Measles outbreaks and public attitudes towards vaccine exemptions: some cautions and strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Quinn SC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7227729 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Measles outbreaks and public attitudes towards vaccine exemptions: some cautions and strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy.
Quinn Sandra Crouse SC Jamison A M AM Freimuth V S VS
Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics 20191022 5
Today, the United States and countries throughout the world are experiencing measles outbreaks that have sickened thousands of children. From the Disneyland outbreak in 2014 to today, some states have responded with changes in laws on vaccine requirements and exemptions. In this article, we examine the history of vaccine laws, and using our 2015 survey data, explore to what extent the news coverage of the Disneyland outbreak altered parents' attitudes toward required vaccination and non-medical ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Routine childhood vaccination is declining in some regions of the United States due to vaccine hesitancy, which risks the resurgence of many infectious diseases with public health and economic consequences. There are ongoing policy debates on the state and national level, including legislation around nonmedical (personal-belief) exemptions for childhood vaccination and possibly a special government commission on vaccine safety, which may affect vaccine coverage.To estimate the number of measles cases in US children and the associated economic costs under scenarios of different levels of vaccine hesitancy, using the case example of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination and measles.Publicly available data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were used to simulate county-level MMR vaccination coverage in children (age 2-11 years) in the United States. A stochastic mathematical model was adapted for infectious disease transmission that estimated a distribution for outbreak size as it relates to vaccine coverage. Economic costs per measles case were obtained from the literature. The predicted effects of increasing the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy as well as the removal of nonmedical exemptions were estimated. The model was calibrated to annual measles cases in US children over recent years, and the model prediction was validated using an independent data set from England and Wales.Annual measles cases in the United States and the associated public sector costs.A 5% decline in MMR vaccine coverage in the United States would result in an estimated 3-fold increase in measles cases for children aged 2 to 11 years nationally every year, with an additional $2.1 million in public sector costs. The numbers would be substantially higher if unvaccinated infants, adolescents, and adult populations were also considered. There was variation around these estimates due to the stochastic elements of measles importation and sensitivity of some model inputs, although the trend was robust.This analysis predicts that even minor reductions in childhood vaccination, driven by vaccine hesitancy (nonmedical and personal belief exemptions), will have substantial public health and economic consequences. The results support an urgent need to address vaccine hesitancy in policy dialogues at the state and national level, with consideration of removing personal belief exemptions of childhood vaccination.
| S-EPMC5710408 | biostudies-other
Project description:ImportanceVaccine exemptions, which allow unvaccinated children to attend school, have increased by a factor of 28 since 2003 in Texas. Geographic clustering of unvaccinated children facilitates the spread of measles introductions, but the potential size of outbreaks is unclear.ObjectiveTo forecast the range of measles outbreak sizes in each metropolitan area of Texas at 2018 and future reduced school vaccination rates.Design, setting, and participantsAn agent-based decision analytical model using a synthetic population of Texas, derived from the 2010 US Census, was used to simulate measles transmission in the Texas population. Real schools were represented in the simulations, and the 2018 vaccination rate of each real school was applied to a simulated hypothetical equivalent. Single cases of measles were introduced, daily activities and interactions were modeled for each population member, and the number of infections over the course of 9 months was counted for 1000 simulated runs in each Texas metropolitan area.InterventionsTo determine the outcomes of further decreases in vaccination coverage, additional simulations were performed with vaccination rates reduced by 1% to 10% in schools with populations that are currently undervaccinated.Main outcomes and measuresExpected distributions of outbreak sizes in each metropolitan area of Texas at 2018 and reduced vaccination rates.ResultsAt 2018 vaccination rates, the median number of cases in large metropolitan areas was typically small, ranging from 1 to 3 cases, which is consistent with outbreaks in Texas 2006 to 2017. However, the upper limit of the distribution of plausible outbreaks (the 95th percentile, associated with 1 in 20 measles introductions) exceeded 400 cases in both the Austin and Dallas metropolitan areas, similar to the largest US outbreaks since measles was eliminated in 2000. Decreases in vaccination rates in schools with undervaccinated populations in 2018 were associated with exponential increases in the potential size of outbreaks: a 5% decrease in vaccination rate was associated with a 40% to 4000% increase in potential outbreak size, depending on the metropolitan area. A mean (SD) of 64% (11%) of cases occurred in students for whom a vaccine had been refused, but a mean (SD) of 36% (11%) occurred in others (ie, bystanders).Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that vaccination rates in some Texas schools are currently low enough to allow large measles outbreaks. Further decreases are associated with dramatic increases in the probability of large outbreaks. Limiting vaccine exemptions could be associated with a decrease in the risk of large measles outbreaks.
| S-EPMC6707017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Immunization programmes have been globally recognized as one of the most successful medical interventions against infectious diseases. Despite the proven efficacy and safety profiles of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, there are still a substantial number of people who express vaccine hesitancy. Factors that influence vaccine decision-making are heterogenous, complex, and context specific and may be caused or amplified by uncontrolled online information or misinformation. With respect to COVID-19, the recent emergence of novel variants of concern that give rise to milder disease also drives vaccine hesitancy. Healthcare professionals remain one of the most trusted groups to advise and provide information to those ambivalent about COVID-19 vaccination and should be equipped with adequate resources and information as well as practical guidance to empower them to effectively discuss concerns. This article seeks to summarize the currently available information to address the most common concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccination.
| S-EPMC9225513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVaccine hesitancy is one of the contributors to low vaccination coverage in both developed and developing countries. Sudan is one of the countries that suffers from low measles vaccine coverage and from measles outbreaks. In order to facilitate the future development of interventions, this study aimed at exploring the opinions of Expanded Program on Immunization officers at ministries of health, WHO, UNICEF and vaccine care providers at Khartoum-based primary healthcare centers.MethodsQualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews during the period January-March 2018. Data (i.e. quotes) were matched to the categories and the sub-categories of a framework that was developed by the WHO-SAGE Working Group called ''Determinants of Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix''.FindingsThe interviews were conducted with 14 participants. The majority of participants confirmed the existence of measles vaccine hesitancy in Khartoum state. They further identified various determinants that were grouped into three domains including contextual, groups and vaccination influences. The main contextual determinant as reported is the presence of people who can be qualified as "anti-vaccination". They mostly belong to particular religious and ethnic groups. Parents' beliefs about prevention and treatment from measles are the main determinants of the group influences. Attitude of the vaccine providers, measles vaccine schedule and its mode of delivery were the main vaccine related determinants.ConclusionMeasles vaccine hesitancy in Sudan appears complex and highly specific to local circumstances. To better understand the magnitude and the context-specific causes of measles vaccine hesitancy and to develop adapted strategies to address them, there is clearly a further need to investigate measles vaccine hesitancy among parents.
| S-EPMC6586394 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn Germany, a mandatory policy on measles vaccination came into effect in March 2020. Physicians, as the main vaccine providers, have a crucial role in implementing it. Mandatory vaccination changes the preconditions under which patient-provider communication on vaccines occurs. Physicians might or might not favor vaccine mandates depending on, among other factors, their attitudes towards vaccines and capabilities as vaccine providers. The aim of this study was to investigate in different subgroups of physicians the association between various factors and their attitudes towards a mandatory policy.MethodsIn total, 2229 physicians participated in a mixed-mode online/paper-pencil survey. Respondents were general practitioners, pediatricians, gynecologists, and internists. Primary determinants were the 5C psychological antecedents of vaccination, communication self-efficacy, patient clientele, projected consequences of the mandate and sociodemographic characteristics. Associations between outcomes and determinants were examined using linear regression analysis.ResultsApproximately 86% of physicians were in favor of the measles vaccine mandate for children. Regarding the 5C model, physicians were more in favor of vaccine mandates when they scored higher on confidence and collective responsibility, and lower on complacency and calculation. They were more in favor of vaccine mandates when they had higher communication self-efficacy and a more vaccine-positive patient clientele. Pediatricians were less in favor of mandates for children (80.0%) than other physician subgroups (87.1%). They were also less convinced that a mandate would result in more children getting vaccinated (59.3%) than other physician subgroups (78.3%). When controlled for these expected consequences, being a pediatrician no longer lowered the attitude towards the mandate.ConclusionsPhysicians in Germany are predominantly in favor of a measles vaccine mandate. Whether or not physicians believe the mandate to be effective in increasing vaccine coverage affects their attitude towards the mandate. In pediatricians, this belief explains their less positive attitude towards the mandate. In addition, physicians need adequate support to communicate well with patients, especially those who are hesitant, to booster their communication self-efficacy. To increase acceptance of vaccine mandates, the 5C model can be used, e.g., collective responsibility can be communicated, to avoid anger stemming from a negative attitude to mandates.
| S-EPMC7986548 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study examined the way attitudes towards science in the U.S. mediate the relationship between COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and psychosocial predictors, such as political ideology, religiosity, reactance proneness, dogmatism, perceived communal ostracism, education, and socioeconomic status. We analyzed the structure of people's attitudes towards science, revealing four distinct factors: epistemic confidence, belief that science and technology are beneficial, trust in science in general, and trust in medical science. With all four factors included as mediators in a saturated path analysis, low levels of trust in medical science and low epistemic confidence fully mediated the relationships between nearly all of the psychosocial predictors and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Political conservativism's negative association with vaccine hesitancy was partially mediated by the same two facets of people's attitudes towards science. Adding nuance to existing research, we found that trust in science in general was not a significant mediator once all four facets were included in the model. These findings are discussed with a focus on their implications for understanding attitudes towards science and their substantial and complex role in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.
| S-EPMC10459256 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is an increased need for COVID-19 vaccination since the world is gradually returning to normal. Current evidence supports vaccination activity more towards viral suppression than COVID-19 prevention. This has led to divergent views regarding vaccination which may influence anti-vaccine attitudes and vaccine hesitancy. The study examined the role of personality traits, anti-vaccine attitudes and illness perceptions on vaccine hesitancy. The study was a cross-sectional survey using snowball and convenience sampling to recruit 492 participants via social media platforms. Multivariate analysis of variance and regression analysis were used to test the hypotheses. The study found that some facets of illness perception (identity, concern, emotional representation and treatment control), extraversion, experience with COVID-19 and anti-vaccine attitudes (mistrust, profiteering, worries about unforeseen effects of vaccine) predicted vaccine hesitancy. The outcomes from this study have implications for achieving public health goals and developing strategies for reaching optimal vaccination targets and attaining herd immunity. Health-promoting programs need to be intensified and could include psychosocial perspectives on vaccine hesitancy so that specific target groups can be reached to be vaccinated.
| S-EPMC10021484 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Previous work demonstrates that individuals who obtain exemptions from school immunization requirements are geographically clustered, making regional differences in vaccination coverage a significant concern. Even where exemption levels are high, there are still parents that vaccinate. School-level assessments have determined that exemptors are more likely to attend wealthier schools with fewer minorities. Few studies have assessed divergent opinions within the context of a higher-exemption community to examine subtle differences in opinion surrounding vaccinations. Therefore, the objective of this work was to assess attitudes and perceptions towards vaccinations and compare them for exemptors and non-exemptors. We administered surveys to parents in high-exemption (>10%) elementary schools in Arizona during the 2012-13 school year. A total of 404 surveys were completed by parents among schools in Maricopa (n = 7) and Yavapai (n = 2) counties. Of these, 35% (n = 141) were exemptors and 65% (n = 261) were non-exemptors. Exemptors were more likely than non-exemptors to be concerned about serious side-effects (p<0.001). They were more likely to report knowing someone who had been diagnosed with a vaccine-preventable disease (p<0.001) but less likely to report that this had been a serious illness in that person (p<0.001) and they believed it is better for a child to develop immunity through illness than vaccination (p<0.001). They were less likely to trust physicians (p<0.001) and information about vaccines (p<0.001) and were more likely to obtain their health care from a naturopath (p<0.001). In summary, exemptors in these Arizona schools do not appear to be exempting their children from vaccinations due to convenience, as has been hypothesized in other settings. Based on the divergent views within high-exemption schools and reported distrust of the medical establishment, target interventions for high-exemption schools are discussed. Additionally, given the lack of effective non-policy based interventions to-date, the negligible declines in personal belief exemption rates, and vaccine preventable disease rate increases in Arizona, especially in high-exemption areas, legislative action in Arizona may also warrant further investigation.
| S-EPMC6002085 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We conducted a survey study at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai to assess COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and behaviors among medical students. Almost all respondents (96.5%, n = 222) believed vaccines were effective and reported being asked about the COVID-19 vaccine by family members (79.0%, n = 180). However, when asked how they respond when someone shares misinformation, 89.0% (n = 202) responded they agree to avoid conflict, 44.9% (n = 102) listened empathically, and 9.3% (n = 21) corrected the misinformation. Medical school education can address this disconnect, using standardized patients and role-playing to give students the tools to address vaccine hesitancy within their communities.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01670-2.
| S-EPMC9638195 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccine hesitancy is proving to be a significant impediment to COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in some developing countries. This study focuses on vaccine hesitancy and means of reducing it. Data come from a large, representative phone survey and online randomized survey experiment, both run in Papua New Guinea, a developing country with low vaccination rates. Less than 20% of relevant respondents to the phone survey were willing to be vaccinated, primarily because of fear of side effects and low trust in the vaccine. Although vaccine hesitancy was high in the online experiment, participants who received a message emphasizing that the vaccine was safe and COVID-19 dangerous were 68% more likely to state they planned to be vaccinated than those in the control group. A message appealing to social norms was also effective in reducing vaccine hesitancy, although its efficacy was limited to certain types of people.
| S-EPMC9671457 | biostudies-literature