Chao Wang

Objective: To evaluate the preference of primary HCWs and residents on vaccination consultation in community health services to provide evidence for vaccine hesitancy intervention strategies. Methods: A discrete choice model (DCM) was constructed to evaluate the preference difference between primary HCWs and residents on vaccination consultation in community health services in China during May–July 2022. Results: A total of 282 residents and 204 HCWs were enrolled in this study. The residents preferred consulting with an HCW-led approach (β = 2.168), with specialized content (β = 0.954), and accompanied by telephone follow-up (β = 1.552). In contrast, the HCWs preferred face-to-face consultation (β = 0.540) with an HCW-led approach (β = 0.458) and specialized content (β = 0.409), accompanied by telephone follow-up (β = 0.831). College residents and residents with underlying self-reported disease may be near-critically inclined to choose traditional consultation (an offline, face-to-face consultation with standardized content and more prolonged duration) rather than a new-media consulting group (an online consultation with specialized content within 5 min). Urban HCWs preferred long-term consultation groups (the resident-led offline consultation with follow-up lasting more than 5 min). In contrast, rural HCWs preferred efficient consultation (the HCW-led, short-duration, standardized offline consultation mode). Conclusion: The selection preference for vaccine consultation reveals a gap between providers and demanders, with different groups exhibiting distinct preferences. Identifying these targeted gaps can help design more acceptable and efficient interventions, increasing their likelihood of success and leading to better resource allocation for policymakers to develop targeted vaccination policies.

Infant hepatitis B vaccine coverage in China is high, with over 95% of infants immunized; however, high vaccine coverage can often mask low timeliness. The vaccination interval between the second and third dose is not clearly defined by immunization guidelines in China. This retrospective cohort study assessed the time interval distribution of hepatitis B vaccination among a cohort of randomly selected live births from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention across four provinces or municipalities in China between January 2017 and December 2021. Among the infants analyzed, 163,224 received the first dose of hepatitis B vaccine with 146,905 (90.0%) and 135,757 (83.2%) infants receiving the second and third doses, respectively. A total of 132,577 (90.2%) infants received the second dose between 28–61 days after the first dose. Of the 119,437 (88.0%) infants that completed the hepatitis B series between 61–214 days after the second dose, 87,067 (64.1%) infants were vaccinated with the third dose between 151–180 days after the second dose. The time interval distribution for the three doses of hepatitis B vaccine varied across the four provinces or municipalities (P<0.001). Of the 58,077 infants who completed the hepatitis B vaccine series, 36,377 (62.6%) infants used the same type of hepatitis B vaccine for all three doses. Overall, the timeliness of hepatitis B vaccination for infants was lower than expected, with regional disparities observed. This highlights the need for improved timeliness through the introduction of a defined timeframe for the last two doses of vaccine, and training for obstetricians and related personnel.

In China, adverse events following immunization (AEFI) are reported by the China AEFI Surveillance System (CNAEFIS). Serious AEFI, including deaths, are mandatorily reported and are evaluated for causality by province-or prefecture-level panels of experts. Yeast-derived HepB is the most widely used HepB in China for infants. However, the information about the death of infants caused by HepB is unclear. The CNAEFIS data on deaths following HepB from 2013 to 2020 were used for analyses. Descriptive analysis of epidemiologic characteristics was used to report death cases following HepB. We used administered doses to calculate denominators to estimate the risk of death after vaccination. During 2013–2020, there were 161 deaths following the administration of 173 million doses of HepB, for an overall incidence of 0.9 deaths per million doses. One hundred fifty-seven deaths were categorized as coincidental, and four deaths were accompanied by an abnormal reaction determined to be unrelated to the cause of death. The most common causes of death were neonatal pneumonia and foreign body asphyxia. These data provide reliable evidence on the safety of HepB among infants in China and can enhance public confidence in HepB immunization. To ensure public confidence in infants’ HepB vaccination, monitoring and scientifically evaluating AEFI-related deaths of HepB is necessary.

(1) Background: To explore the influencing factors of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination among mothers and daughters so as to provide evidence and strategies for improving the HPV vaccination rate of 9–18-years-old girls. (2) A questionnaire survey was conducted among the mothers of 9–18-year-old girls from June to August 2022. The participants were divided into the mother and daughter vaccinated group (M1D1), the mother-only vaccinated group (M1D0), and the unvaccinated group (M0D0). Univariate tests, the logistic regression model, and the Health Belief Model (HBM) were employed to explore the influencing factors. (3) Results: A total of 3004 valid questionnaires were collected. According to the regions, Totally 102, 204, and 408 mothers and daughters were selected from the M1D1, M1D0, and M0D0 groups, respectively. The mother having given her daughter sex education (OR = 3.64; 95%CI 1.70, 7.80), the mother’s high perception of disease severity (OR = 1.79; 95%CI 1.02, 3.17), and the mother’s high level of trust in formal information (OR = 2.18; 95%CI 1.26, 3.78) were all protective factors for both the mother and her daughter’s vaccination. The mother’s rural residence (OR = 0.51; 95%CI 0.28, 0.92) was a risk factor for vaccination of both mother and daughter. The mother’s education of high school or above (OR = 2.12; 95%CI 1.06, 4.22), the mother’s high level of HPV and HPV vaccine knowledge (OR = 1.72; 95%CI 1.14, 2.58), and the mother’s high level of trust in formal information (OR = 1.72; 95%CI 1.15, 2.57) were protective factors of mother-only vaccination. The older the mother (OR = 0.95; 95%CI 0.91, 0.99) was classed as a risk factor for mother-only vaccination. “Waiting until the daughters are older to receive the 9-valent vaccine” is the main reason why the daughters of M1D0 and M0D0 are not vaccinated”. (4) Chinese mothers had a high willingness to vaccinate their daughters with the HPV vaccine. The higher education level of the mother, giving sex education to the daughter, the older ages of mothers and daughters, the mother’s high level of HPV and HPV vaccine knowledge, a high level of perception of the disease severity, and a high level of trust in formal information were promoting factors of HPV vaccination for mother and daughter, and rural residence was a risk factor to vaccination. To promote HPV vaccination in girls from 9–18 years old, communities could provide health education to rural mothers with low education levels; the government could advocate for HPV vaccination through issuing policy documents; and doctors and the CDC could popularize the optimal age for HPV vaccination to encourage mothers to vaccinate their daughters at the age of 9–14 years old.

Vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become an important public health solution. Developing a safe and effective vaccine against COVID-19 is a viable long-term solution to control the pandemic. As one of the two inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines developed in China that entered the WHO emergency use list, Sinopharm BBIBP-CorV, an aluminum-hydroxide-adjuvanted, inactivated whole-virus vaccine, has been widely distributed, with more than 400 million doses administered in more than 40 countries. The evidence of the safety, efficacy, and effectiveness of BBIBP-CorV is gathered and reviewed. We further comment on one of the latest papers that disclosed the effectiveness results between BBIBP-CorV, rAd26-rAd5, and ChAdOx1.

(1) Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines were developed in only a short amount of time and were widely distributed. We conducted this meta-analysis to understand the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. (2) Methods: We searched the corresponding literature published from 1 January 2020 to 20 October 2021. Information of adverse events (AEs) of each selected work was collected. The quality and bias of studies was evaluated, and meta-analysis was carried out by using Stata 17.0. (3) Results: Totally, 11,451 articles were retrieved, and 53 of them were included for analysis. The incidence rate of AEs was 20.05–94.48%. The incidence rate of vascular events increased after viral vector vaccination, while the incidence rate of vascular events decreased after mRNA vaccination. Viral vector vaccine had a higher AE rate compared to mRNA vaccines and inactivated vaccines. In most circumstances, the incidence of AEs was higher in older people, female and after the second dose. The sensitivity of meta-analysis was acceptable; however, the literature was subject to a certain publication bias. (4) Conclusions: The safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines was acceptable. The incidence of allergic symptoms and cardiovascular and cerebrovascular symptoms was low. Viral vector vaccine had a higher risk of leading to thrombosis events. The understanding of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine AEs should be enhanced, so as to promote the vaccination.

Background: Vaccination is considered the most effective and economical measure for controlling infectious diseases. Although combination vaccines are widely used worldwide, whether any of the combination vaccines is superior to each separate vaccine has yet to be established. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of combination vaccines in children. Methods: A systematic search was conducted from database inception to August 20, 2021, in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus. Published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and open-label trials of immunogenicity and safety of combined vaccines were selected. The results of the studies were quantitatively synthesized. Results: Overall, 25 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The results indicated that the combined diptheria–tetanus–acellular pertussis (DTaP)–hepatitis B virus (HBV)–Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib) vaccine group had lower levels of anti-tetanus antibodies than the combined DTaP–HBV and separate Hib vaccinations group (SMD = −0.23; 95% CI: −0.42, −0.05; p = 0.013). Meanwhile, the combined DTaP–HBV–inactivated polio virus (IPV)–Hib vaccine group had higher levels of anti-pertussis (PT) and anti-filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA) antibodies than the combined DTaP–IPV–Hib and separate HBV vaccinations group (anti-PT: SMD = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.45, 0.75; p < 0.0001; anti-FHA: SMD = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.78; p = 0.042). The levels of anti-pertactin (PRN) antibodies were lower in the combined DTaP–IPV–Hib vaccine group than in the combined DTaP–IPV and separate Hib vaccinations group (SMD = −0.13; 95% CI: −0.27, −0.00; p = 0.047). The individuals injected with the DTaP–HBV–IPV–Hib vaccine had a lower risk of pain and swelling than those injected with the combined DTaP–HBV–IPV and separate Hib vaccines (pain: RR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69, 0.91; p = 0.001; swelling: RR = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.78, 0.98; p = 0.020). However, the group that received the DTaP–HBV–IPV–Hib vaccine had a higher risk of fever than the group that received DTaP–HBV–IPV and separate Hib vaccinations (RR = 1.13; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.26; p = 0.021). Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that the combined vaccines (DTaP–IPV–Hib, DTaP–HBV–Hib, DTaP–HBV–IPV–Hib) are safe, well-tolerated, and provide immunogenic alternatives to separate vaccines in children. The combined DTaP–HBV–IPV–Hib vaccine showed a higher incidence of fever, which was lower than the cumulative incidence of fever induced by all vaccines. Future studies should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using combined vaccines and compare the potency of different formulations to improve routine local or national childhood immunization programs.

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has been widely rolled out globally in the general populations. However, specific data on vaccination confidence, willingness or coverage among health care workers (HCWs) has been less reported. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted to specify the basic data and patterns of vaccination confidence, willingness and coverage among HCWs nationwide. Results: In total, 2386 out of 2583 (92.4%) participants were enrolled for analysis, and the rates of confidence in vaccine, professional institutes and government were 75.1%, 85.2% and 85.4%, respectively. The overall vaccination coverage rate was 63.6% which was adjusted as 82.8% for participants under current medical conditions or having contraindications. Confidence in vaccine safety was shown to be the most related factor to willingness among doctors, nurses, medical technicians and hospital administrators, while confidence in vaccine effectiveness as well as trust in government played the key role in formulating public health employees’ willingness. 130 (7.1% of 1833) participants reporting willingness still not been vaccinated regardless of contraindications. Multivariate analysis among willingness participants showed that males, aged over 30 years, public health employees and higher vaccination confidence had significantly higher vaccination rates with ORs (95% confidence intervals) as 1.64 (1.08–2.49), 3.14 (2.14–4.62), 2.43 (1.46–4.04) or 2.31 (1.24–4.33). Conclusions: HCWs’ confidence, willingness and coverage rates to the vaccine were generally at high levels. Heterogeneity among HCWs should be considered for future vaccination promotion strategies. The population’s confidence in vaccination is not only the determinant to their willingness, but also guarantees their actual vaccine uptake.