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.