Search

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a group of medical and public health experts who provides expert advice to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, normally meets three times per year to develop U.S. vaccine recommendations. The ACIP met on February 22–24, 2023, to discuss mpox vaccine, influenza vaccines, pneumococcus vaccines, meningococci vaccines, polio vaccines, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine, chikungunya vaccines, dengue vaccines, and COVID-19 vaccines.

Vaccine uptake during pregnancy remains low. Our objectives were to describe 1) development and adaptation of a clinician communication training intervention for maternal immunizations and 2) obstetrics and gynecology (ob-gyn) clinician and staff perspectives on the intervention and fit for the prenatal care context.Design of the Motivational Interviewing for Maternal Immunizations (MI4MI) intervention was based on similar communication training interventions for pediatric settings and included presumptive initiation of vaccine recommendations ("You're due for two vaccines today") combined with motivational interviewing (MI) for hesitant patients. Interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with ob-gyn clinicians and staff in five Colorado clinics including settings with obstetric physicians, certified nurse midwives (CNMs), and clinician-trainees. Participants were asked about adapting training to the ob-gyn setting and their implementation experiences. Feedback was incorporated through iterative changes to training components.Interview and focus group discussion results from participants before (n = 3), during (n = 11) and after (n = 25) implementation guided intervention development and adaptation. Three virtual, asynchronous training components were created: a video and two interactive modules. This virtual format was favored due to challenges attending group meetings; however, participants noted opportunities to practice skills through role-play were lacking. Training modules were adapted to include common challenging vaccine conversations and live-action videos. Participants liked interactive training components and use of adult learning strategies. Some participants initially resisted the presumptive approach but later found it useful after applying it in their practices. Overall, participants reported that MI4MI training fit well with the prenatal context and recommended more inclusion of non-clinician staff.MI4MI training was viewed as relevant and useful for ob-gyn clinicians and staff. Suggestions included making training more interactive, and including more complex scenarios and non-clinician staff.

To evaluate the impact of a multi-component intervention package of maternal immunization uptake in obstetric care clinics.In a multi-level, cluster- and individually-randomized controlled trial we implemented an evidence-based intervention that targeted practice-, provider- and patient-level barriers to vaccine uptake. Obstetric practices were randomized to receive the practice and provider-level interventions or continue their normal standard of care. We enrolled pregnant women at practices in Georgia and Colorado and randomized women into patient-level intervention and control groups, resulting in four study arms. The primary outcomes were receipt of the influenza and tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines during pregnancy. A sample size of 550 women per arm (2200 total) was planned and enrolled to compare the intervention between the four study arms.Between June 2017 and July 2018, 4907 women were screened and 2200 women were randomized, 550 to each of the four study arms. We were unable to follow-up with 108 women, for a final sample size of 2092. Sample characteristics and sample size were similar among study arms. There was no significant increase in Tdap or influenza vaccine uptake overall. Among women who had no intention of or were unsure about receiving the influenza vaccine during pregnancy, those who received just the patient-level intervention were 61% more likely to receive the influenza vaccine than those in the control arm (Relative risk: 1.61; 95% Confidence Interval: 1.18-2.21). There was no significant difference in vaccine uptake for either influenza or tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis between the four arms of the study.This trial highlights the need for more targeted interventions to improve vaccine uptake. Future work should focus on clinics with low baseline vaccine uptake and the patient-level intervention should be expanded and targeted towards women with low vaccine confidence.

Objective To describe, among pediatricians (Peds) and family physicians (FPs), 1) changes made to routine childhood vaccination delivery as a result of the pandemic, and 2) perceived barriers to delivering vaccinations from March 2020 through the time of the survey. Methods A nationally representative survey among Peds and FPs was administered by mail or Internet in October-December 2020. Results Response rate was 64% (579/909). For children aged 0–2 years, among those who vaccinated that age group pre-pandemic (Peds n=265, FPs n=222), 5% of Peds and 15% of FPs reported they had stopped vaccinating these children at any time. For children aged 4–6 years (Peds n=264, FPs n=229), 19% of Peds and 17% of FPs reported they had stopped vaccinating at any time. For children aged 11–18 years (Peds n=265, FPs n=251), 24% of Peds and 19% of FPs reported they had stopped vaccinating at any time. Nearly all reported returning to pre-pandemic vaccination services at the time of the survey. Factors most frequently reported as major/moderate barriers to providing vaccinations included fewer in-person visits because patients/parents were concerned about risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (Peds, 52%; FPs, 54%), fewer in-person visits for sports clearance (Peds, 39%; FPs, 44%), and fewer back-to-school in-person visits because some children were in virtual learning (Peds, 25%; FPs, 33%). Conclusions Although some physicians reported interrupting vaccination services at some point during the pandemic, the majority reported continuing to provide vaccinations throughout, with essentially all returning to pre-pandemic vaccination services by end of 2020.

Health care provider recommendations are among the most important factors influencing parents' decisions to vaccinate their adolescents. However, delivery of high-quality health care provider recommendations for vaccination is not universal. There is wide variation in the strength, timeliness and consistency of the delivery of recommendations for all adolescent vaccines. The factors that influence health care providers' recommendations are multi-level and can be conceptualized in much the same way as vaccine acceptance among parents. Health care providers are influenced by their own attitudes and beliefs about a vaccine and also by the patient they are treating and by the community in which they practice as well as state and national level vaccine policy. We propose a multi-level framework for understanding the factors that influence health care providers' recommendations at the individual, interpersonal and community level to both develop and adapt interventions to improve providers' recommendations.

Study Objective To compare the recurrence rate, post-treatment American Fertility Society (AFS) score, ongoing pregnancy rate, and endometrial thickness of 3 secondary prevention therapies in preventing recurrent intrauterine adhesions (IUAs) and increasing pregnancy rates in infertile women after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. Design A retrospective study. Setting A private fertility hospital. Patients A total of 200 consecutive infertile women, with the desire to have a baby and were diagnosed as having IUAs detected by hysterosalpingogram, who underwent hysteroscopic adhesiolysis for IUAs from January, 2018 to May, 2020. Interventions Women who underwent hysteroscopic adhesiolysis received hormone therapy, and one of the 3 secondary preventions: hyaluronic acid (HA) gel alone, intrauterine devices (IUDs) alone, or HA gel + IUD. Measurements and Main Results Of the 200 women included in the final analysis, 121 received HA alone, 59 were treated with IUD alone, and 20 received HA gel + IUD combination. The mean post-treatment AFS score for IUAs was significantly lower in the HA gel + IUD group than the HA alone or the IUD alone groups (adjusted p = .01 and p = .02, respectively). Multivariable analysis revealed a significantly lower recurrence rate in the women after treatment with HA gel + IUD than HA alone (adjusted odds ratio, 0.19; 95% credible interval [CreI], 0.03–0.88). Women treated with HA gel + IUD also had reduced post-treatment AFS scores compared with HA alone (β coefficients, −0.83; 95% CreI, −1.64 to −0.01). For ongoing pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization, the adjusted odds ratio for HA gel + IUD vs HA alone was 2.03 (95% CreI, 0.44–11.00) and for IUD alone vs HA alone was 1.13 (95% CreI, 0.41–3.29), indicating nonsignificant differences. There were no differences observed in endometrial thickness on the day of embryo transfer among the 3 groups. Conclusion The investigation of the primary outcome in reducing the recurrence rate IUA after treatment demonstrated that a combination of HA gel + IUD provides greater prevention of recurrent IUAs and may decrease post-treatment AFS scores for infertile women undergoing hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. However, for the secondary outcome of increasing pregnancy rates, there was no improvement in the ongoing pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Acute hematogenous musculoskeletal infections (MSKI) are medical emergencies with the potential for life-altering complications in afflicted children. Leveraging administrative data to study pediatric MSKI is difficult as many infections are chronic, nonhematogenous, or occur in children with significant comorbidities. The objective of this study was to validate a case-finding algorithm to accurately identify children hospitalized with acute hematogenous MSKI using administrative billing codes. METHODS This was a multicenter validation study using the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database. Hospital admissions for MSKI were identified from 6 PHIS hospitals using discharge diagnosis codes. A random subset of admissions underwent manual chart review at each site using predefined criteria to categorize each admission as either “acute hematogenous MSKI” (AH-MSKI) or “not acute hematogenous MSKI.” Ten unique coding algorithms were developed using billing data. The sensitivity and specificity of each algorithm to identify AH-MSKI were calculated using chart review categorizations as the reference standard. RESULTS Of the 492 admissions randomly selected for manual review, 244 (49.6%) were classified as AH-MSKI and 248 (50.4%) as not acute hematogenous MSKI. Individual algorithm performance varied widely (sensitivity 31% to 91%; specificity 52% to 98%). Four algorithms demonstrated potential for future use with receiver operating characteristic area under the curve greater than 80%. CONCLUSIONS Identifying children with acute hematogenous MSKI based on discharge diagnosis alone is challenging as half have chronic or nonhematogenous infections. We validated several case-finding algorithms using administrative billing codes and detail them here for future use in pediatric MSKI outcomes.

BACKGROUND Rural adolescent vaccination rates lag behind urban. We sought to assess rural-urban differences in barriers to adolescent vaccination, perceived parental vaccine attitudes, and immunization delivery practices among public health nursing (PHN), pediatric (Peds), and family medicine (FM) clinicians. METHODS Internet and mail survey of Colorado PHN, Peds, and FM clinicians from June-August 2019. Study population was recruited from local health plans and the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. Rural and urban responses were compared using Cochran Armitage trend, Fisher's exact, and chi-square tests. RESULTS Response rate was 38% (163/433; 91 rural, 72 urban). Rural respondents were less likely than urban to agree most patients have insurance that covers vaccination (86% vs 97%; P = .02). Rural respondents were less likely than urban to indicate most parents in their practice would agree with statements about vaccine benefits (P = .02) and trust in medical providers (P = .05). Rural respondents were more likely than urban to report adolescents were somewhat/very likely to receive vaccines at public health departments (65% vs 28%; P < .0001) and less likely to report adolescents were somewhat/very likely to receive vaccines at pharmacies (26% vs 45%; P = .02). Fewer providers strongly recommended HPV vaccine (81% for females, 80% for males 11 to 12 years) than other adolescent immunizations (Tdap: 97%, MenACWY at 11 to 12 years: 87%; influenza at 11 to 17 years: 87%; each P < .005, rural-urban responses did not differ). CONCLUSIONS Rural barriers to adolescent vaccination include logistic issues and parental vaccine attitudes. Efforts to improve rural adolescent vaccination should include public health departments and address vaccine confidence and access barriers.

Objective To measure the risk of influenza under-vaccination in children of vaccine-hesitant parents, referent to children of nonhesitant parents, in a sample of disadvantaged families in one influenza season. Study Design A prospective observational cohort study of English- and Spanish-speaking parents of 2-year-olds presenting at random for well, sick, or specialty visit care from August 1, 2019 to February 28, 2020. Parents answered demographic questions and the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines survey. We followed children until season's end, extracting vaccination data on April 30, 2020. We dichotomized vaccination status as unvaccinated or partially/fully vaccinated, analyzing data with multivariable Poisson regression; in secondary analyses, we conducted adjusted time-to-event analyses. Results Overall, 263 parents consented (response rate: 90%); our final sample included 255 dyads. Thirty-three (13%) parents were vaccine hesitant. In adjusted analyses, children of hesitant parents (n = 33) had a 195% increased risk (adjusted Risk Ratio 2.95; 95% confidence interval 1.91, 4.56) of being unvaccinated at season's end, referent to children of nonhesitant parents (n = 222). In time-to-event analyses, children of vaccine-hesitant parents were also more likely to be unvaccinated before influenza activity peaked (P = .02). Conclusions Parental vaccine hesitancy tripled the risk of pediatric influenza nonvaccination in a sample of poor and minority families during the 2019 to 2020 influenza season. As parental vaccine hesitancy appears to exacerbate pediatric influenza vaccination disparities, future work should explore parental hesitancy with poor and minority stakeholders and tailor evidence-based interventions to benefit children from these communities who receive care at all practice sites.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a group of medical and public health experts that provides expert advice to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, normally meets three times per year to develop US vaccine recommendations. The ACIP increased its meeting frequency over the past 2.5 years to address vaccine-related issues during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic. They met to discuss updating coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) booster dose recommendations on September 1, 2022 recommending the use of new bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccines which include equal amounts of ancestral and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 variant mRNA that encodes the spike protein.

Purpose of review We reviewed the literature about parental vaccine hesitancy, focusing on publications from October 2019 to April 2021 to describe patterns and causes of hesitancy and interventions to address hesitancy. Recent findings Recent studies expand understanding of the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy globally and highlight associated individual and contextual factors. Common concerns underlying hesitancy include uncertainty about the need for vaccination and questions about vaccine safety and efficacy. Sociodemographic factors associated with parental vaccine hesitancy vary across locations and contexts. Studies about psychology of hesitancy and how parents respond to interventions highlight the role of cognitive biases, personal values, and vaccination as a social contract or norm. Evidence-based strategies to address vaccine hesitancy include presumptive or announcement approaches to vaccine recommendations, motivational interviewing, and use of immunization delivery strategies like standing orders and reminder/recall programs. A smaller number of studies support use of social media and digital applications to improve vaccination intent. Strengthening school vaccine mandates can improve vaccination rates, but policy decisions must consider local context. Summary Vaccine hesitancy remains a challenge for child health. Future work must include more interventional studies to address hesitancy and regular global surveillance of parental vaccine hesitancy and vaccine content on social media.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) was created out of the need to formalize vaccine recommendations for the United States. Annually, ACIP delivers recommendations to the CDC director for guidance about United States vaccine use and publishes the Adult Immunization Schedule. Updated schedules feature changes to vaccine recommendations as well as changes to the schedule's usability for physicians. The objective of this study was to determine physicians' attitudes about the Adult Immunization Schedule. Surveys were administered to a sentinel physician network from October 2019 through January 2020. Physicians that responded were comfortable using the Adult Immunization Schedule, but reported confusion about some medical condition-based indications. Physicians reported a lack engagement with mobile applications, CDC Vaccine Schedules and Shots by STFM (the Society for Teachers of Family Medicine). Future work should focus on increasing clarity regarding the recommendations with medical condition-based indications and increasing knowledge of mobile applications for physicians.

Introduction: Since 2009, pharmacists in all 50 states have been authorized to provide vaccinations to adults. The objective of this study was to assess primary care physicians9 (PCPs) experiences with and attitudes about pharmacists administering vaccinations. Methods: Internet and mail survey of PCPs representative of American College of Physicians9 and American Academy of Family Physicians9 memberships. Results: Response rate was 69% (642/926). Ninety-eight percent of respondents agreed (79% “Strongly,” 19% “Somewhat”) that it is their responsibility to assure their adult patients receive recommended vaccinations. Most respondents agreed that pharmacists either did not have access to patient medical information (33% “Strongly,” 45% “Somewhat”) or did not have adequate vaccination history (33% “Strongly,” 41% “Somewhat”). The majority also agreed that pharmacists did not inform them when vaccinations were given (35% “Strongly,” 39% “Somewhat”) and did not enter vaccinations administered into immunization information systems (IISs) (20% “Strongly,” 37% “Somewhat”). However, 83% agreed (31% “Strongly,” 52% “Somewhat”) that it is helpful to have pharmacists share the role of vaccinating adults. Conclusions: PCPs have mixed feelings about pharmacists delivering vaccines. Universal use of IISs by pharmacists could partially address physicians9 concerns by providing a systematic way for pharmacists and physicians to share patient vaccination histories.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) incorporated the terminology “shared clinical decision-making” (SDM) into recommendations for two adult vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To assess among general internal medicine physicians (GIMs) and family physicians (FPs) nationally (1) attitudes about and experience with ACIP SDM recommendations, (2) knowledge of insurance reimbursement for vaccines with SDM recommendations, (3) how SDM recommendations are incorporated into vaccine forecasting software, and (4) physician and practice characteristics associated with not knowing how to implement SDM. DESIGN: Survey conducted in October 2019–January 2020 by mail or internet based on preference. PARTICIPANTS: Networks of GIMs and FPs recruited from American College of Physicians (ACP) and American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) who practice ≥ 50% in primary care. Post-stratification quota sampling performed to ensure networks similar to ACP and AAFP memberships. MAIN MEASURES: Responses on 4-point Likert scales (attitudes/experiences), true/false options (knowledge), and categorical response options (forecasting). Multivariable modeling with outcome of “not knowing how to implement SDM” conducted. KEY RESULTS: Response rate was 64% (617/968). Most physicians strongly/somewhat agreed SDM requires more time than routine recommendations (90%FP; 95%GIM, p = 0.02) and that they need specific talking points to guide SDM discussions (79%FP; 84%GIM, p = NS). There was both support for SDM recommendations for certain vaccines (81%FP; 75%GIM, p = 0.06) and agreement that SDM creates confusion (64%FP; 76%GIM, p = 0.001). Only 41%FP and 43%GIM knew vaccines recommended for SDM would be covered by most health insurance. Overall, 38% reported SDM recommendations are displayed as “recommended” and 23% that they did not result in any recommendation in forecasting software. In adjusted multivariable models, GIMs [risk ratio 1.44 (1.15–1.81)] and females [1.28 (1.02–1.60)] were significantly associated with not knowing how to implement SDM recommendations CONCLUSIONS: To be successful in a primary care setting, SDM for adult vaccination will require thoughtful implementation with decision-making support for patients and physicians.

BACKGROUND: Several different types of influenza vaccine are licensed for use in adults in the USA including high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV) and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV). HD-IIV is licensed for use in adults ≥ 65 years, and recommendations for use of LAIV have changed several times in recent years. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine family physicians’ (FPs) and general internal medicine physicians’ (GIMs) perceptions, knowledge, and practices for use of HD-IIV and LAIV during the 2016–2017 and 2018–2019 influenza seasons. DESIGN: E-mail and mail surveys conducted February–March 2017, January–February 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Nationally representative samples of FPs and GIMs. MAIN MEASURES: Surveys assessed HD-IIV practices (2017), knowledge and perceptions (2019), and LAIV knowledge and practices (2017, 2019). KEY RESULTS: Response rates were 67% (620/930) in 2017 and 69% (642/926) in 2019. Many physicians believed HD-IIV is more effective than standard dose IIV in patients ≥ 65 years (76%) and reported their patients ≥ 65 years believe they need HD-IIV (67%). Most respondents incorrectly thought ACIP preferentially recommends HD-IIV for adults ≥ 65 years (88%); 65% “almost always/always” recommended HD-IIV for adults ≥ 65 years. Some physicians incorrectly thought ACIP preferentially recommends HD-IIV for adults

Introduction: In June 2019, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended shared clinical decision making (SCDM) regarding human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for adults 27 to 45 years. Our objectives were to assess among primary care physicians 1) recent practice regarding HPV vaccination for adults 27 to 45 years, 2) knowledge of HPV and the new SCDM recommendation, and 3) attitudes toward and anticipated effect of the new SCDM recommendation. Methods: From October to December 2019, we administered an Internet and mail survey to national networks of 494 general internist (GIM) and 474 family physician (FP) members of the American College of Physicians and American Academy of Family Physicians, respectively. Results: Response rate was 64% (617/968; GIM, 57%; FP, 71%). Fifty-eight percent were aware of the new ACIP recommendation; 42% had recommended HPV vaccination to adults 27 to 45 years, but most had administered HPV vaccine to very few of these patients (73% to 0% and 22% to 1 to 3). Fifty-five percent and 63% were unaware that HPV vaccination does not prevent progression of existing HPV-related cancers or infections, respectively and 57% were not sure what to emphasize when having a SCDM conversation about HPV vaccination. A majority reported they will be more likely recommend HPV vaccination to adults in the 27-to-45-year age range as a result of the new recommendation. Conclusions: Physicians are interested in recommending HPV vaccination for adults age 27 to 45 years despite ACIP not routinely recommending it in this age range. The majority need more education about the optimal use of HPV vaccine in this age group.

Introduction We sought to (i) adapt a Spanish-language vaccine hesitancy (VH) tool to rural Guatemala, (ii) pilot the tool with 150 parents of children ≤ 5 years, and (iii) measure if parent scores associated with child under-vaccination. Methods We used implementation science to develop the adapted Guatemalan Vaccine Attitudes (GuaVA) tool, piloting it with 150 parents of children ≤ 5 years, and performing descriptive and adjusted regression analyses. Results Of 150 parents (response rate 99%), 55% (n = 83) of parents expressed a degree of VH. Children of parents with highly hesitant scores (n = 22) had 2.5 times the odds (OR 2.5; 95% CI: 1.2, 5.4) of being undervaccinated at 19 months, referent children of non-hesitant parents (n = 67). Conclusions Vaccine hesitancy may be more prevalent in rural Guatemala than suspected. Implementation science facilitated the adaptation of a VH tool to rural Guatemala and may assist investigators in other settings.

INTRODUCTION. Maternal vaccination is critical for improving maternal and child health. Quality Improvement (QI) models(), such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, eXchange (AFIX)() model, have not yet been adapted to maternal vaccinations. This study assesses the impact of AFIX-OB, an adapted version of AFIX for obstetric settings, on maternal vaccination rates. METHODS. Between December 2016 and May 2018, state health departments and obstetric practices in Colorado and Georgia implemented the adapted AFIX-OB model. The model addressed unique patterns in patient encounters, practice flow, health records systems and competing clinical priorities in the obstetric setting through a menu of clearly-defined QI strategies, bi-weekly technical assistance meetings with designated immunization champions, incentives for champions/staff, and adapted tools to aid each practice during implementation. Vaccination rates were assessed by random chart reviews pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS. The AFIX-OB model was evaluated in eleven obstetric practices in two states as part of a multi-level intervention to increase maternal vaccination. Post AFIX-OB implementation, documented influenza vaccination rates increased from 56% at baseline to 65% (p

Suppressing cellular signal transducers of transcription 2 (STAT2) is a common strategy that viruses use to establish infections, yet the detailed mechanism remains elusive, owing to a lack of structural information about the viral-cellular complex involved. Here, we report the cryo-EM and crystal structures of human STAT2 (hSTAT2) in complex with the non-structural protein 5 (NS5) of Zika virus (ZIKV) and dengue virus (DENV), revealing two-pronged interactions between NS5 and hSTAT2. First, the NS5 methyltransferase and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) domains form a conserved interdomain cleft harboring the coiled-coil domain of hSTAT2, thus preventing association of hSTAT2 with interferon regulatory factor 9. Second, the NS5 RdRP domain also binds the amino-terminal domain of hSTAT2. Disruption of these ZIKV NS5-hSTAT2 interactions compromised NS5-mediated hSTAT2 degradation and interferon suppression, and viral infection under interferon-competent conditions. Taken together, these results clarify the mechanism underlying the functional antagonism of STAT2 by both ZIKV and DENV.

Purpose of review To offer healthcare providers current, evidence-based approaches for addressing vaccine hesitancy to increase vaccine coverage and reduce the frequency of vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks. Recent findings Vaccine hesitancy is a growing problem with profound societal, economic, and medical consequences. Understanding the complexity of vaccine hesitancy can inform approaches to increasing vaccine uptake on both the individual and population levels. Notably, pediatricians play a critical role in increasing vaccine uptake due to their relationships with families. This doctor-patient relationship establishes trust and allows evidence-based intervention strategies to be effective in the office. Understanding potential solutions outside the office, such as media campaigns and policy changes, also provide insight into vaccine hesitancy and potential directions for future research. While pediatricians' attempts in the clinic to increase coverage remain crucial, vaccine hesitancy remains a formidable public health problem that requires attention on both the micro and macro levels to be addressed successfully. Summary Providers have an opportunity to increase both confidence in and uptake of vaccines. Public health interventions would effectively complement strategies in the clinic to increase overall coverage.

Immunization is one of the most effective ways to prevent infectious diseases. However, vaccination rates are suboptimal in the United States. Obstetric providers are critical in influencing vaccine decision making among pregnant women, as trust between a patient and provider may facilitate willingness to accept vaccination. Little is known about how power between a patient and provider affects vaccine acceptance. This study explored pregnant women’s trust in obstetric providers within the context of vaccines. Using concepts from the relational theory of power, we conducted 40 in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of pregnant women from four Ob-Gyn practices each in Georgia and Colorado. Results suggest that to enhance trust, providers could gain distributive power by conveying empathy. Designated power through medical experience was associated with both trust and distrust, as some women trusted their providers because of their authority and medical credentials, while others viewed authority and experience as reasons to distrust their provider. To increase acceptance, providers should acknowledge the underlying power dynamics within these interpersonal relationships and strengthen rapport with patients through empathy and dialogue.

Background In 2017, three media stories regarding influenza vaccine may have impacted obstetricians’ (OB) influenza vaccination practices: reports of reduced influenza vaccine effectiveness, a severe influenza season, and a possible increased risk of miscarriage among pregnant women receiving 2009 H1N1 vaccine in the 1st trimester who had received H1N1 vaccine the previous season (later disproven). Objective Describe OB’s: (1) awareness of; (2) attitudes and experiences related to; and (3) reported alterations in practice as a result of these reports. Methods A survey among a nationally representative sample of OBs April to June 2018. Results Response rate was 65% (302/468). 88% of OBs were “very aware” of the severe season, 74% of lower effectiveness, and 25% of the miscarriage study (47% “completely unaware” of miscarriage study). Among those aware, 58%, 57%, and 16% reported ≥10% of pregnant patients initiated discussions about the severe season, lower effectiveness, and miscarriage study, respectively. Most (83%) agreed reports about increased severity increased their enthusiasm for recommending influenza vaccine; fewer agreed reports about the miscarriage study (18%) and lower vaccine effectiveness (12%) decreased their enthusiasm for recommending influenza vaccine. Providers were more likely to initiate discussion with patients about increased severity of the season than the other reports. However, 35% agreed the miscarriage study reports increased their concerns about influenza vaccine safety; 18% (n = 48) reported changing the way they recommended influenza vaccine. Of those, 17 (6% of all respondents) reported not recommending influenza vaccine to women during the 1st trimester and 26 (10% of all respondents) recommended it but were willing to delay until the 2nd trimester. Conclusions During a season in which media stories could have influenced OB influenza vaccination behaviors in different directions, reports underscoring importance of influenza vaccine may have had more impact on OBs’ recommendations than reports questioning vaccine safety or effectiveness.

Background Infants too young to be fully vaccinated are vulnerable to potentially deadly influenza and pertussis infections. The cocooning strategy limits this risk by vaccinating those likely to interact with the infant and mother during this vulnerable time, such as close friends and family members. Distribution of accurate and accessible vaccine information through existing social networks could be an important tool in increasing vaccine confidence and coverage. Methods We surveyed 1095 pregnant women from diverse prenatal care practices in Georgia and Colorado. These women were surveyed through a mobile app to assess vaccine intentions, attitudes, beliefs, norms, and levels of trust, and then presented brief individually-tailored educational videos about maternal and infant vaccines and the cocooning strategy. They were then given the opportunity to refer up to six contacts to enroll in the app and receive similar vaccine education. Results Twenty-eight percent of these women referred at least one contact, with an average of 2.67 contacts per referring woman. Most referrals (93%) were partners, parents, siblings, relatives, or close friends. Attitudinal constructs significantly associated with increased likelihood of referring contacts included: intention to receive maternal influenza vaccine, perceived safety of maternal Tdap vaccine, perceived efficacy of maternal influenza vaccine, perceived susceptibility to and severity of influenza during pregnancy, and trust in vaccine information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and academic institutions. Uncertainty about infant vaccine intentions was associated with decreased likelihood of referring contacts. Conclusions Pregnant women who valued vaccination and trusted vaccine information from academic institutions were more likely to refer an educational app about vaccines than those who did not. Further research is needed to determine the potential impact of this strategy on vaccine coverage when implemented on a large scale. Trial registration The survey informing this article was part of a randomized controlled trial funded by the National Institutes of Health [clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT02898688].

Herpes zoster vaccination rates remain low despite longstanding national recommendations to vaccinate immunocompetent adults aged ≥ 50 years. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice (ACIP) updated its recommendations for recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in October 2021 to include immunocompromised adults aged ≥19 years.To assess practices, attitudes, and knowledge about RZV, barriers to recommending RZV, and likelihood of recommending RZV to patients with various immunocompromising conditions.Mail and internet-based survey conducted from May through July 2020.General internists and family physicians throughout the USA.Survey responses.The response rate was 66% (632/955). Many physicians were already recommending RZV to immunocompromised populations, including adults ≥50 years with HIV (67% of respondents) and on recombinant human immune modulator therapy (56%). Forty-seven percent of respondents both stocked/administered RZV and referred patients elsewhere, frequently a pharmacy, for vaccination; 42% did not stock RZV and only referred patients. The majority agreed pharmacies do not inform them when RZV has been given (64%). Physicians were generally knowledgeable about RZV; however, 25% incorrectly thought experiencing side effects from the first dose of RZV that interfere with normal activities was a reason to not receive the second dose. The top reported barrier to recommending RZV was experience with patients declining RZV due to cost concerns (67%). Most physicians reported they would be likely to recommend RZV to immunocompromised patients.Most primary care physicians welcome updated ACIP RZV recommendations for immunocompromised adults. Knowledge gaps, communication issues, and financial barriers need to be addressed to optimize vaccination delivery.

Historically, partnerships with community leaders (e.g., religious leaders, teachers) have been critical to building vaccination confidence, but leaders may be increasingly vaccine hesitant. In rural Guatemala, the extent of vaccine hesitancy among community leaders is unclear, as are their perceptions of advocacy for childhood vaccines. We sought to: (i) compare Guatemalan religious leaders’ and community leaders’ attitudes toward childhood vaccines, (ii) describe leaders’ experiences and comfort with vaccination advocacy, and (iii) describe community members’ trust in them as vaccination advocates. In 2019, we surveyed religious leaders, other community leaders, and parents of children under five in rural Guatemala. We recorded participant demographic information and assessed participant vaccine hesitancy regarding childhood vaccines. We analyzed data descriptively and via adjusted regression modeling. Our sample included 50 religious leaders, 50 community leaders, and 150 community members (response rate: 99%); 14% of religious leaders and community leaders were vaccine hesitant, similar to community members (P = 0.71). In the prior year, 47% of leaders had spoken about vaccines in their formal role; 85% felt responsible to do so. Only 28% of parents trusted politicians “a lot” for vaccine advice, versus doctors (72%; P < 0.01), nurses (62%; P < 0.01), religious leaders (49%; P < 0.01), and teachers (48%; P < 0.01). In this study, religious leaders and community leaders were willing but incompletely engaged vaccination advocates. Most community members trusted doctors and nurses a lot for vaccination advice; half trusted teachers and religious leaders similarly. Public health officials in rural Guatemala can complement efforts by doctors and nurses through partnerships with teachers and religious leaders to increase vaccination confidence and delivery.

The purpose of this report is to educate providers about the risk of infectious diseases associated with emerging alternative peripartum and neonatal practices. This report will provide information pediatricians may use to counsel families before birth and to appropriately evaluate and treat neonates who have been exposed to these practices.

To assess measles experience, practice, and knowledge by pediatricians in the context of resurgent US outbreaks in 2018-2019.A nationally representative network of pediatricians were surveyed by email and mail from January to April 2020.The response rate was 67% (297 of 444). In the 3 years preceding the survey, 52% of the respondents reported awareness of measles cases in/near their community. Most thought that media reports about recent measles outbreaks had decreased delay/refusal of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine (6% "greatly decreased"; 66% "moderately decreased"). More than 60% of the pediatricians responded correctly for 6 of 9 true/false measles knowledge items. Less than 50% responded correctly for 3 true/false items, including statements about pretravel MMR recommendations for a preschooler and measles isolation precautions. The most common resources that the pediatricians would "sometimes" or "often/always" consult for measles information were those from the American Academy of Pediatrics (72%), a state or local public health department (70%), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (63%). More than 90% of the pediatricians reported correct clinical practice for MMR vaccination of a 9-month-old before international travel. More than one-third of the respondents did not have a plan for measles exposures in their clinic. Pediatricians aware of measles cases in/near their community in the previous 3 years and those working in a hospital/clinic or Health Maintenance Organization setting were more likely to have a plan for measles exposures.During this time of heightened risk for measles outbreaks, there are opportunities to strengthen the knowledge and implementation of measles pretravel vaccination and infection prevention and control recommendations among pediatricians.

Background Little was known about US parental attitudes, beliefs, and intentions surrounding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines for children before their introduction. Methods An online cross-sectional nationally representative survey of US parents/guardians of children < 18 years old via Ipsos KnowledgePanel, fielded from October 26, 2021 to November 30, 2021. Results Response rate was 64.2% (3230/5034). For children ages 0–4 years, 51.5% of parents were likely to have their children vaccinated, and for ages 5–11 and 12–17, 54.0% and 69.7% of parents, respectively, reported they were likely to vaccinate or had already vaccinated their children. Among respondents with unvaccinated children, 25.2% (ages 0–4) and 22.0% (ages 5–11) reported they would seek COVID-19 vaccination for their children as soon as authorization occurred. Factors associated with willingness to have children receive a COVID-19 vaccine were: belief in benefits of COVID-19 vaccination (odds ratio [OR] = 6.44, 5.68, 4.57 in ages 0–4, 5–11, and 12–17 respectively), acceptance of routine childhood vaccines (OR = 6.42, 5.48, 1.76), parental COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 1.85, 3.70, 6.16), perceptions that pediatric COVID-19 is severe (OR = 1.89, 1.72, 1.35), Hispanic ethnicity (OR = 2.07, 2.29, 2.60), influenza vaccine acceptance (OR = 1.07, 0.88, 1.62), presence of children of another age group in the household (OR = 0.71, 0.71, 0.65), and attitudinal barriers to COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 0.30, 0.26, 0.49). Conclusions Belief in the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination and acceptance of routine childhood vaccines are the strongest predictors of intention to vaccinate children. Further research is needed to track how parental attitudes change as more data about pediatric COVID-19 vaccines become available and how intentions translate into pediatric vaccine uptake.

Objective Both high altitude and trisomy 21 (T21) status can negatively impact respiratory outcomes. The objective of this study was to examine the association between altitude and perinatal respiratory support in neonates with T21 compared with those without T21. Study Design This retrospective cohort study used the United States all-county natality files that included live, singleton, in-hospital births from 2015 to 2019. Descriptive statistics for neonates with and without the primary outcome of sustained assisted ventilation (>6 hours) were compared using t-tests and Chi-squared analyses. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between respiratory support and the presence of T21, and included an interaction term to determine whether the association between respiratory support and the presence of T21 was modified by elevation at delivery. Results A total of 17,939,006 neonates, 4,059 (0.02%) with T21 and 17,934,947 (99.98%) without, were included in the study. The odds of requiring sustained respiratory support following delivery were 5.95 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.31, 6.66), 4.06 (95% CI: 2.39, 6.89), 2.36 (95% CI: 1.64, 3.40), and 5.04 (95% CI: 1.54, 16.54) times as high for neonates with T21 than without T21 when born at low, medium, high, and very high elevations, respectively. The odds of requiring immediate ventilation support following delivery were 5.01 (95% CI: 4.59, 5.46), 5.90 (95% CI: 4.16, 8.36), 2.86 (95% CI: 2.15, 3.80), and 12.08 (95% CI: 6.78, 21.51) times as high for neonates with T21 than without T21 when born at low, medium, high, and very high elevation, respectively. Conclusion Neonates with T21 have increased odds of requiring respiratory support following delivery when compared with neonates without T21 at all categories of altitude. However, the odds ratios did not increase monotonically with altitude which indicates additional research is critical in understanding the effects of altitude on neonates with T21. Key Points

This technical report accompanies the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics for the routine use of the influenza vaccine and antiviral medications in the prevention and treatment of influenza in children during the 2021–2022 season. Influenza vaccination is an important intervention to protect vulnerable populations and reduce the burden of respiratory illnesses during circulation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, which is expected to continue during this influenza season. In this technical report, we summarize recent influenza seasons, morbidity and mortality in children, vaccine effectiveness, vaccination coverage, and detailed guidance on storage, administration, and implementation. We also provide background on inactivated and live attenuated influenza vaccine recommendations, vaccination during pregnancy and breastfeeding, diagnostic testing, and antiviral medications for treatment and chemoprophylaxis.

* Abbreviations: COVID-19 — : coronavirus disease 2019 CDC — : Centers for Disease Control and Prevention FDA — : Food and Drug Administration MIS-C — : multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children SARS-CoV-2 — : serious acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 VAERS — : Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System In this month’s issue of Pediatrics , Marshall et al report a case series describing seven 14- to 19-year-old male individuals who developed symptomatic myocarditis after the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine.1 The authors report that the symptoms began between 2 and 4 days after the second dose and that all 7 patients experienced rapid resolution of symptoms. This case series is published in the context of other media reports of myocarditis in young adults, mostly male, from the US military and from Israel2 as well as a recent increase in reports of myocarditis after serious acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).3 As such, this case series offers useful preliminary information on clinical and therapeutic details regarding myocarditis among adolescents. Although the authors are quick to point out that a causal relationship between vaccination and myocarditis has not been established, the temporal association of these cases with vaccination as well as the striking similarity in the clinical and laboratory presentations raise the possibility for such a relationship. However, the authors also acknowledge that a significant limitation in their report is that they compiled cases through personal communication rather than through a systematic surveillance system. Clearly, this approach could introduce reporting bias, and a case series cannot establish causality. Another critical point to consider is that the reported cases mirror the seasonal prevalence, sex, and age profile of background cases of myocarditis, thereby complicating an assessment of a potential association with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. The authors themselves note in their discussion the high background rate of myocarditis in adolescent and young adult male individuals,4 precisely the population in this case … Address correspondence to Sean T. O’Leary, MD, MPH University of Colorado, Department of Pediatrics Mail Stop F443 13199 E Montview Blvd, Suite 300 Aurora CO 80045. E-mail: sean.oleary{at}cuanschutz.edu