Plans to Vaccinate Children for Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Survey of United States Parents.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Teasdale CA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8286233 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:As of April 2, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in >890,000 cases and >45,000 deaths worldwide, including 239,279 cases and 5,443 deaths in the United States (1,2). In the United States, 22% of the population is made up of infants, children, and adolescents aged <18 years (children) (3). Data from China suggest that pediatric COVID-19 cases might be less severe than cases in adults and that children might experience different symptoms than do adults (4,5); however, disease characteristics among pediatric patients in the United States have not been described. Data from 149,760 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases in the United States occurring during February 12-April 2, 2020 were analyzed. Among 149,082 (99.6%) reported cases for which age was known, 2,572 (1.7%) were among children aged <18 years. Data were available for a small proportion of patients on many important variables, including symptoms (9.4%), underlying conditions (13%), and hospitalization status (33%). Among those with available information, 73% of pediatric patients had symptoms of fever, cough, or shortness of breath compared with 93% of adults aged 18-64 years during the same period; 5.7% of all pediatric patients, or 20% of those for whom hospitalization status was known, were hospitalized, lower than the percentages hospitalized among all adults aged 18-64 years (10%) or those with known hospitalization status (33%). Three deaths were reported among the pediatric cases included in this analysis. These data support previous findings that children with COVID-19 might not have reported fever or cough as often as do adults (4). Whereas most COVID-19 cases in children are not severe, serious COVID-19 illness resulting in hospitalization still occurs in this age group. Social distancing and everyday preventive behaviors remain important for all age groups as patients with less serious illness and those without symptoms likely play an important role in disease transmission (6,7).
| S-EPMC7147903 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo determine factors associated with parents who plan to vaccinate their children against influenza next year, especially those who did not vaccinate against influenza last year using a global survey.Study designA survey of caregivers accompanying their children aged 1-19 years old in 17 pediatric emergency departments in 6 countries at the peak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Anonymous online survey included caregiver and child demographic information, vaccination history and future intentions, and concern about the child and caregiver having COVID-19 at the time of emergency department visit.ResultsOf 2422 surveys, 1314 (54.2%) caregivers stated they plan to vaccinate their child against influenza next year, an increase of 15.8% from the previous year. Of 1459 caregivers who did not vaccinate their children last year, 418 (28.6%) plan to do so next year. Factors predicting willingness to change and vaccinate included child's up-to-date vaccination status (aOR 2.03, 95% CI 1.29-3.32, P = .003); caregivers' influenza vaccine history (aOR 3.26, 95% CI 2.41-4.40, P < .010), and level of concern their child had COVID-19 (aOR 1.09, 95% CI 1.01-1.17, P = .022).ConclusionsChanges in risk perception due to COVID-19, and previous vaccination, may serve to influence decision-making among caregivers regarding influenza vaccination in the coming season. To promote influenza vaccination among children, public health programs can leverage this information.
| S-EPMC7410815 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVaccination complacency occurs when perceived risks of vaccine-preventable diseases are sufficiently low so that vaccination is no longer perceived as a necessary precaution. Disease outbreaks can once again increase perceptions of risk, thereby decrease vaccine complacency, and in turn decrease vaccine hesitancy. It is not well understood, however, how change in perceived risk translates into change in vaccine hesitancy. We advance the concept of vaccine propensity, which relates a change in willingness to vaccinate with a change in perceived risk of infection-holding fixed other considerations such as vaccine confidence and convenience.Methods and findingsWe used an original survey instrument that presents 7 vaccine-preventable "new" diseases to gather demographically diverse sample data from the United States in 2018 (N = 2,411). Our survey was conducted online between January 25, 2018, and February 2, 2018, and was structured in 3 parts. First, we collected information concerning the places participants live and visit in a typical week. Second, participants were presented with one of 7 hypothetical disease outbreaks and asked how they would respond. Third, we collected sociodemographic information. The survey was designed to match population parameters in the US on 5 major dimensions: age, sex, income, race, and census region. We also were able to closely match education. The aggregate demographic details for study participants were a mean age of 43.80 years, 47% male and 53% female, 38.5% with a college degree, and 24% nonwhite. We found an overall change of at least 30% in proportion willing to vaccinate as risk of infection increases. When considering morbidity information, the proportion willing to vaccinate went from 0.476 (0.449-0.503) at 0 local cases of disease to 0.871 (0.852-0.888) at 100 local cases (upper and lower 95% confidence intervals). When considering mortality information, the proportion went from 0.526 (0.494-0.557) at 0 local cases of disease to 0.916 (0.897-0.931) at 100 local cases. In addition, we ffound that the risk of mortality invokes a larger proportion willing to vaccinate than mere morbidity (P = 0.0002), that older populations are more willing than younger (P<0.0001), that the highest income bracket (>$90,000) is more willing than all others (P = 0.0001), that men are more willing than women (P = 0.0011), and that the proportion willing to vaccinate is related to both ideology and the level of risk (P = 0.004). Limitations of this study include that it does not consider how other factors (such as social influence) interact with local case counts in people's vaccine decision-making, it cannot determine whether different degrees of severity in morbidity or mortality failed to be statistically significant because of survey design or because participants use heuristically driven decision-making that glosses over degrees, and the study does not capture the part of the US that is not online.ConclusionsIn this study, we found that different degrees of risk (in terms of local cases of disease) correspond with different proportions of populations willing to vaccinate. We also identified several sociodemographic aspects of vaccine propensity. Understanding how vaccine propensity is affected by sociodemographic factors is invaluable for predicting where outbreaks are more likely to occur and their expected size, even with the resulting cascade of changing vaccination rates and the respective feedback on potential outbreaks.
| S-EPMC7561115 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in 5,817,385 reported cases and 362,705 deaths worldwide through May, 30, 2020,† including 1,761,503 aggregated reported cases and 103,700 deaths in the United States.§ Previous analyses during February-early April 2020 indicated that age ?65 years and underlying health conditions were associated with a higher risk for severe outcomes, which were less common among children aged <18 years (1-3). This report describes demographic characteristics, underlying health conditions, symptoms, and outcomes among 1,320,488 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases individually reported to CDC during January 22-May 30, 2020. Cumulative incidence, 403.6 cases per 100,000 persons,¶ was similar among males (401.1) and females (406.0) and highest among persons aged ?80 years (902.0). Among 599,636 (45%) cases with known information, 33% of persons were Hispanic or Latino of any race (Hispanic), 22% were non-Hispanic black (black), and 1.3% were non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN). Among 287,320 (22%) cases with sufficient data on underlying health conditions, the most common were cardiovascular disease (32%), diabetes (30%), and chronic lung disease (18%). Overall, 184,673 (14%) patients were hospitalized, 29,837 (2%) were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU), and 71,116 (5%) died. Hospitalizations were six times higher among patients with a reported underlying condition (45.4%) than those without reported underlying conditions (7.6%). Deaths were 12 times higher among patients with reported underlying conditions (19.5%) compared with those without reported underlying conditions (1.6%). The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be severe, particularly in certain population groups. These preliminary findings underscore the need to build on current efforts to collect and analyze case data, especially among those with underlying health conditions. These data are used to monitor trends in COVID-19 illness, identify and respond to localized incidence increase, and inform policies and practices designed to reduce transmission in the United States.
| S-EPMC7302472 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe objective of this study was to characterize hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and describe their real-world treatment patterns and outcomes over time.MethodsAdult patients hospitalized on May 1, 2020-December 31, 2020 with a discharge diagnosis of COVID-19 were identified from the Premier Healthcare Database. Patient and hospital characteristics, treatments, baseline severity based on oxygen support, length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) utilization, and mortality were examined.ResultsThe study included 295657 patients (847 hospitals), with median age of 66 (interquartile range, 54-77) years. Among each set of demographic comparators, the majority were male, white, and over 65. Approximately 85% had no supplemental oxygen charges (NSOc) or low-flow oxygen (LFO) at baseline, whereas 75% received no more than NSOc or LFO as maximal oxygen support at any time during hospitalization. Remdesivir (RDV) and corticosteroid treatment utilization increased over time. By December, 50% were receiving RDV and 80% were receiving corticosteroids. A higher proportion initiated COVID-19 treatments within 2 days of hospitalization in December versus May (RDV, 87% vs 40%; corticosteroids, 93% vs 62%; convalescent plasma, 68% vs 26%). There was a shift toward initiating RDV in patients on NSOc or LFO (68.0% [May] vs 83.1% [December]). Median LOS decreased over time. Overall mortality was 13.5% and it was highest for severe patients (invasive mechanical ventilation/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [IMV/ECMO], 53.7%; high-flow oxygen/noninvasive ventilation [HFO/NIV], 32.2%; LFO, 11.7%; NSOc, 7.3%). The ICU use decreased, whereas mortality decreased for NSOc and LFO.ConclusionsClinical management of COVID-19 is rapidly evolving. This large observational study found that use of evidence-based treatments increased from May to December 2020, whereas improvement in outcomes occurred over this time-period.
| S-EPMC8522394 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEfforts to reduce nosocomial spread of COVID-19 have resulted in unprecedented disruptions in clinical workflows and numerous unexpected stressors for imaging departments across the country. Our purpose was to more precisely evaluate these impacts on radiologists through a nationwide survey.MethodsA 43-item anonymous questionnaire was adapted from the AO Spine Foundation's survey and distributed to 1521 unique email addresses using REDCap™ (Research Electronic Data Capture). Additional invitations were sent out to American Society of Emergency Radiology (ASER) and Association of University Radiologists (AUR) members. Responses were collected over a period of 8 days. Descriptive analyses and multivariate modeling were performed using SAS v9.4 software.ResultsA total of 689 responses from radiologists across 44 different states met the criteria for inclusion in the analysis. As many as 61% of respondents rated their level of anxiety with regard to COVID-19 to be a 7 out of 10 or greater, and higher scores were positively correlated the standardized number of COVID-19 cases in a respondent's state (RR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02-1.21, p = 0.01). Citing the stressor of "personal health" was a strong predictor of higher anxiety scores (RR 1.23; 95% CI: 1.13-1.34, p < 0.01). By contrast, participants who reported needing no coping methods were more likely to self-report lower anxiety scores (RR 0.4; 95% CI: 0.3-0.53, p < 0.01).ConclusionCOVID-19 has had a significant impact on radiologists across the nation. As these unique stressors continue to evolve, further attention must be paid to the ways in which we may continue to support radiologists working in drastically altered practice environments and in remote settings.
| S-EPMC7456195 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The experience of individuals with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) ranges from asymptomatic to life threatening multi-organ dysfunction. Specific HLA alleles may affect the predisposition to severe COVID-19 because of their role in presenting viral peptides to launch the adaptive immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this population-based case-control study in the midwestern United States, we performed high-resolution HLA typing of 234 cases hospitalized for COVID-19 in the St. Louis metropolitan area and compared their HLA allele frequencies with those of 22,000 matched controls from the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP). We identified two predisposing alleles, HLA-DRB1*08:02 in the Hispanic group (OR = 9.0, 95% confidence interval: 2.2-37.9; adjusted p = 0.03) and HLA-A*30:02 in younger African Americans with ages below the median (OR = 2.2, 1.4-3.6; adjusted p = 0.01), and several candidate alleles with potential associations with COVID-19 in African American, White, and Hispanic groups. We also detected risk-associated amino acid residues in the peptide binding grooves of some of these alleles, suggesting the presence of functional associations. These findings support the notion that specific HLA alleles may be protective or predisposing factors to COVID-19. Future consortium analysis of pooled cases and controls is warranted to validate and extend these findings, and correlation with viral peptide binding studies will provide additional evidence for the functional association between HLA alleles and COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8429120 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disproportionately affected residents, their families, staff, and operators of congregate care settings. Assisted living (AL) is a type of long-term care setting for older adults who need supportive care but not ongoing nursing care and emphasizes a social model of care provision. Because AL is a type of long-term care, it has at times been referenced along with nursing homes in discussions related to COVID-19 but not recognized for its different care practices that pose unique challenges related to COVID-19; in that manner, it has largely been left out of the COVID-19 discourse, although ~812,000 older adults live in AL. To identify COVID-19 issues specific to AL, stakeholders with expertise in AL operations, policy, practice, and research (n = 42) were recruited to participate in remote interviews between July and September 2020. Using a thematic analysis, we derived the following overarching themes: (1) Policymakers are disconnected from and lack an understanding of the AL context; (2) AL administrators were left to coordinate, communicate, and implement constantly changing guidelines with little support; (3) AL organizations faced limited knowledge of and disparate access to funding and resources; (4) state-level regulatory requirements conflicted with COVID-19 guidelines resulting in uncertainty about which rules to follow; and (5) AL operators struggled to balance public health priorities with promoting their residents' quality of life and well-being. To develop evidence-informed policy and avoid unintended consequences, AL operators, direct care workers, residents, and clinicians practicing in these settings should have opportunities to provide feedback throughout the policy development process, both state and national.
| S-EPMC8170034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSocial distancing is encouraged to mitigate viral spreading during outbreaks. However, the association between distancing and patient-centered outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has not been demonstrated. In the United States, social distancing orders are implemented at the state level with variable timing of onset. Emergency declarations and school closures were 2 early statewide interventions.MethodsTo determine whether later distancing interventions were associated with higher mortality, we performed a state-level analysis in 55 146 COVID-19 nonsurvivors. We tested the association between timing of emergency declarations and school closures with 28-day mortality using multivariable negative binomial regression. Day 1 for each state was set to when they recorded ≥ 10 deaths. We performed sensitivity analyses to test model assumptions.ResultsAt time of analysis, 37 of 50 states had ≥ 10 deaths and 28 follow-up days. Both later emergency declaration (adjusted mortality rate ratio [aMRR] 1.05 per day delay; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.09; P = .040) and later school closure (aMRR 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09; P = .008) were associated with more deaths. When assessing all 50 states and setting day 1 to the day a state recorded its first death, delays in declaring an emergency (aMRR 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09; P = .020) or closing schools (aMRR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.09; P < .001) were associated with more deaths. Results were unchanged when excluding New York and New Jersey.ConclusionsLater statewide emergency declarations and school closure were associated with higher Covid-19 mortality. Each day of delay increased mortality risk 5 to 6%.
| S-EPMC7454446 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We described antibiotic use among inpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Most COVID-19 inpatients received antibiotic therapy. We also described hospital-wide antibiotic use during 2020 compared with 2019, stratified by hospital COVID-19 burden. Although total antibiotic use decreased between years, certain antibiotic use increased with higher COVID-19 burden.
| S-EPMC8244661 | biostudies-literature