METHODOLOGY: Primary data from 117 respondents who did not register for the COVID-19 vaccination were collected using self-administered questionnaires to capture predictors of vaccination intention amongst individuals in a Malaysian context. The partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) technique was used to analyze the data.
RESULTS: Subjective norms and attitude play key mediating roles between the HBM factors and vaccination intention amongst the unregistered respondents. In particular, subjective norms mediate the relationship between cues to action and vaccination intention, highlighting the significance of important others to influence unregistered individuals who are already exposed to information from mass media and interpersonal discussions regarding vaccines. Trust, perceived susceptibility, and perceived benefits indirectly influence vaccination intention through attitude, indicating that one's attitude is vital in promoting behavioral change.
CONCLUSION: This study showed that the behavioral factors could help understand the reasons for vaccine refusal or acceptance, and shape and improve health interventions, particularly among the vaccine-hesitant group in a developing country. Therefore, policymakers and key stakeholders can develop effective strategies or interventions to encourage vaccination amongst the unvaccinated for future health pandemics by targeting subjective norms and attitude.
METHOD: A cross-sectional study was carried out through an online self-administered questionnaire from 27 September 2020 to 11 October 2020. A total of 883 people responded to the survey. The questionnaire included the participants' socio-demographic variables, attitudes, beliefs towards the COVID-19 vaccine and acceptance and rejection of vaccination, and reasons for them. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the predictors for vaccine acceptance and willingness to pay for the vaccine.
RESULTS: A majority (70.8%) of respondents will accept the COVID-19vaccine if available, and 66.8% showed a positive attitude towards vaccination. Monthly family income, education level, self-diagnosis of COVID-19 or a friend, family member, or colleague are significant factors influencing the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. The dogma of being naturally immune to COVID-19 was a key reason for the refusal of the vaccine. Less than half (48%) of those who refuse will vaccinate themselves if government officials have made it compulsory. A third (33.9%) of participants were willing to pay up to (7 USD) 1000 Pkr (Pakistani Rupees) for the vaccine.
CONCLUSION: The population's positive attitude should be improved by increasing awareness and eradicating false myths about vaccines through large-scale campaigns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021286108) based on PRISMA guidelines. Cross-sectional articles on the dental students' and dental practitioners' acceptance towards COVID-19 vaccine published between March 2020 to October 2021 were searched in eight online databases. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was employed to analyse the risk of bias (RoB) of each article, whereas the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine recommendation tool was used to evaluate the level of evidence. Data were analysed using the DerSimonian-Laird random effect model based on a single-arm approach.
RESULTS: Ten studies were included of which three studies focused on dental students and seven studies focused on dental practitioners. Four studies were deemed to exhibit moderate RoB and the remaining showed low RoB. All the studies demonstrated Level 3 evidence. Single-arm meta-analysis revealed that dental practitioners had a high level of vaccination acceptance (81.1%) than dental students (60.5%). A substantial data heterogeneity was observed with the overall I2 ranging from 73.65% and 96.86%. Furthermore, subgroup analysis indicated that dental practitioners from the Middle East and high-income countries showed greater (p < 0.05) acceptance levels, while meta-regression showed that the sample size of each study had no bearing on the degree of data heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high degree of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination among dental practitioners, dental students still demonstrated poor acceptance. These findings highlighted that evidence-based planning with effective approaches is warranted to enhance the knowledge and eradicate vaccination hesitancy, particularly among dental students.
CASE REPORT: We report a case of paraparetic spectrum of GBS in a 53-year-old lady who presented with rapidly progressive acute flaccid paralysis involving both lower extremities with areflexia eight days after the first dose of Sinovac vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 in Malaysia. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) albuminocytological dissociation was seen and nerve conduction study (NCS) revealed sensory neuropathy. The diagnosis of GBS was made based on the Brighton criteria. Patient responded well to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG).
CONCLUSION: Though there is currently no convincing evidence of any causation between GBS and SARS- CoV-2 vaccination, clinicians should remain vigilant and consider GBS in the differential diagnosis for patient who presents with weakness with reduced or absent deep tendon reflex after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2.
METHODS: A PubMed search was performed on HIV or acquired immune deficiency syndrome together with a search for specific vaccines. Review of the literature was performed to develop recommendations on vaccinations for HIV-positive travellers to high-risk destinations.
RESULTS: The immune responses to several vaccines are reduced in HIV-positive people. In the case of vaccines for hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, pneumococcus, meningococcus and yellow fever there is a good body of data in the literature showing reduced immune responsiveness and also to help guide appropriate vaccination strategies. For other vaccines like Japanese encephalitis, rabies, typhoid fever, polio and cholera the data are not as robust; however, it is still possible to gain some understanding of the reduced responses seen with these vaccines.
CONCLUSION: This review provides a summary of the immunological responses to commonly used vaccines for the HIV-positive travellers. This information will help guide travel medicine practitioners in making decisions about vaccination and boosting of travellers with HIV.
METHODS: Using a snowball sampling approach, we conducted an online cross-sectional study in 20 countries across four continents from February to May 2021.
RESULTS: A total of 10,477 participants were included in the analyses with a mean age of 36±14.3 years. The findings revealed the prevalence of perceptions towards COVID-19 vaccine's effectiveness (78.8%), acceptance (81.8%), hesitancy (47.2%), and drivers of vaccination decision-making (convenience [73.3%], health providers' advice [81.8%], and costs [57.0%]). The county-wise distribution included effectiveness (67.8-95.9%; 67.8% in Egypt to 95.9% in Malaysia), acceptance (64.7-96.0%; 64.7% in Australia to 96.0% in Malaysia), hesitancy (31.5-86.0%; 31.5% in Egypt to 86.0% in Vietnam), convenience (49.7-95.7%; 49.7% in Austria to 95.7% in Malaysia), advice (66.1-97.3%; 66.1% in Austria to 97.3% in Malaysia), and costs (16.0-91.3%; 16.0% in Vietnam to 91.3% in Malaysia). In multivariable regression analysis, several socio-demographic characteristics were identified as associated factors of outcome variables including, i) vaccine effectiveness: younger age, male, urban residence, higher education, and higher income; ii) acceptance: younger age, male, urban residence, higher education, married, and higher income; and iii) hesitancy: male, higher education, employed, unmarried, and lower income. Likewise, the factors associated with vaccination decision-making including i) convenience: younger age, urban residence, higher education, married, and lower income; ii) advice: younger age, urban residence, higher education, unemployed/student, married, and medium income; and iii) costs: younger age, higher education, unemployed/student, and lower income.
CONCLUSIONS: Most participants believed that vaccination would effectively control and prevent COVID-19, and they would take vaccinations upon availability. Determinant factors found in this study are critical and should be considered as essential elements in developing COVID-19 vaccination campaigns to boost vaccination uptake in the populations.
METHODS: Five centers participated in this retrospective study and completed a data form, which included general patients' information, clinical and laboratory data.
RESULTS: Among 236 CID patients, 127 were BCG vaccinated. 41.9% of patients with family history of CID and 17.1% who were diagnosed by screening were BCG vaccinated. Twenty-three patients (18.1%) developed BCG-VACs. The median age of VACs was 6 months and the median time from vaccination to complications was 6 months. The highest rate of BCG-VACs was recorded in patients receiving the Russian BCG strain compared to the Tokyo and Danish strains. Univariate analysis of T-lymphocyte subsets showed increased odds of BCG complications in patients with CD3+, CD4+, and CD8+ counts of ≤250 cells/µL. Only CD8 + count ≤250 cells/µL had increased such odds on multivariate analysis. VACs were disseminated in 13 and localized in 10 patients. Localized complication occurred earlier after vaccination (median: 4 months) compared with disseminated ones (median: 7 months). There were no significant associations between sex, administered vaccine strain, serum immunoglobulins levels, lymphocyte subsets counts, and the chance of having either localized or disseminated BCG-related complications.
COCLUSIONS: Although contraindicated, many patients with CID continue to be vaccinated with BCG. Low CD8 + count is a risk factor for BCG-related complications and localized complications occurred earlier than disseminated ones. Considerations should be undertaken by health care authorities especially in countries with high incidence of CID to implement newborn screening, delay the time of BCG vaccine administration beyond 6 months of age and to use the relatively safer strains like the Danish and Tokyo ones.
METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science was conducted up to June 7, 2024, following PRISMA guidelines to identify studies related to COVID-19 vaccines and POTS. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, case series, and case reports. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were independently performed by two reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklists and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS: Of the 1,531 articles identified, 10 met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 284,678 participants. These studies included five case reports, two case series, one cross-sectional study, one prospective observational study, and one cohort study. The cohort study reported that the odds of new POTS diagnoses post-vaccination were 1.33 (95% CI: 1.25-1.41) compared to the 90 days prior. In contrast, the post-infection odds were 2.11 (95% CI: 1.70-2.63), and the risk of POTS was 5.35 times higher (95% CI: 5.05-5.68) post-infection compared to post-vaccination. Diagnostic findings across studies included elevated norepinephrine levels and reduced heart rate variability. Reported management strategies involved ivabradine, intravenous therapies, and lifestyle modifications.
CONCLUSION: The risk of POTS following COVID-19 vaccination is lower than that observed post-SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, existing studies are limited by small sample sizes and methodological variability. Further research is needed to clarify the incidence, mechanisms, and long-term outcomes of vaccine-related POTS to inform effective clinical management strategies.