The Impact of Vaccine Concerns on Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Influenza Vaccine Uptake Among Health Care Workers

Validation of the Scandinavian guidelines for minor and moderate head trauma in children: protocol for a pragmatic, prospective, observational, multicentre cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Mild traumatic brain injury is common in children and it can be challenging to accurately identify those in need of urgent medical intervention. The Scandinavian guidelines for management of minor and moderate head trauma in children, the Scandinavian Neurotrauma Committee guideline 2016 (SNC16), were developed to aid in risk stratification and decision-making in Scandinavian emergency departments (EDs). This guideline has been validated externally with encouraging results, but internal validation in the intended healthcare system is warranted prior to broad clinical implementation.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to validate the diagnostic accuracy of the SNC16 to predict clinically important intracranial injuries (CIII) in paediatric patients suffering from blunt head trauma, assessed in EDs in Sweden and Norway.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective, pragmatic, observational cohort study. Children (aged 0-17 years) with blunt head trauma, presenting with a Glasgow Coma Scale of 9-15 within 24 hours postinjury at an ED in 1 of the 16 participating hospitals, are eligible for inclusion. Included patients are assessed and managed according to the clinical management routines of each hospital. Data elements for risk stratification are collected in an electronic case report form by the examining doctor. The primary outcome is defined as CIII within 1 week of injury. Secondary outcomes of importance include traumatic CT findings, neurosurgery and 3-month outcome. Diagnostic accuracy of the SNC16 to predict endpoints will be assessed by point estimate and 95% CIs for sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, negative predictive value and positive predictive value.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is approved by the ethical board in both Sweden and Norway. Results from this validation will be published in scientific journals, and a tailored development and implementation process will follow if the SNC16 is found safe and effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05964764.

Contextual Pathways Linking Cumulative Experiences of Racial Discrimination to Black American Men's COVID Vaccine Hesitancy

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed and widened racialized health disparities, underscoring the impact of structural inequities and racial discrimination on COVID-19 vaccination uptake. A sizable proportion of Black American men report that they either do not plan to or are unsure about becoming vaccinated against COVID-19. The present study investigated hypotheses regarding the mechanisms by which experiences of racial discrimination are associated with Black American men's COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling with 4 waves of data from 242 Black American men (aged ~ 27) living in resource-poor communities in the rural South. Study findings revealed that racial discrimination was indirectly associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy via increased endorsement of COVID-19 conspiratorial beliefs. Findings also demonstrated that increased levels of ethnic identity strengthen the association between experiences of racial discrimination and COVID-19 conspiratorial beliefs. In contrast, increased levels of social support weakened the association between cumulative experiences of racial discrimination and COVID conspiratorial beliefs. Taken together, these results suggest that racial discrimination may promote conspiratorial beliefs which undermine Black American men's willingness to be vaccinated. Future interventions aimed towards promoting vaccine uptake among Black American men may benefit from the inclusion of targeted efforts to rebuild cultural trust and increase social support.

Association of culturally competent care with influenza vaccination coverage in the United States

BACKGROUND

Cultural minority groups in the United States have lower vaccination rates or worse influenza-related outcomes. Culturally competent care, which aims to engage the social, cultural, and linguistic needs of all patients, may address some of these disparities.

OBJECTIVE

We investigate how self-reported measures of culturally competent care is associated with influenza vaccination rates in the United States.

METHODS

The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 2017 was queried for respondents asked a set of questions which assessed respondents' access to culturally competent care in the past year. The outcome of interest was self-reported receipt of the annual influenza vaccine. Sample-weighted multivariable logistic regressions estimated the adjusted odds ratios and 95 % confidence intervals (95 %CI) of influenza vaccination with response to the cultural competency survey questions as the dependent variable of interest. Subsequent marginal modeling predicted the adjusted vaccination rates among cultural minorities (racial/ethnic minorities, LGBTQ + adults, foreign-born individuals, and non-English speakers) and respondents with high-risk comorbidities for worse influenza outcomes. Models were adjusted for other known determinants of vaccination coverage.

RESULTS

20,303 sample adults were included in the analyses. There were significantly higher odds of influenza vaccination among respondents who were "always" or "most of the time" treated with respect by their providers (aOR 1.53, 95 %CI [1.23-1.90], P < 0.001), given easy-to-understand information (aOR 1.37, 95 %CI [1.19-1.58], P < 0.001), asked about their opinions or beliefs about their care (aOR 1.29, 95 %CI [1.19-1.39], P < 0.001), and seen by providers who shared or understood their culture (aOR 1.15 95 %CI [1.01-1.30], P = 0.03), compared to their counterparts who responded with "some" or "none of the time" to the same survey questions. Higher adjusted influenza vaccination rates were seen among multiple racial/ethnic groups, LGBTQ + adults, foreign-born individuals, non-English speakers, and individuals with high-risk comorbidities who reported positive responses to the cultural competency survey questions.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate a positive association between self-reported frequency of access to culturally competent care and receipt of the annual influenza vaccine. These findings support future efforts to evaluate vaccination outcomes among patients who receive components of culturally competent care, such as linguistically appropriate services, race-concordant healthcare workforce, and community engagement.

Race, ethnicity and COVID-19 vaccination: a qualitative study of UK healthcare staff

OBJECTIVE

COVID-19-related inequities experienced by racial and ethnic minority groups including healthcare professionals mirror wider health inequities, which risk being perpetuated by lower uptake of vaccination. We aim to better understand lower uptake among racial and ethnic minority staff groups to inform initiatives to enhance uptake.

DESIGN

Twenty-five semi-structured interviews were conducted (October 2020-January 2021) with UK-based healthcare staff. Data were inductively and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Vaccine decision-making processes were underpinned by an overarching theme, 'weighing up risks of harm against potential benefits to self and others'. Sub-themes included 'fear of harm', 'moral/ethical objections', 'potential benefits to self and others', 'information and misinformation', and 'institutional or workplace pressure'. We identified ways in which these were weighted more heavily towards vaccine hesitancy for racial and ethnic minority staff groups influenced by perceptions about institutional and structural discrimination. This included suspicions and fear around institutional pressure to be vaccinated, racial injustices in vaccine development and testing, religious or ethical concerns, and legitimacy and accessibility of vaccine messaging and communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Drawing on a critical race perspective, we conclude that acknowledging historical and contemporary abuses of power is essential to avoid perpetuating and aggravating mistrust by de-contextualising hesitancy from the social processes affecting hesitancy, undermining efforts to increase vaccine uptake.

"Still on the Fence": A Mixed Methods Investigation of COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence Among Health Care Providers

BACKGROUND

There is evidence of disparities in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among health care providers. The purpose of this study was to examine confidence receiving and recommending COVID-19 vaccines by health care provider type and race/ethnicity.

METHODS

This mixed methods study involved a cross-sectional survey and qualitative, semi-structured interviews from March to May 2021 among a sample of physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, and pharmacists. These workers were recruited through voluntary response sampling from an integrated health system in Southern California. The primary dependent variables were (a) confidence in vaccine safety, (b) confidence in vaccine effectiveness, and (c) intent to recommend the vaccine to others. The primary independent variables were health care provider type and race/ethnicity.

FINDINGS

A total of 2,948 providers completed the survey. Nurses relative to physicians were 15% less likely to perceive the COVID-19 vaccine to be safe (risk ratio [RR] = 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83-0.87); 27% less likely to perceive the vaccine to prevent COVID-19 (RR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.69-0.76); and 11% less likely to recommend the vaccine to others (RR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.87-0.91). Hispanic/Latinx providers were 10% less likely to perceive the vaccine to prevent COVID-19 (RR = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.83-0.98) relative to White providers. Qualitative themes included: No need for vaccine; distrusting vaccine research and roll-out; caretaking barriers; uncertainty and potential to change one's mind; framing vaccine decisions around personal beliefs.

CONCLUSIONS & APPLICATION TO PRACTICE

Health care workplaces should consider interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination among their workers, including education and mandatory vaccination policies.

Public Reaction towards the Potential Side Effects of a COVID-19 Vaccine: An Italian Cross-Sectional Study

In March 2021, the possible link between the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine and some cases of blood clots lead several governments to suspend the administration of said vaccine, or to adjust their administration strategies, regardless of the fact that both EMA and WHO claimed the benefits of the vaccine to far outweigh its risks. The lack of a coordinated decision-making process between different health authorities possibly had an impact on people’s trust in the health authorities themselves, and on their willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19. In this study, we assessed the impact of the Astrazeneca case on a sample of 1000 Italian participants. The results demonstrate that a large part of the population is willing to delay the vaccination to be granted a vaccine perceived as “better”. We also assessed the importance of several socio-demographic and psychological factors in predicting hesitancy and discuss the implications for public communication strategies.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Adult Vaccination: A Review of the State of Evidence

Background

Adult vaccination coverage remains low in the United States, particularly among racial and ethnic minority populations.

Objective

To conduct a comprehensive literature review of research studies assessing racial and ethnic disparities in adult vaccination.

Search Methods

We conducted a search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant articles.

Selection Criteria

Research studies were eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (1) study based in the United States, (2) evaluated receipt of routine immunizations in adult populations, (3) used within-study comparison of race/ethnic groups, and (4) eligible for at least one author-defined PICO (patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome) question.

Data Collection and Analysis

Preliminary abstract review was conducted by two authors. Following complete abstraction of articles using a standardized template, abstraction notes and determinations were reviewed by all authors; disagreements regarding article inclusion/exclusion were resolved by majority rule. The Social Ecological Model framework was used to complete a narrative review of observational studies to summarize factors associated with disparities; a systematic review was used to evaluate eligible intervention studies.

Results

Ninety-five studies were included in the final analysis and summarized qualitatively within two main topic areas: (1) factors associated with documented racial-ethnic disparities in adult vaccination and (2) interventions aimed to reduce disparities or to improve vaccination coverage among racial-ethnic minority groups. Of the 12 included intervention studies, only 3 studies provided direct evidence and were of Level II, fair quality; the remaining 9 studies met the criteria for indirect evidence (Level I or II, fair or poor quality).

Conclusions

A considerable amount of observational research evaluating factors associated with racial and ethnic disparities in adult vaccination is available. However, intervention studies aimed at reducing these disparities are limited, are of poor quality, and insufficiently address known reasons for low vaccination uptake among racial and ethnic minority adults.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Im/migrants' Elevated Health Concerns in Canada: Vaccine Hesitancy, Anticipated Stigma, and Risk Perception of Accessing Care

Vaccine hesitancy has taken a toll on COVID-19 immunization globally. This study aims to characterize three COVID-19-related health concerns (i.e., vaccine hesitancy, anticipated stigma, and risk perception) in Canada and how they differ based on im/migration status and other social determinants. Data were obtained from a nationwide probability sample of the Canadian Perspective Survey Series 3 (June 15 to 21, 2020). Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate the association between each COVID-19 concern and nativity status, while controlling for socio-demographics. Of 3522 participants aged ≥ 25 years, the estimated overall prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was 16.9%, with im/migrants being greater than non-immigrants (21.5% vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001). After controlling for all covariates, im/migrants had around two-fold greater odds of all three health concerns, including risk perception of accessing care (aOR 2.44, 95% CI 1.89–3.15), anticipated stigma of being targeted (aOR 2.24, 95% CI 1.81, 2.78) and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (aOR 1.99, 95% CI 1.57–2.52), compared to their Canadian-born peers. Among vaccine-hesitant individuals (n = 596), im/migrants reported higher concerns, than non-immigrants, on vaccine safety (71.3% vs. 49.5%), side effects (66.4% vs 47.3%) and mistrust in vaccinations (12.5% vs 6.6%) as possible reasons of vaccine refusal. For migrant justice, health authorities should ensure equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines and other health-enhancing resources for im/migrants to mitigate their heightened fear, stigma, and mistrust of new vaccines amidst turbulent times.

Sociodemographic Factors Associated with Vaccine Hesitancy in Central Texas Immediately Prior to COVID-19 Vaccine Availability

Vaccine-induced herd immunity remains the best opportunity for ending the COVID-19 pandemic. However, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a real concern. In this paper, we report on vaccine hesitancy in Central Texas immediately prior to the release of the two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in late December 2020. A total of 1648 individuals 18 years or older with health insurance living in Central Texas completed a survey on sociodemographic factors and plans to obtain the COVID-19 vaccine. Of the respondents, 64.1% planned to obtain the COVID-19 vaccine. Logistic regression identified the following sociodemographic factors associated with vaccine hesitancy: Black or African American race (POR: 0.351, p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.211, 0.584), female sex (POR: 0.650, p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.518, 0.816), age of 35-49 years old (POR: 0.689, p = 0.004, 95% CI: 0.534, 0.890), annual household income of less than US$10,000 (POR: 0.565, p = 0.041, 95% CI: 0.327, 0.976), a high school education or less (POR: 0.565, p = 0.001, 95% CI: 0.401, 0.795), and a high school education but less than a 4-year college degree (POR: 0.572, p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.442, 0.739). Real-world evidence provided by individuals on plans to get vaccinated can reveal COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy associated heterogeneity.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in COVID-19 Infection and Hospitalization in the Active Component US Military

Objectives. To assess COVID-19 disparities in the active component US military with an emphasis on race and ethnicity. Methods. In this retrospective cohort study, we calculated the incidence of COVID-19 testing, infection, and hospitalization in the active component US military in calendar year 2020. Results. Overall, 61.3 per 100 population per year were tested for COVID-19, 10.4% of tests were positive, and 1.1% of infected individuals were hospitalized. Non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics had a rate of testing for COVID-19 similar to that of Whites but had a higher risk of infection (adjusted risk ratio [ARR] = 1.25 and 1.26, respectively) and hospitalization (ARR = 1.28 and 1.21, respectively). Conclusions. Although of lower magnitude than seen in civilian populations, racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 infection and hospitalizations exist in the US military despite universal eligibility for health care, similar rate of testing, and adjustment for comorbidities and other factors. Simply making health care coverage available may be insufficient to ensure health equity. Interventions to mitigate disparities in the US military should target the patient, provider, health care system, and society at large. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(12):2194-2201. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306527).

Navigating sociocultural disparities in relation to infection and antibiotic resistance-the need for an intersectional approach

One of the key drivers of antibiotic resistance (ABR) and drug-resistant bacterial infections is the misuse and overuse of antibiotics in human populations. Infection management and antibiotic decision-making are multifactorial, complex processes influenced by context and involving many actors. Social constructs including race, ethnicity, gender identity and cultural and religious practices as well as migration status and geography influence health. Infection and ABR are also affected by these external drivers in individuals and populations leading to stratified health outcomes. These drivers compromise the capacity and resources of healthcare services already over-burdened with drug-resistant infections. In this review we consider the current evidence and call for a need to broaden the study of culture and power dynamics in healthcare through investigation of relative power, hierarchies and sociocultural constructs including structures, race, caste, social class and gender identity as predictors of health-providing and health-seeking behaviours. This approach will facilitate a more sustainable means of addressing the threat of ABR and identify vulnerable groups ensuring greater inclusivity in decision-making. At an individual level, investigating how social constructs and gender hierarchies impact clinical team interactions, communication and decision-making in infection management and the role of the patient and carers will support better engagement to optimize behaviours. How people of different race, class and gender identity seek, experience and provide healthcare for bacterial infections and use antibiotics needs to be better understood in order to facilitate inclusivity of marginalized groups in decision-making and policy.

Hesitancy in the time of coronavirus: Temporal, spatial, and sociodemographic variations in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

Leveraging nationally representative survey data on 443,680 respondents from January to March 2021, this study examines the temporal, spatial, and sociodemographic variations in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the U.S. Findings reveal multidimensional determinants of vaccination intentions involving confidence, complacency, and circumspection factors. Using descriptive analyses and multilevel mixed-effects regression models, we find persistent partisan divide across states and significant racial disparities, with Blacks more likely to develop vaccine hesitancy due to confidence and circumspection than Whites. Vaccine hesitancy among Blacks declines dramatically across time but varies little across states, indicating new directions to effectively address inequalities in vaccination. Results also show nuanced gender differences, with women more likely to develop hesitancy due to circumspection and men more likely to have hesitancy due to complacency. Moreover, we find important intersection between race, gender, and education that calls for efforts to adequately address the concerns of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups.

Influenza vaccine coverage and predictors of vaccination among aged care workers in Sydney Australia

Aged care facilities (ACFs) are residential communities with a concentration of vulnerable individuals with increased risk of severe influenza infection and complications such as outbreaks, hospitalisations and deaths. Aged care workers (ACW) are potential sources of influenza introduction and transmission in ACFs. Little is known about vaccine uptake among ACW. This study aimed to measure the vaccine uptake rate among Australian ACW and evaluate the demographic determinants of uptake during the influenza season of 2018. 146 ACWs were recruited from 7 facilities of a multisite aged care provider in Sydney. ACWs completed a questionnaire regarding their demographic, occupational and vaccination status. Vaccine coverage was calculated and variables were examined against their 2018 influenza vaccination status in statistical analysis. ACWs in our study were predominantly from a non-health occupational background with a large proportion of migrant workers (56%, 75/134). Vaccine coverage in 2018 was 48% (65/135). The strongest determinants of vaccine uptake were previous year vaccination history (Odds Ratio [OR] 10.49, 95% CI 3.33-33.10), workplace immunisation programs for employees (OR 7.87, 95% CI 2.47-25.10), casual work as employment status (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.77), and presence of comorbidities (OR 4.04, 95% CI 1.23-13.32). ACW are a unique and understudied group who are critical to infection control in ACFs. Few ACWs have formal health training, and many are migrants who may lack access to subsidised health care and face out of pocket costs for vaccination. Vaccine coverage among ACW were below recommended levels. Provision of influenza vaccine for staff in workplaces is highly effective in raising vaccine coverage amongst ACWs. More research on the aged care sector workforce is needed in order to evaluate the determinants of vaccine uptake among Australian ACWs.

Factors associated with influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in acute care hospitals in Canada

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccine coverage rates among healthcare workers (HCWs) in acute care facilities in Canada remain below national targets.

OBJECTIVE

To determine factors associated with influenza vaccine uptake among HCWs.

METHODS

This secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study included HCWs aged 18-69 years, working ≥20 h/wk in a Canadian acute care hospital. Questionnaires were administered to participants in the fall of the season of participation (2011/12-2013/14) which captured demographic/household characteristics, medical histories, occupational, behavioural and risk factors for influenza. Generalized estimating equation logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with vaccine uptake in the season of participation.

RESULTS

The adjusted odds ratio for influenza vaccination in the current season was highest for those vaccinated in 3 of 3 previous seasons (OR 156; 95% CI 98, 248) followed by those vaccinated in 2 of 3 and 1 of 3 previous seasons when compared with those not vaccinated. Compared with nurses, physicians (OR 4.2; 95% CI 1.4, 13.2) and support services staff (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.3, 2.4) had higher odds ratios for vaccine uptake. Conversely, HCWs identifying as Black had lower odds of uptake compared with those with European ancestry (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26-0.75) when adjusted for other factors in the model.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare workers differ in their annual uptake of influenza vaccine based on their past vaccination history, occupation and ethnicity. These findings indicate a need to determine whether there are other vaccine-hesitant groups within healthcare settings and learn which approaches are successful in increasing their uptake of influenza vaccines.

African American adults and seasonal influenza vaccination: Changing our approach can move the needle

Consistent disparities in influenza (flu) vaccine uptake among African Americans, coupled with a disproportionate burden of chronic diseases, places too many African Americans at high risk for complications, hospitalizations and premature mortality. This disparity is the result of individual attitudes and beliefs, social norms, and health care practices. Recent research identifies critical factors affecting vaccine uptake among African American adults including perceived risk of vaccine side effects, social norms that do not support for vaccination, and lower knowledge of the flu and the vaccine. Yet in our nationally representative survey of African Americans, we also found that there is substantial trust in one's own physician about the flu vaccine coupled with valuing the provider's vaccine recommendation. Other recent research has found that African Americans are not receiving strong recommendations and specific offers of the vaccine in their health care visit. This commentary suggests particular roles and strategies for health care providers, public health agencies, and African American communities and families, which can literally move the needle to increase seasonal flu vaccination.

A randomized trial of maternal influenza immunization decision-making: A test of persuasive messaging models

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine the effectiveness of persuasive communication interventions on influenza vaccination uptake among black/African American pregnant women in Atlanta, Georgia.

METHODS

We recruited black/African American pregnant women ages 18 to 50 y from Atlanta, GA to participate in a prospective, randomized controlled trial of influenza immunization messaging conducted from January to April 2013. Eligible participants were randomized to 3 study arms. We conducted follow-up questionnaires on influenza immunization at 30-days post-partum with all groups. Chi-square and t tests evaluated group differences, and outcome intention-to-treat assessment utilized log-binomial regression models.

RESULTS

Of the 106 enrolled, 95 women completed the study (90% retention), of which 31 were randomly assigned to affective messaging intervention ("Pregnant Pause" video), 30 to cognitive messaging intervention ("Vaccines for a Healthy Pregnancy" video), and 34 to a comparison condition (receipt of the Influenza Vaccine Information Statement). The three groups were balanced on baseline demographic characteristics and reported health behaviors. At baseline, most women (63%, n = 60) reported no receipt of seasonal influenza immunization during the previous 5 y. They expressed a low likelihood (2.1 ± 2.8 on 0-10 scale) of obtaining influenza immunization during their current pregnancy. At 30-days postpartum follow-up, influenza immunization was low among all participants (7-13%) demonstrating no effect after a single exposure to either affective messaging (RR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.30-4.01) or cognitive messaging interventions (RR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.11-2.88). Women cited various reasons for not obtaining maternal influenza immunizations. These included concern about vaccine harm (47%, n = 40), low perceived influenza infection risk (31%, n = 26), and a history of immunization nonreceipt (24%, n = 20).

CONCLUSION

The findings reflect the limitations associated with a single exposure to varying maternal influenza immunization message approaches on vaccine behavior. For this population, repeated influenza immunization exposures may be warranted with alterations in message format, content, and relevance for coverage improvement.

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.

Exploring racial influences on flu vaccine attitudes and behavior: Results of a national survey of White and African American adults

INTRODUCTION

Racial disparities in adult flu vaccination rates persist with African Americans falling below Whites in vaccine acceptance. Although the literature has examined traditional variables including barriers, access, attitudes, among others, there has been virtually no examination of the extent to which racial factors including racial consciousness, fairness, and discrimination may affect vaccine attitudes and behaviors.

METHODS

We contracted with GfK to conduct an online, nationally representative survey with 819 African American and 838 White respondents. Measures included risk perception, trust, vaccine attitudes, hesitancy and confidence, novel measures on racial factors, and vaccine behavior.

RESULTS

There were significant racial differences in vaccine attitudes, risk perception, trust, hesitancy and confidence. For both groups, racial fairness had stronger direct effects on the vaccine-related variables with more positive coefficients associated with more positive vaccine attitudes. Racial consciousness in a health care setting emerged as a more powerful influence on attitudes and beliefs, particularly for African Americans, with higher scores on racial consciousness associated with lower trust in the vaccine and the vaccine process, higher perceived vaccine risk, less knowledge of flu vaccine, greater vaccine hesitancy, and less confidence in the flu vaccine. The effect of racial fairness on vaccine behavior was mediated by trust in the flu vaccine for African Americans only (i.e., higher racial fairness increased trust in the vaccine process and thus the probability of getting a flu vaccine). The effect of racial consciousness and discrimination for African Americans on vaccine uptake was mediated by perceived vaccine risk and flu vaccine knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial factors can be a useful new tool for understanding and addressing attitudes toward the flu vaccine and actual vaccine behavior. These new concepts can facilitate more effective tailored and targeted vaccine communications.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Influenza Vaccination among Adults with Chronic Medical Conditions Vary by Age in the United States

BACKGROUND

People living with chronic health conditions exhibit higher risk for developing severe complications from influenza according to the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention. Although racial and ethnic disparities in influenza vaccination have been documented, it has not been comprehensively determined whether similar disparities are present among the adult population with at least one such condition.

OBJECTIVE

To study if racial and ethnic disparities in relation to influenza vaccination are present in adults suffering from at least one chronic condition and if such inequalities differ between age groups.

METHODS

The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2011-2012) was used to study the adult population (age ≥18) who had at least one chronic health condition. Baseline differences in population traits across racial and ethnic groups were identified using a chi-square test. This was conducted among various age groups. In addition, survey logistic regression was utilized to produce odds ratios of receiving influenza vaccination annually between racial and ethnic groups.

RESULTS

The total sample consisted of 15,499 adults living with at least one chronic health condition. The numbers of non-Hispanic whites (whites), non-Hispanic blacks (blacks), and Hispanics were 8,658, 3,585, and 3,256, respectively. Whites (59.93%) were found to have a higher likelihood of self-reporting their receipt of the influenza vaccine in comparison to the black (48.54%) and Hispanic (48.65%) groups (P<0.001). When examining persons aged 50-64 years and ≥65 years, it was noted that the black (54.99%, 62.72%) and Hispanic (53.54%, 64.48%) population had lower rates of influenza vaccine coverage than the white population (59.22%, 77.89) (both P<0.0001). No significant differences between whites and the blacks or Hispanics were found among the groups among adults between 18 and 49 inclusive (P>0.05). After controlling for patient characteristics, the difference in influenza vaccine coverage between whites and the minority groups were no longer significant for adults aged 50-64 years. However, the difference were still statistically significant for those aged ≥65 years.

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, there are significant disparities in influenza vaccination by race and ethnicity for adults over 65 years with at least one chronic health condition. Future research is needed to help develop more targeted interventions to address these issues and improve influenza vaccination rates.

Immunization of Health-Care Providers: Necessity and Public Health Policies

Health-care providers (HCPs) are at increased risk for exposure to vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) in the workplace. The rationale for immunization of HCPs relies on the need to protect them and, indirectly, their patients from health-care-associated VPDs. Published evidence indicates significant immunity gaps for VPDs of HCPs globally. Deficits in knowledge and false perceptions about VPDs and vaccines are the most common barriers for vaccine uptake and may also influence communication about vaccines between HCPs and their patients. Most countries have immunization recommendations for HCPs; however, there are no universal policies and significant heterogeneity exists between countries in terms of vaccines, schedules, frame of implementation (recommendation or mandatory), and target categories of HCPs. Mandatory influenza immunization policies for HCPs have been implemented with high vaccine uptake rates. Stronger recommendations for HCP immunization and commitment at the level of the health-care facility are critical in order to achieve high vaccine coverage rates. Given the importance to health, mandatory immunization policies for VPDs that can cause serious morbidity and mortality to vulnerable patients should be considered.