Identifying and addressing the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on school-based immunisation programmes in the Canadian Maritimes: a mixed methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of keeping up to date on routine vaccinations. Throughout the pandemic, many routine vaccine programmes in Canada were paused or cancelled, including school-based immunisation programmes (SBIP). This resulted in decreased coverage for many vaccine-preventable diseases. While the effects of the pandemic on SBIP have been described in other provinces, its effects in the Maritime region (ie, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island) have yet to be understood. We aim to determine how these programmes were affected by COVID-19 and associated public health measures in the Canadian Maritimes by (1) identifying and describing usual and interim catch-up programmes; (2) exploring stakeholders' perceptions of SBIP through interviews; and (3) designing recommendations with stakeholders to address gaps in SBIP and vaccine coverage. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A sequential, explanatory mixed methods study design will be used to address the objectives during the study period (September 2022-December 2023). First, an environmental scan will describe changes to SBIP and vaccine coverage over a period of five school years (2018/2019-2022/2023). Findings will inform semistructured interviews (n=65) with key stakeholders (eg, health officials, healthcare providers, school officials and parents and adolescents) to explore perceptions of SBIP and changes in parental vaccine hesitancy during the pandemic. These data will be integrated to design recommendations to support SBIP during two stakeholder engagement meetings. Analysis will be guided by the behaviour change wheel, a series of complementary tools and frameworks to simplify behaviour diagnosis and analysis in public health research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval for this study has been obtained from Dalhousie University's Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (Ref: 2022-6395). Informed consent will be obtained from participants prior to participating in an interview or stakeholder engagement meeting. Study findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, publications and infographics.

Identifying H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among health care providers: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to describe and map the evidence on COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal by physicians, nurses, and pharmacists in North America, the United Kingdom and the European Union, and Australia. INTRODUCTION: Since 2009, we have experienced two pandemics: H1N1 "swine flu" and COVID-19. While severity and transmissibility of these viruses varied, vaccination has been a critical component of bringing both pandemics under control. However, uptake of these vaccines has been affected by vaccine hesitancy and refusal. The vaccination behaviors of health care providers, including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, are of particular interest as they have been priority populations to receive both H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccinations. Their vaccination views could affect the vaccination decisions of their patients. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they identified reasons for COVID-19 or H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, or pharmacists from the included countries. Published and unpublished literature were eligible for inclusion. Previous reviews were excluded; however, the reference lists of relevant reviews were searched to identify additional studies for inclusion. METHODS: A search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Academic Search Premier databases was conducted April 28, 2021, to identify English-language literature published from 2009 to 2021. Gray literature and citation screening were also conducted to identify additional relevant literature. Titles, abstracts, and eligible full-text articles were reviewed in duplicate by 2 trained reviewers. Data were extracted in duplicate using a structured extraction tool developed for the review. Conflicts were resolved through discussion or with a third team member. Data were synthesized using narrative and tabular summaries. RESULTS: In total, 83 articles were included in the review. Studies were conducted primarily across the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. The majority of articles (n=70) used cross-sectional designs to examine knowledge, attitudes, and uptake of H1N1 (n=61) or COVID-19 (n=22) vaccines. Physicians, medical students, nurses, and nursing students were common participants in the studies; however, only 8 studies included pharmacists in their sample. Across health care settings, most studies were conducted in urban, academic teaching hospitals, with 1 study conducted in a rural hospital setting. Concerns about vaccine safety, vaccine side effects, and perceived low risk of contracting H1N1 or COVID-19 were the most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy or refusal across both vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: With increased interest and attention on vaccines in recent years, intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, more research that examines vaccine hesitancy or refusal across different health care settings and health care providers is warranted. Future work should aim to utilize more qualitative and mixed methods research designs to capture the personal perspectives of vaccine hesitancy and refusal, and consider collecting data beyond the common urban and academic health care settings identified in this review.

Barriers and enablers to influenza vaccination uptake in adults with chronic respiratory conditions: applying the behaviour change wheel to specify multi-levelled tailored intervention content.

OBJECTIVE: To specify intervention content to enhance influenza vaccination uptake among adults with chronic respiratory conditions using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW). DESIGN: Cross-sectional, multi-modal data collection and theory-informed analysis and expert stakeholder engagement. METHODS: Content analysis was used to identify barriers and enablers to influenza vaccination from nine focus groups (n = 38), individual interviews (n = 21) and open-ended survey responses (n = 101). The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the BCW were used to specify evidence-based and theoretically-informed recommendations. Expert stakeholders refined recommendations using the Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side-effects, and Equity (APEASE) criteria to yield a range of potentially actionable ideas. RESULTS: TDF analysis identified perceptions of vaccine side effects (beliefs about consequences [BACons]) was the most common barrier to vaccination, followed by time constraints (environmental context and resources [ECR]) and fear of needles (Emotion). Enablers included protection from influenza (BACons), receiving reminders (ECR) and support from others (Social Influences). These factors mapped to seven BCW intervention functions and 22 behaviour change techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Factors affecting vaccine uptake are multifaceted and multileveled. The study suggested a suite of complementary multi-level intervention components to enhance vaccination uptake involving a range of diverse actors, intervention recipients and settings.

Improving older adults' vaccination uptake: Are existing measures of vaccine hesitancy valid and reliable for older people?

We sought to establish whether two recently developed measures, the 5C scale and the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) were reliable and valid for use with older adults. A total of 372 UK-dwelling participants (65-92 years, M = 70.5 years, SD = 4.6) completed a cross-sectional survey measuring health and socio-demographic characteristics in relation to vaccine uptake for influenza, pneumococcal and shingles. The 5C and VAX scales were administered to test their reliability, validity and dimensionality. Both scales showed good internal reliability and convergent, discriminant and concurrent validity. Their factor structures were also confirmed, supporting their use with older adult populations.

Knowledge translation strategies for policy and action focused on sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health and well-being: a rapid scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify knowledge translation (KT) strategies aimed at improving sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (SRMNCAH) and well-being. DESIGN: Rapid scoping review. SEARCH STRATEGY: A comprehensive and peer-reviewed search strategy was developed and applied to four electronic databases: MEDLINE ALL, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science. Additional searches of grey literature were conducted to identify KT strategies aimed at supporting SRMNCAH. KT strategies and policies published in English from January 2000 to May 2020 onwards were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Only 4% of included 90 studies were conducted in low-income countries with the majority (52%) conducted in high-income countries. Studies primarily focused on maternal newborn or child health and well-being. Education (81%), including staff workshops and education modules, was the most commonly identified intervention component from the KT interventions. Low-income and middle-income countries were more likely to include civil society organisations, government and policymakers as stakeholders compared with high-income countries. Reported barriers to KT strategies included limited resources and time constraints, while enablers included stakeholder involvement throughout the KT process. CONCLUSION: We identified a number of gaps among KT strategies for SRMNCAH policy and action, including limited focus on adolescent, sexual and reproductive health and rights and SRMNCAH financing strategies. There is a need to support stakeholder engagement in KT interventions across the continuum of SRMNCAH services. Researchers and policymakers should consider enhancing efforts to work with multisectoral stakeholders to implement future KT strategies and policies to address SRMNCAH priorities. REGISTRATION: The rapid scoping review protocol was registered on Open Science Framework on 16 June 2020 (https://osf.io/xpf2k).

Identifying COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccination hesitancy or refusal among health care providers across North America, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this scoping review is to describe and map the evidence on COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccination hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists across North America, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia. INTRODUCTION: When global pandemics occur, including the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, which originated in 2020, and the swine flu influenza pandemic (H1N1) of 2009, there is increased pressure for pharmaceutical companies and government agencies to develop safe and effective vaccines against these highly contagious illnesses. Following development and approvals, it then becomes essential that priority populations, including frontline health care providers, opt to receive these vaccinations to prevent illness and potential transmission to their patients. However, vaccine hesitancy or refusal has played a significant role in suboptimal vaccination rates globally. As health care providers, including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, often administer vaccines, their vaccination views and behaviors are of great importance because they can directly affect the vaccination decisions of their patients. INCLUSION CRITERIA: The review will identify factors affecting COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists across a range of countries. Published and unpublished evidence, including quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods research, and gray literature, will be eligible for inclusion. METHODS: This scoping review protocol will follow JBI methodology. The search strategy will be developed with support from a health sciences librarian scientist to identify relevant evidence. Screening and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers, with findings summarized and presented through narrative descriptions, tables, and figures.

Changes in attitudes to vaccination as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study of older adults in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines has brought an unprecedented focus on public attitudes to vaccines, with intention to accept a COVID-19 vaccine fluctuating during the pandemic. However, it is unclear how the pandemic may influence attitudes and behaviour in relation to vaccines in general. The aim of the current study is to examine older adults' changes in vaccination attitudes and behaviour over the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: In February-March 2020 (before the first COVID-19 national lockdown in the UK), 372 older adults (aged 65+) provided sociodemographic information, self-reported influenza vaccine uptake, and completed two measures of vaccination attitudes: the 5C scale and the Vaccination Attitudes Examination Scale. One-year later, following rollout of COVID-19 vaccines to older adults, participants provided information on their COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake in the previous 12 months, and completed the 5C and VAX scales again. Paired samples t-tests were used to examine changes in vaccination attitudes over time. RESULTS: Almost all participants (98.7%) had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, and a significant increase in influenza uptake was identified (83.6% in 2020 to 91.6% in 2021). Complacency, mistrust of vaccine benefit, concerns about commercial profiteering, and constraints to vaccination had significantly decreased between Time 1 and Time 2, and collective responsibility had significant increased. However, calculation and worries about unforeseen future effects had increased, indicating that participants now perceived higher risks related to vaccination and were taking a more deliberative information-seeking approach. CONCLUSION: The results show significant changes in vaccination attitudes across the pandemic. These changes suggest that while older adults became less complacent about the importance of vaccines, concerns about potential risks associated with vaccination increased. It will be important for public health communication to address these concerns for all vaccines offered to this group.

Public health implications of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern: a rapid scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: The four SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC; Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta) identified by May 2021 are highly transmissible, yet little is known about their impact on public health measures. We aimed to synthesise evidence related to public health measures and VOC. DESIGN: A rapid scoping review. DATA SOURCES: On 11 May 2021, seven databases (MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Central Register of Controlled Trials, Epistemonikos' L-OVE on COVID-19, medRxiv, bioRxiv) were searched for terms related to VOC, public health measures, transmission and health systems. No limit was placed on date of publication. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included if they reported on any of the four VOCs and public health measures, and were available in English. Only studies reporting on data collected after October 2020, when the first VOC was reported, were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Titles, abstracts and full-text articles were screened by two independent reviewers. Data extraction was completed by two independent reviewers using a standardised form. Data synthesis and reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. RESULTS: Of the 37 included studies, the majority assessed the impact of Alpha (n=32) and were conducted in Europe (n=12) or the UK (n=9). Most were modelling studies (n=28) and preprints (n=28). The majority of studies reported on infection control measures (n=17), followed by modifying approaches to vaccines (n=13), physical distancing (n=6) and either mask wearing, testing or hand washing (n=2). Findings suggest an accelerated vaccine rollout is needed to mitigate the spread of VOC. CONCLUSIONS: The increased severity of VOC requires proactive public health measures to control their spread. Further research is needed to strengthen the evidence for continued implementation of public health measures in conjunction with vaccine rollout. With no studies reporting on Delta, there is a need for further research on this and other emerging VOC on public health measures.

Older adults' vaccine hesitancy: Psychosocial factors associated with influenza, pneumococcal, and shingles vaccine uptake.

Influenza, pneumococcal disease, and shingles (herpes zoster) are more prevalent in older people. These illnesses are preventable via vaccination, but uptake is low and decreasing. Little research has focused on understanding the psychosocial reasons behind older adults' hesitancy towards different vaccines. A cross-sectional survey with 372 UK-based adults aged 65-92 years (M = 70.5) assessed awareness and uptake of the influenza, pneumococcal, and shingles vaccines. Participants provided health and socio-demographic data and completed two scales measuring the psychosocial factors associated with vaccination behaviour. Self-reported daily functioning, cognitive difficulties, and social support were also assessed. Participants were additionally given the opportunity to provide free text responses outlining up to three main reasons for their vaccination decisions. We found that considerably more participants had received the influenza vaccine in the last 12 months (83.6%), relative to having ever received the pneumococcal (60.2%) and shingles vaccines (58.9%). Participants were more aware of their eligibility for the influenza vaccine, and were more likely to have been offered it. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that a lower sense of collective responsibility independently predicted lack of uptake of all three vaccines. Greater calculation of disease and vaccination risk, and preference for natural immunity, also predicted not getting the influenza vaccine. For both the pneumococcal and shingles vaccines, concerns about profiteering further predicted lack of uptake. Analysis of the qualitative responses highlighted that participants vaccinated to protect their own health and that of others. Our findings suggest that interventions targeted towards older adults would benefit from being vaccine-specific and that they should emphasise disease risks and vaccine benefits for the individual, as well as the benefits of vaccination for the wider community. These findings can help inform intervention development aimed at increasing vaccination uptake in future.

Towards intervention development to increase the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among those at high risk: Outlining evidence-based and theoretically informed future intervention content.

OBJECTIVES: Development of a vaccine against COVID-19 will be key to controlling the pandemic. We need to understand the barriers and facilitators to receiving a future COVID-19 vaccine so that we can provide recommendations for the design of interventions aimed at maximizing public acceptance. DESIGN: Cross-sectional UK survey with older adults and patients with chronic respiratory disease. METHODS: During the UK's early April 2020 'lockdown' period, 527 participants (311 older adults, mean age = 70.4 years; 216 chronic respiratory participants, mean age = 43.8 years) completed an online questionnaire assessing willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, perceptions of COVID-19, and intention to receive influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations. A free text response (n = 502) examined barriers and facilitators to uptake. The Behaviour Change Wheel informed the analysis of these responses, which were coded to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were identified. RESULTS: Eighty-six per cent of respondents want to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. This was positively correlated with the perception that COVID-19 will persist over time, and negatively associated with perceiving the media to have over-exaggerated the risk. The majority of barriers and facilitators were mapped onto the 'beliefs about consequences' TDF domain, with themes relating to personal health, health consequences to others, concerns of vaccine safety, and severity of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination is currently high among high-risk individuals. Mass media interventions aimed at maximizing vaccine uptake should utilize the BCTs of information about health, emotional, social and environmental consequences, and salience of consequences.

Discharge communication practices in pediatric emergency care: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: The majority of children receiving care in the emergency department (ED) are discharged home, making discharge communication a key component of quality emergency care. Parents must have the knowledge and skills to effectively manage their child's ongoing care at home. Parental fatigue and stress, health literacy, and the fragmented nature of communication in the ED setting may contribute to suboptimal parent comprehension of discharge instructions and inappropriate ED return visits. The aim of this study was to examine how and why discharge communication works in a pediatric ED context and develop recommendations for practice, policy, and research. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the published and gray literature. We searched electronic databases CINAHL, Medline, and Embase up to July 2017. Policies guiding discharge communication were also sought from pediatric emergency networks in Canada, USA, Australia, and the UK. Eligible studies included children less than 19 years of age with a focus on discharge communication in the ED as the primary objective. Included studies were appraised using relevant Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists. Textual summaries, content analysis, and conceptual mapping assisted with exploring relationships within and between data. We implemented an integrated knowledge translation approach to strengthen the relevancy of our research questions and assist with summarizing our findings. RESULTS: A total of 5095 studies were identified in the initial search, with 75 articles included in the final review. Included studies focused on a range of illness presentations and employed a variety of strategies to deliver discharge instructions. Education was the most common intervention and the majority of studies targeted parent knowledge or behavior. Few interventions attempted to change healthcare provider knowledge or behavior. Assessing barriers to implementation, identifying relevant ED contextual factors, and understanding provider and patient attitudes and beliefs about discharge communication were identified as important factors for improving discharge communication practice. CONCLUSION: Existing literature examining discharge communication in pediatric emergency care varies widely. A theory-based approach to intervention design is needed to improve our understanding regarding discharge communication practice. Strengthening discharge communication in a pediatric emergency context presents a significant opportunity for improving parent comprehension and health outcomes for children. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007106.