ABSTRACT
Implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for both populations and healthcare systems are vast. In addition to morbidity and mortality from COVID-19, the pandemic also disrupted local health systems, including reductions or delays in routine vaccination services and catch-up vaccination campaigns. These disruptions could lead to outbreaks of other infectious diseases that result in an additional burden of disease and strain on the healthcare system. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Zambia's routine childhood immunization program in 2020 using multiple sources of data. We relied on administrative vaccination data and Zambia's 2018 Demographic and Health Survey to project national disruptions to district-specific routine childhood vaccination coverage within the pandemic year 2020. Next, we leveraged a 2016 population-based serological survey to predict age-specific measles seroprevalence and assessed the impact of changes in vaccination coverage on measles outbreak risk in each district. We found minor disruptions to routine administration of measles-rubella and pentavalent vaccines in 2020. This was in part due to Zambia's Child Health Week held in June of 2020 which helped to reach children missed during the first six months of the year. We estimated that the two-month delay in a measles-rubella vaccination campaign, originally planned for September of 2020 but conducted in November of 2020 as a result of the pandemic, had little impact on modeled district-specific measles outbreak risks. This study estimated minimal increases in the number of children missed by vaccination services in Zambia during 2020. However, the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 transmission since our analysis concluded means efforts to maintain routine immunization services and minimize the risk of measles outbreaks will continue to be critical. The methodological framework developed in this analysis relied on routinely collected data to estimate disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic to national routine vaccination program performance and its impact on children missed at the subnational level can be deployed in other countries or for other vaccines.
ABSTRACT
Background: Factors associated with whether individuals choose to participate in serosurveys are not well understood. Understanding perceptions from multiple perspectives, including the perspectives of both data collectors and participants, through a holistic model such as the socio-ecological model contextualizes individual, interpersonal, and structural level influences on survey research participation. We used a multiple methods approach to characterize reasons for serosurvey participation in communities in Southern Province, Zambia where a serosurvey was conducted in 2016. Methods: The first phase conducted focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with 24 data collectors who participated in a measles-rubella serosurvey in 2016. The second phase surveyed 34 caregivers at health facilities to identify barriers and facilitators to serosurvey participation. Emergent themes were then classified into a socio-ecological model using individual, interpersonal, and structural level constructs. Results: Common themes emerged from data collectors as well as caregivers surveyed. At the individual level, providing incentives was a facilitator, and some religious beliefs were described as a barrier to serosurvey participation. At the interpersonal level, family dynamics and community peer influences could help or hinder serosurvey participation. Community health workers were consistently named as facilitators of participation. At the structural level, concerns about specimen collection, who was selected for serosurveys, and not receiving test results arose as potential barriers. The most frequently reported facilitator was provision of information about the purpose of the serosurvey (85% of respondents). The most frequently reported barrier was lack of clarity regarding use of their blood specimen (53% of respondents). For specimen collection type, caregivers consistently preferred finger prick blood collection over both venous blood draw and oral swabs. Conclusion: Serosurvey participation was deemed acceptable to most study participants. The socio-ecological model revealed barriers and facilitators for participation to guide strategies to improve participation which can be applied to ongoing serosurveys for SARS-CoV-2. Serosurveys should continue to develop engagement plans to provide information about blood collection ahead of the serosurvey and communicate the objectives of such studies through trusted sources such as community health workers and traditional leaders.