ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected people with intellectual disabilities worldwide. The objective of this study was to identify global rates of COVID-19 vaccination and reasons not to vaccinate among adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) associated with country economic income levels. The Special Olympics COVID-19 online survey was administered in January-February 2022 to adults with ID from 138 countries. Descriptive analyses of survey responses include 95% margins of error. Logistic regression and Pearson Chi-squared tests were calculated to assess associations with predictive variables for vaccination using R 4.1.2 software. Participants (n = 3560) represented 18 low (n = 410), 35 lower-middle (n = 1182), 41 upper-middle (n = 837), and 44 high (n = 1131) income countries. Globally, 76% (74.8-77.6%) received a COVID-19 vaccination while 49.5% (47.9-51.2%) received a COVID-19 booster. Upper-middle (93% (91.2-94.7%)) and high-income country (94% (92.1-95.0%)) participants had the highest rates of vaccination while low-income countries had the lowest rates (38% (33.3-42.7%)). In multivariate regression models, country economic income level (OR = 3.12, 95% CI [2.81, 3.48]), age (OR = 1.04, 95% CI [1.03, 1.05]), and living with family (OR = 0.70, 95% CI [0.53, 0.92]) were associated with vaccination. Among LLMICs, the major reason for not vaccinating was lack of access (41.2% (29.5-52.9%)). Globally, concerns about side effects (42%, (36.5-48.1%)) and parent/guardian not wanting the adult with ID to vaccinate (32% (26.1-37.0%)) were the most common reasons for not vaccinating. Adults with ID from low and low-middle income countries reported fewer COVID-19 vaccinations, suggesting reduced access and availability of resources in these countries. Globally, COVID-19 vaccination levels among adults with ID were higher than the general population. Interventions should address the increased risk of infection for those in congregate living situations and family caregiver apprehension to vaccinate this high-risk population.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Mathematical modeling studies have suggested that pre-emptive school closures alone have little overall impact on SARS-CoV-2 transmission, but reopening schools in the background of community contact reduction presents a unique scenario that has not been fully assessed. METHODS: We adapted a previously published model using contact information from Shanghai to model school reopening under various conditions. We investigated different strategies by combining the contact patterns observed between different age groups during both baseline and "lockdown" periods. We also tested the robustness of our strategy to the assumption of lower susceptibility to infection in children under age 15 years. RESULTS: We find that reopening schools for all children would maintain a post-intervention R0 < 1 up to a baseline R0 of approximately 3.3 provided that daily contacts among children 10-19 years are reduced to 33% of baseline. This finding was robust to various estimates of susceptibility to infection in children relative to adults (up to 50%) and to estimates of various levels of concomitant reopening in the rest of the community (up to 40%). However, full school reopening without any degree of contact reduction in the school setting returned R0 virtually back to baseline, highlighting the importance of mitigation measures. CONCLUSIONS: These results, based on contact structure data from Shanghai, suggest that schools can reopen with proper precautions during conditions of extreme contact reduction and during conditions of reasonable levels of reopening in the rest of the community.