Toward trustworthy COVID-19 interventions: Building vaccine trust through community-university partnerships.

Prior research identifies trust as critical to increase vaccine acceptance and uptake. However, few intervention studies have sought to develop or test strategies for bolstering vaccine-related trust. To address this gap, this exploratory study identifies features of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy interventions that can promote or undermine trust across three interconnected domains: institutional, interpersonal, and product (the vaccine itself). We draw on focus groups (N = 27 participants) with community and university partners involved with hosting COVID-19 testing and vaccine events in underserved Oklahoma communities. Focus groups explored participants' experiences serving community health needs and elicited feedback on proposed vaccine hesitancy interventions. Proposed interventions included two technology-based strategies (text message reminders and tablet-based testimonials and education) and one dialogue-based strategy (anti-body test interpretation). We find that community partners perceived local universities as trustworthy institutions because of their association with popular sports programs, academic credentials, and proximity, creating opportunities to address vaccine-related distrust through community-university partnerships. The most promising intervention strategies for building interpersonal trust included engaging in one-on-one dialogue and using autonomy enhancing approaches. Finally, interventions that successfully encouraged vaccine trust did so by incorporating personalized health information about individuals' potential level of protection and susceptibility to the COVID-19 virus. These findings can inform future public health efforts to create trustworthy vaccine hesitancy interventions.

CATCH-UP vaccines: protocol for a randomized controlled trial using the multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) framework to evaluate education interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Oklahoma.

BACKGROUND: Oklahoma's cumulative COVID-19 incidence is higher in rural than urban counties and higher than the overall US incidence. Furthermore, fewer Oklahomans have received at least one COVID-19 vaccine compared to the US average. Our goal is to conduct a randomized controlled trial using the multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) to test multiple educational interventions to improve uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among underserved populations in Oklahoma. METHODS: Our study uses the preparation and optimization phases of the MOST framework. We conduct focus groups among community partners and community members previously involved in hosting COVID-19 testing events to inform intervention design (preparation). In a randomized clinical trial, we test three interventions to improve vaccination uptake: (1) process improvement (text messages); (2) barrier elicitation and reduction (electronic survey with tailored questions/prompts); and (2) teachable moment messaging (motivational interviewing) in a three-factor fully crossed factorial design (optimization). DISCUSSION: Because of Oklahoma's higher COVID-19 impact and lower vaccine uptake, identifying community-driven interventions is critical to address vaccine hesitancy. The MOST framework provides an innovative and timely opportunity to efficiently evaluate multiple educational interventions in a single study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05236270, First Posted: February 11, 2022, Last Update Posted: August 31, 2022.

Collective health behavior and face mask utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic in Oklahoma, USA.

BACKGROUND: Face mask use offers an important public health tool for reducing the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet the politicization of COVID-19 has resulted in uneven adherence. This study assesses the effects of setting characteristics and the sociodemographic composition of crowds on group-level masking rates. METHODS: We conducted 123 site observations of masking behavior at public locations across Oklahoma (USA) between June and September 2020. We used analyses of variance and t-tests to examine variation in masking and ordinary least squares regression to model the effect of setting and sociodemographic characteristics on site-level masking rates. RESULTS: The masking rate across all sites averaged 34% but varied widely. Site-level masking rates were higher at metropolitan sites and sites with a store or municipal masking mandate. The masking rate at sites where women or older adults (60+) were the predominant group did not differ significantly from other sites. Ethnically diverse sites exhibited significantly higher masking rates compared with predominantly white sites. Findings indicate that setting characteristics explained a greater amount of variation in collective masking rates than sociodemographic differences. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the importance of place and policy for mask adherence. In the absence of state-level mandates, masking policies at a more local level may be effective.