Vaccine hesitancy in primary care: Building bridges by understanding barriers.

Adult vaccination is an accepted part of health care and diabetes care. In spite of evidence regarding the efficacy and utility of vaccination in preventing disease, we continue to encounter vaccine hesitancy and vaccine skepticism. As physicians, it is our duty to encourage the public to get vaccinated. In this article, we create a simple framework which helps assess the barriers to vaccine acceptance, and create bridges to overcome vaccine hesitancy and skepticism. We use an interesting mnemonic, NARCO, to remind ourselves, and our readers, of the appropriate hierarchy of interviewing related to vaccine acceptance.

Vaccine hesitancy: current and future challenges.

Vaccine hesitancy, defined by the WHO as reluctance or refusal to vaccinate, despite the availability of vaccines, threatens to undermine progress in tackling vaccine-preventable disease. In this Immunology Futures article, I explore my experiences of combating vaccine hesitancy, and how research in this area can help. The graphic was made with assets from Freepik.com.

The Psychometric Properties of Intention to Receive the COVID-19 Vaccine Scale Based on the Health Belief Model.

Acceptance of the SARS-CoV-2) COVID-19( vaccine is a very important factor to keep health workers safe. The study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of intention to receive the COVID-19 vaccine using a health belief model among health workers in Iran The study was a tools design study that was conducted in the period from February to March 2020, Iran Questionnaire items were designed using text review. The sampling method was multi-stage. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis at a 95% confidence level using SPSS software version 16. The designed questionnaire had an appropriate content validity and internal consistency. Also, the exploratory factor analysis showed that a 5-factor structure was extracted and confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the conceptual five-factor structure of the measure had good fit indices. Reliability was evaluated using internal consistency. Cronbach Alpha coefficient was .82 and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was .9. It can be concluded that the instrument designed in the preliminary stage of psychometrics properties had good validity and reliability indicators. Also, the constructs of the health belief model well explain the determinants of the intention to receive the COVID-19 vaccine at the individual level.

Vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries.

Background: Vaccination has a tremendous impact on health at the regional and global levels, however, the tendency for people to hesitate on vaccination has been increasing in the past few decades. Aims: We assessed vaccine hesitancy and its determinants in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Methods: We conducted a literature review to assess peer-reviewed articles published up to March 2021 on vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach. A search was conducted via PubMed and 29 articles were identified. After the removal of duplicates and irrelevant articles, 14 studies remained relevant and were used for the review. Results: Vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries ranged from 11% to 71%. Differences in rates were noted for vaccine type, with COVID-19 vaccine having the highest reported hesitancy (70.6%). The likelihood of accepting vaccination was associated with previous individual acceptance of vaccine, specifically the seasonal influenza vaccine. The most common determinants of vaccine hesitancy were distrust in vaccine safety and concerns about side-effects. Healthcare workers were among the main sources of information and recommendations about vaccination, but 17-68% of them were vaccine-hesitant. The majority of the healthcare workers had never received any training on addressing vaccine hesitancy among patients. Conclusions: Vaccine hesitancy is prevalent among the publics and healthcare workers in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. There is a need to continually monitor perceptions and knowledge about vaccines and vaccination in these countries to better inform interventions to improve vaccine uptake in the sub-region.

When Adolescents Disagree with Their Vaccine-Hesitant Parents about COVID-19 Vaccination.

AbstractAs we journey into the fourth year of the COVID-19 pandemic, a majority of Americans express relief at a "return to normal," experience pandemic fatigue, or embrace the idea of living with COVID-19 in much the same way we live with the seasonal flu. But transition to a new phase of life with SARS-CoV-2 does not diminish the importance of vaccination. The US Centers for Disease Control and the Food and Drug Administration recently recommended another round of booster dose for persons age 5 and up, or an initial series for those not previously vaccinated, with an updated bivalent formula that protects against both the original virus strain and Omicron subvariants that are now the dominant source of infection. By most accounts most of the population has been or will become infected with SARS-CoV-2. Suboptimal uptake of the COVID-19 vaccines among the approximately 25 million adolescents in the United States is a significant obstacle to population coverage, public health, and the health and well-being of adolescents. A major cause of low adolescent uptake is parental vaccine hesitancy. This article discusses parental vaccine hesitancy and argues that permitting independent adolescent consent to COVID-19 vaccination should be an ethical and policy priority as we continue to confront the threat of Omicron and other variants of the coronavirus. We discuss the central role of the pediatric healthcare team in caring for adolescent patients who disagree with their parents about vaccination.

Fake News and vaccine hesitancy in the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. / Fake news e hesitação vacinal no contexto da pandemia da COVID-19 no Brasil.

This paper presents the evolution of fake news disseminated about vaccines and the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its adverse impacts on the current Brazilian health crisis. This quantitative, empirical study is based on the notifications received by the Eu Fiscalizo app, through which the Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp platforms were identified as the principal means for disseminating and sharing rumors and misinformation about COVID-19. We observed large-scale circulation of fake news about vaccines directly related to the Brazilian political polarization, which became prevalent four months after the first COVID-19 case was recorded in the country. We can conclude that this phenomenon was crucial in discouraging the adherence of segments of the Brazilian population to social distancing and vaccination campaigns.

Este artigo apresenta a evolução das notícias falsas disseminadas a respeito das vacinas e do vírus Sars-CoV-2 e os impactos negativos desse fenômeno sobre a crise sanitária que o Brasil atravessa. Trata-se de um estudo empírico quantitativo, realizado a partir das notificações recebidas pelo aplicativo Eu Fiscalizo, por meio do qual foi identificado o predomínio das plataformas Instagram, Facebook, Twitter e WhatsApp como os principais meios de difusão e compartilhamento de boatos e desinformações acerca da COVID-19. Foi observada a circulação em escala de fake news sobre vacinas, diretamente relacionadas à polarização política brasileira, tornando-se prevalente quatro meses depois de ser registrado o primeiro caso de COVID-19 no Brasil. Conclui-se que o fenômeno colaborou para desestimular a adesão de parcelas da população brasileira às campanhas de isolamento social e de vacinação.

Vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries

Background: Vaccination has a tremendous impact on health at the regional and global levels, however, the tendency for people to hesitate on vaccination has been increasing in the past few decades. Aims: We assessed vaccine hesitancy and its determinants in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Methods: We conducted a literature review to assess peer-reviewed articles published up to March 2021 on vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach. A search was conducted via PubMed and 29 articles were identified. After the removal of duplicates and irrelevant articles, 14 studies remained relevant and were used for the review. Results: Vaccine hesitancy in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries ranged from 11% to 71%. Differences in rates were noted for vaccine type, with COVID-19 vaccine having the highest reported hesitancy (70.6%). The likelihood of accepting vaccination was associated with previous individual acceptance of vaccine, specifically the seasonal influenza vaccine. The most common determinants of vaccine hesitancy were distrust in vaccine safety and concerns about side-effects. Healthcare workers were among the main sources of information and recommendations about vaccination, but 17–68% of them were vaccine-hesitant. The majority of the healthcare workers had never received any training on addressing vaccine hesitancy among patients. Conclusions: Vaccine hesitancy is prevalent among the publics and healthcare workers in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. There is a need to continually monitor perceptions and knowledge about vaccines and vaccination in these countries to better inform interventions to improve vaccine uptake in the sub-region.

Trust in science and belief in misinformation mediate the effects of political orientation on vaccine hesitancy and intention to be vaccinated.

In previous studies, anti-vaccination attitudes have been attributed either to far-right voters or to both far-left and far-right voters. The present study investigated the associations of political orientation with vaccine hesitancy and intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and the potential mediating roles of trust in science and belief in misinformation. A total of 750 Italian respondents completed an online questionnaire in the period between the second and the third wave of COVID-19 (from 9th March to 9th May 2021). The results showed that political orientation had both direct and indirect associations with vaccine hesitancy and vaccine intention, mediated by trust in science and belief in misinformation. Specifically, right-wing adherents were less trustful of scientists and believed in COVID-19-related misinformation more than left-wing adherents, and these two factors accounted for their higher vaccine hesitancy and reduced willingness to receive an anti-COVID-19 vaccination. Our findings are in line with the predictions of the mindsponge theory and suggest that communicative campaigns aimed at improving the rates of vaccine acceptance in right-wing adherents should be specifically focused on enhancing trust in science and reducing belief in misinformation.

COVID-19 vaccination challenges: from fake news to vaccine hesitancy. / Desafios da imunização contra COVID-19 na saúde pública: das fake news à hesitação vacinal.

This article aims to synthesize articles addressing fake news and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the context of public health. We conducted an integrative review of articles published in any language between 2019 and 2022 in journals indexed in the following databases: Latin American and the Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. A critical analysis was performed, guided by the research question and objective of the review. Eleven articles were selected, the overwhelming majority of which were cross-sectional studies. The main factors related to vaccine take-up highlighted by the studies were gender, age, education level, political leanings, religion, trust in health authorities, and perceptions of side-effects and vaccine efficacy. The main obstacles to attaining optimal vaccination coverage were vaccine hesitancy and disinformation. All studies addressed the relationship between low vaccination intention and the use of social media as a source of information about SARS-CoV-2. It is necessary to build public trust in vaccine safety and efficacy. Promoting a better understanding of the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination is essential to combat vaccine hesitancy and improve vaccine take-up.

O objetivo deste artigo é sintetizar artigos que abordam fake news e hesitação vacinal contra a COVID-19 no contexto de saúde pública. Revisão integrativa que incluiu estudos originais indexados nas bases de dados Literatura Latino Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde; Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online; Scopus; Web of Science e Embase, publicados em qualquer idioma, entre 2019 e 2022. A análise crítica foi realizada na forma descritiva, consoante à pergunta de pesquisa e ao objetivo da revisão. Foram selecionados 11 artigos, com predomínio de estudos transversais. Relacionaram-se ao processo de adesão à vacinação: gênero, idade, estado civil, escolaridade, posicionamento político, religião, confiança em autoridades de saúde, percepção de efeitos colaterais e eficácia das vacinas, entre outros. Hesitação e desinformação são os principais entraves para se alcançar a cobertura vacinal em muitos países. Todos os estudos abordam a relação entre baixa intenção de imunização e uso de mídias sociais como fonte de informação sobre o SARS-CoV-2. É necessário aumentar a confiança na segurança e eficácia das vacinas. A melhor compreensão dos benefícios da vacinação para COVID-19 é imprescindível para combater a hesitação e ampliar a adesão vacinal.

How to reduce vaccination hesitancy? The relevance of evidence and its communicator.

Even though the immediate urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic seems to have passed, many countries did not reach the vaccination rates they initially aimed for. The stagnation in vaccine uptake during the height of the pandemic presented policy makers with a challenge that remains unresolved and is paramount for future pandemics and other crises: How to convince the (often not insubstantial) unvaccinated proportion of the population of the benefits of a vaccination? Designing more successful communication strategies, both in retrospect and looking ahead, requires a differentiated understanding of the concerns of those that remain unvaccinated. Guided by the elaboration likelihood model, this paper has two objectives: First, it explores by means of a latent class analysis how unvaccinated individuals might be characterized by their attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination. Second, we investigate to what extent (i) varying types of evidence (none/anecdotal/statistical) can be employed by (ii) different types of communicators (scientists/politicians) to improve vaccination intentions across these subgroups. To address these questions, we conducted an original online survey experiment among 2145 unvaccinated respondents from Germany where a substantial population share remains unvaccinated. The results suggest three different subgroups, which differ regarding their openness towards a COVID-19 vaccination: Vaccination opponents (N = 1184), sceptics (N = 572) and those in principle receptive (N = 389) to be vaccinated. On average, neither the provision of statistical nor anecdotal evidence increased the persuasiveness of information regarding the efficacy of a COVID-19 vaccine. However, scientists were, on average, more persuasive than politicians (relatively increase vaccination intentions by 0.184 standard deviations). With respect to heterogeneous treatment effects among the three subgroups, vaccination opponents seem largely unreachable, while sceptics value information by scientists, particularly if supported by anecdotal evidence (relatively increases intentions by 0.45 standard deviations). Receptives seem much more responsive to statistical evidence from politicians (relatively increases intentions by 0.38 standard deviations).

Vaccine hesitancy and the willingness to recommend the COVID-19 vaccine to children in a rural country on the United States-Mexico border.

Introduction: As of October 26, 2022, only 9% of children in the United States aged 6 months to 4 years have received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine despite FDA approval since June 17, 2022. Rates are better yet still low for children aged 5 to 11 years as nearly 30% were fully vaccinated as of August 23, 2022. Vaccine hesitancy among adults is one of the major factors affecting low vaccine uptake rates in children against COVID-19, yet most studies examining vaccine hesitancy have targeted school-age and adolescent children. Methods: With the aim of assessing the willingness to recommend the COVID-19 vaccination to children under 5 years compared to children 5 to 12 years of age, a county-wide survey was conducted between January 11 and March 7, 2022, among adults on the United States-Mexico border. Results: Among the 765 responses, 72.5% were female and 42.3% were Latinx. The most significant factor associated with likelihood to recommend the COVID-19 vaccine to children less than 5 years and 5-12 years of age was adult vaccination status. Ordinal logistic regression also indicated that ethnicity, primary language, being a parent, previous COVID-19 infection, and concern about getting COVID-19 in the future were significantly associated with likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine recommendation to children < 5 years and 5-12 years old. Discussion: This study found high consistency among respondents in their willingness to vaccinate children aged < 5 years compared with children aged 5-12 years. Our findings support public health strategies that target adult vaccinations as an avenue to improve childhood vaccinations for young children.

Vaccine hesitancy promotes emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants.

The successive emergence of SARS-CoV-2 mutations has led to an unprecedented increase in COVID-19 incidence worldwide. Currently, vaccination is considered to be the best available solution to control the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. However, public opposition to vaccination persists in many countries, which can lead to increased COVID-19 caseloads and hence greater opportunities for vaccine-evasive mutant strains to arise. To determine the extent that public opinion regarding vaccination can induce or hamper the emergence of new variants, we develop a model that couples a compartmental disease transmission framework featuring two strains of SARS-CoV-2 with game theoretical dynamics on whether or not to vaccinate. We combine semi-stochastic and deterministic simulations to explore the effect of mutation probability, perceived cost of receiving vaccines, and perceived risks of infection on the emergence and spread of mutant SARS-CoV-2 strains. We find that decreasing the perceived costs of being vaccinated and increasing the perceived risks of infection (that is, decreasing vaccine hesitation) will decrease the possibility of vaccine-resistant mutant strains becoming established by about fourfold for intermediate mutation rates. Conversely, we find increasing vaccine hesitation to cause both higher probability of mutant strains emerging and more wild-type cases after the mutant strain has appeared. We also find that once a new variant has emerged, perceived risk of being infected by the original variant plays a much larger role than perceptions of the new variant in determining future outbreak characteristics. Furthermore, we find that rapid vaccination under non-pharmaceutical interventions is a highly effective strategy for preventing new variant emergence, due to interaction effects between non-pharmaceutical interventions and public support for vaccination. Our findings indicate that policies that combine combating vaccine-related misinformation with non-pharmaceutical interventions (such as reducing social contact) will be the most effective for avoiding the establishment of harmful new variants.

Imprecision in adverse event reports following immunization against HPV in Japan and COVID-19 in the USA, UK, and Japan-and the effects of vaccine hesitancy and government policy.

INTRODUCTION: Erroneous reports of adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) likely exacerbated the 2013 collapse of Japan's HPV immunization program. A similar phenomenon characterized the first months of COVID-19 immunization programs in the USA, UK, and Japan with high rates of reported anaphylaxis. These reports illustrate the susceptibility of supposedly objective medical judgments to public anxiety. PURPOSE AND METHODS: This study documents inaccuracies in reported AEFIs using three quantitative methods. RESULTS: One of these quantitative methods revealed that false-positive rates for anaphylaxis reports following HPV and later COVID-19 vaccination ranged from 74 to 91 percent. However, unlike HPV vaccinations in Japan, anaphylaxis reports following COVID-19 vaccines fell in Japan, the USA and the UK in the latter months of 2021. Nevertheless, false-positive rates for anaphylaxis reports remained high, suggesting a high degree of imprecision in serious AEFI reports from many countries for many vaccines. Japan's HPV immunization program indicates that media reports, patient hesitancy, healthcare providers' perspectives on vaccine safety, and consistency of government messaging, all influence report number and accuracy. A parallel publication analyzes in depth how such factors affect AEFI reports. CONCLUSION: Confidence in the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines may have been bolstered trough rapid monitoring of AEFI reports and communication of these findings. This may partly explain the different trajectories of serious AEFI following HPV immunizations in Japan and COVID-19 immunizations in the USA, UK, and Japan.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients with primary immunodeficiencies: an international survey on patient vaccine hesitancy and self-reported adverse events.

Introduction: The Sars-CoV-2 pandemic caused great concern for this novel virus among patients with primary immunodeficiency (PID) or inborn errors of immunity (IEI) and their families. When COVID-19 vaccination program started, no data existed on adverse events (AEs) in this particular patient population, nor if patients felt hesitancy being vaccinated. Objectives: To explore i) reasons for COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy, ii) the number and symptoms of AEs and their severity, durability and management. Method: The organisations International Patient Organisation for Primary Immunodeficiencies (IPOPI), European Society for Immunodeficiencies (ESID) and International Nursing Group for Immunodeficiencies (INGID) distributed a global self-administered online survey. Results: The survey was completed by 1317 patients (mean 47, range 12-100, years) from 40 countries. 41.7% of the patients denoted some hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccination, mainly having doubts about postvaccination protection related to their underlying PID and concerns about negative long-term effects. More women (22.6%) reported "very" or "pretty much" hesitancy compared to men (16.4%) (P<0.05). The most common systemic AEs were fatigue, muscle/body pain and headache, usually the same day or the day after the vaccination and lasting for 1-2 days. 27.8% of the respondents reported severe systemic AEs after any dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Only a minority (7.8%) of these patients visited a health-care professional and 20 patients (1.5%) were hospitalized or seen at emergency room without specifying subsequent admission at the hospital. Significantly more local and systemic AEs were reported after the second dose. No differences regarding AEs were observed across different PID subgroups or vaccine types. Conclusion: At the time of the survey, almost half of the patients reported having felt hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccination highlighting the importance and need of developing joint international guidelines and education programs about COVID-19 vaccination. The types of AEs were comparable to healthy controls, but more frequent AEs were reported. Clinical studies and prospective, detailed registration of AEs related to COVID-19 vaccines in this patient population is of great importance. It is crucial to elucidate whether there is a coincidental or causal association between COVID-19 vaccine and some severe systemic AEs. Our data do not contradict that patients with PID can be advised to be vaccinated against COVID-19, in accordance with applicable national guidelines.

Patterns of HPV vaccine hesitancy among catch-up generations in Japan: A descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a preventable disease caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). The HPV vaccine uptake in Japan has been slow since the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare suspended the recommendation for proactive HPV vaccination in 2013. In April 2022, Japan initiated catch-up vaccinations for women who missed the opportunity to receive the HPV vaccine. However, as of September 2022, very few women had received catch-up vaccination, raising concerns about vaccine hesitancy in the target population. It is necessary to understand the thinking and motivation of the target population to develop effective strategies to improve vaccination rates. Therefore, using cluster analysis, this study aimed to clarify the pattern of HPV vaccine hesitancy among the catch-up generations in Japan. METHODS: This descriptive study was based on an Internet survey completed by 3,790 women in Japan aged over 18 years who were eligible for catch-up vaccination and had not yet received an HPV vaccine. Participants were asked about their intention and thinking about the HPV vaccine and descriptive norms on vaccination intention. Cluster analysis using k-means clustering was performed to clarify these patterns. RESULTS: Cluster analysis revealed three hesitancy patterns: acceptance, neutral and refusal. The acceptance group, with high intention, comprised 28.2% of the participants, and students and a high-income level mainly dominated this group. The refusal group, with negative thinking and low intention, accounted for 20.1% and was more prevalent among workers and the unemployed. The neutral group, with neutral thinking and intention, accounted for 51.6%. The perceived effect of descriptive norms on vaccination intention was large in the acceptance group but small in the refusal group. CONCLUSION: HPV vaccine awareness promotion strategies must be based on the characteristics of each group and the different distributions of sociodemographic factors.

Evaluating COVID-19 vaccination intentions and vaccine hesitancy among parents of children with autism spectrum disorder.

As the global vaccination mass campaign against COVID-19 extended to children aged 5 to 11 years, some parents remained hesitant about their children being administered the vaccine despite data supporting its safety. Parent vaccine hesitancy (PVH) may have predisposed certain groups of children, particularly those with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), to COVID-19 when other neurotypical children would have been vaccinated. We investigated the current PVH in 243 parents of children with ASD and 245 controls using the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) scale. The study was conducted in Qatar from May to October 2022. Overall, 15.0% [95% CI 11.7%; 18.3%] of parents were vaccine-hesitant, with no difference (p = 0.054) between groups (ASD children [18.2%] vs. controls [11.7%]). The only sociodemographic factor associated with higher vaccine hesitancy was being a mother (as compared to being a father). The COVID-19 vaccine receipt rate at the time of the study did not differ between ASD (24.3%) and non-ASD groups (27.8%). Around two-thirds of parents of children with ASD refused or were unsure about vaccinating their children against COVID-19. We found that the intent to vaccinate against COVID-19 was higher in parents who were married and in those with a lower PACV total score. Continued public health efforts are needed to address vaccine hesitancy among parents.

What contributes to COVID-19 online disinformation among Black Canadians: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Black Canadians are disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the literature suggests that online disinformation and misinformation contribute to higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccine hesitancy in Black communities in Canada. Through stakeholder interviews, we sought to describe the nature of COVID-19 online disinformation among Black Canadians and identify the factors contributing to this phenomenon. METHODS: We conducted purposive sampling followed by snowball sampling and completed in-depth qualitative interviews with Black stakeholders with insights into the nature and impact of COVID-19 online disinformation and misinformation in Black communities. We analyzed data using content analysis, drawing on analytical resources from intersectionality theory. RESULTS: The stakeholders (n = 30, 20 purposively sampled and 10 recruited by way of snowball sampling) reported sharing of COVID-19 online disinformation and misinformation in Black Canadian communities, involving social media interaction among family, friends and community members and information shared by prominent Black figures on social media platforms such as WhatsApp and Facebook. Our data analysis shows that poor communication, cultural and religious factors, distrust of health care systems and distrust of governments contributed to COVID-19 disinformation and misinformation in Black communities. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest racism and underlying systemic discrimination against Black Canadians immensely catalyzed the spread of disinformation and misinformation in Black communities across Canada, which exacerbated the health inequities Black people experienced. As such, using collaborative interventions to understand challenges within the community to relay information about COVID-19 and vaccines could address vaccine hesitancy.