Implications from COVID-19 for future pandemic global health governance.

BACKGROUND: Limitations of current global health governance revealed during the COVID-19 pandemic can inform the ongoing deliberations of an international treaty on pandemics. OBJECTIVES: To report on WHO definitions for governance and the enforcement of treaties in the context of a proposed international treaty on pandemics. SOURCES: This narrative review was based on keyword searches related to public health, global health governance, and enforcement in PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar. Snowballing for additional articles followed the keyword search review. CONTENT: WHO lacks a consistent definition of global health governance. Moreover, in its current state, the proposed international treaty on pandemics lacks articulated compliance, accountability, or enforcement mechanisms. Findings reveal that humanitarian treaties often fail to achieve their aims absent clear enforcement mechanisms. The proposed international treaty on public health is garnering a range of perspectives. Decision-makers should evaluate whether a globally aligned definition of global health governance is needed. Decision-makers should also consider whether the proposed international treaty on pandemics should be opposed if it lacks sufficiently clear compliance, accountability, and enforcement mechanisms. IMPLICATIONS: To our knowledge, this narrative review is believed to be the first of its kind to search scientific-oriented databases regarding governance and international pandemic treaties. The review includes several findings that advance the literature. These findings, in turn, reveal two key implications for decision-makers. First, whether an aligned definition for governance addressing compliance, accountability, and enforcement mechanisms is needed. Second, whether a draft treaty lacking enforcement mechanisms should be approved.

A survey of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance across 23 countries in 2022.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continued to mutate and spread in 2022 despite the introduction of safe, effective vaccines and medications. Vaccine hesitancy remains substantial, fueled in part by misinformation. Our third study of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among 23,000 respondents in 23 countries (Brazil, Canada, China, Ecuador, France, Germany, Ghana, India, Italy, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Poland, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States), surveyed from 29 June to 10 July 2022, found willingness to accept vaccination at 79.1%, up 5.2% from June 2021. Hesitancy increased in eight countries, however, ranging from 1.0% (United Kingdom) to 21.1% (South Africa). Almost one in eight (12.1%) vaccinated respondents are hesitant about booster doses. Overall support for vaccinating children under 18 years of age increased slightly but declined among parents who were personally hesitant. Almost two in five (38.6%) respondents reported paying less attention to new COVID-19 information than previously, and support for vaccination mandates decreased. Almost a quarter (24%) of those who became ill reported taking medications to combat COVID-19 symptoms. Vaccination remains a cornerstone of the COVID-19 pandemic response, but broad public support remains elusive. These data can be used by health system decisionmakers, practitioners, advocates and researchers to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy more effectively.

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic^1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches¹, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach² that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities³ in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

A cross sectional study to examine factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, hesitancy and refusal in urban and rural settings in Tamil Nadu, India.

The second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic left the Indian healthcare system overwhelmed. The severity of a third wave will depend on the success of the vaccination drive; however, even with a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine, hesitancy can be an obstacle to achieving high levels of coverage. Our study aims to estimate the population's acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine in an Indian district. A pilot community-based cross-sectional study was conducted from March-May 2021. The data was collected from eight primary health centres in Tamil Nadu. The eligible study participants were interviewed using a self-constructed questionnaire. A total of 3,130 individuals responded to the survey. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to assess the factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and refusal. Results of our study showed that 46% percent (n = 1432) of the respondents would accept the COVID-19 vaccine if available. Acceptance for the COVID-19 vaccine was higher among males (54%), individuals aged 18-24years (62%), those with higher education (77%), having the higher income (73%), and employed (51%). Individuals with no education (OR: 2.799, 95% CI = 1.103-7.108), and low income (OR: OR: 10.299, 95% CI: 4.879-21.741), were significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy (p < 0.05). Living in urban residence (OR: 0.699, 95% CI = 0.55-0.888) and age between 18 to 25 years (OR: 0.549, 95% CI = 0.309-0.977) were protective factor of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. While individuals in the age group 25-54years (OR = 1.601, 95%CI = 1.086-2.359), fewer education (OR = 4.8, 95% CI = 2.448-9.412,), low income (OR = 2.628, 95% CI = 1.777-3.887) and unemployment (OR = 1.351, 95% CI = 1.06-1.722) had high odds of refusing the COVID-19 vaccine. Concerns and suspicions about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine (63%) was the major reasons causing hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine The public health authorities and government need to design, develop and implement targeted interventions to enhance awareness about COVID-19 vaccines, and barriers and enablers to vaccine acceptance among individuals across diverse settings. Emphasis on involving local and religious leaders, ASHA workers, community healthcare workers, Anganwadi workers, and auxiliary nurse midwives can help to overcome context-specific barriers in areas of low COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, especially in rural settings.

Revisiting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy around the world using data from 23 countries in 2021.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact daily life, including health system operations, despite the availability of vaccines that are effective in greatly reducing the risks of death and severe disease. Misperceptions of COVID-19 vaccine safety, efficacy, risks, and mistrust in institutions responsible for vaccination campaigns have been reported as factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy. This study investigated COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy globally in June 2021. Nationally representative samples of 1,000 individuals from 23 countries were surveyed. Data were analyzed descriptively, and weighted multivariable logistic regressions were used to explore associations with vaccine hesitancy. Here, we show that more than three-fourths (75.2%) of the 23,000 respondents report vaccine acceptance, up from 71.5% one year earlier. Across all countries, vaccine hesitancy is associated with a lack of trust in COVID-19 vaccine safety and science, and skepticism about its efficacy. Vaccine hesitant respondents are also highly resistant to required proof of vaccination; 31.7%, 20%, 15%, and 14.8% approve requiring it for access to international travel, indoor activities, employment, and public schools, respectively. For ongoing COVID-19 vaccination campaigns to succeed in improving coverage going forward, substantial challenges remain to be overcome. These include increasing vaccination among those reporting lower vaccine confidence in addition to expanding vaccine access in low- and middle-income countries.

Acceptability of COVID-19 vaccine mandates among New York City parents, November 2021.

School-based vaccine mandates improve vaccination coverage in children. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of parents in New York City (NYC) in November 2021 to measure acceptability of COVID-19 vaccine mandates for students, and for teachers and school staff. Random address-based sampling was used to recruit parents of children 5-11 years of age. Among 2,506 parents surveyed, 44.3% supported school-based vaccine mandates for students and 69.1% supported mandates for teachers and school staff. Asian parents, male parents, those with higher income, college education, those voting for the 2021 Democratic mayoral candidate and parents from Manhattan were most likely to support vaccine mandates for students. Among all parents, 25.1% said they would not vaccinate their child if required. Our data show only modest support for school-based COVID-19 vaccine mandates for children despite their importance in improving vaccination coverage.

A call for citizen science in pandemic preparedness and response: beyond data collection.

The COVID-19 pandemic has underlined the need to partner with the community in pandemic preparedness and response in order to enable trust-building among stakeholders, which is key in pandemic management. Citizen science, defined here as a practice of public participation and collaboration in all aspects of scientific research to increase knowledge and build trust with governments and researchers, is a crucial approach to promoting community engagement. By harnessing the potential of digitally enabled citizen science, one could translate data into accessible, comprehensible and actionable outputs at the population level. The application of citizen science in health has grown over the years, but most of these approaches remain at the level of participatory data collection. This narrative review examines citizen science approaches in participatory data generation, modelling and visualisation, and calls for truly participatory and co-creation approaches across all domains of pandemic preparedness and response. Further research is needed to identify approaches that optimally generate short-term and long-term value for communities participating in population health. Feasible, sustainable and contextualised citizen science approaches that meaningfully engage affected communities for the long-term will need to be inclusive of all populations and their cultures, comprehensive of all domains, digitally enabled and viewed as a key component to allow trust-building among the stakeholders. The impact of COVID-19 on people's lives has created an opportune time to advance people's agency in science, particularly in pandemic preparedness and response.

Factors affecting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare providers in 23 countries.

BACKGROUND: Several early COVID-19 studies aimed to assess the potential acceptance of a vaccine among healthcare providers, but relatively few studies of this population have been published since the vaccines became widely available. Vaccine safety, speed of development, and low perceived disease risk were commonly cited as factors for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among this group. PURPOSE AND METHODS: In a secondary analysis based on a cross-sectional, structured survey, the authors aimed to assess the associations between self-reported vaccine hesitancy and a number of sociodemographic and COVID-19 vaccine perception factors using data from 3,295 healthcare providers (physicians, nurses, community health workers, other healthcare providers) in 23 countries. FINDINGS: 494 (15.0%) of the participants reported vaccine hesitancy, of whom 132 (4.0%) would outright refuse to accept a COVID-19 vaccine. Physicians were the least hesitant. Vaccine hesitancy was more likely to occur among those with less than the median income and, to a lesser degree, younger age. Safety and risk concerns and lack of trust that vaccines would be equitably distributed were strongly associated with hesitancy, less so were concerns about the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines. INTERPRETATION: Findings suggest a need to address safety and risk concerns through tailored messaging, training, and/or incentive approaches among healthcare providers, as well as the need for international and national vaccination efforts to ensure equitable distribution.

COVID-19 Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy Among New York City Parents of Children Aged 5-11 Years.

Objectives. To measure vaccine uptake and intentions among New York City (NYC) parents of children aged 5 to 11 years following emergency use authorization. Methods. We conducted a survey of 2506 NYC parents of children aged 5 to 11 years. We used survey weights to generate prevalence estimates of vaccine uptake and intentions. Multivariable Poisson regression models generated adjusted prevalence ratios (APRs) of vaccine hesitancy, defined as parents who reported being not very likely or not at all likely to vaccinate their children, or unsure about whether to do so. Results. Overall, 11.9% of NYC parents reported that their child was vaccinated; 51.0% were very or somewhat likely to vaccinate; 8.0% were not sure; 29.1% were not very likely or not at all likely to vaccinate their child. Among vaccine-hesitant parents, 89.9% reported safety concerns and 77.8% had concerns about effectiveness. In multivariable models, more vaccine hesitancy was expressed by non-Hispanic Black parents than by non-Hispanic White parents (APR = 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.17, 1.72) and by parents who were not themselves vaccinated than by parents who were vaccinated (APR = 1.53; 95% CI = 1.32, 1.77). Conclusions. In a survey conducted after authorization of COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 5 to 11 years, significant hesitancy among parents was observed. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(6):931-936. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306784).

The Vaccine Communication Demands on Community-Based Workforces.

Community-based organizations (CBOs) are experiencing some of the highest demand in years for a wide spectrum of health and social services. Their client-facing employees have taken on a new, challenging role as a sought-after source of COVID-19 vaccine information and guidance. These workforces operating on the frontlines, do their best to meet the increased need for services and information, often without additional resources or training to do so. The most effective immediate response to this challenge is a comprehensive communication support system working in tandem with CBOs. Our three organizations, the New York Vaccine Literacy Campaign at the CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, Hunger Free NYC, and Health Leads, have collaborated in key short-term approaches to meet these needs. We outline these processes and anticipated outcomes and offer lessons learned to advocate for long-term structural changes needed to increase community-level communication support.

Elimination versus mitigation of SARS-CoV-2 in the presence of effective vaccines.

There is increasing evidence that elimination strategies have resulted in better outcomes for public health, the economy, and civil liberties than have mitigation strategies throughout the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. With vaccines that offer high protection against severe forms of COVID-19, and increasing vaccination coverage, policy makers have had to reassess the trade-offs between different options. The desirability and feasibility of eliminating SARS-CoV-2 compared with other strategies should also be re-evaluated from the perspective of different fields, including epidemiology, public health, and economics. To end the pandemic as soon as possible-be it through elimination or reaching an acceptable endemic level-several key topics have emerged centring around coordination, both locally and internationally, and vaccine distribution. Without coordination it is difficult if not impossible to sustain elimination, which is particularly relevant in highly connected regions, such as Europe. Regarding vaccination, concerns remain with respect to equitable distribution, and the risk of the emergence of new variants of concern. Looking forward, it is crucial to overcome the dichotomy between elimination and mitigation, and to jointly define a long-term objective that can accommodate different political and societal realities.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among adults in four major US metropolitan areas and nationwide.

This study assesses attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination and the predictive value of COVID-VAC, a novel scale, among adults in the four largest US metropolitan areas and nationally. A 36-item survey of 6037 Americans was conducted in mid-April 2021. The study reports factors for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among: (1) already vaccinated; (2) unvaccinated but willing to accept a vaccine; and (3) unvaccinated and unwilling to vaccinate. More than 20% were unwilling to vaccinate, expressing concerns about vaccine efficacy and safety and questioning the disease's severity. Poverty, working outside of the home and conservative political views are predictors of unwillingness. Conversely, those who either personally tested positive for COVID-19, or had a family member who did so, were more likely to accept vaccination. Majorities of all respondents supported vaccination mandates for employees and university students. Respondents preferred to receive vaccines in their doctor´s office. Lower income and conservative ideology, but not race, were strongly associated with vaccine unwillingness. The predictive value of COVID-VAC was demonstrated. While vaccination mandates are likely to be accepted, additional effective, targeted interventions to increase vaccine uptake are needed urgently.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance, Intention, and Hesitancy: A Scoping Review.

COVID-19 vaccine is regarded as the most promising means of limiting the spread of or eliminating the pandemic. The success of this strategy will rely on the rate of vaccine acceptance globally. The study aims to examine the factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, intention, and hesitancy. PubMed was searched comprehensively for articles using the keyword "COVID-19 vaccine surveys." Of the 192 records, 22 studies were eligible for the review. Eighty-two percent of these studies were conducted among the general population. Gender, age, education, and occupation were some of the socio-demographic variables associated with vaccine acceptance. Variables such as trust in authorities, risk perception of COVID-19 infection, vaccine efficacy, current or previous influenza vaccination, and vaccine safety affected vaccine acceptance. Globally, in March 2020, the average vaccine acceptance observed was 86% which dropped to 54% in July 2020 which later increased to 72% in September 2020. Globally, the average rate of vaccine hesitancy in April 2020 was 21%, which increased to 36% in July 2020 and later declined to 16% in October 2020. Large variability in vaccine acceptance and high vaccine hesitancy can influence the efforts to eliminate the COVID-19. Addressing the barriers and facilitators of vaccines will be crucial in implementing effective and tailored interventions to attain maximum vaccine coverage.

Hesitant or Not? The Association of Age, Gender, and Education with Potential Acceptance of a COVID-19 Vaccine: A Country-level Analysis.

In December 2020, the first COVID-19 vaccines were approved. Despite more than 85 million reported cases and 1.8 million known deaths, millions worldwide say they may not accept it. This study assesses the associations of age, gender, and level of education with vaccine acceptance, from a random sample of 13,426 participants selected from 19 high-COVID-19 burden countries in June 2020. Based on univariable and multivariable logistic regression, several noteworthy trends emerged: women in France, Germany, Russia, and Sweden were significantly more likely to accept a vaccine than men in these countries. Older (≥50) people in Canada, Poland, France, Germany, Sweden, and the UK were significantly more favorably disposed to vaccination than younger respondents, but the reverse trend held in China. Highly educated individuals in Ecuador, France, Germany, India, and the US reported that they will accept a vaccine, but higher education levels were associated with lower vaccination acceptance in Canada, Spain, and the UK. Heterogeneity by demographic factors in the respondents' willingness to accept a vaccine if recommended by employers were substantial when comparing responses from Brazil, Ecuador, France, India, Italy, Mexico, Poland, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, and the US. This information should help public health authorities target vaccine promotion messages more effectively.

COVID-SCORE Spain: public perceptions of key government COVID-19 control measures.

BACKGROUND: Spain was initially one of the countries most affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In June 2020, the COVID-SCORE-10 study reported that the Spanish public's perception of their government's response to the pandemic was low. This study examines these perceptions in greater detail. METHODS: We employed an ordered logistic regression analysis using COVID-SCORE-10 data to examine the Spanish public's perception of 10 key aspects of their government's COVID-19 control measures. These included support for daily needs, mental and general health services, communication, information and coordination, which were examined by gender, age, education level, having been affected by COVID-19 and trust in government's success in addressing unexpected health threats. RESULTS: 'Trust in the government' showed the greatest odds of positive perception for the 10 measures studied. Odds of positive perception of communication significantly varied by gender, education level and having been affected by COVID-19, whereas for information and coordination of disease control, odds significantly varied by gender and having been affected by COVID-19. Odds of positive perception for access to mental health services significantly varied by gender and education level. Age was not significant. CONCLUSION: Public perception of the government's pandemic response in Spain varied by socio-demographic and individual variables, particularly by reported trust in the government. Fostering public trust during health threats may improve perception of response efforts. Future efforts should tailor interventions that consider gender, education level and whether people have been affected by COVID-19.

A cross-sectional study of the association of age, gender, education and economic status with individual perceptions of governmental response to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the impact of key population variables (age, gender, income and education) on perceptions of governmental effectiveness in communicating about COVID-19, helping meet needs for food and shelter, providing physical and mental healthcare services, and allocating dedicated resources to vulnerable populations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study carried out in June 2020. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: 13 426 individuals from 19 countries. RESULTS: More than 60% of all respondents felt their government had communicated adequately during the pandemic. National variances ranged from 83.4% in China down to 37.2% in Brazil, but overall, males and those with a higher income were more likely to rate government communications highly. Almost half (48.8%) of the respondents felt their government had ensured adequate access to physical health services (ranging from 89.3% for Singapore to 27.2% for Poland), with higher ratings reported by younger and higher-income respondents. Ratings of mental health support were lower overall (32.9%, ranging from 74.8% in China to around 15% in Brazil and Sweden), but highest among younger respondents. Providing support for basic necessities of food and housing was rated highest overall in China (79%) and lowest in Ecuador (14.6%), with higher ratings reported by younger, higher-income and better-educated respondents across all countries. The same three demographic groups tended to rate their country's support to vulnerable groups more highly than other respondents, with national scores ranging from around 75% (Singapore and China) to 19.5% (Sweden). Subgroup findings are mostly independent of intercountry variations with 15% of variation being due to intercountry differences. CONCLUSIONS: The tendency of younger, better-paid and better-educated respondents to rate their country's response to the pandemic more highly, suggests that government responses must be nuanced and pay greater attention to the needs of less-advantaged citizens as they continue to address this pandemic.

A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 48.1% reported that they would accept their employer's recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer's advice to do so.