CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for school-based immunizations in Calgary, Canada: a pragmatic cluster trial.

ABSTRACT: School-based immunizations are fear-inducing events for many students and contribute to vaccine hesitancy. We developed an immunization delivery framework called the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system that incorporates evidence-based interventions to improve the experience (eg, reduce fear, pain, dizziness). We evaluated CARD in grades 6 and 9 students in Calgary, Canada. In this pragmatic, hybrid, effectiveness-implementation, cluster trial, we randomized 8 Community Health Centres providing regional immunization services to CARD or control (usual care). In the CARD group, public health staff educated students about CARD and planned processes to reduce fear cues and support student coping choices during immunization. Students self-reported fear, pain, and dizziness during immunization using a 0-10 numerical rating scale; staff recorded procedure details, including vaccines administered, fainting episodes, and coping strategies used. Staff participated in focus groups afterward. Altogether, 8839 children from 105 schools in the 2019 to 2020 school calendar year were included. Fear was lower for CARD (mean = 3.6 [SD = 3.1] vs control 4.1 [3.2]; mean difference = -0.5; 95% confidence interval = -0.74 to -0.21; P < 0.001). Effectiveness persisted after stratification by student gender (male and female) and grade level (grade 6 and grade 9). Other symptoms did not differ. Compared with control, CARD students used peers, privacy, muscle tension, and topical anesthetics more; verbal distraction, deep breathing, and adult support were used less frequently ( P < 0.05, all analyses). Immunization rate did not differ. Staff reported positive to neutral attitudes about CARD. In summary, this pragmatic trial demonstrated that CARD improved the immunization experiences of students at school.

How to increase and maintain high immunization coverage: Vaccination Demand Resilience (VDR) framework.

BACKGROUND: Resilience in vaccination demand is ever more critical as the COVID-19 pandemic has increased our understanding of the importance of vaccines on health and well-being. Yet timid demand for COVID-19 vaccines where available and reduced uptake of routine immunizations globally further raise the urgent need to build vaccination resilience. We demonstrate the complexity of vaccination demand and resilience in a framework where relevant dimensions are intertwined, fluid, and contextual. METHODS: We developed the Vaccination Demand Resilience (VDR) framework based on a literature review on vaccination demand and expert consultation. The matrix framework builds on three main axes: 1) vaccination attitudes and beliefs; 2) vaccination seeking behavior; and 3) vaccination status. The matrix generated eight quadrants, which can help explain people's levels of vaccination demand and resilience. We selected four scenarios as examples to demonstrate different interventions that could move people across quadrants and build vaccination resilience. RESULTS: Incongruence between individuals' attitudes and beliefs, vaccination behavior, and vaccination status can arise. For example, an individual can be vaccinated due to mandates but reject vaccination benefits and otherwise avoid seeking vaccination. Such incongruence could be altered by interventions to build resilience in vaccination demand. These interventions include information, education and communication to change individuals' vaccination attitudes and beliefs, incentive programs and reminder-recalls to facilitate vaccination seeking, or by strengthening healthcare provider communications to reduce missed opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination decision-making is complex. Individuals can be vaccinated without necessarily accepting the benefits of vaccination or seeking vaccination, threatening resilience in vaccination demand. The VDR framework can provide a useful lens for program managers and policy makers considering interventions and policies to improve vaccination resilience. This would help build and sustain confidence and demand for vaccinations, and help to continue to prevent disease, disability, and death from vaccine-preventable diseases.

Exploring parents' views of the use of narratives to promote childhood vaccination online.

BACKGROUND: Negative information about vaccines that spreads online may contribute to parents' vaccine hesitancy or refusal. Studies have shown that false claims about vaccines that use emotive personal narratives are more likely to be shared and engaged with on social media than factual evidence-based public health messages. The aim of this study was to explore parents' views regarding the use of positive narratives to promote childhood vaccination. METHODS: We identified three ∼4-minute video narratives from social media that counter frequent parental concerns about childhood vaccination: parents and informed decision-making (online misinformation about vaccines); a paediatrician's clinical experience with vaccine-preventable diseases (prevention of still existing diseases); and a mother's experience with vaccine-preventable disease (risks of the disease). Focus group discussions were held with parents of children aged 0 to 5 years to assess their views on these three narratives and their general opinion on the use of narratives as a vaccine promotion intervention. RESULTS: Four focus groups discussions were virtually held with 15 parents in December 2021. In general, parents trusted both health care provider's and parent's narratives, but participants identified more with stories having a parent as the main character. Both narratives featuring personal stories with vaccine-preventable diseases were preferred by parents, while the story about informed decision-making was perceived as less influential. Parents expressed the need for reliable and nuanced information about vaccines and diseases and felt that a short video format featuring a story was an efficient vaccine promotion intervention. However, many mentioned that they generally are not watching such videos while navigating the Web. CONCLUSION: While vaccine-critical stories are widely shared online, evidence on how best public health could counter these messages remains scarce. The use of narratives to promote vaccination was well-perceived by parents. Future studies are needed to assess reach and impact of such an intervention.

From high hopes to disenchantment: A qualitative analysis of editorial cartoons on COVID-19 vaccines in Canadian newspapers.

In Canada, the first COVID-19 vaccine was approved for use in December 2020, marking the beginning of a large vaccination campaign. The campaign was not only unprecedented in terms of reach, but also with regards to the amount of information about vaccines that circulated in traditional and social media. This study's aim was to describe COVID-19 vaccine related discourses in Canada through an analysis of editorial cartoons. We collected 2172 cartoons about COVID-19 published between January 2020 and August 2022 in Canadian newspapers. These cartoons were downloaded and a first thematic analysis was conducted using the WHO-EPIWIN taxonomy (cause, illness, treatment, interventions, and information). From this, 389 cartoons related to COVID-19 vaccines were identified under the treatment category. These were subjected to a second thematic analysis to assess main themes (e.g., vaccine development, campaign progress, etc.), characters featured (e.g., politicians, public figures, public) and position with respect to vaccine (favorable, unfavorable, neutral). Six main themes emerged: Research and development of vaccines; Management of the vaccination campaign; Perceptions of and experiences with vaccination services; Measures and incentives to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake; Criticism of the unvaccinated; and Effectiveness of vaccination. Our analysis revealed a shift in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination from high hopes to disenchantment, which may reflect some vaccine fatigue. In the future, public health authorities could face some challenges in maintaining confidence and high COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

COVID vaccine evaluation of barriers and resources among families of children with diagnosed allergies.

Background: We aimed to determine vaccine hesitancy and the main barriers associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccination among families of children diagnosed with food/drug/environmental allergies. Methods: Between May and June 2021, we approached 146 families seen at the outpatient allergy clinic at the Montreal Children's Hospital and a community allergy practice were invited to complete an anonymous online survey on COVID-19 and vaccination attitudes and behaviour. Uni and multivariable logistic regressions were compared to estimate factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. Results: Among all patients, 24.1% reported vaccine hesitancy. The large majority of parents (95.2%) believed that vaccines work. The most common barrier to vaccination was fear of adverse side effects (57.0%). One-third of participants (31.5%) reported that a history of food, venom and drug allergy was a contraindication for COVID-19 vaccination. Fifty-nine (60.8%) participants stated that the dissemination of additional information would increase their willingness to be vaccinated. Most (96.9%) parents reported that their children's vaccinations were up to date. Hesitant families were more likely to be parents of children aged 6-10 years, be of Asian descent, report that mRNA vaccines are riskier than traditional vaccines, and report that the vaccine should not be given if the child has a history of allergic reaction to vaccines. Conclusion: Vaccine hesitancy exists mainly among certain ethnic groups and families with young children. Allergies to food, venom and drug allergy are commonly perceived as contraindications for COVID-19 vaccination. Knowledge translation activities addressing parental concerns will help increase vaccination rates.

"I Want People to Be Able to Make an Informed Choice": How Quebec naturopaths discuss vaccination in their practice.

Health care providers' recommendations can play an important role in individuals' vaccination decisions. Despite being one of the most popular complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), naturopathy is understudied in relation to vaccination decisions. We sought to address this gap through this study of vaccination perspectives of naturopathy practitioners in the province of Quebec, Canada. We conducted in-depth interviews with 30 naturopaths. Thematic analysis was conducted. Main themes were developed deductively (i.e., based on prior literature) and expanded through inductive coding of the data. Participants noted that they discuss vaccination in their practice, but only when clients asked questions or wanted advice. Naturopaths described refraining from explicitly recommending for or against vaccination. Instead, they focus on empowering their clients to make their own informed decision regarding vaccination. Most participants noted that they direct clients towards sources of information so that clients could decide for themselves, but some mentioned they discussed with clients what they considered to be risks associated with vaccination, as well as its benefits. These discussions were framed through a personalized and individual approach with clients.

CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for community pharmacy vaccinations in children: Effect on immunization stress-related responses and satisfaction.

Introduction: CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) is a vaccine delivery program demonstrated to reduce pain, fear and associated immunization stress-related responses (ISRR) in children undergoing vaccinations at school. This study evaluated CARD's clinical impact when integrated into community pharmacy-based pediatric vaccinations. Methods: This was a before-and-after CARD implementation study in 5 independent pharmacies offering COVID-19 vaccinations to children aged 5-11 years. No changes were made to practices in the "before" phase. CARD interventions were integrated in the "after" phase (e.g., children prepared a coping plan using a checklist, distraction toolkits were placed in waiting and vaccination spaces, vaccinations were performed with privacy, needles were obscured). Children self-reported ISRR, including fear, pain and dizziness during vaccination, and both children and parents/caregivers (herein, parents) compared the child's experience to their last needle (better, same, worse). In the "after" phase, parents and children reported how much CARD helped (not at all, a little bit, a moderate amount, a lot). Results: The study was conducted between January 16 and March 20, 2022. Altogether, 152 children participated (71 before and 81 after CARD); demographic characteristics did not differ. Children's self-reported fear was lower after CARD, when assessed continuously (2.5 vs 3.7 out of 10; p = 0.02) or dichotomously, using a cut-off of 0 vs >0 (58% vs 80%; p = 0.01). Pain was lower when assessed dichotomously (<2 vs ≥2; p = 0.03). There was no difference in dizziness. After CARD, children and parents reported more positive experiences compared to the child's last needle (p = 0.01, both analyses) and more children and parents reported that distraction and child participation in the process were helpful (p < 0.001, both analyses). Overall, 92% of children and 91% of parents said CARD helped. Conclusion: CARD reduced children's fear and improved vaccination experiences for children and parents when integrated in community pharmacy-based vaccinations.

Integration of CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) for COVID-19 community pharmacy vaccination in children: Effect on implementation outcomes.

Introduction: Community pharmacists report that providing vaccinations can be challenging, particularly if the vaccine recipient is a child, because of heightened levels of fear. The objective of this study was to determine acceptability and feasibility of the CARD (Comfort Ask Relax Distract) system as a vaccination delivery framework for children receiving COVID-19 vaccinations in a community pharmacy setting. CARD incorporates evidence-based interventions that reduce fear and immunization stress-related responses in vaccine recipients and was demonstrated to be effective and feasible in other vaccination settings providing vaccinations to children and adults. Methods: This mixed-methods study involved 5 independent pharmacies (with 6 vaccinators) offering COVID-19 vaccinations to children between 5 and 11 years of age. Vaccinating staff and implementation leads from the pharmacy organization participated in a small-scale CARD implementation project (before-and-after design). Afterwards, they filled in quantitative surveys and provided qualitative feedback about their perceptions and experiences in focus group discussions. Qualitative data were analyzed deductively, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: The study was conducted between January 16 and March 20, 2022. Across both quantitative and qualitative measures, vaccinating staff reported positive attitudes about CARD and alignment with their professional roles. They reported that CARD reduced children's fear and improved the vaccination experiences in children and parents and for themselves. Vaccinators reported increased confidence due to CARD. They reported compatibility of CARD interventions within their practice and that it was time neutral. They maintained use of some interventions after the study. They also provided suggestions and shared concerns about fidelity and future feasibility of continuing various components of the program. Conclusion: CARD was demonstrated to be acceptable and feasible by vaccinators performing vaccinations in children in community pharmacies.

Vaccines, Politics and Mandates: Can We See the Forest for the Trees? Comment on "Convergence on Coercion: Functional and Political Pressures as Drivers of Global Childhood Vaccine Mandates".

Under-vaccination is a complex problem that is not simple to address whether this is for routine childhood immunization or for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. Vaccination mandates has been one policy instrument used to try to increase vaccine uptake. While the concept may appear straight forward there is no standard approach. The decision to shift to a more coercive mandated program may be influenced by both functional and/or political needs. With mandates there may be patient and/or public push back. Anti-mandate protests and increased public polarization has been seen with COVID-19 vaccine mandates. This may negatively impact on vaccine acceptance ie, be counterproductive, causing more harm than overall good in the longer term. We need a better understanding of the political and functional needs that drive policy change towards mandates as well as cases studies of the shorter- and longer-term outcomes of mandates in both routine and pandemic settings.

Empowering Health Workers to Build Public Trust in Vaccination: Experience from the International Pediatric Association's Online Vaccine Trust Course, 2020-2021.

BACKGROUND: The quality of interactions between health workers (HWs) and caregivers is key in vaccine acceptance. To optimize this, HWs need knowledge about best vaccine communication practices in person and on social media. Most pre-service curricula do not include such approaches. COVID-19 necessitated the International Pediatric Association (IPA) to shift from in-person train the trainer workshops to developing an online Vaccine Trust Course to address these gaps. METHOD: The seven-module, 8-hour Vaccine Trust Course was offered online in seven languages and promoted globally. Course outcomes for participants between September 1, 2020 and September 30, 2021 were assessed using enrollment, participation, and completion data; pre-and post-training surveys of attitudes, knowledge, and practice skills; and follow-up practice surveys 3 months post course completion. RESULTS: Of the 4,926 participants across 137 countries who registered; 2,381 (48.3 %) started the course, with 1,217 (51.1 %) completing. The majority were 25 - 39 years (57 %), female (57 %), and in pediatrics (70 %); 31 % came from India. 62 % of completers rated course structure/design as excellent, 36 % as good. Over 80 % rated the content as the most valuable aspect. Three months post training, 61 % HWs reported increased empathy towards caregivers, confidence while counseling and increased vaccine acceptance amongst their patients. 21 % identified the course as the only factor in these positive changes. CONCLUSION: Shifting from face-to-face to online training due to the COVID-19 pandemic helped increase the global reach of HWs course engagement and uptake. Trained HWs reported increased empathy towards caregivers and confidence while counseling and increased patient vaccine acceptance.

COVID-19 vaccine policy development in a sample of 44 countries - Key findings from a December 2021 survey of National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs).

National Immunization Technical Advisory Committees (NITAGs) are tasked with the responsibility of guiding ministries of health and national immunization programmes in their policy development processes. Many NITAGs rely on evidence reviewed by the World Health Organization's (WHO) Strategic Group of Experts(SAGE) on immunization and aim to adapt WHO's recommendations to their respective contexts. This relationship took on exceptional importance since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which NITAGs have expressed a notable struggle to craft appropriate policies on population prioritization and vaccine utilization in the face of supply constraints and complex programmatic and delivery logistics. This online survey was conducted to assess the usefulness of the SAGE guidance documents for COVID-19 vaccine policies and to examine the persisting needs and challenges facing NITAGs. Results confirmed that SAGE recommendations concerning COVID-19 vaccines are easy to access, understand, and adapt. They have been found to be comprehensive and timely under the data and time constrained circumstances confronting SAGE. The Global NITAG Network (GNN) appears to be the most popular vehicle for addressing questions among high income countries, in contrast to lower income countries who favour WHO Country or Regional Offices. NITAGs place much value on interaction with other NITAGs, which requires facilitation and could benefit from increased opportunities, especially within regions. It is further noted that some NITAGs have had to tackle issues during the pandemic not typically considered by SAGE, such as supply chain logistics and vaccine demand. Learning from the COVID-19 experience offers opportunities to strengthen NITAGs and the pandemic recovery effort through the development of more concrete procedures and consideration of more varied types of data, including implementation effectiveness and uptake data. There is also an opportunity for an increasing involvement of Country Office WHO personnel to support NITAGs, while ensuring information and evidence needs of countries are adequately reflected in SAGE deliberations.

A long-term process for decolonizing and democratizing community-focused research: the case for MicroResearch in East Africa and in Canada.

Academics and multinational pharmaceutical companies from high-income countries (HIC) are major drivers of health research in many low- and low-middle-income countries (LMIC) but have neglected investing in and growing local research capacity. Community-focused health research in LMICs needs to be more locally driven and benefiting. The MicroResearch (MR) workshop program supports teams of local healthcare workers and community experts to identify local healthcare problems. Once a problem is clearly identified, the team then develops a research proposal and is empowered to conduct this research to find solutions to address the problem that fit the local context, culture and resources. Knowledge translation of the findings is a key element in MR. By placing the drivers of change in the hands of locals, the decolonization of the local health research has begun. MR also democratizes health research by extending community health research training beyond local academics and by fostering gender equity. More than half of the local MR research project team leaders, as selected by team members, are women. The success of MR in LMIC has led to its adaptation for use in HIC such as Canada. Decolonization and democratization of community-focused research is practical and achievable and should be seen as best practice in global health research capacity building.

RéSUMé: Les universitaires et les compagnies pharmaceutiques multinationales des pays à revenu élevé (PRÉ) sont les principaux moteurs de la recherche en santé dans bien des pays à faible revenu et à revenu faible/intermédiaire (PFRRI), mais ils ont négligé d'investir dans le renforcement des capacités de recherche locales. La recherche de proximité en santé dans les PFRRI devrait être plus axée sur les besoins locaux. Un programme d'ateliers de « microrecherche ¼ (MR) aide des équipes de personnels de santé et d'experts locaux à cerner les problèmes de soins de santé sur le terrain. Lorsqu'un problème est clairement défini, l'équipe élabore un plan de recherche, et on lui donne les moyens d'effectuer cette recherche afin de trouver des solutions en harmonie avec la culture et les ressources locales. L'application des connaissances sur les constats de la recherche est un élément clé en MR. Lorsque les facteurs de changement sont entre les mains des résidents, la décolonisation de la recherche locale en santé peut commencer. La MR démocratise aussi la recherche en santé en offrant de la formation en recherche sur la santé communautaire à d'autres que les universitaires locaux et en favorisant l'équité entre les sexes. Plus de la moitié des responsables des équipes de MR locales, sélectionnés par les membres de ces équipes, sont des femmes. En raison de son succès dans les PFRRI, la MR est maintenant adaptée pour être utilisée dans les PRÉ comme le Canada. Il est pratique et réalisable de décoloniser et de démocratiser la recherche de proximité, et cela devrait être considéré comme une pratique exemplaire de renforcement des capacités de recherche en santé mondiale.

Building and sustaining public and political commitment to the value of vaccination: Recommendations for the Immunization Agenda 2030 (Strategic Priority Area 2).

Vaccines have contributed to substantial improvements in health and social development outcomes for millions in recent decades. However, equitable access to immunization remains a critical challenge that has stalled progress toward improving several health indicators around the world. The COVID-19 pandemic has also negatively impacted routine immunization services around the world further threatening universal access to the benefits of lifesaving vaccines. To overcome these challenges, the Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) focuses on increasing both commitment and demand for vaccines. There are three broad barriers that will need to be addressed in order to achieve national and subnational immunization targets: (1) shifting leadership priorities and resource constraints, (2) visibility of disease burden, and (3) social and behavioral drivers. IA2030 proposes a set of interventions to address these barriers. First, efforts to ensure government engagement on immunization financing, regulatory, and legislative frameworks. Next, those in subnational leadership positions and local community members need to be further engaged to ensure local commitment and demand. Governance structures and health agencies must accept responsibility and be held accountable for delivering inclusive, quality, and accessible services and for achieving national targets. Further, the availability of quality immunization services and commitment to adequate financing and resourcing must go hand-in-hand with public health programs to increase access to and demand for vaccination. Last, strengthening trust in immunization systems and improving individual and program resilience can help mitigate the risk of vaccine confidence crises. These interventions together can help ensure a world where everyone, everywhere has access to and uses vaccines for lifesaving vaccination.

Unmasking the Twitter Discourses on Masks During the COVID-19 Pandemic: User Cluster-Based BERT Topic Modeling Approach.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has spotlighted the politicization of public health issues. A public health monitoring tool must be equipped to reveal a public health measure's political context and guide better interventions. In its current form, infoveillance tends to neglect identity and interest-based users, hence being limited in exposing how public health discourse varies by different political groups. Adopting an algorithmic tool to classify users and their short social media texts might remedy that limitation. Objective: We aimed to implement a new computational framework to investigate discourses and temporal changes in topics unique to different user clusters. The framework was developed to contextualize how web-based public health discourse varies by identity and interest-based user clusters. We used masks and mask wearing during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in the English-speaking world as a case study to illustrate the application of the framework. Methods: We first clustered Twitter users based on their identities and interests as expressed through Twitter bio pages. Exploratory text network analysis reveals salient political, social, and professional identities of various user clusters. It then uses BERT Topic modeling to identify topics by the user clusters. It reveals how web-based discourse has shifted over time and varied by 4 user clusters: conservative, progressive, general public, and public health professionals. Results: This study demonstrated the importance of a priori user classification and longitudinal topical trends in understanding the political context of web-based public health discourse. The framework reveals that the political groups and the general public focused on the science of mask wearing and the partisan politics of mask policies. A populist discourse that pits citizens against elites and institutions was identified in some tweets. Politicians (such as Donald Trump) and geopolitical tensions with China were found to drive the discourse. It also shows limited participation of public health professionals compared with other users. Conclusions: We conclude by discussing the importance of a priori user classification in analyzing web-based discourse and illustrating the fit of BERT Topic modeling in identifying contextualized topics in short social media texts.

Letting kids play their CARDs (Comfort, Ask, Relax, Distract) to help cope with needle-related fear and pain: Results from user testing.

This study examined perceptions of children and parents about a new web-based CARD (Comfort, Ask, Relax, Distract) game that teaches children how to cope with needle-related pain and fear. A convenience sample of 15 child-parent dyads (children, 6-12 years) participated. Children played the game on a handheld device while being virtually monitored. Activity tracking revealed most children engaged with multiple components. Children reported they understood the game, it was easy to play, they learned coping strategies and believed they could implement them. Children reported lower fear of needles after playing. Parents liked the simplicity and variety of game activities. Most children and parents reported they would use the game or its coping strategies for future needles and would recommend the game. In summary, children and parents found the CARD web game acceptable and appropriate. Future studies can evaluate its effectiveness when integrated into upcoming needle procedures like COVID-19 vaccinations.

A qualitative investigation of facilitators and barriers to accessing COVID-19 vaccines among Racialized and Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

Structural and systemic inequalities can contribute to susceptibility to COVID-19 disease and limited access to vaccines. Recognizing that Racialized and Indigenous Peoples may experience unique barriers to COVID-19 vaccination, this study explored early COVID-19 vaccine accessibility, including barriers and potential solutions to vaccine access, for these communities in Canada. We conducted semi-structured interviews about challenges to accessing COVID-19 vaccination with Racialized and Indigenous Peoples, including linguistic minorities and newcomers, in Spring 2021, just as COVID-19 vaccines were becoming more widely available in Canada. Participants were purposely selected from respondents to a Canadian national online survey. Three researchers analyzed the interviews for emergent themes using a descriptive content analysis approach in NVivo. At the time of the interview, interview participants (N = 27) intended to receive (n = 15) or had received (n = 11) at least one vaccine dose, or did not state their status (n = 1). Participants described multiple barriers to COVID-19 vaccination that they personally experienced and/or anticipated they or others could experience - including technology requirements, language barriers, lack of identification documentation, and travel challenges - as well as related solutions. These were organized into three broad categories: 1) COVID-19 disease and vaccination information, 2) vaccination booking procedures, and 3) vaccination sites. These structural and systemic barriers during the initial months of vaccine rollout substantially restricted participants' COVID-19 vaccination access, even when they were eager to get vaccinated, and should be addressed early in vaccine rollouts to facilitate optimal uptake for everyone everywhere.