National strategies for preparedness for future outbreaks of COVID-19 often include timely preparedness with vaccines. Fiscal health modelling (FHM) has recently been brought forward as an additional analysis by defining the public economic impact from a governmental perspective. As governments are the main decision-makers concerning pandemic preparedness, this study aimed to develop an FHM framework for infectious diseases in the Netherlands. Based on the Dutch COVID-19 outbreak of 2020 and 2021 and publicly available data on tax income and gross domestic product (GDP), the fiscal impact of COVID-19 was assessed using two approaches. Approach I: Prospective modelling of future fiscal impact based on publicly available laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases; and Approach II: Retrospective assessment of the extrapolated tax and benefit income and GDP. Approach I estimated the consequences that can be causally linked to the population counts reducing income taxes by EUR 266 million. The total fiscal loss amounted to EUR 164 million over 2 years (excluding pension payments averted). The total losses in terms of tax income (2020 and 2021) and GDP (2020) (Approach II), were estimated at, respectively, EUR 13.58 billion and EUR 96.3 billion. This study analysed different aspects of a communicable disease outbreak and its influence on government public accounts. The choice of the two presented approaches depends on the perspective of the analysis, the time horizon of the analysis and the availability of data. Full article

(1) Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the concerns and beliefs of Olympians and elite athletes toward COVID-19 vaccination. (2) Methods: The study was framed by a quantitative method and was conducted using the PAPI (pen and paper interview) technique among 895 Polish elite athletes representing 34 sports. (3) Results: Three-quarters (76.3%) of the athletes were vaccinated against COVID-19; statistically participants were more likely to be women, and athletes who participated in the Olympic Games. Four in ten (39.2%) were in favor of vaccination. Athletes were mainly concerned that COVID-19 would exclude them from training/competition (19.3%) and could have a long-term impact on their health (17.2%). Athletes who were vaccinated reported much higher confidence in the composition of the vaccine and the doctors who recommended vaccination than unvaccinated athletes. Athletes who competed at the Olympic level were more likely than others to disbelieve that vaccines were produced too quickly and were not well tested. National-level athletes showed the highest degree of distrust in the government regarding COVID-19 vaccination, with one in six respondents distrusting doctors with respect to COVID-19 vaccination. Four in ten respondents said they were in favor of vaccination. (4) Conclusions: Athletes’ attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination were significantly influenced by their environment—especially coaches and relatives. The power of social norms with respect to the decision to vaccinate against COVID-19 was very strong. Therefore, it is essential to build awareness about preventive policies among athletes and their social environment. Full article

Immunization is the best protection against chickenpox, measles and rubella. It is important to identify and immunize susceptible healthcare workers to prevent and control hospital infections. Our aim was to estimate the susceptibility level of healthcare workers at a Teaching Hospital in Rome concerning these diseases and the factors associated to the susceptibility. Methods: a cross sectional study was carried out at the Department of Occupational Medicine of the Umberto I General Hospital of Rome. Participants were recruited during routine occupational health surveillance. As far as inclusion criteria, the following professionals were considered: doctors, nurses, laboratory technicians and other health professionals. Concerning the exclusion criteria, patients with HIV, cancer and diseases of the immune system, and acute illness or fever more than 38.5 °C, were not included in the study. A blood sample was tested for the presence of antibodies against measles, rubella and chicken pox. Results: 1106 healthcare professionals were involved in the study (41.8% nurses, 30.4% doctors, 12.3% laboratory technicians, 15.1% other health professionals): 25 (2.3%), 73 (6.6%) and 35 (3.2%) of these were susceptible to measles, rubella and chicken pox, respectively. The only variable associated with susceptibility of measles was age (p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was evidence of an association between various susceptibilities, particularly between measles and chickenpox (OR: 4.38). Conclusion: this study showed that even if the majority of our healthcare professionals are immunized for MRV, it is necessary not to underestimate the seronegativity of non-immune ones. All health professionals should be vaccinated to ensure safety for patients, especially the weakest. Full article

Previous researchers have established the influence of social norms on vaccine behavior. However, little work has been performed contextualizing individuals’ experience with these social factors and how they operate to persuade individuals’ acceptance or refusal of a vaccine. We aimed to determine the mechanisms of familial and societal pressure or expectations that contribute to COVID-19 vaccine decision-making. We conducted four focus groups and eleven individual interviews (total n = 32) with participants from across the U.S. of different vaccination statuses. We identified three emergent themes: (1) Altruistic reasoning was particularly prevalent among initially hesitant late adopters—the desire to protect loved ones and others constituted a dominant motive, more powerful than protecting oneself. Vaccination was also reckoned as part of a joint effort to return to normal life; hence, it invoked a sense of responsibility or “obligation”; (2) expectation often became pressure; although most vaccinated participants stated that they respected others’ choices, late adopters or unvaccinated participants perceived differently and felt rushed or “forced” into choosing, and many resented being “targeted” or “bullied”; (3) vaccination status became a new label, frequently dividing families, thus producing familial mandates, exclusions, or social stratifications. This caused sadness and feelings of isolation, along with the formation of a camaraderie among the excluded unvaccinated. A vaccine decision builds from the complexities of individuals’ experiences and cultures. The vaccinated were not free of hesitancy nor were the unvaccinated all anti-vaxxers. Vigorous vaccine promotion successfully converted some undecided individuals but also fostered distrust of government; alarmingly, the push to receive the COVID-19 vaccine further triggered doubts about established vaccines. Communication strategies need to be developed and implemented carefully so as not to ostracize the unvaccinated community and strengthen their resistance. Full article

Background: Limited information exists regarding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCWs). Our previous survey analyzed the reasons for HCWs’ decisions to accept vaccination, suggesting that a “one-size fits all” approach may not suffice to increase vaccine uptake. Methods: Based on the vaccination acceptance group (acceptor, hesitant, refuser), we examined differences by sociodemographic factors (race/ethnicity, household income, education) from Likert Scale responses to fourteen influences affecting a decision to be vaccinated using the Kruskal–Wallis test and multinomial logistic regression with mutual adjustment for these sociodemographic factors, age, and sex. Results: Non-Hispanic White vaccine acceptors ranked lower confidence in preventing, withstanding, or treating COVID-19, while Non-Hispanic Blacks more highly regarded the motivation of a religious leader, colleague, or family member. Social media was ranked more influential among Non-Hispanic Asians. Acceptors with lower incomes ranked a job requirement influential; conversely, higher income vaccine hesitant HCWs highly rated this reason. More highly educated acceptors ranked being motivated by colleagues, family, and other HCWs higher. Adjustment weakened some but not all the differences between groups. Conclusions: Sociodemographic factors affect HCWs’ decisions to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Our findings may help develop more focused and tailored strategies to improve vaccination acceptance. Full article

Global health authorities have emphasized the vital role of healthcare professionals (HCPs) as a reliable source of vaccination information for patients in primary care. However, HCPs are concerned whether COVID-19 vaccinations can be used off-label. Hence, the current study was conducted to assess their perspectives towards off-label COVID-19 immunization in children. The study tool, consisting of 40 items, was utilized to evaluate HCPs’ knowledge and attitudes towards the off-label use of the COVID-19 vaccine in children under 12 years of age. To assess the unfavorable attitudes regarding vaccinations, the Vaccination Attitudes Examination Scale was employed. Overall, 477 completed questionnaires were incorporated in the present study, with a response rate of 88.9%. The mean age of the respondents was 38.6 ± 7.5 years; among whom the majority were physicians, n = 209 (43.8%), and pharmacists, n = 112 (23.4%). Approximately 78% of the respondents had a general awareness of off-label vaccination. Around 80% knew the adverse drug reactions associated with the use of COVID-19 vaccines. Females showed more mistrust about vaccine benefits, n = 55 (16.9%), compared to males, n = 21 (13.8%), and concerns about commercial profits of vaccines, n = 59 (18.1%), compared to males, n = 19 (12.5%). By profession, physicians showed statistically significantly lower mistrust, n = 18 (8.6%), and higher concerns about unpredicted effects of vaccines, n = 41 (19.6%). A major portion of the respondents, n = 327 (68.5%), did not consider that HCPs should prescribe/administer off-label COVID-19 vaccination in children. The current findings demonstrated that respondents had an appropriate level of understanding about COVID-19 immunization in children. They showed higher levels of rejection for off-label use of the COVID-19 vaccination. Full article

(1) Background: This study aims to analyse the attitudinal components influencing paediatricians’ self-vaccination. (2) Methods: The national-cross survey was conducted among paediatricians involved in childhood vaccination within the immunisation program. (3) Results: A hypothetical model indicating the influence of cognitive and behavioural factors on influenza vaccination among paediatricians was verified based on a survey of Polish paediatricians. A simple mediation model, based on Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour, reflects a relationship in which knowledge and beliefs about outcomes contribute to whether paediatricians vaccinate against influenza. (4) Conclusions: The presented research shows that the pro-vaccination behaviours of paediatricians are not only influenced by cognitive factors but also the behavioural components of attitudes, which are equally important. The conclusions point to the pivotal role of shaping both knowledge and understanding of the effectiveness of immunisation programmes in building the pro-vaccination attitudes of paediatricians. (5) Practical Implications: This is the first representative study of Polish paediatricians to demonstrate how their attitudes and behaviour are related to self-vaccination. Its conclusions allow policymakers to develop programmes to support effective measures against the spread of infectious diseases through the self-vaccination of medical professionals. Full article

In Italy, the paper package leaflet (PPL) is the official document that is approved by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) for each medicine. PPLs of all medicines, including vaccines, are freely available online by accessing the AIFA website. To investigate people’s attitudes toward possible access to the PPLs of vaccines and the acceptability of switching to an electronic package leaflet (e-leaflet) in the future, we surveyed three target groups (pregnant women, young parents, and older people) in Italy, via an online survey. We collected 321 questionnaires from the cohorts, which comprised 104 pregnant women, 105 young parents, and 112 older people. The results indicate in all target groups that health care professionals (HCPs) do not usually offer the vaccine PPL during the vaccination session: only about 10.7% of respondents receive the PPL without asking for it, with pregnant women receiving it the most frequently. The acceptance rate for switching from a PPL to an e-leaflet is fairly high in all target groups (76.9% in pregnant women, 81.9% in young parents, and 66.1% in the elderly), especially if the option exists to request a paper print, to make sure that people with a low level of digital skills can access the PPL information as well. HCPs have an important role in ensuring access to the PPLs of vaccines. HCPs should be trained to inform their patients about the different options for accessing the PPLs (as well as online access) to increase their patients’ knowledge and satisfaction. Full article

Evidence on the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine shows that it is effective in reducing the burden of HPV-related diseases. For more than 15 years the HPV vaccine has been offered free of charge in Italy to girls from the age of 12. Over time, the free offer of the HPV vaccine has also been extended to boys and to young adults at risk of developing HPV lesions. Despite the HPV vaccine’s effectiveness and availability, vaccination coverage is low in Italy, with a reported value of 46.5% in 2020. Furthermore, in the southern administrative regions, vaccination coverage is even lower than national values, with 25.9% coverage in Sicily. A cross-sectional study was conducted among university and high school students in the Palermo area (Sicily, Italy) in order to identify the determinants of HPV vaccination adherence by using a questionnaire that investigated factors of HPV vaccine practice. The study explored the behavioral attitude by using the Health Belief Model (HBM), and also used the SILS test and the METER test to investigate the level of health literacy (HL). Overall, 3,073 students were enrolled, and less than a third reported they had completed the vaccination schedule (n = 925, 30.1%). Multivariable analysis showed that the factors directly associated with the adherence to HPV vaccination were female sex (OR = 4.43, p < 0.001), high HBM total score (OR = 4.23, p < 0.001), good HL level (OR = 1.26, p = 0.047), parents (OR = 1.78, p = 0.004), general practitioner (OR = 1.88, p = 0.001), and educational material provided by public vaccination services (OR = 1.97, p = 0.001) as HPV vaccine information sources. Further health-promotion programs focused on improving HL and perception of the HPV vaccine’s benefits should be implemented in order to achieve the desirable 95% vaccination coverage. Full article

The COVID-19 vaccine is widely available to adolescents in the U.S.; however, vaccine hesitancy poses a threat to full coverage. The literature shows that perceived risks and the presence or lack of motivators are determinants for vaccination decisions, yet research evidence from minors is scant. This study adopted the Protection Motivation framework to identify differences in these facilitators and compare the influence of internal and external motivators among American adolescents in COVID-19 vaccine uptake. A nationwide online survey analyzed 13–17-year-old teenagers’ COVID-19 beliefs as well as present or potential reasons for accepting the vaccine. Of the 439 participants, 21.18% were not and did not plan to get vaccinated. Another 52.39% had at least one dosage, of which over three-quarters were internally motivated (whereas those unvaccinated were more likely to be externally motivated, X² = 4.117, p = 0.042). In unvaccinated individuals, older adolescents reported slightly more internal motivators than younger adolescents (t = −2.023, p = 0.046). Internal motivation was associated with higher risk perception (r² = 0.06651, p = 0.001), but risk perception had a stronger relationship with vaccination status (r² = 0.1816, p < 0.001), with vaccinated individuals showing higher risk perception than those unvaccinated (mean difference = 0.42 on a scale of 1–4; t = −3.603, p < 0.001); the risk perception difference was even greater between hesitant and non-hesitant participants (mean difference = 0.63; t = −0.892, p < 0.001). The relationship was moderated by perceived knowledge, where the difference in risk perception between vaccination status was only significant for those with low perceived knowledge (f = 10.59, p = 0.001). Increasing awareness of disease risks and stressing internal motivators may be key to improving uptake in young people. Future research could delve deeper into risk perception formation of adolescents and why and how it differs across populations. Full article

Vaccine literacy (VL) mediates the transfer of information and facilitates vaccination acceptance. The aims of this study are to validate the HLVa-IT (Health Literacy Vaccinale degli adulti in Italiano—Vaccine health literacy for adults in Italian language) for the staff of nursing homes (NHs), to measure VL in such a peculiar target group, and to assess its relationship with the sources used to obtain information about vaccines and vaccinations. A survey has been conducted in a sample of Tuscan NHs using an online questionnaire. Eight-hundred and fifty-three questionnaires were analyzed. Two dimensions of the HLVa-IT appeared (functional and interactive/communicative/critical VL). The HLVa-IT interactive/communicative/critical subscale score was slightly higher than the functional subscale, although with no statistical significance. General practitioners (GPs) or other professionals have been reported as the main source of information by most of the respondents (66.1%). The HLVa-IT total score was significantly higher among those who have declared to use official vaccination campaigns (mean score: 3.25 ± 0.49; p < 0.001), GPs or other health professionals (3.26 ± 0.47; p < 0.001), and search engines (3.27 ± 0.48; p = 0.040) as the main sources of information. In conclusion, the HLVa-IT could be reliable test to investigate VL for staff of NHs, and also to highlight criticalities related to information sources. Full article

Background: In Switzerland, HPV vaccination has been recommended since 2007 for all adolescent girls aged between 11 and 14 years. More than 10 years after the introduction of this recommendation, immunization coverage targets have not been met. Very few studies at a national level describe the reasons for the reluctance of some young women to become vaccinated. The aim of this study is to describe the socio-demographic characteristics of a population of vaccinated and unvaccinated female health students and then to compare the different factors that may have influenced their vaccine choice. Method: Female health students in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, aged between 18 and 31, were invited to participate in the study. A total of 234 female students completed a questionnaire that included questions about their socio-demographic data, sexual behavior and vaccination status. Results: 69% of the participants received at least one dose of the vaccine. Women who had not yet had sex were less likely to be vaccinated than sexually active women (ORa: 0.1, 0.0–0.4, 95% CI), the same as those who did not express an opinion about the importance of vaccination (ORa: 0.1: 0.0–0.6, 95% CI). The main reasons given for refusing vaccination were fear of side effects (26.0%), parental opposition (24.6%) and reluctance of the attending physician (13.6%). Conclusions: The main results of this study highlight a good rate of vaccine coverage in the sample population. Reasons for nonvaccination demonstrate the need to provide information on the vaccine to the target audience, as well as to parents and health professionals. Full article

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the adverse consequences created by an infodemic, specifically bringing attention to compliance with public health guidance and vaccine uptake. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is a complex construct that is related to health beliefs, misinformation exposure, and perceptions of governmental institutions. This study draws on theoretical models and current data on the COVID-19 infodemic to explore the association between the perceived risk of COVID-19, level of misinformation endorsement, and opinions about the government response on vaccine uptake. We surveyed a sample of 2697 respondents from the US, Canada, and Italy using a mobile platform between 21–28 May 2021. Using multivariate regression, we found that country of residence, risk perception of contracting and spreading COVID-19, perception of government response and transparency, and misinformation endorsement were associated with the odds of vaccine hesitancy. Higher perceived risk was associated with lower odds of hesitancy, while lower perceptions of government response and higher misinformation endorsement were associated with higher hesitancy. Full article

The coronavirus pandemic has been recognized as a major threat to public health. Widespread acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines is crucial for achieving adequate immunization coverage to end the global pandemic. However, to date, there are still hesitant people, especially among the younger population groups. For this reason, it is essential to identify the psychological variables that may affect vaccination intention among these “at risk groups” and to select possible successful communication frames in order to increase vaccination rates. An online cross-sectional survey was carried out on 208 Italian citizens younger than 50 years old, to explore message framing effects on their intention to receive the vaccination and to understand the psychological factors influencing it. Results showed that depending on the goal (stimulate vaccination intention, vaccination trust, or vaccine attitude), not all the communication stimuli are equally effective on this target population. Furthermore, the study showed that sociodemographic variables do not help to explain the vaccination intention of the younger population groups, while the psychological variables have been found to have a stronger impact on such attitude. Trust and attitudes towards vaccines, concern about the pandemic and concern about infecting others have been found to be the most effective predictive variables of people vaccination intention. The study results underline the importance of understanding the psychological roots behind vaccine hesitancy to shape sensitization actions and vaccination campaigns targeting this population group. Full article

The emergence of a highly transmissible and a more pathogenic B.1.617.2 (delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2 has brought concern over COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and the increased risk of severe breakthrough infections. The objective of this study was to assess the frequency and the clinical characteristics of severe breakthrough COVID-19 cases recorded in 10 Polish healthcare units between 1 June and 31 December 2021, a period during which a rapid surge in the share of B.1.617.2 infections was seen, while a significant number of populations were already fully vaccinated. Overall, 723 individuals who completed the initial vaccination regime (fully vaccinated group) and an additional 18 who received a booster dose were identified—together, they represented 20.8% of all the COVID-19 patients hospitalized during the same period in the same healthcare institutions (0.5% in the case of a group that received a booster dose). Although laboratory and clinical parameters did not differ between both groups, patients who received a booster tended to have lower CRP, IL-6, PCT, and d-dimer levels and they required oxygen therapy less frequently. The most common early COVID-19 symptoms in the studied group were fatigue, cough, fever (>38 °C), and dyspnea. Individuals with no detectable anti-spike IgG antibodies constituted 13%; the odds of being a humoral non-responder to the vaccine were increased in patients aged >70 years. Fully vaccinated patients hospitalized after more than 180 days from the last vaccine dose were significantly older and they were predominantly represented by individuals over 70 years and with comorbidities, particularly cardiovascular disease. Contrary to mRNA vaccines, most patients vaccinated with adenoviral vector vaccines were infected within six months. A total of 102 fatal cases (14% of all deaths among vaccinated individuals; 0.7% in the case of a group that received a booster dose) were recorded, representing 17.6% of all the COVID-19 fatalities recorded in June–December 2021 in the considered healthcare units. The odds of death were significantly increased in men, individuals aged >70 years, patients with comorbidities, and those identified as humoral non-responders to vaccination; in fully vaccinated patients the odds were also increased when the second vaccine dose was given >180 days before the first COVID-19 symptoms. The mortality rate in immunocompromised subjects was 19%. The results indicate that compared to vaccinated individuals, severe COVID-19 and deaths in the unvaccinated group were significantly more prevalent during the B.1.617.2-dominated wave in Poland; and, it highlight the protective role of a booster dose, particularly for more vulnerable individuals. Full article

The COVID-19 vaccination has been the subject of unprecedented misinformation, false news, and public concerns. This study presents a unique analysis comprising persons who were not vaccinated and became ill. It investigates reasons for not vaccinating and evaluates how the personal experience of COVID-19 affected further attitudes and decisions related to health. The study included 730 consecutive unvaccinated patients hospitalized in 12 centers in Poland during the autumn 2021 pandemic wave. The most frequent reason behind the refusal to receive the vaccine was concern over the adverse effects, disbelief that the vaccine was sufficiently tested, and one’s conviction that COVID-19 will not affect a patient. Online information, friends, spouse, children/grandchildren, and other family members were most often the source of discouragement from vaccination. Most individuals regretted their decision not to receive a vaccine (66.0%), declared to promote COVID-19 vaccination after discharge (64.0%), and to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in the time recommended for convalescents (69.5%). Individuals expressing no regrets of vaccine refusal more frequently revealed conspiracy beliefs. The study shows that personal experience with severe COVID-19 can influence the perception of vaccination, but approximately one-third of unvaccinated hospitalized patients still appear to express vaccine hesitancy. Full article

Health care professionals (HCPs) working in pediatric and perinatal settings have a strong influence on parental vaccine decision making. Furthermore, HCPs’ motivations behind vaccine acceptance are associated with their likelihood of recommending vaccines to their patients. Understanding these motivations in the context of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign may aid in the development of interventions that improve pediatric practitioners’ vaccine confidence and prescription. We aimed at studying the motivations affecting COVID-19 vaccination behavior among a sample of vaccinated Italian HCPs working in pediatric settings. A sample (n = 162) of HCPs completed an online self-reported survey exploring motivations behind getting vaccinated against COVID-19. Emotions of HCPs at the moment of COVID-19 vaccination injection were also recorded to collect data about the main feelings connected to the vaccination decision-making process. Data were collected between 19 March 2021 and 21 April 2021. The most effective motivational incentives were the beliefs that vaccination helped protect vulnerable members of the community (97.5% agreement), could protect one’s own health (93.7%), health authorities could be trusted (58.7%), and the vaccine had been rigorously tested (53.8%). Actual personal exposure to COVID was less important (reported importance agreement 16–24%), and the influence of news and social media was still lower (4–6%). Differences between physicians’ and other HCPs’ ratings were also found. Finally, emotional status at vaccination showed high ratings for positive emotions surrounding the vaccination act. This study provided additional evidence about the multifaceted motivations behind COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and showed the potential of understanding the psychosocial roots of vaccine behaviors for shaping public communication campaigns. The highly emotionally charged response obtained underscores the importance of strengthening the community feeling among HCPs. Full article

COVID-19 vaccination has been extended to include children aged 5–11 years. This cross-sectional survey evaluated parental COVID-19 vaccine willingness and hesitancy, and associated factors, for their children aged 5–11 years with chronic conditions. A telephone survey was conducted from 14 December 2021 to 4 January 2022. The questionnaire assessed participants’ socio-demographic and health-related information, attitudes towards COVID-19 infection, hesitancy, by using the PACV-5 (Parent Attitudes About Childhood Vaccines Survey Tool), and sources of information. A total of 430 answers were collected anonymously. Respondents with no cohabitant who had been infected by SARS-CoV-2 and having been vaccinated against COVID-19 had a higher concern about the severity of COVID-19. The parents’ perceived risk that the child could be infected by SARS-CoV-2 was higher in those more concerned about the severity of COVID-19, with an older child, and who had at least one cohabitant positive for COVID-19. Only 38.8% parents were willing to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. Parents who did not need additional information, those with higher education, those who have been vaccinated against COVID-19, those whose child was older, who had received information on this vaccination from physicians, with higher self-reported concern about the severity of COVID-19, and who had a higher perceived risk that their child could be infected by SARS-CoV-2, expressed a greater willingness to vaccinate their child. Overall, 26.3% were high-hesitant, with a PACV-5 score ≥ 7. Respondents who did not get the COVID-19 vaccine, were less educated, with a lower concern about severity of COVID-19, and with a lower perceived risk that their child could be infected by SARS-CoV-2, were more likely to be high-hesitant. New policies and educational programs regarding COVID-19 vaccination for children with chronic conditions are needed to reduce hesitancy and increase vaccination uptake. Full article

To assess influenza vaccine uptake during the 2020/2021 flu season and compare it with that of the 2019/2020 flu season among respondents to the second phase of the web-based EPICOVID-19 survey, we performed an observational web-based nationwide online survey (January–February 2021) in which respondents to the first survey (April–June 2020) were contacted and asked to complete a second questionnaire. Factors associated with vaccine uptake in the 2020/2021 flu season were assessed by applying a multivariable multinomial logistic regression model. Out of the 198,822 respondents to the first survey, 41,473 (20.9%) agreed to fill out the follow-up questionnaire; of these, 8339 (20.1%) were vaccinated only during the 2020/2021 season, 8828 (21.3%) were vaccinated during both seasons and 22,710 (54.8%) were vaccinated in neither season. Educational level (medium (aOR 1.33 95%CI 1.13–1.56) and high (aOR 1.69 95%CI 1.44–1.97) vs. low) and socio-economic deprivation according to SES scoring (1 point aOR 0.83 (95%CI 0.78–0.89), 2 aOR 0.68 (95%CI 0.60–0.77) points or ≥3 points aOR 0.42 (95%CI 0.28–0.45) vs. 0 points) were found to be associated with flu vaccine uptake. Our study shows that social determinants seemed to affect flu vaccination uptake and identifies specific categories of the population to target during future influenza vaccination campaigns. Full article

Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) are a group of diseases that are highly prevalent in tropical and subtropical regions, and closely associated with poverty and marginalized populations. Infectious diseases affect over 1.6 billion people annually, and vaccines are the best prophylactic tool against them. Along with NTDs, emerging and reemerging infectious diseases also threaten global public health, as they can unpredictably result in pandemics. The recent advances in vaccinology allowed the development and licensing of new vaccine platforms that can target and prevent these diseases. In this work, we discuss the advances in vaccinology and some of the difficulties found in the vaccine development pipeline for selected NTDs and emerging and reemerging infectious diseases, including HIV, Dengue, Ebola, Chagas disease, malaria, leishmaniasis, zika, and chikungunya. Full article

Background: vaccine hesitancy is defined as a delay in the acceptance or refusal of vaccination, even though immunisation is a determinant in reducing the mortality and morbidity associated with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Aim: to identify and analyse the predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and/or hesitancy. Methods: a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Keywords: vaccine and (COVID or SARS) and (acceptance or acceptability or willingness or hesitancy or refusal) and (multivariate or regression) and (questionnaire or survey) and national. Databases/resources: PubMed, DOAJ, SciELO and b-on. Timeframe: March 2020–2022. Inclusion criteria: general population, questionnaire-based, calculation of a multivariate regression model and national studies. Quality assessment: application of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood institute (NHLBI) tool. Results: a total of 37 studies were selected, whose overall rate was fair. The most predominant predictors of vaccine hesitancy were a lower perceived risk of getting infected, a lower level of institutional trust, not being vaccinated against influenza, lower levels of perceived severity of COVID-19, or stronger beliefs that the vaccination would cause side effects or be unsafe. Discussion and conclusion: the identified predictors can be used to design tailored health policies and/or public health interventions, or to evaluate subjects’ vaccine hesitancy. Full article