While COVID-19 continues raging worldwide, effective vaccines are highly anticipated. However, vaccine hesitancy is widespread. Survey results on uptake intentions vary and continue to change. This review compared trends and synthesized findings in vaccination receptivity over time across US and international polls, assessing survey design influences and evaluating context to inform policies and practices. Data sources included academic literature (PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO following PRISMA guidelines), news and official reports published by 20 October 2020. Two researchers independently screened potential peer-reviewed articles and syndicated polls for eligibility; 126 studies and surveys were selected. Declining vaccine acceptance (from >70% in March to <50% in October) with demographic, socioeconomic, and partisan divides was observed. Perceived risk, concerns over vaccine safety and effectiveness, doctors’ recommendations, and inoculation history were common factors. Impacts of regional infection rates, gender, and personal COVID-19 experience were inconclusive. Unique COVID-19 factors included political party orientation, doubts toward expedited development/approval process, and perceived political interference. Many receptive participants preferred to wait until others have taken the vaccine; mandates could increase resistance. Survey wording and answer options showed influence on responses. To achieve herd immunity, communication campaigns are immediately needed, focusing on transparency and restoring trust in health authorities.

No abstract

Compared to traditional demographic, system, and clinical-related factors that have been well documented in the literature but are not easily changed, these cognitive, psychological, and interpersonal factors are more amendable via intervention and therefore could generate greater benefit in improving patient compliance and health outcomes. As OAMs shift treatment administration responsibility onto patients, continuous provider communication and education on illness and regimen are the keys to supporting patients' medication behavior.

Despite vaccines’ effectiveness in reducing the rate of preventable diseases, vaccine hesitancy has threatened public health and economies worldwide. Healthcare providers’ (HCP) communications and behavior strongly influence patient receptivity and uptake. The goal of this review was to examine HCP vaccine perceptions, knowledge, and reservations and how these attitudes affect their recommendations and vaccination practices. Primary research studies published by 16 September 2020 were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. A 14-item scale was developed for survey study and risk of bias appraisal (SSRBA). In total, 96 papers from 34 countries were included, covering 17 vaccines (HPV and influenza vaccines the most studied). Recommendation was positively associated with provider knowledge and experience, beliefs about disease risk, and perceptions of vaccine safety, necessity, and efficacy. HCP vaccination attitudes and practices varied across specialties, vaccines, and countries; demographic impact was inconclusive. Barriers included anticipation of patient/parental concerns or refusal, lacking clear guidelines, time constraints, and cost. For HPV, vaccines were more often recommended to older, female adolescents and by physicians who discussed sexual health. HCPs are vital advocates for patients and the public, but studies indicated a prevalence of provider hesitancy pertaining to inadequate knowledge, low vaccine confidence, and suboptimal uptake themselves. Improving HCP knowledge and assuring their access to information they deem trustworthy are essential to supporting HCPs‘ role as “trusted messengers” to promote vaccine acceptance.

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.

IntroductionRheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a common disease that requires patient self-management with chronic medications. Adherence rates for RA medications are suboptimal. This study explores medication adherence and self-efficacy behaviors among RA patients.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study comprising focus groups and individual interviews. Nineteen participants were recruited and screened to participate in three 90-minute focus groups (n = 13) and six 60-minute individual interviews. We created and maintained a codebook to analyze data. Interviews were analyzed by using NViVo qualitative analysis software.ResultsKey points in participant interviews were 1) self-efficacy as influenced by the ability to establish routines, and having an understanding relationship with their healthcare provider; 2) self-efficacy to adjust medications depended on having permission from providers to adjust medications, perceptions of the effectiveness of medications, and confidence in self-knowledge to make appropriate adjustments; and 3) changes in self-efficacy over time were influenced by initial denial and later acceptance of the diagnosis. Participant interviews revealed that medication adherence is a spectrum that ranges from adherent to nonadherent.ConclusionParticipants’ experience with RA medications revealed varied underlying reasons for adherence behaviors. Recognizing adherence as a dynamic behavior has important implications for how adherence interventions are designed. For example, participants reported adjusting medications in response to the unpredictable nature of RA. Interventions could collect information about RA symptoms and be tailored to provide adherence support at times when patients need it most. The importance of self-efficacy in influencing participants’ adherence behaviors is an area for continuing research among patients and providers.

Background Over 325 million people in the world are infected with hepatitis B or C virus. Chronic hepatitis is responsible for 78% of cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and an estimated 1.3 million preventable deaths a year. As “silent killers”, liver diseases are often asymptomatic and go undiagnosed until their terminal stage. Knowledge of infection status via screening is thus a vital part of preventing spread and seeking early treatment. Recently there has been a worldwide push to eliminate hepatitis. The objective of this study is to assess hepatitis B and C self-reported awareness of infection status vs correct awareness (compared to blood test results) and follow-up rates in Taiwan to inform global health promotion efforts that utilize screening interventions to prevent chronic liver diseases. Methods De-identified data from a Liver Foundation’s nationwide community-outreach free blood screening programs was utilized, including 50 909 participants’ data from 74 sites with a questionnaire (demographics, screening history, hepatitis awareness, monitoring behavior) and blood test results. Chi square tests were applied using R programing to examine the impacts of demographic variables on infection prevalence, awareness, and behavior relating to hepatitis. Results Among all participants, 41.1% indicated having had a hepatitis screening, of which only 60.8% knew their results. Around 69.7% and 66.5% self-reported awareness of their hepatitis B and C status respectively; 12.8% and 26.4% of individuals who tested positive for HBsAg and Anti-HCV respectively incorrectly thought they were not infected. Of those who self-reported awareness of their positive infection, 43.4% and 26.6% did not follow up with a health care professional for monitoring or treatment; the top reasons were “no symptoms”, “too busy”, and “don’t know where to follow up”. Rural populations showed higher infection prevalence but lower screening rates and self-reported awareness. Conclusions Intervention programs must address the substantial number of people that do not recall if they were screened or do not know the results of a screening. Discrepancies between self-reported awareness, correct awareness, and follow-up and disparities across demographic groups deserve further scrutiny. Global hepatitis eradication initiatives should reconsider how screening, test results, and education are presented in order to improve awareness and prevent chronic infection that could develop into life-threatening liver diseases.

No abstract