Employer requirements and COVID-19 vaccination and attitudes among healthcare personnel in the U.S.: Findings from National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module, August - September 2021

Canadian health care providers' and education workers' hesitance to receive original and bivalent COVID-19 vaccines

BACKGROUND

The demand for COVID-19 vaccines has diminished as the pandemic lingers. Understanding vaccine hesitancy among essential workers is important in reducing the impact of future pandemics by providing effective immunization programs delivered expeditiously.

METHOD

Two surveys exploring COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in 2021 and 2022 were conducted in cohorts of health care providers (HCP) and education workers participating in prospective studies of COVID-19 illnesses and vaccine uptake. Demographic factors and opinions about vaccines (monovalent and bivalent) and public health measures were collected in these self-reported surveys. Modified multivariable Poisson regression was used to determine factors associated with hesitancy.

RESULTS

In 2021, 3 % of 2061 HCP and 6 % of 3417 education workers reported hesitancy (p < 0.001). In December 2022, 21 % of 868 HCP and 24 % of 1457 education workers reported being hesitant to receive a bivalent vaccine (p = 0.09). Hesitance to be vaccinated with the monovalent vaccines was associated with earlier date of survey completion, later receipt of first COVID-19 vaccine dose, no influenza vaccination, and less worry about becoming ill with COVID-19. Factors associated with hesitance to be vaccinated with a bivalent vaccine that were common to both cohorts were receipt of two or fewer previous COVID-19 doses and lower certainty that the vaccines were safe and effective.

CONCLUSION

Education workers were somewhat more likely than HCP to report being hesitant to receive COVID-19 vaccines but reasons for hesitancy were similar. Hesitancy was associated with non-receipt of previous vaccines (i.e., previous behaviour), less concern about being infected with SARS-CoV-2, and concerns about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines for both cohorts. Maintaining inter-pandemic trust in vaccines, ensuring rapid data generation during pandemics regarding vaccine safety and effectiveness, and effective and transparent communication about these data are all needed to support pandemic vaccination programs.

State COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates and Uptake Among Health Care Workers in the US

Importance

Seventeen states introduced COVID-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers (HCWs) in mid-2021. Prior research on the effect of these mandates was centered on the nursing home sector, and more evidence is needed for their effect on the entire HCW population.

Objective

To examine the association between state COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs and vaccine uptake in this population.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This repeated cross-sectional study included biweekly, individual-level data for adults aged 25 to 64 years who were working or volunteering in health care settings obtained from the Household Pulse Survey between May 26 and October 11, 2021. Analyses were conducted between November 2022 and October 2023.

Exposure

Announcement of a state COVID-19 vaccine mandate for HCWs.

Main Outcomes and Measures

An indicator for whether a sampled HCW ever received a COVID-19 vaccine and an indicator for whether an HCW completed or intended to complete the primary COVID-19 vaccination series. Event study analyses using staggered difference-in-differences methods compared vaccine uptake among HCWs in mandate and nonmandate states before and after each mandate announcement. The sample was further stratified by the availability of regular COVID-19 testing in place of a vaccination (ie, a test-out option) and by the ages of HCWs (25-49 or 50-64 years) to examine heterogeneous associations.

Results

The study sample included 31 142 HCWs (mean [SD] age, 45.5 [10.6] years; 72.1% female) from 45 states, 16 of which introduced COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs. Results indicated a mandate-associated 3.46-percentage point (pp) (95% CI, 0.29-6.63 pp; P = .03) increase in the proportion of HCWs ever vaccinated against COVID-19 and a 3.64-pp (95% CI, 0.72-6.57 pp; P = .02) increase in the proportion that completed or intended to complete the primary vaccination series 2 weeks after mandate announcement from baseline proportions of 87.98% and 86.12%, respectively. In the stratified analyses, positive associations were only detected in mandate states with no test-out option and among HCWs aged 25 to 49 years, which suggested vaccination increases of 3.32% to 7.09% compared with baseline proportions.

Conclusions and Relevance

This repeated cross-sectional study found that state COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs were associated with increased vaccine uptake among HCWs, especially among younger HCWs and those in states with no test-out option. These findings suggest the potential for vaccine mandates to further promote vaccinations in an already highly vaccinated HCW population, especially when no test-out option is in place.

Megastudy shows that reminders boost vaccination but adding free rides does not

Encouraging routine COVID-19 vaccinations is likely to be a crucial policy challenge for decades to come. To avert hundreds of thousands of unnecessary hospitalizations and deaths, adoption will need to be higher than it was in the autumn of 2022 or 2023, when less than one-fifth of Americans received booster vaccines1,2. One approach to encouraging vaccination is to eliminate the friction of transportation hurdles. Previous research has shown that friction can hinder follow-through3 and that individuals who live farther from COVID-19 vaccination sites are less likely to get vaccinated4. However, the value of providing free round-trip transportation to vaccination sites is unknown. Here we show that offering people free round-trip Lyft rides to pharmacies has no benefit over and above sending them behaviourally informed text messages reminding them to get vaccinated. We determined this by running a megastudy with millions of CVS Pharmacy patients in the United States testing the effects of (1) free round-trip Lyft rides to CVS Pharmacies for vaccination appointments and (2) seven different sets of behaviourally informed vaccine reminder messages. Our results suggest that offering previously vaccinated individuals free rides to vaccination sites is not a good investment in the United States, contrary to the high expectations of both expert and lay forecasters. Instead, people in the United States should be sent behaviourally informed COVID-19 vaccination reminders, which increased the 30-day COVID-19 booster uptake by 21% (1.05 percentage points) and spilled over to increase 30-day influenza vaccinations by 8% (0.34 percentage points) in our megastudy. More rigorous testing of interventions to promote vaccination is needed to ensure that evidence-based solutions are deployed widely and that ineffective but intuitively appealing tools are discontinued.

From speculative to real: community attitudes towards government COVID-19 vaccine mandates in Western Australia from May 2021 to April 2022

Many governments employed mandates for COVID-19 vaccines, imposing consequences upon unvaccinated people. Attitudes towards these policies have generally been positive, but little is known about how discourses around them changed as the characteristics of the disease and the vaccinations evolved. Western Australia (WA) employed sweeping COVID-19 vaccine mandates for employment and public spaces whilst the state was closed off from the rest of the country and world, and mostly with no COVID-19 in the community. This article analyses WA public attitudes during the mandate policy lifecycle from speculative to real. Qualitative interview data from 151 adults were analysed in NVivo 20 via a novel chronological analysis anchored in key policy phases: no vaccine mandates, key worker vaccine mandates, vaccine mandates covering 75% of the workforce and public space mandates. Participants justified mandates as essential for border reopening and, less frequently, for goals such as protecting the health system. However, public discourse focusing on 'getting coverage rates up' may prove counter-productive for building support for vaccination; governments should reinforce end goals in public messaging (reducing suffering and saving lives) because such messaging is likely to be more meaningful to vaccination behaviour in the longer term.

Do COVID-19 Vaccination Policies Backfire? The Effects of Mandates, Vaccination Passports, and Financial Incentives on COVID-19 Vaccination

Faced with the challenges of motivating people to vaccinate, many countries have introduced policy-level interventions to encourage vaccination against COVID-19. For example, mandates were widely imposed requiring individuals to vaccinate to work and attend school, and vaccination passports required individuals to show proof of vaccination to travel and access public spaces and events. Furthermore, some countries also began offering financial incentives for getting vaccinated. One major criticism of these policies was the possibility that they would produce reactance and thus undermine voluntary vaccination. This article therefore reviews relevant empirical evidence to examine whether this is indeed the case. Specifically, we devote separate sections to reviewing and discussing the impacts of three major policies that were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: vaccination mandates, vaccination passports, and the provision of financial incentives. A careful analysis of the evidence provides little support that these policies backfire but instead can effectively promote vaccination at the population level. The policies are not without limitations, however, such as their inability to mobilize those that are strongly hesitant to vaccines. Finally, we discuss how policy-level interventions should be designed and implemented to address future epidemics and pandemics.

Is resistance to Covid-19 vaccination a "problem"? A critical policy inquiry of vaccine mandates for healthcare workers

As the COVID-19 global vaccination campaign was launched in December of 2020, vaccination became mandatory for many healthcare workers (HCWs) worldwide. Large minorities resisted the policy, and the responses of authorities to this resistance led to damaged professional reputations, job losses, and suspension or termination of practice licenses. The joint effect of dismissals, early retirements, career changes, and vaccine injuries disabling some compliant HCWs from adequate performance has exacerbated existing crises within health systems. Nevertheless, leading health authorities have maintained that the benefits of a fully vaccinated healthcare labor force-believed to be protecting health systems, vulnerable patient populations, and even HCWs themselves-achieved through mandates, if necessary, outweigh its potential harms. Informed by critical policy and discourse traditions, we examine the expert literature on vaccine mandates for HCWs. We find that this literature neglects evidence that contradicts official claims about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines, dismisses the science supporting the contextual nature of microbial virulence, miscalculates patient and system-level harms of vaccination policies, and ignores or legitimizes the coercive elements built into their design. We discuss the implications of our findings for the sustainability of health systems, for patient care, and for the well-being of HCWs, and suggest directions for ethical clinical and policy practice.

Behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation in the US: a longitudinal study March─ October 2021

Many studies have examined behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation, but few have examined these drivers longitudinally. We sought to identify the drivers of COVID-19 vaccination initiation using the Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) Framework. Participants were a nationally-representative sample of 1,563 US adults who had not received a COVID-19 vaccine by baseline. Participants took surveys online at baseline (spring 2021) and follow-up (fall 2021). The surveys assessed variables from BeSD Framework domains (i.e., thinking and feeling, social processes, and practical issues), COVID-19 vaccination initiation, and demographics at baseline and follow-up. Between baseline and follow-up, 65% of respondents reported initiating COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccination intent increased from baseline to follow-up (p < .01). Higher vaccine confidence, more positive social norms towards vaccination, and receiving vaccine recommendations at baseline predicted subsequent COVID-19 vaccine initiation (all p < .01). Among factors assessed at follow-up, social responsibility and vaccine requirements had the greatest associations with vaccine initiation (all p < .01). Baseline vaccine confidence, social norms, and vaccination recommendations were associated with subsequent vaccine initiation, all of which could be useful targets for behavioral interventions. Furthermore, interventions that highlight social responsibility to vaccinate or promote vaccination requirements could also be beneficial.

Are COVID-19 vaccination mandates for healthcare workers effective? A systematic review of the impact of mandates on increasing vaccination, alleviating staff shortages and decreasing staff illness

INTRODUCTION

The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines is a cornerstone in the global effort to combat the pandemic. Healthcare workers (HCWs), being at the forefront of the pandemic response, have been the focus of vaccine mandate policies. This review aims to evaluate the impacts of COVID-19 vaccine mandates among HCWs, a critical step in understanding the broader implications of such policies in healthcare settings.

OBJECTIVE

The review seeks to synthesize available literature to contribute to greater understanding of the outcomes associated with COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs including vaccine uptake, infection rates, and staffing.

METHODS

A systematic search of relevant literature published from March 2020 to September 2023 was conducted. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed for quality assessment of the included articles. A total of 4,779 publications were identified, with 15 studies meeting the inclusion criteria for the review. A narrative synthesis approach was used to analyze these studies.

RESULTS

COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs were broadly successful in increasing vaccine uptake in most settings. Although the penalties imposed on unvaccinated HCWs did not lead to major disruption of health services, less well-resourced areas may have been more impacted. Furthermore, there is insufficient literature on the impact of the vaccine mandate on reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs have significant implications for public health policy and healthcare management. The findings underscore the need for tailored approaches in mandate policies, considering the specific contexts of healthcare settings and the diverse populations of HCWs. While mandates have shown potential in increasing vaccine uptake with minimal impacts to staffing, more work is needed to investigate the impacts of mandates across various contexts. In addition to these impacts, future research should focus on long-term effects and implications on broader public health strategies.

Assessing COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Trust in Home Health Workers in New York City: A Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify characteristics surrounding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and trust in home health workers (HHWs) in New York City.

METHODS

Data were collected from HHWs through focus group sessions conducted via Zoom. We developed a facilitator guide using the 5C Scale, a validated psychometric tool for assessing vaccine hesitancy. We performed qualitative thematic analysis using a combined inductive and deductive approach.

RESULTS

Major themes that emerged included the following: conflicting information decreased vaccine confidence; individualized outreach is valued when information gathering; mandates and financial incentives may increase skepticism; low health literacy and conflict in personal relationships are barriers to acceptance; and experiencing a severe infection and fear of exposure at work increase acceptance.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our study, personalized yet consistent messaging may be key to reaching hesitant HHWs.

Exclusive and dual influenza and COVID-19 vaccination among U.S. adults and adolescents in 2021

INTRODUCTION

Despite recommendations for influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, studies have documented gaps and disparities in vaccination coverage for adults and adolescents. Understanding the proportion and demographics of those unvaccinated against influenza and/or COVID-19 is important for tailoring appropriate messaging and strategies to increase confidence and uptake.

METHODS

Using the 2021 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), we assessed the prevalence of four vaccination patterns (exclusive influenza vaccination, exclusive COVID-19 vaccination, dual influenza and COVID-19 vaccination, and neither vaccination) by sociodemographic and other characteristics among adults and adolescents 12-17 years. Adjusted multivariable regression analyses were conducted to examine factors associated with each of the four vaccination categories among adults and adolescents.

RESULTS

In 2021, 42.5% of adults and 28.3% of adolescents received both influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, while approximately a quarter (22.4%) of adults and a third (34.0%) of adolescents did not receive either vaccine. Among adults and adolescents, 6.0% and 11.4% were exclusively vaccinated against influenza and 29.1% and 26.4% were exclusively vaccinated against COVID-19, respectively. Among adults, exclusive COVID-19 or dual vaccination was more likely to be associated with older age, non-Hispanic multi/other race, and having a college degree compared to their respective counterparts. Exclusive influenza or neither vaccination was more likely to be associated with younger age, having a high school diploma or less, living below the poverty level, and having a previous COVID-19 diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, approximately two-thirds of adolescents and three-fourths of adults received exclusive influenza or COVID-19 vaccines or both vaccines in 2021. Vaccination patterns differed by sociodemographic and other characteristics. Promoting confidence in vaccines and reducing barriers to access is needed to protect individuals and families from severe health consequences of vaccine-preventable diseases. Being up-to-date with all recommended vaccinations can prevent a future resurgence of hospitalizations and cases.Key messages42.5% of adults and 28.3% of adolescents received both influenza and COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, while approximately a quarter (22.4%) of adults and a third (34.0%) of adolescents did not receive either vaccine; 6.0% of adults and 11.4% of adolescents were exclusively vaccinated against influenza and 29.1% of adults and 26.4% of adolescents were exclusively vaccinated against COVID-19.Among adults, exclusive COVID-19 vaccination or dual vaccination was more likely to be associated with older age, non-Hispanic multi/other race, and having a college degree or higher compared to their respective counterparts; exclusive influenza vaccination or neither vaccination was more likely to be associated with younger age, having a high school diploma or less, living below poverty level, and having a previous COVID-19 diagnosis compared to their respective counterparts.Promoting confidence in vaccines and reducing barriers to access is needed to protect individuals and families from severe health consequences of vaccine-preventable diseases. Being up-to-date with all recommended vaccinations can prevent a future resurgence of hospitalizations and cases, especially as new variants emerge.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination rates and staffing shortages among healthcare personnel in nursing homes before, during, and after implementation of mandates for COVID-19 vaccination among 15 US jurisdictions, National Healthcare Safety Network, June 2021-January 2022

OBJECTIVE

To examine temporal changes in coverage with a complete primary series of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and staffing shortages among healthcare personnel (HCP) working in nursing homes in the United States before, during, and after the implementation of jurisdiction-based COVID-19 vaccination mandates for HCP.

SAMPLE AND SETTING

HCP in nursing homes from 15 US jurisdictions.

DESIGN

We analyzed weekly COVID-19 vaccination data reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network from June 7, 2021, through January 2, 2022. We assessed 3 periods (preintervention, intervention, and postintervention) based on the announcement of vaccination mandates for HCP in 15 jurisdictions. We used interrupted time-series models to estimate the weekly percentage change in vaccination with complete primary series and the odds of reporting a staffing shortage for each period.

RESULTS

Complete primary series vaccination among HCP increased from 66.7% at baseline to 94.3% at the end of the study period and increased at the fastest rate during the intervention period for 12 of 15 jurisdictions. The odds of reporting a staffing shortage were lowest after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate that COVID-19 vaccination mandates may be an effective strategy for improving HCP vaccination coverage in nursing homes without exacerbating staffing shortages. These data suggest that mandates can be considered to improve COVID-19 coverage among HCP in nursing homes to protect both HCP and vulnerable nursing home residents.

Discretion in decision to receive COVID-19 vaccines and associated socio-economic inequalities in rates of uptake: a whole-of-population data linkage study from Australia

OBJECTIVE

In Australia, first and second compared to third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were implemented under different policies and contexts, resulting in greater discretion in decisions to receive a third compared to first and second dose. We quantified socio-economic inequalities in first and third dose to understand how discretion is associated with differences in uptake.

STUDY DESIGN

Whole-of-population cohort study.

METHODS

Linked immunisation, census, death and migration data were used to estimate weekly proportions who received first and third doses of a COVID-19 vaccine until 31 August 2022 for those with low (no formal qualification) compared to high (university degree) education, stratified by 10-year age group (from 30 to 89 years). We estimated relative rates using Cox regression, including adjustment for sociodemographic factors.

RESULTS

Among 13.1 million people in our study population, 94% had received a first and 80% a third dose by 31 August 2022. Rates of uptake of first and third dose were around 50% lower for people with low compared to high education. Gaps were small in absolute terms for first dose, and at the end of the study period ranged from 1 to 11 percentage points across age groups. However, gaps were substantial for third dose, particularly at younger ages where the socio-economic gap was as wide as 32 percentage-points.

CONCLUSION

Education-related inequalities in uptake were larger where discretion in decisions was larger. Policies that limited discretion in decisions to receive vaccines may have contributed to achieving the dual aims of maximising uptake and minimising inequalities.

Effects Of An Employee COVID-19 Vaccination Mandate At A Long-Term Care Network

We assessed COVID-19 vaccination and employment status among employees of a long-term care network that announced an employee vaccination mandate on July 29, 2021. The day before the announcement, 1,208 employees were unvaccinated; of these workers, 56.2 percent subsequently were vaccinated, whereas 20.9 percent (3.7 percent of active employees) were terminated because of noncompliance with the mandate.

Healthcare Workers' Attitudes towards Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccine mandates are considered a controversial public health policy both in public debate and among healthcare workers (HCWs). Thus, the objective of this systematic review is to give a deep insight into HCWs' views and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination mandates amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science) was conducted between July 2022 and November 2022. Original quantitative studies that addressed the attitudes of HCWs regarding COVID-19 vaccine mandates were considered eligible for this systematic review. All the included studies (n = 57) were critically appraised and assessed for risk of systematic bias. Meta-analyses were performed, providing a pooled estimate of HCWs' acceptance towards COVID-19 vaccine mandates for: 1. HCWs and 2. the general population.

RESULTS

In total, 64% (95% CI: 55%, 72%) of HCWs favored COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs, while 50% (95% CI: 38%, 61%) supported mandating COVID-19 vaccines for the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 is a highly controversial issue among HCWs. The present study provides stakeholders and policy makers with useful evidence related to the compulsory or non-compulsory nature of COVID-19 vaccinations for HCWs and the general population. Other: The protocol used in this review is registered on PROSPERO with the ID number: CRD42022350275.

Behavioral and Social Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States, August-November 2021

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and widely available, but many adults in the U.S. have not been vaccinated for COVID-19. This study examined the associations between behavioral and social drivers of vaccination with COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the U.S. adults and their prevalence by region.

METHODS

A nationally representative sample of U.S. adults participated in a cross-sectional telephone survey in August-November 2021; the analysis was conducted in January 2022. Survey questions assessed self-reported COVID-19 vaccine initiation, demographics, and behavioral and social drivers of vaccination.

RESULTS

Among the 255,763 respondents, 76% received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine uptake was higher among respondents aged ≥75 years (94%), females (78%), and Asian non-Hispanic people (94%). The drivers of vaccination most strongly associated with uptake included higher anticipated regret from nonvaccination, risk perception, and confidence in vaccine safety and importance, followed by work- or school-related vaccination requirements, social norms, and provider recommendation (all p<0.05). The direction of association with uptake varied by reported level of difficulty in accessing vaccines. The prevalence of all of these behavioral and social drivers of vaccination was highest in the Northeast region and lowest in the Midwest and South.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationally representative survey found that COVID-19 vaccine uptake was most strongly associated with greater anticipated regret, risk perception, and confidence in vaccine safety and importance, followed by vaccination requirements and social norms. Interventions that leverage these social and behavioral drivers of vaccination have the potential to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and could be considered for other vaccine introductions.

Consolidating a research agenda for vaccine mandates

A workshop on mandatory vaccination was pitched to the World Public Health Congress in 2019 and the resultant special issue was pitched to Vaccine in 2020. During this project, the COVID-19 pandemic pushed vaccine policy to the forefront of global public health policy, and the imposition of vaccine mandates prompted a new wave of scholarship in the field. This introductory article employs the heuristic of Lasswell's (1956) policy cycle to synthesise the findings of the articles in the special issue. It considers the temporal lifetime of mandates and highlights findings regarding: the emergence of mandates as a policy option, public support and policy instrument design, what matters in the implementation of mandates, and what we can learn from evaluating them. The second half of the paper categorizes the included papers in terms of what aspects of mandates they study and the methods they employ to do so, in order to formulate a guide for future researchers of vaccine mandates. Scholars study either speculative or existing mandates - research can address several stages of the policy cycle or just one of them, ranging from attitudinal research to implementation studies and impact studies. Historical and contextual studies that take deep dives into a particular mandate are a much needed resource for studying emerging mandates, too, and scoping and framework- building work will undoubtedly be valuable in understanding and appreciating the wealth of knowledge production in this growing field. This special issue can serve as a roadmap for a consolidation of this interdisciplinary research agenda, and provide a helpful resource for decisionmakers at this historical juncture.

Healthcare workers' attitudes on mandates, incentives, and strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake: A mixed methods study

Healthcare workers are a trusted health information source and are uniquely positioned to reduce the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this sequential exploratory mixed methods study was to understand attitudes of healthcare workers working in Massachusetts during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine utilization, including vaccine mandates and incentives. Fifty-two individuals completed one-on-one interviews between April 22nd and September 7th, 2021. The survey was developed based on findings from the interviews; 209 individuals completed the online survey between February 17th and March 23rd, 2022. Both the interview and survey asked about attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine and booster mandates, incentives, and strategies to improve vaccination rates. Most participants were female (79%-interview, 81%-survey), Caucasian (56%, 73%), and worked as physicians (37%, 34%) or nurses (10%, 18%). Overall, nuanced attitudes regarding vaccine and booster mandates were expressed; many supported mandates to protect their patients' health, others emphasized personal autonomy, while some were against mandates if job termination was the consequence of declining vaccines. Similarly, views regarding vaccine incentives differed; some considered incentives helpful, yet many viewed them as coercive. Strategies believed to be most effective to encourage vaccination included improving accessibility to vaccination sites, addressing misinformation, discussing vaccine safety, tailored community outreach via trusted messengers, and one-on-one conversations between patients and healthcare workers. Healthcare workers' experiences with strategies to improve utilization of COVID-19 vaccines and boosters have implications for public health policies. Generally, efforts to improve access and education were viewed more favorably than incentives and mandates.

Primary care professionals' support for Covid-19 vaccination mandates: Findings from a US national survey

Healthcare organizations have been early adopters of Covid-19 vaccine mandates as a strategy to end the pandemic. We sought to evaluate support for such mandates among pediatric primary care professionals (PCPs) in the United States. In February-March 2021, we conducted a national online survey of 1,047 PCPs (71% physicians). We used multivariable logistic regression to assess correlates of PCPs' support for Covid-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers. Most PCPs supported Covid-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers (83%). PCPs were more likely to support mandates if they perceived health care workers to be at highest risk of getting Covid-19 compared to other worker types (8 percentage points, p < 0.01). PCPs were also more likely to support mandates if their clinic recommended or required vaccination (11 percentage points and 20 percentage points respectively, both p < 0.01). However, PCPs were less likely to support mandates if their clinic offered incentives to vaccinate (10 percentage points, p < 0.05). Clinic recommendations and requirements for Covid-19 vaccination may increase support for mandates. Incentives may decrease support, perhaps by creating the perception that viable alternatives to mandates exist.