Influenza vaccination hesitancy in large urban centers in South America. Qualitative analysis of confidence, complacency and convenience across risk groups.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gonzalez-Block MA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8360613 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionInfluenza morbidity and mortality are significant in the countries of South America, yet influenza vaccination is as low as 56.7% among pregnant women, reaching 76.7% of adults with chronic diseases. This article measures the relative values for the vaccination hesitancy indicators of confidence, complacency and convenience by risk-groups in urban areas of five countries of South America with contrasting vaccination rates, analyzing their association with sociodemographic variables and self-reported immunization status.MethodsAn exit survey was applied to 640 individuals per country in Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay, distributed equally across risk groups of older adults, adults with risk factors, children ≤6 and pregnant women. Indicators were constructed for vaccine confidence, complacency and convenience. Analysis of variance and multiple logistic analysis was undertaken.ResultsAdults with risk factors are somewhat more confident of the influenza vaccine yet also more complacent. Convenience is higher for mothers of minors. Children and older adults report higher levels of vaccination. The 3Cs are more different across countries than across risk groups, with values for Chile higher for confidence and those for Uruguay the lowest. Complacency is lower in Brazil and higher in Uruguay. Results suggest that confidence and complacency affect vaccination rates across risk groups and countries.ConclusionsInfluenza vaccine confidence, complacency and convenience have to be bolstered to improve effective coverage across all risk groups in the urban areas of the countries studied. The role played by country contextual and national vaccination programs has to be further researched in relation to effective coverage of influenza vaccine.
| S-EPMC7732123 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Influenza vaccination has been available under Peru's national immunization program since 2008, but vaccination coverage has decreased lately. Surveys and focus groups were conducted among four risk groups (pregnant women, mothers of children aged <6 years, adults with risk factors, and adults aged ≥65 years) to identify factors affecting influenza vaccine hesitancy in Peru. The 3Cs model (Confidence, Complacency, and Convenience) was used as a conceptual framework for the study. Most pregnant women and mothers of young children (70.0%), but less than half (46.3%) of older adults and adults with risk factors were vaccinated against influenza. Vaccine confidence and complacency were positively associated with educational level. Complacency was the most deficient of the 3Cs. Pregnant women and mothers were the most informed and least complacent among risk groups. Focus groups revealed the misconceptions behind the high level of complacency observed, including the perception of influenza risk and the role assigned to vaccination in preventing the disease. Interviews with officials identified that most strategies are directed to vaccination availability and hence to convenience, with opportunities for strategies to improve vaccination uptake and community engagement. The results highlight the importance of implementing in Peru communication strategies to increase perceptions of vaccine safety and effectiveness thus improving confidence and reducing complacency. The establishment of explicit incentives should also be considered to increase vaccination uptake, particularly to health personnel.
| S-EPMC7899688 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectives Vaccine hesitancy is a big obstacle for vaccination programs, as is anticipated for the COVID-19 vaccination program, resulting in low uptake of vaccines thereby hindering the process of reaching herd immunity. Bearing this in mind the current study was aimed to explore the determinants of vaccine hesitancy amongst the Pakistani population. Methodology A cross-sectional study was carried out from November 2020 to March 2021. The conceptual framework of the study was based on the 3Cs (Confidence, Convenience, Complacency) model. The google-forms-based questionnaire was disseminated amongst the general population. Data collected were entered into SPSS version 26 and analyzed. Results Of the 421 participants, 68.4% were women. Non-healthcare workers were 55.8% of respondents. Of vaccine-hesitant individuals, 26.13% reported they were very unlikely to get vaccinated. Perception of COVID-19 vaccine was explored, which revealed 12.6% of individuals agreed the vaccine was not safe as it came out too fast, 50.6% were worried about experiencing side-effects, 18% believed the vaccine will not offer protection and 5.9% believed the vaccine would cause death. Low Practice of standard operating procedure (SOP) in non-Healthcare workers was the strongest contributor to vaccine hesitancy (OR: 5.338, p = 0.040, 95% CI: 1.082–26.330) followed by High complacency (p = 0.026) and Moderate Complacency (OR: 0.212, p = 0.007, 95% CI: 0.069–0.654) towards COVID-19 vaccination. In Healthcare workers the strongest contributor to vaccine hesitancy was having a Moderate Confidence (OR: 0.323, p = 0.042, 95% CI: 0.109–0.958) in the vaccine followed by Moderate Convenience (OR: 0.304, p = 0.049, 95% CI: 0.093–0.993) for vaccination. Conclusion Campaigning and communication strategies to reaffirm confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine and educating the general population about the vaccine could lead to increased perception of vaccine safety and effectiveness thereby restoring confidence in vaccine and decreasing vaccine hesitancy. Likewise, working to increase vaccine convenience and decreasing complacency towards the COVID-19 vaccine would translate into high vaccine uptake. MeSH words Vaccine hesitancy; vaccination intention, COVID-19 vaccine, vaccine confidence, complacency, convenience.
| S-EPMC10431607 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccine hesitancy, associated with medical mistrust, confidence, complacency and knowledge of vaccines, presents an obstacle to the campaign against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The relationship between vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy beliefs may be a key determinant of the success of vaccination campaigns. This study provides a conceptual framework to explain the impact of pathways from conspiracy beliefs to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy with regard to medical mistrust, confidence, complacency and knowledge of vaccines. A non-probability study was conducted with 1015 respondents between 17 April and 28 May 2021. Conspiracy beliefs were measured using the coronavirus conspiracy scale of Coronavirus Explanations, Attitudes, and Narratives Survey (OCEANS), and vaccine conspiracy beliefs scale. Medical mistrust was measured using the Oxford trust in doctors and developers questionnaire, and attitudes to doctors and medicine scale. Vaccine confidence and complacency were measured using the Oxford COVID-19 vaccine confidence and complacency scale. Knowledge of vaccines was measured using the vaccination knowledge scale. Vaccine hesitancy was measured using the Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to evaluate the measurement models for conspiracy beliefs, medical mistrust, confidence, complacency, and knowledge of vaccines and vaccine hesitancy. The structural equation modeling (SEM) approach was used to analyze the direct and indirect pathways from conspiracy beliefs to vaccine hesitancy. Of the 894 (88.1%) respondents who were willing to take the COVID-19 vaccine without any hesitancy, the model fit with the CFA models for conspiracy beliefs, medical mistrust, confidence, complacency and knowledge of vaccines, and vaccine hesitancy was deemed acceptable. Conspiracy beliefs had significant direct (β = 0.294), indirect (β = 0.423) and total (β = 0.717) effects on vaccine hesitancy; 41.0% of the total effect was direct, and 59.0% was indirect. Conspiracy beliefs significantly predicted vaccine hesitancy by medical mistrust (β = 0.210), confidence and complacency (β = 0.095), knowledge (β = 0.079) of vaccines, explaining 29.3, 11.0, and 13.2% of the total effects, respectively. Conspiracy beliefs significantly predicted vaccine hesitancy through the sequential mediation of knowledge of vaccines and medical mistrust (β = 0.016), explaining 2.2% of the total effects. Conspiracy beliefs significantly predicted vaccine hesitancy through the sequential mediation of confidence and complacency, and knowledge of vaccines (β = 0.023), explaining 3.2% of the total effects. The SEM approach indicated an acceptable model fit (χ2/df = 2.464, RMSEA = 0.038, SRMR = 0.050, CFI = 0.930, IFI = 0.930). The sample in this study showed lower vaccine hesitancy, and this study identified pathways from conspiracy beliefs to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in China. Conspiracy beliefs had direct and indirect effects on vaccine hesitancy, and the indirect association was determined through medical mistrust, confidence, complacency, and knowledge of vaccines. In addition, both direct and indirect pathways from conspiracy beliefs to vaccine hesitancy were identified as intervention targets to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.
| S-EPMC8624917 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe demographic determinants of hesitancy in Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccination include rurality, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. In the second year of the pandemic, in South Tyrol, Italy, 15.6 percent of a representative adult sample reported hesitancy. Individual factors responsible for greater vaccination hesitancy in rural areas of central Europe are poorly understood.MethodsA cross-sectional survey on a probability-based sample of South Tyrol residents in March 2021 was analyzed. The questionnaire collected information on sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, COVID-19-related experiences, conspiracy thinking, and the likelihood of accepting the national vaccination plan. A logistic regression analysis was performed.ResultsAmong 1426 survey participants, 17.6% of the rural sample (n = 145/824) reported hesitancy with COVID-19 vaccination versus 12.8% (n = 77/602) in urban residents (p = 0.013). Rural residents were less likely to have post-secondary education, lived more frequently in households with children under six years of age, and their economic situation was worse than before the pandemic. Chronic diseases and deaths due to COVID-19 among close relatives were less frequently reported, and trust in pandemic management by national public health institutions was lower, as was trust in local authorities, civil protection, and local health services. Logistic regression models confirmed the most well-known predictors of hesitancy in both urban and rural populations; overall, residency was not an independent predictor.ConclusionSeveral predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were more prevalent in rural areas than in urban areas, which may explain the lower vaccine uptake in rural areas. Rurality is not a determinant of vaccine hesitancy in the economically well-developed North of Italy.
| S-EPMC9692501 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesIncreasing vaccine hesitancy and decreasing acceptance of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) recommended schedule for childhood vaccines represent a crucial public health issue. The present study directly compares vaccine acceptance behavior across four different groups: those who are fully accepting of the CDC-recommended schedule, those who are accepting but on a delayed schedule, those who only partially vaccinate, and those who do not vaccinate at all.MethodsA total of 779 adults residing in the United States with at least one child under the age of 18 years participated in an online survey.ResultsLogistic and Ordinary Least Squares regression analyses revealed clear differences between the vaccination behavior groups on a variety of demographic, psychographic, and behavioral metrics. Results suggest financial and insurance-related barriers still hinder full vaccination, and there are differences by race, ethnicity, and educational attainment. Sources of information about vaccines also differed by vaccination behavior group, with those who never vaccinate more likely to rely on friends and family for information. Finally, those whose child experienced what the parent interpreted as an adverse reaction to a previous vaccine, even if that reaction was within the bounds of "normal", were more likely to report they delay or partially vaccinate.Conclusions for practiceThese results have implications for public health policy and intervention campaigns, in particular that two-step flow campaigns and increased knowledge of normal vaccine side effects may ameliorate some vaccine hesitancy.
| S-EPMC8736300 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of our study was to identify primary care providers' (PCPs') practices in promoting childhood vaccination and their perceptions regarding barriers to vaccination in a primarily rural state. In January-May 2022, we conducted a mail and online survey of PCPs across Montana (n = 829). The survey included modules on routine immunizations in children 0-2 years old and COVID-19 vaccination in children 5-17 years old. The survey response rate was 36% (298/829). We categorized PCPs as working in rural (n = 218) or urban areas (n = 80), based on Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes. We then compared responses between rural and urban PCPs using chi-square tests. Urban PCPs (90-94%, depending on vaccine) stocked routinely recommended vaccines more frequently than rural PCPs (71-84%), but stocked the COVID-19 vaccine less often than rural PCPs (44% vs. 71%, respectively, p < 0.001). A higher percentage of rural providers reported parental beliefs that vaccine-preventable diseases are not severe enough to warrant vaccination (48% vs. 31%, p = 0.01) and concerns that vaccination will weaken their child's immune system (29% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). More rural (74%) compared to urban (59%) PCPs identified a social media campaign from local health departments promoting early childhood vaccinations as an effective strategy to increase childhood vaccination rates (p = 0.01). We identified key differences in some childhood vaccination practices and barriers between rural and urban PCPs. Interventions to increase rural vaccination rates could include increasing the number of providers stocking all recommended vaccines, identifying strategies to address parents' concerns regarding vaccine necessity, and collaborations with public health departments.
| S-EPMC10148012 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Social capital (SC) has been documented to effectively reduce the spread of diseases, including COVID-19; however, research pertaining to SC and COVID-19 vaccination in Korea is lacking. This cross-sectional study conducted in the city of Wonju, Gangwon Province, Korea (n = 1,096) examined the differences in COVID-19 vaccine trust and hesitancy considering individual characteristics and investigated the effects of SC on COVID-19 vaccine trust and hesitancy. SC was measured based on 14 items pertaining to social trust, network, and norms. Responses regarding COVID-19 screening history, vaccine trust, and vaccine hesitancy were also assessed. SC scores did not differ between sexes, but differed significantly according to age and household income; thus, adults aged 70-79 years had the highest SC scores, and mean SC score increased significantly with income. COVID-19 vaccine trust differed significantly according to age, average household income, social organization involvement, and SC score. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy differed significantly with age, SC score, and COVID-19 screening history. In univariate logistic regression, age, average household income, social organization involvement, and SC score were significant predictors of vaccine trust; in multivariable analysis, however, the identified predictors were age and SC. In particular, people with an SC score ≥50 were 2.660 times more likely to trust COVID-19 vaccines than those with lower scores. In multivariable analysis, age and SC were significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy. In particular, people with an SC score ≥50 were 1.400 times more likely not to be hesitant about receiving COVID-19 vaccines than people with lower scores. These results indicate that prioritizing policies to increase SC and trust in the government could boost the COVID-19 vaccination rate.
| S-EPMC9662712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We test the hypothesis that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is attributable to distrustful complacency-an interactive combination of low concern and low trust. Across two studies, 9,695 respondents from different parts of Britain reported their level of concern about COVID-19, trust in the UK government, and intention to accept or refuse the vaccine. Multilevel regression analysis, controlling for geographic area and relevant demographics, confirmed the predicted interactive effect of concern and trust. Across studies, respondents with both low trust and low concern were 10%-22% more vaccine hesitant than respondents with either high trust or high concern, and 26%-29% more hesitant than respondents with both high trust and high concern. Results hold equally among White, Black, and Muslim respondents, consistent with the view that regardless of mean-level differences, a common process underlies vaccine hesitancy, underlining the importance of tackling distrustful complacency both generally and specifically among unvaccinated individuals and populations.
| S-EPMC9878109 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The present study shows that the most prominent human arboviruses worldwide (dengue viruses 1, 2, 3, and 4, Chikungunya virus, and Zika virus) can infect wild animals and transfer from urban to sylvatic maintenance cycles in South America, as did the yellow fever virus (YFV) in the past. All these viruses are transmitted by the anthropophilic mosquito Aedes aegypti and cause epidemics throughout Brazil. The YFV is the oldest example of an urban arbovirus that became sylvatic in South America. Currently, the disease is a zoonosis of non-human primates that moves like a wave through the forests of the Brazilian countryside, traveling thousands of kilometers, killing many animals and eventually infecting man. However, since 2016, this zoonotic wave has reached the highly populated areas of Southeast Brazil, producing the largest human outbreak in the past 60 years. As with the YFV, sylvatic cycles may occur with dengue, Chikungunya, and Zika. In order to become sylvatic, arboviruses require an apparently unlikely conjunction of factors to unexpectedly take place. These arboviruses could start to infect sylvatic primates and be transmitted by Haemagogus mosquitoes that inhabit tree canopies. We mention here publications reporting evidence of sylvatic cycles of dengue, Chikungunya, and Zika virus in South America. Indeed, it is almost unfeasible to control these cycles of arboviruses since it is impossible to know where, when or why an arboviral spill-over would occur in wild animals. The sylvatic maintenance cycle could preclude the eradication of an arbovirus. Moreover, an arbovirus in a sylvatic cycle could re-emerge anytime, infecting humans and producing outbreaks. In case of the reemergence of an arbovirus, it is crucial to prevent the occurrence of an urban cycle as a spill-back from the sylvatic cycle.
| S-EPMC6653809 | biostudies-literature