Dataset Information

Is There Broad-Based Support in High-Income Countries for COVID-19 Vaccine Donation? Evidence from Seven Countries.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Many high-income countries (HICs) have now vaccinated a substantial proportion of their population against COVID-19. Many low-income countries (LICs) may need to wait until at least 2022 before even the most vulnerable 20% of their populations are vaccinated. Beyond ethical considerations, some redistribution of doses would reduce the risk of the emergence and spread of new variants and benefit the economy, both globally and in donor countries. However, the willingness of HIC governments to donate vaccine doses is likely to depend on public support. While previous work has indicated strong average levels of public support in HIC for donation, little is known about how broad-based this support is.

Objective

To investigate the extent to which support for donation holds across both pre-specified and exploratory subgroups.

Methods

From 24 November-28 December 2020 we conducted an online survey of 8209 members of the general public in seven HIC (Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Spain, UK and USA). We conducted tests of proportions and used Bayesian ordinal logistic regression models to assess the extent of support for donation across population subgroups.

Results

We found broad-based support for donations in terms of age, gender, socio-economic status and political ideology. We found no strong evidence that support for donations was higher among those with greater income or a university education. Support for donation among those on the political right and centre was lower than on the left, but 51% (95% confidence interval 48-53%) of respondents who identified with the right supported some level of donation. Those in the more altruistic half of the sample (as captured by willingness to donate money to a good cause) were more likely to support donation than those who were not, but around half of the less altruistic group supported some level of donation.

Conclusion

There is broad-based support for policymakers in HICs to donate some of their countries' COVID-19 vaccine doses for distribution to LICs.

SUBMITTER: Roope LSJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8627792 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ContextThe COVID-19 pandemic caused unprecedented global disruption and continues to wreak havoc. Dire predictions were made about the risks to smallholder farmers in lower- and middle- income, but hard data have been lacking. We present the results from 9201 interviews with smallholder farmers from seven countries.ObjectiveThe objectives are to describe: i) how farmers perceive the key effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and containment measures on livelihoods and food security; ii) the effects on agricultural activities; iii) the coping strategies households deployed.MethodsHousehold surveys were conducted as part of ongoing monitoring programs during the latter half of 2020. Sites in seven countries were covered: Burundi; Kenya; Rwanda; Tanzania; Uganda; Zambia; and Vietnam. Findings are representative of smallholder farmers across multiple districts per country.Results and conclusionsThe effects of the COVID-19 containment measures were widespread and often perceived to be severe. Food purchase, off-farm income, sale of farm produce, and access to crop inputs were all affected. In locations under more stringent restrictions during the time of the survey, up to 80% of households had to reduce food consumption and/or variety. Almost all households with off-farm incomes reported reductions, by half on average. A half to three-quarters of households (depending on the location) with income from farm sales reported losses compared to the pre-pandemic situation. In locations with more relaxed containment measures in place during the time of the survey, less frequent and less severe economic and food security outcomes were perceived by the respondent, with around 20% of households reporting negative outcomes. Mobility restrictions, reduced market access, crashes in sale price for agricultural goods, and soaring prices for food purchase were key factors. Sale prices generally dropped for all agricultural products in any given location, and affected not only high-value perishable products, but also staple crops such as maize and cassava. Depending on the location, between 30% and 90% of the households applied coping strategies in response to the pandemic during 2020. There was an almost complete absence of official aid amongst households interviewed.SignificanceOur results raise the thorny issue of how best to balance containment of disease against the wellbeing of the vulnerable rural population in lower- and middle-income countries. There is a risk that the buffering capacity of rural people will become exhausted. Possible policy measures to limit negative outcomes include i) tiered mobility restrictions with travel allowed for economic reasons; ii) short-term price guarantee schemes to stabilise the food system; iii) direct aid; iv) the timely re-installation of distribution channels for agricultural inputs.

Project description:Vaccine hesitancy forms a critical barrier to the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine in high-income countries or regions. This review aims to summarize rates of COVID-19 hesitancy and its determinants in high-income countries or regions. A scoping review was conducted in Medline®, Embase®, CINAHL®, and Scopus® and was reported in accordance with the PRISMA-SCr checklist. The search was current as of March 2021. Studies which evaluated COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its determinants in high-income countries (US$12,536 or more GNI per capita in 2019) were included. Studies conducted in low, lower-middle, and upper-middle income countries or regions were excluded. Factors associated with vaccine hesitancy were grouped into four themes (vaccine specific, individual, group, or contextual related factors). Of 2237 articles retrieved, 97 articles were included in this review. Most studies were conducted in U.S. (n = 39) and Italy (n = 9). The rates of vaccine hesitancy across high-income countries or regions ranged from 7-77.9%. 46 studies (47.4%) had rates of 30% and more. Younger age, females, not being of white ethnicity and lower education were common contextual factors associated with increased vaccine hesitancy. Lack of recent history of influenza vaccination, lower self-perceived risk of contracting COVID-19, lesser fear of COVID-19, believing that COVID-19 is not severe and not having chronic medical conditions were most frequently studied individual/group factors associated with increased vaccine hesitancy. Common vaccine-specific factors associated with increased vaccine hesitancy included beliefs that vaccine are not safe/effective and increased concerns about rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines. Given the heterogeneity in vaccine hesitancy definitions used across studies, there is a need for standardization in its assessment. This review has summarized COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy determinants that national policymakers can use when formulating health policies related to COVID-19 vaccination.

Project description:As the world tries to cope with the devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and emerging variants of the virus, COVID-19 vaccination has become an even more critical tool toward normalcy. The effectiveness of the vaccination program and specifically vaccine uptake and coverage, however, is a function of an individual's knowledge and individual opinion about the disease and available vaccines. This study investigated the knowledge, attitudes, and resulting community practice(s) associated with the new COVID-19 variants and vaccines in Bangladesh, Colombia, India, Malaysia, Zimbabwe, and the USA. A cross-sectional web-based Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) survey was administered to respondents living in six different countries using a structured and multi-item questionnaire. Survey questions were translated into English, Spanish, and Malay to accommodate the local language in each country. Associations between KAP and a range of explanatory variables were assessed using univariate and multiple logistic regression. A total of 781 responses were included in the final analysis. The Knowledge score mean was 24 (out of 46), Attitude score 28.9 (out of 55), and Practice score 7.3 (out of 11). Almost 65% of the respondents reported being knowledgeable about COVID-19 variants and vaccination, 55% reported a positive attitude toward available COVID-19 vaccines, and 85% reported engaging in practices that supported COVID-19 vaccination. From the multiple logistic models, we found post-graduate education (AOR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.23-2.74) and an age range 45-54 years (AOR = 5.81, 95% CI: 2.30-14.69) to be significantly associated with reported COVID-19 knowledge. In addition, positive Attitude scores were associated with respondents living in Zimbabwe (AOR = 4.49, 95% CI: 2.04-9.90) and positive Practice scores were found to be associated with people from India (AOR = 3.68, 95% CI: 1.15-11.74) and high school education (AOR = 2.16, 95% CI: 1.07-4.38). This study contributes to the identification of socio-demographic factors associated with poor knowledge, attitudes, and practices relating to COVID-19 variants and vaccines. It presents an opportunity for collaboration with diverse communities to address COVID-19 misinformation and common sources of vaccine hesitancy (i.e., knowledge, attitudes, and practices).

Project description:BackgroundVaccine acceptance and hesitancy among the general population and health care workers play an important role in successfully controlling the Coronavirus Disease (COVID)-19 pandemic. While there is evidence for vaccine hesitancy across the globe, wide variation in factors influencing vaccine acceptance has been reported, mainly from High-Income Countries (HIC). However, the evidence from Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) remains unclear. The objective of this review was to describe the determinants of vaccine acceptance and strategies to address those in an LMIC context.MethodsThe World Health Organization's (WHO) Measuring Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) Increasing Vaccination Model was employed to identify factors that influenced vaccine acceptance. All evidence related to supply-side and demand-side determinants and social and health system processes were examined. A comprehensive search for published literature was conducted in three databases and grey literature in relevant websites of government, multinational agencies, and COVID-19 resource aggregators, followed by a narrative synthesis.ResultsOverall, the results showed that the vaccine acceptance rates differed across LMICs, with a wide variety of reasons cited for vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine acceptance was reportedly greater among males, those with higher education, elevated socio-economic status, the unmarried, those employed as health care workers. Evidence suggested that exposure to misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines and public concerns over the safety of vaccines may contribute to lower acceptance rates. Strategies to increase vaccine acceptance rates included direct engagement with communities through influencers, including community leaders and health experts; clear and transparent communication about COVID-19 vaccines, financial and non-financial incentives; and strong endorsement from health care workers. Trust in government was identified as a significant enabler of vaccine acceptance.ConclusionsThere is a need for measures to address public acceptability, trust and concern over the safety and benefit of approved vaccines. Local context is essential to consider while developing programs to promote vaccine uptake. The governments worldwide also need to strategize to develop plans to address the anxiety and vaccine related concerns of community regarding vaccine hesitancy. There is a need for further research to evaluate strategies to address vaccine hesitancy in LMIC.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted immunization services critical to the prevention of vaccine-preventable diseases in many low- and middle- income countries around the world. These services will need to be modified in order to minimize COVID-19 transmission and ensure the safety of health workers and the community. Additional budget will be required to implement these modifications that ensure safe delivery.MethodsUsing a simple modeling analysis, we estimated the additional resource requirements associated with modifications to supplementary immunization activities (campaigns) and routine immunization services via fixed sites and outreach in 2020 US dollars. We considered the following four categories of costs: (1) personal protective equipment (PPE) & infection prevention and control (IPC) measures for immunization sessions; (2) physical distancing and screening during immunization sessions; (3) delivery strategy changes, such as changes in session sizes and frequency; and (4) other operational cost increases, including additional social mobilization, training, and hazard pay to compensate health workers.ResultsWe found that implementing a range of measures to protect health workers and communities from COVID-19 transmission could result in a per-facility start-up cost of $466-799 for routine fixed-site delivery and $12-220 for routine outreach delivery, and $12-108 per immunization campaign site. A recurrent monthly cost of $137-1,024 for fixed-site delivery and $152-848 for outreach delivery per facility could be incurred, and a $0.32-0.85 increase in the cost per dose during campaigns.ConclusionsBy illustrating potential cost implications of providing immunization services through a range of strategies in a safe manner, these estimates can provide a benchmark for program managers and policy makers on the additional budget required. These findings can help country practitioners and global development partners planning the continuation of immunization services in the context of COVID-19.