Dataset Information

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To identify, describe and map the research tools used to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, refusal, acceptance and access in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

Design

Scoping review.

Methods

In March 2022, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Academic Search Premier, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health Source Nursing, Africa Wide and APA PsychInfo for peer-reviewed literature in English related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, refusal, acceptance and access in SSA. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews to guide evidence gathering and as a template to present the evidence retrieval process.

Results

In the studies selected for review (n=72), several measurement tools were used to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptance and refusal. These measurements were willingness and intent to vaccinate from the perspectives of the general population, special population groups such as mothers, students and staff in academic institutions and healthcare workers and uptake as a proxy for measuring assumed COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Measurements of access to COVID-19 vaccination were cost and affordability, convenience, distance and time to travel or time waiting for a vaccine and (dis)comfort. Although all studies measured COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptance and refusal, relatively few studies (n=16, 22.2%) included explicit measurements of access to COVID-19 vaccination.

Conclusions

Based on the gaps identified in the scoping review, we propose that future research on determinants of COVID-19 vaccination in SSA should further prioritise the inclusion of access-related variables. We recommend the development and use of standardised research tools that can operationalise, measure and disentangle the complex determinants of vaccine uptake in future studies throughout SSA and other low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings.

SUBMITTER: Deml MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9676416 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.

Deml Michael J MJ Githaiga Jennifer Nyawira JN

BMJ open 20221118 11

<h4>Objective</h4>To identify, describe and map the research tools used to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, refusal, acceptance and access in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).<h4>Design</h4>Scoping review.<h4>Methods</h4>In March 2022, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Academic Search Premier, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health Source Nursing, Africa Wide and APA PsychInfo for peer-reviewed literature in English related to COVID-19 vaccine he ...[more]

PMID: 36400736

Similar Datasets

Project description:COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adolescents poses a challenge to the global effort to control the pandemic. This multi-country survey aimed to assess the prevalence and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa between July and December 2021. The survey was conducted using computer-assisted telephone interviewing among adolescents in five sub-Saharan African countries, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria, and Tanzania. A rural area and an urban area were included in each country (except Ghana, which only had a rural area), with approximately 300 adolescents in each area and 2662 in total. Sociodemographic characteristics and perceptions and attitudes on COVID-19 vaccines were measured. Vaccine hesitancy was defined as definitely not getting vaccinated or being undecided on whether to get vaccinated if a COVID-19 vaccine were available. Log-binomial models were used to calculate the adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between potential determinants and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The percentage of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was 14% in rural Kersa, 23% in rural Ibadan, 31% in rural Nouna, 32% in urban Ouagadougou, 37% in urban Addis Ababa, 48% in rural Kintampo, 65% in urban Lagos, 76% in urban Dar es Salaam, and 88% in rural Dodoma. Perceived low necessity, concerns about vaccine safety, and concerns about vaccine effectiveness were the leading reasons for hesitancy. Healthcare workers, parents or family members, and schoolteachers had the greatest impacts on vaccine willingness. Perceived lack of safety (aPR: 3.52; 95% CI: 3.00, 4.13) and lack of effectiveness (aPR: 3.46; 95% CI: 2.97, 4.03) were associated with greater vaccine hesitancy. The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adolescents is alarmingly high across the five sub-Saharan African countries, especially in Tanzania. COVID-19 vaccination campaigns among sub-Saharan African adolescents should address their concerns and misconceptions about vaccine safety and effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccination efforts are lagging in Sub-Saharan Africa, as just over 20 percent of the population has been fully vaccinated. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is considered important as a prerequisite for widespread vaccine take-up. Here, we study the dynamics of vaccine acceptance, its correlates, and reasons for hesitancy over time, drawing on two years of panel survey data.MethodsIn this observational study, we use multiple rounds of data from national High Frequency Phone Surveys (HFPS) in five countries in East and West Africa (Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Malawi, Nigeria, and Uganda), covering a period between 2020 and 2022. The surveys are cross-country comparable and draw their samples from nationally representative sampling frames. Based on this data source, the study presents population-weighted means and performs multivariate regression analysis.ResultsCOVID-19 vaccine acceptance was high throughout the study period (68% to 98%). However, acceptance levels were lower in 2022 than in 2020 in three countries (Burkina Faso, Malawi, Nigeria), and higher in one country (Uganda). Moreover, individuals are observed to change their stated vaccine attitudes between survey rounds, to a limited extent in some countries (Ethiopia) and more frequently in others (Burkina Faso, Malawi, Nigeria, Uganda). Vaccine hesitancy is higher in richer households, and those residing in urban areas; among women and those better educated. Hesitancy is lower in larger households and among heads of the household. The main reasons for hesitancy are concerns about side effects of the vaccine, its safety and efficacy, as well as assessments of COVID-19 risk, though these reasons fluctuate over time.ConclusionsReported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance levels remain far above vaccination rates in the study countries, suggesting that vaccine hesitancy is not the primary obstacle to reaching greater vaccine coverage, which may instead be related to access and delivery barriers as well as supply shortages. Nevertheless, vaccine attitudes appear malleable so that continued efforts are needed to retain high levels of vaccine acceptance.

Project description:BackgroundVaccination remains the most powerful weapon against the emergence of new variants of coronavirus (COVID-19). However, false information about COVID-19 vaccines through various platforms including social media remains a major threat to global public health. This study examined the impact of information sources on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).MethodsA validated web-based cross-sectional study was conducted from 14 March to 16 May 2021, and was administered in both French and English to 2572 participants aged 18 years and over. Data on sociodemographic characteristics, medical and vaccination history, and the information sources (mainstream media and social media) used by the participants during the pandemic were obtained. There were three main outcomes: The vaccinated group were those who responded in the affirmation (Yes) to the question of whether they have been vaccinated against COVID-19. Those who responded 'not sure' or 'no' to the question were then asked if they were willing to be vaccinated when the vaccine became available in their home countries. The responses to this follow-up question were used to derive the second and third outcome variables of 'vaccine hesitancy' and 'vaccine resistance', respectively. A series of logistic regression analyses were used to examine the impact of information sources on the three main outcomes.ResultsThe prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the participants was lowest among newspaper readers (42%) and highest among TV (72%) and social media users (73%). The prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine-resistance was also lowest among newspaper readers (37%) but highest among social media users (87%). Multivariate analyses revealed that compared to those who did not use these information sources, SSA participants who relied on the radio (aOR 0.83, 95%CI = 0.70, 0.99), TV (aOR 0.80, 95%CI = 0.65, 0.97) and social media (aOR 0.79, 95%CI = 0.65, 0.97) for information during the pandemic were less likely to be hesitant towards taking the vaccines. However, social media users (aOR 2.13, 95%CI = 1.62, 2.80), those who watched TV (aOR 1.40, 95%CI =1.08, 1.80), relied on healthcare workers (HCWs: aOR 1.32, 95%CI = 1.07, 1.63) and families/friends (aOR 1.31, 95%CI = 1.06, 1.61) for COVID-19 related information during the pandemic were more likely to resist taking the COVID vaccines in this study. Participants who relied on the newspaper for information during the pandemic were less likely to resist the vaccines (aOR 0.77, 95%CI = 0.62, 0.95) compared to non-readers of a newspaper.ConclusionWe found that all six information sources except radio were strong predictors of the resistance towards COVID-19 vaccination. Further research on how these channels can be used to improve the availability of reliable healthcare information is needed. Investments in these resources will protect people and empower them to make appropriate choices about their health.

Project description:BackgroundDiagnostics are critical for preventing COVID-19 transmission, enabling disease management and engagement with care. However, COVID-19 testing uptake remained low in low- and middle- income countries in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) during the recent pandemic, due to issues of supply, access and acceptability. Early studies conducted outside of the region provide insight into uptake of COVID-19 testing, however there has been no systematic research within the region. The aim of this scoping review is to investigate factors influencing uptake of COVID-19 testing in different settings across SSA.Materials and methodsInclusion criteria was any study employing qualitative or mixed methodologies, addressing uptake of COVID-19 testing conducted in SSA. MEDLINE, PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Africa-Wide Information were searched. Thematic content analysis was conducted across all included articles until saturation was attained.ResultsIn total 2994 articles were identified and fourteen reviewed. Structural, social, epidemiological, informational, and political elements affected how the public interacted with COVID-19 testing. Coverage was limited by insufficient diagnostic capabilities caused by a shortage of laboratory resources and trained personnel. False information spread through social media led to testing misperceptions and apprehension. Testing hesitancy was ascribed to fear of restrictive measures and the possibility of social harms if positive. Facility-based testing was physically inaccessible and perceived as lacking privacy, whereas self-testing distributed by the community removed lengthy distances and prevented stigma. Perceptions that COVID-19 was not severe and low numbers of confirmed cases in comparison to other settings undermined public urgency for testing. Low testing frequency led to low-rate assumptions, which in turn generated denial and othering narratives. Politicians' acceptance or denial of COVID-19 affected the mobilization of the health system, and their model actions-such as testing openly-promoted public confidence and involvement in interventions.ConclusionsThis review emphasizes the necessity of strong political commitments to enhancing health systems for future pandemic preparedness. Response plans should consider contextual elements that affect how people react to interventions and perceive health emergencies. Community-driven self-testing distribution could enhance the uptake of diagnostics through addressing socio-economic constraints impacting facility-delivered testing.

Project description:The African continent has some of the world's lowest COVID-19 vaccination rates. While the limited availability of vaccines is a contributing factor, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare providers (HCP) is another factor that could adversely affect efforts to control infections on the continent. We sought to understand the extent of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCP, and its contributing factors in Africa. We evaluated COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among 1,499 HCP enrolled in a cross-sectional study conducted as a telephone survey in Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Ghana between July to December of 2021. We defined COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCP as self-reported responses of definitely not, maybe, unsure, or undecided on whether to get the COVID-19 vaccine, compared to definitely getting the vaccine. We used log-binomial or modified Poisson regression models to evaluate factors influencing vaccine hesitancy among HCP. Approximately 65.6% of the HCP interviewed were nurses and the mean age (±SD) of participants was 35.8 (±9.7) years. At least 67% of the HCP reported being vaccinated. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy affected 45.7% of the HCP in Burkina Faso, 25.7% in Tanzania, 9.8% in Ethiopia, 9% in Ghana and 8.1% in Nigeria. Among unvaccinated HCP reasons for low vaccine uptake included concern about vaccine effectiveness, side effects, and fear of receiving experimental and unsafe vaccines. HCP reporting that COVID-19 vaccines are very effective (RR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.08, 0.55), and older HCP (45 or older vs.20-29 years, RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.95) were less likely to be vaccine-hesitant. Nurses were more likely to be vaccine-hesitant (RR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.89) than doctors. Information asymmetry among HCP, beliefs about vaccine effectiveness, and the endorsement of vaccines by public health institutions may be important. Efforts to address hesitancy should consider information and knowledge gaps among different cadres of HCP alongside efforts to increase vaccine supply.

Project description:IntroductionCervical cancer is the most diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related death in 36 low- and middle-income countries, with the majority located in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), South America and Southeastern Asia. The highest regional incidence and mortality occur in SSA. Despite the high efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in preventing cervical cancer, its uptake remains unacceptably low in SSA. This scoping review aims to integrate evidence from SSA on social determinants of HPV vaccine uptake with complementary evidence on interventions to promote its uptake.Methods and analysisThe proposed review will be conducted following the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute Scoping Review Methodology Group. Additionally, a sequential explanatory design will guide the integration of determinant evidence with intervention evidence. This scoping review will be reported per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. Six databases, PubMed/MEDLINE, LIVIVO, Google Scholar, BASE (Grey Literature), preprint databases (eg, OSF and medRxiv) and African Journals Online will be searched, with results limited to English language publications and those published from 2006 to 2024. Two forms will be used for data extraction from determinant and intervention studies by two independent reviewers. A narrative summary of evidence from both determinant and intervention studies will be conducted. Furthermore, a multilevel analysis will be conducted to explore the intersections of determinants across socioecological levels of health behaviour. A further integrative cross-study analysis of results from determinant and intervention studies will be conducted, where the determinant evidence will be used to interrogate the intervention evidence. Data will be presented in tables and matrices.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval will be required for this study because it will be based on data collected from publicly available records. The review results will be disseminated widely through a peer-reviewed publication and other forums such as workshops, conferences and meetings with local health administrators, policymakers and other wider stakeholder engagements.

Project description:BackgroundNovel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy is a barrier to achieving herd immunity, and thus, a prominent public health concern. This study aimed to identify the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy based on the World Health Organization's '3Cs' model (i.e., confidence, complacency, and convenience) in the United States (U.S.) and Canada.MethodsData from 7678 adults ages 18 or older were collected from the four most populous U.S. States, specifically New York, California, Florida, and Texas, and from English-speaking Canada at three timepoints, in May and July 2020, and March 2021 using a web-based survey (www.covid19-database.com). Sociodemographic information was collected, and comprehensive psychological assessments were administered. Univariate analyses were performed to identify the individual determinants of vaccine hesitancy, which were categorized as: 1) vaccine confidence, 2) vaccine complacency, 3) sociodemographic, and 4) other psychological factors. A series of models were computed using these categorizations.ResultsMistrust of vaccine benefit (β(SE) = 0.67(0.01), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.26) and lower perceived seriousness of COVID-19 (β(SE) = 0.68(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.12) were the principal determinants of vaccine hesitancy. Right-wing political affiliation (β(SE) = 0.32(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03), higher risk propensity (β(SE) = 0.24(0.02), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03), and less negative mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic (β(SE) = 0.20(0.01), p<0.001, partial η2 = 0.03) were the main sociodemographic and psychological determinants. Other sociodemographic determinants included younger age, women, race, and employment status. Lack of vaccine confidence and complacency explained 38% and 21% of the variance in vaccine hesitancy, respectively; whereas, sociodemographic and psychological determinants explained 13% and 11% of the variance in vaccine hesitancy, respectively.DiscussionTargeted and tailored public health interventions that enhance the public's confidence in vaccines and emphasize the risk and seriousness of COVID-19 may address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Efforts directed toward specific marginalized and underserved groups may be required to promote vaccine confidence.

Dataset Information

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.

Objective

Design

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets