Antenatal care provider's advice is the key determinant of influenza vaccination uptake in pregnant women

Global Systematic Scoping Review of Adolescent Factors Associated With COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy

Although COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for adolescents aged 12-17 years, they remain one of the least commonly vaccinated age groups. Therefore, studies investigating the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy among adolescents are needed. We conducted a systematic review of the literature in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards from inception to October 23, 2022, for adolescent-reported factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. Titles and abstracts of articles were screened, full-text articles were reviewed for eligibility, and eligible articles were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Results were summarized using a narrative synthesis. The review protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022363411). Of 4,140 articles screened, 302 were selected for full-text review, 27 of which met the eligibility criteria. Most studies evaluated age (n = 20 studies) and sex (n = 21 studies) in relation to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, yet these were uncommonly linked with vaccine hesitancy among adolescents. Adolescents consistently reported the impact of the pandemic on social activities, social and parental norms, and a sense of communal responsibility as reasons for vaccinating. Although fewer studies (n = 18 studies) evaluated theoretical-based factors, the studies conducted showed that perceived vaccine safety and efficacy (n = 6 studies), risks from vaccination (n = 5 studies), and social and parental norms (n = 3) were consistently linked with vaccine hesitancy. To address low vaccination rates, adolescent-engaged research remains needed that considers their perspectives on COVID-19 vaccines.

Factors that influence vaccination communication during pregnancy: provider and patient perspectives using the theoretical domains framework

INTRODUCTION

Vaccination during pregnancy is recommended but uptake is low and evidence on the topic is limited.

AIMS

This study aimed to identify the drivers of current behavior and barriers to change for health care practitioners (HCPs) and pregnant patients in Canada.

METHODS

This study is an in-depth qualitative investigation of the factors influencing HCPs' vaccination communication during pregnancy, as well as factors influencing pregnant patients' vaccination uptake in Canada using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Three data sources were used: (1) perinatal HCP interviews before COVID-19; (2) perinatal HCP interviews regarding vaccine communication after COVID-19; and (3) survey of pregnant or lactating women after COVID-19.

RESULTS

Forty-seven interviews and 169 participant responses were included. Perinatal HCPs reported limited information on vaccine communication or difficulty keeping up-to-date ( Environmental context and resources ; Knowledge; Beliefs about capabilities ). HCPs lacked confidence and struggled with lack of training to address vaccine hesitancy without alienating patients ( Beliefs about capabilities; Skills ). Pregnant or lactating women struggled with the amount of information they felt was imposed on them, had concerns about the perceived negative consequences of vaccination, and felt pressure to understand what was best for them and their babies ( Knowledge; Beliefs about consequences; Social influences ).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides a theory-based approach to identify influencing factors that can be mapped to theory-based intervention components, improving the likelihood of intervention effectiveness. The study is the first step in adapting an existing intervention to improve vaccine communication during pregnancy, ultimately, increasing vaccination uptake.

SPANISH ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A260.

DECIDE, A Pregnancy-specific Patient-provider Communication Approach: Multi-method and Codesign

BACKGROUND

Vaccination in pregnancy is recommended for preventing maternal and infant morbidity, but uptake is low. Existing presumptive and participatory vaccine communication approaches for childhood vaccinations may not encompass the nuanced decision-making during pregnancy.

METHODS

We employed a multi-method study using the double diamond design framework to codesign a pregnancy-specific, person-centered communication approach. Key activities of each double diamond phase are listed below:Discover: Conducted a scoping review, a survey assessing psychological antecedents of (n = 237) pregnant or lactating individuals, qualitative interviews with (n = 169) patients and (n = 47) healthcare providers (HCPs) and gathered insights through (n = 20) community outreach events to understand the problem.Define: Synthesized findings through thematic analysis and key informant interviews, to validate our understanding of the problem.Develop: Prototyped solutions through role-playing, iterative feedback with patient partners and HCPs, and qualitative inquiry into parental preferences.Deliver: Finalized the communication approach after iterative usability testing with (n = 15) HCPs and feedback-driven refinement with (n = 9) patient partners.

RESULTS

We confirmed the need for a pregnancy-specific communication approach and identified key gaps. We then built a prototype where perinatal HCPs could use either a presumptive if acceptant or participatory if hesitant approach but questioned the applicability of vaccine hesitancy to pregnancy. We abandoned a solely presumptive approach given parental insights: it is normal to "question" during pregnancy and developed a balanced approach. The final DECIDE (determine, elicit, consent, interactive discussion, deliver, empower) communication approach balances shared decision-making with a clear recommendation. It addresses pregnant individuals' desire for autonomy and support, and HCPs call for simple tools to improve their confidence and communication skills without alienating their patients.

CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS

DECIDE is a pregnancy-specific vaccine communication approach potentially applicable to other interventions beyond vaccination.

Timing and temporal trends of influenza and pertussis vaccinations during pregnancy in three Australian jurisdictions: The Links2HealthierBubs population-based linked cohort study, 2012-2017

BACKGROUND

Antenatal inactivated influenza (IIV) and pertussis-containing vaccines (dTpa) offer protection against severe respiratory infections for pregnant women and infants <6 months of age. Both vaccines are recommended in pregnancy; however, little is known about temporal or jurisdictional trends and predictors of uptake.

AIMS

To identify gaps and predictors of IIV and/or dTpa vaccinations in Australian pregnancies from 2012 to 2017.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a probabilistically linked, multi-jurisdictional population-based cohort study, drawing from perinatal data collections and immunisation databases. We used a generalised linear mixed model with a random effect term to account for clustering of multiple pregnancies within mothers, to calculate vaccination uptake, and identify predictors of uptake by maternal demographic, pregnancy, and health characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 591 868 unique pregnancies, IIV uptake was 15%, dTpa 27% and 12% received both vaccines. Pertussis vaccinations in First Nations pregnancies were 20% lower than non-Indigenous pregnancies; dTpa was strongly associated with IIV uptake (risk ratio (RR): 8.60, 95% CI 8.48-8.73). This trend was temporally and jurisdictionally consistent. First Nations women were more likely to have had IIV in pregnancy before the introduction of dTpa in the pregnancy program: (RR: 1.48, 95% CI 1.40-1.57), but less likely after dTpa implementation (RR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.76-0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Inequity in vaccine uptake between First Nations and non-Indigenous pregnancies, and dismal rates of vaccination in pregnancy overall need urgent review, particularly before the next influenza pandemic or pertussis outbreak. If antenatal dTpa is driving IIV uptake, changes in antenatal healthcare practices are needed to ensure vaccines are offered equitably and optimally to protect against infection.

Disparities in Prenatal Immunization Rates in Rural and Urban US Areas by Indicators of Access to Care

PURPOSE

To evaluate disparities in urban-rural immunization rates among pregnant women by indicators of access to health care.

METHODS

We analyzed Phase 8 (2016-2018) Pregnant Risk Assessment Monitoring System data for 82,603 respondents who recently gave birth to a live infant. Uptake of influenza (33 states) or Tdap (19 states) vaccines was compared for rural versus urban areas of participating states. We compared the prevalence of immunization for rural versus urban areas by indicators of health care access using average marginal predictive values from multivariable regression models.

FINDINGS

Although nearly half (48.2%) of pregnant women in rural areas relied on Medicaid to fund prenatal care, rural-residing women were less likely to live in a state offering full coverage under Medicaid to pregnant women than urban-residing women (93.9% vs 98.0%, respectively). Among states with Medicaid programs not offering full access for pregnant women, influenza immunization coverage was 12% lower (aPR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82, 0.94) and Tdap immunization coverage was 20% lower (aPR 0.80; 95% CI 0.68, 0.95) for rural versus urban areas. Uninsured women in rural areas were less likely to receive influenza or Tdap vaccine compared to uninsured women in urban areas (aPR 0.65; 95% CI 0.50, 0.85 and aPR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57, 0.95, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant women residing in rural areas more commonly rely on Medicaid to financially support prenatal care but are less likely to have expanded or full access to Medicaid coverage, potentially contributing to disparities vaccine uptake during pregnancy and increased rates of vaccine-preventable disease.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and coverage among pregnant persons in the United States

Pregnant persons are at higher risk of severe COVID-19. Although vaccination is recommended, COVID-19 vaccination rates are lower among pregnant persons compared to the non-pregnant population. We aimed to evaluate acceptance of any dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. A national online cross-sectional survey of US adults who were pregnant between December 2020 and July 2021 was used to measure COVID-19 vaccine behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs. Post-stratification weighting was used to ensure representativeness to the US population. Marginal log-binomial models were used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, accounting for sociodemographic factors. Of 5,660 who responded to survey advertisements, 2,213 met eligibility criteria and completed the survey; 55.4% of respondents received or planned to receive COVID-19 vaccine prior to or during pregnancy, 27.0% planned to vaccinate after pregnancy, 8.8% were unsure and 8.7% had no plans to vaccinate. Individuals were more likely to receive or plan to receive COVID-19 vaccine if they had group prenatal care (aPR 1.57; 95% CI 1.40, 1.75), were employed in a workplace with a policy recommending vaccination (aPR 1.15; 95% CI 1.06, 1.26), and believed COVID-19 vaccines are safe (aPR 2.86; 95% CI 2.49, 3.29). Pregnant persons who were recommended COVID-19 vaccination by their healthcare provider less commonly reported concerns about vaccine safety (35.5% vs 55.9%) and were more likely to accept COVID-19 vaccines (aPR 1.52; 95% CI 1.31, 1.76). COVID-19 vaccine acceptance during pregnancy is not universal and public health intervention will be needed to continue to increase vaccine coverage.

Trends and characteristics of Tdap vaccination during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In February 2018, Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) recommended tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination during pregnancy to protect newborns against pertussis infection. We sought to describe pre- and postrecommendation trends in Tdap vaccination coverage among pregnant Ontario residents.

METHODS

Using linked health administrative databases, we conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of all pregnant individuals who gave birth in Ontario hospitals between April 2012 and March 2020. We described Tdap vaccination patterns in pregnancy for the entire study period and before and after the NACI recommendation. We used log-binomial regression to identify characteristics associated with Tdap vaccination during pregnancy.

RESULTS

Among the 991 850 deliveries included, 7.0% of pregnant individuals received the Tdap vaccination during pregnancy. Vaccine coverage increased from 0.4% in 2011/12 to 29.2% in 2019/20. Coverage was highest among individuals who were older, had no previous live births, had adequate prenatal care and received maternity care primarily from a family physician. After adjustment, characteristics associated with lower coverage included younger maternal age, having a multiple birth, residing in a rural location and higher area material deprivation. In 2019/20, 71.0% of vaccinated individuals received the Tdap vaccination during the recommended gestational window (27-32 wk). Stratified analyses of the pre- and postrecommendation cohorts yielded similar findings to the main analyses with a few gradient differences after adjustment.

INTERPRETATION

During pregnancy, Tdap vaccination coverage increased substantially in Ontario between 2011/12 and 2019/20, most notably after recommendations for universal Tdap vaccination during pregnancy began in Canada. To further improve vaccine coverage in the obstetric setting, public health strategies should consider tailoring their programs to reach subpopulations with lower vaccine coverage.

An evaluation of an influenza vaccination campaign targeting pregnant women in 27 clinics in two provinces of South Africa, 2015 - 2018

Introduction

Despite prioritization, routine antenatal influenza vaccine coverage is < 16% in South Africa. We aimed to describe maternal influenza vaccine coverage in 27 antenatal clinics (ANCs) in Gauteng and Western Cape (WC) Provinces, where in collaboration with the Department of Health (DoH), we augmented the annual influenza vaccination programme among pregnant women.

Methods

From 2015 through 2018, 40,230 additional doses of influenza vaccine were added to the available stock and administered as part of routine antenatal care. Educational talks were given daily and data were collected on women attending ANCs. We compared characteristics of vaccinated and unvaccinated women using multivariable logistic regression.

Results

We screened 62,979 pregnant women during the period when Southern Hemisphere influenza vaccines were available (27,068 in Gauteng and 35,911 in WC). Vaccine coverage at the targeted clinics was 78.7% (49,355/62682), although pregnant women in WC were more likely to be vaccinated compared to those in the Gauteng (Odds ratio (OR) =3.7 p < 0.001). Women aged 25—29 and > 35 years were less likely to be vaccinated than women aged 18—24 years (OR = 0.9 p = 0.053; OR = 0.9 p < 0.001). HIV positive status was not associated with vaccination (OR = 1.0 p = 0.266). Reasons for not vaccinating included: vaccine stock-outs where ANCs depleted available stock of vaccines and/or were awaiting delivery of vaccines (54.6%, 6949/12723), refusal/indecision (25.8%, 3285), and current illness that contraindicated vaccination (19.6%, 2489).

Conclusion

Antenatal vaccination uptake was likely improved by the increased vaccine supply and vaccine education offered during our campaign.

National predictors of influenza vaccine uptake in pregnancy: the FluMum prospective cohort study, Australia, 2012-2015

OBJECTIVE

Ascertain predictors of inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) uptake in pregnancy in mother-infant pairs from six Australian sites over four consecutive influenza seasons (2012-2015).

METHODS

Prospective observational cohort study calculating proportions of unvaccinated and vaccinated pregnancies. Multivariable logistic regression calculating adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) to determine demographic, pregnancy and birth characteristics as predictors of IIV uptake in pregnancy.

RESULTS

Uptake of IIV was 36% (n=3,651/9,878) with only 3-4% during the first trimester. Validation of IIV receipt was obtained for 77% of vaccinated participants. Predictors of IIV uptake in pregnancy were: healthcare provider recommendation to have IIV during pregnancy (aOR 7.04 [95%CI 5.83-8.50]): GP (aOR 4.12 [95%CI 3.43-4.98]), obstetrician (aOR 4.41 [95%CI 3.45-5.64]), midwife (aOR 1.88 [95%CI 1.51-2.36]); previous IIV within 12 months of their current pregnancy (aOR 2.87 [95%CI 2.36-3.50]); and pertussis vaccination during the current pregnancy (aOR 4.88 [95%CI 4.08-5.83]). Conclusions and implications for public health: Healthcare provider discussions with pregnant women about the risks associated with influenza infection during pregnancy and early infancy and evidence about the safety and effectiveness of IIV are required. Recommending and offering IIV in pregnancy needs to be included in these discussions to improve uptake.

Disparities in maternal influenza immunization among women in rural and urban areas of the United States

Pregnant women and their infants are at high risk of influenza-associated complications. Although maternal immunization offers optimal protection for both, immunization rates remain low in the U.S. Women in rural communities may represent a difficult to reach group, yet immunization rates among rural-residing women have not been well evaluated. We analyzed data from the 2016-2018 Phase-8 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System for 19 U.S. states, including 45,018 women who recently gave birth to a live infant. We compared the prevalence of influenza vaccination prior to or during pregnancy and receipt of a vaccine recommendation from a healthcare provider for rural vs. urban-residing women. We used average marginal predictions derived from multivariate logistic regression models to generate weighted adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and corresponding 95% CIs. Of the 45,018 respondents, 6575 resided in a rural area; 55.1% (95% CI: 53.3, 56.9) of rural-residing women and 61.3% (95% CI: 60.6, 61.9) of urban-residing women received an influenza vaccine prior to or during pregnancy. The prevalence of vaccination was 4% lower among rural-residing women (aPR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93, 0.99). The greatest difference in rural vs. urban immunization rates were observed for Hispanic women and women with no health insurance. Our results indicate that pregnant women residing in rural communities have lower rates of immunization. To prevent maternal and infant health disparities, it is important to better understand the barriers to maternal immunization along with efforts to overcome them.

Antenatal influenza vaccination in urban Pune, India: clinician and community stakeholders' awareness, priorities, and practices

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends antenatal influenza vaccination (AIV) for pregnant women at any stage of pregnancy. This study assessed fundamental aspects of AIV acceptance and demand among key stakeholders in urban Pune, India. Semi-structured interviews for rapid ethnographic assessment of AIV-related awareness, priorities, and practices were used to study clinicians and their communities of practice. A qualitative survey was conducted among 16 private clinicians providing antenatal care (ANC) in slum and middle-class areas of Pune. Following the survey, clinicians were informed about authoritative AIV recommendations. A qualitative community survey was also conducted with 60 women aged 20-35 years and 30 spouses from the same slum and middle-class practice areas of the ANC providers. Subsequently, a second clinician survey was conducted to assess changes in clinicians' awareness, priority, and vaccination practice. After this interview, clinicians were informed of community survey findings. Most community respondents were unaware of AIV, in contrast with well-known and widely used antenatal tetanus vaccination. They expressed confidence in vaccines and trust in the clinicians. Clinicians' advice was reportedly the most important determinant of community vaccine acceptance. Clinicians were confident of the safety of AIV and they anticipated patients' acceptance if recommended. The second clinician interview showed increased awareness of AIV policy, but clinicians were more skeptical about the severity of maternal influenza in their practice. Our findings indicate community acceptance though not demand for AIV. We recommend five essential elements for vaccination program strategies to improve coverage with AIV and other ANC vaccines.

Vaccination in pregnancy: Challenges and evidence-based solutions

Vaccination in pregnancy (VIP) is dually beneficial - it protects the mother and the baby from tetanus, influenza, and pertussis. VIP uptake is low in many countries. Vaccine hesitancy, defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a "delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite the availability of vaccination services" is one of WHO's ten threats to global health per 2019. According to extensive research, mostly from high-income countries (HIC) and limited to tetanus, influenza and pertussis vaccines, lack of provider recommendations, safety concerns, and limitations in access are the main barriers to VIP. Health care provider recommendation is the leading facilitator for VIP across various socioeconomic status groups. Data on strategies to overcome patient, provider, and system barriers to VIP are inconsistent, contradictory, or lacking. Patient-focused research on evidence-based strategies to overcome provider and system barriers is needed. Furthermore, VIP programs require embedded continuous quality improvement to ensure sustainability.

Risk of adverse maternal and foetal outcomes associated with inactivated influenza vaccination in first trimester of pregnancy

BACKGROUND

In many countries, influenza vaccination is routinely recommended during any stage of pregnancy, yet uptake remains low, particularly in the first trimester. This is thought to be due to maternal concerns regarding vaccine safety.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of influenza vaccination in the first trimester of pregnancy.

METHODS

In a 4-year retrospective cohort study using probabilistic record linkage of administrative health data, we established a population-based cohort of 2391 women vaccinated in first trimester and 68 447 never vaccinated women with a date of conception between 2012 and 2015 in Western Australia. We estimated the relative risk (RR) of perinatal health outcomes among first trimester vaccinated women as compared to never vaccinated women using log-binomial logistic regression following a propensity score matched (PSM) analyses (2391 vaccinated women matched with 9564 never vaccinated women).

RESULTS

First trimester vaccination was not associated with increased risk of stillbirth (RR 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64, 2.19), small for gestational age (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.83, 1.11) or preeclampsia (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.74, 1.28). The risk of spontaneous birth at 32-36 weeks was higher in first trimester vaccinated women compared with never vaccinated women (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.11, 1.77). Vaccination was associated with a 10-19% increase in the risk of gestational diabetes (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.94, 1.49), premature rupture of membranes (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.82, 1.48), and threatened preterm labour (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.90, 1.59).

CONCLUSIONS

With exception to spontaneous preterm birth, findings suggest that first trimester vaccination is not associated with adverse maternal and foetal outcomes. Results can be used to support patient and provider-level vaccine decision making during first trimester.

Sociodemographic and health-related determinants of seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence since 2000

INTRODUCTION

Vaccination is considered to be the most practical and effective preventative measure against influenza. It is highly recommended for population subgroups most at risk of developing complications, including pregnant women. However, seasonal influenza vaccine uptake remains suboptimal among pregnant women, even in jurisdictions with universal vaccination. We summarized the evidence on the determinants of seasonal influenza vaccine uptake during pregnancy to better understand factors that influence vaccine uptake among pregnant women.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL from January 2000 to February 2020 for publications in English reporting on sociodemographic and/or health-related determinants of seasonal influenza vaccine uptake during pregnancy. Two reviewers independently included studies. One reviewer extracted data and assessed study quality, and another reviewer checked extracted data and study quality assessments for errors. Disagreements were resolved through consensus, or a third reviewer. We meta-analyzed using the inverse variance, random-effects method, and reported the odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

From 1663 retrieved citations, we included 36 studies. The following factors were associated with increased seasonal influenza vaccine uptake: Older age (20 studies: OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.20), being nulliparous (13 studies: OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.15-1.38), married (8 studies: OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.07-1.15), employed (4 studies: OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.24), a non-smoker (8 studies: OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.04-1.51) and having prenatal care (3 studies: OR 3.36, 95% CI 2.25-5.02), a chronic condition (6 studies: OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.17-1.44), been previously vaccinated (9 studies: OR 4.88, 95% CI 3.14-7.57) and living in a rural area (9 studies: OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.05-1.14). Compared with being black, being white was also associated with increased seasonal influenza vaccine uptake (11 studies: OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.20-1.41).

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that several sociodemographic and health-related factors may determine seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnancy, and that parity, history of influenza vaccination, prenatal care and comorbidity status may be influential.

An exploration of midwives' role in the promotion and provision of antenatal influenza immunisation: A mixed methods inquiry

PROBLEM

No South Australian study has previously investigated the role of midwives in the promotion and provision of antenatal influenza immunisation.

BACKGROUND

Influenza acquired in pregnancy can have serious sequalae for both mother and foetus. Recent studies have demonstrated that influenza vaccine in pregnancy is both safe and effective. Despite this, evidence suggests that vaccine uptake in pregnancy is suboptimal in both Australia and worldwide.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the role of midwives in the promotion and provision of antenatal influenza vaccine and, to provide a statistical and thematic description of the barriers and enablers midwives encounter.

METHODS

This mixed method study incorporated a cross sectional on-line survey and in-depth interviews conducted with midwives, employed in urban and regional South Australia.

FINDINGS

Quantitative data were available for 137 midwives and 10 midwives participated in the interviews. Recruitment for the interview phase was through the last question on the survey. Whilst all midwives indicated that education and vaccine promotion were part of their role, immunisation knowledge varied between Registered Nurse/Midwives (RM/RN) 80% and Registered Midwives (RM) 48.90% (p = 0.001). Quantitative data showed that only 43% of midwives felt sufficiently educated to provide the vaccine. Midwives who had received formal immunisation training were more likely to recommend the vaccine 93.7% (p = 0.001). Qualitative data confirmed these results and identified the lack of immunisation education as a barrier to practise.

CONCLUSION

Midwives identified an immunisation knowledge deficit. Midwives who had received immunisation education were more likely to actively promote and provide the vaccine to pregnant women. These findings indicate the need for more immunisation education of midwives in both tertiary and practice settings.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices on influenza vaccination during pregnancy in Quito, Ecuador

Background

Vaccination is the most effective way to prevent infection and severe outcomes caused by influenza viruses in pregnant women and their children. In Ecuador, the coverage of seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnant women is low. The aim of this study was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of pregnant women toward influenza vaccination in Quito-Ecuador.

Methods

A cross-sectional study enrolled 842 women who delivered at three main public gynecological-obstetric units of the Metropolitan District of Quito. A questionnaire regarding demographics, antenatal care, risk conditions and knowledge, attitudes and practices related to influenza vaccination was administered. We examined factors associated with vaccination using log-binomial regression models.

Results

A low vaccination rate (36.6%) against influenza was observed among pregnant women. The factors associated with vaccination included the recommendations from health providers (adjusted PR: 15.84; CI 95% 9.62–26.10), belief in the safety of the influenza vaccine (adjusted PR: 1.53; CI 95% 1.03–2.37) and antenatal care (adjusted PR: 1.21; CI 95% 1.01–1.47). The most common reasons for not vaccinating included the lack of recommendation from health care providers (73.9%) and lack of access to vaccine (9.0%).

Conclusions

Health educational programs aimed at pregnant women and antenatal care providers have the most potential to increase influenza vaccination rates. Further studies are needed to understand the barriers of health care providers regarding influenza vaccination in Ecuador.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-020-10061-4.

Factors that influence vaccination decision-making among pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The most important factor influencing maternal vaccination uptake is healthcare professional (HCP) recommendation. However, where data are available, one-third of pregnant women remain unvaccinated despite receiving a recommendation. Therefore, it is essential to understand the significance of other factors and distinguish between vaccines administered routinely and during outbreaks. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD 42019118299) to examine the strength of the relationships between identified factors and maternal vaccination uptake.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase Classic & Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, IBSS, LILACS, AfricaWideInfo, IMEMR, and Global Health databases for studies reporting factors that influence maternal vaccination. We used random-effects models to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) of being vaccinated by vaccine type.

FINDINGS

We screened 17,236 articles and identified 120 studies from 30 countries for inclusion. Of these, 49 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. The odds of receiving a pertussis or influenza vaccination were ten to twelve-times higher among pregnant women who received a recommendation from HCPs. During the 2009 influenza pandemic an HCP recommendation increased the odds of antenatal H1N1 vaccine uptake six times (OR 6.76, 95% CI 3.12-14.64, I2 = 92.00%). Believing there was potential for vaccine-induced harm had a negative influence on seasonal (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11-0.44 I2 = 84.00%) and pandemic influenza vaccine uptake (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09-0.29, I2 = 89.48%), reducing the odds of being vaccinated five-fold. Combined with our qualitative analysis the relationship between the belief in substantial disease risk and maternal seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccination uptake was limited.

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of an HCP recommendation during an outbreak, whilst still powerful, may be muted by other factors. This requires further research, particularly when vaccines are novel. Public health campaigns which centre on the protectiveness and safety of a maternal vaccine rather than disease threat alone may prove beneficial.

Antenatal vaccine uptake: A cross-sectional study investigating factors influencing women's choices in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Seasonal influenza and pertussis cause significant morbidity and mortality among expectant mothers and infants. Vaccination during the antenatal period is an important public health intervention, minimising rates of maternal, neonatal and infant infection.

AIMS

The primary aim of this project was to establish the rates of antenatal vaccine uptake. Secondly, the study aimed to determine socio-demographic factors significant to vaccine uptake. Thirdly, the project aimed to produce a thematic analysis of the factors affecting vaccination uptake during pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional observational study was conducted among women attending a large maternity hospital, in the western suburbs of Melbourne, for perinatal care. Data were collected via self-completed questionnaires after delivery. Data from the questionnaires were entered into an electronic database, and STATA was used to undertake correlation analysis.

RESULTS

Over a 12-month period 1678 women completed questionnaires and 1305 were eligible for further analysis. The uptake of influenza vaccine was 48.3%, pertussis vaccine uptake was higher, at 82.9%. Uptake of influenza and pertussis vaccines strongly correlated with recommendations from healthcare providers (odds ratios 29.7 and 63.8 respectively). Maternal country of birth, age and parity were significant predictors of vaccine uptake. In thematic analysis, healthcare provider recommendation and the perceived risk of the disease were factors resulting in vaccination.

CONCLUSION

This study determined the rate of antenatal vaccine uptake and significant socio-demographic determinants affecting uptake at a large maternity hospital in metropolitan Melbourne. Ensuring healthcare providers recommend vaccination is likely to improve coverage.

Vaccination against influenza among pregnant women in southern Brazil and associated factors

Abstract This article aims to identify the prevalence and factors associated with influenza vaccination in pregnant women. This is a cross-sectional study conducted in a municipality in the southernmost region of Brazil, which included all women giving birth in 2016. The outcome was having received the vaccine against influenza during pregnancy. Sociodemographic, behavioral and prenatal care characteristics and morbidities were analyzed. The analysis included sample description, the prevalence of vaccination for each independent variable and a multivariate analysis. Two thousand six hundred ninety-four pregnant women were interviewed, of which 53.9% reported having been vaccinated. Factors associated with increased prevalence of vaccination were mother’s higher schooling, prenatal care, tetanus vaccination and prenatal care performed in a public service. On the other hand, prenatal care onset after the first quarter reduced the prevalence of vaccination. The results point to the need to reinforce the importance of vaccination against influenza among pregnant women and among health professionals, regardless of the severity of the current epidemiological setting.

Seasonal influenza vaccine uptake and vaccine refusal among pregnant women in France: results from a national survey

Pregnant women and infants are at high risk for severe influenza and many countries, including France, recommend annual influenza immunization during pregnancy. We aimed to estimate influenza vaccination and refusal rates and assess associated factors among pregnant women during the 2015-16 season in France. We used data from a national representative sample of women who gave birth in March 2016 and were interviewed before hospital discharge (N = 11,752). In the multivariable analysis, robust Poisson regression models were used to study associations with maternal characteristics and prenatal care characteristics. Influenza vaccine coverage among pregnant women was 7.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.9-7.9). Only 24.9% (95% CI: 24.2-25.7) of women said that they received a care provider proposal for vaccination and 70.4% (95% CI: 68.7-72.0) of these declined it. Vaccine uptake was associated with low parity (prevalence ratio [PR] = 2.1; 95% CI: 1.4-3.2 for parity 0 vs ≥ 3), high educational level (PR = 2.5; 95% CI: 2.0-3.2), healthcare occupation during pregnancy (PR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.5-2.1) and preexisting conditions at risk for influenza (PR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3-2.2). Women were more frequently vaccinated when their main care provider was a general practitioner. Multiparae women and those with medium or low educational level were significantly more likely than others to decline influenza vaccine after a provider proposal. Influenza vaccine coverage is very low in France, mainly because of infrequent care provider proposals and also frequent women's refusals. Effective interventions should be designed to promote vaccination among medical professionals and reduce vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women.

Predictors for influenza vaccination among Thai pregnant woman: The role of physicians in increasing vaccine uptake

BACKGROUND

Physician recommendation and attitudes and beliefs of pregnant women toward influenza and vaccination may influence vaccine uptake during pregnancy. We examined how physician recommendation and health beliefs of pregnant women may jointly affect influenza vaccination during pregnancy.

METHODS

Thai pregnant women aged ≥18 years and >13 gestational weeks attending antenatal care (ANC) clinics, and ANC physicians were recruited during May-August 2015. Women and physicians, linked using unique identifiers, provided data on demographic, health and work history, knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs toward influenza and vaccination, based on Health Belief Model constructs. Physicians also provided data on their practices in recommending influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Prevalence ratios for the association between knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of pregnant women, physician recommendation and documented receipt of vaccination within 30 days of the visit were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 610 women, the median age was 27 years; 266 (44%) and 344 (56%) were in the second and third trimesters, respectively. Twenty-one (3%) had pre-existing conditions. Of 60 physicians with the median years of practice of 5; 17 (28%) reported frequently/usually/always recommending influenza vaccine to their pregnant patients, while 43 (72%) reported never/rarely/sometimes recommending the vaccine. Controlling for the pregnant women's knowledge and beliefs, pregnant women whose physician recommended influenza vaccination were 2.3 times (95% confidence interval 1.4-3.8) more likely to get vaccinated.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, physician recommendation was the only significant factor associated with influenza vaccine uptake among Thai pregnant women. Understanding physicians' motivation/barrier to recommending influenza vaccination to pregnant women may increase coverage.

Determinants of influenza and pertussis vaccine uptake in pregnant women in Ireland: A cross-sectional survey in 2017/18 influenza season

In Ireland seasonal influenza and pertussis vaccination during pregnancy is recommended and every year national campaigns are organised to raise awareness and improve uptake. We estimated influenza and pertussis vaccine uptake and identified factors associated with vaccination status in pregnant women in 2017/18. We conducted a face-to-face omnibus survey, with quota sampling, among women aged 18-55 years and collected socio-demographic characteristics, self-reported vaccination status, awareness of vaccine campaigns, and attitudes towards vaccination. Sample was weighted to ensure representativeness with the target population. We performed univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses on survey data. Overall, 241 pregnant women were enrolled. Influenza and pertussis vaccine uptake was 61.7% and 49.9%, respectively. Awareness of vaccine campaign and socio-economic status (SES) were associated with both influenza and pertussis vaccine uptake. The association between SES and uptake of vaccines differed by awareness. Women aware of the influenza vaccine campaign and with mid and low SES were less likely to be vaccinated, compared to those with high SES (aOR = 0.46; 95%CI: 0.22-0.97; aOR = 0.27; 95%CI: 0.12-0.60, respectively); women not aware of the pertussis vaccine campaign and with mid and low SES were less likely to be vaccinated, compared to those aware and with high SES (aOR = 0.15; 95%CI: 0.04-0.48; aOR = 0.05; 95%CI: 0.01-0.24, respectively). General practitioner (GP) recommendation was the main reason for receiving influenza vaccine (39.2%), and 71.8% of women were recommended pertussis vaccination from their GPs. The survey reports moderate uptake of vaccines among pregnant women, inequalities in uptake by SES and identifies GPs as primary source for vaccine recommendation. We recommend multifaceted campaigns, by engaging GPs, to target all socio-economic groups.

Attitudes about and access to influenza vaccination experienced by parents of children hospitalised for influenza in Australia

INTRODUCTION

In Australia, influenza hospitalises more children than any other vaccine preventable disease does. Children aged six months or older are recommended to receive annual influenza vaccines, and pregnant women are recommended vaccination to protect infants aged up to six months. However, vaccine uptake is low. This study explored influenza vaccination knowledge and behaviours of parents of children who were hospitalised for influenza, in order to inform strategies that target barriers to uptake.

METHODS

We conducted 27 semi-structured interviews with parents/caregivers during or shortly after their child's hospitalisation for laboratory-confirmed influenza in 2017. Questions were guided by the Social Ecological Model exploring all levels of influence on vaccination uptake from the intrapersonal through to policy, via the parents' perspective. Transcripts were inductively analysed. Themes were categorised into the components of the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model.

RESULTS

20/27 children were aged six months or older; 16/20 had not received an influenza vaccine in 2017. Mothers of 4/7 infants aged less than six months were not vaccinated in pregnancy. The themes regarding barriers to influenza vaccination were: (1) Limited Capability - misinterpretations and knowledge gaps, (2) Lack of Opportunity - inconvenient vaccination pathway, missing recommendations, absence of promotion to all, and the social norm, and (3) Missing Motivation - hierarchy of perceived seriousness, safety concerns, a preference for 'natural' ways. Though most parents, now aware of the severity of influenza, intended to vaccinate their child in future seasons, some harboured reservations about necessity and safety. When parents were asked how to help them vaccinate their children, SMS reminders and information campaigns delivered through social media, schools and childcare were suggested.

CONCLUSION

Improving parents' and providers' knowledge and confidence in influenza vaccination safety, efficacy, and benefits should be prioritised. This, together with making influenza vaccination more convenient for parents, would likely raise vaccine coverage.

Influenza vaccination in pregnancy among a group of remote dwelling Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mothers in the Northern Territory: The 1+1 Healthy Start to Life study

Remote-living Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women experience a higher burden of influenza infection during pregnancy than any other Australian women. Despite recommendations of inactivated influenza vaccination (IIV) in pregnancy, uptake and safety data are scarce for this population. We examined uptake of IIV in pregnancy and report adverse birth outcomes amongst a predominantly unvaccinated group of remote-living Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women from the Northern Territory (NT), using data from the 1+1 Healthy Start to Life study. Data were deterministically linked with the NT Immunisation Register to ascertain IIV exposure in pregnant women during 2003-2006 and 2009-2011 inclusive. Overall, IIV uptake in pregnancy was 3% (n=20/697 pregnancies); 0% (0/414) pre-influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and 7% (20/293) post-influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (2009-2011). Vaccine uptake was poor in this cohort and it is unclear at what stage this policy failure occurred. Women with known comorbidities and/or high risk factors were not targeted for vaccination. Much larger study participant numbers are required to validate between group comparisons but there was no clinically nor statistically significant difference in median gestational ages (38 weeks for both groups), mean infant birthweights (3,001 g unvaccinated vs 3,175 g IIV vaccinated), nor birth outcomes between the few women who received IIV in pregnancy and those who did not. There were no stillbirths in women who received an IIV in pregnancy.

Influenza vaccine uptake in the elderly population: Individual and general practitioner's determinants in Central Italy, Lazio region, 2016-2017 season

BACKGROUND

Elderly people are a priority target group for influenza vaccination and their decision to be vaccinated might partly depend on advice received from general practitioners (GP). This study aims to investigate the association between influenza vaccine uptake in the elderly residents in the Lazio region of Italy and the demographic and professional characteristics of their GPs, taking simultaneously into account the elderly's individual characteristics.

METHODS

We used data retrieved from different administrative sources to retrospectively analyse the cohort of 1,255,657 elderly residents aged ≥65 years who were alive and registered in the regional healthcare service at the beginning of the 2016-2017 influenza vaccination campaign (1 Oct. 2016-31 Jan. 2017). We assessed influenza vaccine uptake at the end of the vaccination campaign and evaluated its association with both individual and GP-related characteristics through a multilevel Poisson regression models accounting for clustering at physician level.

RESULTS

Overall, vaccination coverage at the end of vaccination campaign was 50.6%. Elderly residents who were male, older, vaccinated in the previous seasons, living in smaller provinces, and spending more money for specialist medical care showed a significantly increased probability to be vaccinated. Vaccine uptake was also significantly higher in the elderly residents assisted by GPs who got master's degree more recently, assisted a relatively high proportion of elderly patients, received influenza vaccination, had a computer assistant, and were associated with other physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that influenza vaccination coverage in the elderly residents of the Lazio region is still unsatisfactorily low. We identified several determinants of influenza vaccine uptake, related to both individual and GP characteristics. Understanding how GP characteristics affected influenza vaccine uptake in the elderly population might provide insight on GPs' attitudes and concerns regarding influenza vaccination, allowing the implementation of targeted evidence-based interventions to sensitise GPs and increase vaccination coverage.

Potential use of Western Australia’s mandatory Midwives Notification System for routinely monitoring antenatal vaccine coverage

Background Despite the maternal and infant health benefits of antenatal vaccines and availability of government-funded vaccination programs, Australia does not have a national system for routinely monitoring antenatal vaccination coverage. We evaluated the potential use of Western Australia’s mandatory Midwives Notification System (MNS) as a tool for routinely monitoring antenatal vaccination coverage. Methods Two hundred and sixty-eight women who gave birth to a live infant between August and October 2016 participated in a telephone survey of vaccines received in their most recent pregnancy. For women who reported receiving influenza and/or pertussis vaccine and whose vaccination status was documented by their vaccine provider, MNS vaccination data were compared with the vaccine provider’s record as the ‘gold standard.’ For women who reported receiving no vaccines, MNS vaccination data were compared with self-reported information. Results Influenza and pertussis vaccination status was complete (i.e. documented as either vaccinated or not vaccinated) for 66% and 63% of women, respectively. Sensitivity of MNS influenza vaccination data was 65.7% (95% CI 56.0-74.2%) and specificity was 53.0% (95% CI 42.4-63.4%). Sensitivity of MNS pertussis vaccination data was 62.5% (95% CI 53.3-70.9%) and specificity was 40.4% (95% CI 27.6-54.7%). There was no difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated women in the proportion of MNS records with missing or unknown vaccination information. When considering only MNS records with complete vaccination information, the sensitivity of the MNS influenza vaccination field was 91.8% (95% CI 83.0-96.9%) and the sensitivity of the MNS pertussis vaccination field was 88.0% (95% CI 76.7-95.5%). Conclusion Due to the high proportion of records with missing or unknown vaccination status, we observed low sensitivity and specificity of antenatal vaccination data in the MNS. However, given we did not observe differential ascertainment by vaccination status, MNS records with complete information may be reliable data source for routinely monitoring antenatal vaccine coverage.

Influenza vaccination of pregnant women: Engaging clinicians to reduce missed opportunities for vaccination

BACKGROUND

Antenatal influenza vaccination (AIV) is an effective intervention for protecting pregnant women and their newborns against influenza. Although the World Health Organization recommends AIV at any stage of pregnancy, in low- and middle-income countries, including India, it is rarely provided. Research suggests that antenatal care (ANC) provider practices explain much of this limited coverage. Our study in urban Pune, India, assessed the feasibility of a two-stage clinician-engagement strategy to reduce missed opportunities for AIV in urban private-practice ANC clinics.

METHODS

Clinicians were randomized to intervention and control groups in slum and middle-class study sites. Intervention-group clinicians (active clinicians) were assessed on vaccination-related views and practices, and were presented with authoritative AIV recommendations from global, academic and professional medical organizations. In a second meeting after a community survey, findings concerning vaccination-related views and experiences were explained to active clinicians. Assessments of community vaccination views were not provided to control-group clinicians. Both groups maintained logs of ANC clinic visit vaccination status throughout the 11-month study period to enable identification of missed and taken opportunities for vaccination. Analyses were restricted to visits of women in their third trimester without previous AIV in the current pregnancy.

RESULTS

Overall, 30 clinicians participated. After first and second interactions, active clinicians in middle-class communities vaccinated at 12.2% and 37.8%, respectively. Middle-class control clinicians vaccinated at <0.2% throughout the study. This difference in AIV taken opportunities between middle-class active and control clinics was statistically significant (p < 0.05) after first and second interactions. In slum-community sites, active clinicians' AIV activity was minimal throughout.

CONCLUSIONS

Our approach for engaging clinicians effectively reduced missed opportunities for AIV in urban middle-class settings of Pune. It may also improve maternal vaccination for other conditions. The absence of any similar effect in slum-based clinics likely reflects critical limitations of vaccine access.

Key considerations for successful implementation of maternal immunization programs in low and middle income countries

The Maternal Neonatal Tetanus Elimination program is proof of concept for the feasibility and potential for maternal immunization to reduce neonatal mortality particularly in low and middle-income countries. Introduction of any additional vaccine into the antenatal space, such as Influenza and Pertussis, and potentially Respiratory Syncytial Virus and Group B Streptococcus vaccines in the future, requires strengthening of antenatal care and immunization services. Successful implementation also requires robust disease surveillance in pregnant women and neonates and active surveillance for adverse events following immunization to monitor the impact and ensure the safe use of the vaccine. This review outlines five key elements essential for successful implementation of a maternal immunization program focusing particularly on low and middle-income countries. These include; relevant considerations in supporting a decision to undertake a maternal immunization program including knowledge of local disease epidemiology, involvement of the consumer, healthcare provider recommendation, equitable access to maternal vaccination, and systems for disease surveillance, program evaluation and safety monitoring.

Estimating Vaccine Effectiveness Against Hospitalized Influenza During Pregnancy: Multicountry Protocol for a Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Although pregnant women are believed to have elevated risks of severe influenza infection and are targeted for influenza vaccination, no study to date has examined influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations during pregnancy, primarily because this outcome poses many methodological challenges.

Objective

The Pregnancy Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (PREVENT) was formed in 2016 as an international collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Abt Associates; and study sites in Australia, Canada, Israel, and the United States. The primary goal of this collaboration is to estimate IVE in preventing acute respiratory or febrile illness (ARFI) hospitalizations associated with laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection during pregnancy. Secondary aims include (1) describing the incidence, clinical course, and severity of influenza-associated ARFI hospitalization during pregnancy; (2) comparing the characteristics of ARFI-hospitalized pregnant women who were tested for influenza with those who were not tested; (3) describing influenza vaccination coverage in pregnant women; and (4) comparing birth outcomes among women with laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalization versus other noninfluenza ARFI hospitalizations.

Methods

For an initial assessment of IVE, sites identified a retrospective cohort of pregnant women aged from 18 to 50 years whose pregnancies overlapped with local influenza seasons from 2010 to 2016. Pregnancies were defined as those that ended in a live birth or stillbirth of at least 20 weeks gestation. The analytic sample for the primary IVE analysis was restricted to pregnant women who were hospitalized for ARFI during site-specific influenza seasons and clinically tested for influenza virus infection using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.

Results

We identified approximately 2 million women whose pregnancies overlapped with influenza seasons; 550,344 had at least one hospitalization during this time. After restricting to women who were hospitalized for ARFI and tested for influenza, the IVE analytic sample included 1005 women.

Conclusions

In addition to addressing the primary question about the effectiveness of influenza vaccination, PREVENT data will address other important knowledge gaps including understanding the incidence, clinical course, and severity of influenza-related hospitalizations during pregnancy. The data infrastructure and international partnerships created for these analyses may be useful and informative for future influenza studies.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/11333

Antenatal influenza and pertussis vaccination in Western Australia: a cross-sectional survey of vaccine uptake and influencing factors

Background

Influenza and pertussis vaccines have been recommended in Australia for women during each pregnancy since 2010 and 2015, respectively. Estimating vaccination coverage and identifying factors affecting uptake are important for improving antenatal immunisation services.

Methods

A random sample of 800 Western Australian women ≥18 years of age who gave birth between 4th April and 4th October 2015 were selected. Of the 454 (57%) who were contactable by telephone, 424 (93%) completed a survey. Data were weighted by maternal age and area of residence to ensure representativeness. The proportion immunised against influenza and pertussis was the main outcome measure; multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors significantly associated with antenatal vaccination. Results from the 2015 study were compared to similar surveys conducted in 2012–2014.

Results

In 2015, 71% (95% CI 66–75) of women received pertussis-containing vaccine and 61% (95% CI 56–66) received influenza vaccine during pregnancy; antenatal influenza vaccine coverage was 18% higher than in 2014 (43%; 95% CI: 34–46). Pertussis and influenza vaccine were co-administered for 68% of the women who received both vaccines. The majority of influenza vaccinations in 2015 were administered during the third trimester of pregnancy, instead of the second trimester, as was observed in prior years. Women whose care provider recommended both antenatal vaccinations had significantly higher odds of being vaccinated against both influenza and pertussis (OR 33.3, 95% CI: 15.15–73.38). Of unvaccinated mothers, 53.6% (95% CI: 45.9–61.3) and 78.3% (95% CI: 70.4–85.3) reported that they would have been vaccinated against influenza and pertussis, respectively, if their antenatal care provider had recommended it.

Conclusions

Pertussis vaccination coverage was high in the first year of an antenatal immunisation program in Western Australia. Despite a substantial increase in influenza vaccination uptake between 2014 and 2015, coverage remained below that for pertussis. Our data suggest influenza and pertussis vaccination rates of 83% and 94%, respectively, are achievable if providers were to recommend them to all pregnant women.

Antenatal influenza and pertussis vaccine uptake among Aboriginal mothers in Western Australia

BACKGROUND

Antenatal influenza and pertussis vaccination prevent serious disease in mothers and infants. Aboriginal individuals are at increased risk of infection yet little is known about vaccine coverage among Aboriginal mothers.

AIMS

To estimate the uptake of influenza and pertussis vaccination among pregnant Aboriginal women in Western Australia and identify barriers and enablers to vaccination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four hundred Aboriginal women, aged ≥18 years, who gave birth to a live infant between April and October 2015, were randomly selected and invited to participate in telephone interviews. Of the 387 women who did not decline, 178 had a functioning phone number and 100 completed the survey. Analyses were weighted by maternal residence.

RESULTS

During pregnancy the majority of Aboriginal mothers were recommended influenza (66%; unweighted, 65/96 = 68%) and pertussis (65%; unweighted, 62/94 = 66%) vaccines, with 62% (unweighted, 56/94 = 56%) and 63% (unweighted, 60/93 = 65%) receiving the vaccinations, respectively. Almost all vaccinated women (98%) reported wanting to protect their baby as the reason for immunisation. Rural mothers were more likely than metropolitan mothers to have been vaccinated against influenza (odds ratio (OR) 4.1, 95% CI 1.7-10.2) and pertussis (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.2-7.6). Recommendation by a healthcare provider was strongly associated with vaccine uptake (influenza: OR 15.6, 95% CI 4.9-49.5; pertussis: OR 13.3, 95% CI 4.6-38.0).

CONCLUSION

Vaccination uptake among Western Australian Aboriginal mothers is comparable with rates reported for non-Aboriginal populations worldwide. Provider recommendation is the single most important factor associated with vaccination uptake, underlining the importance of integrating vaccination into routine antenatal care.

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate? Women's perception of vaccination in pregnancy: a qualitative study

Background

Vaccination against influenza and pertussis in pregnancy can reduce the significant morbidity and mortality associated with these infections. Despite this, there is poor uptake of both vaccines in pregnancy.

Aim

To explore women’s perception of vaccination in pregnancy and thereby determine the reasons behind such low vaccination rates.

Design & setting

This is a qualitative study undertaken at a large maternity hospital.

Method

Seventeen post-partum women completed a semi-structured interview discussing vaccination. They were recruited from a quantitative study looking at vaccination rates in pregnancy. The interview transcripts were discussed among three researchers and underwent thematic analysis.

Results

Three themes emerged. The first theme explored the influencing factors that shaped the women’s decision to vaccinate in pregnancy. The recommendation of a healthcare provider was the most important influencing factor for this study's cohort of women. The second theme highlighted the deficiency in knowledge women had regarding vaccine safety. The last theme related to the pertussis vaccine, and the reluctance of healthcare providers to discuss and offer this vaccine in pregnancy.

Conclusion

The qualitative approach gives voice to the thoughts and concerns of women as they make the complex decision to vaccinate in pregnancy. Clinicians must be cognizant of the important role they play in advising women to vaccinate in pregnancy. They must advise women that the vaccine is safe and address any of their concerns. Lastly, a message on vaccine safety should be included in future public health campaigns to promote vaccination in pregnancy.

Beyond the verbal: Pregnant women's preferences for receiving influenza and Tdap vaccine information from their obstetric care providers

OBJECTIVE

Prenatal providers are pregnant women's most trusted sources of health information, and a provider's recommendation is a strong predictor of maternal vaccine receipt. However, other ways women prefer receiving vaccine-related information from prenatal providers, aside from face-to-face conversations, is unclear. This study explores what secondary communication methods are preferred for receiving maternal vaccine-related information.

STUDY DESIGN

Obstetric patients at four prenatal clinics around Atlanta, Georgia received a 27-item survey between May 5th, 2016 and June 15th, 2016. Participants were asked about sources they currently use to obtain prenatal health information and their preferences for receiving vaccine-related information from providers. Descriptive statistics were calculated and chi-square tests were used to evaluate associations between participant characteristics and outcomes.

RESULTS

Women primarily reported using the CDC website (57.7%) and pregnancy-related websites (53.0%) to obtain vaccine information. Apart from clinical conversations, educational brochures (64.9%) and e-mails (54.7%) were the preferred methods of receiving vaccine information from providers, followed by their provider's practice website (42.1%). Communication preferences and interest in maternal immunization varied by race/ethnicity, age and education; white women were twice as likely to want information on a provider's practice website compared to African-American women (OR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.31, 3.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant women use the Internet for information about vaccines, but they still value input from their providers. While e-mails and brochures were the preferred secondary modes of receiving information, a provider's existing practice website offers a potential communications medium that capitalizes on women's information seeking behaviors and preferences while limiting burden on providers.

Improving rates of maternal immunization: Challenges and opportunities

OBJECTIVES

An increasing number of vaccines are recommended or are being developed for use during pregnancy to protect women, fetuses, and/or newborns. For vaccines that are already recommended, vaccine uptake is variable and well below desired target. We reviewed the literature related to factors that affect a healthcare provider's recommendation and a woman's willingness to be vaccinated during pregnancy.

DESIGN

A scoping review of published literature from 2005 to 2015 was undertaken and all relevant articles were abstracted, summarized, and organized thematically.

RESULTS

Barriers and facilitators were identified that either decreased or increased the likelihood of a healthcare provider offering and a pregnant woman accepting vaccination during pregnancy. Concern about the safety of vaccines given during pregnancy was the most often cited barrier among both the public and healthcare providers. Other barriers included doubt about the effectiveness of the vaccine, lack of knowledge about the burden of disease, and not feeling oneself to be at risk of the infection. Major facilitators for maternal immunization included specific safety information about the vaccine in pregnant women, strong national recommendations, and healthcare providers who both recommended and provided the vaccine to their patients. Systems barriers such as inadequate facilities and staffing, vaccine purchase and storage, and reimbursement for vaccination were also cited. Evidence-based interventions were few, and included text messaging reminders, chart reminders, and standing orders.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to have an effective vaccination program, improvements in the uptake of recommended vaccines during pregnancy are needed. A maternal immunization platform is required that normalizes vaccination practice among obstetrical care providers and is supported by basic and continuing education, communication strategy, and a broad range of research.

A survey-based study of Zika virus communication preferences among pregnant women in Georgia, United States

BACKGROUND

Because of the particularly severe perinatal outcomes associated with antenatal Zika virus infection, it is important for prenatal care providers to communicate Zika virus risks and strategies for prevention to their patients. Although face-to-face communication is ideal, clinic visits may not allow for in-depth discussion of all concerns. While previous studies have shown prenatal providers to be pregnant women's most trusted sources of health information, there is little knowledge on what secondary communication modalities pregnant women prefer for receiving information from their providers about an evolving public health emergency.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, descriptive anonymous 27-item survey was distributed to pregnant women at four clinics around Atlanta, Georgia from May 5th to June 20th, 2016. The survey assessed women's interest in and communication preferences about prenatal topics, including Zika virus. Descriptive statistics were calculated and chi-square tests were used to evaluate associations between the primary outcomes and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Four-hundred and eight women completed the survey. The most popular resource for obtaining Zika virus information was the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website (73.0%). While their prenatal provider's own website for Zika information ranked 5th among sources currently accessed for Zika information, it ranked third behind educational brochures and emails for ways in which women wanted to receive information. The characteristics of Zika virus information deemed most important were: evidence-based (87.5%), endorsed by the CDC (74.1%), and endorsed by their own provider (67.9%).

CONCLUSION

In any public health emergency affecting pregnant women, women are going to seek advice from their obstetric providers. Because providers may lack sufficient time to discuss concerns with every patient, they may consider providing patient education in other ways. For the women included in this study, educational brochures, emails and providers' own practice websites were preferred. Providers should consider taking greater advantage of these modalities to supplement in-person exchanges, particularly during a public health emergency.

Vaccine decision-making begins in pregnancy: Correlation between vaccine concerns, intentions and maternal vaccination with subsequent childhood vaccine uptake

INTRODUCTION

Maternal and childhood vaccine decision-making begins prenatally. Amongst pregnant Australian women we aimed to ascertain vaccine information received, maternal immunisation uptake and attitudes and concerns regarding childhood vaccination. We also aimed to determine any correlation between a) intentions and concerns regarding childhood vaccination, (b) concerns about pregnancy vaccination, (c) socioeconomic status (SES) and (d) uptake of influenza and pertussis vaccines during pregnancy and routine vaccines during childhood.

METHODS

Women attending public antenatal clinics were recruited in three Australian states. Surveys were completed on iPads. Follow-up phone surveys were done three to six months post delivery, and infant vaccination status obtained via the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register (ACIR).

RESULTS

Between October 2015 and March 2016, 975 (82%) of 1184 mothers consented and 406 (42%) agreed to a follow up survey, post delivery. First-time mothers (445; 49%) had significantly more vaccine concerns in pregnancy and only 73% had made a decision about childhood vaccination compared to 89% of mothers with existing children (p-value<0.001). 66% of mothers reported receiving enough information during pregnancy on childhood vaccination. In the post delivery survey, 46% and 82% of mothers reported receiving pregnancy influenza and pertussis vaccines respectively. The mother's degree of vaccine hesitancy and two attitudinal factors were correlated with vaccine uptake post delivery. There was no association between reported maternal vaccine uptake or SES and childhood vaccine uptake.

CONCLUSION

First time mothers are more vaccine hesitant and undecided about childhood vaccination, and only two thirds of all mothers believed they received enough information during pregnancy. New interventions to improve both education and communication on childhood and maternal vaccines, delivered by midwives and obstetricians in the Australian public hospital system, may reduce vaccine hesitancy for all mothers in pregnancy and post delivery, particularly first-time mothers.

Barriers of Influenza Vaccination Intention and Behavior - A Systematic Review of Influenza Vaccine Hesitancy, 2005 - 2016

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccine hesitancy is a significant threat to global efforts to reduce the burden of seasonal and pandemic influenza. Potential barriers of influenza vaccination need to be identified to inform interventions to raise awareness, influenza vaccine acceptance and uptake.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to (1) identify relevant studies and extract individual barriers of seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccination for risk groups and the general public; and (2) map knowledge gaps in understanding influenza vaccine hesitancy to derive directions for further research and inform interventions in this area.

METHODS

Thirteen databases covering the areas of Medicine, Bioscience, Psychology, Sociology and Public Health were searched for peer-reviewed articles published between the years 2005 and 2016. Following the PRISMA approach, 470 articles were selected and analyzed for significant barriers to influenza vaccine uptake or intention. The barriers for different risk groups and flu types were clustered according to a conceptual framework based on the Theory of Planned Behavior and discussed using the 4C model of reasons for non-vaccination.

RESULTS

Most studies were conducted in the American and European region. Health care personnel (HCP) and the general public were the most studied populations, while parental decisions for children at high risk were under-represented. This study also identifies understudied concepts. A lack of confidence, inconvenience, calculation and complacency were identified to different extents as barriers to influenza vaccine uptake in risk groups.

CONCLUSION

Many different psychological, contextual, sociodemographic and physical barriers that are specific to certain risk groups were identified. While most sociodemographic and physical variables may be significantly related to influenza vaccine hesitancy, they cannot be used to explain its emergence or intensity. Psychological determinants were meaningfully related to uptake and should therefore be measured in a valid and comparable way. A compendium of measurements for future use is suggested as supporting information.

Effect of Maternal Influenza Vaccination on Hospitalization for Respiratory Infections in Newborns: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Infants are at increased risk of hospitalization for influenza. Although vaccinating women during pregnancy has been shown to reduce the incidence of influenza infection among newborns, population-based data are limited.

METHODS

A population-based cohort of 31,028 mothers and singleton infants were included in the analysis. Hospitalizations with a principal diagnosis or additional diagnoses consistent with severe respiratory illness occurring during the 2012 and 2013 southern hemisphere influenza seasons were identified using a state-wide hospital discharge database. Newborns were defined as "maternally vaccinated" if the mother received influenza vaccine ≥14 days before delivery. Cox regression models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios for hospitalization.

RESULTS

A total of 3169 infants were maternally vaccinated and 27,859 were unvaccinated; 732 hospitalizations were identified, 528 (69%) of which were for bronchiolitis. There were 21.9 hospitalizations per 100,000 person days among maternally vaccinated infants and 30.2 hospitalizations per 100,000 person days among unvaccinated infants. Maternally vaccinated infants were 25% less likely to be hospitalized for an acute respiratory illness during influenza season compared with unvaccinated infants (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.75, 95% confidence interval: 0.56-0.99, P = 0.04). Vaccinations administered in the third trimester were associated with a 33% reduction in the risk of newborn hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.67, 95% confidence interval: 0.47-0.95, P = 0.03). No such reduction was identified for vaccinations administered earlier in pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Maternal influenza vaccination was associated with a reduction in the incidence of hospital admission for acute respiratory illness among infants <6 months of age. These data suggest that vaccination during third trimester may provide optimal benefit to the newborn.

The safety of maternal immunization

Maternal vaccination offers the opportunity to protect pregnant women and their infants against potentially serious disease. As both pregnant women and their newborns are vulnerable to severe illness, the potential public health impact of mass maternal vaccination programs is remarkable. Several high-income countries recommend seasonal influenza and acellular pertussis vaccines, and many developing countries recommend immunization against tetanus during pregnancy. There is a significant amount of literature supporting the safety of vaccination during pregnancy. As other vaccines are newly introduced for pregnant women, routine systems for monitoring vaccine safety in pregnant women are needed. To facilitate meta-analyses and comparison across systems and studies, future research and surveillance initiatives should utilize the same criteria for defining adverse events following immunization among pregnant women. At least 2 areas require further exploration: 1) identification of pregnancy outcomes associated with concomitant and closely spaced vaccines; 2) evaluation of possible improvement in birth outcomes associated with maternal vaccination. Given the public health impact of maternal vaccination, the existing evidence supporting the safety of vaccination during pregnancy should be used to reassure pregnant women and their providers and improve vaccine uptake in pregnancy.

Effectiveness of seasonal trivalent influenza vaccination against hospital-attended acute respiratory infections in pregnant women: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women are at risk of serious influenza infection. Although previous studies indicate maternal influenza vaccination can prevent hospitalisation in young infants, there is limited evidence of the effect in mothers.

METHODS

A cohort of 34,701 pregnant women delivering between 1 April 2012 and 31 December 2013 was created using birth records. Principal diagnosis codes from hospital emergency department (ED) and inpatient records were used to identify episodes of acute respiratory illness (ARI) during the 2012 and 2013 southern hemisphere influenza seasons. Cox regression models were used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) by maternal vaccination status, controlling for Indigenous status, socioeconomic level, medical conditions, and week of delivery.

RESULTS

3,007 (8.7%) women received a seasonal influenza vaccine during pregnancy. Vaccinated women were less likely to visit an ED during pregnancy for an ARI (9.7 visits per 10,000 person-days vs. 35.5 visits per 10,000 person-days; aHR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.05-0.68). Vaccinated women were also less likely to be hospitalised with an ARI compared to unvaccinated women (16.2 hospitalisations per 10,000 person-days vs. 34.0 hospitalisations per 10,000 person-days; aHR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.13-0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccination during pregnancy was associated with significantly fewer hospital attendances for ARI in pregnant women.

Perception and Attitudes of Korean Obstetricians about Maternal Influenza Vaccination

Pregnant women are prioritized to receive influenza vaccination. However, the maternal influenza vaccination rate has been low in Korea. To identify potential barriers for the vaccination of pregnant women against influenza, a survey using a questionnaire on the perceptions and attitudes about maternal influenza vaccination was applied to Korean obstetricians between May and August of 2014. A total of 473 respondents participated in the survey. Most respondents (94.8%, 442/466) recognized that influenza vaccination was required for pregnant women. In addition, 92.8% (410/442) respondents knew that the incidence of adverse events following influenza vaccination is not different between pregnant and non-pregnant women. However, 26.5% (124/468) obstetricians strongly recommended influenza vaccination to pregnant women. The concern about adverse events following influenza vaccination was considered as a major barrier for the promotion of maternal influenza vaccination by healthcare providers. Providing professional information and education about maternal influenza vaccination will enhance the perception of obstetricians about influenza vaccination to pregnant women and will be helpful to improve maternal influenza vaccination coverage in Korea.

Lack of Availability of Antenatal Vaccination Information on Obstetric Care Practice Web Sites

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the proportion of obstetric practice web sites in the United States providing information on antenatal influenza and tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination.

METHODS

Using www.healthgrades.com, a national random sample of 1,003 obstetric practice web sites was examined for provision of information on antenatal vaccination and other preventive prenatal health topics. Data were collected for this cross-sectional study between September 25, 2014, and November 12, 2014. χ tests and odds ratios were calculated to determine significance and magnitude of associations between provision of antenatal vaccination information and other practice characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 1,003 web sites examined, 229 (22.8%) posted information pertaining to antenatal vaccinations. Only 105 web sites (10.5%) provided up-to-date information about both antenatal influenza and Tdap vaccination. Compared with the proportion posting on antenatal vaccination, significantly more web sites posted on safe foods (40.8%; P<.001), safe medications (36.9%; P<.001), and safe exercise (38.5%; P<.001) during pregnancy. When compared with web sites not mentioning these other prenatal health topics, web sites mentioning these topics were more likely to also mention antenatal vaccination (safe foods: 45.7% compared with 7.1%; odds ratio [OR] 11.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.65-16.01; safe medications: 45.4% compared with 9.6%; OR 7.8, CI 5.58-10.89; safe exercise: 45.9% compared with 8.4%; OR 9.2, CI 6.5-13.03).

CONCLUSION

A majority of obstetric care practice web sites do not provide information on antenatal vaccinations. Obstetric practices should consider using their web sites to provide reliable information on antenatal vaccinations as many already do for other prenatal health topics.