Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy among Romanian Pregnant Women

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

INTRODUCTION

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULT

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

CONCLUSION

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

The Psychological Impact on Romanian Women Infected with SARS-CoV-2 during Pregnancy

BACKGROUND

It is well-known that the uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic has an indirect negative impact on pregnant women's mental health, given the fact that pregnant women are more vulnerable emotionally and psychologically than non-pregnant women. The aim of this study was to evaluate the maternal psychological impact on Romanian women who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy and their concerns and to determine which are the best measures to prevent negative outcomes.

METHODS

A 40-item questionnaire was created for data collection and was shared on social platforms (Facebook and Instagram) and also with obstetric communities between February 2021 and January 2023. Our cross-sectional survey recruited 317 Romanian pregnant women who suffered from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among general questions about their life and pregnancy during the pandemic, the survey included questions about their SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, their concerns and how they perceived this period in order to evaluate their emotional status.

RESULTS

Of 317 women recruited, 91% of them had a mild to moderate form of COVID-19, and 2% had serious symptoms. Only 9% of women were hospitalized, 4% of women considered that the SARS-CoV-2 infection affected their physical condition to a great extent, and 8% considered to be affected in terms of mental state to a great extent. The main negative feelings of pregnant women during the COVID-19 disease were the fear regarding the possibility of affecting the pregnancy and the concern for their life (51.4%). These increase the risk of developing anxiety or depression. Pregnant women who contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection faced negative feelings, especially those with a severe form of the disease or who recovered with difficulty after the disease. Patients who required hospitalization reported an impairment of the mental state to a great extent and to a very great extent with a frequency of approximately two times and four times higher than non-hospitalized patients, respectively (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively). Also, giving birth during SARS-CoV-2 and the difficulty of accessing medical services represented a high level of stress. Also, 47% of patients who reported difficulty accessing medical services during the illness evaluated their mental state significantly less favorably.

CONCLUSION

Preventive measures are essential to minimizing the negative psychological impact of COVID-19 disease during pregnancy among pregnant women. The medical treatment of COVID-19 disease during pregnancy should be prioritized, but emotional and mental health support must also be provided.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance: The Role of Trust and the Influence of Social Media

The study discusses the predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Romania. We implemented a national survey using an online panel (N = 1006), representative for the online population of Romania aged 18 or higher, conducted on 13-26 October, 2020, by the national pollster QUESTIA. Results show a predictive model of people's willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine, in which trust in the actors and institutions involved in the management of the crisis is the strongest predictor, followed by the belief in toxic or misleading narratives about vaccines and the COVID-19 pandemic, and media consumption patterns. Education is a moderator of the relationship between trust and the willingness to vaccinate. Implications for professionals in the social work fields, as well as for policy-makers are discussed. Results could be used as a starting point for developing recommendations for evidence-based health communication in the context of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

Is decision-making based on the internet during pregnancy a predictive factor for vaccine hesitancy in pregnant women during the pandemic?

Pregnant women frequently use the Internet to get information, and the information they receive is effective in their decision-making. It is known that pregnant women get information about COVID-19 vaccines from the Internet. This study aims to determine whether decision-making based on Internet sources during pregnancy is a predictive factor for vaccine hesitancy in pregnant women during the pandemic. A descriptive, cross-sectional research design was used. The data were collected by using an online survey instrument. There was a positive, moderate, and significant relationship between the self-efficacy perception sub-dimension of the internet decision-making during pregnancy scale and the risk sub-dimension of the vaccine hesitancy in pandemics scale (r: .584, p < .05) and between the self-control sub-dimension of the internet decision-making during pregnancy scale and the risk sub-dimension of the vaccine hesitancy in pandemics scale (r: .546, p < .05). The perception of self-control (β: .291) affected the lack of confidence, and the perception of self-efficacy (β: .481) affected the risk perception more than other variables. There was a relationship between internet decision-making and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in pregnant women. Health professionals, information specialists, and librarians should orient people to reliable sources about vaccines.

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

RATIONALE

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

COVID-19 Vaccine Knowledge, Attitude, Acceptance and Hesitancy among Pregnancy and Breastfeeding: Systematic Review of Hospital-Based Studies

The risk of unfavourable outcomes for SARS-CoV-2 infection is significant during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Vaccination is a safe and effective measure to lower this risk. This study aims at reviewing the literature concerning the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine's acceptance/hesitancy among pregnant and breastfeeding women attending hospital facilities. A systematic review of literature was carried out. Hospital-based observational studies related to vaccination acceptance, hesitancy, knowledge and attitude among pregnant and breastfeeding women were included. Determinants of acceptance and hesitancy were investigated in detail. Quality assessment was done via the Johann Briggs Institute quality assessment tools. After literature search, 43 studies were included, 30 of which only focused on pregnant women (total sample 25,862 subjects). Sample size ranged from 109 to 7017 people. Acceptance of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine ranged from 16% to 78.52%; vaccine hesitancy ranged between 91.4% and 24.5%. Fear of adverse events for either the woman, the child, or both, was the main driver for hesitancy. Other determinants of hesitancy included religious concerns, socioeconomic factors, inadequate information regarding the vaccine and lack of trust towards institutions. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in hospitalized pregnant women appears to be significant, and efforts for a more effective communication to these subjects are required.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in an antenatal clinic in Durban, South Africa

Background

Mass administration of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the most efficient intervention against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Recently, vaccinations were shown to be safe and effective during pregnancy. However, vaccination rates are low in low- and middle-income countries, and vaccine hesitancy is a major limiting factor.

Objectives

To investigate the rate of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women.

Method

A cross-sectional questionnaire-based investigation of 313 unvaccinated pregnant women attending an antenatal clinic in Durban, South Africa (SA). The questionnaire included clinical and socio-demographic data, and reasons for vaccine hesitancy were recorded and evaluated.

Results

Of 313 women participating, 126 (40.3%) were vaccinated against COVID-19, 21/313 = 6.7%; for those unvaccinated, 21/187 (13.9%) were planning to be vaccinated. However, most unvaccinated women, 174 of 187 (93%), showed COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy among pregnant women in Durban, SA, is exceptionally high. This requires urgent attention by the relevant health authorities (both professional health organisations and the SA Department of Health) as many countries experience different waves of the variants of SARS-CoV-2 and herd immunity may not have been achieved.

Contribution

This study showed a high vaccine acceptance hesitancy rate among pregnant women in SA.

Vaccine Hesitancy Phenomenon Evolution during Pregnancy over High-Risk Epidemiological Periods-"Repetitio Est Mater Studiorum"

(1) Background: The recent epidemiological events were high-stress level generators for humanity, particularly for pregnant women, influencing their attitude, behavior, and decisions regarding vaccination during pregnancy or regarding their future child. The aim of this study was to analyze the anti-pertussis vaccination decision-shaping factors in pregnant women during two epidemiological periods: the measles epidemic and the COVID-19 pandemic. (2) Methods: Two groups of pregnant women were invited to be part of a medical education program, having as the main theme the infectious disease risks and their prevention through vaccination. Before launching the program, participants received a 12-item questionnaire. From a total number of 362 pregnant women enrolled in the study, 182 participated in 2019, and 180 participated in 2022. (3) Results: The socio-demographic data revealed that the age of pregnant women participating in medical education programs increased in 2022 by 1.7 years (p < 0.01). In vitro fertilization was reported in a significantly higher proportion (20% in 2022 vs 9.8% in 2019, p < 0.01). Participation in community-initiated educational programs almost doubled during the pandemic time from 18.7% in 2019 to 33.9% in 2022 (p < 0.01). Pertussis vaccine acceptancy (VA) dropped from 85% in 2019 to 44.4% in 2022 (p < 0.01) (4) Conclusions: In this study, we reported fast-growing vaccine hesitancy and severe declared vaccine reluctance. The results of this complex long-term study, which evaluated pregnant women over several years, showed a five-fold increase in the percentage of pregnant women who disagreed with personal pertussis vaccination. This draws attention to the risks of pertussis epidemic outbreaks in pregnant women and their future infants in the first couple of months of life before the initiation of vaccination.

Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic and social media on the behaviour of pregnant and lactating women towards vaccination: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women, foetuses and infants are at risk of infectious disease-related complications. Maternal vaccination is a strategy developed to better protect pregnant women and their offspring against infectious disease-related morbidity and mortality. Vaccines against influenza, pertussis and recently also COVID-19 are widely recommended for pregnant women. Yet, there is still a significant amount of hesitation towards maternal vaccination policies. Furthermore, contradictory messages circulating social media impact vaccine confidence.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aims to reveal how COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination impacted vaccine confidence in pregnant and lactating women. Additionally, this review studied the role social media plays in creating opinions towards vaccination in these target groups.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Articles published between 23 November 2018 and 18 July 2022 that are linked to the objectives of this review were included. Reviews, articles not focusing on the target group, abstracts, articles describing outcomes of COVID-19 infection/COVID-19 vaccination were excluded.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

The PubMed database was searched to select articles. Search terms used were linked to pregnancy, lactation, vaccination, vaccine hesitancy, COVID-19 and social media.

CHARTING METHODS

Included articles were abstracted and synthesised by one reviewer. Verification was done by a second reviewer. Disagreements were addressed through discussion between reviewers and other researchers.

RESULTS

Pregnant and lactating women are generally less likely to accept a COVID-19 vaccine compared with non-pregnant and non-nursing women. The main reason to refuse maternal vaccination is safety concerns. A positive link was detected between COVID-19 vaccine willingness and acceptance of other vaccines during pregnancy. The internet and social media are identified as important information sources for maternal vaccination.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Vaccine hesitancy in pregnant and lactating women remains an important issue, expressing the need for effective interventions to increase vaccine confidence and coverage. The role social media plays in vaccine uptake remains unclear.

Pregnancy Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany: A Public Health Lens

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to various challenges in German health care, including pregnancy care. This paper aims to provide an overview of the pandemic-related challenges faced by pregnant women, new mothers, and their families in maternal and newborn care. A literature review was performed by including international literature as well as recommendations of institutions and official stakeholders. These challenges refer to restrictions at all stages of pregnancy, including wearing masks during labour, limitations of a companion of choice during birth, and restrictions of unvaccinated women from attending, e.g., antenatal classes. Compared with the general population, COVID-19 vaccination of pregnant women was recommended later, as pregnant women were initially excluded from clinical trials. Women who gave birth during the COVID-19 pandemic also reported mental health issues. The findings stress the importance of the inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials. This might also help to overcome vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women and women seeking family planning. Taking the COVID-19 pandemic as an example, one must weigh the changes and restrictions associated with the potential disadvantages for mothers, newborns, and their families in pregnancy care against the measures to control the pandemic.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Related Factors among Unvaccinated Pregnant Women during the Pandemic Period in Turkey

The COVID-19 virus appeared in Wuhan, China in 2019 and spread rapidly all over the world. Vaccination guidelines have recommended pregnant women to get vaccinated against COVID-19 to prevent disease. This study aimed to understand the willingness of pregnant women to vaccinate and the factors associated with their hesitation and resistance. This cross-sectional study was conducted between March and April 2022. The sample size was not calculated and tried to reach all pregnant women who did not have any COVID-19 vaccine. In the first part of the questionnaire, socio-demographic questions, and in the last part, the short form of the 12-item anti-vaccine scale, which was prepared as a 5-point Likert scale, were applied. The study was completed with 561 pregnant women. The mean score of the pregnant women who participated in this study from the vaccine hesitancy scale was found to be 33.40 ± 6.07. It was found that as the income of pregnant women decreased, the vaccine hesitancy scores decreased. Vaccine hesitancy scores of those who stated no one gave advice were significantly higher. The vaccination of pregnant women will bring significant success to the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic when implemented as part of the public health policies of countries.

Sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and leading concerns with COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women at a South Texas clinic

OBJECTIVE

COVID-19 vaccination rates among pregnant women remain low, despite increased risk of COVID-19-related illness and death and demonstrated vaccine safety and efficacy in this population. The objective of this study is to identify sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and elucidate important concerns among the pregnant population in light of evolving conversations regarding COVID-19.

METHODS

A prospective survey of pregnant women at a single urban clinic in South Texas was conducted August to September 2021 to identify predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the pregnant population. Collected variables included demographics, COVID-19 beliefs, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap)/influenza vaccine hesitancy, and primary vaccine concerns. Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact test, asymptotic two-sample Brown-Mood median test, and multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

One hundred and nine participants completed the survey, 35 vaccinated and 74 unvaccinated, with a response rate of 91.6%. Women who were COVID-19 vaccine hesitant were more likely to be younger (28.0 vs. 31.0 years, p < .004) and further along in pregnancy (30.0 vs. 20.0 weeks, p = .001). They were also more likely to report influenza (odds ratio (OR) 6.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.5-17.1) and Tdap (OR 4.1; 95% CI 1.75-10.7) vaccine hesitancy. Furthermore, women who were vaccine hesitant were more likely to believe they did not have enough information to confidently make their decision (OR 4.0; 95% CI 1.4-11.4). Primary concerns with COVID-19 vaccines included: short- and long-term side effects on the pregnancy, personal long-term side effects, and harmful ingredients.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccine hesitant pregnant women were more likely to be younger, hesitant toward other vaccines, and concerned with pregnancy impact and harmful ingredients. Personal knowledge of other vaccinated pregnant women was associated with significantly higher vaccine acceptance rates. Access to vaccines and concerns about quality control were not cited as reasons for vaccine hesitancy, in contrast to earlier studies on this topic.

The impact of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination on maternal-fetal outcomes

The rapidly evolving COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an upsurge of scientific productivity to help address the global health crisis. One area of active research is the impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy. Here, we provide an epidemiological overview about what is known about the effects of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination on maternal-fetal outcomes, and identify gaps in knowledge. Pregnant people are at increased risk for severe COVID-19, and maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection increases the risk of negative maternal-fetal outcomes. Despite this elevated risk, there have been high rates of vaccine hesitancy, heightened by the initial lack of safety and efficacy data for COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy. In response, retrospective cohort studies were performed to examine the impact of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Here, we report the vaccine's efficacy during pregnancy and its impact on maternal-fetal outcomes, as well as an overview of initial studies on booster shots in pregnancy. We found that pregnant people are at risk for more severe COVID-19 outcomes, maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with worse birth outcomes, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy remains prevalent in the pregnant population, and COVID-19 vaccination and boosters promote better maternal-fetal outcomes. The results should help reduce vaccine hesitancy by alleviating concerns about the safety and efficacy of administering the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. Overall, this review provides an introduction to COVID-19 during pregnancy. It is expected to help consolidate current knowledge, accelerate research of COVID-19 during pregnancy and inform clinical, policy, and research decisions regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant people.

COVID-19 in Pregnancy: Knowledge about the Vaccine and the Effect of the Virus. Reliability and Results of the MAMA-19 Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Fear or mistrust of the vaccine and concern for the well-being of their unborn infants are the main reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in pregnant women. The aim of this work was to validate a questionnaire on knowledge about COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and to examine the sources of information in a group of new mothers, as well as their effectiveness and intelligibility.

METHODS

A literature review was carried out to develop a questionnaire of forty-five questions, divided into six sections, called MAMA-19. The assessment of agreement and the interrater reliability was carried out using Cronbach's analysis and Cohen's kappa statistic. Data obtained from the questionnaire were analysed using descriptive and univariate statistics.

RESULTS

The total alpha values in the two sections about knowledge of vaccination during pregnancy and about the effects of disease and possible post-COVID-19 consequences for the unvaccinated showed sufficient consistency, at 0.860 and 0.725, respectively. Non-vaccinated women thought that receiving the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy can lead to malformations in the newborn (60% vs. 40%, p = 0.002) and to an increased risk of foetal growth restriction (61.9% vs. 38.1%, p < 0.001). The percentage of vaccinated women was significantly higher than non-vaccinated when more than one professional was consulted and consistent information was received from them (74.2% vs. 25.8%, p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The MAMA-19 questionnaire shows results in line with the literature and valid in the two main sections. It is quick to use for measuring communication effectiveness by healthcare professionals and institutions in the context of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in the pregnant population. The results evidence that a physician's recommendation to get vaccinated is the most important factor in maternal decision making, regardless of geographic, social or educational context.

The Challenges of Colorectal Cancer Surgery during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Romania: A Three-Year Retrospective Study

The predictions on the influence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on access to medical services in Romania predicted a 35% drop in oncological hospitalizations in 2020 compared to the previous decade, raising the hypothesis that patients with colorectal cancer can become indirect victims of the ongoing pandemic. Therefore, the aim of the current research was to observe how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced colorectal cancer surgery in Romania, to determine the level of addressability towards specialized care, to compare the cancer staging between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods, and to observe the risk factors for disease progression. This retrospective study was spread over three years, respectively, from March 2019 to March 2022, and included a total of 198 patients with a history of colorectal cancer surgery. It was decided to perform a parallel comparison of 2019, 2020, and 2021 to observe any significant changes during the pandemic. Our clinic encountered a significant decrease in all interventions during the pandemic; although the number of CRC surgeries remained constant, the cases were more difficult, with significantly more patients presenting in emergency situations, from 31.3% in 2019 to 50.0% in 2020 and 57.1% in 2021. Thus, the number of elective surgeries decreased significantly. The proportion of TNM (tumor-node-metastasis) staging was, however, statistically significant between the pre-pandemic and pandemic period. In 2019, 13.3% of patients had stage IIa, compared with 28.8% in 2020 and 13.1% in 2021. Similarly, the proportion of very advanced colorectal cancer was higher during the pandemic period of 2020 and 2021 (12.0% in 2019 vs. 12.5% in 2020 and 25.0% in 2021), which was represented by a significantly higher proportion of patients with bowel perforation. Patients with an advanced TNM stage had a 6.28-fold increased risk of disease progression, followed by lymphovascular invasion (HR = 5.19). However, the COVID-19 pandemic, represented by admission years 2020 and 2021, did not pose a significant risk for disease progression and mortality. In-hospital mortality during the pandemic also did not change significantly. After the pandemic restrictions have been lifted, it would be advisable to conduct a widespread colorectal cancer screening campaign in order to identify any instances of the disease that went undetected during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Clinics in Pakistan: A Multicentric, Prospective, Survey-Based Study

This study aimed to assess the vaccination status and factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in the largest province of Pakistan. A multicentric, prospective, survey-based study using an interviewer-administered tool was conducted among pregnant women attending antenatal clinics between 1 December 2021 through 30 January 2022 across seven hospitals in Pakistan. The healthcare professionals providing care at the participating hospitals administered the survey. Four hundred and five pregnant women fully consented and completed the study. The majority of the study participants (70.6%, n = 286) were aged between 25 and 34 and had a previous successful pregnancy history. More than half of the study participants (56.0%, n = 227) did not receive COVID-19 vaccination at the time of data collection despite their family members (93.9%, n = 372) had already received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Among those who received COVID-19 vaccination (n = 173), vaccine efficacy, protection for the foetus, and risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalisation were the main driving factors for vaccine hesitancy. The majority of the unvaccinated women (77.8%, n = 182) had no intention of receiving the vaccine. However, more than two-thirds (85.7%, n = 342) consulted the doctor about COVID-19 vaccines, and most were recommended to receive COVID-19 vaccines by the doctors (80.7%, n = 280). Women were significantly more likely to be vaccinated if they had employment (odds ratio [OR] 4.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.31-8.64) compared with their counterparts who were homemakers, consulted their doctors (OR 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04-0.35), and if they did not have pregnancy-related issues (OR 6.02, 95% CI: 2.36-15.33). In this study, vaccine hesitancy was prevalent, and vaccine uptake was low among pregnant women. Education and employment did impact COVID vaccination uptake, emphasising the need for more targeted efforts to enhance the trust in vaccines.

The Multidimensional Vaccine Hesitancy Scale: A Validation Study

Vaccination hesitancy (VH) is a phenomenon which increases the occurrence of vaccine-preventable diseases. The study tests the validity of the Multidimensional Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (MVHS) in the case of a sample of Romanian adults (n = 528; Meanage = 30.57). The latter filled in an online cross-sectional survey. The construct validity of MVHS was assessed by using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the reliability was calculated by using the internal consistency, and the convergent and discriminant validity was assessed by using the composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE). The obtained model was invariant across gender. The structural equation model was designed for predictive validity by using the partial least square method (PLS-SEM) which analyses the relation between the MVHS dimensions and the vaccination willingness. The results show support for the 8-factor structure of the scale (χ2/df = 2.48; CFI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.053). The Cronbach’s coefficients α > 0.70; McDonald’s ω > 0.70 and CR > 0.80 have very good values. The structural equation model shows that there are more dimensions of the scale which predict vaccination hesitancy in various types of vaccines—the main predictors remain the dimensions of health risk and healthy condition. The study’s conclusion led to the idea that the MVHS is suitable for medical practice and for research on the analysis of vaccination behaviours and intentions.

COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and willingness among pregnant women in Italy

Background

Pregnant women, especially those with comorbidities, compared to those non-pregnant, have higher risk of developing a severe form of COVID-19. However, COVID-19 vaccine uptake is very low among them.

Methods

An anonymous questionnaire was administered to randomly selected women 18 years of age that were currently pregnant or had just given birth between September 2021 and May 2022 in the geographic area of Naples. Vaccine hesitancy was assessed using the vaccine hesitancy scale (VHS).

Results

A total of 385 women participated. Women who had not been infected by SARS-CoV-2 and who needed information about vaccination against COVID-19 had a higher perceived risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2. More than half (54.3%) of the women were very afraid of the potential side effects of the COVID-19 vaccination on the fetus. There was higher concern of the side effects of the vaccine on the fetus among those who did not have a graduate degree, those with high-risk pregnancy, those who had not been infected by SARS-CoV-2, those who were more concerned that they could be infected by SARS-CoV-2, those who did not know that this vaccination was recommended for them, and those trusting mass media/internet/social networks for information. Only 21.3% were vaccinated when pregnant, mostly women with a university degree, those who had been infected by SARS-CoV-2 before pregnancy, those who did not need information, and those who acquired information about the vaccination from gynecologists. Almost three-quarters (71.9%) were willing to receive the vaccination and those more likely were those with a university degree, those who have had at least one relative/cohabitant partner/friend who had been infected by SARS-CoV-2, those who were more concerned that they could be infected by SARS-CoV-2, and those who were not extremely concerned of the side effects of the vaccine on the fetus. A total of 86.4% were highly hesitant. Highly hesitant were respondents who did not get a graduate degree, those less concerned that they could be infected by SARS-CoV-2, and those trusting mass media/internet/social networks for information.

Conclusion

Public health efforts and education campaigns for pregnant women are needed for changing their perception patterns and for supporting gynecologists in promoting the uptake of this vaccination.

Maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes among pregnant women receiving COVID-19 vaccination: The preg-co-vax study

Introduction

Although the European Medicines Agency (EMA) encourage coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in pregnant women, the scientific evidence supporting the use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is still limited.

Aim

We aimed to investigate adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy.

Methods

We retrieved Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) related to the use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy from the EudraVigilance database for the year 2021. We analyzed AEFI related to the mother and fetus/newborn. The reporting odds ratio (ROR) was computed to compare the reporting probability of spontaneous abortion between COVID-19 vaccines.

Results

During the study period, among 1,315,315 ICSRs related to COVID-19 vaccines, we retrieved 3,252 (0.25%) reports related to the use in pregnancy. More than half (58.24%) of ICSRs were submitted by non-healthcare professionals. Although the majority (87.82%) of ICSRs concerned serious AEFI, their outcomes were mostly favorable. In this study, 85.0% of total ICSRs referred to pregnant women (n = 2,764), while 7.9% referred to fetuses/newborns (n = 258). We identified 16,569 AEFI. Moreover, 55.16% were AEFI not related to pregnancy (mostly headache, pyrexia, and fatigue), while 17.92% were pregnancy-, newborn-, or fetus-related AEFI. Among pregnancy-related AEFI, the most reported was spontaneous abortion. Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines had a lower reporting probability of spontaneous abortion than viral vector-based vaccines (ROR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69–0.93). Moderna and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines had a higher reporting probability of spontaneous abortion (ROR 1.2, 95% CI 1.05–1.38 and ROR 1.26, 95% CI 1.08–1.47, respectively), while a lower reporting probability was found for Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine compared with all other COVID-19 vaccines (ROR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64–0.84). In addition, 5.8% of ICSRs reported a fatal outcome.

Conclusions

No strong insight of unknown AEFI associated with COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women was observed. Considering the high risk associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, our analysis suggests that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy outweigh the possible risks. However, it is important to continue monitoring the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in this subpopulation.

Biological Profile and Clinical Features as Determinants for Prolonged Hospitalization in Adult Patients with Measles: A Monocentric Study in Western Romania

Measles is a highly infectious and sometimes deadly illness that is preventable with vaccination. The present research aims to analyze the most recent measles epidemic from Romania that occurred in a population with a falling desire to receive immunizations, by detailing the clinical picture and biological profile of hospitalized patients. A secondary goal of the present research is to identify characteristics that increase the likelihood of a longer hospitalization and the development of measles-related pneumonia. A retrospective cohort study was conducted to follow the course and effects of measles virus infection in adult hospitalized patients who were divided into two groups based on whether they had been in the hospital for more than 6 days or fewer than 6 days. A total of 114 adult patients with measles were eligible to participate in the trial if they had a positive measles-specific IgM antibody test resulting from the study. The average age in the short hospital stay group was 28.1 years, while the average age in the long hospital stay group was 31.9 years. There was a statistically significant difference in the number of Roma persons in the research groups, with 17.4 percent of them having a lengthy hospital stay compared to 5.9 percent in the group with a short hospital stay, according to the findings. It was observed that many patients had a long hospitalization associated with chronic lung disease (OR = 1.07), liver damage (OR = 1.66), Roma ethnicity (OR = 1.79), a long duration elapsed from the last MMR dose (OR = 2.02), elevated c-reactive protein (OR = 2.17), the presence of bilateral pulmonary condensations on X-ray (OR = 3.13), and elevated procalcitonin (OR = 3.49). The same significant independent risk factors were also associated with the development of pneumonia. It is of imperative need to address these risk factors in a patient with measles, moreover in association with an unknown status of vaccination. Vaccination awareness against measles must be pushed in Romania to determine a higher than 95% coverage. Significant efforts are still needed to ensure improved protection against measles epidemics within a specific region or population and, more importantly, in patients with significant risk factors for complications, as described in this study.

Evaluation of FIB-4, NFS, APRI and Liver Function Tests as Predictors for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the Elderly Population: A Matched Case-Control Analysis

Several investigations have revealed that COVID-19 causes a significant death rate due to acute respiratory distress syndrome, alterations in the quantity of ACE2 receptor expression, or the intensity of cytokine storm. Similarly, patients with hepatic impairment that are co-infected with SARS-CoV-2 are more likely to display upregulations of ACE2 receptors and cytokine storm overload, which exacerbates hepatic impairment, potentially increasing the death rate. Moreover, it is expected that the aging population develops a higher degree of hepatic fibrosis in association with other comorbid conditions that are likely to influence the course of COVID-19. Therefore, this research was developed to describe the differences in liver test parameters in elderly individuals with COVID-19 in relation to other inflammatory markers and outcomes. This current observational single-center research followed a case-control design of elderly patients hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 infection. The research was conducted at a tertiary emergency hospital in western Romania during a two-year period. There were 632 patients included in the analysis that were split into two equal groups matched 1:1 based on gender and body mass index. Three hundred sixteen patients made the group of cases with COVID-19 patients older than 65 years, while the other half were the 316 patient controls with COVID-19 that were younger than 65 years old. Disease outcomes showed a higher prevalence of ICU admissions (22.8% vs. 12.7%, p-value < 0.001) and in-hospital mortality (17.1% vs. 8.9%, p-value = 0.002) in the group of cases. Specific and non-specific liver biomarkers were identified as risk factors for mortality in the elderly, such as ALP (OR = 1.26), LDH (OR = 1.68), AST (OR = 1.98), and ALT (OR = 2.34). Similarly, patients with APRI and NFS scores higher than 1.5 were, respectively, 2.69 times and, 3.05 times more likely to die from COVID-19, and patients with FIB-4 scores higher than 3.25 were 3.13 times more likely to die during hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our research indicates that abnormally increased liver biomarkers and high liver fibrosis scores are related to a worse prognosis in SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the vaccines' acceptance level and to find the factors influencing pregnant women's vaccination decisions, with the goal of assisting in the development of interventions and promoting more research in this area.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PubMed.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies providing any kind of quantitative assessment of overall COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among pregnant women in any country or region across the globe.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The pooled prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women was calculated using the random-effects model. Subgroup (sensitivity) analysis was performed to determine the overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level to understand the sources of substantial heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Out of the 375 studies identified, 17 studies from four continents assessing 25 147 participants (pregnant women) were included in this study. Among the participants, only 49% (95% CI 42% to 56%, p<0.001) had COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. High-income countries (47%; 95% CI 38% to 55%, p<0.001), participants with fewer than 12 years of education (38%; 95% CI 19% to 58%, p<0.001) and multiparous women (48%; 95% CI 31% to 66%, p<0.001) had lower COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Overall heterogeneity was high (I² ≥98%), and publication bias was present (p<0.001). A very weak positive correlation between COVID-19 knowledge and COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was observed (r=0.164; 95% CI -0.946 to 0.972; p=0.8359).

CONCLUSION

Overall, COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women was low across the studies and considerably low among some specific subgroups of participants. These research findings have implications for the development of effective interventions that could increase the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level among pregnant women to attain herd immunity.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021277754.

Covid-19 vaccination in pregnancy

Pregnancy is an independent risk factor for severe covid-19. Vaccination is the best way to reduce the risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and limit its morbidity and mortality. The current recommendations from the World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and professional organizations are for pregnant, postpartum, and lactating women to receive covid-19 vaccination. Pregnancy specific considerations involve potential effects of vaccination on fetal development, placental transfer of antibodies, and safety of maternal vaccination. Although pregnancy was an exclusion criterion in initial clinical trials of covid-19 vaccines, observational data have been rapidly accumulating and thus far confirm that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the potential risks. This review examines the evidence supporting the effectiveness, immunogenicity, placental transfer, side effects, and perinatal outcomes of maternal covid-19 vaccination. Additionally, it describes factors associated with vaccine hesitancy in pregnancy. Overall, studies monitoring people who have received covid-19 vaccines during pregnancy have not identified any pregnancy specific safety concerns. Additional information on non-mRNA vaccines, vaccination early in pregnancy, and longer term outcomes in infants are needed. To collect this information, vaccination during pregnancy must be prioritized in vaccine research.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Debre Tabor public health institutions: A cross-sectional study

Background

Vaccination is the best means of reducing the increased risk of severe COVID-19 during pregnancy. Data on COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women in Ethiopia is scarce. Thus, this study aimed to assess COVID-19 vaccine uptake and associated factors among pregnant women.

Method

An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 634 pregnant women attending antenatal care in Debre Tabor public health institutions from March 14 to 30, 2022. Participants were recruited using a multistage sampling technique and data were collected via face-to-face interviews using a pre-tested structured questionnaire. Stata version 16.0 software was used for data analysis. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to assess factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake, with a p-value&lt; 0.05 considered statistically significant.

Result

Only 14.4% (95% CI: 11.7%-17.3%) of participants had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccines. The main reasons for declining vaccination were fear that the COVID-19 vaccine may have harmful side effects on the fetus or the mother. Being 45 or older (AOR: 1.75, 95%CI: 1.01–2.95), being married (AOR: 1.26, 95%CI: 1.12, 2.96), having good knowledge (AOR:3.52, 95%CI:1.83–3.87), and a positive attitude (AOR:4.81, 95% CI: 1.42–7.33) were positive predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. But attaining a college or university education (AOR: 0.43, 95%CI: 0.12–0.69) was found to be a barrier to vaccine uptake by pregnant women.

Conclusion

COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women was substantially low. Old age, being married, low education, good knowledge, and a positive attitude were significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. To enhance the COVID-19 vaccine uptake, the government should improve the knowledge and attitude of pregnant women toward the COVID-19 vaccine.

Appraisal of COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance in the Romanian Pregnant Population

Widespread COVID-19 vaccination is crucial for limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and minimizing the risk of novel variants arising in the general population, especially in pregnant women. According to the publicly available research data, vaccination intentions vary significantly by country, with Romania among the European countries with the lowest vaccination rates. Thus, we sought to determine the scale of acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign among pregnant women in Romania, as well as the variables affecting their choices. A cross-sectional study was conducted on pregnant women referred to the Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic of the Timisoara Municipal Emergency Hospital in Romania, where participants were asked to complete an online survey including standardized and unstandardized questionnaires indicating their willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and the reasons for their willingness. Out of the 500 women who were requested to participate, there was a total of 345 validated questionnaires, with 184 vaccinated and 161 unvaccinated pregnant women. The statistically significant determinant factors for COVID-19 vaccination acceptance were the urban area of residence (OR = 0.86), having a higher level of education (OR = 0.81), the third trimester of pregnancy (OR = 0.54), trusting the government (OR = 0.83), being a frequent traveler (OR = 0.76), fearing the severity of COVID-19 (OR = 0.68), the higher availability of COVID-19 vaccines nearby (OR = 0.87), and seeing more people getting vaccinated (OR = 0.75). As there are no increased risks associated with SARS-CoV-2 immunization in pregnant women, the variables identified in this research are crucial in determining the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines that should be addressed in this vulnerable group to increase vaccination rates.

Factors Influencing Willingness to Be Vaccinated against COVID-19 in Nigeria

Vaccines have been historically used to address some pressing health problems in the world. COVID-19 presents no exception, although vaccine hesitancy remains a major bottleneck in some countries. This study analyzed the factors influencing willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in Nigeria. The data are from the 10th wave of COVID-19 National Longitudinal Phone Survey (COVID-19 NLPS) that was conducted in 2021. The data were analyzed with Logit regression. The result showed that the national acceptance rate of COVID-19 vaccine was 85.29%. The North East had the highest acceptance rate (96.14%), while the South East (71.80%) had the lowest value. Rural areas had higher vaccine acceptance rates of 87.80% as compared against 81.41% for urban areas. Logit regression result showed that urban residents in the South East zone and the South South zone were not too worried about contracting COVID-19 or not worried at all about contracting COVID-19, saw COVID-19 as not much of a threat to household finance or COVID-19 as not a threat at all to households’ finances, which significantly reduced the log odds of residents’ willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 (p < 0.05). However, age, the COVID-19 preventive compliance index and needing medical services significantly increased the log odds of the willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 vaccines (p < 0.05). Addressing the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria through vaccination requires significant interventions for ensuring regional and sectoral balances in vaccine acceptability through interventions and programmes for promoting individuals’ perception of health risk and vulnerability.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

FINDINGS

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

INTERPRETATION

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

FUNDING

None.

The Benefits of Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 during Pregnancy in Favor of the Mother/Newborn Dyad

When the first vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 emerged, pregnant women were excluded from clinical trials, so vaccine recommendations were initially adjourned, with late initiation for this populational category. The present study aims to quantify the serum and breastmilk values of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies in both the mother and her newborn after complete vaccination during pregnancy. Ninety-one vaccinated patients were included, some of whom presented COVID-19 infection during pregnancy. In the delivery room, venous blood was collected from the mother and umbilical cord blood from her offspring. All samples were processed using the ECLIA (electrochemiluminescence) method. Breastmilk was collected and tested during the third postnatal day. The highest maternal serum values were 19,523 U/mL (detection limit > 0.8 U/mL) and in breastmilk, 206.7 U/mL. Every single newborn had antibody values higher than 0, with a mean serum value (M = 5288.37, SD = 5661.49) significantly higher than 0, t(90) = 8.91, p < 0.001. Consequently, this study intents to emphasize the importance of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy. This double kind of neonatal protection, attained by placental and breastmilk transfer, can be accomplished by encouraging vaccination, breastfeeding, bonding, and providing maternal empowerment to participate in her infant’s care.

The Risk of Spontaneous Abortion Does Not Increase Following First Trimester mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination

Clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccines initially excluded pregnant women due to safety concerns, and when the vaccines were authorized for emergency use, they were not recommended for this population. However, observational studies discovered that pregnant women infected with COVID-19 have higher risks of negative pregnancy and delivery outcomes compared to non-pregnant women, raising the question of the risks–benefits of administering COVID-19 vaccines to pregnant women. By mid-2021, there was general consensus on the relative safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy; therefore, it is critical to investigate the safety issues related to these vaccines, considering the increasing acceptance among pregnant women. To address these concerns, we developed a research project to study the short-term effects and outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination during the first trimester of pregnancy. Our research followed an observational retrospective design for 12 months from the beginning of the vaccination campaign, and included 124 cases of spontaneous abortions and 927 ongoing pregnancies. The odds of spontaneous abortion were non-significant for both versions of the mRNA vaccine (Pfizer BNT162b2 AOR = 1.04, CI = 0.91–1.12; Moderna mRNA-1273 AOR = 1.02, CI = 0.89–1.08). Overall, our data indicated that the risk of spontaneous abortion after mRNA COVID-19 immunization during the first trimester of pregnancy is commensurate with the predicted risk in non-vaccinated pregnant women. These findings contribute to the growing body of information regarding the safety of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy.