Vaccine acceptance: the UK perspective

A scoping review of the reasons for and approaches to non-uptake of pertussis and influenza vaccinations in pregnant women in the United Kingdom and Ireland

BACKGROUND

Pertussis and influenza cause significant morbidity and mortality in pregnancy and the neonatal period. Maternal vaccination in pregnancy would reduce harm, but low vaccine uptake is a concern. This scoping review aimed to understand the reasons for, and approaches, to non-uptake of pertussis and influenza vaccinations in pregnant women in the UK and Ireland.

METHODS

The inclusion criteria of this scoping review consist of pregnant women who avail of pertussis and influenza vaccines in the UK and Ireland. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL databases were searched in June 2021 and updated in October 2022. Searches were limited to English language reports published after 2011. We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance on scoping reviews. Data were extracted and charted.

RESULTS

Five themes emerged from the literature. Acceptability, as well as organisational and awareness issues, were overarching themes regarding reasons for and approaches to non-uptake of the vaccines respectively. Other themes included healthcare professional factors, information interpretation and pregnancy-related factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Women need clear, comprehensible information, ideally provided by their healthcare professionals, in a way that is meaningful and addresses their circumstances and risk perceptions. This research will serve as a base for future work that aims behaviour science interventions at the wider pregnant population as well as the target groups that have been identified in this review.

Pregnant women's attitudes and behaviours towards antenatal vaccination against Influenza and COVID-19 in the Liverpool City Region, United Kingdom: Cross-sectional survey

Objectives

Influenza poses a serious health risk to pregnant women and their babies. Despite this risk, influenza vaccine uptake in pregnant women in the UK is less than 50%. Little is known about how COVID-19 affects pregnant women, but its management may affect attitudes and behaviours towards vaccination in pregnancy. The study objectives were to establish attitudes and knowledge of pregnant women towards influenza disease and influenza vaccination and to compare these to attitudes and knowledge about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination.

Design

A cross-sectional survey was conducted using an online questionnaire distributed through local advertisement and social media outlets. Information was sought on attitudes and knowledge of influenza and COVID-19 and their respective vaccines.

Participants and setting

Pregnant women residing in Liverpool City Region, UK.

Results

Of the 237 respondents, 73.8% reported receiving an influenza vaccine. Over half (56.5%) perceived themselves to be at risk from influenza, 70.5% believed that if they got influenza, their baby would get ill, and 64.6% believed getting influenza could hurt their baby, 60.3% believed that the influenza vaccine would prevent their baby from getting ill, and 70.8% believed it would protect their baby. Only 32.9% of respondents stated they would receive the COVID-19 vaccine if it were available to them. However, 80.2% stated they would receive a COVID-19 vaccine if they were not pregnant. Most of the women stated that they would accept a vaccine if recommended to them by healthcare professionals.

Conclusions

Acceptance of the influenza and COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy seems to be more related to the safety of the baby rather than the mother. Women perceived their child to be more at risk than themselves. Information about influenza and COVID-19 vaccine safety as well as healthcare provider recommendations play an important role in vaccine uptake in pregnant women.

Predictors and impact of trust on vaccine decisions in parents of 2-year-old children in Canada: findings from the 2017 Childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey (cNICS)

Trust is known to be an important factor in vaccine decisions for parents of young children, but there has been a lack of Canadian data measuring the determinants and impact of trust. Using data from the 2017 Canadian Childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey (cNICS), this study analyzed the relationships between sources that parents trust for vaccine information and demographics, parental knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs (KAB) and vaccine decisions (refusal, delay or reluctance) in parents of 2-year-old children who had accepted at least one vaccine for their child (n = 6125). The findings show that 83% of parents trust doctors for vaccine information; 70-80% trust pharmacists, PMH, nurses and HC/PHAC; 34% trust family and 23% trust friends and CAM HCPs. However, parents found to have poor or moderate KAB were less likely to trust doctors, nurses, pharmacists, PMH and HC/PHAC. Parents were also less likely to trust the PMH or HC/PHAC if they had high school education or less or trade/college education, or were widowed, separated, or divorced. Parents who had never been reluctant to vaccinate their 2-year-old child were over 2 times more likely to trust doctors, nurses, pharmacists, PMH and HC/PHAC while parents who trusted family and friends were less likely to delay or refuse vaccines. There was also significant regional variation within Canada, with parents from Quebec most likely to trust doctors, nurses, pharmacists, friends, PMH and HC/PHAC. Parents from the Territories were less likely to trust doctors, nurses and pharmacists, but more likely to trust family. Parents were less likely to trust doctors if they were from the Prairies, and pharmacists if they were from BC, and parents from the Prairies and BC were less likely to trust HC/PHAC. Parents from Ontario were less likely to trust family or friends, but more likely to trust the PMH. Tailored vaccine campaigns are needed to account for educational, marital, and regional differences across Canada to improve vaccine uptake.

Rotavirus vaccination impact, Ireland, implications for vaccine confidence and screening

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus vaccine efficacy is well established. However, it is important to consistently demonstrate the positive impact of vaccination programmes in order to optimize uptake rates and combat vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

Routine data were used to examine rotavirus vaccine effectiveness in Ireland, including changes in age-specific crude incidence rates (CIRs), hospitalizations and hospital length of stay. National intussusception incidence was interrogated. Vaccination status of vaccine-eligible cases of rotavirus infection was determined.

RESULTS

Nationally, a reduction in the CIR of rotavirus infection of 77.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 57.8-88.5%, P<0.001] was observed post-inclusion of the rotavirus vaccine in the primary immunization schedule. A decrease in hospitalizations of 85.5% (95% CI 79.3-90.2%, P<0.001), 86.5% (95% CI 82.9-89.4%, P<0.001) and 78.5% (95% CI 74.7-81.9%, P<0.001) was observed in children aged <1, <2 and <5 years, respectively. Most hospitalizations occurred in infants too young to have been vaccinated. There was no significant difference in median length of stay for children hospitalized with rotavirus infection. Decreased CIRs and hospitalization rates in unvaccinated children aged between 2 and 5 years suggest community immunity. Vaccine non-protection was 0.13%. No increase in the national CIR of intussusception was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Inclusion of the rotavirus vaccine in the Irish primary immunization schedule has resulted in a significant reduction in the burden of rotavirus infection. However, vaccine hesitancy remains a concern. With new vaccination programmes, risk of vaccine harms should be considered and mitigated in order to protect individuals and the integrity of the programme.

Global Measles Epidemic Risk: Current Perspectives on the Growing Need for Implementing Digital Communication Strategies

A safe vaccine against measles has been available and globally recommended since 1974. The World Health Organization established measles elimination as a goal for 2020 but, unfortunately, this objective has not been achieved yet and outbreaks still occur. Herd immunity, ie, a population immunity higher than 95%, is required to stop the measles virus transmission. Communication plays a crucial role in immunization strategy to obtain high coverage levels, as it helps to fight barriers against vaccination. Delay and refusal of measles vaccination have become widespread due to misinformation, fake news and barriers to effective communication. This phenomenon has been defined as “vaccine hesitancy” and is considered as one of the top ten risks for global health. The alleged association between measles vaccination and autism has caused a sharp decline in vaccination rates. In this current situation, mass communication integrated into public health policies is fundamental to sway people’s positive attitudes toward vaccination. Digital communication strategies based on social media and other internet platforms may represent useful tools to promote immunization and discourage skepticism and complement information provided by health-care professionals who have been considered as the most credible source on risk/benefits on vaccines for families. Digital communication strategies that may help supporting the measles elimination strategy include monitoring information needs online, integrating digital communication into immunization programs, involving a multidisciplinary group in communication, developing content that balances facts with positive messaging, using multiple communication channels. Further research activities should be promoted in the field of effective communication for immunization.

The MMR Vaccine and Autism

Autism is a developmental disability that can cause significant social, communication, and behavioral challenges. A report published in 1998, but subsequently retracted by the journal, suggested that measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine causes autism. However, autism is a neurodevelopmental condition that has a strong genetic component with genesis before one year of age, when MMR vaccine is typically administered. Several epidemiologic studies have not found an association between MMR vaccination and autism, including a study that found that MMR vaccine was not associated with an increased risk of autism even among high-risk children whose older siblings had autism. Despite strong evidence of its safety, some parents are still hesitant to accept MMR vaccination of their children. Decreasing acceptance of MMR vaccination has led to outbreaks or resurgence of measles. Health-care providers have a vital role in maintaining confidence in vaccination and preventing suffering, disability, and death from measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases.

Relationship Between Media Coverage and Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) Vaccination Uptake in Denmark: Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Understanding the influence of media coverage upon vaccination activity is valuable when designing outreach campaigns to increase vaccination uptake.

OBJECTIVE

To study the relationship between media coverage and vaccination activity of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine in Denmark.

METHODS

We retrieved data on media coverage (1622 articles), vaccination activity (2 million individual registrations), and incidence of measles for the period 1997-2014. All 1622 news media articles were annotated as being provaccination, antivaccination, or neutral. Seasonal and serial dependencies were removed from the data, after which cross-correlations were analyzed to determine the relationship between the different signals.

RESULTS

Most (65%) of the anti-vaccination media coverage was observed in the period 1997-2004, immediately before and following the 1998 publication of the falsely claimed link between autism and the MMR vaccine. There was a statistically significant positive correlation between the first MMR vaccine (targeting children aged 15 months) and provaccination media coverage (r=.49, P=.004) in the period 1998-2004. In this period the first MMR vaccine and neutral media coverage also correlated (r=.45, P=.003). However, looking at the whole period, 1997-2014, we found no significant correlations between vaccination activity and media coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the falsely claimed link between autism and the MMR vaccine, provaccination and neutral media coverage correlated with vaccination activity. This correlation was only observed during a period of controversy which indicates that the population is more susceptible to media influence when presented with diverging opinions. Additionally, our findings suggest that the influence of media is stronger on parents when they are deciding on the first vaccine of their children, than on the subsequent vaccine because correlations were only found for the first MMR vaccine.

A comprehensive analysis of Italian web pages mentioning squalene-based influenza vaccine adjuvants reveals a high prevalence of misinformation

Squalene-based adjuvants have been included in influenza vaccines since 1997. Despite several advantages of adjuvanted seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines, laypeople's perception of such formulations may be hesitant or even negative under certain circumstances. Moreover, in Italian, the term “squalene” has the same root as such common words as “shark” (squalo), “squalid” and “squalidness” that tend to have negative connotations. This study aimed to quantitatively and qualitatively analyze a representative sample of Italian web pages mentioning squalene-based adjuvants used in influenza vaccines. Every effort was made to limit the subjectivity of judgments. Eighty-four unique web pages were assessed. A high prevalence (47.6%) of pages with negative or ambiguous attitudes toward squalene-based adjuvants was established. Compared with web pages reporting balanced information on squalene-based adjuvants, those categorized as negative/ambiguous had significantly lower odds of belonging to a professional institution [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.12, p = .004], and significantly higher odds of containing pictures (aOR = 1.91, p = .034) and being more readable (aOR = 1.34, p = .006). Some differences in wording between positive/neutral and negative/ambiguous web pages were also observed. The most common scientifically unsound claims concerned safety issues and, in particular, claims linking squalene-based adjuvants to the Gulf War Syndrome and autoimmune disorders. Italian users searching the web for information on vaccine adjuvants have a high likelihood of finding unbalanced and misleading material. Information provided by institutional websites should be not only evidence-based but also carefully targeted towards laypeople. Conversely, authors writing for non-institutional websites should avoid sensationalism and provide their readers with more balanced information.