The faces of influenza vaccine recommendation: A Literature review of the determinants and barriers to health providers' recommendation of influenza vaccine in pregnancy

Uptake of Recommended Vaccines During Pregnancy Among Publicly and Privately Insured People in the United States, December 2020-September 2022

Objectives. To estimate maternal COVID-19, influenza, and pertussis vaccine uptake during pregnancy by insurance type and identify factors characterizing those vaccinated and unvaccinated. Methods. We conducted a US cohort study of pregnant individuals (for pregnancies ending December 11, 2020-September 30, 2022) using insurance claims data. We calculated vaccination probability using Kaplan-Meier methods and identified factors associated with vaccination through binomial regression with inverse probability weights. Results. Among 695 887 pregnant individuals (median age = 32 years for privately and 27 years for publicly insured), the cumulative probability of COVID-19 vaccination was 43.0% (privately insured) and 11.8% (publicly insured). We observed marked disparities between influenza (33.2% vs 14.2%) and pertussis (70.3% vs 42.8%) vaccination. Only 6.8% (privately insured) and 1.1% (publicly insured) received all 3 vaccines. COVID-19 and influenza vaccination odds were lower among drug and tobacco users. People with high-risk medical conditions, particularly the publicly insured, commonly were vaccinated. Conclusions. Marked vaccine uptake disparities exist between privately and publicly insured pregnant people. Understanding structural barriers, particularly for Medicaid enrollees, is critical to improving maternal vaccine access. (Am J Public Health. 2025;115(3):354-363. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307899).

Do Pregnant Persons Want Influenza Vaccines? Knowledge, Attitudes, Perceptions, and Practices Toward Influenza Vaccines in 8 Low- and Middle-Income Countries

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is the most effective way to prevent influenza infection and adverse outcomes; despite global recommendations to vaccinate pregnant persons, access to influenza vaccines remains low. We explored knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pregnant persons to inform actions to improve vaccine uptake.

METHODS

We pooled data from cross-sectional surveys assessing pregnant persons' attitudes toward influenza vaccines in 8 low- and middle-income countries. Countries used standard methods to measure attitudes and intents toward influenza vaccination. We stratified by presence/absence of a national influenza vaccination program, income group, geographic region, and individual-level factors.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 8556 pregnant persons from 8 countries. Most pregnant persons (6323, 74%) were willing to receive influenza vaccine if it was offered for free. Willingness differed by presence of an existing influenza vaccination program; acceptance was higher in countries without programs (2383, 89%) than in those with programs (3940, 67%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Most pregnant persons in middle-income countries, regardless of influenza vaccination program status, were willing to be vaccinated against influenza if the vaccine was provided free of charge. National investments in influenza vaccination programs present an opportunity to avert illness both in pregnant persons themselves and in their newborn babies.

Trends in influenza vaccination and its determinants among pregnant French women between 2015 and 2020: A single-center study

In 2016, only 7% of French women had received an influenza vaccination during their pregnancy. In this vaccine-averse country, the possibility of reaching the rates of 50% observed in other countries remains unknown. To measure the rate of influenza vaccination in a French university maternity. To study its evolution and determinants over the last 5 years. Single-center observational study of all women who gave birth during March 2020 in this maternity. Comparison with rates observed in 2015 in the same conditions. Of the 337 women included in the study, 202 received a vaccination during pregnancy (59.9%). After logistic regression, the factors significantly associated with achieving vaccination were the offer of vaccination during pregnancy, odds ratio (ORa) 26.2 [7.0; 98.2]; previous vaccination, ORa 20.3 [9.6; 42.6]; high education level, ORa 2.9 [1.3; 6.2]; delivery of a CERFA government reimbursement form, ORa 2.5 [1.3; 4.8]; a vaccination offer made by a general practitioner, ORa 2.1 [1.0; 4.4] and not by a hospital midwife, ORa 0.3 [0.1; 0.6]. The rate of vaccination increased from 35% to 59.9% between 2015 and 2020 (p < .001), with a significant increase in the offer of vaccination during pregnancy (+14.6%) - especially by a general practitioner (+17.2%) - and in the rate of women with earlier vaccination (+13.6%). In France, vaccination rates above 50% are possible at a center level. A proposal of vaccination during pregnancy - especially by the general practitioner - seems to be a determining factor in this development.

Understanding COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Among Iranian Pregnant Women: Insights From a Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

Background and Aims

Despite significant advancements in COVID-19 vaccine research and development, hesitancy in its acceptance, particularly among pregnant women, is recognized as a health threat. Based on the Health Belief Model, this study aimed to identify the factors influencing vaccine nonacceptance among pregnant women in the cities of Zahedan and Tabriz, Iran.

Methods

The present research was a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted among pregnant women in two Iranian provinces, Zahedan and Tabriz, covering both high and low fertility regions. The study was conducted from February 2022 to August 2022. The sample size comprised 650 pregnant women attending selected healthcare centers. Data collection tools included questionnaires on sociodemographic characteristics, awareness, vaccine acceptance, and health beliefs related to vaccination. Data were analyzed using descriptive and analytical methods, including Analysis of variance (ANOVA), Independent t-test, and multivariable logistic regression.

Results

Among the 650 pregnant women, the vaccine acceptance rate was 47.4% and 52.6% of pregnant women reported vaccine nonacceptance during pregnancy. The logistic regression model indicated that the odds of vaccine acceptance increase with maternal employment (OR = 11.53, 95% CI: 4.81-27.63), higher maternal education levels (OR = 6.97, 95% CI: 3.11-15.63), higher income (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.07-2.55), and increased awareness levels (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.03-1.52). Additionally, the odds of vaccine acceptance increase with increased perceived susceptibility (OR = 2.55, 95% CI: 0.47-3.76), increased perceived benefits (OR = 2.22, 95% CI: 1.06-4.61), increased perceived barriers (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.18-1.12), and increased cues to action (OR = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.03-3.92).

Conclusion

Our study underscores the multifaceted nature of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women, with socioeconomic, awareness-related, and psychological factors all playing pivotal roles. These findings can inform targeted interventions and strategies aimed at increasing vaccine acceptance in this vulnerable population, ultimately contributing to enhanced maternal and fetal health during the ongoing pandemic.

Healthcare personnel acceptance and recommendations for influenza vaccine in twelve low- and middle-income countries: A pooled analysis from 2018 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Although healthcare personnel (HCP) are targeted for influenza vaccination they typically underutilize vaccines especially in low- and middle-income countries. We explored knowledge, attitudes, and practices of HCP about seasonal influenza vaccines (SIV) to identify factors associated with and modifiable barriers to SIV uptake.

METHODS

We pooled individual-level data from cross-sectional surveys about SIV conducted among health workers in 12 low- and middle- income countries during 2018-2020 (i.e., Albania, Armenia, Cote d'Ivoire, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Lebanon, Morocco, North Macedonia, Tunisia, Tajikistan, and Uganda). Eleven countries used a standard protocol and questionnaire based on the Health Belief Model to measure perceptions of susceptibility and severity of influenza disease, benefits of, barriers to, and motivators for vaccination. We analyzed attitudes and perceptions among HCP, including acceptance of vaccine for themselves and willingness to recommend vaccines to patients, grouped by the presence/absence of a national influenza vaccination program. Models were adjusted for geographic region.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 10,281 HCP from 12 countries representing four of the six World Health Organization regions: African, Eastern Mediterranean, European, and Western Pacific. The sample was distributed across low income (LIC) (3,183, 31 %), lower-middle (LMIC) (4,744, 46 %), and upper-middle income (UMIC) (2,354, 23 %) countries. Half (50 %) of the countries included in the analysis reported SIV use among HCP in both the year of and the year preceding data collection while the remainder had no influenza vaccination program for HCP. Seventy-four percent (6,341) of HCP reported that they would be willing to be vaccinated if the vaccine was provided free of charge. HCP in LICs were willing to pay prices for SIV representing a higher percentage of their country's annual health expenditure per capita (6.26 % [interquartile range, IQR: 3.13-12.52]) compared to HCP in LMICs and UMICs. HCP in countries with no SIV program were also willing to pay a higher percentage for SIV (5.01 % [IQR: 2.24-8.34]) compared to HCP in countries with SIV programs.. Most (85 %) HCP in our analysis would recommend vaccines to their patients, and those who would accept vaccines for themselves were 3 times more likely to recommend vaccines to their patients (OR 3.1 [95 % CI 1·8, 5·2]).

CONCLUSION

Increasing uptake of SIV among HCP can amplify positive impacts of vaccination by increasing the likelihood that HCP recommend vaccines to their patients. Successful strategies to achieve increased uptake of vaccines include clear guidance from health authorities, interventions based on behavior change models, and access to vaccine free-of-charge.

Social Processes and COVID-19 Vaccination of Children of Hesitant Mothers

OBJECTIVE

Investigate relationships between pediatric COVID-19 vaccination and social processes of healthcare provider recommendations and school encouragement to provide insights into social processes that may support pediatric COVID-19 vaccination among hesitant mothers.

METHODS

We analyzed survey data from a subsample (n = 509) of vaccine-hesitant mothers to child patients (ages 2 to 17) in regional clinics across Arkansas. Data were collected between September 16th and December 6th, 2022. Full information maximum likelihood multivariable logistic regression was conducted to evaluate associations with pediatric COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

Adjusted odds of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination were more than three times greater when a child's healthcare provider recommended vaccination compared to when they did not (aOR = 3.52; 95% CI[2.06, 6.01]). Adjusted odds of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination were 85% greater when a child's school encouraged parents to vaccinate compared to when the school did not (aOR = 1.85; 95% CI[1.13, 3.03]).

CONCLUSIONS

For pediatric COVID-19 vaccination, having a personal healthcare provider is not significantly different from having no personal healthcare provider if they do not recommend the child be vaccinated.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinical and public health interventions should consider social processes of healthcare provider recommendations and school encouragement.

Influences on COVID-19 booster uptake among adults intending to receive a booster: a qualitative study

Bivalent COVID-19 vaccine boosters have been recommended for all Americans 12 years of age and older. However, uptake remains suboptimal with only 17% of the United States (US) population boosted as of May 2023. This is a critical public health challenge for mitigating the ongoing effects of COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 booster uptake is not currently well understood, and few studies in the US have explored the vaccination process for booster uptake in a 'post-pandemic' context. This study fills gaps in the literature through qualitative analysis of interviews with a racially/ethnically diverse sample of Arkansans who received the COVID-19 vaccine main series and expressed intent to receive a booster (n = 14), but had not yet received the COVID-19 booster at the time we recruited them. All but one did not receive the booster by the time of the interview. Participants described influences on their vaccination behavior and uptake of boosters including reduced feelings of urgency; continued concerns about the side effects; social contagion as a driver of urgency; increasing practical barriers to access and missing provider recommendations. Our findings highlight the importance of considering vaccination as an ongoing, dynamic process drawing on past/current attitudes, prior experience, perceptions of risk and urgency and practical barriers. Based on these findings, healthcare providers should continue to provide strong, consistent recommendations for COVID-19 boosters to patients, even among those with histories of vaccine uptake.

Understanding the gap between guidelines and influenza vaccination coverage in people with diabetes: a scoping review

Background

Diabetes affects millions of people worldwide, making them more vulnerable to infections, including seasonal influenza. It is therefore particularly important for those suffering from diabetes to be vaccinated against influenza each year. However, influenza vaccination coverage remains low in this population. This review primarily aims to identify the determinants of influenza vaccination in people with diabetes (T1D or T2D). Secondly, it aims to assess main recommendations for influenza vaccination, vaccine effectiveness, vaccination coverage, and how education and pharmacists can encourage uptake of the vaccine in the diabetic population.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted in January 2022 to systematically review evidence on influenza vaccination in people with diabetes using data from PubMed, Science Direct, and EM Premium with terms such as "Diabetes mellitus," "Immunization Programs," "Vaccination," and "Influenza Vaccines." Quality assessment and data extraction were independently conducted by two authors. Disagreements between the authors were resolved through discussion and consensus, and if necessary, by consulting a third author.

Results

Of the 333 records identified, 55 studies met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review. Influenza vaccination was recommended for people ≥6 months. Despite effectiveness evidence showing a reduction in mortality and hospitalizations in people with diabetes vaccinated vs. non-vaccinated ones, very few studies reported a coverage rate ≥ 75%, which is WHO's target objective. Determinants such as advanced age, presence of comorbidities and healthcare givers' advice were associated with increased vaccination uptake. On the contrary, fear of adverse reactions and concerns about vaccine effectiveness were significant barriers. Finally, education and pharmacists' intervention played a key role in promoting vaccination and increasing vaccination uptake.

Conclusion

Influenza vaccination coverage in people with diabetes remains low despite recommendations and evidence on vaccine effectiveness. Motivators and barriers as well as several socio-demographic and clinical factors have been identified to explain this trend. Efforts are now needed to increase the number of diabetics vaccinated against influenza, mainly through education and the involvement of healthcare givers.

Vaccine knowledge, attitudes, and recommendation practices among health care providers in New York State

Community-wide vaccine uptake remains sub-optimal. Healthcare provider (HCP) vaccine recommendations influence patient vaccination; however, provider vaccine recommendation behavior is highly influenced by one's own vaccine attitudes and/or knowledge. We aim to describe vaccine knowledge, attitudes, and recommendation practices (KAP) among New York State HCPs. A survey to assess HCP KAP was developed and electronically distributed to NYS members of national medical organizations via their local chapter administrators. Descriptive statistical methods were used to define provider KAP. A total of 864 surveys were included, 500 (60%) and 336 (40%) primary and specialty care providers, respectively. Eighty-one percent (402/499) of primary care providers (PCPs) report encountering vaccine hesitant patients daily or weekly. Of the 500 PCPs who responded, only 204 (41%) stated strong agreement with confidence in their communications with vaccine hesitant patients. HCPs who correctly answered all four knowledge questions were more likely to self-report routine recommendations of standard vaccines to all patients when compared to those who correctly answered fewer questions (489/588 (83%) vs 135/241 (56%), p < .05). HCPs were more likely to routinely recommend standard vaccines to all patients if they also report initiating vaccine discussion (476/485 (98%) vs 148/344 (43%), p < .05) and reviewing and recommending vaccinations at each encounter (315/320 (98%) vs 308/508 (61%), p < .05). Vaccine hesitancy exists across healthcare specialties and provider roles. Focused interventions should include reaching all HCPs to promote vaccinations for disease prevention, tailoring messages to reduce HCP vaccine misperceptions, and increasing awareness of evidence-based office strategies known to facilitate immunizations.

Influenza immunization of healthcare personnel in the post-COVID-19 pandemic era: Still a lot to do!

Healthcare-associated influenza is frequently encountered in healthcare settings with significant morbidity and mortality among vulnerable patients, absenteeism among healthcare personnel (HCP), and interruption of healthcare services. Numerous investigations indicate that nosocomial outbreaks are often traced to HCP. Despite the international and national endorsements, seasonal influenza vaccine acceptance among HCP continues suboptimal worldwide. Infection control is the major objective for healthcare risk management in order to guarantee patient safety, limit the cost of hospitalization and assurance health management in controlling influenza seasons. Vigilance and anticipation are required as globally we are moving from a reactive COVID-19 pandemic response phase to one of planning for the co-circulation of viral respiratory infections. Declining to understand HCP perception of influenza risk and acceptance of vaccination might have impact patient safety as well as healthcare services.

Influenza Vaccination during Pregnancy: A Descriptive Study of the Knowledge, Beliefs, and Practices of Mexican Gynecologists and Family Physicians

BACKGROUND

Influenza in pregnancy is associated with elevated morbidity and mortality. Influenza vaccines are safe and effective in pregnancy. There are no Mexican surveys of physicians on knowledge, beliefs, and practices towards influenza and influenza immunization during pregnancy.

METHODS

A 32-question descriptive survey was conducted, addressing the general knowledge of influenza as well as beliefs and practices regarding influenza vaccination during pregnancy among Mexican physicians responsible for prenatal care, traditionally Obstetricians (OBGYNs) and Family Physicians (FPs).

RESULTS

A total of 206 surveys were available, 98 (47.6%) from OBGYNs and 108 (52.4%) from FPs, representing an estimated 2472 daily pregnancy consultations. In total, 54 of the 206 respondents (26.2%) were not aware that influenza is more severe during pregnancy, 106 of the 206 respondents (51.5%) ignored the potential side effects of influenza infection on the fetus, and 56.8% did not know when to vaccinate pregnant women. Pregnancy as a risk factor for developing influenza complications was only known by 99 of the 206 respondents (48.1%), and 6.1% believed that vaccination does not confer protection to the fetus.

CONCLUSIONS

The current beliefs of Mexican OBGYNs and FPs for both influenza morbidity and mortality, and the importance of influenza vaccination during pregnancy are suboptimal. The drivers of these beliefs should be assessed to improve influenza vaccination recommendations, as knowledge alone is not sufficient.

COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: How discrepant public health discourses shape responsibility for fetal health

Early in COVID-19 vaccine rollout, expert recommendations about vaccination while pregnant and breastfeeding changed rapidly. This paper addresses the (re)production of gendered power relations in these expert discourses and recommendations in Canada. We collected texts about COVID-19 vaccine use in pregnancy (N ​= ​52) that Canadian health organizations (e.g., professional societies, advisory groups, health authorities) and vaccine manufacturers made publicly available online. A discourse analysis was undertaken to investigate intertextuality (relations between texts), social construction (incorporation of assumptions about gender), and contradictions between and within texts. National expert recommendations varied in stating COVID-19 vaccines are recommended, should be offered, or may be offered, while manufacturer texts consistently stated there was no evidence. Provincial and territorial texts reproduced discrepancies between the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada and National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommendations, including that COVID-19 vaccines should be versus may be offered in pregnancy. Our findings suggest gaps in data and discrepant COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, eligibility, and messaging limit guidance regarding vaccination in pregnancy. We argue that these discrepancies magnified the already common practice of deferring responsibility for the uncertainties of vaccination in pregnancy onto parents and healthcare providers. The deferral of responsibility could be reduced by harmonizing recommendations, regularly updating texts that describe evidence and recommendations, and prioritizing research into disease burden, vaccine safety, and efficacy before vaccine rollout.

Health Systems Determinants of Delivery and Uptake of Maternal Vaccines in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Qualitative Systematic Review

Maternal vaccination is considered a key component of the antenatal care package for improving maternal and child health. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) fall short of global targets to prevent maternal and neonatal deaths, with a disproportionate burden of vaccine-preventable diseases. Strategies towards ending preventable maternal mortality necessitate a health systems approach to adequately respond to this burden. This review explores the health systems determinants of delivery and uptake of essential maternal vaccines in LMICs. We conducted a qualitative systematic review of articles on maternal vaccination in LMICs, published between 2009 and 2023 in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify key themes in the literature, interpreted within a conceptual framing that explores the systems determinants influencing maternal vaccines. Our search yielded 1309 records, of which 54 were included, covering 34 LMICs. Most of the included studies were from South America (28/54) and included pregnant women as the primary study population (34/54). The studies explored influenza (25/54) and tetanus toxoid (20/54) vaccines predominantly. The findings suggest that systems hardware (lack of clear policy guidelines, ineffective cold-chain management, limited reporting and monitoring systems) are barriers to vaccine delivery. Systems software (healthcare provider recommendations, increased trust, higher levels of maternal education) are enablers to maternal vaccine uptake. Findings show that formulation, dissemination and communication of context-specific policies and guidelines on maternal vaccines should be a priority for decision-makers in LMICs.

Pharmacists' attitudes toward influenza vaccination: does the COVID-19 pandemic make a difference?

Background

Influenza vaccine uptake in most European countries remains low, despite the World Health Organization's target of 75%. Community pharmacists play a vital role in promoting vaccination; however, they have been reported to be vaccine-hesitant. This study aimed to investigate changes in pharmacists' attitudes toward influenza vaccination since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as their COVID-19 vaccination intentions.

Methods

In December 2020, all members of the Swiss Association of Pharmacists were invited to participate in an online, cross-sectional survey. This study assessed pharmacists' attitudes toward influenza vaccination by surveying influenza vaccine uptake during the 2019-20 influenza season and possible reasons for their decision(s), in addition to their intention to receive COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccination(s) during the 2020-21 influenza season. Descriptive analysis and multinomial logistic regression were used to assess predictors of vaccine uptake and intention.

Results

Of 5900 Swiss pharmacists, 569 (9.6%) completed the survey. The self-reported influenza vaccination coverage among pharmacists during the 2019-20 season was 48.0%. The primary reason for vaccine uptake was the belief that all healthcare workers should be vaccinated, whereas the main reason for refusal was a lack of concern about contracting influenza. The proportions of participants who intend to accept influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations in the 2020-2021 season, when available, were 63.3% and 66.5%, respectively. The most important predictor of high willingness to be vaccinated against influenza in 2020-21 was vaccination history (OR = 3.73; 95% CI = 1.47-9.50), while the most critical predictor of willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 was the intention to be vaccinated against influenza (OR = 3.45; 95% CI = 1.74-6.84).

Conclusions

Findings indicated that although pharmacists' readiness to accept seasonal influenza vaccination significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, influenza vaccine uptake among them remains suboptimal. This is consistent with what has been reported in the literature.

Effectiveness of Maternal Influenza Vaccination in Peru PRIME Cohort

Background

Few studies have examined influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) among women during pregnancy in middle-income countries. We used data from a prospective cohort of women who were pregnant in Peru to estimate effectiveness of the 2018 Southern Hemisphere influenza vaccine.

Methods

Women at <28 weeks gestation were enrolled from 4 tertiary level hospitals in Lima, Peru at the start of the 2018 influenza season and followed until the end of their pregnancies. Participants had mid-turbinate nasal swabs collected and tested for influenza by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with onset of ≥1 of myalgia, cough, runny nose or nasal congestion, sore throat, or difficulty breathing. Time-varying Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to estimate the risk of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza infection after adjusting for inverse probability treatment weight.

Results

We followed 1896 women for a median of 127 days (interquartile range [IQR], 86-174). Participants had a median age of 29 years (IQR, 24-34). Among the 1896 women, 49% were vaccinated with the 2018 influenza vaccine and 1039 (55%) developed influenza-like illness, 76 (7%) of whom had RT-PCR-confirmed influenza. Incidence rates of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza were 36.6 and 15.3 per 100 000 person-days among women who were unvaccinated and vaccinated, respectively. Adjusted influenza VE was 22% (95% confidence interval, -64.1% to 62.9%).

Conclusions

Participants vaccinated against influenza had more than 50% lower incidence of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza illness. Although the VE estimated through propensity weight-adjusted time-varying Cox regression did not reach statistical significance, our findings provide additional evidence about the value of maternal influenza vaccination in middle-income countries.

Uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers in Malawi

BACKGROUND

Little is known about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in Africa. We sought to understand Malawian healthcare workers' (HCWs') COVID-19 vaccination and its hypothesized determinants.

METHODS

In March 2021, as the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out commenced in Malawi, we surveyed clinical and lay cadre HCWs (n=400) about their uptake of the vaccine and potential correlates (informed by the WHO Behavioral and Social Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccination framework). We analyzed uptake and used adjusted multivariable logistic regression models to explore how 'what people think and feel' constructs were associated with HCWs' motivation to be vaccinated.

RESULTS

Of the surveyed HCWs, 82.5% had received the first COVID-19 vaccine dose. Motivation (eagerness to be vaccinated) was strongly associated with confidence in vaccine benefits (adjusted OR [aOR] 9.85, 95% CI 5.50 to 17.61) and with vaccine safety (aOR 4.60, 95% CI 2.92 to 7.23), but not with perceived COVID-19 infection risk (aOR 1.38, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.16). Of all the information sources about COVID-19 vaccination, 37.5% were reportedly negative in tone.

CONCLUSIONS

HCWs in Malawi have a high motivation to be vaccinated and a high COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Disseminating vaccine benefits and safety messages via social media and social networks may be persuasive for individuals who are unmotivated to be vaccinated and less likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.

Medical specialists' attitudes and practices towards childhood vaccination: a qualitative study in Armenia

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination rates in Armenia are high. However, anecdotal evidence suggests that some health workers may advise against vaccination. The extent and reasons behind this are unknown. This study used the World Health Organization Tailoring Immunization Programmes approach to investigate medical specialists' vaccination practices.

METHODS

Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 30 medical specialists (paediatricians, immunologists, neonatologists, neurologists, gynaecologists). Interviews explored their vaccination practices (recommending/administering), knowledge, attitudes and confidence. Data were analysed using the Framework approach and COM (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation) factors.

FINDINGS

Medical specialists were routinely consulted by parents about vaccination. They engaged in conversations, even if they did not administer vaccinations and lacked expertise. Vaccination recommendation was "selective", influenced by their own vaccine hesitancy. Doctors administering vaccination used false contraindications to postpone vaccination. Multiple barriers and drivers to positive vaccination practices were evident, with differences between specialists administering/not administering vaccinations. Capability Drivers were knowledge of vaccination, vaccines, and vaccine-preventable diseases; with awareness and use of protocols for adverse events and contraindications (those with a vaccination role). Barriers were a lack of a detailed understanding of vaccination, vaccines, and vaccine-preventable diseases, especially amongst neonatologists and gynaecologists, and for HPV. Poor knowledge of adverse events and mixed knowledge of contraindications was evident, as was low confidence about conversations with parents declining vaccination. Opportunity Drivers were using "official" guidance and professional information and feeling protected by the Government of Armenia should an adverse event occur. Conversely, barriers were a reliance on media/social media without considering credibility, peers not recommending vaccination, increasing parent demands and not feeling protected by the Government. Motivation Drivers were seeing vaccination as their responsibility (those who administer vaccinations); and generally supporting vaccination. Barriers were vaccine hesitancy, some anti-vaccination sentiments amongst neonatologists and gynaecologists and not seeing vaccination as their role (those who do not administer vaccinations).

CONCLUSIONS

Applying a theory-informed approach allowed us to identify critical issues and possible solutions. High vaccination coverage may disguise underlying issues, e.g. false contraindications. We addressed gaps in the literature, with our geographical focus and study of medical specialists advising parents on vaccination, a widely used practice in this sub-region.

The Vaccine Hesitancy Profiles and Determinants of Seasonal Influenza among Chinese Community Healthcare Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study

This paper is an evaluation of seasonal influenza vaccination hesitancy (IVH) and its determinants among community HCWs in Chongqing, a city in southwest China. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 1030 community HCWs with direct or indirect patient contact was conducted from July to September 2021 using a self-administered electronic questionnaire. Possible factors for IVH among community HCWs were investigated by multivariable logistic regression to yield adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Overall, 46.2% of community HCWs were vaccinated in the 2020–2021 season, while 65.8% of community HCWs had IVH. “Don’t know the coverage in China” (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.01–2.11; 40-year-old group OR: 3.02, 95% CI: 1.92–4.76), “complacency” (OR: 4.55, 95% CI: 3.14–6.60) were positively related with having IVH. The community HCWs that had a history of influenza vaccination (OR: 0.67 95% CI: 0.48–0.95) and groups with confidence and convenience (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.06–0.12; OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.23–0.52, respectively) were more likely to completely accept vaccination. Conclusions: Measures such as improving the awareness and knowledge of influenza and vaccination and expanding the free vaccination policy, combined with improving the convenience of the vaccination service, will promote increased seasonal influenza vaccination-coverage in community HCWs in Chongqing.

Analysis of Vaccine Reactions After COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Doses Among Pregnant and Lactating Individuals

IMPORTANCE

COVID-19 vaccine boosters or third doses are recommended for adolescents and adults who completed their initial COVID-19 vaccine course more than 5 months prior. Minimal data are available on COVID-19 vaccine booster or third dose reactogenicity among pregnant and lactating individuals.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the reactions to the booster or third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine experiences among pregnant and lactating individuals.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Beginning in October 2021, a follow-up Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) survey regarding a COVID-19 vaccine booster or third dose was sent to 17 504 participants in an ongoing online prospective cohort study on COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant and lactating individuals. A convenience sample of adults enrolled in the online prospective study who were pregnant, lactating, or neither pregnant nor lactating at the time of their booster or third dose was eligible for this follow-up survey; 17 014 (97.2%) completed the follow-up survey.

EXPOSURE

Receipt of a booster or third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Self-reported vaccine reactions less than 24 hours after the dose.

RESULTS

As of April 4, 2022, 17 014 eligible participants (mean [SD] age, 33.3 [3.5] years) responded to the booster or third dose survey; of these, 2009 (11.8%) were pregnant at the time of their booster or third dose, 10 279 (60.4%) were lactating, and 4726 (27.8%) were neither pregnant nor lactating. After a COVID-19 booster or third dose, most individuals (14 074 of 17 005 [82.8%]) reported a local reaction, and 11 542 of 17 005 (67.9%) reported at least 1 systemic symptom. Compared with individuals who were neither pregnant nor lactating, pregnant participants were more likely to report any local reaction to a COVID-19 booster or third dose (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4; P = .01) but less likely to report any systemic reaction (aOR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.8; P < .001). Most pregnant (1961 of 2009 [97.6%]) and lactating (9866 of 10 277 [96.0%]) individuals reported no obstetric or lactation concerns after vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study suggests that COVID-19 vaccine boosters or third doses were well tolerated among pregnant and lactating individuals. Data to evaluate tolerability of boosters or additional doses among pregnant and lactating individuals will be important as they are considered for these populations.

Deferring Risk: Limitations to the Evidence in Product Labels for Vaccine Use in Pregnancy

Background: The gaps in clinical trial evidence about vaccination in pregnancy have serious implications for health care worker and public misunderstandings. Contradictions between National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) recommendations and regulatory product labeling information contribute to misinformation about vaccine safety and effectiveness. Methods: A mixed methods approach that included a stakeholder consensus decision-making workshop and a national survey of Canadian health care providers (HCPs). Results: We identified knowledge gaps and serious limitations concerning the information in vaccine product labels. Stakeholders were troubled that some HCPs rely on regulatory product labels to inform their decisions without knowing their limitations in content. Our survey showed that HCPs were uncertain about the purpose of product labels and the evidence contained in them. Over a third of respondents incorrectly thought that product labels and NITAG recommendations are based on the same evidence and that the information they contain is regularly updated. Conclusions: Applying social risk theories, we show how such gaps in information defer responsibility for decisions about disease risk and vaccine safety from regulatory agencies and vaccine manufacturers onto HCPs and their clients. This may be especially relevant for COVID-19 and other emerging vaccines that are initially authorized for conditional or emergency use, and especially in understudied populations such as pregnant people. More frequent updating and alignment of robust, unbiased, and independently reviewed clinical trial and postmarket safety and effectiveness evidence with NITAG recommendations would allay HCP and public misunderstandings.

Do intentions lead to action? Results of a longitudinal study assessing determinants of Tdap vaccine uptake during pregnancy in Quebec, Canada

BACKGROUND

In Canada, vaccination against pertussis (Tdap) during pregnancy has been recommended since 2018, with suboptimal uptake. We aimed to assess the determinants of intention and uptake of Tdap vaccine among pregnant women in Quebec.

METHODS

Participants (< 21 weeks of pregnancy) were recruited in four Quebec regions. Two online surveys were administered during pregnancy (< 21 weeks and > 35 weeks). One measured vaccination intention and the other assessed the actual decision. Questionnaires were informed by the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). We used logistic multivariate analysis to identify determinants of Tdap vaccination uptake during pregnancy using responses to both questionnaires.

RESULTS

A total of 741 women answered the first survey and 568 (76.7%), the second survey. In the first survey most participants intended to receive the Tdap vaccine during their pregnancy (76.3%) and in the second survey, 82.4% reported having been vaccinated against Tdap during their pregnancy. In multivariate analysis, the main determinants of vaccine uptake were: a recommendation from a healthcare provider (OR = 7.6), vaccine intention (OR = 6.12), social norms (or thinking that most pregnant women will be vaccinated (OR = 3.81), recruitment site (OR = 3.61 for General Family Medicine unit) perceived behavioral control (or low perceived barriers to access vaccination services, (OR = 2.32) and anticipated feeling of guilt if not vaccinated (OR = 2.13). Safety concerns were the main reason for not intending or not receiving the vaccine during pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

We observed high vaccine acceptance and uptake of pertussis vaccine in pregnancy. The core components of the TPB (intention, social norms and perceived behavioral control) were all predictors of vaccine uptake, but our multivariate analysis also showed that other determinants were influential: being sufficiently informed about Tdap vaccination, not having vaccine safety concerns, and anticipated regret if unvaccinated. To ensure high vaccine acceptance and uptake in pregnancy, strong recommendations by trusted healthcare providers and ease of access to vaccination services remain instrumental.

Trends of influenza vaccination coverage in pregnant women: a ten-year analysis from a French healthcare database

Pregnant women have a high risk of severe influenza, associated with obstetrical complications. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended influenza vaccination for all pregnant women since 2012. The vaccination coverage remains low worldwide, and in Europe, due to a lack of proposition from the health care providers, and a high refusal rate from the women. The primary aim of this study was to estimate the influenza vaccination coverage (IVC) in a population of pregnant women in France, and to analyse its evolution from 2009 to 2018. The secondary objective was to describe the vaccinated population and to find determinants associated with the vaccination. This retrospective cohort study is based on the EGB French health care database, a representative sample of the French population containing data from the health insurance system. All pregnant women who delivered medically or spontaneously over the 2009–2018 period were included. In the 2009–2018 period, only 1.2% pregnant women were vaccinated against influenza (n = 875/72,207; 95% CI 1.14–1.30). The IVC slightly increased after the 2012 WHO recommendation, from 0.33 to 1.79% (p < 0.001) but remained extremely low (4.1% in 2018). Women younger than 25 years old had a low coverage (0.6%) whereas women over 35 years old were more likely to get the influenza vaccine (1.7%; OR: 2.82, 95% CI 2.14–3.71). The vaccination behavior was not influenced by multifetal pregnancy or parity, but socio-economically deprived women were less likely to be vaccinated (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67–0.98). Women with pre-existing medical conditions had an overall higher vaccination rate (2.5%; OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.94–2.77). The vaccine was mainly prescribed by family physicians (58%). Influenza vaccination in pregnant women in France remains very low, particularly in younger, healthy women, and measures such as information campaigns towards pregnant women and studies of the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of the health care professionals need to be undertaken to improve the coverage.

Pharmacists’ Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Recommendations

Seasonal influenza vaccination rates among European countries remain low despite the World Health Organization’s recommendations to vaccinate high-risk groups. Healthcare worker recommendations are strong predictors of increased vaccination uptake in the population. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze seasonal influenza vaccination recommendation behavior among pharmacists towards high-risk groups including patients, coworkers, and pharmacists’ family members during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-sectional, questionnaire-based research was conducted in Switzerland during the flu season and sent to all members of the Swiss Pharmacist Association. In December 2020, 569 community pharmacists completed the online survey. The influenza vaccination recommendation rates for high-risk patients were 93.6% for the elderly, 70.7% for pregnant women, 65.2% for immunocompromised people, and 60.3% for patients with chronic diseases. Pharmacists tend to recommend influenza immunization to patients more than to family members and colleagues. Holding a certification to administer immunization and personal influenza vaccine history were the main predictors for recommending influenza vaccination to patients, family members, and colleagues. Our results indicated that influenza vaccination recommendation rates in our whole sample of pharmacists, were higher for vaccinated and immunizing pharmacists. Ensuring high vaccinations rates and high ratio of immunizing pharmacists may be important in promoting seasonal influenza vaccination in the general population.

Effect of Personalized Messages Sent by a Health System's Patient Portal on Influenza Vaccination Rates: a Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Adult influenza vaccination rates are low. Tailored patient reminders might raise rates.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate impact of a health system's patient portal reminders: (1) tailored to patient characteristics and (2) incorporating behavioral science strategies, on influenza vaccination rates among adults.

DESIGN

Pragmatic 6-arm randomized trial across a health system during the 2019-2020 influenza vaccination season. The setting was one large health system-53 adult primary care practices.

PARTICIPANTS

All adult patients who used the patient portal within 12 months, stratified by the following: young adults (18-64 years, without diabetes), older adults (≥65 years, without diabetes), and those with diabetes (≥18 years).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized within strata to either (1) pre-commitment reminder alone (1 message, mid-October), (2) pre-commitment + loss frame messages, (3) pre-commitment + gain frame messages, (4) loss frame messages alone, (5) gain frame messages alone, or (6) standard of care control. Patients in the pre-commitment group were sent a message in mid-October, asking if they planned on getting an influenza vaccination. Patients in loss or gain frame groups were sent up to 3 portal reminders (late October, November, and December, if no documented influenza vaccination in the EHR) about importance and safety of influenza vaccine.

MAIN MEASURES

Receipt of 1 influenza vaccine from 10/01/2019 to 03/31/2020.

KEY RESULTS

196,486 patients (145,166 young adults, 29,795 older adults, 21,525 adults with diabetes) were randomized. Influenza vaccination rates were as follows: for young adults 36.8%, for older adults 55.6%, and for diabetics 60.6%. On unadjusted and adjusted (for age, gender, insurance, race, ethnicity, and prior influenza vaccine history) analyses, influenza vaccination rates were not statistically different for any study group versus control.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient reminders sent by a health system's patient portal that were tailored to patient demographics (young adults, older adults, diabetes) and that incorporated two behavioral economic messaging strategies (pre-commitment and loss/gain framing) were not effective in raising influenza vaccination rates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04110314).

Determinants of maternal influenza vaccination in the context of low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pregnancy and early infancy are considered to be the vulnerable phases for severe influenza infection causing morbidity and mortality. Despite WHO recommendations, influenza is not included in the immunization programs of many low- and middle-income countries. This systematic review is aimed at identifying barriers and facilitators for maternal influenza vaccination amongst the perinatal women and their health care providers in low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

We selected 11 studies from the 1669 records identified from PubMed, CABI, EMBASE and Global Health databases. Studies related to both pandemic and routine influenza vaccination and studies conducted amongst women in the antenatal as well as postnatal period were included. Both qualitative, quantitative, cross-sectional and interventional studies were included.

RESULTS

Knowledge about influenza disease, perception of the disease severity during pregnancy and risk to the foetus/newborn and perceived benefits of influenza vaccination during pregnancy were associated with increased uptake of influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Recommendation by health care provider, vaccination in previous pregnancy and availability of vaccine in public health system facilitated vaccine uptake. High parity, higher education, vaccination in the later months of pregnancy, less than 4 antenatal visits, concerns about vaccine safety and negative publicity in media were identified as barriers for influenza vaccination. Lack of government recommendation, concerns about safety and effectiveness and distrust in manufacturer were the barriers for the healthcare providers to recommend vaccination.

CONCLUSION

While availability of influenza vaccine in public health system can be a key to the success of vaccine implementation program, increasing the awareness about need and benefits of maternal influenza vaccination amongst pregnant women as well as their health care providers is crucial to improve the acceptance of maternal influenza vaccination in low and middle-income countries.

Differences between influenza and pertussis vaccination uptake in pregnancy: a multi-center survey study in Italy

BACKGROUND

A suboptimal maternal vaccination coverage in 2017-18 has been reported in Italy. The study aims were to (i) assess changes in maternal influenza and tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis vaccination coverage during 2018-19 influenza season compared to the previous season (ii) estimate influenza vaccine coverage among maternal care providers (MCPs) and (iii) explore the characteristics of vaccine delivery to pregnant women.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey among pregnant women and MCPs about influenza and pertussis immunization during pregnancy. We also collected information regarding prenatal care characteristics and vaccine delivery among four centers in Italy.

RESULTS

We recruited 483 pregnant women and 452 MCPs. The influenza and pertussis vaccine uptake among pregnant women for the season 2018-19 was 14.9% and 60.9%, respectively. MCPs' influenza vaccine uptake was 33.6%. Knowing that the flu vaccine was safe for mothers and their infants and being vaccinated in the previous influenza season were associated with higher vaccine uptake. Regarding pertussis, being a housewife was associated to lower vaccine uptake, while knowing the vaccine is effective and safe for mothers and newborns were associated with higher pertussis vaccine uptake. The single most important factor associated to higher coverage of both influenza and pertussis vaccines was receiving a health-care provider's vaccine advice. Most pregnant women (69.4%) stated that they preferred to be vaccinated in their same prenatal care setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving a health-care provider's vaccine advice and the availability of vaccines during prenatal care visits might improve vaccination coverage among pregnant women.

Incidence of influenza and other respiratory viruses among pregnant women; a multi-country, multiyear cohort

OBJECTIVE

To quantify rates of influenza illness and assess value of influenza vaccination among pregnant women in Panama and El Salvador.

METHODS

Pregnant women were enrolled and followed each week in a prospective cohort study to identify acute respiratory infections (ARI). Nasopharyngeal swabs obtained from women with febrile ARI were tested by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction for influenza and other respiratory viruses.

RESULTS

We enrolled 2,556 women between October 2014-April 2017. Sixteen percent developed at least one ARI; 59 had two ARI, and five had three ARI for a total of 463 ARI. Women in El Salvador and Panama contributed 297 person-years (py) and 293py, respectively, during influenza circulation. Twenty-one (11%) of 196 sampled women tested positive for influenza. Influenza incidence was 5.0/100py (4.3/100py in Panama and 5.7/100py in El Salvador). Only 13% of women in El Salvador and 43% in Panama had been vaccinated against influenza before influenza epidemics (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

One in six pregnant women developed ARI and more than one in ten ARI were attributable to vaccine-preventable influenza. While women were at risk of influenza, few had vaccinated before each epidemic. Such findings suggest the utility of evaluations to optimize vaccine timing and coverage.

Expert opinion on the way forward for improving maternal influenza vaccination in India

INTRODUCTION

: Rates of maternal vaccination against influenza are extremely low in India. An expert panel of obstetric-gynecologists and pediatricians met to develop consensus-based recommendations for improving awareness of the benefits of influenza vaccination during pregnancy in India.

AREAS COVERED

: The group discussed experiences of influenza infection in pregnancy and infancy before focusing on maternal vaccination practices in India, including the degree of communication between obstetric-gynecologists and pediatricians and opinions on optimal timing for vaccination. The impact of inconsistent vaccine prescription practices by healthcare providers was discussed, as well as current clinical recommendations on maternal influenza vaccination.

EXPERT OPINION

: Although clinical evidence demonstrates the benefit of maternal influenza vaccination in any trimester, influenza vaccination is not widely accepted in India as an integral part of antenatal care. There is a lack of familiarity among obstetricians of clinical guidelines on maternal influenza vaccination. This can be addressed with an education campaign targeting obstetricians and other providers of maternal healthcare. With variable influenza seasons between regions in India, common vaccine stock shortages, and data suggesting influenza vaccination is feasible anytime in pregnancy, all opportunities to offer vaccination to this high-risk group for severe influenza disease should be considered.

Barriers and activities to implementing or expanding influenza vaccination programs in low- and middle-income countries: A global survey

INTRODUCTION

Despite considerable global burden of influenza, few low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have national influenza vaccination programs. This report provides a systematic assessment of barriers to and activities that support initiating or expanding influenza vaccination programs from the perspective of in-country public health officials.

METHODS

Public health officials in LMICs were sent a web-based survey to provide information on barriers and activities to initiating, expanding, or maintaining national influenza vaccination programs. The survey primarily included Likert-scale questions asking respondents to rank barriers and activities in five categories.

RESULTS

Of 109 eligible countries, 62% participated. Barriers to influenza vaccination programs included lack of data on cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination programs (87%) and on influenza disease burden (84%), competing health priorities (80%), lack of public perceived risk from influenza (79%), need for better risk communication tools (77%), lack of financial support for influenza vaccine programs (75%), a requirement to use only WHO-prequalified vaccines (62%), and young children require two vaccine doses (60%). Activities for advancing influenza vaccination programs included educating healthcare workers (97%) and decision-makers (91%) on the benefits of influenza vaccination, better estimates of influenza disease burden (91%) and cost of influenza vaccination programs (89%), simplifying vaccine introduction by focusing on selected high-risk groups (82%), developing tools to prioritize target populations (80%), improving availability of influenza diagnostic testing (79%), and developing collaborations with neighboring countries for vaccine procurement (74%) and regulatory approval (73%). Responses varied by country region and income status.

CONCLUSIONS

Local governments and key international stakeholders can use the results of this survey to improve influenza vaccination programs in LMICs, which is a critical component of global pandemic preparedness for influenza and other pathogens such as coronaviruses. Additionally, strategies to improve global influenza vaccination coverage should be tailored to country income level and geographic location.

Seasonal influenza vaccination policies in the 194 WHO Member States: The evolution of global influenza pandemic preparedness and the challenge of sustaining equitable vaccine access

Introduction

As of 2018, 118 of 194 WHO Member States reported the presence of an influenza vaccination policy. Although influenza vaccination policies do not guarantee equitable access or ensure vaccination coverage, they are critical to establishing a coordinated influenza vaccination program, which can reduce morbidity and mortality associated with yearly influenza, especially in high-risk groups. Established programs can also provide a good foundation for pandemic preparedness and response.

Methods

We utilized EXCEL and STATA to evaluate changes to national seasonal influenza vaccination policies reported on the WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Forms on Immunization (JRF) in 2014 and 2018. To characterize countries with or without policies, we incorporated external data on World Bank income groupings, WHO regions, and immunization system strength (using 3 proxy indicators).

Results

From 2014 to 2018 there was a small net increase in national seasonal influenza vaccination policies from 114 (59%) to 118 (61%). There was an increase in policies targeting high-risk groups from 34 in 2014 (34 /114 policies, 29%) to 56 (56/118 policies, 47%) in 2018. Policies were consistently more frequent in high-income countries, in WHO Regions of the Americas (89% of countries) and Europe (89%), and in countries satisfying all three immunization system strength indicators. Low and low-middle income countries, representing 40% of the worlds' population, accounted for 52/61 (85%) of countries with no evidence of a policy in either year.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrate that national influenza vaccination policies vary significantly by region, income, and immunization system strength, and are less common in lower-income countries. Barriers to establishing and maintaining policies should be further examined as part of international efforts to expand influenza vaccination policies globally. Next generation influenza vaccine development should work to address barriers to influenza vaccination policy adoption, such as cost, logistics for adult vaccination, country priorities, need for yearly vaccination, and variations in seasonality.

Perceptions and attitudes towards vaccination during pregnancy in a peri urban area of Lima, Peru

BACKGROUND

Maternal immunization has the potential to reduce both maternal and infant morbidity and mortality by protecting women from complications during pregnancy as well as conferring protection for babies who are too young to be vaccinated. Limited evidence is available about the drivers of maternal immunization in middle-income countries such as Peru. Vaccines against tetanus, diphtheria and influenza are recommended beginning in the second trimester in Peru; however, vaccination coverage has remained low in Peru compared to other countries in the region. As additional vaccines are recommended for administration in pregnancy, a better understanding of the perceptions and attitudes of pregnant women that influence vaccination are needed to design communication materials.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory qualitative study to understand the individual level factors influencing pregnant women's vaccine uptake. We interviewed pregnant women about their knowledge, perceptions and experiences with vaccination during pregnancy. Community health workers recruited women in a peri urban area of Peru in April 2018.

RESULTS

Twelve women were interviewed, the majority of which had received vaccination during the current pregnancy. The most common reasons for vaccination were to protect the baby and because vaccines are effective. Concerns included vaccine safety during pregnancy and adverse effects on the unborn baby. Some women mentioned that because vaccines are given later in pregnancy, the unborn baby is stronger, so vaccines will not harm them. Women highlighted that the main reason for not being vaccinated was lack of information. They also noted that they were the decision-maker in whether or not they were vaccinated. Most women said that they trusted healthcare providers and that trust was linked to providing information through open communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, participants were supportive of maternal vaccination. They believed that vaccines were effective in protecting both their unborn baby and themselves. The main reason given for non-vaccination was lack of knowledge about vaccination in pregnancy. The strong desire expressed by study participants to get more information presents an opportunity for immunization programs to develop interventions that facilitate better information dissemination to pregnant women to increase vaccination uptake.

Influenza Vaccination Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in South Al Batinah Governorate in Oman: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Seasonal influenza infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are an important target group for vaccination against influenza due to their increased risk of infection and their potential to transmit the infection to their patients, families and communities. The aim of this study was to assess the potential hesitancy and its associated factors towards influenza vaccination amongst HCWs in the South Al Batinah governorate in Oman. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 390 HCWs with direct or indirect patient contact was conducted in May and June 2019 using a self-administered questionnaire. Associations between HCW characteristics and vaccination status were examined using bivariate and multivariate analyses to identify the likelihood of vaccination against seasonal influenza among HCWs. Results: Overall, 60% of HCWs were vaccinated in the 2018/2019 season; vaccine uptake among nurses was 52% and uptake was higher among women. Self-protection and protection of the community were the most cited reasons for vaccine acceptance, with side effects being the main reason for hesitancy. Vaccinated respondents had a higher mean knowledge score (7.18; standard deviation SD: 2.14) than unvaccinated respondents (6.30; SD: 2.2). Odds of vaccination were highest among respondents who believed influenza vaccine should be mandatory for HCWs (Odds ratio (OR): 2.04 [1.30–3.18]), those working in the general medicine, emergency medicine, or intensive care units (OR: 1.92 [1.20–3.10]), nurses and doctors (OR: 1.75 [1.09–2.79]) and those who believe that HCWs should receive an influenza vaccine (OR: 1.35 [1.07–2.77]). Conclusions: The study provides valuable insights into the enablers and barriers of influenza vaccination practices among HCWs and may inform interventions to increase acceptance of vaccination.