3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Parental perceptions and the 5C psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccination during the first month of omicron variant surge: A large-scale cross-sectional survey in Saudi Arabia

      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

          With the rapid surge of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, we aimed to assess parents' perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccines and the psychological antecedents of vaccinations during the first month of the Omicron spread.

          Methods

          A cross-sectional online survey in Saudi Arabia was conducted (December 20, 2021-January 7, 2022). Convenience sampling was used to invite participants through several social media platforms, including WhatsApp, Twitter, and email lists. We utilized the validated 5C Scale, which evaluates five psychological factors influencing vaccination intention and behavior: confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility.

          Results

          Of the 1,340 respondents, 61.3% received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, while 35% received an additional booster dose. Fify four percentage were unwilling to vaccinate their children aged 5–11, and 57.2% were unwilling to give the additional booster vaccine to children aged 12–18. Respondents had higher scores on the construct of collective responsibility, followed by calculation, confidence, complacency, and finally constraints. Confidence in vaccines was associated with willingness to vaccinate children and positively correlated with collective responsibility ( p < 0.010). Complacency about COVID-19 was associated with unwillingness to vaccinate older children (12–18 years) and with increased constraints and calculation scores ( p < 0.010). While increasing constraints scores did not correlate with decreased willingness to vaccinate children ( p = 0.140), they did correlate negatively with confidence and collective responsibility ( p < 0.010).

          Conclusions

          The findings demonstrate the relationship between the five antecedents of vaccination, the importance of confidence in vaccines, and a sense of collective responsibility in parents' intention to vaccinate their children. Campaigns addressing constraints and collective responsibility could help influence the public's vaccination behavior.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

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

          WHO Declares COVID-19 a Pandemic

          The World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, has declared the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a global pandemic (1). At a news briefing, WHO Director-General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, noted that over the past 2 weeks, the number of cases outside China increased 13-fold and the number of countries with cases increased threefold. Further increases are expected. He said that the WHO is “deeply concerned both by the alarming levels of spread and severity and by the alarming levels of inaction,” and he called on countries to take action now to contain the virus. “We should double down,” he said. “We should be more aggressive.” Among the WHO’s current recommendations, people with mild respiratory symptoms should be encouraged to isolate themselves, and social distancing is emphasized and these recommendations apply even to countries with no reported cases (2). Separately, in JAMA, researchers report that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was most often detected in respiratory samples from patients in China. However, live virus was also found in feces. They conclude: “Transmission of the virus by respiratory and extrarespiratory routes may help explain the rapid spread of disease.”(3). COVID-19 is a novel disease with an incompletely described clinical course, especially for children. In a recente report W. Liu et al described that the virus causing Covid-19 was detected early in the epidemic in 6 (1.6%) out of 366 children (≤16 years of age) hospitalized because of respiratory infections at Tongji Hospital, around Wuhan. All these six children had previously been completely healthy and their clinical characteristics at admission included high fever (>39°C) cough and vomiting (only in four). Four of the six patients had pneumonia, and only one required intensive care. All patients were treated with antiviral agents, antibiotic agents, and supportive therapies, and recovered after a median 7.5 days of hospitalization. (4). Risk factors for severe illness remain uncertain (although older age and comorbidity have emerged as likely important factors), the safety of supportive care strategies such as oxygen by high-flow nasal cannula and noninvasive ventilation are unclear, and the risk of mortality, even among critically ill patients, is uncertain. There are no proven effective specific treatment strategies, and the risk-benefit ratio for commonly used treatments such as corticosteroids is unclear (3,5). Septic shock and specific organ dysfunction such as acute kidney injury appear to occur in a significant proportion of patients with COVID-19–related critical illness and are associated with increasing mortality, with management recommendations following available evidence-based guidelines (3). Novel COVID-19 “can often present as a common cold-like illness,” wrote Roman Wöelfel et al. (6). They report data from a study concerning nine young- to middle-aged adults in Germany who developed COVID-19 after close contact with a known case. All had generally mild clinical courses; seven had upper respiratory tract disease, and two had limited involvement of the lower respiratory tract. Pharyngeal virus shedding was high during the first week of symptoms, peaking on day 4. Additionally, sputum viral shedding persisted after symptom resolution. The German researchers say the current case definition for COVID-19, which emphasizes lower respiratory tract disease, may need to be adjusted(6). But they considered only young and “normal” subjecta whereas the story is different in frail comorbid older patients, in whom COVID 19 may precipitate an insterstitial pneumonia, with severe respiratory failure and death (3). High level of attention should be paid to comorbidities in the treatment of COVID-19. In the literature, COVID-19 is characterised by the symptoms of viral pneumonia such as fever, fatigue, dry cough, and lymphopenia. Many of the older patients who become severely ill have evidence of underlying illness such as cardiovascular disease, liver disease, kidney disease, or malignant tumours. These patients often die of their original comorbidities. They die “with COVID”, but were extremely frail and we therefore need to accurately evaluate all original comorbidities. In addition to the risk of group transmission of an infectious disease, we should pay full attention to the treatment of the original comorbidities of the individual while treating pneumonia, especially in older patients with serious comorbid conditions and polipharmacy. Not only capable of causing pneumonia, COVID-19 may also cause damage to other organs such as the heart, the liver, and the kidneys, as well as to organ systems such as the blood and the immune system. Patients die of multiple organ failure, shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, heart failure, arrhythmias, and renal failure (5,6). What we know about COVID 19? In December 2019, a cluster of severe pneumonia cases of unknown cause was reported in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. The initial cluster was epidemiologically linked to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan, although many of the initial 41 cases were later reported to have no known exposure to the market (7). A novel strain of coronavirus belonging to the same family of viruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), as well as the 4 human coronaviruses associated with the common cold, was subsequently isolated from lower respiratory tract samples of 4 cases on 7 January 2020. On 30 January 2020, the WHO declared that the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak constituted a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, and more than 80, 000 confirmed cases had been reported worldwide as of 28 February 2020 (8). On 31 January 2020, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that all citizens returning from Hubei province, China, would be subject to mandatory quarantine for up to 14 days. But from China COVID 19 arrived to many other countries. Rothe C et al reported a case of a 33-year-old otherwise healthy German businessman :she became ill with a sore throat, chills, and myalgias on January 24, 2020 (9). The following day, a fever of 39.1°C developed, along with a productive cough. By the evening of the next day, he started feeling better and went back to work on January 27. Before the onset of symptoms, he had attended meetings with a Chinese business partner at his company near Munich on January 20 and 21. The business partner, a Shanghai resident, had visited Germany between January 19 and 22. During her stay, she had been well with no signs or symptoms of infection but had become ill on her flight back to China, where she tested positive for 2019-nCoV on January 26. This case of 2019-nCoV infection was diagnosed in Germany and transmitted outside Asia. However, it is notable that the infection appears to have been transmitted during the incubation period of the index patient, in whom the illness was brief and nonspecific. The fact that asymptomatic persons are potential sources of 2019-nCoV infection may warrant a reassessment of transmission dynamics of the current outbreak (9). Our current understanding of the incubation period for COVID-19 is limited. An early analysis based on 88 confirmed cases in Chinese provinces outside Wuhan, using data on known travel to and from Wuhan to estimate the exposure interval, indicated a mean incubation period of 6.4 days (95% CI, 5.6 to 7.7 days), with a range of 2.1 to 11.1 days. Another analysis based on 158 confirmed cases outside Wuhan estimated a median incubation period of 5.0 days (CI, 4.4 to 5.6 days), with a range of 2 to 14 days. These estimates are generally consistent with estimates from 10 confirmed cases in China (mean incubation period, 5.2 days [CI, 4.1 to 7.0 days] and from clinical reports of a familial cluster of COVID-19 in which symptom onset occurred 3 to 6 days after assumed exposure in Wuhan (10-12). The incubation period can inform several important public health activities for infectious diseases, including active monitoring, surveillance, control, and modeling. Active monitoring requires potentially exposed persons to contact local health authorities to report their health status every day. Understanding the length of active monitoring needed to limit the risk for missing infections is necessary for health departments to effectively use resources. A recent paper provides additional evidence for a median incubation period for COVID-19 of approximately 5 days (13). Lauer et al suggest that 101 out of every 10 000 cases will develop symptoms after 14 days of active monitoring or quarantinen (13). Whether this rate is acceptable depends on the expected risk for infection in the population being monitored and considered judgment about the cost of missing cases. Combining these judgments with the estimates presented here can help public health officials to set rational and evidence-based COVID-19 control policies. Note that the proportion of mild cases detected has increased as surveillance and monitoring systems have been strengthened. The incubation period for these severe cases may differ from that of less severe or subclinical infections and is not typically an applicable measure for those with asymptomatic infections In conclusion, in a very short period health care systems and society have been severely challenged by yet another emerging virus. Preventing transmission and slowing the rate of new infections are the primary goals; however, the concern of COVID-19 causing critical illness and death is at the core of public anxiety. The critical care community has enormous experience in treating severe acute respiratory infections every year, often from uncertain causes. The care of severely ill patients, in particular older persons with COVID-19 must be grounded in this evidence base and, in parallel, ensure that learning from each patient could be of great importance to care all population,
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants.

            The SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy concluded that vaccine hesitancy refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. Vaccine hesitancy is complex and context specific, varying across time, place and vaccines. It is influenced by factors such as complacency, convenience and confidence. The Working Group retained the term 'vaccine' rather than 'vaccination' hesitancy, although the latter more correctly implies the broader range of immunization concerns, as vaccine hesitancy is the more commonly used term. While high levels of hesitancy lead to low vaccine demand, low levels of hesitancy do not necessarily mean high vaccine demand. The Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants Matrix displays the factors influencing the behavioral decision to accept, delay or reject some or all vaccines under three categories: contextual, individual and group, and vaccine/vaccination-specific influences.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant

              Background The B.1.617.2 (delta) variant of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), has contributed to a surge in cases in India and has now been detected across the globe, including a notable increase in cases in the United Kingdom. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines against this variant has been unclear. Methods We used a test-negative case–control design to estimate the effectiveness of vaccination against symptomatic disease caused by the delta variant or the predominant strain (B.1.1.7, or alpha variant) over the period that the delta variant began circulating. Variants were identified with the use of sequencing and on the basis of the spike ( S ) gene status. Data on all symptomatic sequenced cases of Covid-19 in England were used to estimate the proportion of cases with either variant according to the patients’ vaccination status. Results Effectiveness after one dose of vaccine (BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) was notably lower among persons with the delta variant (30.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 25.2 to 35.7) than among those with the alpha variant (48.7%; 95% CI, 45.5 to 51.7); the results were similar for both vaccines. With the BNT162b2 vaccine, the effectiveness of two doses was 93.7% (95% CI, 91.6 to 95.3) among persons with the alpha variant and 88.0% (95% CI, 85.3 to 90.1) among those with the delta variant. With the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, the effectiveness of two doses was 74.5% (95% CI, 68.4 to 79.4) among persons with the alpha variant and 67.0% (95% CI, 61.3 to 71.8) among those with the delta variant. Conclusions Only modest differences in vaccine effectiveness were noted with the delta variant as compared with the alpha variant after the receipt of two vaccine doses. Absolute differences in vaccine effectiveness were more marked after the receipt of the first dose. This finding would support efforts to maximize vaccine uptake with two doses among vulnerable populations. (Funded by Public Health England.)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Pediatr
                Front Pediatr
                Front. Pediatr.
                Frontiers in Pediatrics
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2296-2360
                16 August 2022
                2022
                16 August 2022
                : 10
                Affiliations
                [1] 1College of Medicine, King Saud University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
                [2] 2Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
                [3] 3Pediatric Kidney Transplant, Organ Transplant Center of Excellence, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
                [4] 4Critical Care Department, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
                [5] 5Institute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University , AlAin, United Arab Emirates
                [6] 6Department of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Sharjah , Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
                [7] 7Sharjah Institute of Medical Research, University of Sharjah , Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
                [8] 8Department of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
                [9] 9Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
                [10] 10Clinical Sciences Department, College of Medicine, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
                [11] 11Division of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Lilavati Hospital and Research Center , Mumbai, India
                [12] 12Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Sharjah , Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
                [13] 13Pediatric Department, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University , Assiut, Egypt
                [14] 14Division of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa , Ottawa, ON, Canada
                [15] 15King Saud Medical City, Ministry of Health and Alfaisal University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
                [16] 16Hubert Department of Global Health, Emory University , Atlanta, GA, United States
                [17] 17Specialty Internal Medicine and Quality Department, Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare , Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
                [18] 18Infectious Disease Division, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine , Indianapolis, IN, United States
                [19] 19Infectious Disease Division, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , Baltimore, MD, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Carolina Oi Lam Ung, University of Macau, China

                Reviewed by: Muhammad Salman, University of Lahore, Pakistan; Mohammad Ali, La Trobe University, Australia

                *Correspondence: Mohamad-Hani Temsah mtemsah@ 123456ksu.edu.sa

                This article was submitted to Pediatric Infectious Diseases, a section of the journal Frontiers in Pediatrics

                †These authors have contributed equally to this work

                ‡ORCID: Shuliweeh Alenezi https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7049-0960

                Article
                10.3389/fped.2022.944165
                9424678
                d98afa3c-f187-44da-a5f6-024b7fec147b
                Copyright © 2022 Alenezi, Alarabi, Al-Eyadhy, Aljamaan, Elbarazi, Saddik, Alhasan, Assiri, Bassrawi, Alshahrani, Alharbi, Fayed, Minhaj Ahmed, Halwani, Saad, Alsubaie, Barry, COVID-19 Saudi Research Consortium, Memish, Al-Tawfiq and Temsah.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 5, Equations: 0, References: 75, Pages: 13, Words: 8929
                Categories
                Pediatrics
                Original Research

                covid-19,sars-cov-2 among general population,omicron variant worries,vaccination hesitancy,5c scale

                Comments

                Comment on this article