Dataset Information

Internal and external factors affecting vaccination coverage: Modeling the interactions between vaccine hesitancy, accessibility, and mandates.

ABSTRACT: Society, culture, and individual motivations affect human decisions regarding their health behaviors and preventative care, and health-related perceptions and behaviors can change at the population level as cultures evolve. An increase in vaccine hesitancy, an individual mindset informed within a cultural context, has resulted in a decrease in vaccination coverage and an increase in vaccine-preventable disease (VPD) outbreaks, particularly in developed countries where vaccination rates are generally high. Understanding local vaccination cultures, which evolve through an interaction between beliefs and behaviors and are influenced by the broader cultural landscape, is critical to fostering public health. Vaccine mandates and vaccine inaccessibility are two external factors that interact with individual beliefs to affect vaccine-related behaviors. To better understand the population dynamics of vaccine hesitancy, it is important to study how these external factors could shape a population's vaccination decisions and affect the broader health culture. Using a mathematical model of cultural evolution, we explore the effects of vaccine mandates, vaccine inaccessibility, and varying cultural selection trajectories on a population's level of vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior. We show that vaccine mandates can lead to a phenomenon in which high vaccine hesitancy co-occurs with high vaccination coverage, and that high vaccine confidence can be maintained even in areas where access to vaccines is limited.

SUBMITTER: Anderson KM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10550134 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Internal and external factors affecting vaccination coverage: Modeling the interactions between vaccine hesitancy, accessibility, and mandates.

Anderson Kerri-Ann M KM Creanza Nicole N

PLOS global public health 20231004 10

Society, culture, and individual motivations affect human decisions regarding their health behaviors and preventative care, and health-related perceptions and behaviors can change at the population level as cultures evolve. An increase in vaccine hesitancy, an individual mindset informed within a cultural context, has resulted in a decrease in vaccination coverage and an increase in vaccine-preventable disease (VPD) outbreaks, particularly in developed countries where vaccination rates are gener ...[more]

PMID: 37792691

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMandated vaccination for school attendance is a growing strategy internationally. Our aim was to investigate the effects of implementing school vaccination mandates on pediatric population vaccine coverage.MethodsIn this systematic review, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) and the PAIS Index for empirical studies of implementation of a primary or secondary school vaccination requirement published in any language through March 2019 with vaccination rates as an outcome. We sought additional studies by consulting experts, reference lists and grey literature sources. Included studies were too heterogeneous for meta-analysis; thus, we extracted data using a standardized rubric and synthesized the results narratively.ResultsAmong the 4232 citations obtained, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria. Eighteen were conducted with US data, 1 with Italian data, and 1 with Australian data. Four studies examined school-entry mandates, and 16 examined adolescent requirements. An uncontrolled before-after design was used in 10 studies, cross-sectional analysis in 7, a retrospective cohort design in 2, and a prospective cohort in 1. In many cases, increased documentation of coverage followed the addition of new requirements. The exception to this was human papillomavirus vaccination mandates, which were highly controversial, in the United States. The studies contained notable risks of bias, with cointerventions rarely acknowledged or accounted for, and subpopulations often excluded. A substantial risk of ecological fallacy existed for most studies.InterpretationVaccination mandates appear largely associated with increased vaccination coverage, but it is not possible to attribute causality to the mandate in most studies. High-quality implementation research that uses whole-population coverage data and takes into consideration cointerventions, confounders, clustering of unvaccinated populations and context is required.

Project description:ImportanceSeveral states implemented COVID-19 vaccine mandates for nursing home employees, which may have improved vaccine coverage but may have had the unintended consequence of staff departures.ObjectiveTo assess whether state vaccine mandates for US nursing home employees are associated with staff vaccination rates and reported staff shortages.Design setting and participantsThis cohort study performed event study analyses using National Healthcare Safety Network data from June 6, 2021, through November 14, 2021. Changes in weekly staff vaccination rates and reported staffing shortages were evaluated for nursing homes in states with mandates after the mandate announcement compared with changes in facilities in nonmandate states. An interaction between the mandates and county political leaning was considered. Data analysis was performed from February to March 2022.ExposuresWeeks after announcement of a state's COVID-19 vaccine mandate.Main outcomes and measuresWeekly percentage of all health care staff at a nursing home who received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccine dose, and a weekly indicator of whether a nursing home reported a staffing shortage.ResultsAmong 38 study-eligible states, 26 had no COVID-19 vaccine mandate for nursing home employees, 4 had a mandate with a test-out option, and 8 had a mandate with no test-out option. Ten weeks or more after mandate announcement, nursing homes in states with a mandate and no test-out option experienced a 6.9 percentage point (pp) increase in staff vaccination coverage (95% CI, -0.1 to 13.9); nursing homes in mandate states with a test-out option experienced a 3.1 pp increase (95% CI, 0.5 to 5.7) compared with facilities in nonmandate states. No significant increases were detected in the frequency of reported staffing shortages after a mandate announcement in mandate states with or without test-out options. Increases in vaccination rates in states with mandates were larger in Republican-leaning counties (14.3 pp if no test-out option; 4.3 pp with option), and there was no evidence of increased staffing shortages.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this cohort study suggest that state-level vaccine mandates were associated with increased staff vaccination coverage without increases in reported staffing shortages. Vaccination increases were largest when mandates had no test-out option and were also larger in Republican-leaning counties, which had lower mean baseline vaccination rates. These findings support the use of state mandates for booster doses for nursing home employees because they may improve vaccine coverage, even in areas with greater vaccine hesitancy.

Project description:Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) causes substantial financial losses in pig farms and economic losses to societies worldwide. Vaccination against PRRS virus (PRRSV) is a common intervention in affected farms. The aim of this study was to assess the economic impact and profitability of potential new PRRS vaccines with improved efficacy at animal, herd, and national level. Two vaccination strategies were modeled; (i) mass vaccination of sows only (MS) and (ii) mass vaccination of sows and vaccination of piglets (MSP), comprising different scenarios of vaccine effectiveness, vaccine price, and vaccination coverage. A farrow-to-finish farm with 1,000 working sows from a pig-dense region in Germany served as an example farm. Financial benefits were obtained from gross margin analyses and were defined as difference in gross margin between a PRRSV-infected farm without vaccination (baseline) and with vaccination (intervention). Financial benefits were highest if both sows and piglets (MSP) were vaccinated. In these scenarios, median annual net benefits per working sow ranged from €170 to 340. If sows only were vaccinated (MS), estimated benefits attributable to vaccination were between €148 and 270. Decisive variables for the estimation of national level benefits were the number of farmers switching from existing to a better protecting vaccine, the number of previously non-vaccinating herds adopting the new vaccine, and the effectiveness of the new vaccine relative to those already available. Benefits were greatest when the new vaccine was adopted by previously non-vaccinating herds. The analyses showed that vaccination against PRRS was beneficial for all modeled scenarios. The magnitude of benefits derived from vaccination was more susceptible to changes in vaccination effectiveness than to vaccine price changes. This study provides evidence to support future vaccine development. The estimates indicate that the introduction of more efficient vaccines might lead to substantial financial benefits, is of socio-economic importance and that new vaccines might significantly contribute to the reduction of disease burden.

Project description:In Austria, data on vaccine hesitancy is scarce. Available studies suggest around 1-11% of parents refuse vaccination, while many more are hesitant and consider refraining from some but not all of the recommended vaccinations. However, the key drivers for vaccine hesitancy in Austria are largely unknown. To learn more about vaccination coverage, attitude towards and knowledge around immunization as well as views on mandatory vaccination, we conducted a survey in a rural Austrian lay population including adults and children. Two paper-based questionnaires, one for adults 16 years or older and one for children aged 6-15 years, were developed, then sent to all houses of a rural community in Austria as well as handed out at the local primary and middle school, respectively. Self-reported coverage rates of children and adults were found to be low. Within the surveyed population 3% of children had never been or do not get vaccinated. More than half (57%) of the survey participants had a positive attitude towards vaccines, 21% were without reserves, 16% were found skeptical and 5% had a generally negative attitude. Knowledge about immunization in general was poor. Younger adults and people with secondary education appear to be most skeptical and negative towards vaccination. Children's attitudes were closely linked to those of their parents. The major concern around vaccination in adults was fear of side effects. In adults, 54.2% support mandatory vaccination for Health Care Workers and 20.7% are against it. 39% of adults and 37% of children wanted more information on vaccination, preferably provided by physicians. Knowledge about disease prevention by vaccination should be improved and children could also benefit from an early age-appropriate vaccine education to strengthen health literacy. Physicians are the most trusted source of health information. Medical doctors should be aware of their very important role in transmitting trusted health information. This should include an up-to-date education in communicable disease prevention and immunization during their whole medical career. Furthermore, the curricula of health-care workers may need to be improved and harmonized concerning prevention and vaccination.

Dataset Information

Internal and external factors affecting vaccination coverage: Modeling the interactions between vaccine hesitancy, accessibility, and mandates.

Publications

Internal and external factors affecting vaccination coverage: Modeling the interactions between vaccine hesitancy, accessibility, and mandates.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets