How Vaccine Ambivalence Can Lead People Who Inject Drugs to Decline COVID-19 Vaccination and Ways This Can Be Addressed: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

People who inject drugs are disproportionately impacted by SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, yet they do not frequently accept vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 when offered.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore why people who inject drugs decline free vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and how barriers to vaccination can potentially be addressed.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with 17 unvaccinated adult persons who inject drugs during August and September 2021 at a New York City syringe service program, where approximately three-fourth of participants identified as Latino (55%) or African American (22%). Interviews lasted roughly 20 minutes. The interview guide examined reasons for declining vaccination, participants' understanding of COVID-19 risks, and how messages could be developed to encourage vaccine uptake among people who inject drugs.

RESULTS

Participants acknowledged that they faced increased risk from SARS-CoV-2 owing to their injection drug use but feared that long-term substance use may have weakened their health, making them especially vulnerable to side effects. Fears of possible side effects, compounded by widespread medical mistrust and questions about the overall value of vaccination contributed to marked ambivalence among our sample. The desire to protect children and older family members emerged as key potential facilitators of vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Community-developed messages are needed in outreach efforts to explain the importance of vaccination, including the far greater dangers of COVID-19 compared to possible unintended side effects. Messages that emphasize vaccines' ability to prevent inadvertently infecting loved ones, may help increase uptake. Community-focused messaging strategies, such as those used to increase HIV and hepatitis C virus testing and overdose prevention among people who inject drugs, may prove similarly effective.

Using the participatory education and research into lived experience (PEARLE) methodology to localize content and target specific populations

Technology-based behavioral health interventions offer potentially limitless opportunities to localize content and target specific populations. However, this ability to customize requires developers to make a wide range of decisions not only about who should appear on screen, but how each message should be refined to most effectively reach a particular group of intervention recipients. These issues become especially salient as interventions are scaled for delivery to multiple populations in different geographical locations or settings (e.g., a hospital emergency department versus the drop-in center of a community-based clinic), and in more than one language. To facilitate evidence-based development of customized, targeted intervention content, our team created a multi-step methodology over a series of NIH-funded research projects. The resulting Participatory Education and Research into Lived Experience (PEARLE) Methodology entails formative qualitative interviews to examine why members of a given population do not enact a specific health behavior such as HIV/HCV testing or vaccinating against COVID-19 (this step includes identifying potential gaps in related health literacy), followed by iterative evaluations of draft content designed to address these barriers, and extensive discussions with a Community Advisory Board. The final step is a clinical trial. PEARLE is designed to be highly flexible, adaptable to a variety of behavioral outcomes in clinical and community settings, and to create content in more than one language depending on the needs or preferences of a population. The current paper discusses how our team employed PEARLE to develop content in English and Spanish for our latest project, which is intended to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake among people who inject drugs.