Understanding COVID-19 vaccination decisions during pregnancy and while breastfeeding in a Canadian province

3Citations
Citations of this article
26Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Vaccination in pregnancy is important for preventing illness for mothers and babies; however, vaccine uptake in pregnant individuals is lower than non-pregnant females of fertile age. Given the devastating effects of COVID-19 and the increased morbidity and mortality risk for pregnant individuals, it is important to understand the determinants of vaccine hesitancy in pregnancy. The focus of our study was to explore COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant and breastfeeding individuals and its association with their reasons (psychological factors) for vaccination using the 5C scale and other factors. Methods: An online survey investigating prior vaccinations, level of trust in healthcare providers, demographic information, and the 5C scale was used for, pregnant and breastfeeding individuals in a Canadian province. Results: Prior vaccinations, higher levels of trust in medical professionals, education, confidence, and collective responsibility predicted increased vaccine uptake pregnant and breastfeeding individuals. Conclusions: There are specific psychological and socio-demographic determinants that affect COVID-19 vaccine uptake in pregnant populations. Implications of these findings include targeting these determinants when informing and developing intervention and educational programs for both pregnant and breastfeeding individuals, as well as healthcare professionals who are making vaccine recommendations to patients. Study limitations include a small sample and lack of ethnic and socioeconomic diversity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lee, K., Surti, M., Bruce, M., Beharaj, G., Giesbrecht, G. F., & Castillo, E. (2023). Understanding COVID-19 vaccination decisions during pregnancy and while breastfeeding in a Canadian province. Expert Review of Vaccines, 22(1), 520–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2023.2221730

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free