COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers in the fourth country to authorize BNT162b2 during the first month of rollout

Cost-based COVID-19 vaccination and willingness to pay: A post-pandemic review

The primary objective of this paper is to serve as a valuable resource for policymakers who are confronted with the evolving landscape of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), considering both free and cost-based vaccination approaches. The potential consequences of shifting from free to cost-based vaccination are explored, encompassing its impact on global vaccine equity and prioritization, economic well-being, healthcare systems and delivery, public health policies, and vaccine distribution strategies. Examining past studies on willingness to pay for the initial COVID-19 vaccine dose and booster shots provides insights into how individuals value COVID-19 vaccinations and underscores the significance of addressing issues related to affordability. If COVID-19 vaccinations incur expenses, using effective communication strategies that emphasize the importance of vaccination and personal health benefits can increase willingness to pay. Making COVID-19 vaccines accessible through public health programs or health insurance can help alleviate financial barriers and increase vaccination rates.

Vaccination coverage and access among children and adult migrants and refugees in the Middle East and North African region: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The Middle East and North African (MENA) region is a major global hotspot for migration with more than 40 million migrants, who may be an under-vaccinated group because of barriers to vaccination within countries of origin, transit, and destination. We systematically synthesised the evidence on coverage, acceptance, drivers of uptake, and policies pertaining to vaccination for children and adult migrants in the region, in order to explore tailored interventions for these groups.

Methods

We searched six databases (including Medline, Embase) for peer-reviewed literature, and other websites (including WHO, IOM, ministries of health) for grey literature on coverage, acceptance, drivers of uptake and policies for any vaccination in migrants in the MENA region from between 2000 and 27 August 2024 in any language. We included studies reporting primary data on coverage, acceptance, and drivers of uptake, and any relevant articles on policies. We defined migrants as individuals who move away from their place of habitual residence, within or across international borders, temporarily or permanently. Studies without disaggregated migrant data were excluded. Primary outcomes were coverage (% individuals receiving ≥1 doses of any vaccine) and acceptance (% individuals accepting any vaccine). We separately synthesised data on children (<18 years) and adults (≥18). Estimates were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis where possible or narratively synthesised, and drivers of uptake were synthesised using the WHO Behavioural and Social Drivers model. PROSPERO protocol: CRD42023401694.

Findings

We identified 6088 database and 282 grey literature records and included 55 studies and 1,906,975 migrants across 15 countries (including mostly refugees in the Middle East and expatriates in Gulf Cooperation Council countries). COVID-19 vaccination was reportedly provided free of charge to migrants in all countries whereas childhood vaccinations were reportedly provided to migrant children in seven countries. However, for adolescents and adults, there were wide variations across countries, and we found no policies relating to catch-up vaccination. Coverage for childhood vaccination amongst migrants was reportedly low, with only 36.0% of 589 migrant children fully vaccinated according to national schedules (95% CI 35.0%-43.0%, I 2 = 67%; data from migrants in Lebanon, Morocco, Sudan). Likewise, data on specific routine vaccines in children was generally low: measles containing vaccines (MCV): MCV dose 1 63.9%-66.9%; MCV dose 2 25.4%-85.6%; oral polio vaccine (OPV): OPV dose 3 65.1%-76.4%; diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP) containing vaccines: DTP dose 1 81.8%-86.7%; DTP dose 3 59.7%-76.6%). Drop-out rates across all routine vaccines for subsequent vaccine doses ranged from 12.4 to 38.5%, suggesting that migrants face a range of barriers to vaccine uptake beyond the first dose, that need to be better considered when designing interventions. For adults, we found eleven studies on coverage (including 9 on COVID-19) showing that COVID-19 vaccination coverage ranged 33.5-84.8% in migrants and 25.0-59.0% in host populations. Drivers of uptake of childhood vaccination in migrants included limited availability of vaccines and vaccination personnel, communication and administrative barriers, financial difficulties, lack of caregiver knowledge about services, and concerns expressed by caregivers around safety and benefits. For adults, drivers were mainly related to the COVID-19 vaccine and included concerns around safety, quality, side effects, and mistrust in vaccines and the systems that deliver them.

Interpretation

Migrants have unique risk factors for under-immunisation in the MENA region and have low vaccination coverage despite some level of entitlement to services. Data on vaccination coverage, drivers of uptake and policies for migrants in the MENA region is limited to small-scale studies among accessible groups, mostly focusing on COVID-19 compared to routine childhood and adult vaccination. There is an urgent need to strengthen data collection to better understand coverage across different migrant groups, ages, and MENA countries, especially on adult and catch-up vaccinations for routine immunisations, and develop innovative co-designed strategies to address specific drivers of vaccine uptake among this group.

Funding

La Caixa, LCF/PR/SP21/52930003.

Pediatric nurses' acceptance and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines for their children at Assiut University Children Hospital: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Children's vaccination mainly depends on their parents' decisions. Therefore, it is important to understand parents' acceptance and attitudes toward vaccinating their children against COVID-19.

AIM

The study aimed to assess the pediatric nurses' acceptance and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines for their children at Assiut University Children Hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

A cross-sectional descriptive design was used on a convenience sample of 270 nurses who worked at Assiut University Children Hospital.

TOOLS

Tool one involved the demographic characteristics of pediatric nurses and their children. Tool two consisted of pediatric nurses' acceptance and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines for their children: RESULTS: The results indicated that 79.3% of pediatric nurses had higher acceptance of vaccines and immunization of their children. Results also revealed that 80.0% of pediatric nurses had positive attitudes toward vaccines and their children's immunizations.

CONCLUSION

It was concluded that most of pediatric nurses had high acceptance and positive attitudes toward vaccines and immunization of their children. Also, it was clarified that there was a positive statistically significant correlation between nurses' acceptance of vaccines and immunization of their children and their attitudes.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Continuing education and tailored intervention should be implemented to correct misinformation and negative conceptions about the safety of vaccines for children.

Covid-19 vaccine uptake and its associated factors among adult population in Dangila district, Awi Zone, Northwest Ethiopia: A mixed method study

INTRODUCTION

Vaccination is the most cost-effective approach that significantly reduces morbidity and mortality related to Coronavirus disease -19 (COVID-19). Nevertheless, there is a lack of information on the COVID-19 vaccine uptake and related factors in Ethiopia including the research area.

OBJECTIVE

To assess COVID-19 vaccine uptake and its associated factors among adult population in Dangila District, Awi Zone, Northwest Ethiopia, 2023.

METHODS

A community-based mixed-type study design was conducted from Oct, 15-Nov 15/2022. The study population was chosen using the multistage stratified random sampling technique for the quantitative study and the purposive sampling method for the qualitative inquiry. The collected data were managed and analyzed using SPSS version 25. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regressions were employed to identify factors associated with vaccine uptakes. In the qualitative part of the study, key informant interview was applied. After the interview was listened, the transcripts were coded and categorized into themes, and analyzed using Atlas.ti 7 software. Finally, the finding was triangulated with the quantitative results.

RESULT

The vaccine uptake among the adult population was found to be 47% (95% CL: 42.7%, 51.0%). History of having test for COVID-19 (AOR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.84), good knowledge about COVID-19 vaccine (AOR; 3.12, 95% CI; 2.11, 4.59), no formal education (AOR: 1.78, 95%: 1.26, 2.58), good attitude (AOR: 3.21, 95% CI: 2.13, 4.89), being in poor Income category (AOR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.08, 3.06), being female (AOR: 1.75, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.58) and living in rural area (AOR: 3.1, 95% CI: 1.87, 5.12) were significantly associated with vaccine uptake rate. The study also identified that misperceptions about the vaccine efficacy and safety, availability of vaccine, lack of knowledge about the vaccine, mistrust of the corona virus vaccine, fear of adverse effects, social media influence and religious beliefs were found to be barriers of COVID -19 vaccine uptake.

CONCLUSION

In the Dangila district, adult population vaccination uptake for COVID-19 was comparatively low. To raise the rate of vaccination uptake, interventions must focus on the identified modifiable factors.

High uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers in urban Uganda

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to describe the facilitators, barriers to and level of uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers in primary healthcare facilities in an urban setting in Uganda.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study among HCWs in private and public health facilities in Entebbe municipality between July 2021 and August 2021. Data was collected using a structured questionnaire that was shared, via an online link, to consented participants. Uptake of the vaccines among healthcare workers was analysed as proportions, and logistic regression was used to analyse barriers and facilitators to uptake of COVID-19 vaccines.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 360 participants, with 61.7% (n = 222) females. A total of 236 (65.6%) healthcare workers had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, with higher uptake among females 64% (n = 151). Age above 40 years (OR 2.16), working in a government healthcare facility (OR 3.12), participating in COVID-19 vaccine related activities (OR 4.62), and having tested for SARS-COV-2 (OR 3.05) increased the odds of having been vaccinated. Working in small roadside clinics reduced the odds of being vaccinated by almost 70%, while HCWs in government health services were 3.1 times more likely to have been vaccinated. History of having cared for a COVID-19 patient and having a positive SARS-COV-2 test result did not influence the uptake of the vaccines in the study population.

CONCLUSION

Vaccine uptake among HCWs was close to the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended uptake of 70% by mid-2022.

Caveats of chimpanzee ChAdOx1 adenovirus-vectored vaccines to boost anti-SARS-CoV-2 protective immunity in mice

Several COVID-19 vaccines use adenovirus vectors to deliver the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein. Immunization with these vaccines promotes immunity against the S protein, but against also the adenovirus itself. This could interfere with the entry of the vaccine into the cell, reducing its efficacy. Herein, we evaluate the efficiency of an adenovirus-vectored vaccine (chimpanzee ChAdOx1 adenovirus, AZD1222) in boosting the specific immunity compared to that induced by a recombinant receptor-binding domain (RBD)-based vaccine without viral vector. Mice immunized with the AZD1222 human vaccine were given a booster 6 months later, with either the homologous vaccine or a recombinant vaccine based on RBD of the delta variant, which was prevalent at the start of this study. A significant increase in anti-RBD antibody levels was observed in rRBD-boosted mice (31-61%) compared to those receiving two doses of AZD1222 (0%). Significantly higher rates of PepMix™- or RBD-elicited proliferation were also observed in IFNγ-producing CD4 and CD8 cells from mice boosted with one or two doses of RBD, respectively. The lower efficiency of the ChAdOx1-S vaccine in boosting specific immunity could be the result of a pre-existing anti-vector immunity, induced by increased levels of anti-adenovirus antibodies found both in mice and humans. Taken together, these results point to the importance of avoiding the recurrent use of the same adenovirus vector in individuals with immunity and memory against them. It also illustrates the disadvantages of ChAdOx1 adenovirus-vectored vaccine with respect to recombinant protein vaccines, which can be used without restriction in vaccine-booster programs. KEY POINTS: • ChAdOx1 adenovirus vaccine (AZD1222) may not be effective in boosting anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity • A recombinant RBD protein vaccine is effective in boosting anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity in mice • Antibodies elicited by the rRBD-delta vaccine persisted for up to 3 months in mice.

Promoter or barrier? Assessing how social media predicts Covid-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy: A systematic review of primary series and booster vaccine investigations

RATIONALE

Prior research indicates that social media is primarily a negative contributor to Covid-19 vaccine outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The current systematic review of Covid-19 primary series and booster vaccine investigations provides a more nuanced and comprehensive assessment of this association by exploring a) how distinct social media judgments and actions predict different vaccine-related outcomes - perceptions and intentions/uptake, b) both primary series and booster findings, c) types of social media, and d) comparisons across different populations.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic review of published research examining the link between social media and COVID-19 vaccine outcomes - judgments, intentions, and uptake. Overall, we identified 113 published articles.

RESULTS

The findings reveal complex associations between distinct social media predictors and these outcomes. The most consistent negative relationships emerge within studies looking at 'social media as an information source,' 'trust', and 'general social media use/passive exposure' as predictors of less favorable vaccine judgments and intentions/uptake. Conversely, studies focused on 'information seeking' indicate more mixed results. Among the few booster investigations, there are more positive than negative associations between social media predictors and Covid-19 vaccine intentions. Across different social media platforms and sample populations, social media was a less robust/consistent negative predictor of COVID-19 judgments and intentions.

CONCLUSIONS

While social media can contribute to more negative COVID-19 vaccine judgments and motivations, the consistency of this relationship may vary across populations, the platforms users access, and the nature of exposure. Overall, social media campaigns promoting COVID-19 vaccines should employ distinct strategies to target those individuals that value social media as an information resource.

Association between Gross National Income per capita and COVID-19 vaccination coverage: a global ecological study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has claimed over six million lives and infected more than 650 million people globally. Public health agencies have deployed several strategies, including rolling out vaccination campaigns to curb the pandemic, yet a significant proportion of the global population has not received the COVID-19 vaccine. We assessed differences in COVID-19 vaccination coverage by Gross National Income (GNI) per capita of WHO members (i.e., countries, areas, and territories, n = 192) and by WHO member regions (n = 6).

METHODS

Using an ecological study design, we analyzed publicly available data from the WHO website merged with the World Bank's GNI per capita data. We included a total of 192 WHO members and six WHO regions in the analysis. We utilized negative binomial regression to assess the associations between the GNI per capita and COVID-19 vaccination coverage (cumulative number of persons fully vaccinated and/or received at least one dose of the vaccine per 100 population), and ANOVA test to assess the differences in vaccination coverage per WHO regions.

RESULTS

Low GNI per capita WHO members had significantly lower full vaccination coverage (aRR 0.30, 95% CI 0.22-0.40) compared to high GNI per capita WHO members. These members were also 66% less likely to receive at least one dose of the vaccine (aRR 0.34, 0.26-0.44) relative to high GNI per capita WHO members. Africa region had a significantly lower fully vaccination coverage (aRR 0.71, 95% CI 0.36-0.54) and received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (aRR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.99) than Europe region. Conversely, the Western Pacific region had significantly higher fully vaccination coverage (aRR 1.40 95% CI 1.12-1.74) and received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccines (aRR 1.40 95% CI 1.14-1.73) relative to European region.

CONCLUSION

WHO members with low GNI per capita and the African region reported significantly lower COVID-19 vaccination coverage than those with high GNI per capita or other regions. Efforts to strengthen and promote COVID-19 vaccination in low-income WHO countries and African region should be scaled up.

Willingness of Healthcare Workers to Recommend or Receive a Third COVID-19 Vaccine Dose: A Cross-Sectional Study from Jordan

The availability of COVID-19 vaccines worldwide necessitates measuring healthcare workers' (HCWs') willingness to recommend or receive these vaccines. Therefore, we conducted a local study in Jordan to assess HCWs' willingness to recommend or receive a third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and the predictors of such a decision. A cross-sectional study investigated Jordanian HCWs' willingness regarding a third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine using a self-administered online questionnaire through WhatsApp, a mobile phone application. A total of 300 HCWs participated in the current study. Of these HCWs, 65.3% were physicians, 25.3% were nurses, and 9.3% were pharmacists. HCWs' overall willingness regarding a third vaccine dose was 68.4% (49.4% certainly and 19.0% probably), whereas the overall willingness of HCWs to recommend a third dose to their patients was 73.3% (49.0% certainly and 24.3% probably). Males had significantly higher willingness than females (82.1% vs. 60.1%, p < 0.05). Physicians reported more willingness than nurses and pharmacists. HCWs' willingness was not significantly affected by direct contact with a patient infected with COVID-19 or by a personal history of COVID-19 infection. Only 31% of HCWs were certainly willing to recommend the vaccine to their patients with chronic diseases, and only 28% of the participants were certainly willing to recommend it to people aged 65 or older. HCWs' willingness to receive a third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine is limited in Jordan. This has affected their certainty in recommending this vaccine to their patients or people older than 60. Decision-makers and health-promotion programs in Jordan should focus on addressing this public health problem.

Factors influencing attitudes toward vaccine safety and vaccine effectiveness amongst UK healthcare professionals prior to and at the time of COVID-19 vaccine rollout: Insights from the CoPE-HCP cohort study

Given the potential for nosocomial outbreaks, we must understand factors associated with negative vaccine attitudes amongst healthcare professionals (HCPs) before the rollout of a newly developed vaccine in a pandemic setting. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to study the impact of preexisting and prevailing mental health on United Kingdom HCPs' attitudes towards a newly developed COVID-19 vaccine. Two online surveys were distributed: first during vaccine development (July-September, 2020) and second during nationwide vaccine rollout (December 2020-March 2021). Mental health (PHQ-9 for depression; GAD-7 for anxiety) was assessed in both surveys. Negative attitude regarding vaccine safety and vaccine effectiveness was assessed at vaccine rollout. A series of logistic regression models were developed relating mental health (preexisting during vaccine development, ongoing and new-onset during rollout, and changes in symptom severity) to negative vaccine attitudes. In 634 HCPs, the presence of depression and/or anxiety during vaccine development was associated with elevated negative attitude towards vaccine safety (adj. OR 1.74 [95% CI 1.10-2.75], p = .02), but not vaccine effectiveness (1.13 [0.77-1.66], p = .53) at rollout. This was independent of other characteristics: age, ethnicity, professional role, and history of contracting COVID-19. Ongoing depression and/or anxiety (1.72 [1.10-2.69], p = .02) was associated with elevated negative attitude regarding vaccine effectiveness, but not vaccine safety. Worsened combined symptom scores over time were associated with elevated negative vaccine effectiveness attitudes (1.03 [1.00-1.05], p < .05), but not vaccine safety. Overall, adverse mental health can impact on HCPs' attitudes towards a newly developed vaccine. Further work is required to understand how this translates to vaccine uptake.

COVID-19 Vaccination Among Healthcare Workers: Trend and Protection in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Northern India

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease that poses health risks to everyone exposed to the virus and frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) are at very high risk. COVID-19 vaccines have been developed to offer protection from the disease and reduce the severity of illness. Objective This questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey aimed to determine COVID-19 vaccination trends and protection among HCWs in a dedicated COVID-19 tertiary care hospital in Northern India. Methods A printout of the questionnaire was distributed. Part 1 of the questionnaire included voluntary consent and demographics information, and part 2 dealt with COVID-19 vaccination, COVID-19 illness, and post-vaccination illness. The outcomes of the study comprised trends and protection offered by COVID-19 vaccination, post-vaccination side-effects, and reasons for vaccine hesitancy. The responses were analyzed using Stata version 15.0. Results: A total of 256 HCWs were approached to take the questionnaire, out of whom 241 consented to participate in the survey. One-hundred and fifty-five (64.3%) of these HCWs were fully vaccinated, 53 (21.9%) were partially vaccinated, and 33 (13.7%) were non-vaccinated. The overall rate of infection was 45.64% (110/241). The rate of infection was 58.18% among non-vaccinated HCWs, 21.81% after partial vaccination, and 20% after full vaccination. The odds of infection among vaccinated versus non-vaccinated HCWs was 0.338 (95% CI: 0.224 to 0.512; P<0.001). The overall hospitalization rate among infected HCWs was 6.36% and there was no incidence of hospitalization among fully vaccinated HCWs. Conclusions: Vaccination was shown to reduce the rates of infection and hospitalization among HCWs. A sizeable number of HCWs remained unvaccinated due to either recent COVID-19 infection or apprehension about vaccine-related side-effects.

Mpox Perceptions and Vaccine Advocacy among the Healthcare Workers of Solid Organ Transplant Centers: A Multicenter, Cross-Sectional Survey in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

In response to the global Mpox outbreaks, this survey aimed to assess the knowledge, perceptions, and advocacy of Mpox vaccines among solid organ transplant healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among solid organ transplant HCWs in Saudi Arabia from 15 August to 5 September 2022. A total of 199 responses were received from participants primarily working in the kidney (54.8%) and liver (14.6%) transplant units.

RESULTS

The survey found that most participants were aware of the 2022 Mpox outbreak, but the majority were more concerned about COVID-19 than Mpox. While the majority of participants thought laboratory personnel and HCWs in direct contact with Mpox patients should receive the vaccine, less than 60% believed that all HCWs should be vaccinated. Additionally, over half of the participants lacked knowledge of animal-human transmission of the virus.

CONCLUSION

The results highlight the need for increased education on Mpox among transplant HCWs in Saudi Arabia, particularly regarding the virus's transmission dynamics and vaccines. This education is crucial to improve HCWs' understanding of this emerging disease, especially given their vulnerability during the COVID-19 pandemic.

What motivated residents of Saudi Arabia to receive the COVID-19 vaccine?

Background

Acceptance of vaccination is a multifactorial issue. The unprecedented speed at which the COVID-19 disease spread globally has meant that people have had to face the idea of receiving novel vaccines for a novel disease.

Purpose

Studies conducted earlier in the pandemic had shown high vaccine hesitancy in Saudi Arabia, therefore we wanted to understand the motivating factors for people living in Saudi Arabia with regards to accepting the COVID-19 vaccine, our survey was conducted when the government had already mandated vaccination to enter public spaces. Saudi society is not particularly outspoken and therefore it was of special importance to the authors to explore the motivation behind COVID-19 vaccines.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional survey of 802 participants living in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire was distributed to staff, visitors, and patients in a hospital in Saudi Arabia and via electronic means to the general population.

Results

A total of 521 (65%) of the respondents were women, and 281 (35%) were men. A total of 710 (88.5%) were Saudi, and 55 (6.9%) were non-Saudi. The majority of participants (496, 65.7%) stated that they registered for the vaccine as soon as it was available, with 185 (24.5%) stating that they registered when they were mandated to do so and 74 (9.8%) registered only when they felt cases were increasing. Most participants (316, 41%) stated that the main reason for taking the vaccine was one of a self-protective nature, followed by indirect vaccination (240, 31.1%), paternalistic reasons (157, 20.4%) and altruistic reasons (58, 7.5%).

Conclusions

With the increased burden on healthcare that is being faced by COVID-19, other resources need to be carefully allocated. This paper may aid the Saudi government in understanding the motivation for the population to take the vaccine and therefore facilitate any future vaccination campaigns to ensure the best utilization of resources.

Pattern of self-reported adverse events related to COVID-19 vaccines in Saudi Arabia: A nationwide study

Background

Vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the most effective way to end the pandemic. Any development of adverse events (AEs) from various vaccines should be reported. We therefore aimed to explore major and minor AEs among vaccinated individuals in Saudi Arabia.

Methods

This is a nationwide report based on the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Health (MOH) registry. It included those who received COVID-19 vaccines from 17th December 2020 to 31st December 2021. The study included spontaneous self-reported adverse effects to COVID-19 vaccines where the study participants used a governmental mobile app (Sehhaty) to report their AEs following vaccination using a checklist option that included a selection of side-effects. The primary outcome was to determine AEs reported within 14 days of vaccination which included injection site itching, pain, reaction, redness, swelling, anxiety, dizziness, fever, headache, hoarseness, itchiness, loss of consciousness, nausea, heartburn, sleep disruption, fatigue, seizures, anaphylaxis, shortness of breath, wheezing, swelling of lips, face, and throat, loss of consciousness, and admissions into the intensive care unit (ICU).

Results

The study included a total number of 28,031 individuals who reported 71,480 adverse events (AEs); which were further classified into minor and major adverse events including ICU admissions post vaccination. Of the reported AEs, 38,309 (53. 6%) side-effects were reported following Pfizer-BioNTech, 32,223 (45%) following Oxford-AstraZeneca, and 948 (1.3%) following Moderna. The following reported AEs were statistically significant between the different vaccine types: shortness of breath\difficulty of breathing, dizziness, fever above 39°C, headache, hoarseness, injection site reactions, itchiness, nausea, sleep disruption, fatigue, wheezing, swelling of lips/face and\or throat, and loss of consciousness (p-value < 0.05). Fever and seizure were the only statistically significant AEs amongst the number of vaccine doses received (p-value < 0.05). Ten ICU admissions were reported in the 14 days observation period post-COVID-19 vaccination with the following diagnoses: acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, atherosclerosis, acute respiratory failure, intracranial hemorrhage, grand mal seizure, Guillain-Barré syndrome, abnormal blood gas levels, and septic shock.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that the most prevalent SARS-CoV-2 vaccine side-effects among adults in Saudi Arabia were mild in nature. This information will help reduce vaccine hesitancy and encourage further mass vaccination to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, especially as booster doses are now available. Further studies are warranted to obtain a better understanding of the association between risk factors and the experiencing of side-effects post vaccination.

Determinants of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine acceptance, hesitancy, and barriers among healthcare workers in Ismailia, Egypt: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers (HCWs) plays a fundamental role in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccination acceptance depends on perceptions of competence and motives of the providers, producers, health professionals, and policymakers. This study aimed to identify the frequency and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake acceptance, hesitancy, and barriers among HCWs.

METHODS

A total of 500 HCWs from 3 different hospital affiliations in Ismailia Governorate, Egypt, were included in this mixed methods study. The study was conducted between March and April 2021 through two phases. Phase 1 included a cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire with inquiries about different determinants of vaccine acceptance, hesitancy, and barriers, which was completed either electronically in a Google form or a hard printed copy. Phase 2 included four focus group discussions to explore the determinants in depth.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 33.9 ± 7.9 years, 70% were females, 51.2% were nurses, and 28.6% were physicians. Of the 500 HCWs, only 27.8% accepted taking the vaccine immediately, 49.2% refused, and 23% were hesitant. Vaccine safety was the highest associated factor with vaccine acceptance (odds ratio (OR) = 6.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.132-12.619), followed by previous uptake of influenza vaccine (OR = 3.3, 95% CI 2.048-5.217) and vaccine effectiveness (OR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.282-5.262). The main barriers to vaccine acceptance were mistrust in governmental policies during the pandemic or in the healthcare facility they work in. Hesitancy was common among females and nurses and was attributed to three prominent factors, including safety concerns, negative stories, and personal knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

The vaccine acceptance frequency among HCWs was considered low, as the majority either refused or was hesitant about taking the vaccine. Concerns about vaccine safety and effectiveness were significant determinants of vaccine acceptance. Factors related to trust were the main barriers to vaccine uptake. The health authority should establish a surveillance system for side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine and communicate this information between HCWs to decrease their worries about safety and increase vaccine uptake.

Monkeypox Disease (MPOX) Perceptions among Healthcare Workers versus General Population during the First Month of the WHO Alert: Cross-Sectional Survey in Saudi Arabia

Background: Monkeypox disease (MPOX) recently re-emerged in May 2022, causing international outbreaks in multiple non-endemic countries. This study demonstrates a novel comparison between the knowledge and perceptions of Saudi healthcare workers (HCWs) and the general public regarding MPOX. Methods: An online survey, conducted from 27 May to 5 June 2022, assessing participants' MPOX and monkeypox virus (MPV) knowledge in terms of transmission, vaccination, isolation precautions, and their attitudes toward seeking more information. Results: A total of 1546 members of the public and 1130 HCWs completed the survey. Briefly, 61.3% of the public and 74.2% of HCWs showed interest in seeking more information about MPOX. Both groups had average overall mean MPOX knowledge scores. Members of the public holding university degrees and those showing high levels of worry regarding MPOX had significantly higher knowledge scores. However, HCWs showed a poor vaccination knowledge score, while only 57% recognized that MPOX can present similarly to COVID-19 in the early stages. Female HCWs and those with high self-rated MPOX awareness had significantly high knowledge scores. HCWs in secondary and tertiary centers had significantly higher knowledge scores. Conclusion: Both groups showed a decent attitude in terms of seeking more MPOX knowledge, which correlated positively with their worry about and awareness of the disease. These observations are mostly as a consequence of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which encouraged the public and HCW to acquire more information about any novel emerging disease. Policymakers should make the most of this attitude in their awareness campaigns to prevent the spread of the disease and encourage vaccination in cases where it is needed. The knowledge gaps among HCWs were most evident in terms of clinical presentation and vaccinations; this problem needs addressing if we are to avoid further emerging MPOX cases.

Is vaccine confidence an unexpected victim of the COVID-19 pandemic?

Vaccines are among the safest and most effective primary prevention measures. Thanks to the synergistic global efforts of research institutions, pharmaceutical companies and national health services, COVID-19 vaccination campaigns were successfully rolled out less than a year after the start of the pandemic. While the unprecedented speed of development and approval of COVID-19 vaccines has been applauded as a public health success story, it also spurred considerable controversy and hesitancy even amongst individuals that did not previously hold anti-vaccination stances. This study aimed to compare pre- and post-pandemic vaccine confidence trends in different demographic groups by analysing the outcomes of two online surveys run respectively in November 2019 and January 2022 involving a total of 1009 participants. Non-parametric tests highlighted a statistically significant decline in vaccine confidence in the 2022 cohort compared to the 2019 cohort, with median Vaccine Confidence Score dropping from 22 to 20 and 23.8% of participants reporting that their confidence in vaccines had declined since the onset of the pandemic. While the majority of internal trends were comparable between the two surveys with regards to gender, graduate status and religious belief, vaccine confidence patterns showed considerable alterations with regards to age and ethnicity. Middle-aged participants were considerably more hesitant than younger groups in the 2019 cohort, however this was not the case in the 2022 survey. In both surveys White participants showed significantly higher vaccine confidence than those from Black backgrounds; in the 2022 cohort, unlike the pre-pandemic group, Asian participants showed significantly lower confidence than White ones. This study suggests that paradoxically, despite the success of COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, vaccine confidence has significantly declined since the onset of the pandemic; the comparison of a pre- and post-pandemic cohort sheds light on the differential effect that the pandemic had on vaccine confidence in different demographic groups.

Influence of Psychological Factors on Vaccination Acceptance among Health Care Workers in Slovenia in Three Different Phases of the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among healthcare workers (HCWs) is very important to control the pandemic and to ensure the safety of HCWs and patients. As psychological factors may affect the decision to be vaccinated, the aim of this study was to investigate the influence of psychological factors on vaccination acceptance in different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional study using a web-based survey was conducted among HCWs in Slovenia at the beginning of the pandemic (N = 851), one month later (N = 86), and one year later (N = 145) when vaccines were already available. The results showed that the influence of psychological factors (anxiety, psychological burden, perceived infectability, and germ aversion) was specific for each survey period. At the beginning of the pandemic, vaccination intention was positively associated with anxiety. In the third survey period, anxiety was not exposed as a predictive factor for vaccination intention. However, comparison of vaccination status among groups with different levels of anxiety revealed an interesting distinction within those in favour of vaccination; in the group with minimal levels of anxiety, there was a relatively high share of respondents that were already vaccinated, whereas in the group with severe anxiety, most individuals intended to be vaccinated but hesitated to take action.

Healthcare Workers’ Worries and Monkeypox Vaccine Advocacy during the First Month of the WHO Monkeypox Alert: Cross-Sectional Survey in Saudi Arabia

Background: Monkeypox virus re-surged in May 2022 as a new potential global health threat, with outbreaks bursting in multiple countries across different continents. This study was conducted in Saudi Arabia during the first month following the WHO announcement of the Monkeypox outbreak, to assess healthcare workers (HCWs) perceptions of, worries concerning, and vaccine acceptance for, Monkeypox, in light of the resolving COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A national cross-sectional survey was conducted between 27 May and 10 June 2022, in Saudi Arabia. Data were collected on: HCWs’ sociodemographic and job-related characteristics; COVID-19 infection status; and worries concerning Monkeypox, compared to COVID-19 and its sources; as well as their perceptions and awareness of, and advocacy for, supporting Monkeypox vaccination. Results: A total of 1130 HCWs completed the survey, of which 41.6% have already developed COVID-19. However, 56.5% were more concerned about COVID-19 compared to Monkeypox, while the rest were more worried about Monkeypox disease. The main cause for concern among 68.8% of the participants was the development of another worldwide pandemic, post-COVID-19, followed by their concern of either themselves or their families contracting the infection (49.6%). Most HCWs (60%) rated their level of self-awareness of Monkeypox disease as moderate to high. Males, and those who had previously developed COVID-19, were significantly less likely to worry about Monkeypox. The worry about Monkeypox developing into a pandemic, and the perception of Monkeypox being a severe disease, correlated significantly positively with the odds of high worry concerning the disease. The major predictors of participants’ advocacy for vaccination against Monkeypox disease were: those who had developed COVID-19 previously; and those who supported tighter infection control measures (than those currently used) to combat the disease. A total of 74.2% of the surveyed HCWs perceived that they needed to read more about Monkeypox disease. Conclusions: Approximately half of the HCWs in this study were more concerned about Monkeypox disease than COVID-19, particularly regarding its possible progression into a new pandemic, during the first month following the WHO’s Monkeypox international alert. In addition, the majority of participants were in favor of applying tighter infection prevention measures to combat the disease. The current study highlights areas requiring attention for healthcare administrators regarding HCWs’ perceptions and preparedness for Monkeypox, especially in the event of a local or international pandemic.

Sociodemographic and Occupational Factors Associated with Low Early Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccine in Hospital-Based Healthcare Workers, Georgia, March-July 2021

In Georgia, an upper-middle income European country, the COVID-19 vaccine rollout began on 15 March 2021 with health workers (HWs), a priority group for vaccination. We assessed the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination among HWs at six large hospitals in the early stages of the vaccine rollout (March−July 2021). Among 1533 HWs, 274 (17.9%) had received one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Strong independent predictors of early vaccine uptake were age > 40 years, especially 50−59 years old (aOR 2.40, 95% CI 1.50−3.88), considering the vaccine as “somewhat effective” or “very effective” rather than “not effective” (aOR 6.33, 95% CI 2.29−26.3 and aOR 10.9, 95% CI 3.88−45.70, respectively), and previous vaccination against seasonal influenza (aOR 2.98, 95% CI 2.19−4.08). Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was negatively associated with receiving the vaccine (aOR 0.6, 95% CI 0.40−0.80). Compared to physicians, nurses/midwives (aOR 0.22, 95% CI 0.15−0.32), administrative staff (aOR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22−0.56), and ancillary staff (aOR 0.07, 95% CI 0.04−0.15) were less likely to have received the COVID-19 vaccine. Tailoring the COVID-19 vaccine communications campaign to younger and non-physician HWs, and emphasizing the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine, could help further increase vaccine coverage among HWs in Georgia.

Perspective on the challenges of COVID-19 facing healthcare workers

The emergence of COVID-19 has caused a significant impact on healthcare workers (HCWs) across the globe. A few of these challenges include high workload, lack of coordination and direction, changing information, shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE), managing isolation, fear, and increased anxiety, adapting to changes in healthcare practice and policy, coping strategies, and emotional and physical needs. Here, we shed light on some aspects of these challenges among healthcare workers.

SARS-CoV-2 variants and the global pandemic challenged by vaccine uptake during the emergence of the Delta variant: A national survey seeking vaccine hesitancy causes

BACKGROUND

Herd immunity for COVID-19 is the ultimate goal to end the pandemic. Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has been a subject of considerable debate regarding vaccines effectiveness. This ongoing discussion and other evolving variables contribute to the hesitancy toward vaccines and levels of vaccination acceptance among both the healthcare workers and the public. This study was conducted to assess COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy among the Saudi Arabian population during the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant.

METHODS

A national cross-sectional survey conducted between June 28 and July 5, 2021. The survey collected sociodemographic information, personal and family history of previous COVID-19 infection, adherence to precautionary measures, COVID-19 vaccination status, parental willingness to vaccinate their teenage children, and address variable associated with hesitancy to receive vaccination.

RESULTS

Among the 4071 participants, 67 % were women, 86 % of the participants received COVID-19 vaccine, 70 % had very high or high commitment with COVID-19 precautionary measures. On multivariate analysis, vaccine hesitancy was less likely in men (OR 0.652, p-value < 0.001), those who had direct family members infected with COVID-19 (OR 0.455, p-value < 0.001), and those who reported using the Ministry of Health official channels as information sources (OR 0.522, p-value < 0.001), while those younger than 44 years had higher hesitancy to receive the vaccine (1.5-2.1 times). Of the participants, only 42 % showed willingness to vaccinate their teenage (12-18 years old) children.

CONCLUSIONS

The participants in this study had high COVID-19 vaccination rate; however, hesitancy was reported more commonly among women. Their willingness to vaccinate their teenage children was much lower. Participants relying on social media platforms were highly hesitant to receive vaccination. Public health officials should scale up their efforts targeting females, young population, and parents by vaccination awareness campaigns, and refute misinformation spread on social media, especially with the emergence of variants and the news burst that coincide with them.

Predictors of the Third (Booster) Dose of COVID-19 Vaccine Intention among the Healthcare Workers in Saudi Arabia: An Online Cross-Sectional Survey

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic is still continuing throughout the world, with newer genetic variants regularly appearing from different parts of the world. Considering the waning of immunity against COVID-19 infection even with two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, regulatory authorities have authorised booster COVID-19 vaccination in many countries, especially for vulnerable populations, including healthcare workers. The current study analysed factors predicting the third (booster) dose of COVID-19 vaccine intention, including the health belief model (HBM), among the healthcare workers in Saudi Arabia. Methods: The current study was a cross-sectional online survey performed from 1st October 2021 to 30th November 2021, using a questionnaire prepared in GoogleTM form among healthcare workers in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire asked demographic factors, COVID-19 experience of participants, subjective assessment of health, intention of COVID-19 booster dose vaccination, preferences for local/foreign-made vaccines, and health belief of the study population related to COVID-19 infection and COVID-19 booster dose. Results: This study received 2059 complete responses. The study population reported mixed health belief with respect to the susceptibility of COVID-19 infection, and higher health belief perception regarding the severity. The perceptions of the study participants regarding the benefits of COVID-19 booster dose were positive. There were few barriers to COVID-19 booster dose expressed by study participants. A total of 1464 (71.1%) study participants reported positive intent for receiving a COVID-19 booster dose. The study showed significant association between definite intention to receive a booster dose and nationality (p = 0.001), marital status (p = 0.017), gender (p < 0.001), education level (p = 0.001), monthly income (p < 0.001), and co-morbid medical illness (p = 0.045). The perception of the COVID-19 booster vaccine as a good idea to minimise worries about getting COVID-19 (OR = 2.28, CI 1.89−2.76), and perceptions that receiving the third (booster) dose reduces the risk of COVID-19 infection and associated complications (OR= 2.69, CI = 2.17−3.34), of the perceived benefit construct of HBM, predicted significantly higher definite intention to receive a booster dose. The concern with the safety of the vaccine (OR= 0.40, CI 0.34−0.47) under the perceived barriers construct of HBM predicted as significantly higher no definite intention to receive a booster dose. Conclusions: The results of the present study can guide policy makers in their efforts to promote booster doses of COVID-19 vaccination among the healthcare workers in Saudi Arabia.

Social media and attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review of the literature

Background

Vaccine hesitancy continues to limit global efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging research demonstrates the role of social media in disseminating information and potentially influencing people's attitudes towards public health campaigns. This systematic review sought to synthesize the current evidence regarding the potential role of social media in shaping COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, and to explore its potential for shaping public health interventions to address the issue of vaccine hesitancy.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of the studies published from inception to 13 of March2022 by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, PsychNET, Scopus, CINAHL, and MEDLINE. Studies that reported outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (attitudes, opinion, etc.) gathered from the social media platforms, and those analyzing the relationship between social media use and COVID-19 hesitancy/acceptance were included. Studies that reported no outcome of interest or analyzed data from sources other than social media (websites, newspapers, etc.) will be excluded. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of all cross-sectional studies included in this review. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021283219).

Findings

Of the 2539 records identified, a total of 156 articles fully met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the quality of the cross-sectional studies was moderate - 2 studies received 10 stars, 5 studies received 9 stars, 9 studies were evaluated with 8, 12 studies with 7,16 studies with 6, 11 studies with 5, and 6 studies with 4 stars. The included studies were categorized into four categories. Cross-sectional studies reporting the association between reliance on social media and vaccine intentions mainly observed a negative relationship. Studies that performed thematic analyses of extracted social media data, mainly observed a domination of vaccine hesitant topics. Studies that explored the degree of polarization of specific social media contents related to COVID-19 vaccines observed a similar degree of content for both positive and negative tone posted on different social media platforms. Finally, studies that explored the fluctuations of vaccination attitudes/opinions gathered from social media identified specific events as significant cofactors that affect and shape vaccination intentions of individuals.

Interpretation

This thorough examination of the various roles social media can play in disseminating information to the public, as well as how individuals behave on social media in the context of public health events, articulates the potential of social media as a platform of public health intervention to address vaccine hesitancy.

Funding

None.

In-Person Schooling Amidst Children’s COVID-19 Vaccination: Exploring Parental Perceptions Just after Omicron Variant Announcement

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron spread fast globally and became the predominant variant in many countries. Resumption of public regular life activities, including in-person schooling, presented parents with new sources of worry. Thus, it is important to study parental worry about the Omicron variant, willingness to vaccinate their children, and knowledge about school-based COVID-19 precautionary measures. Methods: A national, cross-sectional, pilot-validated online questionnaire targeting parents in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) was distributed between 31 December 2021, and 7 January 2022. The survey included sociodemographic, COVID-19 infection data, parental and children vaccination status, attitudes towards booster vaccine, parents’ Omicron-related perceptions and worries, and attitude towards in-person schooling. Results: A total of 1340 participants completed the survey, most (65.3%) of whom were mothers. Of the parents, 96.3% either received two or three doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. Only 32.1% of the parents were willing to vaccinate their young children (5–11 years of age). In relation to their children 12–18 years of age, 48% had already had them vaccinated, 31% were planning to vaccinate them, and 42.8% were willing to administer a booster dose. Only 16% were more worried about the Omicron variant compared to the Delta variant. Residents of western KSA were more worried about Omicron compared to Delta. Parents worried about the Omicron variant and male participants were significantly less aware of school-based COVID-19 precautionary measures. Parents with post-graduate degrees and those having more children were significantly more inclined to send their children to school even if COVID-19 outbreaks could occur in schools, while parents who were more worried about the Omicron variant and were more committed to infection prevention measures were significantly less inclined to do so. Conclusions: Overall, parents had lower worry levels about the Omicron variant compared to the Delta variant. They had a higher willingness to vaccinate their older children compared to the younger ones. In addition, our cohort of parents showed high willingness to send their children to schools and trusted the school-based preventative measures. These findings can inform policy makers when considering school related decisions during the current or future public health crises.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Healthcare Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study in Greece

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the uptake of a COVID-19 vaccine and associated factors in a sample of healthcare workers (HCWs).

METHODS

An on-line cross-sectional study with 885 HCWs was conducted in Greece during August 2021. We measured socio-demographic data of HCWs and attitudes towards vaccination and the COVID-19 pandemic. A convenience sample was used since the questionnaire was distributed through social media and emails.

RESULTS

The majority of HCWs were vaccinated against the COVID-19 (91.5%). Females and HCWs with a history of seasonal influenza vaccination had a greater probability to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Also, increased self-perceived knowledge regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and increased trust in COVID-19 vaccines were associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

CONCLUSIONS

Policymakers and scientists should develop novel strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake among HCWs.

Differences by region of birth in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine coverage and positive SARS-CoV-2 test among 400 000 healthcare workers and the general population in Sweden

Background

Globally SARS-CoV-2 vaccine coverage varies among healthcare workers.

Methods

Based on Swedish registers, data on vaccination status as of 31 October 2021 were analysed for all adults aged 35–64 years, 3 861 565 individuals, in Sweden by healthcare worker occupation group and region of birth.

Results

For both men and women vaccination coverage decreased in a graded manner by healthcare worker group with physicians having the highest coverage (96%), followed by registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and nurse aides. Coverage also differed by region of birth for all groups of healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers with those born in Sweden with Sweden born parents having the highest coverage, and those born outside Sweden but within EU the lowest.

Conclusion

The difference in vaccine coverage by region of birth among healthcare workers, regardless of whether it results from socioeconomic inequalities or sociocultural beliefs, puts them at a great occupational hazard and increased risk of nosocomial transmission.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant: Exploring Healthcare Workers' Awareness and Perception of Vaccine Effectiveness: A National Survey During the First Week of WHO Variant Alert

Background

As the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant spreads in several countries, healthcare workers' (HCWs) perceptions and worries regarding vaccine effectiveness and boosters warrant reassessment.

Methods

An online questionnaire among HCWs in Saudi Arabia (KSA) was distributed from Dec 1st-6th 2021 to assess their perceptions, vaccine advocacy to the Omicron variant, and their perception of the effectiveness of infection prevention measures and vaccination to prevent its spread, their Omicron variant related worries in comparison to the other variants, and their agreement with mandatory vaccination in general for adults.

Results

Among the 1,285 HCW participants, two-thirds were female, 49.8 % were nurses, 46.4% were physicians, and 50.0% worked in tertiary care hospitals. 66.9% considered vaccination to be the most effective way to prevent the spread of the Omicron variant and future variants. The respondents however perceived social distancing (78.0%), universal masking (77.8%), and avoiding unnecessary travel (71.4%) as slightly superior to vaccination to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants. HCWs aging 55 or older agreed significantly with vaccine ineffectiveness to control Omicron spread, while those who believed in non-pharmacological infection prevention measures agreed significantly with vaccination for that purpose. Male HCWs had a significant agreement with mandatory vaccination of all eligible adult populations. On the other hand, unwilling HCWs to receive the vaccine had strong disagreements with mandatory vaccination.

Conclusions

The current study in the first week of Omicron showed that only two-thirds of HCWs felt that vaccination was the best option to prevent the spread of the Omicron variant, indicating the need for further motivation campaigns for vaccination and booster dose. HCWs had a strong belief in infection prevention measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants that should be encouraged and augmented.

Willingness and uptake of the COVID-19 testing and vaccination in urban China during the low-risk period: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Regular testing and vaccination are effective measures to mitigate the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence on the willingness and uptake of the COVID-19 testing is scarce, and the willingness and uptake of vaccination may change as the pandemic evolves. This study aims to examine willingness and uptake of COVID-19 testing and vaccination during a low-risk period of the COVID-19 pandemic in urban China.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 2244 adults in urban China. Descriptive analyses were performed to compare the respondents' willingness and uptake of COVID-19 testing and vaccination. Multivariate logistic regressions were fitted to investigate factors associated with the willingness and uptake of the two measures.

RESULTS

In early 2021, about half (52.45%) of the respondents had received or scheduled a COVID-19 test at least once, and a majority (95.63%) of the respondents were willing to receive testing. About two-thirds (63.28%) of the respondents had received/scheduled or were willing to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Willingness and uptake of COVID-19 testing were not associated with socio-demographic characteristics, except for occupation. Being of older age, migrants, having higher educational attainment and secure employment were associated with a higher uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among the surveyed respondents, while willingness to vaccinate was consistent across socio-demographic characteristics among those who had not been vaccinated.

CONCLUSIONS

By early 2021, Chinese adults expressed almost universal willingness of COVID-19 testing and over half of adults have been tested, while the willingness and uptake of COVID-19 vaccination were relatively low at the low-risk period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Maintaining willingness of COVID-19 vaccination is critical and necessary, especially when the pandemic evolved into a low-risk period.

Post-COVID-19 syndrome: assessment of short- and long-term post-recovery symptoms in recovered cases in Saudi Arabia

Introduction

Recent studies investigated the endurance of symptoms and occurrence of complications three months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study aims to examine the prevalence, variation, and severity of continual symptoms in the post‐COVID-19 using a single-center questionnaire.

Methods

The questionnaire was distributed among population in Saudi Arabia who recovered from COVID‐19 between April 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021.

Results

A total of 744 participants completed the questionnaire, 318 (42.8%) recovered less than 3 months, 75 (10.1%) recovered 3–6 months, while 351 (47.2%) recovered more than 6 months. About half of the participants 353 (47.5%) had incessant symptoms and of those patients, more than half had two or more symptoms. Common symptoms included fatigue 189 (25.4%), headache 118 (15.9%), and myalgia 63 (8.5%). Of the participants, 189 (21.4%) experienced continual symptoms including anxiety in 98 (13.2%) and depression in 70 (9.5%).

Conclusion

The current study showed a high proportion of individuals with long-COVID-19 symptoms. Thus, proper assessment of the individuals in the post-recovery period can guide the patients to the relevant clinics for rehabilitation. Moreover, there is a great importance to decrease COVID-19 infection, populations should be targeted to boost vaccine efficiency.

Factors Predicting COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in China: An Observational Prospective Cohort Study

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately affected sexual minorities including men who have sex with men (MSM). This study investigated factors associated with the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among MSM in China.

Methods

Inclusion criteria were: (1) born biologically male, (2) had oral or anal sex with men in the past year, (3) aged at least 18 years, and (4) lived in Shenzhen, China. Prospective participants were recruited through outreach in gay bars and saunas, online recruitment, and peer referrals. Participants completed a baseline online survey between August and September 2020 and a follow-up online survey between April and May 2021. Logistic regression models were fitted for data analysis.

Results

Among 420 participants who completed the baseline survey, 303 completed the follow-up survey. Among participants being followed up, 113 (37%) received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccination during the study period. After adjusting for significant sociodemographic characteristics, five baseline predisposing factors predicted COVID-19 vaccination uptake during the follow-up period, including asking whether their partners had COVID-19 symptoms [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00-1.38], washing hands before and after sex (AOR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.03-1.46), sanitizing before and after sex (AOR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.00-1.37), perceived higher risk of COVID-19 transmission through sexual behaviors (AOR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.04-1.58), and panic about COVID-19 (AOR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.16-1.89). Regarding enabling factors, receiving testing for sexually transmitted infections (STI) (AOR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.25-3.85) and other prevention measures for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/STI (AOR: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.56-4.37) 6 months prior to the baseline survey were associated with higher uptake of COVID-19 vaccination.

Conclusion

MSM's uptake rate of COVID-19 vaccination was comparable to that of the general population in Shenzhen, China. This study offered an overview for us to identify tapping points that can encourage COVID-19 vaccination uptake among Chinese MSM.

Attitudes Towards COVID-19 Vaccine: A Survey of Health Care Workers in Oman

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among health care workers (HCWs) is widely reported. Here we report on the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy and the factors associated with it in a sample of non-vaccinated HCWs. Data from 433 not vaccinated medical and non-medical HCWs from various health care facilities after the introduction of COVID-19 vaccination in Oman were analyzed. Most of the participants were nurses (41.5%) followed by physicians (37.5%) and non-medical HCWs (21%). Forty percent of HCWs were willing to uptake the COVID-19 vaccines. Physicians and male HCWs had more positive attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccines than nurses and female HCWs. Concerns about the COVID-19 vaccines including unknown health issues, efficacy and safety were stated by the participants. Our results show a low level of willingness to uptake the COVID-19 vaccines among HCWs, an issue that must be urgently addressed.

Clinical Presentation and Outcome of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in the First and Second Waves in Saudi Arabia

Introduction

The world had witnessed the occurrence of multiple waves of the SARS-CoV-2. Data comparing the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients in Saudi Arabia during the first and second waves are lacking. This study compares the characteristics and the outcomes of patients in these 2 waves.

Methods

This is a retrospective case series of hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2. We compared epidemiological, demographic, laboratory, and clinical data.

Results

The study included hospitalized patients admitted up to February 28, 2021 as the first wave and those admitted from March 1, 2021 as the second wave. There were 378 patients in the first wave and 241 patients in the second wave. Patients in the first wave were significantly younger (mean age and SD of 47.5 ± 20 vs 55.3 ± 18.2 years; p <0.001). In relation to symptoms, shortness of breath, wheezes, myalgia, tachypnea, and respiratory distress were significantly more common in the second wave than the first wave. On the other hand, sore throat was more common in the first wave than the second wave. Patients in the second wave had higher mean values of lymphocytes count, platelet counts, and ALT than those in the first wave. Patients in the first wave were more likely to receive antibiotics and antiviral therapy and had higher death rate (16.2% vs 8.4%; p = 0.001).

Conclusion

The study showed that patients in the second wave were younger and had a lower rate of death than the first wave.

Healthcare Workers' SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Uncertainty-Related Stress, Resilience, and Coping Strategies during the First Week of the World Health Organization's Alert

BACKGROUND

As the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant emerged and spread globally at an alarming speed, healthcare workers' (HCWs) uncertainties, worries, resilience, and coping strategies warranted assessment. The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe psychological impact on HCWs, including the development of Post-Traumatic Stress symptoms. Specific subgroups of HCWs, such as front-line and female workers, were more prone to poor mental health outcomes and difficulties facing stress.

METHODS

The responses to an online questionnaire among HCWs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) were collected from 1 December 2021 to 6 December 2021, aiming to assess their uncertainties, worries, resilience, and coping strategies regarding the Omicron variant. Three validated instruments were used to achieve the study's goals: the Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS), the Standard Stress Scale (SSS), and the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS)-Short Form.

RESULTS

The online survey was completed by 1285 HCWs. Females made up the majority of the participants (64%). A total of 1285 HCW's completed the online survey from all regions in KSA. Resilient coping scored by the BRCS was negatively and significantly correlated with stress as scored by the SSS (r = -0.313, p < 0.010). Moreover, intolerance of uncertainty scored by the IUS positively and significantly correlated with stress (r = 0.326, p < 0.010). Increased stress levels were linked to a considerable drop in resilient coping scores. Furthermore, being a Saudi HCW or a nurse was linked to a significant reduction in resilient coping ratings. Coping by following healthcare authorities' preventative instructions and using the WHO website as a source of information was linked to a considerable rise in resilient coping.

CONCLUSIONS

The negative association between resilient coping and stress was clearly shown, as well as how underlying intolerance of uncertainty is linked to higher stress among HCWs quickly following the development of a new infectious threat. The study provides early insights into developing and promoting coping strategies for emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Prospective Evaluation of Side-Effects Following the First Dose of Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 Vaccine among Healthcare Workers in Saudi Arabia

Background: Several different types of vaccines have been developed for the prevention of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Despite several local and systemic side-effects to COVID-19 vaccination reported, the vaccines are still considered the best intervention to tackle the spread of the virus and reduce the severity of COVID-19 infection. However, the reported side-effects continue to have a crucial role in public confidence in the vaccine and its acceptance. This study aimed to investigate the short-term side-effects reported by the healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia after receiving the first dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted among HCWs in the Jazan region of southwestern Saudi Arabia. Healthcare workers who had received the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and agreed to participate in the study were followed up for 3 weeks post vaccination through a weekly online survey. Information was collected on local and/or systemic side-effects reported following vaccine administration. Participants’ general and demographic information was also collected. Results: A total of 57.2% (250/437) of the HCWs who participated in this study reported at least one side-effect. Injection site pain and redness (80.0%), fever (73.2%), whole-body pain/fatigue (56.4%), and headache (48.8%) were the most commonly reported side-effects. Moreover, 12.4% of the participants who reported side-effects needed to see a physician, and only one female participant was admitted to the hospital. Multivariate regression analyses revealed that nationality (Saudi, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.65; 95% CI = 2.40, 5.55) and residency (Jazan governorate, aOR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.15, 0.95) were the significant factors associated with reporting COVID-19 post-vaccination side-effects, while the number of reported side-effects was found to be significantly influenced by occupation (medical, aOR  =  0.42; 95% CI  =  0.26, 0.66; p < 0.001) and gender (female, aOR  = 0.61; 95% CI  =  0.38, 0.97; p  =  0.038). Conclusions: Findings of the present study support the safety of the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine among HCWs in Saudi Arabia. All the reported side-effects were mild-to-moderate side-effects. The findings may help convince vaccine-hesitant individuals and skeptics to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Ethiopian healthcare workers

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 poses significant health and economic threat prompting international firms to rapidly develop vaccines and secure quick regulatory approval. Although COVID-19 vaccination priority is given for high-risk individuals including healthcare workers (HCWs), the success of the immunization efforts hinges on peoples' willingness to embrace these vaccines.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess HCWs intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and the reasons underlying vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among HCWs in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia from March to July 2021. Data were collected from eligible participants from 18 health facilities using a pre-tested semi-structured questionnaire. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression was performed to explore factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. A p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 614 HCWs participated in the study, with a mean age of 30.57±6.87 years. Nearly two-thirds (60.3%) of HCWs were hesitant to use the COVID-19 vaccine. Participants under the age of 30 years were approximately five times more likely to be hesitant to be vaccinated compared to those over the age of 40 years. HCWs other than medical doctors and/or nurses (AOR = 2.1; 95%CI; 1.1, 3.8) were more likely to be hesitant for COVID-19 vaccine. Lack of believe in COVID-19 vaccine benefits (AOR = 2.5; 95%CI; 1.3, 4.6), lack of trust in the government (AOR = 1.9; 95%CI; 1.3, 3.1), lack of trust science to produce safe and effective vaccines (AOR = 2.6; 95%CI; 1.6, 4.2); and concern about vaccine safety (AOR = 3.2; 95%CI; 1.9, 5.4) were also found to be predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy showed to be high among HCWs. All concerned bodies including the ministry, regional health authorities, health institutions, and HCWs themselves should work together to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and overcome the pandemic.

COVID-19 vaccine confidence and hesitancy among health care workers: A cross-sectional survey from a MERS-CoV experienced nation

Objectives

This study aimed to identify coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine perception, acceptance, confidence, hesitancy, and barriers among health care workers (HCWs).

Methods

An online national cross-sectional pilot-validated questionnaire was self-administered by HCWs in Saudi Arabia, which is a nation with MERS-CoV experience. The main outcome variable was HCWs’ acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine candidates. The factors associated with vaccination acceptance were identified through a logistic regression analysis, and the level of anxiety was measured using a validated instrument to measure general anxiety levels.

Results

Out of the 1512 HCWs who completed the study questionnaire—of which 62.4% were women—70% were willing to receive COVID-19 vaccines. A logistic regression analysis revealed that male HCWs (ORa = 1.551, 95% CI: 1.122–2.144), HCWs who believe in vaccine safety (ORa = 2.151; 95% CI: 1.708–2.708), HCWs who believe that COVID vaccines are the most likely way to stop the pandemic (ORa = 1.539; 95% CI: 1.259–1.881), and HCWs who rely on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website for COVID 19 updates (ORa = 1.505, 95% CI: 1.125–2.013) were significantly associated with reporting a willingness to be vaccinated. However, HCWs who believed that the vaccines were rushed without evidence-informed testing were found to be 60% less inclined to accept COVID-19 vaccines (ORa = 0.394, 95% CI: 0.298–0.522).

Conclusion

Most HCWs are willing to receive COVID-19 vaccines once they are available; the satisfactoriness of COVID-19 vaccination among HCWs is crucial because health professionals’ knowledge and confidence toward vaccines are important determining factors for not only their own vaccine acceptance but also recommendation for such vaccines to their patients.

COVID-19 Delta Variant: Perceptions, Worries, and Vaccine-Booster Acceptability among Healthcare Workers

Background: As the COVID-19 Delta variant has spread across the globe, healthcare workers' (HCWs) knowledge, worries, and vaccine booster acceptance should be assessed. Methods: Online questionnaires aimed at HCWs in Saudi Arabia were distributed between 9 and 12 August 2021, aiming to evaluate HCWs' perceptions and worries about the Delta variant as well as their feelings about receiving a booster-vaccine. Results: A total of 1279 HCWs participated, with 51.1% being physicians and 41.7% nurses. 92.5% were aware of the emergence of the Delta variant. Still, only 28.7% were found to have sufficient knowledge of the variant, and their level of worry about it was higher than their level of worry about the Alpha variant (2.32/5 versus 1.79/5). The main information sources cited by the participants were social media (50.5%), while 30.5% used scientific journals. Overall, 55.3% were willing to receive a vaccine booster, while one third would have preferred to receive a new mRNA vaccine specifically developed for the Delta variant. Factors associated with vaccine booster acceptance were receiving both vaccination doses (p = 0.008), believing that the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine is effective against variants (p < 0.001), and agreement that mixing/matching vaccines is effective against variants (p < 0.001). Conclusions: A high percentage of HCWs were aware of the Delta variant, but only a small fraction had decent quality of knowledge about it. The participants exhibited high worry levels and showed a modest acceptance of receiving a vaccine booster dose. These results should encourage public health officials to scale up educational efforts to disseminate reliable information about the different variants and provide recommendations about receiving a vaccine booster. Further research on methods to alleviate HCWs' worries about emerging variants is warranted.

Parental Attitudes and Hesitancy About COVID-19 vs. Routine Childhood Vaccinations: A National Survey

Objectives: To quantify parental acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine and assess the vaccine hesitancy (VH) for COVID-19 vs. childhood vaccines.

Methods: Eight vaccine hesitancy scale (VHS) items, adopted from WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Immunization (SAGE), were used to assess VH for COVID-19 vaccine vs. routine childhood vaccines. We distributed the online survey to parents with the commence of the national childhood COVID-19 vaccination program in Saudi Arabia.

Results: Among 3,167 parents, 47.6% are decided to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. The most common reasons for refusal were inadequate safety information (69%) and worry about side effects (60.6%). Parents have a significantly greater positive attitudes toward children's routine vaccines vs. the COVID-19 vaccine, with higher mean VHS (±SD) = 2.98 ± 0.58 vs. 2.63 ± 0.73, respectively (p-value < 0.001). Parents agreed more that routine childhood vaccines are more essential and effective as compared to the COVID-19 vaccine (Cohen's D: 0.946, and 0.826, consecutively; T-test p-value < 0.00). There is more parental anxiety about serious side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine vs. routine childhood vaccines (Cohen's D = 0.706, p-value < 0.001). Parents who relied on the Ministry of Health information were more predicted (OR = 1.28, p-value = 0.035) to intend to vaccinate as opposed to those who used the WHO website (OR = 0.47, −53%, p-value < 0.001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, the factors associated with intention to vaccinate children were parents who received COVID-19 vaccine, older parents, having children aged 12–18, and parents with lower education levels.

Conclusions: Significant proportion of parents are hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine because they are less confident in its effectiveness, safety, and whether it is essential for their children. Relying on the national official healthcare authority's website for the source of information was associated with increased acceptance of childhood COVID-19 vaccination. As parental intention to vaccinate children against COVID-19 is suboptimal, healthcare authorities could boost vaccine uptake by campaigns targeting hesitant parents.