The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that health care personnel receive an annual influenza vaccine. In September 2023, ACIP recommended that everyone aged ≥6 months receive a 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine. Health care facilities, including acute care hospitals and nursing homes, report vaccination of health care personnel against influenza and COVID-19 to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). During October 2023-March 2024, NHSN defined up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination as receipt of a 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine. This analysis describes influenza and 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination coverage among health care personnel working in acute care hospitals and nursing homes during the 2023-24 respiratory virus season (October 1, 2023-March 31, 2024). Influenza vaccination coverage was 80.7% among health care personnel at acute care hospitals and 45.4% among health care personnel at nursing homes. Coverage of 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination was 15.3% among health care personnel at acute care hospitals and 10.5% among health care personnel at nursing homes. Respiratory viral diseases including influenza and COVID-19 pose risks to health care personnel in U.S. health care settings, and vaccination of health care personnel is an effective strategy for maintaining a healthy workforce and improving health care system resiliency.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the most common cause of hospitalization among U.S. infants. CDC recommends RSV vaccination for pregnant persons or administration of RSV antibody (nirsevimab) to infants aged <8 months to prevent RSV lower respiratory tract disease among infants. To determine maternal and infant RSV immunization coverage for the 2023-24 RSV season, CDC conducted an Internet panel survey during March 26-April 11, 2024. Among 678 women at 32-36 weeks' gestation during September 2023-January 2024, 32.6% reported receipt of an RSV vaccine any time during pregnancy. Among 866 women with an infant born during August 2023-March 2024, 44.6% reported receipt of nirsevimab by the infant. Overall, 55.8% of infants were protected by maternal RSV vaccine, nirsevimab, or both. Provider recommendation for maternal vaccination or infant nirsevimab was associated with higher immunization coverage, whereas lack of a provider recommendation was the main reason for not getting RSV immunization. The main reason for definitely or probably not getting nirsevimab for infants was concern about the long-term safety for the infant. Activities supporting providers to make RSV prevention recommendations and have informative conversations with patients might increase the proportion of infants protected against severe RSV disease. CDC and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have resources to assist providers in effectively communicating the importance of immunization.

The COVID-19 Uninsured Program, administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), reimbursed providers for administering COVID-19 vaccines to uninsured US adults from December 11, 2020, through April 5, 2022. Using HRSA claims data covering forty-two states, we estimated that the program funded about 38.9 million COVID-19 vaccine doses, accounting for 5.7 percent of total doses distributed and 10.9 percent of doses administered to adults ages 19-64.

Inequities in availability and access to adult vaccinations represent significant gaps in the US public health infrastructure. Adults in racial and ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive routinely recommended vaccinations due to systemic barriers, distribution inequities, and lack of trust in vaccines; similar disparities were seen during early COVID-19 vaccination efforts. However, a deliberate focus on reducing disparities can yield progress. National data show narrowing of racial and ethnic adult COVID-19 vaccination coverage disparities over time, highlighting the value of the equity-focused, community-level interventions implemented during the pandemic. This paper describes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic to address racial and ethnic disparities in adult immunization, and how lessons learned may be applied post-pandemic. Progress made is likely to be lost without sustained support for adult vaccination at national, state, and community levels.

Nursing home residents are at risk for becoming infected with and experiencing severe complications from respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). Fall 2023 is the first season during which vaccines are simultaneously available to protect older adults in the United States against all three of these respiratory viruses. Nursing homes are required to report COVID-19 vaccination coverage and can voluntarily report influenza and RSV vaccination coverage among residents to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network. The purpose of this study was to assess COVID-19, influenza, and RSV vaccination coverage among nursing home residents during the current 2023-24 respiratory virus season. As of December 10, 2023, 33.1% of nursing home residents were up to date with vaccination against COVID-19. Among residents at 20.2% and 19.4% of facilities that elected to report, coverage with influenza and RSV vaccines was 72.0% and 9.8%, respectively. Vaccination varied by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services region, social vulnerability index level, and facility size. There is an urgent need to protect nursing home residents against severe outcomes of respiratory illnesses by continuing efforts to increase vaccination against COVID-19 and influenza and discussing vaccination against RSV with eligible residents during the ongoing 2023-24 respiratory virus season.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends that health care personnel (HCP) receive an annual influenza vaccine and that everyone aged ≥6 months stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccination. Health care facilities report vaccination of HCP against influenza and COVID-19 to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). During January-June 2023, NHSN defined up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination as receipt of a bivalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose or completion of a primary series within the preceding 2 months. This analysis describes influenza and up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination coverage among HCP working in acute care hospitals and nursing homes during the 2022-23 influenza season (October 1, 2022-March 31, 2023). Influenza vaccination coverage was 81.0% among HCP at acute care hospitals and 47.1% among those working at nursing homes. Up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination coverage was 17.2% among HCP working at acute care hospitals and 22.8% among those working at nursing homes. There is a need to promote evidence-based strategies to improve vaccination coverage among HCP. Tailored strategies might also be useful to reach all HCP with recommended vaccines and protect them and their patients from vaccine-preventable respiratory diseases.

Health care personnel (HCP) are recommended to receive annual vaccination against influenza to reduce influenza-related morbidity and mortality. Every year, acute care hospitals report receipt of influenza vaccination among HCP to CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). This analysis used NHSN data to describe changes in influenza vaccination coverage among HCP in acute care hospitals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Influenza vaccination among HCP increased during the prepandemic period from 88.6% during 2017-18 to 90.7% during 2019-20. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the percentage of HCP vaccinated against influenza decreased to 85.9% in 2020-21 and 81.1% in 2022-23. Additional efforts are needed to implement evidence-based strategies to increase vaccination coverage among HCP and to identify factors associated with recent declines in influenza vaccination coverage.

INTRODUCTION: Vaccination with tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccine during pregnancy is highly effective against Bordetella pertussis in young infants. We aimed to evaluate the uptake of maternal tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccination during the recommended gestation period of 27 through 36 weeks among women enrolled in a public medical insurance plan in the U.S. METHODS: In this analysis using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services insurance claims data, we identified women aged 15 through 49 years who delivered a live-born infant from 2016 through 2019. We identified claims for tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccination to calculate the proportion of women who were vaccinated during Weeks 27 through 36 of gestation in each calendar year. We also assessed the average annual maternal tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis coverage by age group, race and ethnicity, U.S. Census region of residence, and plan type. Data were analyzed in 2021. RESULTS: Among 4,318,823 deliveries, the 4-year national average for tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccination was 26%, improving from 22% in 2016 to 31% in 2019 (p<0.001). Within subgroups, the lowest 4-year average coverage was among women aged 15 through 18 years (22%); Black, non-Hispanic (23%) and Hispanic women (24%); those residing in the South (18%); those enrolled in a Children's Health Insurance Program plan (22%); and those covered by a fee-for-service plan (19%). Coverage increased across all subgroups from 2016 through 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Although maternal tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis coverage among publicly insured women in the U.S. increased from 2016 through 2019, it remained considerably lower than estimated national coverage, with notable differences by race and ethnicity.

Despite the availability of effective vaccines against pneumococcal disease, pneumococcus is a common bacterial cause of pneumonia, causing approximately 100,000 hospitalizations among U.S. adults per year. In addition, approximately 30,000 invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) cases and 3,000 IPD deaths occur among U.S. adults each year. Previous health care provider surveys identified gaps in provider knowledge about and understanding of the adult pneumococcal vaccine recommendations, and pneumococcal vaccine coverage remains suboptimal. To assess the feasibility and acceptability domains of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Evidence to Recommendations (EtR) framework, a health care provider knowledge and attitudes survey was conducted during September 28-October 10, 2022, by the Healthcare and Public Perceptions of Immunizations Survey Collaborative before the October 2022 ACIP meeting. Among 751 provider respondents, two thirds agreed or strongly agreed with the policy option under consideration to expand the recommendations for the new 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) to adults who had only received the previously recommended 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13). Gaps in providers' knowledge and perceived challenges to implementing recommendations were identified and were included in ACIP's EtR framework discussions in late October 2022 when ACIP updated the recommendations for PCV20 use in adults. Currently, use of PCV20 is recommended for certain adults who have previously received PCV13, in addition to those who have never received a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. The survey findings indicate a need to increase provider awareness and implementation of pneumococcal vaccination recommendations and to provide tools to assist with patient-specific vaccination guidance. Resources available to address the challenges to implementing pneumococcal vaccination recommendations include the PneumoRecs VaxAdvisor mobile app and other CDC-developed tools, including summary documents and overviews of vaccination schedules and CDC's strategic framework to increase confidence in vaccines and reduce vaccine-preventable diseases, Vaccinate with Confidence.

Monitoring COVID-19 vaccination coverage among nursing home (NH) residents and staff is important to ensure high coverage and guide patient-safety policies. With the termination of the federal Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program, another source of facility-based vaccination data is needed. We compared numbers of COVID-19 vaccinations administered to NH residents and staff reported by pharmacies participating in the temporary federal Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program with those reported by NHs participating in new COVID-19 vaccination modules of CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). Pearson correlation coefficients comparing the number vaccinated between the two approaches were 0.89, 0.96, and 0.97 for residents and 0.74, 0.90, and 0.90 for staff, in the weeks ending January 3, 10, and 17, respectively. Based on subsequent NHSN reporting, vaccination coverage with ≥1 vaccine dose reached 77% for residents and 50% for staff the week ending January 31 and plateaued through April 2021.Three-question summary boxWhat is the current understanding of the subject?Because of high risk of disease, nursing home residents and staff were prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination when doses were limited.What does this report add to the literature?National monitoring of nursing home residents and staff vaccination coverage through the CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) correlated with vaccination administration reports from the federal Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program in January 2021. NHSN-reported vaccination coverage rates plateaued from February through April 2021.What are the implications for public health practice?NHSN can track COVID-19 vaccination in nursing homes and help guide efforts to increase vaccine uptake in residents and staff.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy (See e.g., 45 C.F.R. part 46, 21 C.F.R. part 56; 42 U.S.C. section 241(d); 5 U.S.C. section 552a; 44 U.S.C. section 3501 et seq.).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData supporting the findings of the study are found in the manuscript and/or supplementary files. Any other data can be furnished upon request.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 vaccine uptake remains low for US adolescents and contributes to excess morbidity and mortality. Most research has assessed parental intention to vaccinate their children. We explored differences between vaccine-acceptant and vaccine-hesitant unvaccinated US adolescents using national survey data. METHODS: A nonprobability, quota-based sample of adolescents, aged 13-17 years, was recruited through an online survey panel in April 2021. One thousand nine hundred twenty seven adolescents were screened for participation and the final sample included 985 responses. We assessed responses from unvaccinated adolescents (n = 831). Our primary measure was COVID-19 vaccination intent ("vaccine-acceptant" defined as "definitely will" get a COVID-19 vaccine and any other response classified as "vaccine-hesitant") and secondary measures included reasons for intending or not intending to get vaccinated and trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information. We calculated descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to explore differences between vaccine-acceptant and vaccine-hesitant adolescents. RESULTS: Most (n = 831; 70.9%) adolescents were hesitant, with more hesitancy observed among adolescents with low levels of concern about COVID-19 and high levels of concern about side effects of COVID-19 vaccination. Among vaccine-hesitant adolescents, reasons for not intending to get vaccinated included waiting for safety data and having parents who would make the vaccination decision. Vaccine-hesitant adolescents had a lower number of trusted information sources than vaccine-acceptant adolescents. DISCUSSION: Differences identified between vaccine-acceptant and vaccine-hesitant adolescents can inform message content and dissemination. Messages should include accurate, age-appropriate information about side effects and risks of COVID-19 infection. Prioritizing dissemination of these messages through family members, state and local government officials, and healthcare providers may be most effective.

This article describes perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine among US adults, and reports that younger adults, women, non-Hispanic Black adults, adults living in nonmetropolitan areas, adults with less education and income, and adults without health insurance have the highest estimates of nonintent to receive vaccination; due to concerns about side effects and safety of the COVID-19 vaccine, lack of trust in the government, and concern that COVID-19 vaccines were developed too quickly are the primary reasons for deferring vaccination. Solid organ transplant candidates and recipients may harbor similar concerns about vaccination, and further, may rely more heavily on herd immunity for protection from COVID-19, since the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination among immunosuppressed individuals remains ill-defined. Promoting vaccine confidence among transplant candidates, transplant recipients, and the general population will thus be critical to preventing spread of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends shared clinical decision-making (SCDM) regarding HPV vaccination for adults aged 27-45 years who are not adequately vaccinated. The objective of this survey was to understand physician knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding HPV vaccination in this age group. METHODS: An online survey was administered in June 2021 to physicians who reported practicing internal medicine, family medicine, or obstetrics and gynecology (targeted N = 250 in each practice specialty), selected randomly from potentially eligible physicians from a panel of 2 million U.S. health care providers. RESULTS: In total, 753 physicians participated in the survey: 33.3% practiced internal medicine, 33.1% practiced family medicine, and 33.6% practiced obstetrics/gynecology; 62.5% were male and mean physician age was 52.7 years. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, at least a third of participating physicians in each practice specialty reported having more HPV vaccine SCDM discussions with patients aged 27-45 years in the past 12 months. While a majority of physicians (79.7%) reported being aware of the SCDM recommendation for adults in this age group, only half of physicians answered an objective knowledge question about SCDM recommendations correctly. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that there are physician knowledge gaps related to SCDM for HPV vaccination. To improve access to HPV vaccination for people most likely to benefit, increasing availability and use of decision aids to support SCDM discussions might help healthcare providers and patients jointly make the most informed decisions about HPV vaccination.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has caused more than 100.2 million infections and more than 1 million deaths in the US as of November 2022, yet information on the economic burden associated with post-COVID-19 conditions is lacking. We estimated the possible economic burden associated with post-COVID-19 conditions by comparing direct medical costs among patients younger than 65 years with and without COVID-19 in the postacute period. METHODS: Commercially insured children and adults with a COVID-19 diagnosis (cases) during April-August 2020 were matched to those without COVID-19 (controls) on a 1:4 ratio. Direct medical costs represented 1-, 3-, and 6-month total expenditures per person starting 31 days after the diagnosis date. We used a 2-part model to evaluate cost differences among individuals with and without COVID-19, adjusted for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Costs were higher among cases compared with controls. Direct medical costs among child cases were 1.82, 1.72, and 1.70 times higher than controls over 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Direct medical costs among adult cases were 1.69, 1.54, and 1.46 times higher than costs among controls over 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Relative differences in costs were highest among adults aged 50 to 64 years. In a subset of people with COVID-19, costs were higher among hospitalized cases compared with nonhospitalized cases. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a considerable economic burden of COVID-19 even after the resolution of acute illness, highlighting the importance of prevention and mitigation measures to reduce the economic impact of COVID-19 on the US health care system.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and infant influenza vaccination. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of individuals aged 15-49 years who were continually privately insured from August 2017 to May 2019 and had singleton live births between September 2017 and February 2018 and their infants. Influenza vaccination coverage was assessed for pregnant people during the 2017-2018 influenza season and for their infants during the 2018-2019 season using the 2017-2019 MarketScan data. Multivariate log-binomial regressions were conducted to examine the association between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and infant influenza vaccination. RESULTS: Of the 34,919 pregnant people in this analysis, 14,168 (40.6%) received influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Of the infants born to people vaccinated during pregnancy, 90.0% received at least one dose of influenza vaccine during the 2018-2019 season and 75.5% received at least two doses. Of the infants born to those not vaccinated during pregnancy, 66.3% received at least one dose of influenza vaccine and 51.8% received at least two doses. At-least-one-dose coverage was 35.7% higher (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.34, 95% CI 1.33-1.36) and at-least-two-dose coverage was 45.8% higher (aRR 1.43, 95% CI 1.41-1.46) for infants born to people who received influenza vaccination during pregnancy compared with infants born to people who did not. CONCLUSION: Our results show a positive and statistically significant relationship between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and infant influenza vaccination status in their first season eligible for vaccination. Interventions to increase influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant people may also increase infant influenza vaccination coverage, offering greater protection against serious complications of influenza in both vulnerable populations.

PURPOSE: Vaccinating adolescents against COVID-19 while avoiding delays in other routine vaccination is paramount to protecting their health. Our objective was to assess parental preferences to have their adolescents aged 12-17 years receive COVID-19 and other routine vaccines at the same time. METHODS: An online survey with a national, quota-based cross-sectional sample of United States parents of youth aged 12-17 years was fielded in April 2021 ahead of FDA's Emergency Use Authorization of COVID-19 vaccine for age 12-15 years. Parents were asked about their willingness to have their adolescents aged 12-17 years receive both COVID-19 and routine vaccines at the same visit and/or to follow their provider's recommendation. Predictors included demographic characteristics, being behind on routine vaccines, and perceived risks and benefits. RESULTS: Few parents were willing to have their adolescent receive COVID-19 and routine vaccines at the same visit (10.6%) or follow the healthcare provider's recommendation (18.5%). In multivariate analyses, demographic characteristics had no effect on willingness, reporting that the adolescent was behind on routine vaccines correlated with decreased willingness (p = .004). Greater concern about the adolescent getting COVID-19 (p = .001), lower concern about the adolescent having side effects from the COVID-19 vaccine (p = .013), and more positive feelings about vaccines in general (p = .002) were associated with higher willingness. DISCUSSION: Few parents would prefer to have their adolescents receive COVID-19 and routine vaccines at the same visit. Understanding what drives willingness to receive all recommended vaccines in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic could inform policies to optimize adolescent vaccination.

IMPORTANCE: Children aged 6 months through 4 years have become eligible for COVID-19 vaccination, but little is known about parental intentions regarding, concerns about, or facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination for this age group. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate parental intentions, concerns, and facilitators for COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 6 months through 4 years and to help inform the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' deliberations and recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 6 months through 4 years. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study fielded an online survey from February 2 to 10, 2022, among a nonprobability sample of US parents of children aged 6 months through 4 years who were recruited through Qualtrics using quota-based sampling for respondent gender, race and ethnicity, and child age group. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: COVID-19 vaccination intentions, time to COVID-19 vaccination, COVID-19 vaccination concerns and facilitators, and trusted COVID-19 vaccination locations for children aged 6 months through 4 years. RESULTS: The final weighted sample of 2031 participants (73.5% participation rate) had more respondents who identified as male (985; weighted percentage, 54.8%) or White (696; weighted percentage, 66.2%), were aged 25 to 49 years (1628; weighted percentage, 85.6%), had at least a bachelor's degree (711; weighted percentage, 40.0%), lived in a metropolitan area (1743; weighted percentage, 82.9%) or the South (961; weighted percentage, 43.4%), or received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine (1205; weighted percentage, 59.8%). Half of respondents (645; weighted percentage, 45.6%) indicated that they "definitely" or "probably" will vaccinate their child aged 6 months through 4 years once they became eligible. However, only one-fifth (396; weighted percentage, 19.0%) indicated they would get a COVID-19 vaccine for their child in this age group within 3 months of them becoming eligible for vaccination. Vaccine safety and efficacy were parents' top concerns, and receiving more information about safety and efficacy were the top facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination for this age group. A doctor's office or clinic and local pharmacy were the most trusted COVID-19 vaccination locations for this age group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These results suggest that only a minority of parents of children in this age group are eager to vaccinate their children within the first few months of eligibility, with widespread concerns about COVID-19 vaccination for this age group. Thus, considerable efforts to increase parental COVID-19 vaccine confidence for children aged 6 months through 4 years may be needed to maximize COVID-19 vaccination for this age group in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Herpes zoster vaccination rates remain low despite longstanding national recommendations to vaccinate immunocompetent adults aged ≥ 50 years. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice (ACIP) updated its recommendations for recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in October 2021 to include immunocompromised adults aged ≥19 years. OBJECTIVE: To assess practices, attitudes, and knowledge about RZV, barriers to recommending RZV, and likelihood of recommending RZV to patients with various immunocompromising conditions. DESIGN: Mail and internet-based survey conducted from May through July 2020. PARTICIPANTS: General internists and family physicians throughout the USA. MAIN MEASURES: Survey responses. KEY RESULTS: The response rate was 66% (632/955). Many physicians were already recommending RZV to immunocompromised populations, including adults ≥50 years with HIV (67% of respondents) and on recombinant human immune modulator therapy (56%). Forty-seven percent of respondents both stocked/administered RZV and referred patients elsewhere, frequently a pharmacy, for vaccination; 42% did not stock RZV and only referred patients. The majority agreed pharmacies do not inform them when RZV has been given (64%). Physicians were generally knowledgeable about RZV; however, 25% incorrectly thought experiencing side effects from the first dose of RZV that interfere with normal activities was a reason to not receive the second dose. The top reported barrier to recommending RZV was experience with patients declining RZV due to cost concerns (67%). Most physicians reported they would be likely to recommend RZV to immunocompromised patients. CONCLUSION: Most primary care physicians welcome updated ACIP RZV recommendations for immunocompromised adults. Knowledge gaps, communication issues, and financial barriers need to be addressed to optimize vaccination delivery.

Some racial and ethnic minority groups have experienced disproportionately higher rates of COVID-19-related illness and mortality (1,2). Vaccination is highly effective in preventing severe COVID-19 illness and death (3), and equitable vaccination can reduce COVID-19-related disparities. CDC analyzed data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM), a random-digit-dialed cellular telephone survey of adults aged 18 years, to assess disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage by race and ethnicity among U.S. adults during December 2020-November 2021. Asian and non-Hispanic White (White) adults had the highest 1-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage by the end of April 2021 (69.6% and 59.0%, respectively); 1-dose coverage was lower among Hispanic (47.3%), non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) (46.3%), Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NH/OPI) (45.9%), multiple or other race (42.6%), and American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) (38.7%) adults. By the end of November 2021, national 1-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage was similar for Black (78.2%), Hispanic (81.3%), NH/OPI (75.7%), and White adults (78.7%); however, coverage remained lower for AI/AN (61.8%) and multiple or other race (68.0%) adults. Booster doses of COVID-19 vaccine are now recommended for all adults (4), but disparities in booster dose coverage among the fully vaccinated have become apparent (5). Tailored efforts including community partnerships and trusted sources of information could be used to increase vaccination coverage among the groups with identified persistent disparities and can help achieve vaccination equity and prevent new disparities by race and ethnicity in booster dose coverage.

This survey study assesses vaccination intentions of unvaccinated US adults in response to full US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine and any demographic characteristics associated with those intentions.

Background: Adult vaccination coverage remains low in the United States, particularly among racial and ethnic minority populations. Objective: To conduct a comprehensive literature review of research studies assessing racial and ethnic disparities in adult vaccination. Search Methods: We conducted a search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant articles. Selection Criteria: Research studies were eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (1) study based in the United States, (2) evaluated receipt of routine immunizations in adult populations, (3) used within-study comparison of race/ethnic groups, and (4) eligible for at least one author-defined PICO (patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome) question. Data Collection and Analysis: Preliminary abstract review was conducted by two authors. Following complete abstraction of articles using a standardized template, abstraction notes and determinations were reviewed by all authors; disagreements regarding article inclusion/exclusion were resolved by majority rule. The Social Ecological Model framework was used to complete a narrative review of observational studies to summarize factors associated with disparities; a systematic review was used to evaluate eligible intervention studies. Results: Ninety-five studies were included in the final analysis and summarized qualitatively within two main topic areas: (1) factors associated with documented racial-ethnic disparities in adult vaccination and (2) interventions aimed to reduce disparities or to improve vaccination coverage among racial-ethnic minority groups. Of the 12 included intervention studies, only 3 studies provided direct evidence and were of Level II, fair quality; the remaining 9 studies met the criteria for indirect evidence (Level I or II, fair or poor quality). Conclusions: A considerable amount of observational research evaluating factors associated with racial and ethnic disparities in adult vaccination is available. However, intervention studies aimed at reducing these disparities are limited, are of poor quality, and insufficiently address known reasons for low vaccination uptake among racial and ethnic minority adults. © Charleigh J. Granade et al., 2022; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2022.

New York City (NYC) introduced a universal prekindergarten program in 2014 that mandated influenza vaccination for enrollment. We conducted a difference-in-difference-in-differences study to evaluate the program using 2012 to 2019 MarketScan claims data. After the introduction of the program, influenza vaccine uptake among four-year-old children in NYC during the subsequent seasons increased by 6.3 to 9.8 percentage points compared with the rest of New York State. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print March 24, 2022: e1-e5. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306765).

INTRODUCTION: National Immunization Survey-Child data are used widely to assess childhood vaccination coverage in the U.S. This study compares National Immunization Survey-Child coverage estimates with estimates using other supplementary data sources. METHODS: Retrospective analyses in 2021 assessed vaccination coverage of privately insured children for vaccines recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices by age 2 years, using the 2015-2018 MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters databases and the 2018-2019 Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set. The coverage estimates were compared statistically with those using the 2016-2018 National Immunization Survey-Child. RESULTS: Estimated coverage ranged from 69.9% (≥2 doses of influenza vaccine) to 95.0% (≥3 doses of diphtheria, tetanus toxoids, and acellular pertussis vaccine) using the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters data and from 68.0% (≥2 doses of influenza vaccine) to 92.2% (≥1 dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine) using the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set. The difference between the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and National Immunization Survey-Child estimates ranged from 0.1 to 4.3 percentage points and was statistically significant for 6 of the 13 assessed vaccines/doses and percentage of children receiving no vaccinations. The difference between the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set and National Immunization Survey-Child estimates ranged from 0.4 to 7.2 percentage points and was statistically significant for 6 of the 10 assessed vaccines/doses. CONCLUSIONS: For certain vaccines and populations of interest, the National Immunization Survey-Child, MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters, and Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set data might give comparable coverage of privately insured children.

Human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination for adolescents aged 11-12 years and cervical cancer screening for women aged 21-65 years are recommended to help prevent cervical cancer. The purpose of this study was to describe 2018 National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) data for the United States on HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening from 275 commercial preferred provider organizations (PPOs), 219 commercial health maintenance organizations (HMOs), and 204 Medicaid HMOs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and NCQA analyzed the data in 2021. The HEDIS measure for HPV vaccination was the percentage of male and female adolescents aged 13 years who completed HPV immunization (2- or 3-dose series) on or before their 13th birthday. The measure for cervical cancer screening was the percentage of women screened either with cervical cytology within the last 3 years for women aged 21-64 years or with cervical cytology/HPV co-testing within the last 5 years for women aged 30-64 years. Nationally, the mean rate for HPV vaccination in 2018 was 37.8% in Medicaid HMOs, 30.3% in commercial HMOs, and 24.9% in PPOs. The mean rate for cervical cancer screening was 75.9% in commercial HMOs, 72.6% in commercial PPOs, and 60.3% among Medicaid HMOs. Medicaid HMOs reported higher HPV vaccination rates but lower cervical cancer screening rates than commercial plans. These differences raise questions about explanatory factors and how to improve prevention performance by plan category.

INTRODUCTION: Parental vaccine hesitancy can be a barrier to routine childhood immunization and contribute to greater risk for vaccine-preventable diseases. This study examines the impact of parental vaccine hesitancy on childhood vaccination rates. METHODS: This study assessed the association of parental vaccine hesitancy on child vaccination coverage with ≥4 doses of diphtheria, tetanus toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccine; ≥1 dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine; up-to-date rotavirus vaccine; and combined 7-vaccine series coverage for a sample of children aged 19-35 months using data from the 2018 and 2019 National Immunization Survey-Child (N=7,645). Adjusted differences in multivariable analyses of vaccination coverage were estimated among vaccine hesitant and nonhesitant parents and population attributable risk fraction of hesitancy on undervaccination, defined as not being up to date for each vaccine. RESULTS: Almost a quarter of parents reported being vaccine hesitant, with the highest proportion of vaccine hesitancy among parents of children who are non-Hispanic Black (37.0%) or Hispanic (30.1%), mothers with a high school education or less (31.9%), and households living below the poverty level (35.6%). Childhood vaccination coverage for all vaccines was lower for children of hesitant than nonhesitant parents, and the population attributable fraction of hesitancy on undervaccination ranged from 15% to 25%, with the highest percentage for ≥1 dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Parental vaccine hesitancy may contribute up to 25% of undervaccination among children aged 19-35 months. Implementation of strategies to address parental vaccine hesitancy is needed to improve vaccination coverage for children and minimize their risk of vaccine-preventable diseases.

Monitoring COVID-19 vaccination coverage among nursing home residents and staff is important to ensure high coverage rates and guide patient-safety policies. With the termination of the federal Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program, another source of facility-based vaccination data is needed. We compared numbers of COVID-19 vaccinations administered to nursing home residents and staff reported by pharmacies participating in the temporary federal Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program with the numbers of COVID-19 vaccinations reported by nursing homes participating in new COVID-19 vaccination modules of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). Pearson correlation coefficients comparing the number vaccinated between the 2 approaches were 0.89, 0.96, and 0.97 for residents and 0.74, 0.90, and 0.90 for staff, in the weeks ending January 3, 10, and 17, 2021, respectively. Based on subsequent NHSN reporting, vaccination coverage with ≥1 vaccine dose reached 73.7% for residents and 47.6% for staff the week ending January 31 and increased incrementally through July 2021. Continued monitoring of COVID-19 vaccination coverage is important as new nursing home residents are admitted, new staff are hired, and additional doses of vaccine are recommended.

OBJECTIVE: To describe, among pediatricians (Peds) and family physicians (FPs), 1) changes made to routine childhood vaccination delivery as a result of the pandemic, and 2) perceived barriers to delivering vaccinations from March 2020 through the time of the survey. METHODS: A nationally representative survey among Peds and FPs was administered by mail or Internet in October-December 2020. RESULTS: Response rate was 64% (579/909). For children aged 0-2 years, among those who vaccinated that age group pre-pandemic (Peds n=265, FPs n=222), 5% of Peds and 15% of FPs reported they had stopped vaccinating these children at any time. For children aged 4-6 years (Peds n=264, FPs n=229), 19% of Peds and 17% of FPs reported they had stopped vaccinating at any time. For children aged 11-18 years (Peds n=265, FPs n=251), 24% of Peds and 19% of FPs reported they had stopped vaccinating at any time. Nearly all reported returning to pre-pandemic vaccination services at the time of the survey. Factors most frequently reported as major/moderate barriers to providing vaccinations included fewer in-person visits because patients/parents were concerned about risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (Peds, 52%; FPs, 54%), fewer in-person visits for sports clearance (Peds, 39%; FPs, 44%), and fewer back-to-school in-person visits because some children were in virtual learning (Peds, 25%; FPs, 33%). CONCLUSIONS: Although some physicians reported interrupting vaccination services at some point during the pandemic, the majority reported continuing to provide vaccinations throughout, with essentially all returning to pre-pandemic vaccination services by end of 2020.

IMPORTANCE: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected routine vaccine delivery in the US and globally. The magnitude of these disruptions and their association with childhood vaccination coverage are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To compare trends in pediatric vaccination before and during the pandemic and to evaluate the proportion of children up to date (UTD) with vaccinations by age, race, and ethnicity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This surveillance study used a prepandemic-postpandemic control design with data from 8 health systems in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, and Wisconsin in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Children from age groups younger than 24 months and 4 to 6, 11 to 13, and 16 to 18 years were included if they had at least 1 week of health system enrollment from January 5, 2020, through October 3, 2020, over periods before the US COVID-19 pandemic (January 5, 2020, through March 14, 2020), during age-limited preventive care (March 15, 2020, through May 16, 2020), and during expanded primary care (May 17, 2020, through October 3, 2020). These individuals were compared with those enrolled during analogous weeks in 2019. EXPOSURES: This study evaluated UTD status among children reaching specific ages in February, May, and September 2020, compared with those reaching these ages in 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Weekly vaccination rates for routine age-specific vaccines and the proportion of children UTD for all age-specific recommended vaccines. RESULTS: Of 1 399 708 children in 2019 and 1 402 227 in 2020, 1 371 718 were female (49.0%) and 1 429 979 were male (51.0%); 334 216 Asian individuals (11.9%), 900 226 were Hispanic individuals (32.1%), and 201 619 non-Hispanic Black individuals (7.2%). Compared with the prepandemic period and 2019, the age-limited preventive care period was associated with lower weekly vaccination rates, with ratios of rate ratios of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.80-0.85) among those younger than 24 months, 0.18 (95% CI, 0.16-0.20) among those aged 4 to 6 years, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.14-0.17) among those aged 11 to 13 years, and 0.10 (95% CI, 0.08-0.13) among those aged 16 to 18 years. Vaccination rates during expanded primary care remained lower for most ages (ratios of rate ratios: <24 months, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.93-0.98]; 11-13 years, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.76-0.86]; 16-18 years, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.51-0.63]). In September 2020, 74% (95% CI, 73%-76%) of infants aged 7 months and 57% (95% CI, 56%-58%) of infants aged 18 months were UTD vs 81% (95% CI, 80%-82%) and 61% (95% CI, 60%-62%), respectively, in September 2019. The proportion UTD was lowest in non-Hispanic Black children across most age groups, both during and prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (eg, in May 2019, 70% [95% CI, 64%-75%] of non-Hispanic Black infants aged 7 months were UTD vs 82% [95% CI, 81%-83%] in all infants aged 7 months combined). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: As of September 2020, childhood vaccination rates and the proportion who were UTD remained lower than 2019 levels. Interventions are needed to promote catch-up vaccination, particularly in populations at risk for underimmunization.

OBJECTIVES: To assess pediatricians' mumps knowledge and testing practices, to identify physician and practice characteristics associated with mumps testing practices, and to assess reporting and outbreak response knowledge and practices. STUDY DESIGN: From January-April 2020, we surveyed a nationally representative network of pediatricians. Descriptive statistics were generated for all items. Chi-square, t-tests, and Poisson regression were used to compare physician and practice characteristics between respondents who would rarely or never vs. sometimes or often/always test for mumps in a vaccinated 17-year-old with parotitis in a non-outbreak setting. RESULTS: The response rate was 67% (297/444). For knowledge, over half of pediatricians responded incorrectly or 'Don't know' for six of nine true/false statements about mumps epidemiology, diagnosis, and prevention; and over half reported they would need additional guidance on mumps buccal swab testing. For testing practices, 59% of respondents reported they would sometimes (35%) or often/always (24%) test for mumps in a vaccinated 17-year-old with parotitis in a non-outbreak setting; older physicians, rural physicians, and physicians from the Northeast or Midwest were more likely to test for mumps. Thirty-six percent of pediatricians reported they would often/always report a patient with suspected mumps to public health authorities. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatricians report mumps knowledge gaps and practices that do not align with public health recommendations. These gaps may lead to under-diagnosis and under-reporting of mumps cases, delaying public health response measures and contributing to ongoing disease transmission.

Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and health care personnel (HCP) working in these facilities are at high risk for COVID-19-associated mortality. As of March 2021, deaths among LTCF residents and HCP have accounted for almost one third (approximately 182,000) of COVID-19-associated deaths in the United States (1). Accordingly, LTCF residents and HCP were prioritized for early receipt of COVID-19 vaccination and were targeted for on-site vaccination through the federal Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program (2). In December 2020, CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) launched COVID-19 vaccination modules, which allow U.S. LTCFs to voluntarily submit weekly facility-level COVID-19 vaccination data.* CDC analyzed data submitted during March 1-April 4, 2021, to describe COVID-19 vaccination coverage among a convenience sample of HCP working in LTCFs, by job category, and compare HCP vaccination coverage rates with social vulnerability metrics of the surrounding community using zip code tabulation area (zip code area) estimates. Through April 4, 2021, a total of 300 LTCFs nationwide, representing approximately 1.8% of LTCFs enrolled in NHSN, reported that 22,825 (56.8%) of 40,212 HCP completed COVID-19 vaccination.(†) Vaccination coverage was highest among physicians and advanced practice providers (75.1%) and lowest among nurses (56.7%) and aides (45.6%). Among aides (including certified nursing assistants, nurse aides, medication aides, and medication assistants), coverage was lower in facilities located in zip code areas with higher social vulnerability (social and structural factors associated with adverse health outcomes), corresponding to vaccination disparities present in the wider community (3). Additional efforts are needed to improve LTCF immunization policies and practices, build confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and promote COVID-19 vaccination. CDC and partners have prepared education and training resources to help educate HCP and promote COVID-19 vaccination coverage among LTCF staff members.(§).