Prioritise research on vaccines for pregnant and breastfeeding women

Vaccination during pregnancy: A golden opportunity to embrace

Immunization strategies are part of routine pregnancy care to prevent infectious diseases in the mother, the fetus, and the newborn. Maternal immunization recommendations followed the recognition of the consequences of infectious diseases in pregnancy, including vertical transmission and perinatal consequences. The recent COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the issue of vaccination among pregnant individuals. Recommendations vary globally; however, Tdap, influenza, and, recently, COVID-19 vaccines are routinely recommended during pregnancy. There are several new maternal immunization products in the pipeline, including those directed against malaria, cytomegalovirus, Group B Streptococcus, herpes simplex virus, and respiratory syncytial virus. Important challenges must be addressed in all countries to guarantee that pregnant individuals and their babies receive the best care possible, including uptake of recommended immunizations by their entire target population groups. These challenges include disseminating appropriate data for vaccine recommendations and many others, such as ensuring stakeholder endorsement, achieving in-country distribution and administration, adequate vaccine supply, and a well-organized healthcare system, ideally offering the immunization free of charge. More recently, the hesitancy of pregnant women to receive immunizations highlights the relevance of cultural aspects and other contextual factors affecting vaccine uptake among pregnant individuals.

A Mother's Dilemma: The 5-P Model for Vaccine Decision-Making in Pregnancy

Pregnant women are a highly vaccine-resistant population and face unique circumstances that complicate vaccine decision-making. Pregnant women are also at increased risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes to many vaccine-preventable diseases. Several models have been proposed to describe factors informing vaccine hesitancy and acceptance. However, none of these existing models are applicable to the complex decision-making involved with vaccine acceptance during pregnancy. We propose a model for vaccine decision-making in pregnancy that incorporates the following key factors: (1) perceived information sufficiency regarding vaccination risks during pregnancy, (2) harm avoidance to protect the fetus, (3) relationship with a healthcare provider, (4) perceived benefits of vaccination, and (5) perceived disease susceptibility and severity during pregnancy. In addition to these factors, the availability of research on vaccine safety during pregnancy, social determinants of health, structural barriers to vaccine access, prior vaccine acceptance, and trust in the healthcare system play roles in decision-making. As a final step, the pregnant individual must balance the risks and benefits of vaccination for themselves and their fetus, which adds greater complexity to the decision. Our model represents a first step in synthesizing factors informing vaccine decision-making by pregnant women, who represent a highly vaccine-resistant population and who are also at high risk for adverse outcomes for many infectious diseases.

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

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

Vaccine regulation should require and enforce the inclusion of pregnant and breastfeeding women in prelicensure clinical trials

Exclusion of pregnant and breastfeeding women from the pivotal randomized controlled trials for COVID-19 vaccines that led to emergency regulatory approval created gaps in data needed for vaccine policy, healthcare provider recommendations, and women's decisions about vaccination. We argue that such knowledge gaps increase potential for vaccine hesitancy and misinformation relating to the health of women and infants, and that these gaps in evidence are avoidable. Over several decades, ethical and scientific guidance, scholarship, and advocacy in favor of pregnant and breastfeeding women's participation in clinical development of vaccines has accumulated. Guidance on how to include pregnant and breastfeeding women in vaccine trials ethically and safely predates the COVID-19 pandemic but has yet to be routinely incorporated in vaccine development. We highlight the important role regulatory authorities could play in requiring that pregnant and breastfeeding women be eligible as volunteer participants in prelicensure vaccine trials for products that are expected to be used in this population. Inclusion of pregnant and breastfeeding populations in clinical trials leading to market approval or emergency use authorization should be undertaken early or concurrently at the time of trials in the general population.

A socio-ecological exploration to identify factors influencing the COVID-19 vaccine decision-making process among pregnant and lactating women: Findings from Kenya

The vaccine decision-making process of pregnant and lactating women is complex. Regarding COVID-19, pregnant women are at increased risk for severe disease and poor health outcomes. While pregnant and lactating women were excluded from COVID-19 vaccine trials, available evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and protective during pregnancy. In this study, we used a socio-ecological approach to explore factors influencing the decision-making process for COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant and lactating women in Kenya, for the purpose of informing demand generation strategies. As pregnant and lactating women are influenced by many factors, we conducted 84 in-depth interviews with a variety of stakeholders, including 31 pregnant or lactating women, 20 healthcare workers such as nurses, midwives, doctors, and frontline workers, 25 male family members of pregnant or lactating women, and 8 gatekeepers such as community leaders and faith-based leaders. These individuals were recruited from six communities in Kenya: three urban, and three rural. We applied a grounded theory approach to identify emerging themes and organized emerging themes using the SAGE Vaccine Hesitancy model, which includes three categories of determinants of vaccine acceptance, including contextual influences, individual and group influences, and vaccine and vaccination specific issues. Myths, interpersonal norms, and religion emerged as themes related to contextual influences. Safety, risk perception, and the role of the healthcare worker emerged as themes related to individual and group influences. For vaccine and vaccination specific issues, emerging themes included availability, accessibility, and eligibility. While maternal immunization can substantially reduce the effect of infectious diseases in mothers and infants, vaccine acceptance is critical. However, vaccines do not save lives; vaccination does. We hope the results of this study can be used to tailor communication efforts to increase vaccine demand among pregnant and lactating women.

What message appeal and messenger are most persuasive for COVID-19 vaccine uptake: Results from a 5-country survey in India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Ukraine

Effective strategies to encourage COVID-19 vaccination should consider how health communication can be tailored to specific contexts. Our study aimed to evaluate the influence of three specific messaging appeals from two kinds of messengers on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in diverse countries. We surveyed 953 online participants in five countries (India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Ukraine). We assessed participants’ perceptions of three messaging appeals of vaccination—COVID-19 disease health outcomes, social norms related to COVID-19 vaccination, and economic impact of COVID-19—from two messengers, healthcare providers (HCP), and peers. We examined participants’ ad preference and vaccine hesitancy using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. Participants expressed a high level of approval for all the ads. The healthcare outcome–healthcare provider ad was most preferred among participants from India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Ukraine. Participants in Kenya reported a preference for the health outcome–peer ad. The majority of participants in each country expressed high levels of vaccine hesitancy. However, in a final logistic regression model participant characteristics were not significantly related to vaccine hesitancy. These findings suggest that appeals related to health outcomes, economic benefit, and social norms are all acceptable to diverse general populations, while specific audience segments (i.e., mothers, younger adults, etc.) may have preferences for specific appeals over others. Tailored approaches, or approaches that are developed with the target audience’s concerns and preferences in mind, will be more effective than broad-based or mass appeals.