We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Immunization is a global development success story, saving millions of lives yearly by reducing the risks of contracting an infectious disease and enabling the immune system within the body to build protection. The global eradication of smallpox in 1977 demonstrates the potential of well-designed immunization campaigns. Islamic teaching places attention on preserving life, encouraging Muslims to care for their bodies and overall health, because of its preventive function. However, vaccination of populations is not without challenges; for example, vaccine hesitancy or avoidance emerges for a variety of reasons in Muslim populations, increasing the risks of communicable diseases globally. Public health has a role to play in countering issues. Such issues include misinformation, acting with diplomacy when discussing immunization programs with Muslim community leaders, ensuring the availability of evidence-based accessible information, and educating populations about the necessity and protective ability of vaccines to prevent life-threatening diseases. It also has a role to play in educating non-Muslim professionals about culturally competent care.
As COVID-19 spread rapidly during the early months of the pandemic, many communities around the globe anxiously waited for a vaccine. At the start of the pandemic, it was widely believed that Africa would be a significant source of infection, and thus, vaccinating African communities became a primary goal among local and global health authorities. However, when the COVID-19 vaccine became available in March 2021 in Sierra Leone, many people viewed it with scepticism and hesitation. While much literature has focused on access and distribution-related challenges for vaccination in the region, a growing number of studies discuss vaccine hesitancy as driving low vaccine uptake. Shifting attention to understanding the determinants of vaccine hesitancy remains fundamental to increasing vaccination rates, as negative vaccine perceptions tend to delay or prevent vaccination. This study sought to do this by assessing, through semi-structured qualitative interviews, vaccine-related attitudes and experiences of residents of Sierra Leone’s Kono District. In contrast to studies that utilise “knowledge-deficit” models of belief, however, this study drew upon the vaccine anxieties framework (Leach and Fairhead, 2007), which views vaccines as being imbued with personal, historical, and political meaning. Findings suggest that important bodily, social, and political factors, including fear of side effects, the spread of misinformation prompted by poor messaging strategies, and distrust of government and international actors, influenced people’s COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and behaviours. It is hoped that the study’s findings will inform future policies and interventions related to vaccine uptake in Africa and globally.
This study explored the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy on neonatal outcomes among women from the general Dutch population. VASCO is an ongoing prospective cohort study aimed at assessing vaccine effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination. Pregnancy status was reported at baseline and through regular follow-up questionnaires. As an extension to the main study, all female participants who reported to have been pregnant between enrolment (May–December 2021) and January 2023 were requested to complete an additional questionnaire on neonatal outcomes. Multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses were used to determine the associations between self-reported SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, adjusted for age, educational level, and presence of a medical risk condition. Infection analyses were additionally adjusted for COVID-19 vaccination before and during pregnancy, and vaccination analyses for SARS-CoV-2 infection before and during pregnancy. Of 312 eligible participants, 232 (74%) completed the questionnaire. In total, 196 COVID-19 vaccinations and 115 SARS-CoV-2 infections during pregnancy were reported. Infections were mostly first infections (86; 75%), caused by the Omicron variant (95; 83%), in women who had received ≥1 vaccination prior to infection (101; 88%). SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy was not significantly associated with gestational age (β = 1.7; 95%CI: −1.6–5.0), birth weight (β = 82; −59 to 223), Apgar score <9 (odds ratio (OR): 1.3; 0.6–2.9), postpartum hospital stay (OR: 1.0; 0.6–1.8), or neonatal intensive care unit admission (OR: 0.8; 0.2–3.2). COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was not significantly associated with gestational age (β = −0.4; −4.0 to 3.2), birth weight (β = 88; −64 to 240), Apgar score <9 (OR: 0.9; 0.4–2.3), postpartum hospital stay (OR: 0.9; 0.5–1.7), or neonatal intensive care unit admission (OR: 1.6; 0.4–8.6). In conclusion, this study did not find an effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy on any of the studied neonatal outcomes among a general Dutch, largely vaccinated, population. Together with data from other studies, this supports the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy.
High prevalence of long COVID symptoms has emerged as a significant public health concern. This study investigated the associations between three doses of COVID-19 vaccines and the presence of any and ≥3 types of long COVID symptoms among people with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Hong Kong, China. This is a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional online survey among Hong Kong adult residents conducted between June and August 2022. This analysis was based on a sub-sample of 1,542 participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during the fifth wave of COVID-19 outbreak in Hong Kong (December 2021 to April 2022). Among the participants, 40.9% and 16.1% self-reported having any and ≥3 types of long COVID symptoms, respectively. After adjusting for significant variables related to sociodemographic characteristics, health conditions and lifestyles, and SARS-CoV-2 infection, receiving at least three doses of COVID-19 vaccines was associated with lower odds of reporting any long COVID symptoms comparing to receiving two doses (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.87, P = .002). Three doses of inactivated and mRNA vaccines had similar protective effects against long COVID symptoms. It is important to strengthen the coverage of COVID-19 vaccination booster doses, even in the post-pandemic era.
Vaccination is the most important method to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and vaccination is key to this goal. This paper highlights considerations for policy development around vaccination attestation and proof requirements, specifically in rural Appalachia. Migrant and immigrant farmworkers are integral to the food and goods supply chain globally; they have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, therefore these policies need to take extensive precautions for farmworkers to systematically and easily comply with vaccination status submission procedures. In this paper, we present steps to equitably manage and implement vaccine mandates: (1) Develop and establish policies to support safe workplace standards for everyone, including vaccination policies; (2) Utilize equitable methods to collect vaccine verification; (3) Use effective and inclusive methods to implement the policies by using these techniques; (4) Integrate key populations to develop and strengthen policies to improve health equity.
Vaccines are not the only public health tool, but they are critical in routine and emergency settings. Achieving optimal vaccination rates requires timely access to vaccines. However, we have persistently failed to secure, distribute, and administer vaccines in a timely, effective, and equitable manner despite an enduring rhetoric of global health equity.
Many governments employed mandates for COVID-19 vaccines, imposing consequences upon unvaccinated people. Attitudes towards these policies have generally been positive, but little is known about how discourses around them changed as the characteristics of the disease and the vaccinations evolved. Western Australia (WA) employed sweeping COVID-19 vaccine mandates for employment and public spaces whilst the state was closed off from the rest of the country and world, and mostly with no COVID-19 in the community. This article analyses WA public attitudes during the mandate policy lifecycle from speculative to real. Qualitative interview data from 151 adults were analysed in NVivo 20 via a novel chronological analysis anchored in key policy phases: no vaccine mandates, key worker vaccine mandates, vaccine mandates covering 75% of the workforce and public space mandates. Participants justified mandates as essential for border reopening and, less frequently, for goals such as protecting the health system. However, public discourse focusing on ‘getting coverage rates up’ may prove counter-productive for building support for vaccination; governments should reinforce end goals in public messaging (reducing suffering and saving lives) because such messaging is likely to be more meaningful to vaccination behaviour in the longer term.
This chapter deals with Occupational Health and how to protect healthcare workers from acquiring infections (e.g. HAV, HBV, HIV, HCV, VZV, influenza, Covid-19, measles, mumps, rubella, polio, TB, diphtheria, meningococcal infection and tetanus) while at work. It describes how healthcare workers can be protected by providing pre-exposure vaccinations and post-exposure treatments, as well as discussing responses to outbreaks and routes of infection.
This chapter deals with public health and pandemic preparedness. It recognises the five stages of a new pandemic (detection, assessment, treatment, escalation and recovery). The chapter also deals with the issue of laboratory preparedness and the need to maintain a critical mass of laboratory and skilled staff expertise at all times in order to be able to respond rapidly and effectively to a new emerging pandemic.
Vaccination is one of the most recognised strategies in public health for preventing the spread of epidemics, and the availability of a vaccine is often expected by health actors to be a ‘game-changer’. However, the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) vaccine in Senegal was not the magic bullet that the international community expected. A very low vaccination coverage rate (less than 10% by April 2023) was observed in this country, once considered a model in West Africa for its epidemic response. Beyond the population’s alleged hesitancy to be vaccinated, was a lack of preparedness to blame? Previous analyses show that outbreak preparation limited to standard interventions is not sufficient in the face of the social, cultural, and political configurations of each epidemic context and that uncertainty limits response capacity. This paper examines the social life of the COVID-19 vaccine to identify the forms and contextual dimensions of uncertainty related to immunisation in Senegal. The authors explore how vaccination was implemented and compare experiences with the preparedness process, to offer insight on uncertainties. Using Stirling’s theoretical model that defines various expressions of incertitude, the authors identify four nexuses at various stages of the social life of COVID-19 vaccine in Senegal: (1) material uncertainty related to vaccine availability, (2) ambiguity of the population about the purpose of vaccination and the risks of the disease, (3) uncertainty related to side effects, and (4) uncertainty about vaccination strategies shared by scientific and health authorities. These uncertainties were only partly considered in the preparedness process, for they are related to systemic structural dimensions and reflect the impact of global/regional powers on the local level. The findings of this research are relevant not only to support better communication around vaccines in Senegal but also more generally to the prevention of emerging epidemics shaped by human behaviours.
Australia’s approach to its biosecurity and borders has always been two-pronged – quarantine first, vaccination second. This article asks what this combination looked like in practice by exploring two neglected smallpox vaccination campaigns directed towards Indigenous peoples in the early twentieth century. We argue these were important campaigns because they were the first two pre-emptive, rather than reactionary, vaccination programs directed towards First Nations people. Second, both episodes occurred in Australia’s northern coastline, where the porous maritime geography and proximity to Southeast Asia posed a point of vulnerability for Australian health officials. While smallpox was never endemic, (though epidemic), in Australia, it was endemic at various times and places across Southeast Asia. This shifting spectre of smallpox along the northern coastline was made even more acute for state and federal health officials because of the existing polyethnic relationships, communities, and economies. By vaccinating Indigenous peoples in this smallpox geography, they were envisioned and embedded into a ‘hygienic’ border for the protection of white Australia, entwining the two-prongs as one approach. In this article, we place public health into a recent scholarship that has ‘turned the map upside down’ to re-spatialise Australia’s history and geography to the north and its global connections, while demonstrating how particular coastlines and their connections were drawn into a national imaginary through a health lens.
This paper challenges historically preconceived notions surrounding a minor’s ability to make medical decisions, arguing that federal health law should be reformed to allow minors with capacity as young as age 12 to consent to their own Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC)-approved COVID-19 vaccinations. This proposal aligns with and expands upon current exceptions to limitations on adolescent decision-making. This analysis reviews the historic and current anti-vaccination sentiment, examines legal precedence and rationale, outlines supporting ethical arguments regarding adolescent decision-making, and offers rebuttals to anticipated ethical counterarguments.
Policies allowing some minors to consent to receive recommended vaccines are ethically defensible. However, a policy change at the federal level expanding minor consent for vaccinations nationwide risks triggering a political backlash. Such a move may be perceived as infringing on the rights of parents to make decisions about their children’s health care. In the current post-COVID environment of heightened anti-vaccination activism, changes to minor consent laws may be unadvisable, and policy makers should proceed with caution.
Edited by
Richard Williams, University of South Wales,Verity Kemp, Independent Health Emergency Planning Consultant,Keith Porter, University of Birmingham,Tim Healing, Worshipful Society of Apothecaries of London,John Drury, University of Sussex
Pandemics and epidemics have affected human populations throughout recorded history. Larger human communities make it possible for epidemics to occur, and also promote maintaining infections in endemic form. Regardless of the organisms involved and the nature of the illness caused, certain themes are common to all in terms of the impacts and outcomes of the outbreaks in health, social, and political terms, and the measures used in attempts to control these events. In some instances, these measures have exerted some beneficial effects by changing the rate of spread of outbreaks, although not necessarily the numbers affected. it is only recently, with the advent of vaccination, that it has it become possible to effectively reduce the impacts of pandemics. Given the frequency with which people are exposed to novel infections and the speed with which some organisms can mutate, the need for readiness to combat pandemics on a worldwide basis is paramount.
Assessing perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccines is essential for understanding vaccine hesitancy and for improving uptake during public health emergencies. In the complicated landscape of COVID-19 vaccine mandates and rampant misinformation, many individuals faced challenges during vaccination decision-making. The purpose of our mixed methods study is to elucidate factors affecting vaccine decision-making and to highlight the discourse surrounding the COVID-19 vaccines in diverse and underserved communities.
Methods:
This mixed methods study was conducted in Arizona, Florida, Minnesota, and Wisconsin between March and November 2021, combining a cross-sectional survey (n = 3593) and focus groups (n = 47).
Results:
The groups least likely to report receiving a vaccination were non-Hispanic Whites, Indigenous people, males, and those with moderate socioeconomic status (SES). Those indicating high and low SES reported similar vaccination uptake. Focus group data highlighted resistance to mandates, distrust, misinformation, and concerns about the rapid development surrounding the COVID-19 vaccines. Psychological reactance theory posits that strongly persuasive messaging and social pressure can be perceived as a threat to freedom, encouraging an individual to take action to restore that freedom.
Conclusion:
Our findings indicate that a subsection of participants felt pressured to get the vaccine, which led to weaker intentions to vaccinate. These results suggest that vaccine rollout strategies should be reevaluated to improve and facilitate informed decision-making.
Little information exists concerning the spatial relationship between invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) cases and Neisseria meningitidis (N. meningitidis) carriage. The aim of this study was to examine whether there is a relationship between IMD and asymptomatic oropharyngeal carriage of meningococci by spatial analysis to identify the distribution and patterns of cases and carriage in South Australia (SA). Carriage data geocoded to participants’ residential addresses and meningococcal case notifications using Postal Area (POA) centroids were used to analyse spatial distribution by disease- and non-disease-associated genogroups, as well as overall from 2017 to 2020. The majority of IMD cases were genogroup B with the overall highest incidence of cases reported in infants, young children, and adolescents. We found no clear spatial association between N. meningitidis carriage and IMD cases. However, analyses using carriage and case genogroups showed differences in the spatial distribution between metropolitan and regional areas. Regional areas had a higher rate of IMD cases and carriage prevalence. While no clear relationship between cases and carriage was evident in the spatial analysis, the higher rates of both carriage and disease in regional areas highlight the need to maintain high vaccine coverage outside of the well-resourced metropolitan area.
This study aimed to understand rural–urban differences in the uptake of COVID-19 vaccinations during the peak period of the national vaccination roll-out in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ). Using a linked national dataset of health service users aged 12+ years and COVID-19 immunization records, age-standardized rates of vaccination uptake were calculated at fortnightly intervals, between June and December 2021, by rurality, ethnicity, and region. Rate ratios were calculated for each rurality category with the most urban areas (U1) used as the reference. Overall, rural vaccination rates lagged behind urban rates, despite early rapid rural uptake. By December 2021, a rural–urban gradient developed, with age-standardized coverage for R3 areas (most rural) at 77%, R2 81%, R1 83%, U2 85%, and U1 (most urban) 89%. Age-based assessments illustrate the rural–urban vaccination uptake gap was widest for those aged 12–44 years, with older people (65+) having broadly consistent levels of uptake regardless of rurality. Variations from national trends are observable by ethnicity. Early in the roll-out, Indigenous Māori residing in R3 areas had a higher uptake than Māori in U1, and Pacific peoples in R1 had a higher uptake than those in U1. The extent of differences in rural–urban vaccine uptake also varied by region.
Childhood immunisation is a critically important public health initiative. However, since most vaccines are administered by injection, it is associated with considerable pain and distress. Despite evidence demonstrating the efficacy of various pain management strategies, the frequency with which these are used during routine infant vaccinations in UK practice is unknown.
Aim:
This study aimed to explore primary care practice nurses’ (PNs) use of evidence-based pain management strategies during infant immunisation, as well as barriers to evidence-based practice.
Methods:
A questionnaire was developed and distributed to nurses throughout the UK via convenience sampling in paper and online formats. Questions assessed the frequency of pain management intervention use during infant immunisation and barriers to their use.
Findings:
A total of 255 questionnaire responses were received. Over 90% (n = 226) of respondents never used topical anaesthetics or sweet solutions during immunisations, while 41.9% advised breastfeeding occasionally (n = 103). Parent-/caregiver-led distraction was the most frequently used intervention, with most nurses using it occasionally (47.9%, n = 116) or often (30.6%, n = 74). Most practices had no immunisation pain management policy (81.1%, n = 184), and most PNs’ previous training had not included pain management (86.9%, n = 186). Barriers to intervention use included lack of time, knowledge and resources. Excluding distraction, pain management strategies were infrequently or never used during infant immunisation. Key barriers to using evidence-based strategies were lack of time, knowledge and resources.
Health protection refers to threats to health such as infectious diseases, environmental threats, natural hazards and threats from terrorist acts. Health protection may also overlap with action, tackling the determinants of health, especially legislative aspects such as workplace smoking bans or speed restrictions and even lifestyle choices and the health issues of ageing populations, such as increasing levels of chronic disease (which we now know may also be due to infections).
This chapter outlines the public health aspects of communicable disease control and touches on some of the other areas now included within health protection in the UK. Important health protection terms are included in the glossary.
From the earliest weeks of the pandemic, courts and commentators turned to Jacobson v. Massachusetts for guidance. The 1905 Supreme Court case upheld a statute authorizing local boards of health to make smallpox vaccination compulsory if, in the board’s opinion, it was necessary for the public health. Led by the Fifth Circuit, many courts interpreted Jacobson as dictating a highly deferential “suspension” standard for judicial review of public health emergency orders – a throwback to the standard commonly applied to any constitutional violation in 1905. Judges relied on Jacobson to uphold infringements upon abortion rights, voting rights, and freedoms of worship, assembly, association, and movement. In a November 2020 decision, the Supreme Court majority apparently rejected the Jacobson suspension standard, at least for Fourteenth Amendment claims. This chapter parses the fractured opinions in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo and subsequent lower court opinions for indications of Jacobson’s continued vitality as a lodestar for public health powers. The chapter rejects the Jacobson suspension doctrine in favor of a broader reading that provides guidance for judicial review on separation of powers and federalism questions as well as individual rights. Jacobson offers enduring and flexible guidance on the two tensions at the heart of public health law and policy, which have been brought into stark relief by the pandemic but will continue to be litigated long after the COVID-19 threat has subsided: first, the tension between individual rights and the common good; and second, the tension between bureaucratic expertise and democratic accountability.