Determinants of non-vaccination against seasonal influenza during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify the determinants of influenza non-vaccination during pregnancy in Canada. METHODS: Biological mothers of children born between December 2018 and March 2019 were surveyed about vaccinations they had received during pregnancy, reasons for non-vaccination, obstetrical history, and demographics. Simple and multiple logistic regression models were used to measure associations between various sociodemographic factors as well as obstetrical history, and non-vaccination against influenza. We analyzed data from 2361 mothers. RESULTS: Factors associated with non-vaccination included being followed during pregnancy by a midwife compared to by an obstetrician-gynecologist (OR 2.02; 95% CI, 1.17‒3.50); having two or more past live births compared to none (OR 1.58; 95% CI, 1.01‒2.49); having an education level below high school diploma compared to a bachelor's degree or above (OR 2.50; 95% CI, 1.06‒5.90); and having a household income below $60,000 (OR 2.46; 95% CI, 1.42‒4.24) or between $60,000 and $99,999 (OR 2.77; 95% CI, 1.70‒4.52) compared to a household income of $140,000 or more. The province or territory of prenatal care proved to be an important factor in non-vaccination, with statistically significant odds ratios for certain provinces: OR 7.50 (95% CI, 1.40‒40.26) for Ontario, 8.23 (95% CI, 1.53‒44.23) for Newfoundland and Labrador, and 11.39 (95% CI, 2.14‒60.60) for Quebec, as compared to the territories. CONCLUSION: Despite universal access to influenza vaccines in Canada during pregnancy, regional variations and socioeconomic disparities in non-vaccination are still observable.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Identifier les déterminants de la non-vaccination contre la grippe pendant la grossesse au Canada. MéTHODES: Notre étude porte sur 2 361 mères biologiques d'enfants nés entre décembre 2018 et mars 2019 qui ont été interrogées sur les vaccins reçus pendant leur grossesse, les raisons de non-vaccination, leurs antécédents obstétricaux, et leurs caractéristiques démographiques. Des modèles de régression logistique simple et multiple ont été utilisés pour mesurer les associations entre divers facteurs sociodémographiques, les antécédents obstétricaux, et la non-vaccination contre l'influenza. RéSULTATS: Les facteurs associés à la non-vaccination comprennent le suivi de grossesse par une sage-femme par rapport à un obstétricien-gynécologue (RC 2,02; IC 95% : 1,17‒3,50); avoir eu deux naissances vivantes ou plus par rapport à aucune (RC 1,58; IC 95% : 1,01‒2,49); avoir une scolarité inférieure au diplôme d'études secondaires par rapport à un baccalauréat ou plus (RC 2,50; IC 95% : 1,06‒5,90); et avoir un revenu du ménage inférieur à 60 000 $ (RC 2,46; IC 95% : 1,42‒4,24) ou entre 60 000 $ et 99 999 $ (RC 2,77; IC 95% : 1,70‒4,52) par rapport à un revenu ménager de 140 000 $ ou plus. La province ou le territoire de soins prénataux s'est avéré un facteur important de la non-vaccination avec des rapports de cote statistiquement significatifs pour certaines provinces : RC 7,50 (IC 95% : 1,40‒40,26) pour l'Ontario, 8,23 (IC 95% : 1,53‒44,23) pour Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, et 11,39 (IC 95% : 2,14‒60,60) pour le Québec, comparativement aux territoires. CONCLUSION: Malgré l'accès universel aux vaccins antigrippaux au Canada durant la grossesse, des variations régionales et des disparités socioéconomiques en non-vaccination persistent.

Racial disparities in COVID-19 vaccination in Canada: results from the cross-sectional Canadian Community Health Survey.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage have been observed in Canada and in other countries. We aimed to compare vaccination coverage for at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine between First Nations people living off reserve and Métis, Black, Arab, Chinese, South Asian and White people. METHODS: We used data collected between June 2021 and June 2022 by Statistics Canada's Canadian Community Health Survey, a large, nationally representative cross-sectional study. The analysis included 64 722 participants aged 18 years or older from the 10 provinces. We used a multiple logistic regression model to determine associations between vaccination status and race, controlling for collection period, region of residence, age, gender and education. RESULTS: Nonvaccination against COVID-19 was more frequent in off-reserve First Nations people (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-2.7) and Black people (adjusted OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.6), and less frequent among South Asian people (adjusted OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.7) compared to White people. INTERPRETATION: This analysis showed significant inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake between racial/ethnic populations in Canada. Further research is needed to understand the sociocultural, structural and systemic facilitators of and barriers to vaccination across racial groups, and to identify strategies that may improve vaccination uptake among First Nations and Black people.

The effect of vaccine mandate announcements on vaccine uptake in Canada: An interrupted time series analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In 2021, the ten provinces in Canada enacted COVID-19 vaccine mandates that restricted access to non-essential businesses and services to those that could provide proof of full vaccination to decrease the risk of transmission and provide an incentive for vaccination. This analysis aims to examine the effects of vaccine mandate announcements on vaccine uptake over time by age group and province. METHODS: Aggregated data from the Canadian COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage Surveillance System (CCVCSS) were used to measure vaccine uptake (defined as the weekly proportion of individuals who received at least one dose) among those 12 years and older following the announcement of vaccination requirements. We performed an interrupted time series analysis using a quasi-binomial autoregressive model adjusted for the weekly number of new COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths to model the effect of mandate announcements on vaccine uptake. Additionally, counterfactuals were produced for each province and age group to estimate vaccine uptake without mandate implementation. RESULTS: The times series models demonstrated significant increases in vaccine uptake following mandate announcement in BC, AB, SK, MB, NS, and NL. No trends in the effect of mandate announcements were observed by age group. In AB and SK, counterfactual analysis showed that announcement were followed by 8 % and 7 % (310,890 and 71,711 people, respectively) increases in vaccination coverage over the following 10 weeks. In MB, NS, and NL, there was at least a 5 % (63,936, 44,054, and 29,814 people, respectively) increase in coverage. Lastly, BC announcements were followed by a 4 % (203,300 people) increase in coverage. CONCLUSION: Vaccine mandate announcements could have increased vaccine uptake. However, it is difficult to interpret this effect within the larger epidemiological context. Effectiveness of the mandates can be affected by pre-existing levels of uptake, hesitancy, timing of announcements and local COVID-19 activity.

Circulatory health risks from additive multi-pollutant models: short-term exposure to three common air pollutants in Canada.

Numerous studies have reported adverse health effects of ambient air pollution on circulatory health outcomes mainly based on single-pollutant models. However, limited studies have focused on adjusted effect of multi-pollutant exposures on public health. This study aimed to examine short-term effects of three common air pollutants-ground-level ozone (ozone), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5)-through multi-pollutant models for mixed effect of adjustment. Daily data (circulatory hospitalization and mortality) and hourly data (air pollutants and temperature) were collected for 24 Canadian cities for 2001-2012. We applied generalized additive over-dispersion Poisson regression models with 1, 2, or 3 pollutants for city-specific risks, and Bayesian hierarchical models for national risks. This study found little mixed effect of adjustment through multi-pollutant models (ozone and/or NO2 and/or PM2.5) for circulatory hospitalization or mortality in Canada for 2001-2012, indicating that the 1-pollutant model did not result in considerable under- or over-estimates. It seemed weak-to-moderate correlations among air pollutants did not change the significant effect of one air pollutant after accounting for others. Inconsistent findings between other previous studies and this study indicate the need of comparable study design for multi-pollutant effect analysis.

Sociodemographic Disparities in COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Vaccination Intent in Canada.

Introduction: This study's objective was to examine sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake and vaccination intent in the Canadian provinces by identifying factors associated with vaccine uptake in seniors prioritized for vaccination at the time of the survey and vaccination intent in all adults. Data and methods: A cross-sectional survey of Canadian adults was conducted in all provinces from mid-April to mid-May 2021. In addition to sociodemographic characteristics, respondents (n=10,678) provided information on their COVID-19 vaccination status or their intent to get vaccinated. Logistic regression models were fitted using sociodemographic factors as explanatory variables and vaccination status (unvaccinated vs at least one dose) or vaccination intent (unlikely versus likely or already vaccinated) as outcomes. To account for vaccine prioritization groups, multiple regression models were adjusted for province of residence, age, Indigenous identity and health care worker status. Results: Seniors with a lower household income (less than $60,000) and those living in smaller communities (fewer than 100,000 inhabitants) had higher odds of being unvaccinated. Among Canadian adults, the odds of being unlikely to get vaccinated were higher for males (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.3), individuals younger than 60 (AOR between 3.3 and 5.1), non-health care workers (AOR 3.3), those with less than a high school education (AOR 3.4) or a household income of less than $30,000 (AOR 2.7) and individuals who do not identify as South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Arab, Latin American, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean or Japanese (AOR 1.7). Interpretation: COVID-19 vaccine uptake (80%) and vaccination intent (95%) were high among Canadians; however, relative disparities were observed among specific groups. Continued efforts targeted toward these groups are essential in reducing potential inequity in access or service provision.

Measuring inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake and intent: results from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2021.

BACKGROUND: By July 2021, Canada had received enough COVID-19 vaccines to fully vaccinate every eligible Canadian. However, despite the availability of vaccines, some eligible individuals remain unvaccinated. Differences in vaccination uptake can be driven by health inequalities which have been exacerbated and amplified by the pandemic. This study aims to assess inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake and intent in adults 18 years or older across Canada by identifying sociodemographic factors associated with non-vaccination and low vaccination intent using data drawn from the June to August 2021 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS). METHODS: The CCHS is an annual cross-sectional and nationally representative survey conducted by Statistics Canada, which collects health-related information. Since September 2020, questions about the COVID-19 pandemic are asked. Adjusted logistic regression models were fitted to examine associations between vaccination uptake or intent and sociodemographic and health related variables. Region, age, gender, level of education, Indigenous status, visible minority status, perceived health status, and having a regular healthcare provider were considered as predictors, among other factors. RESULTS: The analysis included 9,509 respondents. The proportion of unvaccinated was 11%. Non-vaccination was associated with less than university education (aOR up to 3.5, 95% CI 2.1-6.1), living with children under 12 years old (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.4), not having a regular healthcare provider (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), and poor self-perceived health (aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.4). Only 5% of the population had low intention to get vaccinated. Being unlikely to get vaccinated was associated with the Prairies region (aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.1), younger age groups (aOR up to 4.0, 95% CI 1.3-12.3), less than university education (aOR up to 3.8, 95% CI 1.9-7.6), not being part of a visible minority group (aOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.4-6.4), living with children under 12 years old (aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-2.9), unattached individuals (aOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-6.1), and poor self-perceived health (aOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3-2.9). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities were observed in vaccination uptake and intent among various sociodemographic groups. Awareness of inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake and intent is needed to determine the vaccination barriers to address in vaccination promotion strategies.

Sex-difference in air pollution-related acute circulatory and respiratory mortality and hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have estimated adverse effects of short-term exposure to ambient air pollution on public health. Few have focused on sex-differences, and results have been inconsistent. The purpose of this study was three-fold: to identify sex-differences in air pollution-related health outcomes; to examine sex-differences by cause and season; and to examine time trends in sex-differences. METHODS: Daily data were collected on circulatory- and respiratory-related mortality (for 29 years) and cause-specific hospitalization (for 17 years) with hourly concentrations of ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). For hospitalization, more specific causes were examined: ischemic heart disease (IHD), other heart disease (OHD), cerebrovascular disease (CEV), chronic lower respiratory diseases (CLRD), and Influenza/Pneumonia (InfPn). Generalized Poisson models were applied to 24 Canadian cities, and the city-specific estimates were combined for nationwide estimates for each sex using Bayesian hierarchical models. Finally, sex-differences were tested statistically based on their interval estimates, considering the correlation between sex-specific national estimates. RESULTS: Sex-differences were more frequently observed for hospitalization than mortality, respiratory than circulatory health outcomes, and warm than cold season. For hospitalization, males were at higher risk (M > F) for warm season (OHD and InfPn from O3; IHD from NO2; and InfPn from PM2.5), but F > M for cold season (CEV from O3 and OHD from NO2). For mortality, we found F > M only for circulatory diseases from ozone during the warm season. Among the above-mentioned sex-differences, three cases showed consistent time trends over the years: while M > F for OHD from O3 and IHD from NO2, F > M for OHD from NO2. CONCLUSIONS: We found that sex-differences in effect of ambient air pollution varied over health outcome, cause, season and time. In particular, the consistent trends (either F > M or M > F) across 17 years provide stronger evidence of sex-differences in hospitalizations, and warrant investigation in other populations.

Exposure Load: Using biomonitoring data to quantify multi-chemical exposure burden in a population.

People are often concurrently exposed to numerous chemicals. Here we sought to leverage existing large biomonitoring datasets to improve our understanding of multi-chemical exposures in a population. Using nationally-representative data from the 2012-2015 Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS), we developed Exposure Load, a metric that counts the number of chemicals measured in people above a defined concentration threshold. We calculated Exposure Loads based on five concentration thresholds: the analytical limit of detection (LOD) and the 50th, 75th, 90th and 95th percentiles. Our analysis considered 44 analyte biomarkers representing 26 chemicals from the 2012-2015 CHMS; complete biomarker data were available for 1858 participants aged 12-79 years following multiple imputation of results that were missing due to sample loss. Chemicals may have one or more biomarkers, and for the purposes of Exposure Load calculation, participants were considered to be exposed to a chemical if at least one biomarker was above the threshold. Distributions of Exposure Loads are reported for the total population, as well as by age group, sex and smoking status. Canadians had an Exposure Load between 9 and 21 (out of 26) when considering LOD as the threshold, with the majority between 13 and 18. At higher thresholds, such as the 95th percentile, the majority of Canadians had an Exposure Load between 0 and 3, although some people had an Exposure Load of up to 15, indicating high exposures to multiple chemicals. Adolescents aged 12-19 years had significantly lower Exposure Loads than adults aged 40-79 years at all thresholds and adults aged 20-39 years at the 50th and 75th percentiles. Smokers had significantly higher Exposure Loads than nonsmokers at all thresholds except the LOD, which was expected given that tobacco smoke is a known source of certain chemicals included in our analysis. No differences in Exposure Loads were observed between males and females at any threshold. These findings broadly suggest that Canadians are concurrently exposed to many chemicals at lower concentrations and to fewer chemicals at high concentrations. They should assist in identifying vulnerable subpopulations disproportionately exposed to numerous chemicals at high concentrations. Future work will use Exposure Loads to identify prevalent chemical combinations and their link with adverse health outcomes in the Canadian population. The Exposure Load concept can be applied to other large datasets, through collaborative efforts in human biomonitoring networks, in order to further improve our understanding of multiple chemical exposures in different populations.

Pollutant-sex specific differences in respiratory hospitalization and mortality risk attributable to short-term exposure to ambient air pollution.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have reported associations of individual pollutants with respiratory hospitalization and mortality based on different populations, which makes it difficult to directly compare adverse health effects among multiple air pollutants. OBJECTIVES: The study goal is to compare acute respiratory-related hospitalization and mortality associated with short-term exposure to three ambient air pollutants and analyze differences in health risks by season, age and sex. METHODS: Hourly measurements of air pollutants (ozone, NO2, PM2.5) and temperature were collected from ground-monitors for 24 cities along with daily hospitalization (1996-2012) and mortality (1984-2012) data. National associations between air pollutant and health outcome were estimated for season (warm, cold vs. year-round), age (base ≥ 1, seniors > 65), and sex (females ≥ 1 and males ≥ 1) using Bayesian hierarchical models. RESULTS: Overall, the three air pollutants were significantly associated with acute respiratory health outcomes at different lag-days. For respiratory hospitalization, the increased risks in percent changes with 95% posterior intervals for a 10-unit increase in each pollutant were: ozone (lag1, 0.7% (0.4, 0.9)), NO2 (lag0, 0.7% (0.1, 1.4)), and PM2.5 (lag1, 1.3% (0.7, 1.9)). For respiratory mortality: ozone (lag2, 1.2% (0.4, 1.9)), NO2 (lag1, 2.1% (0.6, 3.5)), and PM2.5 (lag1, 0.6% (-1.0, 2.2)). While some differences in risk were observed by season and age group, sex-specific differences were more pronounced. Compared with males, females had a higher respiratory mortality risk (1.8% (0.6, 2.9) vs 0.5% (-0.3, 1.3)) from ozone, a higher respiratory hospitalization risk (0.9% (0.0, 1.8) vs 0.6% (-0.3, 1.4)) but lower mortality risk (1.4% (-1.0, 3.7) vs 2.2% (0.4, 4.0)) from NO2, and a lower hospitalization risk (0.7% (-0.2, 1.7) vs 1.8% (1.0, 2.6)) from PM2.5. CONCLUSION: This study reports significant health effects of short-term exposure to three ambient air pollutants on respiratory hospitalization (ozone≈NO2 < PM2.5 per-10 unit; ozone>NO2 ≈ PM2.5 per-IQR) and mortality (ozone≈NO2 > PM2.5) in Canada. Pollutant-sex-specific differences were found, but inconclusive due to limited biological and physiological explanations. Further studies are warranted to understand the pollutant-sex specific differences.

Comparison of hospitalization and mortality associated with short-term exposure to ambient ozone and PM2.5 in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalization and mortality (H-M) have been linked to air pollution separately. However, previous studies have not adequately compared whether air pollution is a stronger risk factor for hospitalization or mortality. This study aimed to investigate differences in H-M risk from short-term ozone and PM2.5 exposures, and determine whether differences are modified by season, age, and sex. METHODS: Daily ozone, PM2.5, temperature, and all-cause H-M counts (ICD-10, A00-R99) were collected for 22-24 Canadian cities for up to 29 years. Generalized additive Poisson models were employed to estimate associations between each pollutant and health outcome, which were compared across season (warm, cold, or year-round), age (all ages or seniors > 65), and sex. RESULTS: Overall, ozone and PM2.5 showed higher season-specific risk of mortality than hospitalization: warm-season ozone: 0.54% (95% credible interval, 0.20, 0.85) vs. 0.14% (0.02, 0.27) per 10 ppb; and year-round PM2.5: 0.90% (0.33, 1.41) vs. 0.29% (0.03, 0.56) per 10 µg/m3. While age showed little H-M difference, sex appeared to be a modifier of H-M risk. While females had higher mortality risk, males had higher hospitalization risk: for females, ozone 0.87% (0.36, 1.35) vs. -0.03% (-0.18, 0.11) and PM2.5 1.19% (0.40, 1.90) vs. 0.19% (-0.10, 0.47); and for males ozone 0.20% (-0.28, 0.65) vs. 0.35% (0.18, 0.51). CONCLUSION: This study found H-M differences attributable to ozone and PM2.5, suggesting that both are stronger risk factors for mortality than hospitalization. In addition, there were clear H-M differences by sex: specifically, females showed higher mortality risk and males showed higher hospitalization risk.

Temporal trends in associations between ozone and circulatory mortality in age and sex in Canada during 1984-2012.

BACKGROUND: Considerable research has been conducted on the association between ground-level ozone (ozone) and various causes of mortality, but the relationships by age and sex (biological) have been inconsistent, and temporal trends remain unexplored. OBJECTIVES: The study goals are to investigate the adverse health effects of short-term exposure to ozone on circulatory mortality by age and sex, and to examine trends in annual health effects. METHODS: Daily ozone, temperature, and circulatory mortality counts (ICD I00-I99) were collected for 24 urban cities for 29 years (1984-2012). Associations between ozone and circulatory mortality were estimated using generalized additive Poisson models for season (warm vs. cold), age [base (≥1) vs. seniors (>65)], and sex, accounting for confounders (calendar-time, temperature, day of the week). City-specific estimates were pooled to represent national associations through Bayesian hierarchical models. RESULTS: While the cold season returned insignificant estimates, the warm season showed statistically significant associations: a 10 ppb increase in ozone was associated with 0.7% increase in circulatory mortality with a 95% posterior interval of 0.2%, 1.1%. One-day lagged ozone in the warm season showed little age differences [0.7% (0.23%, 1.12%) vs. 0.8% (0.22%, 1.27%)], but visible sex differences: females were at a higher circulatory mortality risk than males [1.1% (0.31%, 1.71%) vs. 0.3% (-0.46%, 0.98%)]. Annual estimates suggest overall up-down temporal changes; a slightly increasing trend until 2002-2004, and a generally decreasing trend thereafter. CONCLUSION: This study found noticeable sex-related differences in circulatory mortality attributable to short-term exposure to ozone. Further research is warranted to understand whether sex alone, or unknown interactions with other factors derived the differences, and to clarify the specific biological mechanisms underlying differences in risk estimates between females and males.