Bachelor's degree. Without considering the format of the test kits, vaccine side effects, and ease of use for digital contact tracing apps, participants appeared to still be hesitant in using COVID-19 prevention strategies at the initial height of the pandemic. Our findings suggest the need for further investigation into this hesitancy to better inform and prepare for future epidemics.

Vaccine Hesitancy at Nine Community Sites Across the United States, Early in COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy has been a significant concern throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine hesitancy can be attributed to lack of confidence in vaccines, complacency about the health threat, or lack of convenience of vaccination. To date, few studies have used methods designed to include populations underrepresented in research when identifying factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

Between January and July 2021, potential participants were recruited from community venues selected through time-location sampling in 15 defined communities in the United States. Study staff administered a questionnaire on demographics, COVID-19 behaviors and attitudes, and vaccination status or intention to consenting individuals. Vaccine hesitancy was analyzed among those age 18 years and older from nine of the 15 sites and was defined as self-reported neutral, unlikely, or very unlikely vaccine intention. Logistic regression modeling, adjusted for site, identified factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

Among 11,559 individuals, vaccine hesitancy by site ranged from 8.7 to 31.1%. Vaccine hesitancy was associated with being Black compared to White, being White compared to Asian, younger age, unstable housing, being unemployed, lower income, having a disability, providing care in home, not reporting inability to visit sick or elderly relatives during the pandemic, not reporting increased anxiety during the pandemic, and not spending more time with loved ones during the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

In these selected US communities, early in vaccine rollout, there were significant racial disparities in vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, individuals who were more marginalized due to their socioeconomic status were more likely to report vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine campaigns should make efforts to remove barriers to vaccination, by improving convenience.

Patient and care partner perspectives and preferences related to myasthenia gravis treatment: A qualitative study

Background and Aims

Due to the high symptom and treatment burden in myasthenia gravis (MG), understanding patient and care partner perspectives and preferences is crucial.

Methods

This study used voice analysis and virtual focus groups to understand patient and care partner experiences with MG-related symptoms, treatments, and preferences. The voice analysis via social media listening used artificial intelligence-powered tools to gather and structure public digital conversations on MG. Focus groups included people living with MG and care partners who completed a questionnaire and participated in a 1-h virtual session facilitated using a semi-structured interview guide. Qualitative data were aggregated, transcribed, and thematically analyzed.

Results

The voice analysis examined 11,554 posts from 8321 individuals, discussing MG symptoms, treatments, and burden. Of 7563 symptom-related posts, 5902 (78%) conveyed negative, 1427 (19%) neutral, and 234 (3%) positive sentiment. The most frequently mentioned symptoms were categorized as dysarthria, muscle weakness, and dysphagia. MG treatment sentiment analysis identified 6667 posts (67%) as neutral, 2887 (29%) as negative, and 350 (4%) as positive. For the focus groups, 15 individuals (12 patients and 3 care partners) completed the questionnaire and 14 participated in the virtual focus group sessions. The 15 participants who completed the questionnaire prioritized treatment convenience, symptom control for improved quality of life, and preventing potential MG crises in their current treatment. New treatment expectations included increased effectiveness, less frequent dosing, faster onset, and fewer side effects. Participants were also receptive to wearable medication delivery systems placed on the body and valued direct involvement in treatment decisions.

Conclusion

Patients and care partners are often negatively impacted by MG symptoms and value convenient and fast-acting treatments that control symptoms with minimal side effects. Considering patient preferences may help optimize treatment decisions and improve patients' overall well-being and satisfaction in their care.

Self-Reported COVID-19 Vaccine and Booster Acceptance and Hesitancy Among Autistic Adults in Pennsylvania: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Survey Data

BACKGROUND

The autistic population is rapidly increasing; meanwhile, autistic adults face disproportionate risks for adverse COVID-19 outcomes. Limited research indicates that autistic individuals have been accepting of initial vaccination, but research has yet to document this population's perceptions and acceptance of COVID-19 boosters.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify person-level and community characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccination and booster acceptance among autistic adults, along with self-reported reasons for their stated preferences. Understanding this information is crucial in supporting this vulnerable population given evolving booster guidelines and the ending of the public health emergency for the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Data are from a survey conducted in Pennsylvania from April 11 to September 12, 2022. Demographic characteristics, COVID-19 experiences, and COVID-19 vaccine decisions were compared across vaccination status groups. Chi-square analyses and 1-way ANOVA were conducted to test for significant differences. Vaccination reasons were ranked by frequency; co-occurrence was identified using phi coefficient correlation plots.

RESULTS

Most autistic adults (193/266, 72.6%) intended to receive or received the vaccine and booster, 15% (40/266) did not receive or intend to receive any vaccine, and 12.4% (33/266) received or intended to receive the initial dose but were hesitant to accept booster doses. Reasons for vaccine acceptance or hesitancy varied by demographic factors and COVID-19 experiences. The most significant were previously contracting COVID-19, desire to access information about COVID-19, and discomfort with others not wearing a mask (all P=.001). County-level factors, including population density (P=.02) and percentage of the county that voted for President Biden (P=.001) were also significantly associated with differing vaccination acceptance levels. Reasons for accepting the initial COVID-19 vaccine differed among those who were or were not hesitant to accept a booster. Those who accepted a booster were more likely to endorse protecting others and trusting the vaccine as the basis for their acceptance, whereas those who were hesitant about the booster indicated that their initial vaccine acceptance came from encouragement from someone they trusted. Among the minority of those hesitant to any vaccination, believing that the vaccine was unsafe and would make them feel unwell were the most often reported reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

Intention to receive or receiving the COVID-19 vaccination and booster was higher among autistic adults than the population that received vaccines in Pennsylvania. Autistic individuals who accepted vaccines prioritized protecting others, while autistic individuals who were vaccine hesitant had safety concerns about vaccines. These findings inform public health opportunities and strategies to further increase vaccination and booster rates among generally accepting autistic adults, to better support the already strained autism services and support system landscape. Vaccination uptake could be improved by leveraging passive information diffusion to combat vaccination misinformation among those not actively seeking COVID-19 information to better alleviate safety concerns.

Trust in institutions affects vaccination campaign outcomes

BACKGROUND

Trust is an important driver of various outcomes, but little is known about whether trust in institutions affects actual vaccination campaign outcomes rather than only beliefs and intentions.

METHODS

We used nationally representative, individual-level data for 114 countries and combined them with data on vaccination policies and rates. We measured the speed of the vaccination campaign for each country using the estimated growth rate of a Gompertz curve. We then performed country-level regressions in the global sample and explored heterogeneity across World Bank development groups.

RESULTS

Globally, higher trust in institutions significantly increased vaccination rates (p<0.01) and vaccination speed (p<0.01). The effect was strong in low- and middle-income countries but statistically not significant in high-income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings have implications for the design of vaccination campaigns for national governments and international organizations. The findings highlight the importance of trust in institutions when designing communication strategies around vaccination campaigns in low- and middle-income countries.

The majority of Canadians likely behaved as myopic rationalists rather than success-based learners when deciding on their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine

Introduction

Successful vaccine promotion communication strategies require knowing how eligible recipients will respond to the opportunity to get vaccinated. Two main classes of recipients are myopic rationalists, those who receive a dose of vaccine only if it maximizes their own instant benefit and if so, do it as soon as possible, and success-based learners, those who learn from others that they perceive to be most successful.

Methods

A recent study models these two decision-making types, and estimates the population proportion of myopic rationalists in each U.S. state. In this report, we fit a similar model to data on COVID-19 vaccine uptake across the Canadian provinces and territories.

Results

We estimated that 64% of Canadians behaved as myopic rationalists in taking the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, compared to an estimated 47% in the United States. Among the provinces, the lowest proportion of myopic rationalists was 0.51 in Saskatchewan, while the highest was 0.74 in Prince Edward Island. The correlation analysis suggested a positive correlation between the proportion of myopic rationalists and the average age across the Canadian provinces (Pearson-r = 0.71).

Discussion

Canadian health management may benefit from these results in tailoring the vaccine promotion communication strategies.

The status and influencing factors of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with COPD

In this study, we investigated the status and influencing factors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A questionnaire on COVID-19 vaccination in patients with COPD was developed. The clinical characteristics, COVID-19 vaccination status, other relevant vaccinations, and vaccination status of the patients with COPD were collected anonymously. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination in patients with COPD. There were 1898 returned questionnaires, of which 1874 were valid. The proportion of patients who completed the COVID-19 vaccination program was 78.60%. Factors influencing the COVID-19 vaccination rate were: the age of individuals who were 75-85 years old and > 85 years old, acute exacerbation 3-4 times in the previous year, comorbid cardiovascular and endocrine system diseases, failure to take regular medication for COPD, application of non-invasive ventilation machines, believing that their current health condition has deteriorated, believing that the current COVID-19 vaccine is not safe, medical staff not specifying whether they would recommend vaccination against COVID-19, medical staff not recommending the COVID-19 vaccine, and fear of adverse reactions and aggravation of COPD. Patients with COPD had a high COVID-19 vaccination rate in China, whereas patients with pneumonia, influenza, and herpes zoster had a low vaccination rate. Improving the patients' understanding of the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine and promoting effective communication between medical staff and patients would help increase the vaccination rate of patients with COPD.

Safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination in the Chinese population with pulmonary lymphangioleiomyomatosis: a single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) is still unclear. This study investigates COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, vaccine safety and efficacy, and COVID-19 symptoms in LAM patients.

RESULTS

In total, 181 LAM patients and 143 healthy individuals responded to the questionnaire. The vaccination rate of LAM patients was 77.34%, and 15.7% of vaccinated LAM patients experienced adverse events. Vaccination decreased the risk of LAM patients developing anorexia [OR: 0.17, 95% CI: (0.07, 0.43)], myalgia [OR: 0.34, 95% CI: (0.13, 0.84)], and ageusia [OR: 0.34, 95% CI: (0.14, 0.84)]. In LAM patients, a use of mTOR inhibitors reduced the risk of developing symptoms during COVID-19, including fatigue [OR: 0.18, 95% CI: (0.03, 0.95)], anorexia [OR: 0.30, 95% CI: (0.09, 0.96)], and ageusia [OR: 0.20, 95% CI: (0.06, 0.67)].

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination rates in the LAM population were lower than those in the general population, as 22.7% (41/181) of LAM patients had hesitations regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. However, the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in the LAM cohort was comparable to the healthy population, and COVID-19 vaccination decreased the incidence of COVID-19 symptoms in LAM patients. In addition, mTOR inhibitors seem not to determine a greater risk of complications in patients with LAM during COVID-19.

Understanding the impact of chronic diseases on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy using propensity score matching: Internet-based cross-sectional study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether chronic diseases are associated with higher COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and explore factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in patients with chronic diseases.

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy has been acknowledged as one of the greatest hazards to public health. However, little information is available about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among patients with chronic diseases who may be more susceptible to COVID-19 infection, severe disease or death.

METHODS

From 6 to 9 August 2021, we performed an internet-based cross-sectional survey with 22,954 participants (14.78% participants with chronic diseases). Propensity score matching with 1:1 nearest neighbourhood was used to reduce confounding factors between patients with chronic diseases and the general population. Using a multivariable logistic regression model, the factors impacting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were identified among patients with chronic diseases.

RESULTS

Both before and after propensity score matching, patients with chronic diseases had higher COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy than the general population. In addition, self-reported poor health, multiple chronic diseases, lower sociodemographic backgrounds and lower trust in nurses and doctors were associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among patients with chronic diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with chronic diseases were more hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine. Nurses should focus on patients with chronic diseases with poor health conditions, low socioeconomic backgrounds and low trust in the healthcare system.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Clinical nurses are recommended to not only pay more attention to the health status and sociodemographic characteristics of patients with chronic diseases but also build trust between nurses and patients by improving service levels and professional capabilities in clinical practice.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients or the public were not involved in setting the research question, the outcome measures, or the design or implementation of the study. However, all participants were invited to complete the digital informed consent and questionnaires.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Association between adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations, the Netherlands, May 2021 to November 2022: a population-based prospective cohort study

BackgroundNon-severe adverse events (AE) including pain at injection site or fever are common after COVID-19 vaccination.AimTo describe determinants of AE after COVID-19 vaccination and investigate the association between AE and pre- and post-vaccination antibody concentrations.MethodsParticipants of an ongoing prospective cohort study (VASCO) completed a questionnaire on AE within 2 months after vaccination and provided 6 monthly serum samples during May 2021-November 2022. Logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate AE determinants after mRNA vaccination, including pre-vaccination Ig antibody concentrations against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor binding domain. Multivariable linear regression was performed in SARS-CoV-2-naive participants to assess the association between AE and log-transformed antibody concentrations 3-8 weeks after mRNA vaccination.ResultsWe received 47,947 completed AE questionnaires by 28,032 participants. In 42% and 34% of questionnaires, injection site and systemic AE were reported, respectively. In 2.2% of questionnaires, participants sought medical attention. AE were reported more frequently by women, younger participants (< 60 years), participants with medical risk conditions and Spikevax recipients (vs Comirnaty). Higher pre-vaccination antibody concentrations were associated with higher incidence of systemic AE after the second and third dose, but not with injection site AE or AE for which medical attention was sought. Any AE after the third dose was associated with higher post-vaccination antibody concentrations (geometric mean concentration ratio: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.23-1.54).ConclusionsOur study suggests that high pre-vaccination antibody levels are associated with AE, and experiencing AE may be a marker for higher antibody response to vaccination.

Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy in U.S. Prisons: Perspectives from a Statewide Survey of Incarcerated People

Much of the American response to the COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by a divergence between general public opinion and public health policy. With little attention paid to individuals incarcerated during this time, there is limited direct evidence regarding how incarcerated people perceived efforts to mediate the harms of COVID-19. Prisons operate as a microcosm of society in many ways but they also face unique public health challenges. This study examines vaccine hesitancy-and acceptance-among a sample of individuals incarcerated within adult prisons in Pennsylvania. Using administrative records as well as rich attitudinal data from a survey of the incarcerated population, this study identifies a variety of social and historical factors that are-and are not-associated with an incarcerated person's willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Our findings highlight vaccination challenges unique to the carceral context and offer policy recommendations to improve trust in credible health messengers and health service provision for this often overlooked but vulnerable population.

Vaccine Uptake and Intentions: Insights from a Texas Survey on Factors Influencing COVID-19 Vaccination Decisions

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines depends on widespread vaccine uptake. Employing a telephone-administered weighted survey with 19,502 participants, we examined the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among adults in Texas. We used multiple regression analysis with LASSO-selected variables to identify factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and intentions to receive the vaccine among the unvaccinated. The prevalence of unvaccinated individuals (22%) was higher among those aged 18-39, males, White respondents, English speakers, uninsured individuals, those facing financial challenges, and individuals expressing no concern about contracting the illness. In a fully adjusted regression model, higher odds of being unvaccinated were observed among males (aOR 1.11), the uninsured (aOR 1.38), smokers (aOR 1.56), and those facing financial struggles (aOR 1.62). Conversely, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics were less likely to be unvaccinated compared to Whites. Among the unvaccinated, factors associated with stronger intent to receive the vaccine included age (over 65 years), Black and Hispanic ethnicity, and perceived risk of infection. Hispanic individuals, the uninsured, those covered by public insurance, and those facing financial challenges were more likely to encounter barriers to vaccine receipt. These findings underscore the importance of devising tailored strategies, emphasizing nuanced approaches that account for demographic, socioeconomic, and attitudinal factors in vaccine distribution and public health interventions.

COVID-19 vaccine intentions and attitudes in Black American emerging adults with asthma

BACKGROUND

Emerging adults (aged 18-29) are less likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine than any other adult age group. Black Americans are less likely than non-Hispanic white Americans to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. This study explored factors which affect vaccine intention and attitudes in Black American emerging adults with asthma.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from an NHLBI-funded clinical trial to improve asthma control. Fifty-nine Black American emerging adults completed a Qualtrics survey that assessed asthma control, intention to vaccinate, and factors which may affect the decision to vaccinate. Twenty-five participants also completed a semi-structured interview via Zoom. Bivariate correlations and descriptive statistics, including Chi Square analyses, were run using SPSS. Interview thematic analyses were conducted via QDA Miner.

RESULTS

Of the 59 Black American emerging adults with asthma who completed surveys, 32.2% responded that they were highly unlikely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, while 50.8% responded that they were highly likely to receive it. Increased asthma control was significantly correlated with a higher likelihood to discuss the COVID-19 vaccine with their healthcare provider (ρ = 0.339, α = 0.011). Concerns about immediate (ρ= -0.261, α = 0.050) and long-term (ρ= -0.280, α = 0.035) side effects were inversely correlated with intention to vaccinate. Only 17% of the participants who were unemployed stated that they were highly likely to receive the vaccines compared to 65% of the participants who were employed; however, interview participants who were unemployed stated not needing the vaccine because they were protecting themselves by social distancing. When deciding whether to receive the vaccine, safety, efficacy, and immediate side effects were the top three factors for 91%, 54%, and 49% of the participants, respectively. Beliefs about the vaccines' safety and efficacy, information gathering, personal factors, and societal factors emerged as important themes from the interviews.

CONCLUSION

Only half of the surveyed Black American emerging adults with asthma were highly likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Safety and efficacy were important for the majority of the participants, regardless of vaccine intention. Greater asthma control, but not access to asthma-related healthcare, was correlated with intention to discuss the vaccine with their healthcare provider.

The second dose of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy among health care workers in China: A multicenter cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 outbreak in China exposed health care workers (HCWs) to an increased risk of infection. The acquired immunity rapidly diminishes after the previous COVID-19 vaccination and the second booster vaccination has been recommended in several countries. HCWs are a priority group for vaccination because they are at increased risk of being infected, however, a certain amount of HCWs were hesitant.

METHODS

The survey was conducted among 5805 HCWs in China from January 5 to February 9, 2023. Questionnaire included sociodemographic information, COVID-19-related variables, psychological factors, and the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influencing factors of the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy.

RESULTS

42.2% of HCWs self-reported having the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy. Occupations, years of working, COVID-19 infection status were associated with less vaccine hesitancy. HCWs who had received 3 doses of COVID-19 vaccine were less likely to be hesitant compared to those had not received. HCWs with PTSD symptoms and anxiety symptoms were more likely to be hesitant. No relation was observed between COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy and age, marriage, salary, and perceived an increased risk of COVID-19 infection due to work (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable proportion of HCWs were hesitant to accept the second dose of the COVID-19 booster vaccine. Incorporating vaccine knowledge and new evidence into routine health educations and procedures to raise confidence and reduce complacency may be effective and feasible in promoting the vaccination and implementing future vaccination programs.

COVID-19 Vaccination Rates and Predictors of Vaccine Uptake Among Adults With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Insights From the 2022 National Health Interview Survey

Background and objective The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination rates and predictors of vaccine uptake among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the United States are unknown. In light of this, we assessed COVID-19 vaccination rates in this population and evaluated predictors of vaccine uptake. Methods Using 2022 survey data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), 1486 adults with COPD who responded with "yes/no" to whether they had received the COVID-19 vaccine were identified, including those who had received booster doses. A chi-square test was used to ascertain differences between those who had received the vaccine and those who had not, as well as between those who had received booster doses and those who had not. A logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Results A total of 1195 individuals among 1486 respondents with chronic pulmonary disease (78.4%) had been vaccinated against COVID-19, and 789/1195 (62.5%) had received booster shots. The majority of individuals were aged 65 years and above, exceeded the 1+ threshold for the ratio of family income to poverty (RFIP), and were covered by insurance. Positive predictors of COVID-19 vaccination were as follows: age 40 - 64 years (OR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.31 - 4.19; p=0.004) and 65 years and above (OR: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.36 - 2.72; p<0.001), RFIP threshold of ≥1 (OR: 2.02, 95% CI: 1.42 - 2.88; p<0.001), having a college degree (OR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.92 - 3.26, p=0.016), and being insured (OR: 3.12, 95% CI: 1.46 - 6.66, p=0.003). The current smoking habit negatively predicted the uptake (OR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.33 - 0.87, p=0.012). The positive predictors of COVID-19 vaccination boosters were as follows: age 40 - 64 years (OR: 2.72, 95% CI: 1.39 - 5.30, p=0.003) and 65 years and above (OR: 4.85, 95% CI: 2.45 - 9.58, p<0.001). Being from the non-Hispanic (NH) black ethnicity negatively predicted receiving the COVID-19 booster (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.36 - 0.85, p=0.007). Conclusions While COVID-19 vaccination rates are fairly satisfactory in COPD patients, the uptake of booster vaccines is relatively lower in this population. Socioeconomic and behavioral factors are associated with poor vaccine uptake, and targeted interventions should be implemented to address these factors.

Attitudes towards COVID-19 Vaccination in Adults with Haematological Malignancies

INTRODUCTION

Despite people with haematological malignancies being particularly vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection and complications, vaccine hesitancy may be a barrier to optimal vaccination. This study explored attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination in people with haematological malignancies.

METHODS

People with haematological malignancies at nine Australian health services were surveyed between June and October 2021. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected. Attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination were explored using the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale, and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six. Open-ended comments were qualitatively analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 869 people with haematological malignancies (mean age 64.2 years, 43.6% female) participated. Most participants (85.3%) reported that they had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Participants who were younger, spoke English as a non-dominant language, and had a shorter time since diagnosis were less likely to be vaccinated. Those who were female or spoke English as their non-dominant language reported greater vaccine side-effect concerns. Younger participants reported greater concerns about the vaccine impacting their treatment.

CONCLUSION

People with haematological malignancies reported high vaccine uptake; however, targeted education for specific participant groups may address vaccine hesitancy concerns, given the need for COVID-19 vaccine boosters.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination willingness and humoral vaccination response in radiation oncology patients

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 infection has been and, in some parts, still is a threat to oncologic patients, making it crucial to understand perception of vaccination and immunologic responses in this vulnerable patient segment. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in relation to malignant disease characteristics and therapies have so far not been studied consecutively in larger oncologic patient populations. This study captures SARS-CoV-2 vaccination willingness and humoral immune response in a large consecutive oncologic patient collective at the beginning of 2021.

METHODS

1142 patients were consecutively recruited over 5.5 months at a tertiary department for radiation oncology and were assessed for vaccination willingness via a standardized interview. In already vaccinated patients total SARS-CoV-2 S antibody titres against the spike protein (Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S) and were evaluated 35 days or later after the first dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

RESULTS

Vaccination willingness was high with a rate of 90 %. The most frequent reasons for rejection were: undecided/potential vaccination after therapy, distrust in the vaccine and fear of interaction with comorbidities. Factors associated with lower vaccination willingness were: worse general condition, lower age and female sex. 80 % of the participants had been previously vaccinated, 8 % reported previous infection and 16 % received vaccination during antineoplastic therapy. In 97.5 % of the vaccinated patients Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S was detected. In a univariable analysis parameters associated with non-conversion were: lower performance status, spread to the local lymphatics (N + ), hematologic disease and diffuse metastases. All patients with oligometastatic disease achieved positive Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S titres. For patients with two vaccinations several risk factors were identified, that were associated with low antibody concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination willingness among oncologic patients was high in the first months after its availability, and most patients had already received one or two doses. Over 97 % of vaccinated patients had measurable anti-SARS-CoV-2 S titres. Our data supports early identification of low humoral responders after vaccination and could facilitate the design of future oncologic vaccine trials (clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04918888).

The Impact of COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Vaccinations in Special Populations

Vaccination to prevent human infection is a key driver for reducing morbidity and mortality [...].

COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Patients with Multiple Myeloma and AL Amyloidosis: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study from India

COVID-19 vaccine uptake has been comparable, if not higher, in LMICs (Low- and Middle-Income Countries) than in developed nations. Patients with plasma cell disorders are at a higher risk for developing COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality due to impaired immune responses. We report the outcome of active counselling for COVID-19 vaccines in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and AL amyloidosis and the reasons for hesitancy in those unvaccinated. This was a cross-sectional, single-centre, observational study enrolling patients who visited the hospital between January 1, 2021 and June 30, 2021. Patients with MM and AL amyloidosis at diagnosis or follow-up were actively counselled by treating oncologists regarding the available COVID-19 vaccines (Covishield and Covaxin) during clinic visits or hospital admission. In the subsequent hospital visits, vaccination details were collected and verified. A structured interview schedule was administered to unvaccinated patients to identify the reasons behind vaccine hesitancy. Association of vaccine acceptance with socio-economic parameters and other disease parameters was studied using Chi-square test. Out of 195 patients, 178 (91%) were included in the study; 17 were lost to follow-up. At least a single dose of vaccine was administered in 86%. 79% received Covishield, whereas 21% received Covaxin. 67% received both vaccine doses. Vaccine-related side effects were mild and no vaccine-related thrombotic events were seen. Three patients died due to COVID-19-related causes, of which two were unvaccinated. The reasons for hesitancy in the 24 unvaccinated patients included: 9-poor general health conditions, 8-lack of advice from doctors, 2-fear of side effects, and 2-unavailability of vaccine delivery centres nearby. In comparison to the other studies, we report a higher vaccine uptake which can be attributed to targeted counselling by the treating oncologist and the universal free vaccination programme that is familiar to all Indians.

The Effect of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on the Quality of Associated Care in Patients with Gastric Cancer

Coronavirus is a new virus that has affected human life on a large scale; it has infected millions of people and killed hundreds of thousands of people. In contrast, among cancers, stomach neoplasia is the most common cancer of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract. COVID-19 disease has disrupted the optimal management of patients with cancer. Metastasis, deterioration of the patient's nutritional status, UGI bleeding, and increased surgical complications are all consequences of delayed treatment of patients with gastric cancer. However, there is still insufficient evidence on the immunogenicity of the vaccine and the protection provided by coronavirus vaccines in patients with cancer, especially those with immunodeficiency or those who are treated for certain types of cancers. Also, as part of the prevention and control of COVID-19 disease, nutritional support for patients with gastrointestinal cancer is particularly important, and the psychological and physiological limitations caused by the disease duration are hurting the well-being of patients. Therefore, the assessment of the impact of the coronavirus on cancer should be treated as an important issue, and healthcare professionals should be prepared to deal with the long-term effects of the coronavirus disease.

The association between COVID-19 vaccination and confirmed patients with hospitalization in Omicron era: A retrospective study

With the emergence of Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, Taiwan has encountered the greatest coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic since 2022 spring. We analyzed the characteristics, vaccinations, and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients quarantined in a dedicated ward. This retrospective study enrolled hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the dedicated wards of a district hospital in southern Taiwan from May 2022 to July 2022. We assessed in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and dedicated ward LOS. Among 209 COVID-19 patients, the in-hospital mortality rates were 20.7% and 29.7% (P = .145) in patients with and without vaccination. A shorter dedicated ward LOS was noted in the vaccination group, with marginal statistical significance. Age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score were recognized as strong prognostic indicators for mortality in multivariable analysis. Vaccination demonstrated significant lower odds of death among relatively young populations in subgroup analysis. COVID-19 vaccination had significant efficacy in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the relatively young group, and the effect may decline among individuals with advanced age and multiple comorbidities.

Immunogenicity and safety of heterologous mRNA-1273/MVC-COV1901 vaccination versus homologous mRNA1273 vaccination: A randomized, double-blind controlled study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

MVC-COV1901 is a protein vaccine based on the same SARS-CoV-2 strain used in mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273. Data are lacking on immunogenicity and safety of MVC-COV1901 as heterologous boost for people already received one dose of mRNA-1273.

METHODS

This is a randomized, double-blind trial that recruited adults aged 20-70 years who previously received a single dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine and were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a second dose with the homologous vaccine or protein-based MVC-COV1901 8-12 weeks after the first dose. The primary outcome was neutralizing antibody titers in terms of the geometric mean titer (GMT) 14 days after the second dose. Safety was assessed in all participants who received a dose of the study vaccine. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05079633).

RESULTS

From September 30 to November 5, 2021, 144 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to the MVC-COV1901 boost group (n = 72) or the mRNA-1273 boost group (n = 72). The neutralizing antibodies on Day 15 and the anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers on Day 15 and 29 of homologous mRNA-1273 were significantly higher than those of heterologous mRNA-1273/MVC-COV1901. Cellular immune responses were comparable in both groups. However, adverse events were much more frequent after the mRNA-1273 boost than after the MVC-COV1901 boost.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that heterologous boost with MVC-COV1901 yielded an inferior immunogenicity but significantly fewer adverse events, compared with homologous boost with mRNA-1273. In people experienced severe adverse events after prime dose of mRNA-1273, as well as in periods when the supply of mRNA-1273 is limited, MVC-COV1901 could serve as an acceptable alternative heterologous boost.

Path analysis of COVID-19 vaccine adherence among adolescents across Indonesia, in the Maluku-Papua Islands (Eastern Indonesia), and on Java Island

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 incidence in Indonesia was high among adolescents, but vaccine acceptance remains low. The unequal geographical distribution of the health workforce and health facilities in Indonesia, including a lower number of health workers and facilities in Maluku-Papua, resulted in a low rate of vaccine acceptance. Knowledge, attitude, belief in the vaccine, comorbidity, congenital status are related to vaccine adherence, but mediation analysis of factors remains lacking. We aimed to analyze path analysis of knowledge, congenital, comorbidity, belief, and attitude to COVID-19 vaccine adherence among adolescents in Indonesia, Maluku-Papua Island, and Java Island.

METHOD

A nationwide cross-sectional study was undertaken among 7604 adolescents. A path analysis to investigate mediating effects between variables combined with bootstrapping was utilized to determine statistical significance.

RESULT

Knowledge, congenital status, comorbidity, belief, and attitude were significantly positively associated with COVID-19 vaccine adherence among adolescents in Maluku-Papua Island (p < 0.01; n = 4761), Java Island (p < 0.01; n = 1573), and Indonesia (p < 0.05; n = 7604). Congenital status, belief, and attitude negatively mediated the relationship between knowledge of and adherence to COVID-19 vaccine (p < 0.01) in Indonesia and among the subgroup on Maluku-Papua Island (p < 0.01), but a positive mediation (p = 0.04) in our subgroup analysis of Java Island. Comorbidity status, belief, and attitude negatively mediated relationship between knowledge and adherence to COVID-19 vaccine in Indonesia (p ≤0.01) and Maluku-Papua (p = 0.00), but no mediation role was found in Java Island (p = 0.58).

CONCLUSION

Comorbidity, congenital illness status, belief in and attitude to COVID-19 vaccine negatively mediated the relationship between knowledge of and adherence to COVID-19 vaccine among adolescents in Indonesia and our sub-group on Maluku-Papua Island but not on Java Island.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATION

Massive improvement in healthcare facility equality plays an important role in Indonesia gaining COVID-19 vaccine adherence.

Factors Associated with COVID-19 Vaccination Promptness after Eligibility in a North Carolina Longitudinal Cohort Study

Many studies identified factors associated with vaccination intention and hesitancy, but factors associated with vaccination promptness and the effect of vaccination intention on vaccination promptness are unknown. This study identified factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination promptness and evaluated the role of vaccination intention on vaccination promptness in 1223 participants in a community-based longitudinal cohort study (June 2020 to December 2021). Participants answered questions regarding COVID-19 vaccination intention, vaccination status, and reasons for not receiving a vaccine. The association of baseline vaccine hesitancy with vaccination was assessed by the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Follow-up analyses tested the importance of other variables predicting vaccination using the Cox proportional hazards model. Older age was associated with shorter time to vaccination (HR = 1.76 [1.37-2.25] 85-year-old versus 65-year-old). Lower education levels (HR = 0.80 [0.69-0.92]), household incomes (HR = 0.84 [0.72-0.98]), and baseline vaccination intention of 'No' (HR = 0.16 [0.11-0.23]) were associated with longer times to vaccination. The most common reasons for not being vaccinated (N = 58) were vaccine safety concerns (n = 33), side effects (n = 28), and vaccine effectiveness (n = 25). Vaccination campaigns that target populations prone to hesitancy and address vaccine safety and effectiveness could be helpful in future vaccination rollouts.

COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage and Factors Influencing Vaccine Hesitancy among Patients with Inborn Errors of Immunity in Latvia: A Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

The European Society for Immunodeficiencies recommends that all patients with inborn errors of immunity (IEI) without contraindications should receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The aim of this study was to investigate the reasons that discourage IEI patients from receiving the recommended vaccination and to assess vaccination coverage among IEI patients in Latvia.

METHODS

In this multicenter mixed-methods study, the vaccination status of all patients with IEI within two tertiary centers in Latvia was reviewed using electronic health records. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 IEI patients who did not undergo vaccination, and a thematic analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 341 patients (49.3% female; median age 19.7 years (IQR:17)) were included in the quantitative part. The proportion of fully vaccinated individuals aged ≥ 12 years was 66.8%-70.9% with patients with selective IgA deficiency and 58.8% with other IEI (χ² = 14.12, p < 0.001). The proportion of fully vaccinated individuals aged 5-11 years was 11.1%. Age was associated with vaccination status: younger patients were found to have a significantly lower likelihood of receiving vaccination (U = 8585, p < 0.001). The five main themes identified were as follows: (1) fear and uncertainty; (2) risk and benefit assessment: COVID-19 vaccine-is it worth it? (3) external influences: the dark horse of the decision-making-people around us; (4) individuals against the system; and (5) beliefs about vaccination and COVID-19. Under-representation of certain IEI groups and recall bias are possible limitations of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

While most reasons for hesitancy were similar to those previously described in the general population, disease-specific concerns were also identified.

College health administrator's perceptions of the impacts of COVID-19 on college immunization programs

College immunization policies vary. To evaluate the landscape of college immunization programs, we distributed a 45-item survey to college health administrators between July and September 2021. Items measured perceptions of institutionally recommended and required vaccines, enforcement strategies, barriers to vaccine uptake, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of 566 invitations sent, only 66 college health administrators completed the survey (11.7% response rate). The majority of participating institutions (89%) required at least one vaccine, with measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) being the most commonly required (83%). Geographic region, school type, or size was not significantly correlated with immunization policies but state-level political leanings were. Common barriers to vaccine program implementation identified by respondents included student-based and institutional concerns. The COVID-19 pandemic was described as both exacerbating existing immunization program barriers and providing opportunities to strengthen programs. Future work will evaluate identified themes in a larger study population and monitor change in perceptions over time.

Effects of COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccination on Rheumatic Diseases: Results From a Survey of Patient-Reported Outcomes After Vaccination

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and disease flares after vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and influenza in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs).

METHODS

Between November 2021 and March 2022, a survey was conducted among patients with ARD who received COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations. The questionnaire included 11 mandatory and closed-ended questions, and the following items were collected: medical history, immunization history, type of vaccine, patient-reported AEs, flare-up of the underlying disease after vaccination, and a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 or influenza. We compared the occurrence of vaccine-related adverse reactions to the COVID-19 and influenza vaccines based on the survey results. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the factors affecting AEs or disease flares and to compare the post-vaccine response to mixed and matched vaccines.

RESULTS

We analyzed 601 adults with ARD who received the COVID-19 vaccine, with a mean age of 49.6 years (80.5% female). A total of 255 participants (42.4%) received a complete course of primary vaccination, 342 (56.9%) completed the booster dose, and 132 (38.6%) received a mixed vaccine. The frequencies of AEs (188 [52.2%] vs. 21 [5.8%]; P < 0.001) and disease flares (58 [16.2%] vs. 5 [1.4%]; P < 0.001) after COVID-19 vaccination were significantly higher than those after influenza vaccination. In the risk factor analysis, previous allergic reaction to other vaccines (odds ratio, 1.95; confidence interval, 1.07-3.70; P = 0.034) was the only factor associated with the occurrence of AEs. There was no difference in the post-vaccine responses between the mixed and matched vaccines.

CONCLUSION

The results of the survey of patients with ARD revealed that patient-reported AEs and underlying disease flares after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine were significantly higher than those after the influenza vaccine.

A Call to Action: Current Challenges and Considerations for COVID-19 Vaccination in Immunocompromised Populations

The heightened risk of infection and complexities of preventing disease in immunocompromised individuals are at the forefront of public health strategies. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the increased vulnerability and susceptibility to serious outcomes in this population. COVID-19 prevention efforts led to the development of vaccines, including mRNA-based options, which were initially recommended as a 2-dose primary schedule for both immunocompromised and immunocompetent individuals. However, post-rollout assessments led to updated recommendations specific to immunocompromised populations. As COVID-19 potentially transitions to become endemic disease, immunocompromised individuals will remain at high risk of severe disease; thus, the evaluation of current vaccination challenges remains crucial for guiding effective public health efforts. This article summarizes key findings from the previous articles of this supplement, highlighting current vaccination challenges for at-risk immunocompromised groups and exploring solutions to ensure protection against COVID-19 for these vulnerable populations.

Effectiveness of mRNA and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines: A test-negative study in an infection-naïve Hong Kong population

OBJECTIVE

Assess real-world effectiveness of vaccines against COVID-19.

METHODS

A test-negative study was conducted in January-May 2022 during an Omicron BA.2 wave in Hong Kong. COVID-19 was identified by RT-PCR. 1-1 case-control matching was based on propensity score with vaccine effectiveness adjusted for confounders.

RESULTS

Altogether, 1781 cases and 1737 controls aged 3-105 years were analysed. The mean lag time from the last dose of vaccination to testing for SARS-CoV-2 was 133.9 (SD: 84.4) days. Two doses of either vaccine within 180 days offered a low effectiveness against COVID-19 of all severity combined (VEadj [95% CI] for BNT162b2: 27.0% [4.2-44.5], CoronaVac: 22.9% [1.3-39.7]), and further decreased after 180 days. Two doses of CoronaVac were poorly protective 39.5% [4.9-62.5] against severe diseases for age ≥ 60 years, but the effectiveness increased substantially after the third dose (79.1% [25.7-96.7]). Two doses of BNT162b2 protected age ≥ 60 years against severe diseases (79.3% [47.2, 93.9]); however, the uptake was not high enough to assess three doses.

CONCLUSIONS

The current real-world analysis indicates a high vaccine effectiveness of three doses of inactivated virus (CoronaVac) vaccines against Omicron variant, whereas the effectiveness of two doses is suboptimal.

Bibliometric and visual analysis of vaccination hesitancy research from 2013 to 2022

Although vaccination is regarded as one of the most significant achievements of public health, there also exists the phenomenon of vaccination hesitancy which refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. In this study, we conducted a bibliometric analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of vaccination hesitancy research from 2013 to 2022. All related publications were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection Database. Information on annual publications, countries, organizations, journals, authors, keywords, and documents was analyzed adopting the bibliometix R-package, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace software. A total of 4042 publications were enrolled. The annual publications increased slightly before 2020 but had an extremely dramatic increase from 2020 to 2022. The United States contributed the most articles and had the greatest collaboration with other countries and organizations. The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine was the most active institution. Vaccine was the most cited and influential journal while Vaccines was the most productive journal. It was Dube E who was the most productive authors with the highest h-index. The most frequent keywords were "vaccine hesitancy," "COVID-19," "SARS-CoV2," "immunization," "attitudes," and "willingness." Vaccination hesitancy to some extent hinders the achievement of global public health. The influencing factors vary across time, space, and vaccines. The COVID-19 pandemic and the development of COVID-19 vaccines have made this issue the focus of interest. The complexity and specific contexts of influencing factors of vaccination hesitancy require further study and will potentially be the focus of future research direction.

Dynamic Trends and Underlying Factors of COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Hesitancy in Adults: Cross-Sectional Observational Study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy reduces vaccination rates, which is detrimental to building herd immunity and halting the spread of COVID-19 and its variations. Most researches have simply identified the reasons affecting COVID-19 vaccination reluctance without delving into its dynamics, which makes forecasting future trends difficult.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the current COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy rate in Chinese adults as well as the dynamics of vaccine hesitancy and its influencing factors. The results of this study will have practical implications for policy responses in mainland China, and effective COVID-19 booster vaccination in specific populations.

METHODS

The web-based survey was completed by creating questionnaires and using a stratified random sampling method to collect information from adults (≥18 years old) among 2556 households in 4 geographical regions of China. We collected sociodemographic information, health status, awareness of COVID-19 and its vaccine, self-perceptions, trust in medical staff and vaccine developers, and so on. The odds ratios and 95% CI for the statistical associations were estimated using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Overall, 6659 participants (females: n=3540, 53.2%; males: n=3119, 46.8%) responded. In total, 533 (8%; 95% CI 7.4%-8.7%) participants presented a clear hesitancy in receiving the COVID-19 booster vaccination, while 736 (11.1%; 95% CI 10.3%-11.8%) expressed hesitancy in regular booster vaccination. A higher prevalence of vaccine hesitancy in both booster vaccination and regular booster vaccination was observed among participants with a history of allergies, experiencing chronic disease, lower levels of public health prevention measures or susceptibility or benefits or self-efficiency, higher levels of severity or barriers, and lower trust in both medical staff and vaccine developers (P<.05). The females and participants with higher education levels, higher levels of barriers, lower levels of susceptibility, and lower trust in vaccine developers preferred to have attitudinal changes from acceptance to hesitancy, while people with higher education levels, lower self-report health conditions, experiencing chronic disease, history of allergies, and lower trust in medical staff and developers were all positively associated with constant COVID-19 booster hesitancy.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy is not high in mainland China. However, there is a slight increment in hesitancy on regular booster vaccination. Conducting targeted information guidance for people with higher education levels and chronic diseases, as well as improving accessibility to booster vaccination and increasing trust in medical staff and vaccine producers may be highly effective in reducing vaccine hesitancy.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Uptake among Patients with Chronic Liver Disease: A Cross-Sectional Analysis in Hebei Province, China

Chronic liver disease (CLD) patients have higher mortality and hospitalization rates after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study aimed to explore SARS-CoV-2 vaccine perceptions, side effects, factors associated with nonvaccination and attitudes toward fourth-dose vaccine among CLD patients. The differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups among 1491 CLD patients and the risk factors associated with nonvaccination status were analyzed. In total, 1239 CLD patients were immunized against SARS-CoV-2. CLD patients have a high level of trust in the government and clinicians and were likely to follow their recommendations for vaccination. Reasons reported for nonvaccination were mainly concerns about the vaccines affecting their ongoing treatments and the fear of adverse events. However, only 4.84% of patients reported mild side effects. Risk factors influencing nonvaccination included being older in age, having cirrhosis, receiving treatments, having no knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine considerations and not receiving doctors' positive advice on vaccination. Furthermore, 20.6% of completely vaccinated participants refused the fourth dose because they were concerned about side effects and believed that the complete vaccine was sufficiently protective. Our study proved that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were safe for CLD patients. Our findings suggest that governments and health workers should provide more SARS-CoV-2 vaccination information and customize strategies to improve vaccination coverage and enhance vaccine protection among the CLD population.

COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy in Autoimmune Disease Patients: Policy Action and Ethical Considerations

As COVID-19 vaccination guidelines were issued by Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC) across the US, each state and clinical provider instituted vaccine implementation and education policies and protocols for high-risk populations. However, current research has shown that while people with autoimmune diseases were listed by ACIP and CDC as a COVID-19 high-risk population, the rate of adherence to implementation and education protocols, as well as the prioritization of this sub-population as a high-risk group, varied among the clinicians and vaccinators thus impacting the hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine and a correlation to low vaccination rates. The purpose of this review was to explore factors of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in people living with autoimmune diseases in relation to current implementation and education policies and protocols, as well as ethical and contextual factors, while providing possible implications. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in people living with autoimmune disease was greater than in the general population, as demonstrated by increased levels of overall mistrust and fear of potential risk and harmful side effects. Evidence has shown that COVID-19 vaccination is safe and effective for patients with autoimmune diseases. Additionally, the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh its potential risks and adverse effects in this population. However, the non-adherence to policy and protocols, especially community education protocols, by those providing the vaccination have a negative impact on the overall perception of the vaccine and needs to be addressed at local and state levels in order to protect this population. Future research should provide strategies to guide collaborative efforts between government and local agencies in providing tailored vaccination campaigns to this population. In parallel with policy, COVID-19 vaccination intervention implementation and educational protocols should be developed with evidence-based guidelines for public health and clinical professionals that are targeted at this vulnerable high-risk population.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake among foreign migrants in China

Background/Purpose

The COVID-19 outbreak created unique policy challenges for vaccinating special groups like migrants. As part of sustainable development goals, the equitable distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine can contribute to ensuring health for all. This study examined COVID-19 vaccine uptake among foreign migrants in China based on sociodemographics, cultural beliefs, past vaccine behaviors, and psychosocial factors.

Design

An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among foreign migrants in mainland China via social media platforms from 21 November through 20 December 2021. Bivariate (unadjusted odd-ratio) and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to establish the correlates of COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

Result

Surveyed foreign migrants that are culture neutral (AOR: 2.5, CI: 95%, 1.02-5.90, p = 0.044), willing to pay for vaccination (AOR: 2.27, CI: 95%, 1.18-3.98, p = 0.012), believe in vaccine efficacy (AOR: 3.00, CI: 95%, 1.75-5.16, p < 0.000), have poor psychological health (AOR: 1.96, CI: 95%, 1.14-3.38, p = 0 0.014), and have higher perceived seriousness of COVID-19 (AOR: 2.12, CI: 95%, 1.26-3.57, p = 0.005) are more likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine. Those migrants with a history of declining vaccination (AOR: 0.34, CI: 95%, 0.18-0.65, p = 0.000) and middle-income earners $1701-3500 (AOR: 0.43, CI: 95%, 0.23-0.82, p = 0.010) are less likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

Conclusion

This study brings a unique perspective to understanding vaccine behavior among international migrants in China. There is an urgent call from the World Health Organization and countries for complete vaccination and efforts to improve vaccine coverage. However, fewer studies have been conducted globally on the vaccination of migrant populations. The current study provides empirical information to increase the knowledge of the correlates of vaccine behavior among immigrants in countries around the globe. Future studies should conduct cross-country comparisons to understand the factors associated with increasing vaccination rates among immigrant populations to formulate a strong policy to increase vaccine coverage among immigrant populations across countries.

Is knowledge about COVID-19 associated with willingness to receive vaccine, vaccine uptake, and vaccine booster uptake in rural Malang, Indonesia?

Background

Lack of knowledge regarding the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and COVID-19 vaccines is a key barrier to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Aims

To examine factors associated with knowledge about COVID-19 and the association between knowledge of COVID-19, willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, and vaccine uptake in Malang, East Java, Indonesia.

Method

A cross-sectional study among individuals aged 15-99 years was conducted in Malang, Java Timur, Indonesia between November 2022 and January 2023. Of 10,050 potential respondents, 10,007 were able to complete the survey. The main independent variable was knowledge about COVID-19, which was assessed using a six-item questionnaire. The dependent variables were COVID-19 vaccine uptake and COVID-19 booster vaccine uptake. The mediating variable was respondent's willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Linear regression was used to examine factors associated with knowledge about COVID-19. Logistic regression was employed to examine the association of knowledge about COVID-19 with vaccine uptake. Generalized structural equation modeling (GSEM) was performed to examine whether willingness to receive a vaccine mediated the association between knowledge about COVID-19 and vaccination uptake.

Findings

The percentage of respondents who reported having received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine was 94.8%, while the percentage of those who reported having received at least three doses was 88.5%. These numbers are higher than the national average for COVID-19 vaccine and booster vaccine uptake. Most respondents answered about four of six knowledge items correctly (M = 4.60, SD = 1.1). Among respondents who had not received a vaccine, 83.1% expressed willingness to receive a vaccine when it became available to them. Older, more educated, employed respondents, and those with higher economic status, demonstrated more accurate knowledge about COVID-19 than younger, less educated, unemployed respondents and those with lower economic status. Respondents who demonstrated more accurate knowledge about COVID-19 were more likely to have received a vaccine (OR = 1.528, 95% CI = 1.428-1.634) and a booster vaccine (OR = 1.260, 95% CI = 1.196-1.328). Willingness to receive a vaccine mediated the association between knowledge about COVID-19 and vaccine uptake (coef. = 0.426, 95% CI = 0.379-0.473).

Implications

Interventions and public health programs aiming to improve knowledge about COVID-19 can be implemented to improve individual willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination and to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake among the general population.

Global acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine among persons with diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

This review aimed to estimate the level of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine among persons with diabetes.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL to identify relevant studies for this review. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to generate an overall estimate of vaccine acceptance. The I² statistic was used to quantify the degree of variation across studies, and subgroup analysis was conducted to identify the sources of heterogeneity. The review was conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA).

RESULTS

This review included 18 studies involving 11,292 diabetes patients. The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among persons with diabetes was 76.1% (95% CI: 66.7% - 83.5%). The pooled prevalence across the continent ranged from 68.9% (95% CI: 47.8% - 84.3%) in Asia to 82.1% (95% CI: 80.2% - 83.8%) in Europe. Barriers to vaccine acceptance included misinformation, lack of information, mistrust, health concerns, and external influences.

CONCLUSION

The barriers to vaccine acceptance identified in this review, could inform the formulation of health policies and public health interventions that are specifically tailored to address the needs of persons with diabetes.

The pattern from the first three rounds of vaccination: declining vaccination rates

Introduction

Vaccination rates for the COVID-19 vaccine have recently been stagnant worldwide. We aim to analyze the potential patterns of vaccination development from the first three doses to reveal the possible trends of the next round of vaccination and further explore the factors influencing vaccination in the selected populations.

Methods

On July 2022, a stratified multistage random sampling method in the survey was conducted to select 6,781 people from 4 provinces China, who were above the age of 18 years. Participants were divided into two groups based on whether they had a chronic disease. The data were run through Cochran-Armitage trend test and multivariable regression analyses.

Results

A total of 957 participants with chronic disease and 5,454 participants without chronic disease were included in this survey. Vaccination rates for the first, second and booster doses in chronic disease population were93.70% (95% CI: 92.19-95.27%), 91.12% (95%CI: 94.43-95.59%), and 83.18% (95%CI: 80.80-85.55%) respectively. By contrast, the first, second and booster vaccination rates for the general population were 98.02% (95% CI: 97.65-98.39%), 95.01% (95% CI: 94.43-95.59%) and 85.06% (95% CI: 84.11-86.00%) respectively. The widening gap in vaccination rates was observed as the number of vaccinations increases. Higher self-efficacy was a significant factor in promoting vaccination, which has been observed in all doses of vaccines. Higher education level, middle level physical activity and higher public prevention measures play a positive role in vaccination among the general population, while alcohol consumption acts as a significant positive factor in the chronic disease population (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

As the number of vaccinations increases, the trend of decreasing vaccination rate is becoming more pronounced. In future regular vaccinations, we may face low vaccination rates as the increasing number of infections and the fatigue associated with the prolonged outbreak hamper vaccination. Measures need to be found to counter this downward trend such as improving the self-efficacy of the population.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer patients in western Pennsylvania: rural-urban disparities

PURPOSE

Disparities in cancer care persist between patients living in rural versus urban areas. The COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted concerns related to care and personal health differently in rural cancer patients. Using survey data collected from cancer patients in western Pennsylvania, we examined pandemic-related distress, concerns related to cancer care, impact on personal health, and the extent to which these differed by urban-rural residence.

METHODS

Patients filled out an initial survey in August-December 2020; a second survey was completed in March 2021. The following patient concerns related to the pandemic were evaluated: threat of COVID-19 to their health, pandemic-related distress, perceptions of cancer care, and vaccine hesitancy. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine relationships between these outcomes and urban-rural residence as well as patient-related factors, including anxiety symptoms and social support.

RESULTS

The study sample included 1,980 patients, 17% resided in rural areas. COVID-19 represented a major or catastrophic threat to personal health for 39.7% of rural and 49.0% of urban patients (p = 0.0017). Patients with high general anxiety were 10-times more likely to experience pandemic-related distress (p < 0.001). In the follow-up survey (n = 983), vaccine hesitancy was twice as prevalent among rural patients compared to urban (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

The extent to which perceptions of the threat of COVD-19 to personal health and vaccine hesitancy exacerbates rural-urban disparities in cancer care and prognosis warrants further study. Cancer patients may be vulnerable to heightened anxiety and distress triggered by the pandemic.

Coronavirus Anxiety Level and COVID-19 Vaccine Attitude Among Patients With Hematological Malignancies

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 vaccine is the most essential tool for altering the pandemic's trajectory. The pandemic's control is complicated by society's unwillingness to vaccinate. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess patients with hematological malignancies and their attitudes regarding COVID-19 immunization and to investigate COVID-19 anxiety in this susceptible population.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 165 patients with hematological malignancies were included. COVID-19 anxiety was evaluated with the coronavirus anxiety scale (CAS), and COVID-19 vaccine attitude was evaluated with the Vaccine Attitudes Review (VAX) scale.

RESULTS

The mean CAS score was 2.42 (0-17). There were 22 (13%) participants with a mean CAS score of ≥ 9. Half of the participants had a CAS score of 0. The CAS score was higher in females (p = 0.023). Similarly, it was significantly higher in patients who were not in remission for hematological malignancy and who received active chemotherapy (p = 0.010). The mean VAX score was 49.07 ± 8.76 (27-72). Most of the participants (64%) had a neutral attitude toward the COVID-19 vaccination. In a survey of 165 patients, 55% said that they were skeptical about vaccination safety, and 58% said that they were concerned about unintended side effects. In addition, 90% expressed moderate concerns about commercial profiteering. Natural immunity was preferred by 30% of the participants. There was no statistically significant correlation between CAS scores and the Vaccine Attitudes Review (VAX) scale.

CONCLUSION

This study draws attention to the level of anxiety in patients with hematological malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Negative attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine are worrisome for at-risk patient groups. We think that patients with hematological malignancies should be informed to eliminate their hesitations about COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 Vaccines Status, Acceptance and Hesitancy among Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study and the Implications for Pakistan and Beyond

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy continues to be a widespread problem in Pakistan due to various conspiracy beliefs, myths and misconceptions. Since the hemodialysis population is at a higher risk of contracting infections, we sought to investigate the current COVID-19 immunization status and reasons for any vaccine hesitancy among these patients in Pakistan. This cross-sectional study was conducted among maintenance hemodialysis patients at six hospitals in the Punjab Province of Pakistan. Data were collected anonymously using a questionnaire. A total of 399 hemodialysis patients took part in the survey, the majority of them were male (56%) and aged 45-64 years. A calculated 62.4% of the patients reported receiving at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Of those vaccinated (249), 73.5% had received two doses and 16.9% had received a booster dose. The most common reasons for vaccination were "being aware they were at high risk" (89.6%), "fear of getting infected" (89.2%) and "willingness to fight against COVID-19-pandemic" (83.9%). Of the 150 patients who had not yet been vaccinated, only 10 showed a willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine. The major reasons for refusal included "COVID-19 is not a real problem" (75%), the "corona vaccine is a conspiracy (72.1%)" and "I don't need the vaccine" (60.7%). Our study revealed that only 62% patients receiving hemodialysis were partially or completely vaccinated against COVID-19. Consequently, there is a need to initiate aggressive approaches to educate this high-risk population in order to address their concerns with vaccine safety and efficacy as well as correct current myths and misconceptions to improve the COVID-19 immunization status in this population.

Investigating the Reasons for Receiving the Second Booster Dose of the COVID-19 Vaccine in Adults and in People with Chronic Medical Conditions in Southern Italy

This cross-sectional survey explored the attitudes and the reasons, as well their associated factors, for receiving the second booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine among a sample of all old adults and of people with chronic medical conditions attending two randomly selected immunization centers in Naples (Italy). A total of 438 questionnaires were collected. The majority were male (55.1%) and the median age was 71 years. A higher perception of the vaccine’s utility, measured with a 10-point Likert type scale, has been observed among males, individuals with a higher perception that COVID-19 is a severe illness, with a higher self-awareness of being at risk of infection, and with a higher trust in the information received. The most reported reasons for receiving the second booster dose included protection of themselves and of their family members from getting COVID-19, fear of acquiring the disease, and having a physician’s recommendation. Younger participants, married/cohabitant, and with a higher perception that COVID-19 is a severe illness were more likely to have indicated protecting themselves and their family members as reason for receiving the booster dose. Respondents with a chronic medical condition, with a higher perception that COVID-19 is a severe illness, with a lower trust in the information received, and informed by physicians were more likely to have received the vaccine because they perceived of being at risk of getting a severe form of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Physicians should play a pivotal role in stressing the importance of the second booster dose and in helping individuals to make decisions.

Impact of a Video-Based Educational Intervention on the Levels of Knowledge and Concerns about COVID-19 Vaccination

BACKGROUND

The hesitancy to receive the COVID-19 vaccine plays a role in delaying the current global and national COVID-19 management strategies. Evidence has highlighted the importance of examining the public's concerns and knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines in sustaining public prevention of the further spread of the virus worldwide. This study aimed to assess the impact of a video-based educational session on the Saudi public's levels of knowledge and concerns about the COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

In a double-blind, randomized posttest-only control group study design, 508 Saudis were randomized to an experimental group (n = 253) and a control group (n = 255). The experimental group was exposed to a video-based educational session, while the control group was not. Then both groups were subjected to a validated questionnaire to assess their level of knowledge and concerns about the vaccine.

RESULTS

In comparison to the control group, the experimental group showed a significantly lower proportion of overall high concern (0.4% vs. 5.5%, p < 0.001) and a higher proportion of overall good knowledge (74.2% vs. 55.7%, p < 0.001). After adjustment for possible confounders, the experimental group showed a significantly lower percent mean score of overall concern (45.0% vs. 65.0%, p < 0.001) and a higher percent mean score of overall knowledge (74.2% vs. 55.7%, p < 0.001) than the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The video-based educational intervention positively impacted the levels of knowledge and concerns about COVID-19 vaccination among the experimental group. These interventions safeguard against the rumors and misconceptions about COVID-19 vaccinations. Further studies on the impacts of such interventions on vaccine uptake are recommended.

Minority Health Social Vulnerability Index and COVID-19 vaccination coverage - The United States, December 14, 2020-January 31, 2022

INTRODUCTION

In 2021, HHS Office of Minority Health and CDC developed a composite measure of social vulnerability called the Minority Health Social Vulnerability Index (MHSVI) to assess the needs of communities most vulnerable to COVID-19. The MHSVI extends the CDC Social Vulnerability Index with two new themes on healthcare access and medical vulnerability. This analysis examines COVID-19 vaccination coverage by social vulnerability using the MHSVI.

METHODS

County-level COVID-19 vaccine administration data among persons aged ≥18 years reported to CDC from 12/14/20 to 01/31/22 were analyzed. U.S. counties from 50 states and DC were categorized into tertiles of vulnerability (low, moderate, and high) for the composite MHSVI measure and each of the 34 indicators. Vaccination coverage (≥1 dose, primary series completion, and receipt of a booster dose) was calculated by tertiles for the composite MHSVI measure and each indicator.

RESULTS

Counties with lower per capita income, higher proportion of individuals with no high school diploma, living below poverty, ≥65 years of age, with a disability, and in mobile homes had lower vaccination uptake. However, counties with larger proportions of racial/ethnic minorities and individuals speaking English less than "very well" had higher coverage. Counties with fewer primary care physicians and greater medical vulnerabilities had lower ≥ 1 dose vaccination coverage. Furthermore, counties of high vulnerability had lower primary series completion and receipt of a booster dose. There were no clear patterns in COVID-19 vaccination coverage by tertiles for the composite measure.

CONCLUSION

Results from the new components in the MHSVI identify needs to prioritize persons in counties with greater medical vulnerabilities and limited access to health care, who are at greater risk for adverse COVID-19 outcomes. Findings suggest that using a composite measure to characterize social vulnerability might mask disparities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake that would have otherwise been observed using specific indicators.

Comorbidity-stratified estimates of 30-day mortality risk by age for unvaccinated men and women with COVID-19: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

The mortality risk following COVID-19 diagnosis in men and women with common comorbidities at different ages has been difficult to communicate to the general public. The purpose of this study was to determine the age at which unvaccinated men and women with common comorbidities have a mortality risk which exceeds that of 75- and 65-year-old individuals in the general population (Phases 1b/1c thresholds of the Centre for Disease Control Vaccine Rollout Recommendations) following COVID-19 infection during the first wave.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using linked administrative datasets in Ontario, Canada. We identified all community-dwelling adults diagnosed with COVID-19 between January 1 and October 31st, 2020. Exposures of interest were age (modelled using restricted cubic splines) and the following conditions: major cardiovascular disease (recent myocardial infarction or lifetime history of heart failure); 2) diabetes; 3) hypertension; 4) recent cancer; 5) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; 6) Stages 4/5 chronic kidney disease (CKD); 7) frailty. Logistic regression in the full cohort was used to estimate the risk of 30-day mortality for 75- and 65-year-old individuals. Analyses were repeated after stratifying by sex and medical condition to determine the age at which 30-day morality risk in strata exceed that of the general population at ages 65 and 75 years.

RESULTS

We studied 52,429 individuals (median age 42 years; 52.5% women) of whom 417 (0.8%) died within 30 days. The 30-day mortality risk increased with age, male sex, and comorbidities. The 65- and 75-year-old mortality risks in the general population were exceeded at the youngest age by people with CKD, cancer, and frailty. Conversely, women aged < 65 years who had diabetes or hypertension did not have higher mortality than 65-year-olds in the general population. Most people with medical conditions (except for Stage 4-5 CKD) aged < 45 years had lower predicted mortality than the general population at age 65 years.

CONCLUSION

The mortality risk in COVID-19 increases with age and comorbidity but the prognostic implications varied by sex and condition. These observations can support communication efforts and inform vaccine rollout in jurisdictions with limited vaccine supplies.

Usage of Heat and Moisture Exchange Devices, Virtual Visits, Masking, and Vaccinations Among People With a Laryngectomy During COVID-19

PURPOSE

This study described the COVID-19 risk mitigation actions of people with a total laryngectomy (TL) during the pandemic.

METHOD

An online survey was completed by 215 people with a TL who lived in the United States. The survey was open from December 1, 2021, to January 15, 2022.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in frequency of heat and moisture exchange (HME) device use during the pandemic compared with pre-COVID-19. Frequency of HME use was significantly greater for those who were vaccinated and those who had at least one clinical visit with their speech-language pathologist (SLP). The use of virtual visits increased from 9% pre-COVID-19 to 37% during the pandemic. Seventy percent of respondents were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with virtual visits and 51% judged them "as good as in-person." Eighty percent were vaccinated for COVID-19 and 75% received a booster. One third reported that they did not wear mask over the face or over the tracheostoma. Twenty percent had tested positive for COVID-19 with 70% of these people requiring hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

HME use and virtual SLP visits increased during the pandemic and the vaccination rate was high among this group of respondents. Overall, there were still large percentages of people with a TL who were not using an HME, not vaccinated, and did not wear a mask. SLPs should consider reaching out directly to their TL caseload, particularly those not yet seen during the pandemic, to support uptake of COVID-19 mitigation activities specific to people with a TL as the pandemic persists.