Public perceptions of Ebola vaccines and confidence in health services to treat Ebola, malaria, and tuberculosis: Findings from a cross-sectional household survey in Uganda, 2020.

Uganda used Ebola vaccines as part of its preparedness and response during the 2018-2020 10th Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in neighboring Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). We evaluated the public's perceptions of Ebola vaccines and compared their confidence in health services to treat Ebola versus malaria and tuberculosis as part of a survey on Ebola knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) conducted in March 2020. A cross-sectional household survey was implemented in six districts in Uganda using multi-stage cluster sampling to randomly select participants. The districts were purposively selected from districts classified by the government as at high- or low-risk for an EVD outbreak. We describe perceptions of Ebola vaccines and confidence in health services to treat Ebola, tuberculosis, and malaria. Modified Poisson regression modeling was used to identify the demographic correlates of these outcomes. Among 3,485 respondents, 18% were aware of Ebola vaccines. Of those, 92% agreed that the vaccines were needed to prevent Ebola. Participants aged 15-24 years were 4% more likely to perceive such need compared to those 60 years and older (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-1.08). The perceived need was 5% lower among participants with at least some secondary education compared to uneducated participants (aPR 0.95; 0.92-0.99). Overall, 81% of those aware of the vaccines believed that everyone or most people in their community would get vaccinated if offered, and 94% said they would likely get vaccinated if offered. Confidence in health services to treat Ebola was lower compared to treating malaria or tuberculosis (55% versus 93% and 77%, respectively). However, participants from the EVD high-risk districts were 22% more likely to be confident in health services to treat Ebola compared to those in low-risk districts (aPR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.38). Our findings suggest that intent to take an Ebola vaccine during an outbreak was strong, but more work needs to be done to increase public awareness of these vaccines. The public's high confidence in health services to treat other health threats, such as malaria and tuberculosis, offer building blocks for strengthening their confidence in health services to treat EVD in the event of an outbreak.

Evaluation of Community Perceptions and Prevention Practices Related to Ebola Virus as Part of Outbreak Preparedness in Uganda, 2020.

INTRODUCTION: During the 2018-2020 Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) were prioritized in geographic areas in Uganda considered at high risk of introduction of EVD. To inform EVD preparedness in Uganda, we evaluated community perceptions and prevention practices related to EVD in 6 districts in Uganda. METHODS: In March 2020, we conducted a population-based survey in 6 purposively selected districts in Uganda using multistage cluster sampling. We examined differences between districts classified as high- versus low risk for EVD in terms of their message exposure from RCCE; risk perception; and EVD knowledge, attitudes, and prevention practices. RESULTS: A total of 3,485 respondents were interviewed (91% response rate). EVD message exposure was more common in the high- versus low-risk districts. EVD risk perceptions were low overall but greater in the high- versus low-risk districts. Comprehensive knowledge was significantly greater in the high- versus low-risk districts (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.35, 1.93). Respondents' engagement in all 3 EVD prevention practices (frequent handwashing with soap, avoiding physical contact with suspected Ebola patients, and avoiding burials involving contact with a corpse) was very low (4%). However, respondents with comprehensive knowledge were more likely to engage in all 3 EVD prevention practices compared to respondents without comprehensive knowledge (aPR 1.87, 95% CI=1.08, 3.25). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that while RCCE efforts as part of EVD outbreak preparedness may have contributed to higher EVD knowledge in the targeted high-risk districts, uptake of prevention behaviors was similarly low across districts. In a non-outbreak setting, implementing targeted RCCE strategies may not be sufficient to motivate people to adopt protective behaviors in the absence of a high threshold of perceived threat such as in an active outbreak.

Disparities in Tdap Vaccination and Vaccine Information Needs Among Pregnant Women in the United States.

Objectives The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommend that pregnant women receive the Tdap vaccine during every pregnancy. The objectives of this paper are to evaluate disparities in Tdap vaccination among pregnant women in the U.S., and to assess whether race/ethnicity and other characteristics are associated with factors that inform pregnant women's decisions about Tdap vaccination. Methods We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional web-based survey of pregnant women in the U.S. during June-July 2014. The primary outcome was self-reported vaccination status with Tdap during pregnancy, categorized as vaccinated, unvaccinated with intent to be vaccinated during the current pregnancy, and unvaccinated with no intent to be vaccinated during the current pregnancy. Secondary outcomes included factors that influenced women's decisions about vaccination and information needs. We used multivariable logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios for associations between race/ethnicity and the outcomes. Results Among pregnant women who completed the survey, 41% (95% CI 36-45%) reported that they had received Tdap during the current pregnancy. Among those women in the third trimester at the time of survey, 52% (95% CI 43-60%) had received Tdap during the current pregnancy. Hispanic women had higher Tdap vaccination than white women and black women (53%, p < 0.05, compared with 38 and 36%, respectively). In logistic regression models adjusting for maternal age, geographic region, education, and income, Hispanic women were more likely to have been vaccinated with Tdap compared with white women (aOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.20-4.37). Higher income and residing in the western U.S. were also independently associated with Tdap vaccination during pregnancy. Twenty-six percent of surveyed women had not been vaccinated with Tdap yet but intended to receive the vaccine during the current pregnancy; this proportion did not differ significantly by race/ethnicity. The most common factor that influenced women to get vaccinated was a health care provider (HCP) recommendation. The most common reason for not getting vaccinated was a concern about safety of the vaccine. Conclusions This study found that some disparities exist in Tdap vaccination among pregnant women in the U.S., and HCPs have an important role in providing information and recommendations about the maternal Tdap recommendation to pregnant women so they can make informed vaccination decisions.

Lessons Learned in Clinical Trial Communication During an Ebola Outbreak: The Implementation of STRIVE.

Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT02378753] and Pan African Clinical Trials Registry [PACTR201502001037220].

Implementing an Ebola Vaccine Study - Sierra Leone.

In October 2014, the College of Medicine and Allied Health Sciences of the University of Sierra Leone, the Sierra Leone Ministry of Health and Sanitation, and CDC joined the global effort to accelerate assessment and availability of candidate Ebola vaccines and began planning for the Sierra Leone Trial to Introduce a Vaccine against Ebola (STRIVE). STRIVE was an individually randomized controlled phase II/III trial to evaluate efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of the recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus Ebola vaccine (rVSV-ZEBOV). The study population was health care and frontline workers in select chiefdoms of the five most affected districts in Sierra Leone. Participants were randomized to receive a single intramuscular dose of rVSV-ZEBOV at enrollment or to receive a single intramuscular dose 18-24 weeks after enrollment. All participants were followed up monthly until 6 months after vaccination. Two substudies separately assessed detailed reactogenicity over 1 month and immunogenicity over 12 months. During the 5 months before the trial, STRIVE and partners built a research platform in Sierra Leone comprising participant follow-up sites, cold chain, reliable power supply, and vaccination clinics and hired and trained at least 350 national staff. Wide-ranging community outreach, informational sessions, and messaging were conducted before and during the trial to ensure full communication to the population of the study area regarding procedures and current knowledge about the trial vaccine. During April 9-August 15, 2015, STRIVE enrolled 8,673 participants, of whom 453 and 539 were also enrolled in the safety and immunogenicity substudies, respectively. As of April 28, 2016, no Ebola cases and no vaccine-related serious adverse events, which by regulatory definition include death, life-threatening illness, hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, or permanent disability, were reported in the study population. Although STRIVE will not produce an estimate of vaccine efficacy because of low case frequency as the epidemic was controlled, data on safety and immunogenicity will support decisions on licensure of rVSV-ZEBOV.The activities summarized in this report would not have been possible without collaboration with many U.S. and international partners (http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/partners.html).