Setting the Stage for Improved Practices During Vaccine Injections: A Knowledge Synthesis of Interventions for the Management of Pain and Fear

The acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines in Rwanda: a cross-sectional study

The first reported case of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Rwanda occurred on March 14 2020. By the end of July 2024, a total of 133,518 individuals had tested positive for the infection, resulting in 1,468 deaths and 132,039 had fully recovered. The success of COVID-19 elimination in Rwanda hinges on the public's level of acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination. Although COVID-19 is no longer a pandemic anymore, the World Health Organisation recommends countries vaccinate their populations to protect them from COVID-19 and its variants. Globally, COVID-19 has affected 704,753,890 people, caused 7,010,681 deaths and 675,619,811 have recovered. This study aimed to assess the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines among adults aged 18 years and above in Rwanda. A cross-sectional study was conducted from January to March 2022 to determine the associations between COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (VA) with respondents' characteristics, using logistic regression analysis. This study enrolled 2,126 respondents with a mean age of 31 years, the majority of whom were females (82.2%), 51.4% had completed primary education, and 78.7% were married. Most respondents recognized the importance of COVID-19 vaccination for both personal health and community well-being. The study found a high rate of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, with 91.6% of respondents expressing VA and an overall VA rate of 98.2%. Having a relationship with the child(ren) was the only characteristic associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (p; 3.2 × 10- 3, OR; 2.9, 95% C.I; 1.4-5.9). In conclusion, the study found a high rate of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among adults in Rwanda, with COVID-19 associated with having a relationship with the child(ren). The study recommends the need for mass educational campaigns and awareness-raising efforts to understand of COVID-19 vaccines.

Intramuscular versus intradermal administration for influenza vaccination in college students: A pilot study

OBJECTIVE

College student populations are considered at greater risk of contracting influenza due to their close living conditions. Despite this increased risk, college students are reluctant to obtain annual vaccination. This pilot study sought to determine perceptions of students on a college campus who received the annual influenza vaccination via an intradermal route. Participants and methods: Forty-nine college students participated in the IRB approved study. After receiving the intradermal influenza vaccination, participants completed a demographic survey and vaccination perceptions questionnaire. Results: Participants were more likely to want to have an intradermal injection in the future and reported less pain with the intradermal injection. Additionally, individuals who reported greater pain with the intramuscular injection in the past were significantly more likely to want to receive an intradermal injection in the future (p < 0.019). Conclusions: Results suggest that intradermal route of vaccination may be more appealing to the college population.

Assessment of Vaccine Hesitancy to a COVID-19 Vaccine in Cameroonian Adults and Its Global Implication

Since the outbreak of COVID-19 in December 2019, no global consensus treatment has been developed and generally accepted for the disease. However, eradicating the disease will require a safe and efficacious vaccine. In order to prepare for the eventual development of a safe and efficacious COVID-19 vaccine and to enhance its uptake, it is imperative to assess vaccine hesitancy in Cameroonians. After obtaining ethical clearance from the Institutional Review Board of the University of Buea, a questionnaire was administered (May–August 2020) to consenting adults either online or in person. A qualitative thematic analysis was done to analyze the participants’ answers to the open questions. A deductive approach was used, that is, the codes and patterns according to the World Health Organization (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) Working Group Matrix of Determinants of vaccine hesitancy. The number of consenting adult Cameroonians who completed the questionnaire were 2512 (Two thousand five hundred and twelve). Vaccine hesitancy to a COVID-19 vaccine was 84.6% in Cameroonians. Using the WHO recommended Matrix of Determinant of Vaccine hesitancy, the most prominent determinants observed in this study were: Communication and Media Environment, Perception of pharmaceutical industry, Reliability and/or source of vaccine and cost. Most Cameroonians agree that even though there are benefits of a clinical trial, they will prefer it should be done out of the continent and involving African scientists for eventual acceptance and uptake. The concerns of safety, efficacy and confidence has to be addressed using a Public Engagement approach if a COVID-19 vaccine has to be administered successfully in Africa or Cameroon specifically. Since this study was carried out following WHO standards, its result can be compared to those of other studies carried out in different cultural settings using similar standards.

The evidence supporting the association between the use of pain scales and outcomes in hospitalized children: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Systematic use of pain intensity scales is considered a prerequisite for treatment of pain in hospitalized children, but already a decade ago, attention was called to the lack of robust evidence supporting the presumed positive association between their use and desired outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To re-evaluate the evidence supporting the association between the use of pain scales and patient and process outcomes in hospitalized children.

DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

DATA SOURCES

The online databases PubMed and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched from inception to April 15, 2020.

REVIEW METHODS

We performed single screening of all records followed by duplicate screening of full texts of interest with a disagreement procedure in place. Studies where the authors evaluated outcomes from the use of self-report or behavioral-based pain scales in children 0-18 years in a hospital setting were included. Emergency care settings were excluded.

RESULTS

In a majority of the 32 included studies, complex interventions that included one or more pain scales were evaluated. Process outcomes (e.g., documentation) were most frequently studied. Interventions were commonly associated with improved documentation of pain assessment, while the effect on pain management documentation was inconsistent. However, improvements in process outcomes did not necessarily result in better patient outcomes. In regard to patient outcomes (e.g., pain intensity, side effects, or satisfaction with treatment), some authors reported reduced pain intensity on group level, but the effect on other functional outcomes, child and parent satisfaction, and aspects of safety were inconsistent. Methodological issues, e.g., weak study designs and small samples, biased the results, and it was not possible to determine how pain scales contributed to the overall effects since they were studied as part of complex interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although both a theoretically founded understanding of pain and clinical experience suggest that the use of pain scales will make a difference for hospitalized children with pain, there is still limited evidence to support this notion. As pain scales have been almost exclusively studied as an aspect of complex interventions, research that determines the active ingredient(s) in a complex intervention and their joint and individual effects on outcomes that are meaningful for the child (for example reduced pain intensity or improved function) are urgently needed. Tweetable abstract: Limited #research supports association between use of pediatric #pain scales and patient outcomes @_randida @PainPearl.

Involving stakeholders in informing the development of a Knowledge Translation (KT) intervention to improve the vaccination experience at school

OBJECTIVE

Pain, fear, and fainting management during school-based vaccinations is suboptimal. The objective was to examine stakeholder perceptions of barriers and facilitators to better practices. Method: Six semi-structured focus groups were conducted in Niagara Region, Ontario: two parent groups (n=7); one grade 7 to 8 student group (n=9); two nurse groups (n=12); and one school staff group (n=6). Participants shared perceptions about school vaccination clinics and the implementation of specific strategies and tools. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as the framework for analysis.

RESULTS

Feedback from stakeholders was categorized into four domains of CFIR: intervention characteristics, inner setting, outer setting, and characteristics of individuals. Intervention characteristics included: vaccine educational materials, vaccination accommodations, distraction techniques, topical anaesthetics, and food. Inner setting factors included: school vaccination procedures, relationships between school staff and nurses, assessment and documentation of student fear, and factors that contribute to a chaotic vaccination clinic. Outer setting factors were: the social environment and addressing parent and student needs. Stakeholder roles were discussed in characteristics of individuals.

CONCLUSION

This study identified elements that can facilitate and challenge pain and fear mitigation tools and strategies; these elements should be considered in the development of a Knowledge Translation (KT) intervention to improve the school vaccination experience.

Vaccine acceptance, hesitancy and refusal in Canada: Challenges and potential approaches

"Vaccine hesitancy" is a concept used frequently in vaccination discourse and is challenging previously held perspective that individual vaccination attitudes and behaviours are a simple dichotomy of accept or reject. Given the importance of achieving high vaccine coverage in Canada to avoid vaccine preventable diseases and their consequences, vaccine hesitancy is an important issue that needs to be addressed. This article describes the scope and causes of vaccine hesitancy in Canada and proposes potential approaches to address it.