Search

Background: COVID-19 has disproportionately impacted low-income immigrant communities. There is concern that the current uptake of COVID-19 vaccines is suboptimal and that this may be contributing to COVID-19 inequities. However, little is known about the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines among immigrants in the U.S. Our goal was to gauge COVID-19 vaccine intentions among Brazilian immigrant women living in the U.S., Methods: We conducted an online survey between July and August 2020 offered in Portuguese and English languages among a convenience sample of Brazilian immigrant women ages 18 years and older. Women were recruited through online advertisements by community-based organizations and social media groups to complete a survey that assessed intention to get a COVID-19 vaccine, attitudes toward vaccines, and perceptions about the pandemic., Results: Of the total sample (N = 353), most (70.8%) indicated they intended to get a COVID-19 vaccine. In bivariate analyses, vaccine intentions were significantly associated with perceptions about the severity of the pandemic, trusted sources of health information, and the number of years lived in the U.S. Multinomial logistic regression models revealed that those who did not intend to be vaccinated had lived a longer time in the U.S. (OR: -0.12 95% CI: -0.19, -0.05), perceived the pandemic to be a minor issue (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 0.62, 2.42), and trusted information from social networks (OR: -1.94, 95% CI: -3.25, -0.63) or private news sources (OR: -1.71, 95% CI: -2.78, -0.63)., Conclusions: While most women reported they would get a COVID-19 vaccine, efforts to reach those who may be hesitant should target those who have lived in the U.S. for longer periods of time and do not perceive the pandemic to be a major crisis. Healthcare providers may be particularly suited to deliver this information given high levels of trust., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction: To present an analysis of the Brazilian health system and subnational (state) variation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, based on 10 non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs)., Materials and Methods: We collected daily information on implementation of 10 NPI designed to inform the public of health risks and promote distancing and mask use at the national level for eight countries across the Americas. We then analyse the adoption of the 10 policies across Brazil's 27 states over time, individually and using a composite index. We draw on this index to assess the timeliness and rigour of NPI implementation across the country, from the date of the first case, 26 February 2020. We also compile Google data on population mobility by state to describe changes in mobility throughout the COVID-19 pandemic., Results: Brazil's national NPI response was the least stringent among countries analysed. In the absence of a unified federal response to the pandemic, Brazilian state policy implementation was neither homogenous nor synchronised. The median NPI was no stay-at-home order, a recommendation to wear masks in public space but not a requirement, a full school closure and partial restrictions on businesses, public transportation, intrastate travel, interstate travel and international travel. These restrictions were implemented 45 days after the first case in each state, on average. Rondônia implemented the earliest and most rigorous policies, with school closures, business closures, information campaigns and restrictions on movement 24 days after the first case; Mato Grosso do Sul had the fewest, least stringent restrictions on movement, business operations and no mask recommendation., Conclusions: The study identifies wide variation in national-level NPI responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our focus on Brazil identifies subsequent variability in how and when states implemented NPI to contain COVID-19. States' NPIs and their scores on the composite policy index both align with the governors' political affiliations: opposition governors implemented earlier, more stringent sanitary measures than those supporting the Bolsonaro administration. A strong, unified national response to a pandemic is essential for keeping the population safe and disease-free, both at the outset of an outbreak and as communities begin to reopen. This national response should be aligned with state and municipal implementation of NPI, which we show is not the case in Brazil., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)