Psychological and Social Aspects of Vaccination Hesitancy-Implications for Travel Medicine in the Aftermath of the COVID-19 Crisis: A Narrative Review.

Vaccines are an important tool of preventive medicine. Although organized vaccination programs have saved large populations from serious infectious diseases, there is a considerable part of the population who oppose vaccinations. In particular, anti-vaccination perceptions, among travelers to countries with endemic diseases, are a major public health concern. Although hesitancy towards vaccinations is not a novel phenomenon, it came back to the forefront during the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. This review explores the etiology of anti-vaccination beliefs among travelers and draws conclusions about their impact on public health and society in general. For this purpose, a purposeful search for data on the causative factors of vaccine hesitancy and their impact on people's health was conducted. A descriptive analysis of the findings and conclusions regarding possible implications in health policy and clinical practice are presented. A fear of side effects, lack of credence in the necessity of vaccines, and mistrust of medical authorities are important causative factors. Their interplay shapes hesitancy towards vaccines. However, anti-vaccination beliefs can also be an aspect of a more general unconventional stance of life. Health care professionals and organizations must be ready to tackle vaccine hesitancy by making the necessary interventions. Correcting misconceptions about vaccinations is a prerequisite for ensuring personal and public health, especially in the context of a pandemic or epidemic. Moreover, ensuring the efficacy and safety of vaccines, especially in cases of modern technology applications, is a fundamental factor in addressing people's concerns about vaccines. For this purpose, medical authorities and organizations must provide accurate and clear information on vaccines so as to eliminate misinformation. Furthermore, clinicians should cultivate their communication skills in order to convey the appropriate messages to prospective recipients of vaccinations.

O discurso antivacina no ontem e no hoje: a Revolta da Vacina e a pandemia da covid-19, uma abordagem a partir da Análise do Discurso / The anti-vaccine discourse yesterday and today: the Vaccine Revolt and the covid-19 pandemic, a Discourse Analysis approach / El discurso antivacunas ayer y hoy: la Revuelta de las Vacunas y la pandemia da covid-19, una aproximación desde el Análisis del Discurso

A pesquisa pretende identificar elementos ideológicos e históricos diante das formações discursivas do discurso antivacina no Brasil, à luz do passado (Revolta da Vacina) e do presente (pandemia da covid-19). Metodologicamente, trata-se de uma pesquisa documental-qualitativa. O corpus de análise é composto por seis enunciados, três da Revolta da Vacina e três da covid-19, tendo como método a Análise do Discurso. Como resultado, foram identificadas três facetas do discurso antivacina: a) medo do desconhecido e desconfiança na eficácia dos imunizantes; b) honra em jogo e interesse institucional sobre a vacinação; c) liberdade e morte, obrigatoriedade da vacina. Conclui-se que, ainda que o discurso antivacina no Brasil seja tão antigo quanto o primeiro método de vacinação, é fundamental superar o fosso entre comunidade científica e sociedade em geral, a fim de combater desinformação com informação científica, levando o fantasma do discurso antivacina ao esquecimento

The research aims to identify ideological and historical elements in the face of the discursive formations of the anti-vaccine discourse in Brazil, in the light of the past (Vaccine Revolt) and the present (covid-19 pandemic). Methodologically, this is a documentary-qualitative research. The corpus of analysis is com-posed of six statements, three from the Vaccine Revolt and three from the covid-19, using Discourse Anal-ysis as method. A result, three facets of the anti-vaccine discourse were identified: a) fear of the unknown and distrust in the effectiveness of immunizers; b) honor at stake and institutional interest in vaccination; c) freedom and death, the mandatory vaccine. It is concluded that, although the anti-vaccination discourse in Brazil is as old as the first vaccination method, overcoming the gap between scientific community and society in general is essential, in order to fight misinformation with scientific information, taking the ghost from the anti-vaccine discourse to oblivion

La investigación tiene como objetivo identificar elementos ideológicos e históricos frente a las formaciones discursivas del discurso antivacunas en Brasil, la luz del pasado (Revuelta de las Vacunas) y del presente (pandemia de covid-19). Metodológicamente se trata de una investigación documental-cualitativa. El corpus consta de seis enunciados, tres de la Revuelta de las Vacunas y tres del covid-19, utilizando como método el Análisis del Discurso. Como resultado, se identificaron tres facetas del discurso antivacunas: a) miedo a lo desconocido y desconfianza en la efectividad de los inmunizadores; b) honor en juego e interés institucional en la vacunación; c) libertad y muerte, vacunación obligatoria. Se concluye que, aunque el discurso antivacunas en Brasil es tan antiguo como el primer método de vacunación, es fundamental superar la brecha entre la comunidad científica y la sociedad, para combatir con información científica la desinformación, liderando el fantasma de la el discurso antivacunas al olvido

Investigating Anti-Vaccination Stances on Social Media: an Assignment To Promote Science Literacy.

In this digital age in which social media use among young adults continues to rise, consideration of the impact of these platforms on our students and on science literacy pedagogy is essential. This has been highlighted during the 2019 coronavirus disease pandemic, when mis- and disinformation surrounding the pandemic and vaccinations were so prevalent on social media platforms that it provoked a cautionary announcement from the World Health Organization. We describe here the structure of an assignment aimed to promote science literacy by encouraging students to explore antivaccination stances on social media and evaluate the scientific validity of such claims using scientific literature. To comprehensively analyze these antivaccination sentiments, we encouraged students to develop succinct arguments to demonstrate the social, economic, or other cultural influences likely contributing to antivaccination stances. In alignment with the philosophical-educational concept of Bildung, we hope to nurture an understanding of scientific literacy that focuses on both evidence-based critical thinking as well as empathetic understanding of the socio-political circumstances that influence public opinion on scientific matters. Student work provided compelling evidence for the success of our field-tested assignment in fostering students to be authoritative voices of science in everyday life and highlighted the importance of efforts to explicitly focus on science literacy within biology curricula.

Propuesta de diagnóstico de enfermería: riesgo de negativa a la vacunación / Nursing diagnosis proposal: risk of vaccination refusal

Introducción: La vacunación es, en la actualidad, la mejor herramienta para la prevención de enfermedades en salud pública, evitándose, gracias a la misma, alrededor de entre 2 y 3 millones de defunciones anualmente. No obstante, los movimientos antivacunas y su crecimiento ponen en riesgo la salud de la comunidad, siendo Enfermería una de las piezas más importantes en la lucha frente a estos movimientos y a la desinformación.Objetivo: Elaborar una propuesta de diagnóstico enfermero que registre la susceptibilidad de aparición del rechazo a la vacunación.Metodología: Se llevó a cabo una búsqueda bibliográfica en diferentes bases de datos (LILACS, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Cochrane y Scopus) para sustentar la propuesta de diagnóstico en la evidencia científica más reciente y con el más alto nivel de calidad.Resultados: Se propone la creación del diagnóstico “Riesgo de negativa a la vacunación”, cuya definición es “susceptible de rechazar la inmunización frente a enfermedades transmisibles y/o mortales, poniendo en riesgo la salud del usuario y la salud pública”.Discusión: Dentro de la Taxonomía II, este diagnóstico quedaría enmarcado en el Dominio 11, seguridad/protección, y a la clase 5, procesos defensivos.Conclusiones: Al no existir un diagnóstico de Enfermería relacionado con la vacunación, proceso en el que las enfermeras desempeñan un papel activo, y ante la amenaza que suponen los movimientos antivacunas, el diagnóstico Riesgo de negativa a la vacunación supone un importante avance en el cuerpo de conocimientos enfermero. (AU)

Introduction: Vaccination is, nowadays, the best tool for the prevention of diseases in public health, avoiding, thanks to it, around 2 to 3 million deaths annually. However, anti-vaccine movements and their growth put public health at risk, being Nursing one of the most important pieces in the fight against these groups and misinformation. Objective: To elaborate a diagnosis proposal that registers the susceptibility to the appearance of vaccination refusal. Methodology: A bibliographic search was carried out in different databases (LILACS, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus) to support the creation of the diagnosis on the most recent scientific evidence and with the highest level of quality. Results: We propose the creation of the diagnosis "Risk of refusal of vaccination", whose definition is "susceptible to refuse immunization against communicable and/or fatal diseases, putting the user's health and public health at risk". Discussion: within Taxonomy II, is included in Domain 11, safety/protection, and in class 5, defensive processes. Conclusions: In the absence of a Nursing diagnosis related to vaccination, a process in which nurses play an active role, and in the face of the threat posed by anti-vaccine movements, the diagnosis Risk of refusal of vaccination represents an important advance in the body of nursing knowledge. (AU)

Impacto da infodemia na hesitação vacinal contra a covid-19: uma ameaça compartilhada / Impact of the infodemia on vaccine hesitation against covid-19: a shared threat / Impacto de la infodemia en las dudas sobre la vacuna contra el covid-19: una amenaza compartida

Objetivo: Examinar e mapear as evidências científicas sobre o compartilhamento de desinformações relacionadas a vacinação contra a COVID-19 entre usuários das redes sociais. Metodologia: Scoping Review, baseado nos procedimentos recomendados pelo Instituto Joanna Briggs. Estabeleceu-se a pergunta norteadora: "Qual o comportamento dos usuários de redes sociais quanto ao compartilhamento de informações e desinformações em saúde relacionados à vacinação contra COVID-19?". A coleta dos dados foi realizada em abril de 2023 nas bases de dados PubMed, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, Scopus, Web of Science e EMBASE. Foram excluídos textos publicados antes de 2020, protocolos de revisão sistemática ou meta análise e estudos fora do recorte temático. Resultados: Os 9 estudos tiveram delineamento de pesquisas experimentais do tipo análise netnográfica. Quanto a plataforma de disseminação, é possível observar que o Facebook é a mídia social que mais veicula fake news relacionadas à vacinação de COVID-19 seguido do Twitter (33,3%) e Instagram (22,2%). Evidencia-se a forte propensão de engajamento a publicações de cunho antivacina e disseminação de eventos adversos e/ou efeitos colaterais dos imunizantes com ênfase na Pfizer-BioNTech. O perfil dos disseminadores está associado a figuras públicas e jovens de 18 a 44 anos, que também possuem maior propensão de crença na fidedignidade das informações encontradas. Os estudos associam a queda nas taxas de imunização pelo medo dos efeitos colaterais, incluindo hospitalização, miocardites, coágulos sanguíneos e óbito, bem como a desconfiança governamental. Conclusão: o compartilhamento de fake news é um forte fator de hesitação vacinal gerando medo, insegurança e preocupação.

Objective: To examine and map scientific evidence on the sharing of misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccination among social media users. Methodology: Scoping Review, based on procedures recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The guiding question was established: "What is the behavior of users of social networks regarding the sharing of health information and misinformation related to vaccination against COVID-19?". Data collection was carried out in April 2023 in the PubMed, Virtual Health Library, Scopus, Web of Science and EMBASE databases. Texts published before 2020, systematic review or meta-analysis protocols and studies outside the thematic scope were excluded. Results: The 9 studies had the design of experimental researches of the netnographic analysis type. As for the dissemination platform, it is possible to observe that Facebook is the social media that most conveys fake news related to the COVID-19 vaccination followed by Twitter (33.3%) and Instagram (22.2%). There is evidence of a strong tendency to engage with anti-vaccine publications and the dissemination of adverse events and/or side effects of immunizations, with an emphasis on Pfizer-BioNTech. The profile of disseminators is associated with public figures and young people aged 18 to 44, who are also more likely to believe in the reliability of the information found. Studies associate the drop in immunization rates with fear of side effects, including hospitalization, myocarditis, blood clots and death, as well as government distrust. Conclusion: The sharing fake news is a strong factor in vaccine hesitancy, generating fear, insecurity and concern.

Objetivo: Examinar y mapear la evidencia científica sobre el intercambio de información errónea relacionada con la vacunación contra la COVID-19 entre los usuarios de las redes sociales. Metodología: Scoping Review, basado en los procedimientos recomendados por el Instituto Joanna Briggs. Se estableció la pregunta guía "¿Cuál es el comportamiento de los usuarios de las redes sociales con respecto al intercambio de información sanitaria y desinformación relacionada con la vacunación contra la COVID-19?". La recogida de datos se realizó en abril de 2023 en las bases de datos PubMed, Virtual Health Library, Scopus, Web of Science y EMBASE. Se excluyeron textos publicados antes de 2020, protocolos de revisión sistemática o metaanálisis y estudios fuera del ámbito temático. Resultados: Los 9 estudios tenían el diseño de investigaciones experimentales del tipo análisis netnográfico. En cuanto a la plataforma de difusión, se puede observar que Facebook es el medio social que más transmite noticias falsas relacionadas con la vacunación COVID-19 seguido de Twitter (33,3%) e Instagram (22,2%). Se evidencia una fuerte tendencia a las publicaciones antivacunas y a la difusión de eventos adversos y/o efectos secundarios de las vacunas, destacando Pfizer-BioNTech. El perfil de los divulgadores se asocia a personajes públicos y jóvenes de 18 a 44 años, que además son más propensos a creer en la fiabilidad de la información encontrada. Los estudios asocian la caída de las tasas de inmunización con el miedo a los efectos secundarios, incluyendo hospitalización, miocarditis, coágulos de sangre y muerte, así como la desconfianza del gobierno. Conclusiones: El intercambio de noticias falsas es un factor importante en la indecisión sobre las vacunas, ya que genera miedo, inseguridad y preocupación.

Vaccination coverage of triple viral and poliomyelitis in Brazil, 2011-2021: temporal trend and spatial dependency / Cobertura vacinal da tríplice viral e poliomielite no Brasil, 2011-2021: tendência temporal e dependência espacial

ABSTRACT Objective: To analyze the coverage of MMR and polio vaccines, the temporal trend and spatial dependence, in children up to one year of age in Brazil, between 2011 and 2021. Methods: Ecological study with secondary data on vaccination coverage rates, made available by the National Immunization Program Information System. Trend analysis was carried out using the joinpoint method, according to geographic regions, estimating the annual percentage change (APC) and its respective confidence interval (95%CI). Choropleth maps of distribution by health region were constructed and, subsequently, the spatial dependence was verified using Moran's statistics. Results: Between 2011 and 2021, vaccination coverage declined in Brazil, both for MMR (APC: −6.4%; 95%CI −9.0; −3.8) and for poliomyelitis (APC: −4. 5%; 95%CI −5.5; −3.6). There was a decline in coverage of both vaccines in all geographic regions over the years of the study, except in the South and Midwest for the MMR vaccine. Since 2015, few health regions in the country have achieved adequate vaccination coverage (≥95.0% to <120.0%). The North and Northeast health regions showed low-low clusters in the univariate analysis for both immunobiological. Conclusions: It is urgent to consider studies like this one for the planning of more effective strategies for immunizing children, especially in areas with higher falls. In this way, barriers to access to immunization can be broken, given Brazil's heterogeneity, and access to reliable information that increases confidence in vaccine efficacy can be expanded.

RESUMO Objetivo: Analisar a cobertura das vacinas tríplice viral e contra poliomielite, a tendência temporal e a dependência espacial em crianças de até um ano no Brasil, entre 2011 e 2021. Métodos: Estudo ecológico com dados secundários das taxas de cobertura vacinal (CV), disponibilizadas pelo Sistema de Informação do Programa Nacional de Imunização. A análise de tendência ocorreu pelo método joinpoint, segundo regiões geográficas, estimando a variação percentual anual (APC) e seu respectivo intervalo de confiança (IC95%). Foram construídos mapas coropléticos de distribuição por região de saúde e, posteriormente, verificou-se a dependência espacial pela estatística de Moran. Resultados: Entre 2011 e 2021, as coberturas vacinais apresentaram queda no Brasil, tanto para tríplice viral (APC: −6,4%; IC95%: −9,0; −3,8) quanto para poliomielite (APC: −4,5%; IC95% −5,5; −3,6). Houve declínio da cobertura de ambas as vacinas em todas as regiões geográficas ao longo dos anos de estudo, exceto no Sul e no Centro-Oeste para a vacina tríplice viral. Desde 2015, poucas regionais de saúde do país atingiram a CV adequada (≥95 a <120%). As regiões sanitárias do Norte e do Nordeste apresentaram clusters do tipo baixo-baixo na análise univariada para ambos os imunobiológicos. Conclusão: É premente considerar estudos como este para o planejamento de estratégias mais eficazes à imunização de crianças, sobretudo em áreas de maior queda. Desse modo, pode-se romper as barreiras do acesso à imunização, dada a heterogeneidade brasileira, e ampliar o acesso a informações fidedignas que aumentem a confiança na eficácia vacinal.

Inquérito online sobre os motivos para hesitação vacinal contra a COVID-19 em crianças e adolescentes do Brasil / Online survey on the reasons for vaccine hesitancy against COVID-19 in children and adolescents in Brazil / Encuesta en línea sobre los motivos de la indecisión a las vacunas contra COVID-19 en niños y adolescentes de Brasil

Resumo: Objetiva-se desvelar os motivos para hesitação vacinal de pais e/ou responsáveis de crianças e adolescentes para prevenção da COVID-19. Trata-se de um estudo descritivo, de abordagem qualitativa, que busca analisar as respostas da pergunta aberta "por que você não vai vacinar, não vacinou ou está na dúvida em vacinar as crianças e os adolescentes sob sua responsabilidade para prevenção da COVID-19?". A pesquisa incluiu indivíduos adultos, brasileiros, residentes no país, responsáveis por crianças e adolescentes menores de 18 anos. A coleta de dados aconteceu de forma eletrônica entre os meses de novembro e dezembro de 2021. As respostas foram organizadas e processadas com suporte do software Iramuteq. O corpus textual desta pesquisa foi composto pela resposta de 1.896 participantes, constituído por 87% de hesitantes (1.650) e 13% (246) de pais que têm intenção de vacinar, mas que esboçaram algumas dúvidas e considerações a respeito da vacinação de crianças e adolescentes. São motivos pelos quais pais e/ou responsáveis não vacinaram ou estão na dúvida em vacinar as crianças e os adolescentes sob sua responsabilidade para prevenção da COVID-19: receio em razão de a vacina estar em fase experimental e medo das reações adversas e dos efeitos a longo prazo. Já os motivos para ausência de intenção de vacinar decorrem dos entendimentos dos participantes de que a COVID-19 em crianças não é grave, os riscos da vacinação são maiores do que os benefícios e o direito de escolha em não vacinar.

Abstract: The objective is to unveil the reasons for vaccine hesitancy among parents and/or guardians of children and adolescents toward the prevention of COVID-19. This is a descriptive study, with a qualitative approach that seeks to analyze the answers to the open question "Why will you not vaccinate or have not vaccinated or are in doubt about vaccinating the children and adolescents under your responsibility, for the prevention of COVID-19?". The research included adult individuals, Brazilians, living in the country, responsible for children and adolescents under 18 years of age. Data collection took place electronically in November and December 2021. The answers were organized and processed with the support of the software Iramuteq. The textual corpus of this research was composed of the response of 1,896 participants, consisting of 87% who were hesitant (1,650) and 13% (246) of parents who intend to vaccinate but who outlined some doubts and considerations about the vaccination of children and adolescents. These are reasons why parents and/or guardians have not vaccinated or are in doubt about vaccinating the children and adolescents under their responsibility for the prevention of COVID-19: fears about vaccination regarding the conception that the vaccine is in the experimental phase, fear of adverse reactions and long-term effects. The reasons for the lack of intention to vaccinate stem from the understanding of the participants that COVID-19 in children is not serious, the risks of vaccination are greater than the benefits, and the right of choice not to vaccinate.

Resumen: El objetivo es revelar los motivos de la indecisión a las vacunas de padres y/o responsables de niños y adolescentes para la prevención de COVID-19. Se trata de un estudio descriptivo con enfoque cualitativo, que busca analizar las respuestas a la pregunta abierta "¿Por qué no va a vacunar o no vacunó o tiene dudas en vacunar a los niños y los adolescentes bajo su responsabilidad para la prevención del COVID-19?". La investigación incluyó individuos adultos, brasileños, residentes en el país, responsables de niños y adolescentes menores de 18 años. La recolección de datos se realizó de forma electrónica entre los meses de noviembre y diciembre de 2021. Las respuestas se organizaron y procesaron con ayuda del software Iramuteq. El corpus textual de esta investigación fue compuesto por la respuesta de 1.896 participantes, siendo constituido por el 87% de indecisos (1.650) y el 13% (246) de padres que tienen la intención de vacunar, pero que esbozaron algunas dudas y consideraciones respecto a la vacunación de niños y adolescentes. Son motivos por los cuales los padres y/o responsables no vacunaron o están en duda en vacunar a los niños y adolescentes bajo su responsabilidad para prevención del COVID-19: temores con la vacunación en cuanto a la concepción de que la vacuna está en fase experimental, miedo a las reacciones adversas y los efectos a largo plazo. Los motivos de la ausencia de intención en vacunar se deben a que los participantes entienden que el COVID-19 en niños no es grave, que los riesgos de la vacunación son mayores que los beneficios y que tienen derecho a decidir no vacunarse.

Prediction and reasons for COVID-19 second dose vaccine hesitation: a cross-sectional study in a municipality of Brazil

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Hesitation and refusal to take a second dose of the vaccine for coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) are prevalent. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify predictive factors for hesitation or refusal and describe groups with higher rates of vaccine hesitancy. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional study in Assis City, Brazil. METHODS: The study included adults who passed the due date for taking the COVID-19 second dose vaccine. Participants were recruited in December 2021 using a mobile-based text message. Sociodemographic and clinical data and reasons for hesitance were collected. The outcome was the attitude towards completing the recommended second dose of the vaccine. Bivariate and multivariate Poisson analyses were performed to determine the adjusted predictors. RESULTS: Participants between 30-44 years of age had a 2.41 times higher prevalence of hesitation than those aged 18-29 years. In addition, people who had adverse events or previously had COVID-19 had 4.7 and 5.4 times higher prevalences of hesitation, respectively (P value < 0.05). CONCLUSION: We found a significant group of adults aged between 30-44 years who refused the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Furthermore, those who reported adverse effects after the first dose and those who had COVID-19 previously were a significant group for refusal.

"Tratamento precoce", antivacinação e negacionismo: quem são os Médicos pela Vida no contexto da pandemia de COVID-19 no Brasil? / "Early Treatment", Anti-Vaccination, and Denialism: who are the Doctors for Life in the COVID-19 pandemic context in Brazil?

Resumo O artigo pretende identificar quem são os "Médicos pela Vida" (MPV), suas informações acadêmicas e profissionais, quais as premissas utilizadas para a defesa do "tratamento precoce" e da negação das vacinas contra COVID-19 e qual a representatividade de seus discursos no contexto da prática médica no Brasil. A análise baseia-se na lista de 276 profissionais médicos catalogados no site dos MPV e em informações acadêmicas e profissionais coletadas nos sites do Conselho Federal de Medicina e da Plataforma Lattes, do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico. A análise do conteúdo aponta para a centralidade das especialidades da Homeopatia e Acupuntura na população de MPV quando comparada ao conjunto dos especialistas do Brasil. A adesão significativa de homeopatas e acupunturistas ao movimento dos MPV pode iluminar a compreensão sobre racionalidades médicas específicas, permitindo distinguir quais categorias e ideias acerca dos processos de saúde e doença estão em disputa. Conclui-se que, para além de descrever a problemática, é preciso estabelecer suas correlações com um conjunto de acontecimentos, práticas, decisões políticas, encadeamentos econômicos, compartilhamento de crenças e uma corrente de processos que configuram seu caráter inegavelmente social.

Abstract The article aims to identify who the "Doctors for Life" are, their academic and professional information, which assumptions have been mobilized for the defense of "early treatment" and the denial of vaccines for COVID-19, and the representativeness of their discourses in the medical practice context in Brazil. The analysis is based on a list of 276 doctors' names, cataloged from their website, and on academic and professional information obtained through research on the Federal Medical Conseil website and the Scientific and Technological Development Nacional Council platform. The content analysis points to the centrality of the medical specialties of homeopathy and acupuncture in the population of Doctors for Life when compared to the set of specialist doctors in Brazil. The significant accession of homeopaths and acupuncturists to the Doctors for Life movement can clarify the understanding of specific medical rationalities, allowing us to distinguish which categories and ideas about the health-disease process are in dispute. It is concluded that, more than describing the problem, it is needed to establish its correlations with a group of events, practices, political decisions, economic linkages, shared beliefs, and a chain of processes that configure its undeniably social characteristics.

Patient-Guided Talking Points to Address COVID-19 and General Vaccine Hesitancy.

Vaccination remains one of the most effective ways to limit spread of disease. Waning public confidence in COVID-19 vaccines has resulted in reduced vaccination rates. In fact, despite vaccine availability, many individuals choose to delay COVID-19 vaccination resulting in suboptimal herd immunity and increased viral mutations. A number of qualitative and quantitative studies have been conducted to identify, understand, and address modifiable barriers and factors contributing to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among individuals with access to vaccine. Vaccine confidence may be improved through targeted patient-provider discussion. More patients are turning to pharmacists to receive their vaccinations across the lifespan. The primary goal of this commentary is to share evidence-based, patient talking points, tailored by practicing pharmacists, to better communicate and address factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy and reduced vaccine confidence.

[Public Resistance to Vaccination During Epidemics: The Example of COVID-19Resistência da população à vacinação em tempos de epidemias: sobre a COVID-19]. / Resistencia de la población hacia la vacunación en época de epidemias: a propósito de la COVID-19.

Objective: This article presents the findings of a review of the literature on public resistance to vaccines and the main factors that have influenced their decisions about immunoprevention, with a focus on the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We searched the literature using the terms DeCs/MeSH, anti-vaccination movement, vaccination refusal, epidemics, COVID-19, and impacts on health, using the Boolean operators OR and AND in Google Scholar, Medline, Lilacs, and Ibecs. Documents from official sources were also considered. Results: Throughout history, since vaccination began, people have had controversial perceptions of the procedure: some accept what the health authorities recommend, and others allege hidden intentions behind immunization. The COVID-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 has been no exception. Conclusions: Vaccination has been one of the greatest scientific achievements in public health. However, despite its benefits, it has raised fear, uncertainty, and suspicion in the population. For this reason, it is important to increase health education actions in the population-with clear, concise, understandable information that is based on reliable and truthful sources-in order to reduce resistance to vaccination and address preventable diseases.

Objetivo: Este artigo busca apresentar os achados de uma revisão da literatura sobre a resistência da população às vacinas e os principais motivos que influenciaram suas decisões em relação à imunoprevenção, com foco na pandemia de COVID-19. Métodos: Foi realizada uma busca na literatura utilizando os termos DeCs/MeSH anti-vaccination movement, vaccination refusal, epidemics, COVID-19 e impacts on health, relacionados entre si pelos operadores booleanos OR e AND, no Google Scholar, MEDLINE, LILACS e IBECS. Documentos de fontes oficiais também foram levados em consideração. Resultados: Ao longo da história, desde o início da vacinação, a percepção das pessoas em relação a esse procedimento foi controversa. Há quem aceite o que as autoridades de saúde recomendam e quem alegue intenções ocultas por trás da imunização. A vacina contra o SARS-CoV-2, que causa a COVID-19, não foi exceção. Conclusões: A vacinação tem sido uma das maiores conquistas científicas em termos de saúde pública ­ um avanço que, apesar de seus benefícios, tem causado medo, incerteza e desconfiança na população. Por isso, é importante aumentar as ações de educação em saúde para a população, com informações claras, concisas e compreensíveis, baseadas em fontes confiáveis e verídicas, a fim de diminuir a resistência à vacinação e evitar doenças preveníveis.

The attitude of Polish women planning pregnancy and/or having children towards vaccinations: a cross-sectional survey study.

OBJECTIVES: Infectious diseases in pregnant women can cause birth defects. Implementing appropriate prevention methods while planning pregnancy can help avoid some of them. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study was performed. The questionnaire investigated attitudes towards vaccinations, as well as opinions on anti-vaccine movements and the so-called "chickenpox parties". The questionnaire was developed for the purpose of this study and the survey was conducted using the google form, which was posted on social media groups for women planning pregnancy, being pregnant or for mothers' groups from Poland. RESULTS: The study group consisted of 2402 women; their median age was 31 years (range 16-54 years). Most women were from cities > 100,000 inhabitants (49.7%, 1194/2402) and had higher education (71.9%, 1726/2402). A positive attitude towards vaccinations was more common among younger, nulliparous women from big cities (p = 0.02, p = 0.04 and p = 0.01, respectively). 2068/2402 (86.1%) of respondents were not vaccinated before pregnancy and 1931/2402 (80.4%) of women were not vaccinated during pregnancy. While most women (1545/2402, 64.3%) considered vaccination safe, and effective (1904/2402, 79.3%) against infectious diseases, many (n = 296/2402 12.3%) have no opinion on the so-called chickenpox party. CONCLUSIONS: Most surveyed women had a positive attitude towards vaccinations and consider vaccines a safe and effective method of protection against infectious diseases. Since a significant proportion of women were not vaccinated before or during pregnancy and about 12% of women are undecided, the physician's role is crucial in educating and persuading the patient to be vaccinated.

Implicações da autonomia na recusa de vacinação contra a COVID-19: reflexões a partir do entendimento do Supremo Tribunal Federal / Implications of autonomy in the refusal of vaccination against COVID-19: reflectinguponthe Brazilian Supreme Court understanding / Implicaciones de la autonomía en el rechazo de la vacunación contra el COVID-19: reflexiones sobre la comprensión del Tribunal Supremo de Brasil

Objetivo: discutir as implicações da autonomia na obrigatoriedade da vacina contra a COVID-19 a partir de decisão do Supremo Tribunal Federal, correlacionando-as com a ética baseada em princípios. Metodologia: trata-se de uma pesquisa documental, pautada por decisões recentes do Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) e bibliográfica, utilizando bases de dados científicas. Resultados: observou-se que a vacinação compulsória no Brasil vem sendo aplicada em vários períodos da história e configura uma medida que assegura os direitos fundamentais, como o direito à saúde. Em um cenário pandêmico, a autonomia do indivíduo perde o protagonismo frente às necessidades coletivas, já que o direito à saúde é individual e coletivo. Concomitantemente, a suposta restrição da liberdade individual respalda-se no fundamento do interesse coletivo à saúde e à dignidade da pessoa humana. Conclusão: a imunização da população brasileira deve ser abordada de forma segura e eficaz para o controle dessa crise sanitária.

Objective: to discuss the implications of autonomy in the mandatory vaccine against COVID-19 from a decision of the Federal Supreme Court correlated with ethics based on principles. Methods: this is a document analysis research, guided by recent decisions of the Supreme Court (STF) and bibliographic, using scientific databases. Results: compulsory vaccination in Brazil has been applied in various periods of history and configures a measure that ensures fundamental rights, such as the right to health. Even because, in a pandemic scenario, the autonomy of the individual loses its protagonism in the face of collective needs, since the right to health is individual and collective. Concomitantly, the alleged restriction of individual freedom is supported by the foundation of the collective interest in health and human dignity. Conclusion: the immunization of the Brazilian population must be approached in a safe and effective way to control this health crisis.

Objetivo: el estudio tuvo como objetivo discutir las implicaciones de la autonomía en la vacuna obligatoria contra el COVID-19 a partir de las decisiones del Supremo Tribunal Federal correlacionada con la ética basada en principios. Metodología: se trata de una investigación documental, guiada por decisiones recientes del Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) y bibliográfica, utilizando bases de datos científicas. Resultados: se observó que la vacunación obligatoria en Brasil se ha aplicado en varios períodos de la historia y configura una medida que garantiza derechos fundamentales, como el derecho a la salud. Además, en un entorno pandémico, la autonomía del individuo pierde el protagonismo frente a las necesidades colectivas, ya que el derecho a la salud es individual y colectivo. Concomitantemente, la supuesta restricción de la libertad individual se apoya en el fundamento del interés colectivo a la salud y la dignidad humana. Conclusión: la inmunización de la población brasileña debe ser abordada de forma segura y eficaz para controlar esta crisis sanitaria.

Addressing vaccine hesitancy and resistance for COVID-19 vaccines.

The COVID-19 vaccine rollout has had various degrees of success in different countries. Achieving high levels of vaccine coverage is key to responding to and mitigating the impact of the pandemic on health and aged care systems and the community. In many countries, vaccine hesitancy, resistance, and refusal are emerging as significant barriers to immunisation uptake and the relaxation of policies that limit everyday life. Vaccine hesitancy/ resistance/ refusal is complex and multi-faceted. Individuals and groups have diverse and often multiple reasons for delaying or refusing vaccination. These reasons include: social determinants of health, convenience, ease of availability and access, health literacy understandability and clarity of information, judgements around risk versus benefit, notions of collective versus individual responsibility, trust or mistrust of authority or healthcare, and personal or group beliefs, customs, or ideologies. Published evidence suggests that targeting and adapting interventions to particular population groups, contexts, and specific reasons for vaccine hesitancy/ resistance may enhance the effectiveness of interventions. While evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions to address vaccine hesitancy and improve uptake is limited and generally unable to underpin any specific strategy, multi-pronged interventions are promising. In many settings, mandating vaccination, particularly for those working in health or high risk/ transmission industries, has been implemented or debated by Governments, decision-makers, and health authorities. While mandatory vaccination is effective for seasonal influenza uptake amongst healthcare workers, this evidence may not be appropriately transferred to the context of COVID-19. Financial or other incentives for addressing vaccine hesitancy may have limited effectiveness with much evidence for benefit appearing to have been translated across from other public/preventive health issues such as smoking cessation. Multicomponent, dialogue-based (i.e., communication) interventions are effective in addressing vaccine hesitancy/resistance. Multicomponent interventions that encompasses the following might be effective: (i) targeting specific groups such as unvaccinated/under-vaccinated groups or healthcare workers, (ii) increasing vaccine knowledge and awareness, (iii) enhanced access and convenience of vaccination, (iv) mandating vaccination or implementing sanctions against non-vaccination, (v) engaging religious and community leaders, (vi) embedding new vaccine knowledge and evidence in routine health practices and procedures, and (vii) addressing mistrust and improving trust in healthcare providers and institutions via genuine engagement and dialogue. It is universally important that healthcare professionals and representative groups, as often highly trusted sources of health guidance, should be closely involved in policymaker and health authority decisions regarding the establishment and implementation of vaccine recommendations and interventions to address vaccine hesitancy.

Turkish Healthcare Workers' Personal and Parental Attitudes to COVID-19 Vaccination From a Role Modeling Perspective.

Introduction As in many other countries, healthcare workers (HCWs) have been identified as the priority group for vaccination in Turkey for they are in close contact with not only patients with COVID-19 to whom they provide treatment but also asymptomatic individuals with COVID-19 infection while inoculating COVID-19 vaccines. As a result of this prioritization, they will always be in the limelight and regarded as role models for personal and parental acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines. Methods Turkish healthcare workers (n=1,808) were contacted and invited to fill out an online questionnaire between December 27, 2020, and January 14, 2021, in order to reveal their approaches to COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination. Results Most of the participants had moderate concerns of having severe COVID-19. Anxiety on the adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines was more prevalent in females and among 36- to 50-year-old healthcare workers and less frequent in physicians, nurses, and midwives and in those with a higher level of knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines. Strict anti-vaccination tendency was higher in professional categories other than physicians, nurses, and midwives. Females, physicians, nurses, midwives, healthcare workers aged 51 and over, healthcare workers having children, married healthcare workers, and healthcare workers who use scientific journals and World Health Organization (WHO) announcements as sources of information were more inclined to accept COVID-19 vaccines. The elimination of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in healthcare workers would be possible if people around them, physicians, and ministers or high officials get vaccinated but will persist in 19% of the healthcare workers. More than half of the healthcare workers thought vaccination against COVID-19 should not be mandatory. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was the most preferred COVID-19 vaccine (37.3%). The reasons for this preference were the trustworthiness of the country of origin, the manufacturer company, the Turkish origin of its developers, the vaccine's being the first to receive emergency validation, and its non-Indian, non-Russian, and non-Chinese origin. Parental vaccine refusal and hesitancy were present in 15.6% and 31.9% of the healthcare workers, respectively. The mistrust in COVID-19 vaccines among Turkish healthcare workers was directed toward not only pharmaceutical companies but also health authorities and academicians because of their unconvincing, conflicting, or vague statements and toward certain countries known for their production of low-quality merchandise in the past. Conclusion The parental COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy of 32% of the healthcare workers is unacceptably high for role modeling against anti-vaccine movement and should be diminished by implementing necessary measures as soon as possible.

Acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers before the launch of vaccine in India: An online survey.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has led to significant morbidity and mortality globally in addition to unprecedented disruption in economic activities. Vaccination against it is considered to be the only sustainable way out of this pandemic. The study was conducted to estimate vaccine acceptance among doctors in India using an online survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study using a purposive sampling method was conducted two weeks before vaccine rollout. A pretested questionnaire developed using Google forms was shared by social media groups targeting doctors only.The questions collected information regarding socio-demographic details, knowledge, attitude and practices towards COVID-19 vaccination. Data was downloaded and analysed using SPSS-v23. Chi-square test and fisher exact test was used and P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 511 records were included in the final analysis of which 340 (66.53%) reported to be either definitely or probably willing to accept COVID-19 vaccine. One third of respondents were working in COVID-19 designated hospitals (37.2%), 30% were posted in non COVID-19 hospitals, 25.1% had no direct contact with COVID-19 patients while 7.7% doctors were involved in testing COVID-19 diagnosis. Subjects who perceived a higher risk of contracting COVID-19, those who perceived that vaccine would be effective against COVID-19 and those who felt that vaccine will not have any serious side effects were more likely to accept the vaccine. CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need to address any apprehensions regarding COVID-19 vaccines. A tailored and intensified advocacy program for doctors is needed before the launch of vaccine.

Vaccine hesitation and the 'pandemic' of the unvaccined: What to do to face the new "Vaccine Revolt"? / Hesitação vacinal e a 'pandemia' dos não vacinados: o que fazer para enfrentar a nova "Revolta da Vacina"?

ABSTRAC: The frequency of people hesitating to get vaccinated is increasing worldwide and regarding the covid-19 pandemic, this phenomenon has been increasingly noticed at a national level. This article exposes a brief presentation of the historical factors of this phenomenon, approaches its main determinants and conceptual model, in addition to presenting a set of communication strategies in vaccine health that can be implemented to face this problem to raise the credibility and adherence to immunizations. (AU)

RESUMO: A frequência da hesitação vacinal está aumentando em todo o mundo e, no contexto da pandemia da Covid-19, esse fenômeno vem sendo cada vez mais percebido no âmbito nacional. No presente trabalho, realizamos uma breve apresentação de fatores históricos desse fenômeno, abordamos seus principais determinantes e modelo conceitual, além de apresentar um conjunto de estratégias de (edu)comunicação em saúde vacinal que podem ser implementadas para enfrentamento dessa problemática com vista a elevar a credibilidade e a adesão às imunizações. (AU)

Anti-vaccination movements in the world and in Brazil

ABSTRACT Over the years, vaccinations have provided significant advances in public health, because they substantially reduce the morbimortality of vaccine-preventable diseases. Nevertheless, many people are still hesitant to be vaccinated. Brazil is a region of many anti-vaccine movements, and several outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, such as yellow fever and measles, have occurred in the country during the last few years. To avoid new outbreaks, immunization coverage must be high; however, this is a great challenge to achieve due to the countless anti-vaccine movements. The World Health Organization has suggested new actions for the next decade via the Immunization Agenda 2030 to control, reduce, or eradicate vaccine-preventable diseases. Nonetheless, the vaccination coverage has decreased recently. To resolve the anti-vaccine issue, it is necessary to propose a long-term approach that involves innovative education programs on immunization and critical thinking, using different communication channels, including social media. Cooperation among biology and health scientists, ethicists, human scientists, policymakers, journalists, and civil society is essential for an in-depth understanding of the social action of vaccine refusal and planning effective education measures to increase the vaccine coverage.

Resistencia de la población hacia la vacunación en época de epidemias: a propósito de la COVID-19 / Public Resistance to Vaccination During Epidemics: The Example of COVID-19 / Resistência da população à vacinação em tempos de epidemias: sobre a COVID-19

RESUMEN Objetivo. El presente artículo busca exponer los hallazgos de una revisión de la literatura sobre la resistencia de la población frente a las vacunas y las principales razones que han influido en sus decisiones hacia a la inmunoprevención, con foco en la pandemia de la COVID-19. Métodos. Se realizó una búsqueda en la literatura utilizando los términos DeCs/MeSH, Anti-Vaccination Movement, Vaccination refusal, Epidemics, COVID-19, Impacts on health, relacionados entre ellos por los operadores booleanos OR y AND en Google Scholar, Medline, Lilacs e Ibecs; también se tuvieron en cuenta documentos de fuentes oficiales. Resultados. A lo largo de la historia, desde el inicio de la vacunación, la percepción de las personas hacia este procedimiento ha sido controversial, hay quienes aceptan lo que las autoridades sanitarias recomiendan y quienes alegan intenciones ocultas detrás de la inmunización; la vacuna contra el SARS-CoV-2 causante de la COVID-19 no ha sido la excepción. Conclusiones. La vacunación ha sido uno de los mayores logros científicos en términos de salud pública, un avance que, a pesar de sus beneficios, ha causado miedo, incertidumbre y suspicacias en la población. Por esta razón, resulta importante incrementar las acciones de educación para la salud en la población, con información clara, concisa y comprensible, y sustentada en fuentes confiables y verídicas, con el fin de disminuir la resistencia a la vacunación y evitar las enfermedades prevenibles.

ABSTRACT Objective. This article presents the findings of a review of the literature on public resistance to vaccines and the main factors that have influenced their decisions about immunoprevention, with a focus on the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. We searched the literature using the terms DeCs/MeSH, anti-vaccination movement, vaccination refusal, epidemics, COVID-19, and impacts on health, using the Boolean operators OR and AND in Google Scholar, Medline, Lilacs, and Ibecs. Documents from official sources were also considered. Results. Throughout history, since vaccination began, people have had controversial perceptions of the procedure: some accept what the health authorities recommend, and others allege hidden intentions behind immunization. The COVID-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 has been no exception. Conclusions. Vaccination has been one of the greatest scientific achievements in public health. However, despite its benefits, it has raised fear, uncertainty, and suspicion in the population. For this reason, it is important to increase health education actions in the population—with clear, concise, understandable information that is based on reliable and truthful sources—in order to reduce resistance to vaccination and address preventable diseases.

RESUMO Objetivo. Este artigo busca apresentar os achados de uma revisão da literatura sobre a resistência da população às vacinas e os principais motivos que influenciaram suas decisões em relação à imunoprevenção, com foco na pandemia de COVID-19. Métodos. Foi realizada uma busca na literatura utilizando os termos DeCs/MeSH anti-vaccination movement, vaccination refusal, epidemics, COVID-19 e impacts on health, relacionados entre si pelos operadores booleanos OR e AND, no Google Scholar, MEDLINE, LILACS e IBECS. Documentos de fontes oficiais também foram levados em consideração. Resultados. Ao longo da história, desde o início da vacinação, a percepção das pessoas em relação a esse procedimento foi controversa. Há quem aceite o que as autoridades de saúde recomendam e quem alegue intenções ocultas por trás da imunização. A vacina contra o SARS-CoV-2, que causa a COVID-19, não foi exceção. Conclusões. A vacinação tem sido uma das maiores conquistas científicas em termos de saúde pública - um avanço que, apesar de seus benefícios, tem causado medo, incerteza e desconfiança na população. Por isso, é importante aumentar as ações de educação em saúde para a população, com informações claras, concisas e compreensíveis, baseadas em fontes confiáveis e verídicas, a fim de diminuir a resistência à vacinação e evitar doenças preveníveis.

Prevalence and Determinants of Vaccine Hesitancy in Aseer Region, Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the awareness of the general population regarding vaccines to determine the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy in Aseer Region in the southern part of Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional approach was used, targeting all parents in Aseer Region. The study was carried out from January to April 2020. The data for this study were collected using a structured questionnaire, which was developed by the researchers after an intensive literature review and consultation with experts. The questionnaire covered aspects such as parents' sociodemographic data, their awareness regarding vaccine safety and efficacy for children and their attitude and adherence to children's vaccination, including their hesitancy towards vaccines. RESULTS: The survey included 796 participants (response rate: 100%) whose ages ranged from 18 to 55 years. Two-thirds (63.4%) of the participants were female. Regarding vaccination adherence and hesitancy among participants, more than three-quarters completely adhered to the vaccination schedule for their children, and only 3.9% were non-adherent. With regards to participants' awareness regarding vaccine safety and efficacy for children, 89.3% agreed that vaccination keeps children healthy, 84.2% reported that vaccines are safe and effective for children and 83.4% reported that all scheduled vaccines in Saudi Arabia are effective. CONCLUSION: Vaccine hesitancy among participants was not low, and this should be taken into account notwithstanding their high awareness levels. The recorded antivaccine action was mostly related to vaccine safety and not its efficacy.