Dataset Information

Sociocultural determinants of anticipated oral cholera vaccine acceptance in three African settings: a meta-analytic approach.

ABSTRACT: Controlling cholera remains a significant challenge in Sub-Saharan Africa. In areas where access to safe water and sanitation are limited, oral cholera vaccine (OCV) can save lives. Establishment of a global stockpile for OCV reflects increasing priority for use of cholera vaccines in endemic settings. Community acceptance of vaccines, however, is critical and sociocultural features of acceptance require attention for effective implementation. This study identifies and compares sociocultural determinants of anticipated OCV acceptance across populations in Southeastern Democratic Republic of Congo, Western Kenya and Zanzibar.Cross-sectional studies were conducted using similar but locally-adapted semistructured interviews among 1095 respondents in three African settings. Logistic regression models identified sociocultural determinants of OCV acceptance from these studies in endemic areas of Southeastern Democratic Republic of Congo (SE-DRC), Western Kenya (W-Kenya) and Zanzibar. Meta-analytic techniques highlighted common and distinctive determinants in the three settings.Anticipated OCV acceptance was high in all settings. More than 93% of community respondents overall indicated interest in a no-cost vaccine. Higher anticipated acceptance was observed in areas with less access to public health facilities. In all settings awareness of cholera prevention methods (safe food consumption and garbage disposal) and relating ingestion to cholera causation were associated with greater acceptance. Higher age, larger households, lack of education, social vulnerability and knowledge of oral rehydration solution for self-treatment were negatively associated with anticipated OCV acceptance. Setting-specific determinants of acceptance included reporting a reliable income (W-Kenya and Zanzibar, not SE-DRC). In SE-DRC, intention to purchase an OCV appeared unrelated to ability to pay. Rural residents were less likely than urban counterparts to accept an OCV in W-Kenya, but more likely in Zanzibar. Prayer as a form of self-treatment was associated with vaccine acceptance in SE-DRC and W-Kenya, but not in Zanzibar.These cholera-endemic African communities are especially interested in no-cost OCVs. Health education and attention to local social and cultural features of cholera and vaccines would likely increase vaccine coverage. High demand and absence of insurmountable sociocultural barriers to vaccination with OCVs indicate potential for mass vaccination in planning for comprehensive control or elimination.

SUBMITTER: Sundaram N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4712562 | biostudies-other | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCholera mainly affects developing countries where safe water supply and sanitation infrastructure are often rudimentary. Sub-Saharan Africa is a cholera hotspot. Effective cholera control requires not only a professional assessment, but also consideration of community-based priorities. The present work compares local sociocultural features of endemic cholera in urban and rural sites from three field studies in southeastern Democratic Republic of Congo (SE-DRC), western Kenya and Zanzibar.MethodsA vignette-based semistructured interview was used in 2008 in Zanzibar to study sociocultural features of cholera-related illness among 356 men and women from urban and rural communities. Similar cross-sectional surveys were performed in western Kenya (n = 379) and in SE-DRC (n = 360) in 2010. Systematic comparison across all settings considered the following domains: illness identification; perceived seriousness, potential fatality and past household episodes; illness-related experience; meaning; knowledge of prevention; help-seeking behavior; and perceived vulnerability.ResultsCholera is well known in all three settings and is understood to have a significant impact on people's lives. Its social impact was mainly characterized by financial concerns. Problems with unsafe water, sanitation and dirty environments were the most common perceived causes across settings; nonetheless, non-biomedical explanations were widespread in rural areas of SE-DRC and Zanzibar. Safe food and water and vaccines were prioritized for prevention in SE-DRC. Safe water was prioritized in western Kenya along with sanitation and health education. The latter two were also prioritized in Zanzibar. Use of oral rehydration solutions and rehydration was a top priority everywhere; healthcare facilities were universally reported as a primary source of help. Respondents in SE-DRC and Zanzibar reported cholera as affecting almost everybody without differentiating much for gender, age and class. In contrast, in western Kenya, gender differentiation was pronounced, and children and the poor were regarded as most vulnerable to cholera.ConclusionsThis comprehensive review identified common and distinctive features of local understandings of cholera. Classical treatment (that is, rehydration) was highlighted as a priority for control in the three African study settings and is likely to be identified in the region beyond. Findings indicate the value of insight from community studies to guide local program planning for cholera control and elimination.

Project description:Cholera is both an endemic and epidemic disease in many low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Strategies for cholera control include improving water, sanitation, and hygiene; providing early and effective treatment; and deploying oral cholera vaccine (OCV). This last strategy is relatively new, and countries considering its introduction are interested in knowing the potential cost not only of the vaccine, but also the cost of introduction. This paper describes the costing of OCV introduction in LMICs using a publicly available Excel-based tool known as the CholTool. It includes estimates of delivery cost categories which cover not only the service delivery costs (e.g. vaccine procurement, handling, storage, and transport; vaccination administration, monitoring supervision, and field support), but also the programmatic costs associated with introducing a new vaccine (i.e. microplanning, communication and training materials development, sensitization/social mobilization, and personnel training) to ensure that a comprehensive estimate is provided with health payer perspective. CholTool takes the user through a structured sequence of interlinked modules containing input parameter cells (assumptions), decision cells (variable selections), and formulas (calculations) to produce customized cost estimates based on standardized methods. The tool provides both financial and economic cost estimates, to ensure that both costs are available for consideration. Four examples of applications of CholTool are presented in three countries- one in Ethiopia, two in Malawi and one in Nepal. The estimates of economic delivery cost per dose (including service delivery and programmatic costs) were (in USD 2016): $2.89 in Ethiopia, $3.04 in Malawi1, $3.35 in Malawi2 and $3.06 in Nepal. A cost projection conducted before the campaign using the tool and a retrospective costing using the tool in Nepal resulted in no significant difference between economic delivery costs per dose.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2013, a stockpile of oral cholera vaccine (OCV) was created for use in outbreak response, but vaccine availability remains severely limited. Innovative strategies are needed to maximize the health impact and minimize the logistical barriers to using available vaccine. Here we ask under what conditions the use of one dose rather than the internationally licensed two-dose protocol may do both.Methods and findingsUsing mathematical models we determined the minimum relative single-dose efficacy (MRSE) at which single-dose reactive campaigns are expected to be as or more effective than two-dose campaigns with the same amount of vaccine. Average one- and two-dose OCV effectiveness was estimated from published literature and compared to the MRSE. Results were applied to recent outbreaks in Haiti, Zimbabwe, and Guinea using stochastic simulations to illustrate the potential impact of one- and two-dose campaigns. At the start of an epidemic, a single dose must be 35%-56% as efficacious as two doses to avert the same number of cases with a fixed amount of vaccine (i.e., MRSE between 35% and 56%). This threshold decreases as vaccination is delayed. Short-term OCV effectiveness is estimated to be 77% (95% CI 57%-88%) for two doses and 44% (95% CI -27% to 76%) for one dose. This results in a one-dose relative efficacy estimate of 57% (interquartile range 13%-88%), which is above conservative MRSE estimates. Using our best estimates of one- and two-dose efficacy, we projected that a single-dose reactive campaign could have prevented 70,584 (95% prediction interval [PI] 55,943-86,205) cases in Zimbabwe, 78,317 (95% PI 57,435-100,150) in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, and 2,826 (95% PI 2,490-3,170) cases in Conakry, Guinea: 1.1 to 1.2 times as many as a two-dose campaign. While extensive sensitivity analyses were performed, our projections of cases averted in past epidemics are based on severely limited single-dose efficacy data and may not fully capture uncertainty due to imperfect surveillance data and uncertainty about the transmission dynamics of cholera in each setting.ConclusionsReactive vaccination campaigns using a single dose of OCV may avert more cases and deaths than a standard two-dose campaign when vaccine supplies are limited, while at the same time reducing logistical complexity. These findings should motivate consideration of the trade-offs between one- and two-dose campaigns in resource-constrained settings, though further field efficacy data are needed and should be a priority in any one-dose campaign.

Project description:BackgroundThe United Kingdom (UK) was the first European country to introduce a national immunisation program for shingles (2013-2014). That year, vaccination coverage ranged from 50 to 64% across the UK, but uptake has declined ever since. This study explored determinants of the acceptance of the shingles vaccine in the UK.MethodsVaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, who were eligible for the last catch-up cohort of the 2014-2015 shingles vaccination campaign, were identified using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (the National Health Service data research service) and invited to participate by their general practitioner (GP). An anonymised self-administered questionnaire was developed using the Health Belief Model as a theoretical framework, to collect data on demographic and socio-economic characteristics, health status, knowledge, influences, experiences and attitudes to shingles and the shingles vaccine. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with vaccination. Physicians' views concerning perceived barriers to vaccination were also assessed.ResultsOf the 2,530 questionnaires distributed, 536 were returned (21.2%) from 69 general practices throughout the UK. The majority of responders were female (58%), lived in care homes (56%) and had completed secondary or higher education (88%). There were no differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated responders. Being offered the shingles vaccine by a GP/nurse (odds ratio (OR) = 2.3), and self-efficacy (OR = 1.2) were associated with being vaccinated (p<0.05). In contrast, previous shingles history (OR = 0.4), perceived barriers to vaccination (OR = 0.7) and perceived control of the disease (OR = 0.7) were associated with not being vaccinated against shingles (p<0.05). Less than half (44.0%) of GPs were aware of the local communication campaigns regarding shingles and the shingles vaccine.ConclusionsSocio-psychological factors largely influence shingles vaccination acceptance in this study. The results add to existing evidence that healthcare providers (HCPs) have a pivotal role against vaccine hesitancy. Campaigns focusing on GPs and accessible information offered to eligible members of the public can further enhance shingles vaccine uptake.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic continues to adversely affect the U.S., which leads globally in total cases and deaths. As COVID-19 vaccines are under development, public health officials and policymakers need to create strategic vaccine-acceptance messaging to effectively control the pandemic and prevent thousands of additional deaths.MethodsUsing an online platform, we surveyed the U.S. adult population in May 2020 to understand risk perceptions about the COVID-19 pandemic, acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine, and trust in sources of information. These factors were compared across basic demographics.FindingsOf the 672 participants surveyed, 450 (67%) said they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine if it is recommended for them. Males (72%) compared to females, older adults (≥55 years; 78%) compared to younger adults, Asians (81%) compared to other racial and ethnic groups, and college and/or graduate degree holders (75%) compared to people with less than a college degree were more likely to accept the vaccine. When comparing reported influenza vaccine uptake to reported acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine: 1) participants who did not complete high school had a very low influenza vaccine uptake (10%), while 60% of the same group said they would accept the COVID-19 vaccine; 2) unemployed participants reported lower influenza uptake and lower COVID-19 vaccine acceptance when compared to those employed or retired; and, 3) Black Americans reported lower influenza vaccine uptake and lower COVID-19 vaccine acceptance than all other racial groups reported in our study. Lastly, we identified geographic differences with Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) regions 2 (New York) and 5 (Chicago) reporting less than 50 percent COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.InterpretationAlthough our study found a 67% acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine, there were noticeable demographic and geographical disparities in vaccine acceptance. Before a COVID-19 vaccine is introduced to the U.S., public health officials and policymakers must prioritize effective COVID-19 vaccine-acceptance messaging for all Americans, especially those who are most vulnerable.

Dataset Information

Sociocultural determinants of anticipated oral cholera vaccine acceptance in three African settings: a meta-analytic approach.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets