Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 46
Filter
4.
Lancet Glob Health ; 10(2): e186-e194, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1721219

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has revealed the vulnerability of immunisation systems worldwide, although the scale of these disruptions has not been described at a global level. This study aims to assess the impact of COVID-19 on routine immunisation using triangulated data from global, country-based, and individual-reported sources obtained during the pandemic period. METHODS: This report synthesised data from 170 countries and territories. Data sources included administered vaccine-dose data from January to December, 2019, and January to December, 2020, WHO regional office reports, and a WHO-led pulse survey administered in April, 2020, and June, 2020. Results were expressed as frequencies and proportions of respondents or reporting countries. Data on vaccine doses administered were weighted by the population of surviving infants per country. FINDINGS: A decline in the number of administered doses of diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus-containing vaccine (DTP3) and first dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) in the first half of 2020 was noted. The lowest number of vaccine doses administered was observed in April, 2020, when 33% fewer DTP3 doses were administered globally, ranging from 9% in the WHO African region to 57% in the South-East Asia region. Recovery of vaccinations began by June, 2020, and continued into late 2020. WHO regional offices reported substantial disruption to routine vaccination sessions in April, 2020, related to interrupted vaccination demand and supply, including reduced availability of the health workforce. Pulse survey analysis revealed that 45 (69%) of 65 countries showed disruption in outreach services compared with 27 (44%) of 62 countries with disrupted fixed-post immunisation services. INTERPRETATION: The marked magnitude and global scale of immunisation disruption evokes the dangers of vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks in the future. Trends indicating partial resumption of services highlight the urgent need for ongoing assessment of recovery, catch-up vaccination strategy implementation for vulnerable populations, and ensuring vaccine coverage equity and health system resilience. FUNDING: US Agency for International Development.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Global Health , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccine-Preventable Diseases/prevention & control , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , World Health Organization
6.
PLoS Med ; 19(2): e1003916, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1703635

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic and lockdown control measures threatened to disrupt routine childhood immunisation programmes with early reports suggesting uptake would fall. In response, public health bodies in Scotland and England collected national data for childhood immunisations on a weekly or monthly basis to allow for rapid analysis of trends. The aim of this study was to use these data to assess the impact of different phases of the pandemic on infant and preschool immunisation uptake rates. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted an observational study using routinely collected data for the year prior to the pandemic (2019) and immediately before (22 January to March 2020), during (23 March to 26 July), and after (27 July to 4 October) the first UK "lockdown". Data were obtained for Scotland from the Public Health Scotland "COVID19 wider impacts on the health care system" dashboard and for England from ImmForm. Five vaccinations delivered at different ages were evaluated; 3 doses of "6-in-1" diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b, and hepatitis B vaccine (DTaP/IPV/Hib/HepB) and 2 doses of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. This represented 439,754 invitations to be vaccinated in Scotland and 4.1 million for England. Uptake during the 2020 periods was compared to the previous year (2019) using binary logistic regression analysis. For Scotland, uptake within 4 weeks of a child becoming eligible by age was analysed along with geographical region and indices of deprivation. For Scotland and England, we assessed whether immunisations were up-to-date at approximately 6 months (all doses 6-in-1) and 16 to 18 months (first MMR) of age. We found that uptake within 4 weeks of eligibility in Scotland for all the 5 vaccines was higher during lockdown than in 2019. Differences ranged from 1.3% for first dose 6-in-1 vaccine (95.3 versus 94%, odds ratio [OR] compared to 2019 1.28, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] 1.18 to 1.39) to 14.3% for second MMR dose (66.1 versus 51.8%, OR compared to 2019 1.8, 95% CI 1.74 to 1.87). Significant increases in uptake were seen across all deprivation levels. In England, fewer children due to receive their immunisations during the lockdown period were up to date at 6 months (6-in-1) or 18 months (first dose MMR). The fall in percentage uptake ranged from 0.5% for first 6-in-1 (95.8 versus 96.3%, OR compared to 2019 0.89, 95% CI 0.86- to 0.91) to 2.1% for third 6-in-1 (86.6 versus 88.7%, OR compared to 2019 0.82, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.83). The use of routinely collected data used in this study was a limiting factor as detailed information on potential confounding factors were not available and we were unable to eliminate the possibility of seasonal trends in immunisation uptake. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that the national lockdown in Scotland was associated with an increase in timely childhood immunisation uptake; however, in England, uptake fell slightly. Reasons for the improved uptake in Scotland may include active measures taken to promote immunisation at local and national levels during this period and should be explored further. Promoting immunisation uptake and addressing potential vaccine hesitancy is particularly important given the ongoing pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/pharmacology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Routinely Collected Health Data , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Child , Child, Preschool , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Infant , Male , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
7.
Am J Public Health ; 111(11): 2027-2035, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1538295

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on immunization services across the life course. Methods. In this retrospective study, we used Michigan immunization registry data from 2018 through September 2020 to assess the number of vaccine doses administered, number of sites providing immunization services to the Vaccines for Children population, provider location types that administer adult vaccines, and vaccination coverage for children. Results. Of 12 004 384 individual vaccine doses assessed, 48.6%, 15.6%, and 35.8% were administered to children (aged 0-8 years), adolescents (aged 9-18 years), and adults (aged 19‒105 years), respectively. Doses administered overall decreased beginning in February 2020, with peak declines observed in April 2020 (63.3%). Overall decreases in adult doses were observed in all settings except obstetrics and gynecology provider offices and pharmacies. Local health departments reported a 66.4% decrease in doses reported. For children, the total number of sites administering pediatric vaccines decreased while childhood vaccination coverage decreased 4.4% overall and 5.8% in Medicaid-enrolled children. Conclusions. The critical challenge is to return to prepandemic levels of vaccine doses administered as well as to catch up individuals for vaccinations missed. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(11):2027-2035. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306474).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Child , Communicable Diseases/transmission , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Michigan , Middle Aged , Pediatrics , Retrospective Studies , United States , Vaccination Coverage/trends
8.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0260041, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1533420

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, governments have implemented a range of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and pharmaceutical interventions (PIs) to reduce transmission and minimise morbidity and mortality, whilst maintaining social and economic activities. The perceptions of public health workers (PHWs) and healthcare workers (HCWs) are essential to inform future COVID-19 strategies as they are viewed as trusted sources and are at the forefront of COVID-19 response. The objectives of this study were to 1) describe the practicality of implementing NPIs and PIs and 2) identify potential barriers to implementation, as perceived by HCWs and PHWs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of PHWs and HCWs perceptions of the implementation, practicality of, and barriers to implementation of NPIs and PIs using an online survey (28/9/2020-1/11/2020) available in English, French and Portuguese. We used descriptive statistics and thematic analysis to analyse quantitative and qualitative responses. RESULTS: In total, 226 respondents (67 HCWs and 159 PHWs) from 52 countries completed the survey and 222 were included in the final analysis. Participants from low and middle-income countries (LMICs) accounted for 63% of HCWs and 67% of PHWs, with the remaining from high-income (HICs). There was little difference between the perceptions of PHWs and HCWs in HICs and LMICs, with the majority regarding a number of common NPIs as difficult to implement. However, PHWs in HICs perceived restrictions on schools and educational institutions to be more difficult to implement, with a lack of childcare support identified as the main barrier. Additionally, most contact tracing methods were perceived to be more difficult to implement in HICs than LMICs, with a range of barriers reported. A lack of public support was the most commonly reported barrier to NPIs overall across both country income and professional groups. Similarly, public fear of vaccine safety and lack of vaccine supply were the main reported barriers to implementing a COVID-19 vaccine. However, PHWs and HCWs in LMICs perceived a lack of financial support and the vaccine being manufactured in another country as additional barriers. CONCLUSION: This snapshot provides insight into the difficulty of implementing interventions as perceived by PHWs and HCWs. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to implementing interventions, and barriers in different contexts do vary. Barriers to implementing a vaccine programme expressed here by HCWs and PHCWs have subsequently come to the fore internationally.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Contact Tracing/statistics & numerical data , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Health Personnel/psychology , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Developing Countries , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
11.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(10): e2130800, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1490643

ABSTRACT

Importance: Although there are reports of COVID-19 vaccine implementation in real-world populations, these come from high-income countries or from experience with messenger RNA technology vaccines. Data on outcomes of vaccine deployment in low- or middle-income countries are lacking. Objective: To assess whether the pragmatic application of the 3 COVID-19 vaccines available in Argentina, 2 of which have no reports of evaluation in real-world settings to date, were associated with a reduction in morbidity, all-cause mortality, and mortality due to COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used individual and ecological data to explore outcomes following vaccination with rAd26-rAd5, ChAdOx1, and BBIBP-CorV. To correct for differences in exposure times, results are shown using incidence density per 100 000 person-days from the start of the vaccination campaign (December 29, 2020) to the occurrence of an event or the end of follow-up (May 15, 2021). Participants included 663 602 people aged at least 60 years residing in the city of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Statistical analysis was performed from June 1 to June 15, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, death from all causes, and death within 30 days of a diagnosis of COVID-19. Poisson regression models were fitted to estimate associations with all 3 outcomes. Results: Among 663 602 residents of the city of Buenos Aires included in the study, 540 792 (81.4%) were vaccinated with at least 1 dose, with 457 066 receiving 1 dose (mean [SD] age, 74.5 (8.9) years; 61.5% were female [n = 281 284]; 68.0% [n = 310 987] received the rAd26-rAd5 vaccine; 29.5% [n = 135 036] received ChAdOx1; 2.4% [n = 11 043] received BBIBP-CorV) and 83 726 receiving 2 doses (mean [SD] age, 73.4 [6.8] years; 63.5% were female [n = 53 204]). The incidence density of confirmed COVID-19 was 36.25 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 35.80-36.70 cases/100 000 person-days) among those who did not receive a vaccine, 19.13 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 18.63-19.62 cases/100 000 person-days) among those who received 1 dose, and 4.33 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 3.85-4.81 cases/100 000 person-days) among those who received 2 doses. All-cause mortality was 11.74 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 11.51-11.96 cases/100 000 person-days), 4.01 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 3.78-4.24 cases/100 000 person-days) and 0.40 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 0.26-0.55 cases/100 000 person-days). COVID-19-related-death rate was 2.31 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 2.19-2.42 cases/100 000 person-days), 0.59 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 0.50-0.67 cases/100 000 person-days), and 0.04 cases/100 000 person-days (95% CI, 0.0-0.09 cases/100 000 person-days) among the same groups. A 2-dose vaccination schedule was associated with an 88.1% (95% CI, 86.8%-89.2%) reduction in documented infection, 96.6% (95% CI, 95.3%-97.5%) reduction in all-cause death, and 98.3% (95% CI, 95.3%-99.4%) reduction in COVID-19-related death. A single dose was associated with a 47.2% (95% CI, 44.2%-50.1%) reduction in documented infection, 65.8% (95% CI, 61.7%-69.5%) reduction in all-cause death, and 74.5% (95% CI, 66%-80.8%) reduction in COVID-19-related death. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that within the first 5 months after the start of the vaccination campaign, vaccination was associated with a significant reduction in COVID-19 infection as well as a reduction in mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization Programs , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Argentina/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19 Vaccines/classification , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Ecological Parameter Monitoring/methods , Ecological Parameter Monitoring/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Immunization Programs/organization & administration , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccine Potency
13.
JAMA Pediatr ; 176(1): 68-77, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1453520

ABSTRACT

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected routine vaccine delivery in the US and globally. The magnitude of these disruptions and their association with childhood vaccination coverage are unclear. Objectives: To compare trends in pediatric vaccination before and during the pandemic and to evaluate the proportion of children up to date (UTD) with vaccinations by age, race, and ethnicity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This surveillance study used a prepandemic-postpandemic control design with data from 8 health systems in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, and Wisconsin in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Children from age groups younger than 24 months and 4 to 6, 11 to 13, and 16 to 18 years were included if they had at least 1 week of health system enrollment from January 5, 2020, through October 3, 2020, over periods before the US COVID-19 pandemic (January 5, 2020, through March 14, 2020), during age-limited preventive care (March 15, 2020, through May 16, 2020), and during expanded primary care (May 17, 2020, through October 3, 2020). These individuals were compared with those enrolled during analogous weeks in 2019. Exposures: This study evaluated UTD status among children reaching specific ages in February, May, and September 2020, compared with those reaching these ages in 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Weekly vaccination rates for routine age-specific vaccines and the proportion of children UTD for all age-specific recommended vaccines. Results: Of 1 399 708 children in 2019 and 1 402 227 in 2020, 1 371 718 were female (49.0%) and 1 429 979 were male (51.0%); 334 216 Asian individuals (11.9%), 900 226 were Hispanic individuals (32.1%), and 201 619 non-Hispanic Black individuals (7.2%). Compared with the prepandemic period and 2019, the age-limited preventive care period was associated with lower weekly vaccination rates, with ratios of rate ratios of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.80-0.85) among those younger than 24 months, 0.18 (95% CI, 0.16-0.20) among those aged 4 to 6 years, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.14-0.17) among those aged 11 to 13 years, and 0.10 (95% CI, 0.08-0.13) among those aged 16 to 18 years. Vaccination rates during expanded primary care remained lower for most ages (ratios of rate ratios: <24 months, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.93-0.98]; 11-13 years, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.76-0.86]; 16-18 years, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.51-0.63]). In September 2020, 74% (95% CI, 73%-76%) of infants aged 7 months and 57% (95% CI, 56%-58%) of infants aged 18 months were UTD vs 81% (95% CI, 80%-82%) and 61% (95% CI, 60%-62%), respectively, in September 2019. The proportion UTD was lowest in non-Hispanic Black children across most age groups, both during and prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (eg, in May 2019, 70% [95% CI, 64%-75%] of non-Hispanic Black infants aged 7 months were UTD vs 82% [95% CI, 81%-83%] in all infants aged 7 months combined). Conclusions and Relevance: As of September 2020, childhood vaccination rates and the proportion who were UTD remained lower than 2019 levels. Interventions are needed to promote catch-up vaccination, particularly in populations at risk for underimmunization.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccines/administration & dosage , Child , Child Health Services/organization & administration , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Male , Time Factors
14.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(9): e30010, 2021 09 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1417039

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared SARS-CoV-2, causing COVID-19, as a pandemic. The UK mass vaccination program commenced on December 8, 2020, vaccinating groups of the population deemed to be most vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the early vaccine administration coverage and outcome data across an integrated care system in North West London, leveraging a unique population-level care data set. Vaccine effectiveness of a single dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines were compared. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study identified 2,183,939 individuals eligible for COVID-19 vaccination between December 8, 2020, and February 24, 2021, within a primary, secondary, and community care integrated care data set. These data were used to assess vaccination hesitancy across ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic deprivation measures (Pearson product-moment correlations); investigate COVID-19 transmission related to vaccination hubs; and assess the early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination (after a single dose) using time-to-event analyses with multivariable Cox regression analysis to investigate if vaccination independently predicted positive SARS-CoV-2 in those vaccinated compared to those unvaccinated. RESULTS: In this study, 5.88% (24,332/413,919) of individuals declined and did not receive a vaccination. Black or Black British individuals had the highest rate of declining a vaccine at 16.14% (4337/26,870). There was a strong negative association between socioeconomic deprivation and rate of declining vaccination (r=-0.94; P=.002) with 13.5% (1980/14,571) of individuals declining vaccination in the most deprived areas compared to 0.98% (869/9609) in the least. In the first 6 days after vaccination, 344 of 389,587 (0.09%) individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rate increased to 0.13% (525/389,243) between days 7 and 13, before then gradually falling week on week. At 28 days post vaccination, there was a 74% (hazard ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.19-0.35) and 78% (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.18-0.27) reduction in risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 for individuals that received the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines, respectively, when compared with unvaccinated individuals. A very low proportion of hospital admissions were seen in vaccinated individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (288/389,587, 0.07% of all patients vaccinated) providing evidence for vaccination effectiveness after a single dose. CONCLUSIONS: There was no definitive evidence to suggest COVID-19 was transmitted as a result of vaccination hubs during the vaccine administration rollout in North West London, and the risk of contracting COVID-19 or becoming hospitalized after vaccination has been demonstrated to be low in the vaccinated population. This study provides further evidence that a single dose of either the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine or the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is effective at reducing the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 up to 60 days across all age groups, ethnic groups, and risk categories in an urban UK population.


Subject(s)
Anti-Vaccination Movement/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Vaccines/standards , Immunization Programs/standards , Anti-Vaccination Movement/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , London , Retrospective Studies
15.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 18117, 2021 09 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1406408

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 vaccination is being rapidly rolled out in the US and many other countries, and it is crucial to provide fast and accurate assessment of vaccination coverage and vaccination gaps to make strategic adjustments promoting vaccine coverage. We reported the effective use of real-time geospatial analysis to identify barriers and gaps in COVID-19 vaccination in a minority population living in South Texas on the US-Mexico Border, to inform vaccination campaign strategies. We developed 4 rank-based approaches to evaluate the vaccination gap at the census tract level, which considered both population vulnerability and vaccination priority and eligibility. We identified areas with the highest vaccination gaps using different assessment approaches. Real-time geospatial analysis to identify vaccination gaps is critical to rapidly increase vaccination uptake, and to reach herd immunity in the vulnerable and the vaccine hesitant groups. Our results assisted the City of Brownsville Public Health Department in adjusting real-time targeting of vaccination, gathering coverage assessment, and deploying services to areas identified as high vaccination gap. The analyses and responses can be adopted in other locations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Geography , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Mexico/ethnology , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Minority Health/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Socioeconomic Factors , Texas/ethnology , Vaccination/methods , Vaccination Coverage/methods , Vulnerable Populations/ethnology , Vulnerable Populations/statistics & numerical data
17.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 40(3): 100874, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384804

ABSTRACT

We report data regarding three countries with similar healthcare systems which had three different vaccinal strategies between 1st of January and 10th of April 2021: rapid full vaccination (Israel), rapid first-dose vaccination (United Kingdom) and a delayed vaccination strategy (France).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Brazil , COVID-19/virology , France , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Immunization Schedule , Israel , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , South Africa , United Kingdom
18.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256394, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1367706

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 vaccination campaign in the US has been immensely successful in vaccinating those who are receptive, further increases in vaccination rates however will require more innovative approaches to reach those who remain hesitant. Developing vaccination strategies that are modelled on what people want could further increase uptake. METHODS AND FINDINGS: To inform COVID-19 vaccine distribution strategies that are aligned with public preferences we conducted a discrete choice experiment among the US public (N = 2,895) between March 15 to March 22, 2021. We applied sampling weights, evaluated mean preferences using mixed logit models, and identified latent class preference subgroups. On average, the public prioritized ease, preferring single to two dose vaccinations (mean preference: -0.29; 95%CI: -0.37 to -0.20), vaccinating once rather than annually (mean preference: -0.79; 95%CI: -0.89 to -0.70) and reducing waiting times at vaccination sites. Vaccine enforcement reduced overall vaccine acceptance (mean preference -0.20; 95%CI: -0.30 to -0.10), with a trend of increasing resistance to enforcement with increasing vaccine hesitancy. Latent class analysis identified four distinct preference phenotypes: the first prioritized inherent "vaccine features" (46.1%), the second were concerned about vaccine "service delivery" (8.8%), a third group desired "social proof" of vaccine safety and were susceptible to enforcement (13.2%), and the fourth group were "indifferent" to vaccine and service delivery features and resisted enforcement (31.9%). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies several critical insights for the COVID-19 public health response. First, identifying preference segments is essential to ensure that vaccination services meet the needs of diverse population subgroups. Second, making vaccination easy and promoting autonomy by simplifying services and offering the public choices (where feasible) may increase uptake in those who remain deliberative. And, third vaccine mandates have the potential to increase vaccination rates in susceptible groups but may simultaneously promote control aversion and resistance in those who are most hesitant.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Immunization Programs/organization & administration , Adult , African Americans , Consumer Behavior , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Politics , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States , Vaccination Coverage , Vaccination Refusal
20.
Value Health ; 24(11): 1543-1550, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1340748

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Amid a pandemic, vaccines represent a promising solution for mitigating public health and economic crises, and an improved understanding of individuals' vaccination intentions is crucial to design optimal immunization campaigns. This study predicts uptake rates for different COVID-19 vaccine specifications and identifies personal characteristics that moderate an individual's responsiveness to vaccine attributes. METHODS: We developed an online survey with contingent specifications of a COVID-19 vaccine, varying in effectiveness, risks of side effects, duration of immunity, and out-of-pocket cost. Using population-averaged logit models, we estimated vaccine uptake rates that account for uncertainty, heterogeneity across respondents, and interactions between vaccine and personal characteristics. RESULTS: We obtained 3047 completed surveys. The highest uptake rate for an annual vaccine, 62%, is predicted when vaccine effectiveness is 80% to 90%, side effects are minimal, and the vaccine is provided at zero cost, with decreases seen in the uptake rate for less effective vaccines, for example, 50% for 50% to 60% effectiveness. Moreover, we found that Americans' response to vaccine effectiveness depends on their self-reported concern, that is, concerned respondents report a higher willingness to get vaccinated. Our findings also indicate that COVID-19 vaccine uptake rates decrease with vaccine cost and that responsiveness to vaccine cost is moderated by income. CONCLUSIONS: Although providing the COVID-19 vaccine at zero cost will motivate many individuals to get vaccinated, a policy focused exclusively on vaccine cost may not be enough to reach herd immunity thresholds. Although those concerned with COVID-19 will participate, further evidence is needed on how to incentivize participation among the unconcerned (43%) to prevent further pandemic spread.


Subject(s)
Anti-Vaccination Movement/psychology , Immunization Programs/standards , Anti-Vaccination Movement/trends , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Immunization Programs/methods , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Intention , Motivation , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL