22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Women’s views on accepting COVID-19 vaccination during and after pregnancy, and for their babies: a multi-methods study in the UK

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          COVID-19 vaccines are advised for pregnant women in the United Kingdom (UK) however COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women is inadequate.

          Methods

          An online survey and semi-structured interviews were used to investigate pregnant women’s views on COVID-19 vaccine acceptability for themselves when pregnant, not pregnant and for their babies. One thousand one hundred eighty-one women, aged over 16 years, who had been pregnant since 23rd March 2020, were surveyed between 3rd August–11th October 2020. Ten women were interviewed.

          Results

          The majority of women surveyed (81.2%) reported that they would ‘definitely’ or were ‘leaning towards’ accepting a COVID-19 vaccine when not pregnant. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was significantly lower during pregnancy (62.1%, p < 0.005) and for their babies (69.9%, p < 0.005). Ethnic minority women were twice as likely to reject a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies compared to women from White ethnic groups ( p < 0.005). Women from lower-income households, aged under 25-years, and from some geographic regions were more likely to reject a COVID-19 vaccine when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies. Multivariate analysis revealed that income and ethnicity were the main drivers of the observed age and regional differences. Women unvaccinated against pertussis in pregnancy were over four times more likely to reject COVID-19 vaccines when not pregnant, pregnant and for their babies. Thematic analysis of the survey freetext responses and interviews found safety concerns about COVID-19 vaccines were common though wider mistrust in vaccines was also expressed. Trust in vaccines and the health system were also reasons women gave for accepting COVID-19 vaccines.

          Conclusion

          Safety information on COVID-19 vaccines must be clearly communicated to pregnant women to provide reassurance and facilitate informed pregnancy vaccine decisions. Targeted interventions to promote COVID-19 vaccine uptake among ethnic minority and lower-income women may be needed.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-021-04321-3.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Characteristics and outcomes of pregnant women admitted to hospital with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK: national population based cohort study

          Abstract Objectives To describe a national cohort of pregnant women admitted to hospital with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the UK, identify factors associated with infection, and describe outcomes, including transmission of infection, for mothers and infants. Design Prospective national population based cohort study using the UK Obstetric Surveillance System (UKOSS). Setting All 194 obstetric units in the UK. Participants 427 pregnant women admitted to hospital with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between 1 March 2020 and 14 April 2020. Main outcome measures Incidence of maternal hospital admission and infant infection. Rates of maternal death, level 3 critical care unit admission, fetal loss, caesarean birth, preterm birth, stillbirth, early neonatal death, and neonatal unit admission. Results The estimated incidence of admission to hospital with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy was 4.9 (95% confidence interval 4.5 to 5.4) per 1000 maternities. 233 (56%) pregnant women admitted to hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy were from black or other ethnic minority groups, 281 (69%) were overweight or obese, 175 (41%) were aged 35 or over, and 145 (34%) had pre-existing comorbidities. 266 (62%) women gave birth or had a pregnancy loss; 196 (73%) gave birth at term. Forty one (10%) women admitted to hospital needed respiratory support, and five (1%) women died. Twelve (5%) of 265 infants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, six of them within the first 12 hours after birth. Conclusions Most pregnant women admitted to hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection were in the late second or third trimester, supporting guidance for continued social distancing measures in later pregnancy. Most had good outcomes, and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to infants was uncommon. The high proportion of women from black or minority ethnic groups admitted with infection needs urgent investigation and explanation. Study registration ISRCTN 40092247.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons

            Background Many pregnant persons in the United States are receiving messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) vaccines, but data are limited on their safety in pregnancy. Methods From December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, we used data from the “v-safe after vaccination health checker” surveillance system, the v-safe pregnancy registry, and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to characterize the initial safety of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in pregnant persons. Results A total of 35,691 v-safe participants 16 to 54 years of age identified as pregnant. Injection-site pain was reported more frequently among pregnant persons than among nonpregnant women, whereas headache, myalgia, chills, and fever were reported less frequently. Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester). Adverse neonatal outcomes included preterm birth (in 9.4%) and small size for gestational age (in 3.2%); no neonatal deaths were reported. Although not directly comparable, calculated proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in persons vaccinated against Covid-19 who had a completed pregnancy were similar to incidences reported in studies involving pregnant women that were conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic. Among 221 pregnancy-related adverse events reported to the VAERS, the most frequently reported event was spontaneous abortion (46 cases). Conclusions Preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA Covid-19 vaccines. However, more longitudinal follow-up, including follow-up of large numbers of women vaccinated earlier in pregnancy, is necessary to inform maternal, pregnancy, and infant outcomes.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK Household Longitudinal Study

              Vaccine hesitancy could undermine efforts to control COVID-19. We investigated the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK and identified vaccine hesitant subgroups. The ‘Understanding Society’ COVID-19 survey asked participants (n=12,035) their likelihood of vaccine uptake and reason for hesitancy. Cross-sectional analysis assessed vaccine hesitancy prevalence and logistic regression calculated odds ratios. Overall vaccine hesitancy was low (18% unlikely/very unlikely). Vaccine hesitancy was higher in women (21.0% vs 14.7%), younger age groups (26.5% in 16-24 year olds vs 4.5% in 75+) and those with lower education levels (18.6% no qualifications vs 13.2% degree qualified). Vaccine hesitancy was high in Black (71.8%) and Pakistani/Bangladeshi (42.3%) ethnic groups. Odds ratios for vaccine hesitancy were 13.42 (95% CI:6.86, 26.24) in Black and 2.54 (95% CI:1.19, 5.44) in Pakistani/Bangladeshi groups (compared to White British/Irish) and 3.54 (95%CI:2.06, 6.09) for people with no qualifications versus degree. Urgent action to address hesitancy is needed for some but not all ethnic minority groups.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                b.holder@imperial.ac.uk
                Journal
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2393
                14 January 2022
                14 January 2022
                2022
                : 22
                : 33
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.7445.2, ISNI 0000 0001 2113 8111, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, , Imperial College London, ; London, UK
                [2 ]GRID grid.7445.2, ISNI 0000 0001 2113 8111, Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, , Institute of Reproductive and Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, ; London, UK
                [3 ]GRID grid.8991.9, ISNI 0000 0004 0425 469X, Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, ; London, UK
                [4 ]GRID grid.8991.9, ISNI 0000 0004 0425 469X, The Vaccine Centre, Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, ; London, UK
                [5 ]GRID grid.415063.5, ISNI 0000 0004 0606 294X, Vaccines and Immunity Theme, MRC Unit The Gambia at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, ; Banjul, The Gambia
                Article
                4321
                10.1186/s12884-021-04321-3
                8759061
                35030996
                d4eb519e-e753-494f-9fa1-f20851aef59e
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 30 June 2021
                : 29 November 2021
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                Obstetrics & Gynecology

                Comments

                Comment on this article