17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Addressing vaccine hesitancy and access barriers to achieve persistent progress in Israel’s COVID-19 vaccination program

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          As of March 31, 2021, Israel had administered 116 doses of vaccine for COVID-19 per 100 population (of any age) – far more than any other OECD country. It was also ahead of other OECD countries in terms of the share of the population that had received at least one vaccination (61%) and the share that had been fully vaccinated (55%). Among Israelis aged 16 and over, the comparable figures were 81 and 74%, respectively. In light of this, the objectives of this article are:

          1. To describe and analyze the vaccination uptake through the end of March 2021

          2. To identify behavioral and other barriers that likely affected desire or ability to be vaccinated

          3. To describe the efforts undertaken to overcome those barriers

          Israel’s vaccination campaign was launched on December 20, and within 2.5 weeks, 20% of Israelis had received their first dose. Afterwards, the pace slowed. It took an additional 4 weeks to increase from 20 to 40% and yet another 6 weeks to increase from 40 to 60%. Initially, uptake was low among young adults, and two religious/cultural minority groups - ultra-Orthodox Jews and Israeli Arabs, but their uptake increased markedly over time.

          In the first quarter of 2021, Israel had to enhance access to the vaccine, address a moderate amount of vaccine hesitancy in its general population, and also address more intense pockets of vaccine hesitancy among young adults and religious/cultural minority groups. A continued high rate of infection during the months of February and March, despite broad vaccination coverage at the time, created confusion about vaccine effectiveness, which in turn contributed to vaccine hesitancy. Among Israeli Arabs, some residents of smaller villages encountered difficulties in reaching vaccination sites, and that also slowed the rate of vaccination.

          The challenges were addressed via a mix of messaging, incentives, extensions to the initial vaccine delivery system, and other measures. Many of the measures addressed the general population, while others were targeted at subgroups with below-average vaccination rates. Once the early adopters had been vaccinated, it took hard, creative work to increase population coverage from 40 to 60% and beyond.

          Significantly, some of the capacities and strategies that helped Israel address vaccine hesitancy and geographic access barriers are different from those that enabled it to procure, distribute and administer the vaccines. Some of these strategies are likely to be relevant to other countries as they progress from the challenges of securing an adequate vaccine supply and streamlining distribution to the challenge of encouraging vaccine uptake.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13584-021-00481-x.

          Related collections

          Most cited references77

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Mass Vaccination Setting

          Abstract Background As mass vaccination campaigns against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) commence worldwide, vaccine effectiveness needs to be assessed for a range of outcomes across diverse populations in a noncontrolled setting. In this study, data from Israel’s largest health care organization were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. Methods All persons who were newly vaccinated during the period from December 20, 2020, to February 1, 2021, were matched to unvaccinated controls in a 1:1 ratio according to demographic and clinical characteristics. Study outcomes included documented infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), symptomatic Covid-19, Covid-19–related hospitalization, severe illness, and death. We estimated vaccine effectiveness for each outcome as one minus the risk ratio, using the Kaplan–Meier estimator. Results Each study group included 596,618 persons. Estimated vaccine effectiveness for the study outcomes at days 14 through 20 after the first dose and at 7 or more days after the second dose was as follows: for documented infection, 46% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40 to 51) and 92% (95% CI, 88 to 95); for symptomatic Covid-19, 57% (95% CI, 50 to 63) and 94% (95% CI, 87 to 98); for hospitalization, 74% (95% CI, 56 to 86) and 87% (95% CI, 55 to 100); and for severe disease, 62% (95% CI, 39 to 80) and 92% (95% CI, 75 to 100), respectively. Estimated effectiveness in preventing death from Covid-19 was 72% (95% CI, 19 to 100) for days 14 through 20 after the first dose. Estimated effectiveness in specific subpopulations assessed for documented infection and symptomatic Covid-19 was consistent across age groups, with potentially slightly lower effectiveness in persons with multiple coexisting conditions. Conclusions This study in a nationwide mass vaccination setting suggests that the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine is effective for a wide range of Covid-19–related outcomes, a finding consistent with that of the randomized trial.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine

            Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 61.4% reported that they would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer’s advice to do so.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                bruce@jdc.org
                ruthw@jdc.org
                avii@hadassah.org.il
                michaelhartal@jdc.org
                nadavd@bgu.ac.il
                Journal
                Isr J Health Policy Res
                Isr J Health Policy Res
                Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                2045-4015
                2 August 2021
                2 August 2021
                2021
                : 10
                : 43
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.419640.e, ISNI 0000 0001 0845 7919, Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute, ; JDC Hill, Jerusalem, Israel
                [2 ]GRID grid.9619.7, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0538, Hebrew University Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, ; Jerusalem, Israel
                [3 ]GRID grid.6734.6, ISNI 0000 0001 2292 8254, Department of Health Care Management, Faculty of Economics & Management, , Technical University Berlin, ; Berlin, Germany
                [4 ]GRID grid.9619.7, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0538, Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, ; Jerusalem, Israel
                [5 ]GRID grid.414840.d, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 052X, Ministry of Health, ; Jerusalem, Israel
                [6 ]GRID grid.7489.2, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0511, Faculty of Health Sciences, , Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, School of Public Health, ; Beersheba, Israel
                [7 ]Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel, Jerusalem, Israel
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0957-5084
                Article
                481
                10.1186/s13584-021-00481-x
                8326649
                34340714
                36df523f-b190-4a11-820c-bb0720acaccb
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 27 May 2021
                : 13 July 2021
                Categories
                Integrative Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Economics of health & social care
                Economics of health & social care

                Comments

                Comment on this article