ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate vaccination coverage and delay in vaccine dose administration in infants in six municipalities in the Southern region of Brazil. Methodology National Vaccination Coverage Survey 2020, with infants born alive in 2017 and 2018, carried out from September 2020 to March 2022. Coverage of doses administered, doses administered on time and delay in dose administration were evaluated. Results For 4681 infants analyzed, coverage for vaccines recommended up to 24 months was 68.0% (95%CI 63.9;71.8%) for doses administered and 3.9% (95%CI 2.7%;5.7%) for doses administered on time. Delay time for the majority of late vaccinations was ≤ 3 months. For some boosters, 25% of vaccine administration was delayed by ≥ 6 months. Conclusion In addition to tracking vaccine defaulters, strategies are needed to encourage compliance with the vaccination schedule at the recommended ages.
resumen está disponible en el texto completo
RESUMO Objetivo Avaliar as coberturas vacinais e o atraso nas doses de vacinas em lactentes em seis municípios da região Sul do Brasil. Metodologia Inquérito Nacional de Cobertura Vacinal 2020, com lactentes nascidos vivos em 2017 e 2018, realizado entre setembro de 2020 e março de 2022. Foram avaliadas as coberturas de doses aplicadas, doses em dia e o tempo de atraso da aplicação. Resultados Para 4.681 lactentes analisados, as coberturas para vacinas indicadas até os 24 meses foram de 68,0% (IC95% 63,9;71,8) para doses aplicadas e 3,9% (IC95% 2,7;5,7) para doses em dia. A maioria das aplicações em atraso foi ≤ 3 meses. Para alguns reforços, 25% das aplicações atrasaram ≥ 6 meses. Conclusão Além da busca de faltosos às vacinas, são necessárias estratégias para estímulo ao cumprimento do esquema de vacinação nas idades preconizadas.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Vaccine hesitancy has been implicated in the low-vaccination coverage in several countries. Knowledge about vaccine hesitancy predictors in health workers is essential because they play a central role in communication about the importance and safety of vaccines. This study aimed to assess beliefs and sociodemographic and occupational factors associated with vaccine hesitancy in health workers. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study among 453 health workers in primary and medium complexity services in a municipality in the state of Bahia, Brazil. The variable vaccine hesitancy was operationalized based on the answers related to incomplete vaccination against hepatitis B, measles, mumps and rubella, and diphtheria and tetanus. Associations between variables were expressed as prevalence ratios (PR) and their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Endemic disease combat agents, administrative service workers, and support staff had the highest levels of vaccine hesitancy. Among the analyzed variables, the following were associated with vaccine hesitancy: working in secondary health care services (PR: 1.21; CI: 1.07-1.36), working as an endemic disease combat agent (PR = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.165-1.75), not sharing information about vaccines on social media (PR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.05-1.28), distrusting information about vaccinations (PR: 0.86; CI: 0.75-0.99), and not feeling safe receiving new vaccines (PR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.06-1.28). Conclusions: Strategies to enhance confidence in vaccination among health workers should consider differences in occupations and their working settings. Improving vaccination-related content in training and continuing education activities and facilitating access to onsite vaccinations at the workplace are crucial elements to reduce vaccine hesitancy among health workers.