The Approach of Pregnant Women to Vaccination Based on a COVID-19 Systematic Review

The impact of vaccine hesitancy on psychological impairment among healthcare workers in a Total Worker Health© approach

Introduction

Vaccination practice is a well-known individual protective measure for biological risk in healthcare. During the COVID-19 pandemic vaccine hesitancy has grown among healthcare workers (HCWs). The study aims to investigate how vaccine hesitancy influences the psychological burden experienced by healthcare workers.

Methods

This study aimed to explore attitudes of HCWs in acceptance or refusal of vaccinations related to the risk of psychological impairment (PI) and describe the associated occupational factors, during the seasonal flu/COVID-19 vaccination campaign of 2022-2023. 302 HCWs were enrolled in the study. A questionnaire was self-administered, including two scales on the risk of psychological impairment (Psychological Injury Risk Indicator, PIRI) and vaccine hesitancy (Adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, AVHS).

Results

PIRI scores revealed that 29.8% of participants were at risk of PI. Differences in sex, age, occupational seniority, professional category, and night shifts were found between HCWs at risk of PI and those not at risk. Females registered a four-fold higher risk than males (85.6% vs. 14.4%, χ2 = 4.450, p < 0.05). Nurses were the highest risk category, followed by physicians and technicians (54.4% vs. 30.0% vs. 12.2%, χ2 = 14.463, p < 0.001). 41.7% of participants received the flu vaccination, and 98.9% received the COVID-19 vaccine. HCWs were prone to being vaccinated to protect patients and family members. Conversely, vaccine refusal was attributed to the perception of flu vaccines as not beneficial and COVID-19 contagion at low risk. The latter was more frequently reported for HCWs at risk of PI (16.7% vs. 4.7%, χ2 = 11.882, p = 0.001). Finally, hesitant HCWs were at higher risk of psychological impairment than others.

Discussion

HCWs expressed vaccine acceptance considering their social role in the community as protectors. However, the underestimation of the risk of severity of COVID-19 was more relevant among HCWs at risk of PI than others. Psychological aspects need to be considered by healthcare providers when fighting vaccine hesitancy.

Feasibility and Effectiveness of Vaccines for COVID-19: An Umbrella Review

Introduction

In January 2020, WHO declared the 2019 Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) a pandemic. Though COVID-19 vaccines are recommended, ongoing surveillance is crucial due to potential unforeseen events. Evaluation of long-term effectiveness and safety and addressing emerging variants are vital. This study integrates systematic reviews to assess COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety comprehensively.

Methods

This study was an umbrella review study on the feasibility and effectiveness of vaccines for COVID-19. We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, Web of Sciences, and Scopus, using MeSH terms and keywords related to COVID-19 vaccines. Inclusion criteria comprised peer-reviewed systematic reviews and meta-analyses in English, focusing on feasibility and effectiveness. Exclusion criteria targeted non-systematic reviews exclusively on vaccine safety and duplicates. Two independent reviewers screened and resolved discrepancies. Data extraction included key details. Methodological quality was assessed using the ROBIS tool. Data synthesis involves narrative and, if applicable, quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). Reporting followed PRISMA guidelines.

Results

A total of 32 systematic reviews were included in the study, of which 20 also conducted a meta-analysis. The studies investigated in the included reviews ranged from 7 to 74. The included articles were conducted in various countries around the globe. The findings indicated that COVID-19 vaccines are generally safe and effective for individuals with various medical conditions. The overall risk of bias for the included studies was assessed as low risk.

Conclusion

The study outcomes indicated that mRNA vaccines exhibit a higher incidence of adverse events but demonstrate greater efficacy. Conversely, inactivated and protein subunit vaccines are safer but exhibit lower efficiency. Moreover, the vaccine is considered safe for individuals with specific conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease, solid organ transplant recipients, children, pregnant individuals, and those with hematologic problems. Ultimately, the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among individuals is influenced by various factors, including geographic, socioeconomic, and pandemic-related considerations.

COVID-19 vaccine preferences for pregnant and lactating women in Bangladesh and Kenya: a qualitative study

COVID-19 was responsible for more than 7 million deaths globally, as well as numerous morbidities and social and economic effects. While COVID-19 vaccines were seen as a marvel of science by the scientific community, much of the public had concerns related to COVID-19 vaccines, with certain groups-such as pregnant and lactating women-having specific concerns related to vaccine effects on their pregnancy and breast milk. In this qualitative study, we interviewed stakeholders in Bangladesh (n = 26) and Kenya (n = 94) who affect the decision-making process related to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant and lactating women. These included pregnant and lactating women themselves, community gatekeepers or family members, healthcare workers, and policymakers. Several themes related to confidence and vaccine preference emerged. Stakeholders indicated a lack of confidence related to non-mRNA vaccines due to safety concerns, number of doses, and media coverage; lack of confidence related to mRNA vaccines due to safety concerns; and preference for non-mRNA vaccines due to health system compatibility and availability. While COVID-19 vaccine availability in much of the world-particularly in low-and middle-income countries-affected the public's ability to have a choice in the vaccine they received, there were evident vaccine preferences. As the public health world will continue to face other infectious disease outbreaks, bolstering vaccine confidence broadly and specifically related to new technologies will be paramount to realize the individual-and population-level benefits of life-saving vaccines.

Factors Influencing COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Pregnant and Breastfeeding/Puerperium Women: A Cross-Sectional Study

Vaccination among pregnant and breastfeeding women is critical for protecting this vulnerable population and their children. COVID-19 vaccination is recommended both during pregnancy and breastfeeding; however, we still do not fully understand the determinants that influence hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccination. This study aimed to identify the determinants of vaccine hesitancy in pregnant and breastfeeding, puerperium women. A multicenter, cross-sectional study, involving 435 pregnant and breastfeeding women, was conducted. Vaccination hesitancy was evaluated by administering the Vaccination Attitudes (VAX) Scale and the Zung Anxiety Self-Assessment Scale (SAS) was adopted to measure anxiety levels. Overall, 14% of the participants reported that they did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine, and 78.3% received their first dose during pregnancy or while breastfeeding. The descriptive statistics for the VAX scale showed a total mean score of 3.35 (±1.6), and 75% of participants reported an anxiety index equal to or lower than the threshold. Vaccine hesitancy increased as "adverse events after vaccination" increased (p < 0.01), while SAS levels positively correlated with the participants' mean age (p < 0.05). Investigating the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy enables the development of targeted health policies and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programs.

COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance During Pregnancy in Europe

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

COVID-19 Vaccination and Reproductive Health: a Comprehensive Review for Healthcare Providers

With all the current misinformation on social media platforms about the COVID-19 vaccine and its potential effects on fertility, it is essential for healthcare providers to have evidenced-based research to educate their patients, especially those who are trying to conceive, of the risks to mothers and fetuses of being unvaccinated. It is well known that COVID-19 infection puts pregnant women at higher risk of complications, including ICU admission, placentitis, stillbirth, and death. In February of 2021, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) released a statement denying any link between COVID vaccination and infertility. ASRM later confirmed and stated that "everyone, including pregnant women and those seeking to become pregnant, should get a COVID-19 vaccine". In this review, we aim to provide a compilation of data that denies any link between vaccination and infertility for healthcare providers to be able to educate their patients based on evidence-based medicine. We also reviewed the effect of COVID-19 virus and vaccination on various parameters and processes that are essential to obtaining a successful pregnancy.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

Objective

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

Materials and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Is It Safe for Me to Get It? Factors Influencing COVID-19 Vaccination Decision-Making among Postpartum Women Who Are Black and Hispanic in Deep South

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccination is vital for ending the pandemic, yet safety concerns persist among pregnant and postpartum women, especially those who are Black and Hispanic. This study aims to explore factors that influence postpartum women's vaccination decision-making during pregnancy and postpartum through women's lived experiences and maternal care providers' (MCPs) observations.

METHODS

From January to August 2022, we conducted semi-structured interviews with postpartum women who are Black and Hispanic and with MCPs. Participants were recruited from obstetric and pediatric clinics in South Carolina and had given birth in 2021. Thematic analysis was employed for data analysis.

RESULTS

The study involved 19 Black and 20 Hispanic women, along with 9 MCPs, and revealed both barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination. The factors that influence pregnant and postpartum women's decision about COVID-19 vaccine uptake included: 1) awareness of health threats associated with COVID-19 vaccines, 2) vaccine availability and accessibility, 3) vaccine-related knowledge and exposure to misinformation, 4) concerns regarding pre-existing health conditions and potential side effects of COVID-19 vaccines, 5) emotional factors associated with vaccination decision-making processes, 6) concerns about the well-being of infants, 7) cultural perspectives, and 8) encouragement by trusted supporters.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that reliable information, social support, and trusted MCPs' advice can motivate COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant and postpartum women who are Black and Hispanic. However, barriers such as misinformation, mistrust in the health care system, and fears of potential side effects impede vaccination uptake. Future interventions should address these barriers, consider health disparities, involve trusted MCPs, and initiate conversations about vaccines to promote vaccination among these populations.

Adverse perinatal outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy: results from two nationwide registries in Germany

INTRODUCTION

Pregnancy is a known independent risk factor for a severe course of COVID-19. The relationship of SARS-CoV-2 infection and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) on neonatal outcomes is unclear. Our aim was to determine if SARS-CoV-2 infection represents an independent risk factor for adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnancy with GDM.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We compared data from two German registries including pregnant women with GDM, established during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (COVID-19-Related Obstetric and Neonatal Outcome Study (CRONOS), a multicenter prospective observational study) and already existing before the pandemic (German registry of pregnant women with GDM; GestDiab). In total, 409 participants with GDM and SARS-CoV-2 infection and 4598 participants with GDM, registered 2018-2019, were eligible for analyses. The primary fetal and neonatal outcomes were defined as: (1) combined: admission to neonatal intensive care unit, stillbirth, and/or neonatal death, and (2) preterm birth before 37+0 weeks of gestation. Large and small for gestational age, maternal insulin therapy, birth weight >4500 g and cesarean delivery were considered as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were younger (32 vs 33 years) and had a higher median body mass index (28 vs 27 kg/m²). In CRONOS, more neonates developed the primary outcome (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.97) and were born preterm (aOR 1.50, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.10). Fasting glucose was higher in women in CRONOS versus GestDiab (5.4 vs 5.3 mmol/L) considering each 0.1 mmol/L increase was independently associated with a 5% higher risk of preterm birth among women in CRONOS only (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09).

CONCLUSIONS

GDM with SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes as compared with GDM without SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Fertility Declines Near the End of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence of the 2022 Birth Declines in Germany and Sweden

Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries faced short-term fertility declines in 2020-2021, a development which did not materialize in the majority of German-speaking and Nordic countries. However, more recent birth statistics show a steep fertility decline in 2022. We aim to provide empirical evidence on the unexpected birth decline in 2022 in Germany and Sweden. We rely on monthly birth statistics and present seasonally adjusted monthly Total Fertility Rates (TFR) for Germany and Sweden. We relate the nine-month lagged fertility rates to contextual developments regarding COVID-19. The seasonally adjusted monthly TFR of Germany dropped from 1.5-1.6 in 2021 to 1.4 in early 2022 and again in autumn 2022, a decline of about 10% in several months. In Sweden, the corresponding TFR dropped from about 1.7 in 2021 to 1.5-1.6 in 2022, a decline of almost 10%. There is no association of the fertility trends with changes in unemployment, infection rates, or COVID-19 deaths, but a strong association with the onset of vaccination programmes and the weakening of pandemic-related restrictions. The fertility decline in 2022 in Germany and Sweden is remarkable. Common explanations of fertility change during the pandemic do not apply. The association between the onset of mass vaccinations and subsequent fertility decline indicates that women adjusted their behaviour to get vaccinated before becoming pregnant. Fertility decreased as societies were opening up with more normalized life conditions. We provide novel information on fertility declines and the COVID-19-fertility nexus during and in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic.

Is decision-making based on the internet during pregnancy a predictive factor for vaccine hesitancy in pregnant women during the pandemic?

Pregnant women frequently use the Internet to get information, and the information they receive is effective in their decision-making. It is known that pregnant women get information about COVID-19 vaccines from the Internet. This study aims to determine whether decision-making based on Internet sources during pregnancy is a predictive factor for vaccine hesitancy in pregnant women during the pandemic. A descriptive, cross-sectional research design was used. The data were collected by using an online survey instrument. There was a positive, moderate, and significant relationship between the self-efficacy perception sub-dimension of the internet decision-making during pregnancy scale and the risk sub-dimension of the vaccine hesitancy in pandemics scale (r: .584, p < .05) and between the self-control sub-dimension of the internet decision-making during pregnancy scale and the risk sub-dimension of the vaccine hesitancy in pandemics scale (r: .546, p < .05). The perception of self-control (β: .291) affected the lack of confidence, and the perception of self-efficacy (β: .481) affected the risk perception more than other variables. There was a relationship between internet decision-making and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in pregnant women. Health professionals, information specialists, and librarians should orient people to reliable sources about vaccines.

Hospitalizations for Obstetrical Conditions During and After the Covid-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

During the Covid-19 pandemic there have been a drastic decrease in hospitalizations for non-Covid conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the trend in hospitalizations for obstetrical conditions during and after the Covid-19 pandemic.

METHODS

For this study there we used electronical data base in order to search for all the obstetrical patients that were hospitalized in a tertiary maternity, Clinical Emergency County Hospital Craiova, during the pre-pandemic period (between March - December 2019), during pandemics (2020 March - December, 2021 March - December) and post pandemics (2022 March - December).

RESULTS

The total number of hospitalizations during 2020 dropped by 28% compared to the pre-pandemic year - 2019, and further by 30% in 2021, and by 26% in 2022. In terms of day admissions, a decreasing trend can be observed, with a total of 3230 admissions, from which, 208 in 2020 showing a decrease of 93%, 695 in 2021 with a decrease of 78% and 941 in 2022 with a decrease of 70% compared to 2019.We experienced a significant increase of vaginal birth rate during the pandemic (2020-2021) of 24% that can be attributed to the unavailability of many surrounding low-risk birth units during the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

The obstetrical conditions hospitalizations dramatically dropped during the COVID-19 pandemic and have not yet recovered to the pre-pandemic level.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Safety of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women and their neonatal outcome: a narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Even through the fact that pregnant women are more and more severely infected with COVID-19 disease, there are still doubts about vaccinating these people due to the lack of sufficient evidence base information. So in this systematic review, we decided to study vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women regarding maternal, fetal and neonatal complications and outcomes.

THE STRATEGY OF SEARCHING

Between 30 December 2019 and 15 October 2021, electronic searches were performed on the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane library by searching in English and free full text. Keywords searched included these: maternal outcome, neonatal outcome, pregnancy, and COVID-19 vaccination. Among 451 articles, finally, seven studies were included to study pregnancy outcomes in vaccinated women compared to unvaccinated for systematic review purposes.

RESULTS

In this study 30257 vaccinated women in their third trimester compared to 132339 unvaccinated women in terms of age, the root of delivery, neonatal adverse outcomes. There were no significant differences between two groups in terms of: IUFD, and 1 min Apgar score, C/S rate, and NICU admission between the two groups, however, the rate of SGA, IUFD, and also neonatal jaundice, asphyxia, and hypoglycemia was more significant in the unvaccinated group comparing to the vaccinated group as a result. Among them, the chance of preterm labor pain was reported more among vaccinated patients. Emphasizing that, except 7.3% of the case population, everyone in the second and third trimesters had been vaccinated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccination during the second and third trimesters appears to be the right choice due to the immediate impact of COVID-19 antibodies on the developing fetus and formation of neonatal prophylaxis, as well as the absence of adverse outcomes for both the fetus and mothers.

Beyond the numbers: An in-depth look at Cameroon's fifth national COVID-19 vaccination campaign through geographical and gender lenses

BACKGROUND

Cameroon has been struggling with low Covid-19 vaccination coverage, with only 4.5 % of the population receiving the primary series as of November 2022. The COVID-19 Vaccine Delivery Partnership (CoVDP) conducted a high-level mission to Cameroon to assess progress and advocate for actions to address bottlenecks. The objective of the mission was to administer at least 3,000,000 doses of vaccines during the 5th Mass vaccination campaign. This study examines the factors contributing to the success of the campaign and uses a geographical and gender lens to assess the results.

METHODS

The study is a secondary analysis of data from the DHIS2 collected during the 5th mass vaccination campaign for Covid-19. Descriptive statistics were used to assess coverages per location and gender expressed in OR. sccess factors, and chi-squared tests were used to assess differences in vaccine distribution across regions and by gender.

RESULTS

This 5th vaccination campaign benefitted from a strong political commitment facilitated by CoVDP's mission, international support, collaboration, planning, supervision, and demand generation. The campaign recorded 2 019 118 administered vaccine doses, a staggering 46-fold increase in vaccinated individuals relative to the first round, with vaccination coverage reaching 10.1 % of the general population. However, the study reveals regional and gender disparities in vaccination coverage. Men had higher odds of being vaccinated than women in the three Sahel regions. Among individuals with comorbidities, the national coverage rate was only 14 %, and the Far North and East regions exhibited the lowest coverage rates. Janssen was the most used vaccine, and the total AEFI cases reported were 2 per 1000 vaccine doses.

CONCLUSION

The 5th COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Cameroon saw a strong political commitment and was the most successful so far. Despite the gains, there was gender disparity in coverage in some regions. It is important to continue the established momentum, ensure equitable access in the Sahel regions, and reach high-priority groups with primary series and booster doses.

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

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

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women

This open-labeled non-inferiority trial evaluated immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous and homologous COVID-19 vaccination schedules in pregnant Thai women. 18-45-year-old pregnant women with no history of COVID-19 infection or vaccination and a gestational age of ≥12 weeks were randomized 1:1:1 into three two-dose primary series scheduled 4 weeks apart: BNT162b2-BNT162b2 (Group 1), ChAdOx1-BNT162b2 (Group 2), and CoronaVac-BNT162b2 (Group 3). Serum antibody responses, maternal and cord blood antibody levels at delivery, and adverse events (AEs) following vaccination until delivery were assessed. The 124 enrolled participants had a median age of 31 (interquartile range [IQR] 26.0-35.5) years and gestational age of 23.5 (IQR 18.0-30.0) weeks. No significant difference in anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG were observed across arms at 2 weeks after the second dose. Neutralizing antibody geometric mean titers against the ancestral Wuhan strain were highest in Group 3 (258.22, 95% CI [187.53, 355.56]), followed by Groups 1 (187.47, 95% CI [135.15, 260.03]) and 2 (166.63, 95% CI [124.60, 222.84]). Cord blood anti-RBD IgG was correlated with, and equal to or higher than, maternal levels at delivery (r = 0.719, P < .001) and inversely correlated with elapsed time after the second vaccination (r = -0.366, P < .001). No significant difference in cord blood antibody levels between groups were observed. Local and systemic AEs were mild-to-moderate and more frequent in Group 2. Heterologous schedules of CoronaVac-BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1-BNT162b2 induced immunogenicity on-par with BNT162b2-BNT162b2 and may be considered as alternative schedules for primary series in pregnant women in mRNA-limited vaccine settings.

Factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination decision-making among African American and Hispanic pregnant and postpartum women in Deep South

Background

COVID-19 vaccination is vital for ending the pandemic but concerns about its safety among pregnant and postpartum women, especially among African American (AA) and Hispanic women, persist. This study aims to explore factors that influence vaccination decision-making among AA and Hispanic pregnant and postpartum women through women's experiences and maternal care providers' (MCPs) observations.

Methods

From January and August 2022, we conducted semi-structured interviews with AA and Hispanic women and MCPs. Participants were recruited from obstetric and pediatric clinics in South Carolina, and all births took place after March 2020. Thematic analysis was employed for data analysis.

Results

The study involved 19 AA and 20 Hispanic women, along with 9 MCPs, and revealed both barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination. The factors that influence pregnant and postpartum women's decision about COVID-19 vaccine uptake included: 1) awareness of health threats associated with COVID-19 vaccines, 2) vaccine availability and accessibility, 3) vaccine-related knowledge and exposure to misinformation, 4) concerns regarding pre-existing health conditions and potential side effects of COVID-19 vaccines, 5) emotional factors associated with vaccination decision-making processes, 6) concerns about the well-being of infants, 7) cultural perspectives, and 8) encouragement by trusted supporters.

Conclusion

Findings suggest that reliable information, social support, and trusted doctors' advice can motivate COVID-19 vaccination. However, barriers such as misinformation, mistrust in the health care system, and fears related to potential side effects impede vaccination uptake among AA and Hispanic pregnant and postpartum women. Future interventions should target these barriers, along with health disparities, involve trusted doctors in outreach, and initiate vaccine conversations to promote vaccination among this population.

Maternal and neonatal outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, a systematic review and meta-analysis

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is associated with increased pregnancy complications. Despite effective vaccination strategies for the general population, the evidence on the safety and efficacy of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations in pregnancy is limited due to a lack of well-powered studies. The present study compares the maternal, neonatal, and immunological outcomes between vaccinated pregnant and unvaccinated pregnant women using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. We included 37 studies with a total of 141,107 pregnant women (36.8% vaccinated) spread across all outcomes. Our evidence indicates a higher rate of cesarean section in the 1898 vaccinated pregnant women compared to the 6180 women who did not receive vaccination (OR = 1.20, CI = (1.05, 1.38), P = 0.007, I2 = 45%). Regarding immunological outcomes, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy or postpartum was significantly reduced in 6820 vaccinated pregnant women compared to 17,010 unvaccinated pregnant women (OR = 0.25, CI = 0.13-0.48, P < 0.0001, I2 = 61%), as evident from qualitative assessment indicating significantly higher postpartum antibody titers compared to that observed in both unvaccinated mothers and mothers who have recently recovered from a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our analysis represents high quality evidence showing that COVID-19 vaccination effectively raises antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2. This may confer protection against infection during pregnancy and the postpartum period. In addition to being protective against SARS-CoV-2, the vaccine was associated with decreased odds of preterm delivery. Furthermore, COVID-19 vaccination may also be associated with higher odds of cesarean section.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Pregnant and Lactating Mothers Attending Government Health Care Centers in Karaikal, South India

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

The Government of India has endorsed COVID-19 vaccination for pregnant and lactating mothers. However, the vaccine acceptance rate among this target group is not satisfactory. The study aimed to assess the awareness level, acceptance rate, and hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant and lactating mothers attending government health care centers and to identify the psycho-social factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A government facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted in various government primary and secondary health care centers in Karaikal for a period of six months. After Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) clearance, a semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect the data from 904 pregnant and lactating mothers. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression were employed.

RESULTS

Despite a high awareness level (87%), vaccine hesitancy was high (55%) among the study participants. In multivariate analysis, age > 30 years, primi mothers, lactating mothers with < 6 months old children, unawareness, and recent COVID-19 infection were significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy. Fear of side effects for baby and mother following vaccination and family pressure were the prime reasons for vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSION

Despite sufficient awareness about the eligibility for COVID-19 vaccination, the acceptance rate was low. There is a dire need to motivate the higher age group, primigravidas, and lactating mothers at the community level to get rid of their fear factors related to vaccination.

Gestational Viral Infections: Role of Host Immune System

Viral infections in pregnancy are major causes of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. Infections can develop in the neonate transplacentally, perinatally, or postnatally (from breast milk or other sources) and lead to different clinical manifestations, depending on the viral agent and the gestational age at exposure. Viewing the peculiar tolerogenic status which characterizes pregnancy, viruses could exploit this peculiar immunological status to spread or affect the maternal immune system, adopting several evasion strategies. In fact, both DNA and RNA virus might have a deep impact on both innate and acquired immune systems. For this reason, investigating the interaction with these pathogens and the host's immune system during pregnancy is crucial not only for the development of most effective therapies and diagnosis but mostly for prevention. In this review, we will analyze some of the most important DNA and RNA viruses related to gestational infections.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The Interplay of Perceived Risks and Benefits in Deciding to Become Vaccinated against COVID-19 While Pregnant or Breastfeeding: A Cross-Sectional Study in Italy

The present study examined the role of the perception of risks and benefits for the mother and her babies in deciding about the COVID-19 vaccination. In this cross-sectional study, five hypotheses were tested using data from a convenience sample of Italian pregnant and/or breastfeeding women (N = 1104, July-September 2021). A logistic regression model estimated the influence of the predictors on the reported behavior, and a beta regression model was used to evaluate which factors influenced the willingness to become vaccinated among unvaccinated women. The COVID-19 vaccination overall risks/benefits tradeoff was highly predictive of both behavior and intention. Ceteris paribus, an increase in the perception of risks for the baby weighed more against vaccination than a similar increase in the perception of risks for the mother. Additionally, pregnant women resulted in being less likely (or willing) to be vaccinated in their status than breastfeeding women, but they were equally accepting of vaccination if they were not pregnant. COVID-19 risk perception predicted intention to become vaccinated, but not behavior. In conclusion, the overall risks/benefits tradeoff is key in predicting vaccination behavior and intention, but the concerns for the baby weigh more than those for the mother in the decision, shedding light on this previously neglected aspect.

Assessing Doubts, Knowledge, and Service Appreciation among Pregnant Women Who Received the COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Research Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Study

The COVID-19 pandemic is considered one of the deadliest pandemics in history. Pregnant women are more susceptible to developing serious diseases during COVID-19 than their non-pregnant peers. Pregnant women often express doubt about accepting the vaccination, especially in regard to their security and safety. This study aims to investigate the appreciation of the vaccination offer, and if there are any determinants impacting vaccine hesitancy. A questionnaire was administered to a sample of pregnant women who had just received their immunization against COVID-19 at the vaccination service of a teaching hospital in Rome, from October 2021 to March 2022. A high appreciation of the vaccination services was found, both for the logistic organization and the healthcare personnel, with mean scores above 4 out of 5. The degree of pre-vaccinal doubt was low (41%) or medium (48%) for the largest part of the sample, while the degree of COVID-19 vaccine knowledge was high for 91% of the participants. Physicians were the most decisive information source for the vaccination choice. Our results highlighted that a supportive approach could increase appreciation and improve the setting of vaccinations. Healthcare professionals should aim for a more comprehensive and integrated role of all figures.

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

Purpose

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

Materials and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

COVID-19 Vaccination during Pregnancy and Lactation: Attitudes and Uptakes before and after Official Recommendations in Germany

Background: Vaccination against COVID-19 is an effective measure to mitigate the pandemic. Pregnant and breastfeeding women were not included in registration studies, so official recommendations to vaccinate this vulnerable group appeared belated. Therefore, our aims were to evaluate vaccination uptake, reasons for and against vaccination, and the changes in these depending on the official national recommendations in Germany. Methods: An anonymous online cross-sectional survey among pregnant and breastfeeding women was conducted prior to and after the publication of the official vaccination recommendation. Results: Data from the convenience sample of 5411 participants (42.9% pregnant; 57% breastfeeding) were analysed. The recommendation was known to 95% of the participants. The information was obtained mainly autonomously (61.6%) and through the media (56.9%). Vaccination uptake increased in pregnant (2.4% before vs. 58.7% after) and breastfeeding women (13.7% vs. 74.7%). As reasons to get vaccinated, pregnant women indicated more fear of the infection than of the side effects of vaccination (52.0% before vs. 66.2% after), intended protection of the baby and oneself (36.0% vs. 62.9%), and limited information about vaccination (53.5% vs. 24.4%). Conclusion: The official national recommendation is widely known and mostly obtained autonomously, thereby showing a high level of awareness and a rise in vaccination uptake. Nonetheless, targeted education campaigns focusing on scientific evidence should be maintained, whereas the engagement of health professionals should be enhanced.

Barriers and facilitators of vaccine hesitancy for COVID-19, influenza, and pertussis during pregnancy and in mothers of infants under two years: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Vaccination during pregnancy has been repeatedly demonstrated to be safe and effective in protecting against infection and associated harms for the mother, developing baby, and subsequent infant. However, maternal vaccination uptake remains low compared to the general population.

OBJECTIVES

An umbrella review to explore the barriers and facilitators to Influenza, Pertussis and COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and within 2 years after childbirth, and to inform interventions to encourage uptake (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022327624).

METHODS

Ten databases were searched for systematic reviews published between 2009 and April 2022 exploring the predictors of vaccination or effectiveness of interventions to improve vaccination for Pertussis, Influenza, or COVD-19. Both pregnant women and mothers of infants under two years were included. Barriers and facilitators were organised using the WHO model of determinants of vaccine hesitancy through narrative synthesis, the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist assessed review quality, and the degree of overlap of primary studies was calculated.

RESULTS

19 reviews were included. Considerable overlap was found especially for intervention reviews, and the quality of the included reviews and their primary studies varied. Sociodemographic factors were specifically researched in the context of COVID-19, exerting a small but consistent effect on vaccination. Concerns around the safety of vaccination particularly for the developing baby were a main barrier. While key facilitators included recommendation from a healthcare professional, previous vaccination, knowledge around vaccination, and communication with and support from social groups. Intervention reviews indicated multi-component interventions involving human interaction to be most effective.

CONCLUSION

The main barriers and facilitators for Influenza, Pertussis and COVID-19 vaccination have been identified and constitute the foundation for policy development at the international level. Ethnicity, socioeconomic status, concerns about vaccine safety and side effects, and lack of healthcare professionals' recommendations, are the most relevant factors of vaccine hesitancy. Adapting educational interventions to specific populations, person-to-person interaction, healthcare professionals' involvement, and interpersonal support are important strategies to improve uptake.

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

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

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in people affected by diabetes and strategies to increase vaccine compliance: A systematic narrative review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

People affected by diabetes are at higher risk for complications from certain vaccine-preventable diseases. Suboptimal vaccination coverages are reported in this population sub-group. The purpose of this study is to estimate the proportion of diabetic patients who express hesitation to the COVID-19 vaccine worldwide.

METHODS

Seven studies were included in the meta-analysis and systematic review, selected from scientific articles available in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus databases from 2020 to 2022. The following terms were used for the search strategy: (adherence OR hesitancy OR compliance OR attitude) AND (covid* OR SARS*) AND (vaccin* OR immun*) AND (diabet*).

RESULTS

The vaccine hesitation rate among persons with diabetes was 27.8 % (95 %CI = 15.6-41.9 %). In the comparison of vaccine hesitancy between sexes and educational status, the RRs were 0.90 (95 %CI = 0.71-1.15) and 0.88 (95 %CI = 0.76-1.02), respectively. The main reasons of unwillingness were lack of information, opinion that the vaccine was unsafe or not efficient, and fear of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to achieve a high vaccination coverage, multifactorial approach is needed, which requires major social, scientific and health efforts. The success of the vaccination campaign in this population depends on the capillarity and consistency of the interventions implemented.

Global Cross-Sectional Study Evaluating the Attitudes towards a COVID-19 Vaccine in Pregnant and Postpartum Women

Pregnant and postpartum women have an increased risk of severe complications from COVID-19. Many clinical guidelines recommend vaccination of these populations, and it is therefore critical to understand their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey in November 2020 of currently pregnant and ≤1-year postpartum women in Brazil, India, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US) that assessed their openness to COVID-19 vaccines and reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to evaluate openness to receiving a vaccine. Out of 2010 respondents, 67% were open to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine themselves. Among pregnant and postpartum participants, 72% and 57% were willing to receive a vaccine, respectively. Vaccine openness varied significantly by country: India (87%), Brazil (71%), UK (59%), and US (52%). Across all participants, among the 33% who were unsure/not open to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, the most common reason cited was safety/side effect concerns (51%). Participants were similarly open to their children/other family members receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. Presence of a comorbidity, a positive COVID-19 test result, and pregnancy were all significantly associated with positive vaccine acceptance. Targeted outreach to address pregnant and postpartum women's concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine is needed.

Exploring the Needs and Expectations of Expectant and New Parents for an mHealth Application to Support the First 1000 Days of Life: Steps toward a Co-Design Approach

To improve maternal and child health, it is essential to adhere to health-promoting and preventive measures. However, reliable information as well as effective tools are not easy to identify in this field. Our cross-sectional study investigated the needs and expectations of expectant and new mothers and fathers as potential primary users of a hypothetical application supporting the first 1000 days of life. Between May and August 2022, we recruited expectant and new parents by administering an 83-item 5-point Likert scale questionnaire related to the content, functionalities, and technical features of the hypothetical app. We stratified responses using sociodemographic characteristics and then performed ward hierarchical clustering. The 94 women and 69 men involved in our study generally agreed with the proposed content, but expressed low interest in certain app functionalities or features, including those related to the interaction mechanism and interactivity. Women were generally more demanding than men. Our findings, resulting from the engagement of end-users, may be useful for designers and technology providers to implement mHealth solutions that, in addition to conveying reliable information, are tailored to the needs and preferences of end-users in the first 1000 days of life.

Trauma-informed care for perinatal women during the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey of nurses and midwives in Turkey

OBJECTIVES

There is a paucity of evidence on the provision of trauma-informed care among nurses and midwives during the pandemic.Therefore, this online survey of Turkish nurses and midwives aimed to: describe reported maternal concerns and anxieties during the COVID-19 pandemic; and explore aspects of trauma-informed care for perinatal women during the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., nurses' and midwives' knowledge, opinions, perceived competence, current practices, and implementation barriers).

DESIGN

A cross-sectional descriptive survey design.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A web-based survey conducted between June 2021 to December 2021. A total of 102 nurses and midwives comprised the final sample of this study.

FINDINGS

The safety of COVID-19 vaccine was both the most common maternal concern (73%) and the most frequently noted maternal source of anxiety (79%) reported to nurses and midwives by perinatal women. Most nurses and midwives were knowledgeable of, held favorable opinion about, and perceived moderate competence in trauma-informed care. The most frequently provided practice was encouraging mothers to make use of their own social support system (82%). Time constrains and lack of resources were perceived as somewhat to significant barriers to providing trauma-informed care during the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Access to correct information related to COVID-19 vaccination is necessary to reduce maternal anxiety. Since perinatal nurses and midwives had favorable opinions concerning implementing trauma-informed care, successful strategies for mitigating the implementation barriers are essential to facilitate the provision of trauma-informed care during the pandemic.

The supply is there. So why can't pregnant and breastfeeding women in rural India get the COVID-19 vaccine?

Despite COVID-19 vaccines being available to pregnant women in India since summer 2021, little is known about vaccine uptake among this high need population. We conducted mixed methods research with pregnant and recently delivered rural women in northern India, consisting of 300 phone surveys and 15 in-depth interviews, in November 2021. Only about a third of respondents were vaccinated, however, about half of unvaccinated respondents reported that they would get vaccinated now if they could. Fears of harm to the unborn baby or young infant were common (22% of unvaccinated women). However, among unvaccinated women who wanted to get vaccinated, the most common barrier reported was that their health care provider refused to provide them the vaccine. Gender barriers and social norms also played a role, with family members restricting women's access. Trust in the health system was high, however, women were most often getting information about COVID-19 vaccines from sources that they did not trust, and they knew they were getting potentially poor-quality information. Qualitative data shed light on the barriers women faced from their family and health care providers but described how as more people got the vaccine that norms were changing. These findings highlight how pregnant women in India have lower vaccination rates than the general population, and while vaccine hesitancy does play a role, structural barriers from the health care system also limit access to vaccines. Interventions must be developed that target household decision-makers and health providers at the community level, and that take advantage of the trust that rural women already have in their health care providers and the government. It is essential to think beyond vaccine hesitancy and think at the system level when addressing this missed opportunity to vaccinate high risk pregnant women in this setting.

Lack of clear national policy guidance on COVID-19 vaccines influences behaviors in pregnant and lactating women in Kenya

SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy is associated with a greater risk of maternal and newborn morbidity and maternal death. In Kenya, pregnant and lactating women (PLW) were ineligible to receive COVID-19 vaccines until August 2021. How shifts in policy influence vaccine behaviors, such as health worker recommendations and vaccine uptake, is not well documented. We conducted qualitative interviews with PLW, health workers, and policymakers in Kenya to understand how different stakeholders' perceptions of national policy regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy shaped vaccine behaviors and decision-making. Policymakers and health workers described pervasive uncertainty and lack of communication about the national policy, cited vaccine safety as their primary concern for administering COVID-19 vaccines to PLW, and expressed that PLW were inadequately prioritized in the COVID-19 vaccine program. PLW perceived the restrictive policy as indicative of a safety risk, resulting in vaccine hesitancy and potentially exacerbated inequities in vaccine access. These findings support the need for the development and dissemination of effective vaccine communication guidelines and the prioritization of PLW in COVID-19 vaccination policies and campaigns. To ensure PLW do not face the same inequities in future epidemics, data on infectious disease burdens and vaccine uptake should be collected systematically among pregnant women, and PLW should be included in future vaccine trials.

COVID-19 in Pregnancy: Knowledge about the Vaccine and the Effect of the Virus. Reliability and Results of the MAMA-19 Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Fear or mistrust of the vaccine and concern for the well-being of their unborn infants are the main reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in pregnant women. The aim of this work was to validate a questionnaire on knowledge about COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and to examine the sources of information in a group of new mothers, as well as their effectiveness and intelligibility.

METHODS

A literature review was carried out to develop a questionnaire of forty-five questions, divided into six sections, called MAMA-19. The assessment of agreement and the interrater reliability was carried out using Cronbach's analysis and Cohen's kappa statistic. Data obtained from the questionnaire were analysed using descriptive and univariate statistics.

RESULTS

The total alpha values in the two sections about knowledge of vaccination during pregnancy and about the effects of disease and possible post-COVID-19 consequences for the unvaccinated showed sufficient consistency, at 0.860 and 0.725, respectively. Non-vaccinated women thought that receiving the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy can lead to malformations in the newborn (60% vs. 40%, p = 0.002) and to an increased risk of foetal growth restriction (61.9% vs. 38.1%, p < 0.001). The percentage of vaccinated women was significantly higher than non-vaccinated when more than one professional was consulted and consistent information was received from them (74.2% vs. 25.8%, p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The MAMA-19 questionnaire shows results in line with the literature and valid in the two main sections. It is quick to use for measuring communication effectiveness by healthcare professionals and institutions in the context of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in the pregnant population. The results evidence that a physician's recommendation to get vaccinated is the most important factor in maternal decision making, regardless of geographic, social or educational context.

COVID-19 vaccine literacy and vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women and mothers of young children in Japan

BACKGROUND

Delays in the spread of vaccination have been recognized as an urgent public health issue in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine literacy (VL) is a critical determinant of vaccine uptake; however, little is known about VL among pregnant women and mothers of young children.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a nationwide, cross-sectional internet survey in Japan on VL and vaccine hesitancy, conducted with 1,639 pregnant women and 5,688 mothers of young children who had given birth after July 2019, between July 24 and August 30, 2021.

RESULTS

Vaccine hesitancy was observed in 51.1 % of pregnant women and 31.9 % of mothers of young children. The risk of vaccine hesitancy was significantly higher among pregnant women with lower interactive/critical skills (risk ratio [RR] 2.10, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.59, 2.78, p < 0.001), although functional skills did not significantly correlate with vaccine hesitancy. For mothers of young children, we found a significantly higher risk of vaccine hesitancy among those with low VL functional skills (RR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.19, 1.61), p < 0.001) and low interactive/critical skills (RR 1.29, 95 % CI 1.10, 1.50, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that aiding individuals to correctly evaluate vaccine-related information is critical for improving vaccine acceptance rates among both pregnant women and mothers of young children. Meanwhile, improving the comprehensibility of communication toolkits may be important for women with children but have a limited effect among pregnant women.

Factors associated with willingness to take COVID-19 vaccine among pregnant women at Gondar town, Northwest Ethiopia: A multicenter institution-based cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease has spread worldwide since late 2019. Vaccination is critical in controlling this pandemic. However, vaccine acceptance among pregnant women is not well-studied. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care clinics in Gondar town, Northwest Ethiopia.

METHODS

An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among pregnant women attending antenatal care clinics at Gondar town, Northwest Ethiopia, 2021. About 510 study subjects were selected using a systematic random sampling technique from August 25 to September 10/2021. Data collection was done by using an interviewer-administered, structured questionnaire. Epi-info 7.2 was used to enter data and then exported to SPSS version 25 software for analysis. Bivariable and multivariable binary logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with the outcome variable. Variables with a p-value < 0.2 in the bivariable analysis were entered into the multivariable analysis to control for possible confounders. Statistical significance is determined using an adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) at a p-value of < 0.05.

RESULTS

Of 510 participants, 211 (41.4%) were willing to take COVID-19 vaccines. Maternal age ≥ 35 years (AOR: 5.678, 95% CI: 1.775-18.166), having contact history with COVID-19 diagnosed people (AOR: 7.724, 95% CI: 2.183, 27.329), having a pre-existing chronic disease (AOR: 3.131, 95% CI: 1.700-5.766), good knowledge about COVID-19 vaccine (AOR: 2.391, 95% CI: 1.144, 4.998) and good attitude towards COVID-19 vaccine (AOR: 2.128, 95% CI: 1.348) were significantly associated with the outcome variable.

CONCLUSIONS

The willingness to take COVID-19 vaccine among pregnant mothers was low. Age, contact history with COVID-19 diagnosed people, chronic disease, knowledge, and attitude towards COVID-19 vaccine were factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine willingness. To enhance the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, the government with different stakeholders should strengthen public education about the importance of getting COVID-19 vaccine.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pregnant women regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy in 7 low- and middle-income countries: An observational trial from the Global Network for Women and Children's Health Research

OBJECTIVES

We sought to determine the knowledge, attitudes and practices of pregnant women regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy in seven low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).

DESIGN

Prospective, observational, population-based study.

SETTINGS

Study areas in seven LMICs: Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Guatemala, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Kenya and Zambia.

POPULATION

Pregnant women in an ongoing registry.

METHODS

COVID-19 vaccine questionnaires were administered to pregnant women in the Global Network's Maternal Newborn Health Registry from February 2021 through November 2021 in face-to-face interviews.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Knowledge, attitude and practice regarding vaccination during pregnancy; vaccination status.

RESULTS

No women were vaccinated except for small proportions in India (12.9%) and Guatemala (5.5%). Overall, nearly half the women believed the COVID-19 vaccine is very/somewhat effective and a similar proportion believed that the COVID-19 vaccine is safe for pregnant women. With availability of vaccines, about 56.7% said they would get the vaccine and a 34.8% would refuse. Of those who would not get vaccinated, safety, fear of adverse effects, and lack of trust predicted vaccine refusal. Those with lower educational status were less willing to be vaccinated. Family members and health professionals were the most trusted source of information for vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

This COVID-19 vaccine survey in seven LMICs found that knowledge about the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine was generally low but varied. Concerns about vaccine safety and effectiveness among pregnant women is an important target for educational efforts to increase vaccination rates.

Pregnancy during COVID-19: social contact patterns and vaccine coverage of pregnant women from CoMix in 19 European countries

BACKGROUND

Evidence and advice for pregnant women evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied social contact behaviour and vaccine uptake in pregnant women between March 2020 and September 2021 in 19 European countries.

METHODS

In each country, repeated online survey data were collected from a panel of nationally-representative participants. We calculated the adjusted mean number of contacts reported with an individual-level generalized additive mixed model, modelled using the negative binomial distribution and a log link function. Mean proportion of people in isolation or quarantine, and vaccination coverage by pregnancy status and gender were calculated using a clustered bootstrap.

FINDINGS

We recorded 4,129 observations from 1,041 pregnant women, and 115,359 observations from 29,860 non-pregnant individuals aged 18-49. Pregnant women made slightly fewer contacts (3.6, 95%CI = 3.5-3.7) than non-pregnant women (4.0, 95%CI = 3.9-4.0), driven by fewer work contacts but marginally more contacts in non-essential social settings. Approximately 15-20% pregnant and 5% of non-pregnant individuals reported to be in isolation and quarantine for large parts of the study period. COVID-19 vaccine coverage was higher in pregnant women than in non-pregnant women between January and April 2021. Since May 2021, vaccination in non-pregnant women began to increase and surpassed that in pregnant women.

INTERPRETATION

Limited social contact to avoid pathogen exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic has been a challenge to many, especially women going through pregnancy. More recognition of maternal social support desire is needed in the ongoing pandemic. As COVID-19 vaccination continues to remain an important pillar of outbreak response, strategies to promote correct information can provide reassurance and facilitate informed pregnancy vaccine decisions in this vulnerable group.

Determinants for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the general population: a systematic review of reviews

Aim

Although multiple COVID-19 vaccines are approved for global use, vaccine hesitancy poses a substantial risk for global health. Therefore, the aim of this umbrella review is to identify those factors that influence COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in the general population. This is necessary to improve the effectiveness of future vaccination programmes.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Epistemonikos, and PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) were searched on December 21, 2021. This review included reviews which investigated factors of intention, willingness, or hesitancy with regard to the COVID-19 vaccination in adult populations, with no restrictions on setting. Content-based structure was used to synthesise the extracted data. The findings were presented based on the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) Working Group Model for vaccine hesitancy.

Results

A total of 3,392 studies were identified, of which 31 met the inclusion criteria. The most frequently documented factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy included contextual factors, such as sex, age, and social inequalities; individual and group factors, such as trust in the healthcare system, public health authorities, and governments, and history of vaccination; vaccine-specific factors, such as concern for vaccine safety, perceived vaccine barriers, perceived effectiveness of vaccines, and concern about the rapid development of the vaccine; and disease-specific factors, such as fear of being infected with COVID-19, perceived severity of COVID-19, and knowledge of COVID-19.

Conclusion

There are multiple factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Our findings lay the foundation to further understand COVID-19 vaccination uptake and provide possible targets for intervention programmes. However, there are gaps in research concerning certain populations, including vaccination in people with mental disorders.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-022-01753-9.

Is it safe and effective to administer COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women performing an updated meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central, and SCOPUS from inception to March 2022. Outcomes of interest were incidence of adverse maternal, fetal and neonatal consequences pertaining to safety of the vaccines. Secondarily, we analyzed the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalization for COVID-19, and admission to the I.C.U. for COVID-19 assessing effectiveness of vaccines. Results were pooled using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Ten observational studies (n=326,499) analyzing pregnant women were included. Our results suggest that COVID-19 vaccination prevents infection (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.67; P = <0.00001) and related hospitalizations (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.82; P = 0.006) effectively. It was also observed that vaccination does not change adverse outcomes in pregnancy, namely preeclampsia or eclampsia, stroke (four weeks of delivery), meconium-stained amniotic fluid, spontaneous vaginal delivery, operative vaginal delivery, cesarean delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and blood transfusions. Furthermore, the vaccine was observed to be protective against neonatal COVID-19 I.C.U. admissions (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.81, 0.90; P = <0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Our pooled analysis suggests that the COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women prevents infection effectively and has no adverse outcomes. Future large-scale trials in a randomized fashion are needed to confirm our results.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Uptake during Pregnancy in Regione Lombardia, Italy: A Population-Based Study of 122,942 Pregnant Women

Italy has been one of the hardest hit countries in the European Union since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, and Regione Lombardia (RL) has reported the largest number of cases in the country. This population-based retrospective study analyzed RL records of 122,942 pregnant women to describe SARS-CoV-2 vaccination uptake in the pregnant population, to compare pregnant women vaccine uptake vs. women of childbearing age and to evaluate the impact of vaccination status in pregnant women on admissions to intensive care units during 2021. Vaccination uptake according to citizenship and educational level and the comparison between pregnant and non-pregnant women was performed by Z test. A logistic regression was performed to compare age groups. Out of 122,942 pregnant women, 79.9% were vaccinated at the end of 2021. The vaccine uptake rate was significantly lower in pregnant versus non-pregnant women but increased after the issuing of official recommendations. Vaccine administration was significantly higher among pregnant women with Italian citizenship and with a high level of education in all trimesters. In conclusion, the role of official recommendations with explicit communication about the importance and safety of vaccination in pregnancy is critical to obtain trust and acceptance among pregnant women.

A qualitative study of pregnant women's opinions on COVID-19 vaccines in Turkey

Objectives

to examine pregnant Turkish women's opinions on COVID-19 vaccines.

Design

a qualitative approach was used to gather data through semi-structured interviews.

Participants and setting

16 women about to receive a vaccine during their pregnancy and who did or did not experience vaccine hesitancy participated.

Analysis

qualitative content analysis.

Findings

three main themes emerged regarding the pregnant women's opinions on COVID-19 vaccines: fear, security/insecurity and social support.

Key conclusions and implications for practice

pregnant women mostly recalled their babies and fears about COVID-19 vaccines. Although the fear of vaccines created vaccine hesitancy during pregnancy, the fear of contracting COVID-19 led to a positive attitude to the vaccines. It is critical to provide pregnant women with information about COVID-19 and vaccines for the disease in order to enhance vaccination rates among pregnant women.

Maternal COVID-19 Disease and COVID-19 Immunization

Aim This study aimed to evaluate the immune response and vertical transmission of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) antibodies in vaccinated, expectant mothers infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to study the sequelae. Study design This was a retrospective study of pregnant women conducted at Bahrain Defense Force Hospital from March 2021 to September 2021. The study population was divided into two groups: group 1 was vaccinated with Sinopharm or Pfizer/BioNTech during pregnancy and never infected with COVID-19. Group 2 was unvaccinated and had been infected with COVID-19. Immune responses such as anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) and anti-spike (anti-S) from paired samples of maternal and umbilical cord blood were measured with Elecsys immunoassay (Roche Holding AG: Basel, Switzerland) at the time of delivery. Obstetric complications such as preterm labor, preeclampsia, and stillbirth were assessed. Analysis was performed using SPSS version 26.0 (IBM Corp: Armonk, NY) and Minitab version 18 (Minitab, LLC: State College, PA). A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results The study included 90 vaccinated and 90 COVID-19-recovered pregnant women. Matched samples were available for 80 vaccinated and 74 COVID-19-recovered women. Group 1 had significantly higher levels of anti-S for both the mother and the cord blood and a significantly higher transfer ratio of anti-S. Group 2 had higher levels of anti-N. In group 1, the paired sample titer of anti-S had a weak negative correlation with maternal age whereas, in group 2, the mother's anti-N had a weak positive correlation with age. Antibodies of COVID-19-recovered mothers and cord blood had a moderate negative correlation with gestational age, except for the mother's anti-N. In group 1, the transfer ratio of anti-N and anti-S had a statistically significant association with gestational age. Preterm delivery had a high prevalence of anti-transfer ratios of <1, and delivery at >37 weeks had a high prevalence of ≥1. In group 2, 90% of preterm deliveries had transfer ratios of anti-S <1. The latency period of the COVID-19 group had a statistically significant association with the antibody transfer ratio. An interval of less than 100 days had a high prevalence in the ratio of <1. An interval of more than 100 days had a high prevalence in the ratio of ≥1. There was no significant latency period in group 1. Group 1 had a 75% prevalence of an anti-S transfer ratio ≥1 with a birth weight of >3500 g; group 2 had no significance in birth weight. We did not find significance in the sequelae of morbidities in either group. Conclusion The production of the antibody N in the COVID-19-infected and antibody S in the vaccinated pregnant women as well as the vertical transmission of antibodies was efficacious. Significant variation was found regarding maternal age in both groups. The transfer ratio of the antibodies in the vaccinated and COVID-19-recovered women was significantly higher in terms of babies of the vaccinated and the infected population. The transfer ratios were distinct according to the latency period and birth weight of the infants.

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in pregnant and breastfeeding women and strategies to increase vaccination compliance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant and breastfeeding women are at an increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19. Despite this, low vaccination coverages are reported in this population sub-group.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose of this study is to estimate the proportion of pregnant and breastfeeding women expressing hesitation to the COVID-19 vaccine worldwide. Forty-six studies were included in the meta-analysis and systematic review, selected from scientific articles available in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases between January 1, 2020 and February 6, 2022. The vaccine hesitation rate among pregnant and breastfeeding women was 48.4% (95%CI= 43.4-53.4%). In a sub analysis by study period, it was 40.0% (95%CI=31.6-46.6%) considering surveys administered in 2020, 58.0% (95%CI=48.9-66.9%) considering surveys administered in the first semester of 2021, and 38.1% (95%CI=25.9-51.2%) considering surveys administered in the second semester of 2021. The main reasons for vaccine hesitation were lack of information about vaccination, opinion that the vaccine is unsafe, and fear of adverse events.

EXPERT OPINION

Available evidence in the literature has shown that fighting vaccine resistance is harsh and too slow as a process, considering the rapidity and unpredictability of a pandemic. Health education should be provided in order to improve the willingness of the community, especially for those with lower levels of education.

Cross-Sectional Survey of High-Risk Pregnant Women's Opinions on COVID-19 Vaccination

Background:

Pregnant women are at increased risk of severe disease with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite strong recommendations from American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine for vaccination, COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy persists. With this study, we aim to evaluate opinions about the COVID-19 vaccine in a cohort of high-risk pregnant patients.

Materials and Methods:

Institutional review board approval was obtained. Patients attending a regional Maternal–Fetal Medicine clinic in central New York were surveyed about the COVID-19 vaccine using a standardized questionnaire. Demographic, obstetrical, and medical information was abstracted using medical records. The vaccinated and unvaccinated groups were evaluated using chi-square tests and a Bayesian model.

Results:

Among the 157 participants, 38.2% are vaccinated. There were no significant differences in race/ethnicity, living situation, marital status, employment status, insurance type, pregravid body mass index, history of recreational drug use, number of living children, or gestational age at the time of survey. Patients with less formal education are less likely to be vaccinated. There was no difference between influenza and tetanus diphtheria pertussis vaccination rates with COVID-19 vaccination rates. Unvaccinated patients cite lack of data in pregnancy (66%) as their primary concern. Most patients prefer to learn about vaccines via conversation with their doctor (46.7% for vaccinated and 59.8% for unvaccinated).

Conclusions:

The vaccination rate is low in our population. A provider-initiated conversation about COVID-19 vaccination included with routine prenatal care could increase the vaccination rate.

The role of psychological self-care on worry of vaccination against COVID-19 in Iranian pregnant women: A cross-sectional study

Background and Aims

Although previous studies have reported some psychological factors to prevent the worry of vaccination against COVID-19 in pregnant women, the role of psychological self-care is unclear. The present study aimed to investigate the role of psychological self-care in pregnant women on the depressive symptoms, psychological distress, and worry of vaccination against COVID-19.

Methods

The present cross-sectional study was conducted during the peak of the Delta variant of COVID-19 in Babol city (North, Iran) from August to November 2021. Two hundred pregnant women referring to three prenatal clinics completed five questionnaires including; demographic characteristics, Edinburgh postnatal depression scale, psychological self-care, brief symptom inventory 18, corona disease anxiety scale, and acceptance of vaccination-3 inventory.

Results

Pregnant women were in relatively good condition based on psychological self-care but were not significantly associated with demographic characteristics, such as age, gestational age, educational background, pregnancy, and risk of parity. It was psychological self-care of pregnant women which negatively predicted the depressive symptoms (β = -0.311, p < 0.001), anxiety symptoms (β = -0.269, p < 0.001), psychological distress (β = -0.269, p < 0.001), and worry of vaccination against COVID-19 (β = -0.214, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Women's psychological self-care plays a protective role against the depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, psychological distress, and worry of vaccination against COVID-19 during pregnancy. Clinicians need to pay more attention to the role of psychological self-care as an important factor in preventing the symptoms of anxiety and depression during regular pregnancy visits.

A comparison of COVID-19 vaccination status among pregnant Israeli Jewish and Arab women and psychological distress among the Arab women

The public debate surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine is especially intense regarding pregnant women, who are concerned with its effects on themselves and their fetus, and a vulnerable at-risk population for psychological distress. We aimed at describing differences in vaccination status between pregnant Jewish and Arab women and understanding factors contributing to psychological distress among Arab women. Pregnant women (n = 860) aged 19-46 completed self-report questionnaires during the national vaccination program (March-April 2021). The questionnaires related to background, COVID-19-related vaccination status and intentions in this regard, COVID-19-related anxiety, and the Mental Health Inventory-Short Form. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t- and chi-square tests, Pearson correlations, and a hierarchical regression. Considerably fewer Jewish women had been infected and more were vaccinated than Arab women. Poorer health, lower economic status, being a mother, not being vaccinated, higher anxiety over economic damage, a family member being infected, delivery, and raising the baby contributed to higher distress. Findings offer novel insights for nurses in their efforts to encourage vaccination, highlighting the need to understand women's concerns during the vulnerable period of pregnancy.