Covid-19 vaccine roll-out in England: A qualitative evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The UK was the first country to launch a national pandemic COVID-19 vaccination programme, which was implemented swiftly despite significant vaccine supply constraints. The delivery strategy used a combination of mass vaccination sites operated by NHS secondary care providers and local sites led by Primary Care Networks, and local pharmacies. Despite nation-wide rollout, persistent gaps in coverage continued to affect particular populations, including ethnic minority and marginalised social groups. AIM: The study examined sub-national immunisation commissioners and providers' perspectives on how the COVID-19 vaccine programme was operationalised, and how delivery strategies impacted inequalities in access to vaccination services and uptake. The study aimed to inform national programme implementation, sustainability and future pandemic preparedness. METHODS: Qualitative research was conducted in eight local NHS areas in 4 regions of England. Semi-structured interviews were performed with 82 sub-national NHS and public health vaccine providers and commissioners. RESULTS: England's COVID-19 vaccination programme was described as top down, centralised and highly political. The programme gradually morphed from a predominantly mass vaccination strategy into more locally driven and tailored approaches able to respond more effectively to inequalities in uptake. Over time more flexibility was introduced, as providers adapted services by "working around" the national systems for vaccine supply and appointment booking. The constant change faced by providers and commissioners was mitigated by high staff motivation and resilience, local collaboration and pragmatism. Opportunities for efficient implementation were missed because priority was given to achieving national performance targets at the expense of a more flexible sub-national tailored delivery. CONCLUSION: Pandemic vaccination delivery models need to be adapted for underserved and hesitant groups, working in collaboration with local actors. Learnings from the initial COVID-19 vaccine roll-out in England and elsewhere is important to inform future pandemic responses, in tailoring strategies to local communities, and improve large-scale vaccination programmes.

Adapting SARS-CoV-2 vaccination delivery in England to population needs: a thematic analysis of providers and commissioner's perceptions.

BACKGROUND: A national SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programme was implemented in England from 8th December 2020, adopting a series of local level service delivery models to maximise rollout. The evidence base informing service design programme at inception was limited. We examined the real-world implementation of the programme through an assessment of sub-national providers' and commissioners' perspectives on the service delivery models used, to strengthen evidence on the acceptability, effectiveness and efficiency of the service delivery approaches used for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in England or elsewhere. METHODS: Qualitative, cross-sectional analysis based on semi-structured interviews conducted with 87 stakeholders working in SARS-CoV-2 vaccination delivery across four regions in England. Localities were selected according to geography and population socio-economic status. Participants were purposively sampled from health service providers, commissioners and other relevant bodies. Interviews were conducted between February and October 2021, and transcripts were thematically analysed using inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: Various service delivery models were implemented over the course of the programme, beginning with hospital hubs and mass vaccination sites, before expanding to incorporate primary care-led services, mobile and other outreach services. Each had advantages and drawbacks but primary care-led models, and to some extent pharmacies, were perceived to offer a better combination of efficiency and community reach for equitable delivery. Common factors for success included availability of a motivated workforce, predictability in vaccine supply chains and strong community engagement. However, interviewees noted a lack of coordination between service providers in the vaccination programme, linked to differing financial incentives and fragmentated information systems, among other factors. CONCLUSION: A range of delivery models are needed to enable vaccine rollout at pace and scale, and to mitigate effects on routine care provision. However, primary care-led services offer a tried-and-trusted framework for vaccine delivery at scale and pace and should be central to planning for future pandemic responses. Mass vaccination sites can offer delivery at scale but may exacerbate inequalities in vaccination coverage and are unlikely to offer value for money. Policymakers in England should prioritise measures to improve collaboration between service providers, including better alignment of IT systems.

COVID-19 vaccination beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours among health and social care workers in the UK: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The UK began delivering its COVID-19 vaccination programme on 8 December 2020, with health and social care workers (H&SCWs) given high priority for vaccination. Despite well-documented occupational exposure risks, however, there is evidence of lower uptake among some H&SCW groups. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods approach-involving an online cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews-to gain insight into COVID-19 vaccination beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours amongst H&SCWs in the UK by socio-demographic and employment variables. 1917 people were surveyed- 1656 healthcare workers (HCWs) and 261 social care workers (SCWs). Twenty participants were interviewed. FINDINGS: Workplace factors contributed to vaccination access and uptake. SCWs were more likely to not be offered COVID-19 vaccination than HCWs (OR:1.453, 95%CI: 1.244-1.696). SCWs specifically reported uncertainties around how to access COVID-19 vaccination. Participants who indicated stronger agreement with the statement 'I would recommend my organisation as a place to work' were more likely to have been offered COVID-19 vaccination (OR:1.285, 95%CI: 1.056-1.563). Those who agreed more strongly with the statement 'I feel/felt under pressure from my employer to get a COVID-19 vaccine' were more likely to have declined vaccination (OR:1.751, 95%CI: 1.271-2.413). Interviewees that experienced employer pressure to get vaccinated felt this exacerbated their vaccine concerns and increased distrust. In comparison to White British and White Irish participants, Black African and Mixed Black African participants were more likely to not be offered (OR:2.011, 95%CI: 1.026-3.943) and more likely to have declined COVID-19 vaccination (OR:5.550, 95%CI: 2.294-13.428). Reasons for declining vaccination among Black African participants included distrust in COVID-19 vaccination, healthcare providers, and policymakers. CONCLUSION: H&SCW employers are in a pivotal position to facilitate COVID-19 vaccination access, by ensuring staff are aware of how to get vaccinated and promoting a workplace environment in which vaccination decisions are informed and voluntary.

Parents' and guardians' views and experiences of accessing routine childhood vaccinations during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic: A mixed methods study in England.

OBJECTIVE: To explore parents' and guardians' views and experiences of accessing National Health Service (NHS) general practices for routine childhood vaccinations during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in England. DESIGN: Mixed methods approach involving an online cross-sectional survey (conducted between 19th April and 11th May 2020) and semi-structured telephone interviews (conducted between 27th April and 27th May 2020). PARTICIPANTS: 1252 parents and guardians (aged 16+ years) who reported living in England with a child aged 18 months or under completed the survey. Nineteen survey respondents took part in follow-up interviews. RESULTS: The majority of survey respondents (85.7%) considered it important for their children to receive routine vaccinations on schedule during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, several barriers to vaccination were identified. These included a lack of clarity around whether vaccination services were operating as usual, particularly amongst respondents from lower income households and those self-reporting as Black, Asian, Chinese, Mixed or Other ethnicity; difficulties in organising vaccination appointments; and fears around contracting COVID-19 while attending general practice. Concerns about catching COVID-19 while accessing general practice were weighed against concerns about children acquiring a vaccine-preventable disease if they did not receive scheduled routine childhood vaccinations. Many parents and guardians felt their child's risk of acquiring a vaccine-preventable disease was low as the implementation of stringent physical distancing measures (from March 23rd 2020) meant they were not mixing with others. CONCLUSION: To promote routine childhood vaccination uptake during the current COVID-19 outbreak, further waves of COVID-19 infection, and future pandemics, prompt and sustained national and general practice level communication is needed to raise awareness of vaccination service continuation and the importance of timely vaccination, and invitation-reminder systems for vaccination need to be maintained. To allay concerns about the safety of accessing general practice, practices should communicate the measures being implemented to prevent COVID-19 transmission.

Parents' and guardians' views on the acceptability of a future COVID-19 vaccine: A multi-methods study in England.

BACKGROUND: The availability of a COVID-19 vaccine has been heralded as key to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 vaccination programme success will rely on public willingness to be vaccinated. METHODS: We used a multi-methods approach - involving an online cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews - to investigate parents' and guardians' views on the acceptability of a future COVID-19 vaccine. 1252 parents and guardians (aged 16 + years) who reported living in England with a child aged 18 months or under completed the survey. Nineteen survey participants were interviewed. FINDINGS: Most survey participants reported they would likely accept a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves (Definitely 55.8%; Unsure but leaning towards yes 34.3%) and their child/children (Definitely 48.2%; Unsure but leaning towards yes 40.9%). Less than 4% of survey participants reported that they would definitely not accept a COVID-19 vaccine. Survey participants were more likely to accept a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves than their child/children. Participants that self-reported as Black, Asian, Chinese, Mixed or Other ethnicity were almost 3 times more likely to reject a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves and their children than White British, White Irish and White Other participants. Survey participants from lower-income households were also more likely to reject a COVID-19 vaccine. In open-text survey responses and interviews, self-protection from COVID-19 was reported as the main reason for vaccine acceptance. Common concerns identified in open-text responses and interviews were around COVID-19 vaccine safety and effectiveness, mostly prompted by the newness and rapid development of the vaccine. CONCLUSION: Information on how COVID-19 vaccines are developed and tested, including their safety and efficacy, must be communicated clearly to the public. To prevent inequalities in uptake, it is crucial to understand and address factors that may affect COVID-19 vaccine acceptability in ethnic minority and lower-income groups who are disproportionately affected by COVID-19.

Factors that influence vaccination decision-making among pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The most important factor influencing maternal vaccination uptake is healthcare professional (HCP) recommendation. However, where data are available, one-third of pregnant women remain unvaccinated despite receiving a recommendation. Therefore, it is essential to understand the significance of other factors and distinguish between vaccines administered routinely and during outbreaks. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD 42019118299) to examine the strength of the relationships between identified factors and maternal vaccination uptake. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase Classic & Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, IBSS, LILACS, AfricaWideInfo, IMEMR, and Global Health databases for studies reporting factors that influence maternal vaccination. We used random-effects models to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) of being vaccinated by vaccine type. FINDINGS: We screened 17,236 articles and identified 120 studies from 30 countries for inclusion. Of these, 49 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. The odds of receiving a pertussis or influenza vaccination were ten to twelve-times higher among pregnant women who received a recommendation from HCPs. During the 2009 influenza pandemic an HCP recommendation increased the odds of antenatal H1N1 vaccine uptake six times (OR 6.76, 95% CI 3.12-14.64, I2 = 92.00%). Believing there was potential for vaccine-induced harm had a negative influence on seasonal (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11-0.44 I2 = 84.00%) and pandemic influenza vaccine uptake (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09-0.29, I2 = 89.48%), reducing the odds of being vaccinated five-fold. Combined with our qualitative analysis the relationship between the belief in substantial disease risk and maternal seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccination uptake was limited. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of an HCP recommendation during an outbreak, whilst still powerful, may be muted by other factors. This requires further research, particularly when vaccines are novel. Public health campaigns which centre on the protectiveness and safety of a maternal vaccine rather than disease threat alone may prove beneficial.