Community health workers' dissemination of COVID-19 information and services in the early pandemic response: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Community health workers (CHWs) had important roles mitigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in vulnerable communities. We described how CHWs supported the dissemination of COVID-19 information and services during the early pandemic response. METHODS: Online article searches were conducted across five scientific databases, with review article reference lists hand searched to identify grey/unpublished literature. Articles were included if they reported on a program that engaged CHWs and aimed to prevent/control COVID-19. RESULTS: Nineteen relevant programs were identified from 18 included articles. CHWs were widely engaged in the pandemic response, especially in low- and middle-income countries and in vulnerable communities. CHWs' ability to effectively disseminate COVID-19 information/services was enabled by community trust and understanding community needs. CHWs were often underfunded and required to work in difficult conditions. Pre-existing services incorporating CHWs rapidly adapted to the new challenges brought by the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend establishing programs that employ CHWs to disseminate health information and services in communities at-risk of misinformation and poor health outcomes during non-pandemic times. CHWs are well-placed to deliver interventions should an infectious disease outbreak arise. Having pre-existing trusted relationships between CHWs and community members may help protect vulnerable groups, including when outbreaks occur.

The Case for Assessing the Drivers of Measles Vaccine Uptake.

Global measles cases are on the rise following disruptions to routine immunisation programs during the COVID-19 pandemic, with devastating consequences. According to the World Health Organization, the behavioural and social drivers of vaccination include what people think and feel about vaccines, social processes, motivation to vaccinate and practical barriers to vaccination. However, the drivers of measles vaccine uptake are not necessarily the same as those for other childhood vaccines, and we lack data on how these drivers specifically have changed during and since the COVID-19 pandemic. Without accurately measuring the behavioural and social drivers for measles vaccination, and ideally measuring them serially over time, countries cannot design, target and implement interventions that effectively increase and sustain measles vaccine coverage. This paper outlines what is and is not known about the behavioural and social drivers of measles vaccination and provides recommendations for improving their post-pandemic assessment.

Comparison of parent-reported motivators of non-vaccination for children 5-11 years old in Australia and Canada: Results of the iCARE study.

BACKGROUND: Despite COVID-19 infection being less severe in children compared to adults, vaccination for children from the age of 6 months onwards is recommended in many countries to reduce symptom severity and prevent severe disease. However, vaccination against COVID-19 for children remains controversial and uptake has been low. AIMS: To assess and compare the rate of change of parent-reported COVID-19 vaccine uptake in children aged 5 to 11 years and motivators of vaccine acceptance and non-vaccination among parents/guardians in Canada and Australia. METHODS: As part of the iCARE study, two cross-sectional representative samples in Canada and Australia were collected between May 20 and September 12, 2022 (i.e., 5 and 9 months after the COVID-19 vaccine rollout for children 5-11 years) using online panels. Parents/guardians reported the vaccine status of their children and motivators for vaccine acceptance and non-vaccination. General linear models were used to estimate differences between countries in terms of vaccine uptake and motivators across time. RESULTS: Parent-reported vaccine uptake for children 5-11 years didn't increase over the study period (T1 = 87 %,T2 = 86 %; OR = 0.83; 95 %CI = 0.45-1.54) and was overall lower in Canada (60.8 %) compared to Australia (71.6 %)(OR = 0.56; 95 %CI = 0.33-0.96). In both countries the socioeconomic characteristics of parents who didn't vaccinate their children were similar and having information on either the short- or long-term side effects of the vaccine were important motivators. However, vaccine effectiveness was more important in Canada and trust in the company that developed the vaccine and a recommendation from the child's doctor were more important motivators in Australia. CONCLUSION: Parent-reported vaccine uptake for children 5-11 years plateaued early in the vaccine rollout. The main motivators for parents of unvaccinated children varied between the two countries but information on vaccine safety and effectiveness were common to both countries. Findings may inform future tailored vaccine communication efforts and pandemic planning in Australia and Canada to optimize vaccine uptake for primary school children.

Development and validation of the Vaccine Barriers Assessment Tool for identifying drivers of under-vaccination in children under five years in Australia.

Data on routine childhood vaccination coverage can only tell us who is under-vaccinated; it cannot explain why vaccine coverage is low. Collecting data on the reasons behind under-vaccination is necessary to implement cost-effective strategies that address key barriers and target interventions appropriately. However, no instruments that measure both vaccine acceptance and access factors among parents of children <5 y have been validated in high-income countries. This study aims to develop and validate the Vaccine Barriers Assessment Tool (VBAT) for Australia. We applied three phases of mixed methods data collection and analysis. In Phase 1, we developed a comprehensive list of 80 items reflecting all potential parental barriers to childhood vaccination, derived from published literature and behavioral theory. Through cognitive interviews (n = 28), we refined this list to 45 items. In Phase 2, we conducted a two-wave online survey to test the reliability and validity of these items in an Australian sample of parents (n = 532) with structural equation modeling, further refining the list to 35 items. In Phase 3, we conducted a final parent survey (n = 156), administering these items along with the Parent Attitudes toward Childhood Vaccination (PACV) scale for comparison. We reviewed participants' immunization register data to assess the predictive validity of the proposed models. The final 6-item short form and 15-item long form Vaccine Barriers Assessment Tool assess access, communal benefit, personal risk, equity, commitment, social norms, and trust in health-care workers. It is being applied for national surveillance in Australia and will be adapted for additional populations and vaccines.

Acceptability of an asymptomatic COVID-19 screening program for schools in Victoria, Australia: a qualitative study with caregivers from priority populations.

BACKGROUND: An asymptomatic COVID-19 rapid antigen testing (RAT) screening program was implemented in Victorian schools in January 2022, to support keeping schools open throughout the pandemic. This study explored compliance with the program among caregivers from priority populations in Victorian mainstream and specialist schools. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews between 7-31 March 2022 with caregivers of school-aged children participating in the RAT program in Victoria. Participants were asked about awareness, acceptability, compliance, frequency, and barriers to testing. Recordings were transcribed and deductively analysed using a framework approach. RESULTS: Fifty caregivers participated. They expressed confusion about the 'recommended' program, assuming it was mandatory. Caregivers wanted notification from schools of positive cases to increase motivation for compliance. Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) families were compliant; however, in-language resources were limited. Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander (Koori) families tested less regularly and received information from their community rather than school. Caregivers of children living with disabilities reported behavioural challenges to testing, resulting in distress or non-compliance, and received non-specific information for their children. CONCLUSIONS: To increase engagement with future surveillance programs, caregivers need clarity about optionality, conducting tests, reporting results, and timely notification of cases. Requirements unique to each priority population include: accurate in-language information for CALD caregivers, community-led communication for Koori caregivers, tailored information, less testing, and flexibility for caregivers of children living with a disability. Keeping schools open and having tailored strategies to ensure equitable access for priority populations are essential for future pandemic management.

Evaluating a peer-to-peer health education program in Australian public housing communities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The cohealth Health Concierge program operated in Melbourne, Australia from July 2020 to 30 June 2022. It provided peer-to-peer support to culturally and linguistically diverse residents of high-rise public housing. During this time, the COVID-19 public health response changed frequently and included movement restriction, testing and vaccination. We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation to determine the Health Concierge program's impact on residents' engagement with health services and public health activities. METHODS: The evaluation, informed by a Project Reference Group, used the RE-AIM framework. We analysed data from 20,901 routinely collected forms describing interactions between Concierges and residents from August 2021 to May 2022. Additional evaluation-specific data were collected between March and May 2022 in four housing estates; we surveyed 301 residents and conducted 32 interviews with residents, Concierges and program stakeholders. RESULTS: Concierges promoted COVID-safe behaviours; linked residents with support, testing and vaccination services; and disseminated up-to-date information. Of the 20,901 recorded interactions, 8,872 (42%) included Concierges providing support around COVID-19 vaccination. Most surveyed residents (191/301, 63%) reported speaking with a Concierge in the previous six months. The self-reported two-dose COVID-19 vaccine uptake was 94% (283/301). Some residents described having meaningful, appreciated conversations with Concierges, and some described superficial interactions. While residents initially welcomed the program, many felt it failed to evolve. Poorly defined management and hiring criteria led to variable program implementation. A need for bicultural workers to continue linking residents with services was discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Concierges' impact on residents may have contributed to high community uptake of COVID-19 testing and vaccination, and had benefits beyond the COVID-19 remit. We recommend the program be revised and continued to inform further preparedness planning and support service access generally. Program models such as this have potential to inform and reassure high-risk communities during a pandemic. In addition, such programs can help overcome vaccine hesitancy and promote protective health behaviours, regardless of whether a pandemic is currently occurring. Ensuring these programs remain responsive to the changing needs of end-users needs over time is imperative.

Priority populations' experiences of isolation, quarantine and distancing for COVID-19: protocol for a longitudinal cohort study (Optimise Study).

INTRODUCTION: Longitudinal studies can provide timely and accurate information to evaluate and inform COVID-19 control and mitigation strategies and future pandemic preparedness. The Optimise Study is a multidisciplinary research platform established in the Australian state of Victoria in September 2020 to collect epidemiological, social, psychological and behavioural data from priority populations. It aims to understand changing public attitudes, behaviours and experiences of COVID-19 and inform epidemic modelling and support responsive government policy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol paper describes the data collection procedures for the Optimise Study, an ongoing longitudinal cohort of ~1000 Victorian adults and their social networks. Participants are recruited using snowball sampling with a set of seeds and two waves of snowball recruitment. Seeds are purposively selected from priority groups, including recent COVID-19 cases and close contacts and people at heightened risk of infection and/or adverse outcomes of COVID-19 infection and/or public health measures. Participants complete a schedule of monthly quantitative surveys and daily diaries for up to 24 months, plus additional surveys annually for up to 48 months. Cohort participants are recruited for qualitative interviews at key time points to enable in-depth exploration of people's lived experiences. Separately, community representatives are invited to participate in community engagement groups, which review and interpret research findings to inform policy and practice recommendations. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Optimise longitudinal cohort and qualitative interviews are approved by the Alfred Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (# 333/20). The Optimise Study CEG is approved by the La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (# HEC20532). All participants provide informed verbal consent to enter the cohort, with additional consent provided prior to any of the sub studies. Study findings will be disseminated through public website (https://optimisecovid.com.au/study-findings/) and through peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05323799.

Interdisciplinary Learning Health System Response to Public Vaccine Concerns.

In Victoria, Australia, jurisdictional vaccine safety service is conducted by SAEFVIC (Surveillance of Adverse Events Following Vaccination in the Community). SAEFVIC developed a public Vaccine Safety Report (saefvic.online/vaccinesafety) to present key surveillance information. This study applies an interdisciplinary learning health system approach to evaluate the report, taking into consideration public expressions of concern on social media.

Behavioural and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination in Vietnam: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Understanding of the behavioural and social drivers (BeSD) of vaccination is key to addressing vaccine hesitancy and accessibility issues. Vietnam's national COVID-19 vaccination programme resulted in high uptake of primary doses among adults, but lower booster doses for adults and primary doses for 5-11 years. This scoping review assessed BeSD influencing COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Vietnam to design interventions on reaching the national vaccination targets. METHOD: We conducted a scoping review by searching PubMed, MedRxiv, LitCOVID, COVID-19 LOVE platform, WHO's COVID-19 research database and seven dominant Vietnamese language medical journals published in English or Vietnamese between 28 December 2019 and 28 November 2022. Data were narratively synthesised and summarised according to the four components of the WHO BeSD framework. The drivers were then mapped along the timeline of COVID-19 vaccine deployment and the evolution of the pandemic in Vietnam. RESULTS: We identified 680 records, of which 39 met the inclusion criteria comprising 224 204 participants. Adults' intention to receive COVID-19 vaccines for themselves (23 studies) ranged from 58.0% to 98.1%. Parental intention to vaccinate their under 11-year-old children (six studies) ranged from 32.8% to 79.6%. Key drivers of vaccination uptake were perceived susceptibility and severity of disease, perceived vaccine benefits and safety, healthcare worker recommendation, and positive societal perception. Commonly reported COVID-19 vaccines' information sources (six studies) were social and mainstream media (82%-67%), television (72.7%-51.6%) and healthcare workers (47.5%-17.5%). Key drivers of COVID-19 uptake remained consistent for both adults and children despite changes in community transmission and vaccine deployment. CONCLUSION: Key enablers of vaccine uptake for adults and children included perceived disease severity, perceived vaccine benefits and safety and healthcare worker recommendations. Future studies should assess vaccine communication targeted to these drivers, national policies and political determinants to optimise vaccine uptake.

Communication to promote and support physical distancing for COVID-19 prevention and control.

BACKGROUND: This review is an update of a rapid review undertaken in 2020 to identify relevant, feasible and effective communication approaches to promote acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing measures for COVID-19 prevention and control. The rapid review was published when little was known about transmission, treatment or future vaccination, and when physical distancing measures (isolation, quarantine, contact tracing, crowd avoidance, work and school measures) were the cornerstone of public health responses globally. This updated review includes more recent evidence to extend what we know about effective pandemic public health communication. This includes considerations of changes needed over time to maintain responsiveness to pandemic transmission waves, the (in)equities and variable needs of groups within communities due to the pandemic, and highlights again the critical role of effective communication as integral to the public health response. OBJECTIVES: To update the evidence on the question 'What are relevant, feasible and effective communication approaches to promote acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing measures for COVID-19 prevention and control?', our primary focus was communication approaches to promote and support acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing. SECONDARY OBJECTIVE: to explore and identify key elements of effective communication for physical distancing measures for different (diverse) populations and groups. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases from inception, with searches for this update including the period 1 January 2020 to 18 August 2021. Systematic review and study repositories and grey literature sources were searched in August 2021 and guidelines identified for the eCOVID19 Recommendations Map were screened (November 2021). SELECTION CRITERIA: Guidelines or reviews focusing on communication (information, education, reminders, facilitating decision-making, skills acquisition, supporting behaviour change, support, involvement in decision-making) related to physical distancing measures for prevention and/or control of COVID-19 or selected other diseases (sudden acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), influenza, Ebola virus disease (EVD) or tuberculosis (TB)) were included. New evidence was added to guidelines, reviews and primary studies included in the 2020 review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Methods were based on the original rapid review, using methods developed by McMaster University and informed by Cochrane rapid review guidance. Screening, data extraction, quality assessment and synthesis were conducted by one author and checked by a second author. Synthesis of results was conducted using modified framework analysis, with themes from the original review used as an initial framework. MAIN RESULTS: This review update includes 68 studies, with 17 guidelines and 20 reviews added to the original 31 studies. Synthesis identified six major themes, which can be used to inform policy and decision-making related to planning and implementing communication about a public health emergency and measures to protect the community. Theme 1: Strengthening public trust and countering misinformation: essential foundations for effective public health communication Recognising the key role of public trust is essential. Working to build and maintain trust over time underpins the success of public health communications and, therefore, the effectiveness of public health prevention measures. Theme 2: Two-way communication: involving communities to improve the dissemination, accessibility and acceptability of information Two-way communication (engagement) with the public is needed over the course of a public health emergency: at first, recognition of a health threat (despite uncertainties), and regularly as public health measures are introduced or adjusted. Engagement needs to be embedded at all stages of the response and inform tailoring of communications and implementation of public health measures over time. Theme 3: Development of and preparation for public communication: target audience, equity and tailoring Communication and information must be tailored to reach all groups within populations, and explicitly consider existing inequities and the needs of disadvantaged groups, including those who are underserved, vulnerable, from diverse cultural or language groups, or who have lower educational attainment. Awareness that implementing public health measures may magnify existing or emerging inequities is also needed in response planning, enactment and adjustment over time. Theme 4: Public communication features: content, timing and duration, delivery Public communication needs to be based on clear, consistent, actionable and timely (up-to-date) information about preventive measures, including the benefits (whether for individual, social groupings or wider society), harms (likewise) and rationale for use, and include information about supports available to help follow recommended measures. Communication needs to occur through multiple channels and/or formats to build public trust and reach more of the community. Theme 5: Supporting behaviour change at individual and population levels Supporting implementation of public health measures with practical supports and services (e.g. essential supplies, financial support) is critical. Information about available supports must be widely disseminated and well understood. Supports and communication related to them require flexibility and tailoring to explicitly consider community needs, including those of vulnerable groups. Proactively monitoring and countering stigma related to preventive measures (e.g. quarantine) is also necessary to support adherence. Theme 6: Fostering and sustaining receptiveness and responsiveness to public health communication Efforts to foster and sustain public receptiveness and responsiveness to public health communication are needed throughout a public health emergency. Trust, acceptance and behaviours change over time, and communication needs to be adaptive and responsive to these changing needs. Ongoing community engagement efforts should inform communication and public health response measures. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Implications for practice Evidence highlights the critical role of communication throughout a public health emergency. Like any intervention, communication can be done well or poorly, but the consequences of poor communication during a pandemic may mean the difference between life and death. The approaches to effective communication identified in this review can be used by policymakers and decision-makers, working closely with communication teams, to plan, implement and adjust public communications over the course of a public health emergency like the COVID-19 pandemic. Implications for research Despite massive growth in research during the COVID-19 period, gaps in the evidence persist and require high-quality, meaningful research. This includes investigating the experiences of people at heightened COVID-19 risk, and identifying barriers to implementing public communication and protective health measures particular to lower- and middle-income countries, and how to overcome these.

Multicomponent interventions to improve routine childhood vaccine uptake in low and middle-income countries: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Vaccine coverage remains inequitable globally. Many systematic reviews have looked at the effectiveness of strategies to improve vaccine uptake; however, these reviews frequently lack data from low and middle-income countries (LMICs), where evidence of cost-effective strategies is most valuable. This is partly because reviews often exclude non-randomised, observational or unpublished evaluations that are common in LMICs. Many reviews also exclude multicomponent interventions due to challenges isolating the effect of each component. A comprehensive mapping of multicomponent interventions implemented in LMICs would increase the visibility of studies excluded from systematic reviews and improve comparability of future evaluations by providing guidance for researchers on evaluation frameworks. This scoping review aims to identify, compare and summarise the properties and evaluation methods of multicomponent interventions to improve uptake of routine childhood vaccines in LMICs, and to assess the strengths and limitations of evaluation frameworks applied. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This review will be conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We will search the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Eldis and Global Health (CAB Direct), Global Index Medicus, 3ie Portal, Google Scholar, COnnecting REpositories, and reference lists. One author will screen titles and abstracts and extract data from included articles using a pretested data extraction template. Uncertainties will be resolved through discussion with another author. Only studies published in English will be included for full review. We will assess the practicability, applicability, sensitivity and specificity of the evaluation frameworks used and present results using descriptive statistics, summary tables and charts. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required. The review will be submitted as part of a doctoral thesis, presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. STUDY REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/7r84g.

Parent-Reported Child and Parent Quality of Life during COVID-19 Testing at an Australian Paediatric Hospital Outpatient Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Globally, we have seen a drop in adult and child quality of life (QOL) during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known about adult or child QOL during the height of the pandemic in Australia and the impact of government-imposed restrictions, specifically attending school on-site versus home schooling. Our study aimed to establish if QOL in children and parents presenting to a Respiratory Infection Clinic in Victoria, Australia, for COVID-19 PCR testing differed from pre-pandemic population norms. We also explored whether on-site versus home schooling further impacted QOL. Following the child's test and prior to receiving results, consenting parents of children aged 6 to 17 years old completed the Child Health Utility 9 Dimension (CHU9D) instrument on their child's behalf. Parents of children aged birth to five years completed the EuroQOL 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) instrument on their own behalf (cross-sectional study). Data analyses utilised quantile regression, adjusting for the child's age, COVID-19 symptoms, gender and chronic health conditions. From July 2020 to November 2021, 2025 parents completed the CHU9D; the mean age for children was 8.41 years (±3.63 SD), and 48.4 per cent were female (n = 980/2025). In the same time period, 5751 parents completed the EQ-5D-5L; the mean age for children was 2.78 years (±1.74 SD), and 52.2 per cent were female (n = 3002/5751). Results showed that QOL scores were lower than pre-pandemic norms for 68 per cent of the CHU9D group and 60 per cent of the EQ-5D-5L group. Comparing periods of on-site to home schooling, there was no difference between the median QOL scores for both CHU9D (0.017, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.01) and EQ-5D-5L (0.000, 95% CI -0.002 to 0.002). Our large-scale study found that while QOL was reduced for children and parents at the point of COVID-19 testing during the pandemic, differing levels of government-imposed restrictions did not further impact QOL. These unique insights will inform decision-making in relation to COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Reducing COVID-19 Vaccine Decisional Conflict in Parents of 5-11-Year-Old Children in Australia: A Single Arm Pre-Post Study.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake among 5-11-year-olds is significantly lower than that of the 12+ age group. Some parents may have decided against vaccinating their children for COVID-19; others may be undecided and may be seeking more information to support their decision. We aimed to assess the effect of a decision support tool on parents' level of decisional conflict, vaccine hesitancy, and intention to vaccinate. We conducted a single-arm, cross-sectional online pre-post intervention survey of parents from Victoria, Australia, who had not yet vaccinated their 5-11-year-old child for COVID-19. We measured change in decisional conflict, intention, and hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines for children before and after viewing a decision support tool. We used logistic regression to identify characteristics associated with reduced decisional conflict. Between May and September 2022, 108 parents took part in the study. The tool reduced decision conflict in 25% (27/107) of parents, with reduced decisional conflict more likely among parents initially undecided about vaccinating, compared to parents who did not intend to vaccinate their child (OR, 12.58 95% CI 3.21 to 9.30). For most parents, hesitancy (83%, 90/108) and intention (89%, 96/108) remained the same. The decision support tool was modestly effective at reducing decisional conflict, particularly among undecided parents.

Factors influencing uptake of the COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women in Australia: A cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Mounting evidence shows the risk of COVID-19 on perinatal outcomes, as well as the safety and efficacy of vaccination during pregnancy. However, little is known about vaccine uptake among pregnant women in Australia, including women who are culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD), and about sources of information pregnant women use when making decisions about vaccines. We aimed to determine the proportion of pregnant women who had been vaccinated and to identify factors associated with vaccine uptake or decline during pregnancy. METHOD: A cross-sectional, anonymous, online survey was conducted from October 2021 to January 2022 in two metropolitan hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. RESULTS: Of 914 pregnant women, 406 (44%) did not speak English at home. Overall, 101 (11%) received a vaccine prepregnancy and 699 (76%) during pregnancy. In the nonvaccinated cohort, 87 (76%) declined vaccination during pregnancy. The uptake was more than 87% among women during pregnancy who received information from government or health professional websites but 37% when received from personal blogs. The main reasons for vaccine uptake were (1) hearing that COVID-19 affects pregnant women, (2) being concerned about the COVID-19 outbreak, and (3) receiving vaccine recommendation from a general practitioner. In a multivariable logistic regression, three main factors associated with declining or feeling unsure about vaccination were (1) concerns about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine, (2) lack of trust and being unsatisfied with the information received about COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, and (3) doubting the importance of COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: Clinicians play a critical role in counseling women to alleviate vaccine fear, support vaccine acceptance, and direct women to use reliable information sources, such as government and professional healthcare organizations, for information about vaccines.

Barriers to COVID-19 vaccination of migrant populations: A qualitative interview study of immunisation providers in Victoria, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to understand barriers and enablers, future strategies, communication approaches and resources needed for COVID-19 vaccination among migrant communities in Melbourne, Australia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We interviewed 24 immunisation providers who deliver immunisation services to migrant populations in Melbourne. We used the WHO Behavioural and Social Drivers framework (underlined) to organise barriers and enablers to COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: Participants believed migrants had concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy and saw vaccines as minimally beneficial in the 'low COVID-19' environment of Australia (what people think and feel). Healthcare providers with established relationships within migrant communities played key roles in vaccine advocacy (social processes). Migrants' vaccine motivation was mediated by health literacy, institutional trust and previous experiences with health services. Practical issues included perceived lack of information on vaccine booking process and accessibility challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to increase migrant vaccine coverage should utilise immunisation providers with community links and trusted local vaccine ambassadors to engage and address community vaccine concerns.

Testing persuasive messages about booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines on intention to vaccinate in Australian adults: A randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Achieving high COVID-19 vaccine booster coverage is an ongoing global challenge. Health authorities need evidence about effective communication interventions to improve acceptance and uptake. This study aimed to test effects of persuasive messages about COVID-19 vaccine booster doses on intention to vaccinate amongst eligible adults in Australia. METHODS: In this online randomised controlled trial, adult participants received one of four intervention messages or a control message. The control message provided information about booster dose eligibility. Intervention messages added to the control message, each using a different persuasive strategy, including: emphasising personal health benefits of booster doses, community health benefits, non-health benefits, and personal agency in choosing vaccination. After the intervention, participants answered items about COVID-19 booster vaccine intention and beliefs. Intervention groups were compared to the control using tests of two proportions; differences of ≥5 percentage points were deemed clinically significant. A sub-group analysis was conducted among hesitant participants. RESULTS: Of the 487 consenting and randomised participants, 442 (90.8%) completed the experiment and were included in the analysis. Participants viewing messages emphasising non-health benefits had the highest intention compared to those who viewed the control message (percentage point diff: 9.0, 95% CI -0.8, 18.8, p = 0.071). Intention was even higher among hesitant individuals in this intervention group compared to the control group (percentage point diff: 15.6, 95% CI -6.0, 37.3, p = 0.150). Conversely, intention was lower among hesitant individuals who viewed messages emphasising personal agency compared to the control group (percentage point diff: -10.8, 95% CI -33.0, 11.4, p = 0.330), although evidence in support of these findings is weak. CONCLUSION: Health authorities should highlight non-health benefits to encourage COVID-19 vaccine booster uptake but use messages emphasising personal agency with caution. These findings can inform communication message development and strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine booster uptake. Clinical trial registration: Registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622001404718); trial webpage: https://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12622001404718.aspx.

Exploring the lived experience of families with a COVID-19 positive child: The journey from a critical grounded theory approach.

COVID-19 and associated public health policies have significantly disrupted the lives of both adults and children. Experiences of COVID-positive adults are well described but less is known about the experiences of families of children who receive a positive diagnosis, and the impact of public health policies on this experience. This study aimed to develop a framework to understand the lived experience of families with a child testing positive for COVID-19. We applied a qualitative study design, using grounded theory. The study took place in Melbourne, Australia between July and December 2020, during the first major Australian COVID-19 wave. Parents of children 0-18 years tested at a walk-in clinic at a paediatric tertiary referral hospital were invited to participate. Two interviewers jointly undertook in-depth interviews with parents of children who tested positive. Interviews were transcribed and two analysts used an inductive, critical realist analysis approach with NVivo and a virtual whiteboard. Results are presented incorporating a stratified reality (empirical, actual, real). Families described seven sequential stages of the COVID-19 positive testing journey: COVID-19 close to home; time to be tested; waiting for the test result; receiving the result; dealing with the diagnosis; coping with isolation; and moving forward/looking back. Our findings highlight how public health policies and messages targeting the general (adult) public were experienced by families. We provide a framework that families move through when their child tests positive for COVID-19. Within each phase, we report unmet needs and identify strategies to improve future pandemic planning for parents and children.

Effect of persuasive messaging about COVID-19 vaccines for 5- to 11-year-old children on parent intention to vaccinate.

AIM: Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 5-11 years old in Australia has plateaued. Persuasive messaging is an efficient and adaptable potential intervention to promote vaccine uptake, but evidence for its effectiveness is varied and dependent on context and cultural values. This study aimed to test persuasive messages to promote COVID-19 vaccines for children in Australia. METHODS: A parallel, online, randomised control experiment was conducted between 14 and 21 January 2022. Participants were Australian parents of a child aged 5-11 years who had not vaccinated their child with a COVID-19 vaccine. After providing demographic details and level of vaccine hesitancy, parents viewed either the control message or one of four intervention texts emphasising (i) personal health benefits; (ii) community health benefits; (iii) non-health benefits; or (iv) personal agency. The primary outcome was parents' intention to vaccinate their child. RESULTS: The analysis included 463 participants, of whom 58.7% (272/463) were hesitant about COVID-19 vaccines for children. Intention to vaccinate was higher in the community health (7.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.3% to 21.0%) and non-health (6.9%, 95% CI -6.4% to 20.3%) groups, and lower in the personal agency group (-3.9, 95% CI -17.7 to 9.9) compared to control, but these differences did not reach statistical significance. The effects of the messages among hesitant parents were similar to the overall study population. CONCLUSION: Short, text-based messages alone are unlikely to influence parental intention to vaccinate their child with the COVID-19 vaccine. Multiple strategies tailored for the target audience should also be utilised.