Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 218
Filter
1.
PLoS Comput Biol ; 20(8): e1012309, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39116038

ABSTRACT

The rapid development of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 altered the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. In most countries, vaccinations were initially targeted at high-risk populations, including older individuals and healthcare workers. Now, despite substantial infection- and vaccine-induced immunity in host populations worldwide, waning immunity and the emergence of novel variants continue to cause significant waves of infection and disease. Policy makers must determine how to deploy booster vaccinations, particularly when constraints in vaccine supply, delivery and cost mean that booster vaccines cannot be administered to everyone. A key question is therefore whether older individuals should again be prioritised for vaccination, or whether alternative strategies (e.g. offering booster vaccines to the individuals who have most contacts with others and therefore drive infection) can instead offer indirect protection to older individuals. Here, we use mathematical modelling to address this question, considering SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a range of countries with different socio-economic backgrounds. We show that the population structures of different countries can have a pronounced effect on the impact of booster vaccination, even when identical booster vaccination targeting strategies are adopted. However, under the assumed transmission model, prioritising older individuals for booster vaccination consistently leads to the most favourable public health outcomes in every setting considered. This remains true for a range of assumptions about booster vaccine supply and timing, and for different assumed policy objectives of booster vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Socioeconomic Factors , Middle Aged , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/prevention & control
2.
Front Public Health ; 12: 1421746, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39206012

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To characterize factors associated with parental willingness for their children participation in a COVID-19 vaccine trial, use of different COVID-19 vaccines and acceptance of a third vaccine dose. Methods: Parents of children aged 12-17 years in Lima, Perú were asked to complete an online questionnaire via social networks, from November 9, 2021, to April 23, 2022. We calculated crude and adjusted prevalence ratios with 95% confidence intervals to compare factors with the mentioned outcomes. Results: From 523 parents responding, 374 completed the survey. 90.4% would give their children a third vaccine dose, 36.6% would allow their children participation in a COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial, and 33.2% would accept different vaccine brands between doses. Parental belief that COVID-19 vaccine studies met quality standards was associated with acceptance of a third booster dose (adjusted PR 3.25; 95% CI1.57-6.74; p = 0.002), enrolment in a COVID-19 clinical trial (adjusted PR 4.49; 95% CI1.25-16.06; p = 0.02), and acceptance of different COVID-19 vaccine brands between doses (adjusted PR 10.02; 95% CI1.40-71.95; p = 0.02). Conclusion: Most parents would accept a third vaccine booster dose, approximately a third would participate in COVID-19 vaccine trials. Believing COVID-19 vaccines studies fulfilled quality standards was associated with the study outcomes. It is necessary to inform about the rigorous processes for the development of COVID-19 vaccines to generate confidence in parents to accept these vaccine-related outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Parents , Humans , Child , Parents/psychology , Male , Female , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Adolescent , COVID-19/prevention & control , Adult , Surveys and Questionnaires , Clinical Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Hesitancy/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Hesitancy/psychology
3.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 10: e51054, 2024 Aug 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39196609

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The autistic population is rapidly increasing; meanwhile, autistic adults face disproportionate risks for adverse COVID-19 outcomes. Limited research indicates that autistic individuals have been accepting of initial vaccination, but research has yet to document this population's perceptions and acceptance of COVID-19 boosters. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify person-level and community characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccination and booster acceptance among autistic adults, along with self-reported reasons for their stated preferences. Understanding this information is crucial in supporting this vulnerable population given evolving booster guidelines and the ending of the public health emergency for the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data are from a survey conducted in Pennsylvania from April 11 to September 12, 2022. Demographic characteristics, COVID-19 experiences, and COVID-19 vaccine decisions were compared across vaccination status groups. Chi-square analyses and 1-way ANOVA were conducted to test for significant differences. Vaccination reasons were ranked by frequency; co-occurrence was identified using phi coefficient correlation plots. RESULTS: Most autistic adults (193/266, 72.6%) intended to receive or received the vaccine and booster, 15% (40/266) did not receive or intend to receive any vaccine, and 12.4% (33/266) received or intended to receive the initial dose but were hesitant to accept booster doses. Reasons for vaccine acceptance or hesitancy varied by demographic factors and COVID-19 experiences. The most significant were previously contracting COVID-19, desire to access information about COVID-19, and discomfort with others not wearing a mask (all P=.001). County-level factors, including population density (P=.02) and percentage of the county that voted for President Biden (P=.001) were also significantly associated with differing vaccination acceptance levels. Reasons for accepting the initial COVID-19 vaccine differed among those who were or were not hesitant to accept a booster. Those who accepted a booster were more likely to endorse protecting others and trusting the vaccine as the basis for their acceptance, whereas those who were hesitant about the booster indicated that their initial vaccine acceptance came from encouragement from someone they trusted. Among the minority of those hesitant to any vaccination, believing that the vaccine was unsafe and would make them feel unwell were the most often reported reasons. CONCLUSIONS: Intention to receive or receiving the COVID-19 vaccination and booster was higher among autistic adults than the population that received vaccines in Pennsylvania. Autistic individuals who accepted vaccines prioritized protecting others, while autistic individuals who were vaccine hesitant had safety concerns about vaccines. These findings inform public health opportunities and strategies to further increase vaccination and booster rates among generally accepting autistic adults, to better support the already strained autism services and support system landscape. Vaccination uptake could be improved by leveraging passive information diffusion to combat vaccination misinformation among those not actively seeking COVID-19 information to better alleviate safety concerns.


Subject(s)
Autistic Disorder , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Vaccination Hesitancy , Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Pennsylvania/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Vaccination Hesitancy/psychology , Vaccination Hesitancy/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Middle Aged , Autistic Disorder/psychology , Self Report , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Immunization, Secondary/psychology , Adolescent , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology
4.
Euro Surveill ; 29(28)2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38994604

ABSTRACT

BackgroundAs Ireland prepared for an autumn 2023 COVID-19 vaccination booster campaign, there was concern that vaccine fatigue would affect uptake, which has been abating.AimThis study aimed to quantify the direct impact of the COVID-19 vaccination programme in Ireland on averted COVID-19-related outcomes including symptomatic presentations to primary care/community testing centres, emergency department (ED) presentations, hospitalisations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and deaths, in individuals aged ≥ 50 years, during Omicron dominance.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective observational COVID-19 vaccine impact study in December 2021-March 2023 in Ireland. We used national data on notified outcomes and vaccine coverage, as well as vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates, sourced from the World Health Organization's live systematic review of VE, to estimate the count and prevented fraction of outcomes in ≥ 50-year-olds averted by the COVID-19 vaccination programme in this age group.ResultsThe COVID-19 vaccination programme averted 48,551 symptomatic COVID-19 presentations to primary care/community testing centres (36% of cases expected in the absence of vaccination), 9,517 ED presentations (53% of expected), 102,160 hospitalisations (81% of expected), 3,303 ICU admissions (89% of expected) and 15,985 deaths (87% of expected).ConclusionsWhen Omicron predominated, the COVID-19 vaccination programme averted symptomatic and severe COVID-19 cases, including deaths due to COVID-19. In line with other international vaccine impact studies, these findings emphasise the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination for population health and the healthcare system and are relevant for informing COVID-19 booster vaccination programmes, pandemic preparedness and communicating the reason for and importance of COVID-19 vaccination in Ireland and internationally.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Hospitalization , Immunization Programs , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Ireland/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Male , Female , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccine Efficacy/statistics & numerical data , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data
5.
J Infect ; 89(3): 106221, 2024 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38996819

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the spring of 2022 and 2023 COVID-19 vaccine boosters were recommended for those aged ≥75 years in England as well as those in an immunosuppression risk group. The aim was to reduce severe COVID-19 disease in these groups. METHODS: The large difference in coverage between those above and below age 75 years was the basis for applying an age-discontinuity approach for measuring the impact of vaccination on COVID-19 hospitalisations in both spring 2022 and 2023. Hospitalisations in individuals positive by PCR for COVID-19 were obtained from the national secondary user service hospital dataset. The ratio of hospital counts by each year of age in 8-week periods after compared to before the roll out was modelled using negative binomial regression to estimate the discontinuity at age 75 years. RESULTS: A clear discontinuity was seen at age 75 years of 17.0% (95% CI: 6.1%-26.6%) in 2022 and 18.0% (3.3%-30.4%) in 2023. If applied to those aged ≥75 years this translates to 1302 and 418 averted hospitalisations in the 8-week period in 2022 and 2023, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a clear impact of vaccination on preventing COVID-19 hospitalisations and compliments other epidemiological methods assessing the impact of COVID-19 vaccines. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: One way to see if the booster vaccines doses given to protect against COVID-19 disease are working is to compare hospital admissions in groups of people who were and were not eligible for the dose. In England the spring booster doses were recommended for those aged 75 years and above. We could therefore compare hospitalisations in those above this age to those just below (aged 65-74) and see if there is a step change in rates from age 74 to 75 in the time after the vaccine was given. The results showed hospitalisations were about 18% lower in the group that were eligible, which is evidence that the vaccine is protecting against severe COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Hospitalization , Immunization, Secondary , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Aged , England/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Male , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Female , Middle Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
6.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 20(1): 2383016, 2024 Dec 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39048929

ABSTRACT

Young adults experience high coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence yet have the lowest vaccination and booster rates among adults. Understanding the factors influencing their intentions regarding boosters is essential for crafting effective public health strategies. We examined the psychosocial factors (attitudes, norms, perceived behavioral control) associated with their intentions to receive a COVID-19 booster. This cross-sectional study included 292 young adults aged 18-25 residing in Philadelphia who completed an online survey from September 2021 and February 2022 (mean age 21.98, standard deviation 2.25; 51% racial/ethnic minorities). The survey included measures of attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control related to COVID-19 vaccination. We employed structural equation modeling analysis to examine the intention of young adults to receive the COVID-19 booster and their vaccine-related attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control. Covariates included race/ethnicity and gender. Subjective norms were significantly associated with the intention to receive a COVID-19 booster (standardized ß̂ = 0.685, p = .018). Attitudes and perceived behavioral control showed no significant association with intention. Subgroup analyses based on race/ethnicity revealed that attitudes (standardized ß̂ = 0.488, p = .004) and subjective norms (standardized ß̂ = 0.451, p = .050) were predictors among young adults from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds, while only subjective norms (standardized ß̂ = 1.104, p = .002) were significant for non-Hispanic White young adults. Public health efforts should prioritize engaging healthcare providers and peer groups in order to influence subjective norms and promote collective responsibility and acceptance for vaccination. Tailored interventions and diverse communication strategies targeting specific subgroups of young adults may be useful to ensure comprehensive and effective vaccination initiatives.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , Intention , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Young Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Cross-Sectional Studies , Ethnicity/psychology , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Immunization, Secondary/psychology , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Philadelphia , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States , Vaccination/psychology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
7.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38928991

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to identify the influence of environmental risk exposure levels on the predictive factors of COVID-19 booster dose vaccination in an urban Thai population in the post-pandemic era. Six study locations, including the three provinces with the highest environmental risk levels and the three provinces with the lowest environmental risk levels, were selected by calculating the environmental risk exposure indexes. Participants from the capital district of each province were chosen via the simple random sampling technique and interviewed using a structured questionnaire. A total of 1315 individuals were included in a sample in this study, and the best predictors of booster dose vaccination were determined using multiple regression analysis. The results showed that a high level of environmental risk exposure occurred in the provinces with a high number of total days exceeding the limits set for PM10 and high rates of mortality for lung cancer. The number of COVID-19 booster vaccinations given amount to 43.4% of the population during the post-COVID-19 pandemic period. Our multivariate analysis indicated that individuals in the working age group (≥25 years old); those with higher education (diploma degree and above); full-time employment (government and private sectors); those with high monthly incomes (≥USD144.1); and those in areas with the lowest risk level of environmental exposure significantly contributed to the number of booster dose vaccinations given during the post-pandemic period. To summarize, the rate of COVID-19 booster dose vaccination acceptance in Thailand was influenced by socio-economic factors with environmental concerns. These findings improve our understating of both the global pandemic and how environmental exposure affects behavioral change patterns and could improve the effectiveness of post-pandemic management.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Environmental Exposure , Immunization, Secondary , Urban Population , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Environmental Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Southeast Asian People , Thailand/epidemiology , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data
8.
Nature ; 631(8019): 179-188, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38926578

ABSTRACT

Encouraging routine COVID-19 vaccinations is likely to be a crucial policy challenge for decades to come. To avert hundreds of thousands of unnecessary hospitalizations and deaths, adoption will need to be higher than it was in the autumn of 2022 or 2023, when less than one-fifth of Americans received booster vaccines1,2. One approach to encouraging vaccination is to eliminate the friction of transportation hurdles. Previous research has shown that friction can hinder follow-through3 and that individuals who live farther from COVID-19 vaccination sites are less likely to get vaccinated4. However, the value of providing free round-trip transportation to vaccination sites is unknown. Here we show that offering people free round-trip Lyft rides to pharmacies has no benefit over and above sending them behaviourally informed text messages reminding them to get vaccinated. We determined this by running a megastudy with millions of CVS Pharmacy patients in the United States testing the effects of (1) free round-trip Lyft rides to CVS Pharmacies for vaccination appointments and (2) seven different sets of behaviourally informed vaccine reminder messages. Our results suggest that offering previously vaccinated individuals free rides to vaccination sites is not a good investment in the United States, contrary to the high expectations of both expert and lay forecasters. Instead, people in the United States should be sent behaviourally informed COVID-19 vaccination reminders, which increased the 30-day COVID-19 booster uptake by 21% (1.05 percentage points) and spilled over to increase 30-day influenza vaccinations by 8% (0.34 percentage points) in our megastudy. More rigorous testing of interventions to promote vaccination is needed to ensure that evidence-based solutions are deployed widely and that ineffective but intuitively appealing tools are discontinued.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , Reminder Systems , Transportation , Vaccination , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Evidence-Based Practice , Health Education/methods , Health Education/statistics & numerical data , Health Policy/trends , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , Pharmacies/statistics & numerical data , Reminder Systems/classification , Reminder Systems/statistics & numerical data , Text Messaging/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors , Transportation/economics , Transportation/methods , United States , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
9.
J Math Biol ; 89(2): 21, 2024 Jun 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38926228

ABSTRACT

For some communicable endemic diseases (e.g., influenza, COVID-19), vaccination is an effective means of preventing the spread of infection and reducing mortality, but must be augmented over time with vaccine booster doses. We consider the problem of optimally allocating a limited supply of vaccines over time between different subgroups of a population and between initial versus booster vaccine doses, allowing for multiple booster doses. We first consider an SIS model with interacting population groups and four different objectives: those of minimizing cumulative infections, deaths, life years lost, or quality-adjusted life years lost due to death. We solve the problem sequentially: for each time period, we approximate the system dynamics using Taylor series expansions, and reduce the problem to a piecewise linear convex optimization problem for which we derive intuitive closed-form solutions. We then extend the analysis to the case of an SEIS model. In both cases vaccines are allocated to groups based on their priority order until the vaccine supply is exhausted. Numerical simulations show that our analytical solutions achieve results that are close to optimal with objective function values significantly better than would be obtained using simple allocation rules such as allocation proportional to population group size. In addition to being accurate and interpretable, the solutions are easy to implement in practice. Interpretable models are particularly important in public health decision making.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Computer Simulation , Endemic Diseases , Immunization, Secondary , Mathematical Concepts , Vaccination , Humans , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Endemic Diseases/prevention & control , Endemic Diseases/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , Models, Biological , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , Communicable Diseases/epidemiology
10.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 20(1): 2352914, 2024 Dec 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38845401

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to evaluate how the duration of travel affects the behavior of urban and rural residents regarding free COVID-19 vaccination, and provide scientific evidence for promoting free vaccination and building an immune barrier to cope with future epidemics. From August 3, 2022 to February,18,2023, A follow-up survey was conducted in urban and rural adults in four cities in China to collect information on socio-demographic factors, vaccination status and travel time for vaccination. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was deployed to measure the net difference of the enhanced vaccination rate between urban and rural residents in different traffic time distribution. A total of 5780 samples were included in the study. The vaccination rate of the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine among rural residents was higher than that of urban residents with a significant P-value (69.36% VS 64.49%,p < .001). The traffic time had a significant negative impact on the COVID-19 booster vaccination behavior of urban and rural residents. There was a significant interaction between the travel time to the vaccination point and the level of trust in doctors. Travel time had a negative impact on the free vaccination behavior of both urban and rural residents. The government should optimize and expand the number of vaccination sites and enhance residents' trust in the medical system. This is crucial for promoting free vaccination and effective epidemic management in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , Rural Population , Travel , Urban Population , Humans , Male , China , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Travel/statistics & numerical data , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Middle Aged , Adult , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/psychology , Time Factors , Aged , Young Adult , Surveys and Questionnaires , East Asian People
11.
Vaccine ; 42(17): 3693-3698, 2024 Jun 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38729911

ABSTRACT

AIM: We assessed the vaccination effectiveness (VE) of a COVID-19 booster vaccine dose and the association between morbidity and absenteeism with COVID-19 booster vaccine receipt among healthcare personnel (HCP) in 2022-2023 in Greece. METHODS: We followed 5752 HCP from November 14, 2022 through May 28, 2023 for episodes of absenteeism. Absenteeism for non-infectious causes, pregnancy leave, or annual leave was not recorded. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination series plus one booster dose within the past six months. Multivariable regression models were used to estimate the association of full COVID-19 vaccination with the outcomes of interest. RESULTS: A total of 1029 episodes of absenteeism occurred during the study period (17.9 episodes per 100 HCP). The mean duration of absence per episode was 5.2 days, and the total duration of absence was 5237 days. COVID-19 was diagnosed in 736 (12.8 %) HCP, asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in 62 (1.1 %) HCP, and influenza in 95 (1.7 %) HCP. Overall, COVID-19, influenza, and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection accounted for 71.5 %, 9.2 %, and 6.0 % of episodes of absenteeism, respectively. Multivariable regression models indicated that fully vaccinated HCP were absent from work for shorter periods [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.42; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.21-0.83], were less likely to develop COVID-19 [aOR: 0.37; 95 % CI: 0.17-0.81)], and were more likely to develop an asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (aOR: 5.90; 95 % CI: 1.27-27.45). The adjusted full VE against COVID-19 was 62.8 % (95 % CI: 18.6 %-83.0 %). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 remains a significant cause of morbidity and absenteeism among HCP. Full COVID-19 vaccination status conferred significant protection against COVID-19 and was associated with shorter periods of absence from work.


Subject(s)
Absenteeism , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Immunization, Secondary , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Female , Male , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Adult , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Greece/epidemiology , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Vaccine Efficacy/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
12.
Nat Aging ; 4(5): 638-646, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38724731

ABSTRACT

The uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccination among older adults in China is suboptimal. Here, we report the results of a parallel-group cluster-randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of promoting COVID-19 booster vaccination among grandparents (≥60 years) through a health education intervention delivered to their grandchildren (aged ≥16 years) in a Chinese cohort (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200063240 ). The primary outcome was the uptake rate of COVID-19 booster dose among grandparents. Secondary outcomes include grandparents' attitude and intention to get a COVID-19 booster dose. A total of 202 college students were randomized 1:1 to either the intervention arm of web-based health education and 14 daily reminders (n = 188 grandparents) or control arm (n = 187 grandparents) and reported their grandparents' COVID-19 booster vaccination status at baseline and 21 days. Grandparents in the intervention arm were more likely to receive COVID-19 booster vaccination compared to control cohort (intervention, 30.6%; control, 16.9%; risk ratio = 2.00 (95% CI, 1.09 to 3.66)). Grandparents in the intervention arm also had greater attitude change (ß = 0.28 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.52)) and intention change (ß = 0.32 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.52)) to receive a COVID-19 booster dose. Our results show that an educational intervention targeting college students increased COVID-19 booster vaccination uptake among grandparents in China.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Grandparents , Immunization, Secondary , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , Male , Female , China , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Middle Aged , Aged , Grandparents/psychology , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/psychology , Health Education , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult
13.
J Infect Public Health ; 17(6): 1095-1099, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38705062

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of exposure to hepatitis B virus (HBV). The most effective prevention measure is vaccination, with a serum hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) titre > 10 mIU/ml considered protective. To date, the sociodemographic and occupational characteristics related to HBV serosusceptibility and factors associated with booster hesitancy remain unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors associated with maintaining a protective HBsAb titre in a large sample of HCWs and to evaluate factors potentially associated with hesitancy towards vaccine boosters. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs who underwent a health surveillance visit between 2017 and 2022. If the serum HBsAb titre was < 10 MIU/ml, a vaccine booster dose was offered. Based on their willingness to be vaccinated, employees were classified into three groups: acceptance, hesitation, and refusal. Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed to assess the association of demographic and occupational characteristics with serosusceptibility and attitudes towards vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 1632 (27%) employees were shown to be nonimmune. A lower median age and being a physician were significantly associated with a protective HBsAb titre. A total of 706 nonimmune employees (43.3%) accepted the vaccination, 865 (53%) hesitated, and 61 (3.7%) refused. The median age of those who refused vaccination was significantly higher than that of those who hesitated and those who were vaccinated. Acceptance of vaccination was significantly higher among nurses, while nurse aides hesitated more; among nonmedical graduate staff both hesitation and refusal were higher than expected. In the multivariable analysis, higher age, female sex, and employment as an allied health care professional were shown to be significantly associated with hesitation/refusal, while being born abroad turned out to be protective. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that approximately a quarter of HCWs were not immune to HBV infection, and of these, more than half were hesitant towards or refused the booster dose. The risk of hesitation/refusal was higher with age in women and among allied health care staff. Based on these findings, further studies are needed to prospectively evaluate HBV seroprevalence, vaccination adherence, factors associated with hesitancy, and the effectiveness of health surveillance strategies in a high-risk population susceptible to infection.


Subject(s)
Health Personnel , Hepatitis B Antibodies , Hepatitis B Vaccines , Hepatitis B , Immunization, Secondary , Vaccination Hesitancy , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Male , Female , Italy , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/psychology , Adult , Hepatitis B Vaccines/administration & dosage , Hepatitis B Vaccines/immunology , Hepatitis B/prevention & control , Middle Aged , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Hepatitis B Antibodies/blood , Vaccination Hesitancy/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Hesitancy/psychology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/psychology , Young Adult , Hepatitis B virus/immunology
14.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0303394, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38743729

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Persons who inject drugs (PWID) may be unengaged with healthcare services and face an elevated risk of severe morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 due to chronic diseases and structural inequities. However, data on COVID-19 vaccine uptake, particularly booster vaccination, among PWID are limited. We examined COVID-19 vaccine uptake and factors associated with booster vaccination among PWID in New York City (NYC). METHODS: We recruited PWID using respondent-driven sampling from October 2021 to November 2023 in a survey that included HIV and SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing. The questionnaire included demographics, COVID-19 vaccination and attitudes, and drug use behaviors. RESULTS: Of 436 PWID, 80% received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Among individuals who received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose, 95% were fully vaccinated. After excluding participants recruited before booster authorization for general adults started in NYC, and those who had never received an initial vaccination, 41% reported having received a COVID-19 booster vaccine dose. COVID-19 booster vaccination was significantly associated with having a high school diploma or GED (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.93; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09, 3.48), ever received the hepatitis A/B vaccine (aOR 2.23; 95% CI 1.27, 3.96), main drug use other than heroin/speedball, fentanyl and stimulants (aOR 14.4; 95% CI 2.32, 280), number of non-fatal overdoses (aOR 0.35; 95% CI 0.16, 0.70), and mean vaccination attitude score (aOR 0.94; 95% CI 0.89, 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: We found a suboptimal level of COVID-19 booster vaccination among PWID, which was consistent with the rates observed in the general population in NYC and the U.S. Community-based interventions are needed to improve COVID-19 booster vaccination access and uptake among PWID. Attitudes towards vaccination were significant predictors of both primary and booster vaccination uptake. Outreach efforts focusing on improving attitudes towards vaccination and educational programs are essential for reducing hesitancy and increasing booster vaccination uptake among PWID.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , Substance Abuse, Intravenous , Humans , New York City , Male , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Female , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult , Drug Users/psychology , Drug Users/statistics & numerical data
15.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 11059, 2024 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38744908

ABSTRACT

Measles is a major public health problem in under-five children, leading to lifelong complications. Therefore, the study aimed to assess the magnitude of measles second-dose vaccine uptake and its determinants among children aged 24-35 months in Northwest Ethiopia. A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 418 children aged 24-35 months in Northwest Ethiopia between January 2022 and February 2022. A simple random sampling technique was used to access study subjects. A binary logistic regression model was employed. An adjusted odd ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI) and a p-value < 0.05 was used to declare significant predictors of measles second dose vaccine uptake. The magnitude of the measles second dose vaccine uptake among children aged 24-35 months was 41.39%. Postnatal care visits (AOR: 4.78, CI 1.49, 15.34), child vaccination status of other scheduled vaccines (AOR: 3.88, CI 2.23, 6.73), awareness of the measles second dose vaccine and its schedule (AOR: 8.924, CI 5.27, 15.09), and distance from the vaccination center (AOR: 0.21, CI 0.06, 0.77) were significantly associated with measles second dose vaccine uptake. The uptake of measles second dose vaccine in the study area was low. Therefore, health workers and other partners should initiate awareness creation programs for mothers/caretaker to improve the uptake of measles second dose vaccine.


Subject(s)
Measles Vaccine , Measles , Vaccination , Humans , Ethiopia , Female , Male , Measles Vaccine/administration & dosage , Child, Preschool , Measles/prevention & control , Measles/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Immunization Schedule , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
16.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 24(1): 624, 2024 May 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38745215

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The emergence of several SARS-CoV-2 variants may necessitate an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine. This study aimed to evaluate healthcare workers' (HCWs) acceptance of a COVID-19 yearly booster vaccine if recommended and its association with their attitudes and burnout levels. METHODS: We used an online self-administered questionnaire to conduct a cross-sectional study of all HCWs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip of Palestine between August and September 2022. We used the Vaccination Attitudes Examination scale to assess HCWs' vaccination attitudes and the Maslach Burnout Inventory to assess work-related Burnout. In addition, we conducted logistic regression to identify factors independently associated with the acceptance of the booster vaccine. RESULTS: The study included 919 HCWs; 52.4% were male, 46.5% were physicians, 30.0% were nurses, and 63.1% worked in hospitals. One-third of HCWs (95% CI: 30.5%-36.7%) said they would accept an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine if recommended. HCWs who are suspicious of vaccine benefits [aOR = .70; 95%CI: .65-.75] and those concerned about unforeseeable future effects [aOR = .90; 95%CI: .84-.95] are less likely to accept the booster vaccine if recommended, whereas those who receive annual influenza vaccine are more likely to get it [aOR = 2.9; 95%CI: 1.7-5.0]. CONCLUSION: Only about a third of HCWs would agree to receive an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine if recommended. Mistrust of the vaccine's efficacy and concerns about side effects continue to drive COVID-19 vaccine reluctance. Health officials need to address HCWs' concerns to increase their acceptance of the annual vaccine if it is to be recommended.


Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Health Personnel , Immunization, Secondary , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Male , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Female , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Adult , Middle East , Immunization, Secondary/psychology , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Burnout, Professional/psychology
17.
Vaccine ; 42(14): 3273-3276, 2024 May 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38653678

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Estimate COVID-19 vaccine booster uptake and identify sociodemographic profiles associated with vaccine booster uptake in Mexican adults aged 60 and older. METHODS: Using data from the 2022 National Health and Nutrition Survey, we estimated COVID-19 booster uptake in Mexican adults 60 and older. We conducted a latent class analysis using sociodemographic characteristics and then estimated group-specific booster prevalence. RESULTS: Adults aged 60 and older with a completed vaccination schedule had 80.3% booster coverage. Two groups showed the lowest coverage: 1) unemployed and informal working men with elementary education with low socioeconomic status (73.8% boosted), and 2) female homekeepers with elementary education or less living in rural areas (77.0% boosted). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis points to the need to reach out to men and women with elementary education or less who live in rural areas to strengthen booster campaigns in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , Latent Class Analysis , Humans , Male , Female , Mexico/epidemiology , Middle Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Aged , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , Aged, 80 and over , Immunization Schedule , Nutrition Surveys
18.
Vaccine ; 42(16): 3529-3535, 2024 Jun 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38670844

ABSTRACT

Long-COVID (having symptoms lasting 3 months or longer post-infection) is an emerging public health concern, yet research on whether COVID-19 booster vaccines can mitigate this condition is limited. This study examined associations between booster uptake and long-COVID prevalence among U.S. adults. Data were analyzed from 8757 adults aged 18 years or older with a history of COVID-19 infection from the 2022 National Health Interview Survey. Weighted prevalence and logistic regression models examined relationships between self-reported COVID-19 booster vaccination status and long-COVID, adjusting for sociodemographics and health factors. 19.5 % reported experiencing long-COVID. Individuals receiving the COVID-19 booster vaccine had significantly lower adjusted odds of long-COVID (OR 0.75, 95 % CI 0.61-0.93) compared to unvaccinated individuals. Overall, these findings suggest that COVID-19 booster vaccination is associated with a reduced prevalence of long-COVID among the U.S. adult population, underscoring the importance of optimizing booster uptake to mitigate the long-term impacts of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Adult , Male , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , United States/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Young Adult , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Aged , Adolescent , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , Prevalence
19.
Vaccine ; 42(15): 3499-3504, 2024 May 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38641495

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine factors associated with intention to receive recommended COVID-19 booster vaccines in 2023-2024. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 1,256 individuals at Minnesota State and County fairs was conducted to assess their intention to receive a COVID-19 booster vaccine in the coming year if recommended. The association between booster intention and multiple factors believed to influence willingness to receive the vaccine, including perceived vaccine safety, perceived risk of COVID-19, public health knowledge, fear of future pandemics, and political affiliation, were analyzed using ordinal logistic regression and adjusted odds ratios (aOR). RESULTS: Intention to receive a COVID-19 booster vaccine was high among our participants with 56% reporting they were extremely likely to receive the vaccine this year and another 15% reporting that they were likely to do the same. A strong association with getting a booster vaccine was found between perceived vaccine safety (aOR: 15.3, 95% CI: 10.6-22.2), perceived COVID-19 risk (aOR: 3.5, 95% CI: 2.4-5.1), pandemic fear (aOR: 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.8), public health knowledge (aOR: 1.3, 95% CI: 0.9-1.8), and democrat political affiliation (aOR: 2.8, 95%CI: 1.8-4.4). CONCLUSIONS: Our study emphasizes the importance of perceived vaccine safety as a predictor of intention to accept COVID-19 vaccines and highlights the continued need to effectively communicate with the public about the safety of vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunization, Secondary , Humans , Minnesota , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Male , Female , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Adult , Middle Aged , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Intention , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Aged , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Surveys and Questionnaires
20.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 166(3): 1144-1160, 2024 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38532554

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the predictors of acceptance and hesitancy of additional doses of any SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine among pregnant or recently pregnant and non-pregnant people of reproductive age and partners in Brazil. METHODS: We conducted an online cross-sectional study from June 2022 to April 2023 and invited women and partners between 18 and 49 years old to participate. We employed a snowball strategy to reach all potential eligible participants. Our primary outcome was the acceptance rate of the COVID-19 booster vaccine. We estimated the frequency and percentage for the three groups and compared categorical variables using the Chi-square test. Moreover, bivariate, backward stepwise regression, and subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate risk factors and predictors of COVID-19 vaccine booster hesitancy. We reported the effect size as OR with a 95% CI. RESULTS: We included 1487 participants, and among them, 334 (22.5%) were pregnant or recently pregnant people, 905 (60.8%) were non-pregnant people, and 247 (16.6%) were male partners. Pregnant and recently pregnant people showed greater hesitancy for the COVID-19 vaccine booster than non-pregnant people (28% vs 15%, P < 0.001) and male partners (28% vs 16%, P < 0.001). Non-pregnant women accepted the COVID-19 vaccine more often than pregnant or recently pregnant people (OR 1.75; 95% CI: 1.13-2.70). The associated factors to the reduced COVID-19 vaccine booster acceptance were family income between US$ 566-945.00 (54%), evangelic religion (65%), concern about vaccine safety (80%) and perceived common vaccine importance (93%). CONCLUSION: Pregnant people were more hesitant than non-pregnant people to accept the COVID-19 booster vaccine. Family income, religious beliefs, vaccine safety concerns, and perceived common vaccine importance were significant barriers to accepting COVID-19 booster vaccines. The impact of these factors was more evident among pregnant or recently pregnant people, emphasizing the harmful effect of misinformation among this vulnerable population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination Hesitancy , Humans , Female , Cross-Sectional Studies , Adult , Brazil , Pregnancy , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Young Adult , Adolescent , Vaccination Hesitancy/psychology , Vaccination Hesitancy/statistics & numerical data , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Sexual Partners/psychology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/prevention & control
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL