Evaluating socioeconomic inequalities in influenza vaccine uptake during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cohort study in Greater Manchester, England
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Watkinson R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10522043 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccine uptake is lower amongst most minority ethnic groups compared to the White British group in England, despite higher COVID-19 mortality rates. Here, we add to existing evidence by estimating inequalities for 16 minority ethnic groups, examining ethnic inequalities within population subgroups, and comparing the magnitudes of ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake to those for routine seasonal influenza vaccine uptake.Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Greater Manchester Care Record, which contains de-identified electronic health record data for the population of Greater Manchester, England. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate ethnic inequalities in time to COVID-19 vaccination amongst people eligible for vaccination on health or age (50+ years) criteria between 1 December 2020 and 18 April 2021 (138 days of follow-up). We included vaccination with any approved COVID-19 vaccine, and analysed first-dose vaccination only. We compared inequalities between COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake adjusting by age group and clinical risk, and used subgroup analysis to identify populations where inequalities were widest. The majority of individuals (871,231; 79.24%) were White British. The largest minority ethnic groups were Pakistani (50,268; 4.75%), 'other White background' (43,195; 3.93%), 'other ethnic group' (34,568; 3.14%), and Black African (18,802; 1.71%). In total, 83.64% (919,636/1,099,503) of eligible individuals received a COVID-19 vaccine. Uptake was lower compared to the White British group for 15 of 16 minority ethnic groups, with particularly wide inequalities amongst the groups 'other Black background' (hazard ratio [HR] 0.42, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.44), Black African (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.44), Arab (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.48), and Black Caribbean (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.45). In total, 55.71% (419,314/752,715) of eligible individuals took up influenza vaccination. Compared to the White British group, inequalities in influenza vaccine uptake were widest amongst the groups 'White and Black Caribbean' (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.68) and 'White and Black African' (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.72). In contrast, uptake was slightly higher than the White British group amongst the groups 'other ethnic group' (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.12) and Bangladeshi (HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.11). Overall, ethnic inequalities in vaccine uptake were wider for COVID-19 than influenza vaccination for 15 of 16 minority ethnic groups. COVID-19 vaccine uptake inequalities also existed amongst individuals who previously took up influenza vaccination. Ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake were concentrated amongst older and extremely clinically vulnerable adults, and the most income-deprived. A limitation of this study is the focus on uptake of the first dose of COVID-19 vaccination, rather than full COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsEthnic inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake exceeded those for influenza vaccine uptake, existed amongst those recently vaccinated against influenza, and were widest amongst those with greatest COVID-19 risk. This suggests the COVID-19 vaccination programme has created additional and different inequalities beyond pre-existing health inequalities. We suggest that further research and policy action is needed to understand and remove barriers to vaccine uptake, and to build trust and confidence amongst minority ethnic communities.
| S-EPMC8893324 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This global umbrella review aimed to synthesise evidence of socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of routine vaccinations and identify the mechanisms that may contribute to the association. To our knowledge, no attempt has been made to synthesise the global body of systematic reviews across a variety of vaccines, geographical locations, and measures of SES. The inclusion criteria were as follows: studies assessing vaccination uptake according to education, income, occupation/employment, and/or area-level deprivation; any country or universally recommended routine vaccination (according to the WHO); qualitative or quantitative reviews, published 2011-present. The searches were performed in eight databases. The screening process followed PRISMA-E guidelines, each stage was performed by one reviewer, and a 10% sample checked by a second for consistency. Included reviews underwent data extraction, quality appraisal (AMSTAR-2), and narrative synthesis according to country-context. After deduplication, 9,163 reports underwent title and abstract screening, leaving 119 full texts to be assessed for eligibility. Overall, 26 studies were included in the umbrella review. Evidence for lower uptake amongst disadvantaged SES individuals was found in all 26 reviews. However, 17 reviews showed mixed results, as inverse associations were also identified (lower uptake for advantaged SES, and/or higher uptake for disadvantaged SES). Those that explored high-income countries had a greater prevalence of mixed findings than those focusing on low/middle-income countries. The two most frequently cited mechanisms were vaccination knowledge, and confidence in vaccination or vaccination providers. These mechanisms were often understood by review authors as varying by level of education. We find socioeconomic differences in routine vaccination uptake, but the association did not always follow a gradient. Whilst education may be associated with uptake globally, our study indicates that its role varies by country-context. A limitation is the overlap of some primary studies across the included systematic reviews.
| S-EPMC10718431 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The effectiveness of immunization is widely accepted: it can successfully improve health outcomes by reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with vaccine-preventable diseases. In the era of pandemics, there is a pressing need to identify and understand the factors associated with vaccine uptake amongst different socioeconomic groups. The knowledge generated from research in this area can be used to inform effective interventions aimed at increasing uptake. This umbrella systematic review aims to determine whether there is an association between socioeconomic inequalities and rate of vaccine uptake globally. Specifically, the study aims to determine whether an individual's socioeconomic status, level of education, occupation, (un)-employment, or place of residence affects the uptake rate of routine vaccines. The following databases will be searched from 2011 to the present day: Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane CENTRAL, Science Citation Index (Web of Science), DARE, SCOPUS (Elsevier), and ASSIA (ProQuest). Systematic reviews will be either included or excluded based on a priori established eligibility criteria. The relevant data will then be extracted, quality appraised, and narratively synthesised. The synthesis will be guided by the theoretical framework developed for this review. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Equity extension (PRISMA-E) guidance will be followed. This protocol has been registered on PROSPERO, ID: CRD42022334223.
| S-EPMC9517548 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite the rigorous investigation of the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy and refusal during the COVID-19 pandemic, the socioeconomic determinants of this phenomenon remain poorly investigated on a global scale. Following proportional quota sampling, we conducted a population-based cross-sectional study. We recruited participants on-site and online from different settings, regions, and socioeconomic strata in two Eastern Mediterranean populations, Greece and Cyprus. Our approach provided a nationwide sample (n = 576) approaching the adult population structure of the two countries, with a slight underrepresentation of men and older people. Our results indicate clear socioeconomic differences in vaccine hesitancy and vaccination coverage, consistent with wider social inequalities in health. In particular, we reveal a clear socioeconomic gradient characterized by lower vaccine hesitancy and higher vaccination coverage, with increasing educational attainment and income. Additionally, participants residing in semi-urban areas show higher vaccine hesitancy and have lower vaccination coverage than those residing in urban and rural areas. Our results could inform Public Health approaches aiming to tackle the alarming phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy by enabling the targeting of population groups who are particularly vaccine-hesitant, rendering such approaches more targeted and effective while at the same time reducing inequalities in the control and prevention of infectious diseases.
| S-EPMC10459981 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveProviding the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is effective to eliminate the disparity in HPV-related cancers. It is unknown regarding inequality in the distribution of HPV vaccination in China since the vaccine was licensed and approved for use in 2016. This study aimed to examine socioeconomic inequalities in HPV-related knowledge and vaccination and identified factors associated with such inequalities.MethodsSelf-administered questionnaires measuring HPV-related knowledge and vaccine uptake were completed by 1,306 women through online survey platform. HPV knowledge was assessed using a 12-item question stem that covered the hazards of HPV infection, HPV vaccine dosage, benefits, and protection. Cluster analysis by combining monthly household income, educational level, and employment status was used to identify socioeconomic status (SES) class. The concentration index (CI) was employed as a measure of socioeconomic inequalities in HPV-related knowledge and vaccination. Linear regression and logistic regression were established to decompose the contributions of associated factors to the observed inequalities.ResultsThe CI for HPV-related knowledge and vaccine uptake was 0.0442 and 0.1485, respectively, indicating the higher knowledge and vaccination rate were concentrated in groups with high SES. Education and household income made the largest contribution to these inequalities. Age, residency and cervical cancer screening were also important contributors of observed inequalities.ConclusionSocioeconomic inequalities in HPV-related knowledge and vaccination uptake are evident in China. Interventions to diffuse HPV-related information for disadvantaged groups are helpful to reduce these inequalities. Providing low or no-cost HPV vaccination and ensuring accessibility of vaccines in rural areas are also considered to be beneficial.
| S-EPMC11236539 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSocioeconomic status is a key predictor of lifetime health: poorer people can expect to live shorter lives with lower average health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) than richer people. In this study, we aimed to improve understanding of the socioeconomic gradient in HRQoL by exploring how inequalities in different dimensions of HRQoL differ by age.MethodsData were derived from the Health Survey for England for 2017 and 2018 (14,412 participants). HRQoL was measured using the EQ-5D-5L instrument. We estimated mean EQ-5D utility scores and reported problems on five HRQoL dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) for ages 16 to 90+ and stratified by neighbourhood deprivation quintiles. Relative and absolute measures of inequality were assessed.ResultsMean EQ-5D utility scores declined with age and followed a socioeconomic gradient, with the lowest scores in the most deprived areas. Gaps between the most and least deprived quintiles emerged around the age of 35, reached their greatest extent at age 60 to 64 (relative HRQoL of most deprived compared to least deprived quintile: females = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.68-0.85); males = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69-0.87)) before closing again in older age groups. Gaps were apparent for all five EQ-5D dimensions but were greatest for mobility and self-care.ConclusionThere are stark socioeconomic inequalities in all dimensions of HRQoL in England. These inequalities start to develop from early adulthood and increase with age but reduce again around retirement age.
| S-EPMC9347153 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEthnic inequalities in oral health among British adults remain largely unexplored. This study explored the role of socioeconomic position (SEP) in explaining ethnic inequalities in oral health; and the consistency of socioeconomic inequalities in oral health across ethnic groups.MethodsData from 45,599 adults, aged 16 years and over, who participated in the Health Survey for England were pooled across 5 years. The seven ethnic groups included were White British, Irish, Black Caribbean, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Chinese. Edentulousness and toothache were the outcome measures. A composite measure of SEP was developed based on education, social class, income and economic activity using confirmatory factor analysis. Ethnic inequalities in oral health were assessed in logistic regression adjusting for sex, age, survey year and SEP.ResultsIndian (OR: 0.55, 95%CI: 0.40-0.76), Pakistani (0.56, 0.38-0.83), Bangladeshi (0.35, 0.23-0.52) and Chinese (0.41, 0.25-0.66) were less likely to be edentulous than White British after controlling for SEP. Irish (1.22, 1.06-1.39) and Caribbean (1.37, 1.19-1.58) were more likely and Bangladeshi (0.83, 0.69-0.99) were less likely to have toothache than White British after controlling for SEP. Socioeconomic inequalities in edentulousness were consistently found across almost all ethnic groups while socioeconomic inequalities in toothache were found among White British and Irish only.ConclusionThis study shows that the role of SEP in explaining ethnic inequalities in oral health depended on the outcome being investigated. Socioeconomic inequalities in oral health among minority ethnic groups did not consistently reflect the patterns found in White British.
| S-EPMC6525386 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSocioeconomic inequalities in survival were observed for many cancers in England during 1981-1999. The NHS Cancer Plan (2000) aimed to improve survival and reduce these inequalities. This study examines trends in the deprivation gap in cancer survival after implementation of the Plan.Materials and methodWe examined relative survival among adults diagnosed with 1 of 21 common cancers in England during 1996-2006, followed up to 31 December 2007. Three periods were defined: 1996-2000 (before the Cancer Plan), 2001-2003 (initialisation) and 2004-2006 (implementation). We estimated the difference in survival between the most deprived and most affluent groups (deprivation gap) at 1 and 3 years after diagnosis, and the change in the deprivation gap both within and between these periods.ResultsSurvival improved for most cancers, but inequalities in survival were still wide for many cancers in 2006. Only the deprivation gap in 1-year survival narrowed slightly over time. A majority of the socioeconomic disparities in survival occurred soon after a cancer diagnosis, regardless of the cancer prognosis.ConclusionThe recently observed reduction in the deprivation gap was minor and limited to 1-year survival, suggesting that, so far, the Cancer Plan has little effect on those inequalities. Our findings highlight that earlier diagnosis and rapid access to optimal treatment should be ensured for all socioeconomic groups.
| S-EPMC2939774 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: In July, 2009, French health authorities, like those in many other countries, decided to embark on a mass vaccination campaign against the pandemic A(H1N1) influenza. Private general practitioners (GPs) were not involved in this campaign. We studied GPs' pandemic vaccine (pvaccine) uptake, quantified the relative contribution of its potential explanatory factors and studied whether their own vaccination choice was correlated with their recommendations to patients about pvaccination. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In this cross-sectional telephone survey, professional investigators interviewed an existing panel of randomly selected private GPs (N = 1431; response rate at inclusion in the panel: 36.8%; participation rate in the survey: 100%). The main outcome variable was GPs' own pvaccine uptake. We used an averaging multi-model approach to quantify the relative contribution of factors associated with their vaccination. The pvaccine uptake rate was 61% (95%CI = 58.3-63.3). Four independent factors contributed the most to this rate (partial Nagelkerke's R(2)): history of previous vaccination against seasonal influenza (14.5%), perception of risks and efficacy of the pvaccine (10.8%), opinions regarding the organization of the vaccination campaign (7.1%), and perception of the pandemic's severity (5.2%). Overall, 71.3% (95%CI = 69.0-73.6) of the participants recommended pvaccination to young adults at risk and 40.1% (95%CI = 37.6-42.7) to other young adults. GPs' own pvaccination was strongly predictive of their recommendation to both young adults at risk (OR = 9.6; 95%CI = 7.2-12.6) and those not at risk (OR = 8.5; 95%CI = 6.4-11.4). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: These results suggest that around 60% of French private GPs followed French authorities' recommendations about vaccination of health care professionals against the A(H1N1) influenza. They pinpoint priority levers for improving preparedness for future influenza pandemics. Besides encouraging GPs' own uptake of regular vaccination against seasonal influenza, providing GPs with clear information about the risks and efficacy of any new pvaccine and involving them in the organization of any future vaccine campaign may improve their pvaccine uptake.
| S-EPMC3411730 | biostudies-other
Project description:Vaccines against COVID-19 and influenza can reduce the adverse outcomes caused by infections during pregnancy, but vaccine uptake among pregnant women has been suboptimal. We examined the COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake and disparities in pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic to inform vaccination interventions. We used data from the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre database in England and the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank in Wales. The uptake of at least one dose of vaccine was 40.2% for COVID-19 and 41.8% for influenza among eligible pregnant women. We observed disparities in COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake, with socioeconomically deprived and ethnic minority groups showing lower vaccination rates. The suboptimal uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines, especially in those from socioeconomically deprived backgrounds and Black, mixed or other ethnic groups, underscores the necessity for interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy and enhance acceptance in pregnant women.
| S-EPMC11324884 | biostudies-literature