BACKGROUND: Some public health professionals have expressed concern that the COVID-19 pandemic has increased vaccine hesitancy about routine childhood vaccines; however, the differential prevalence of vaccine hesitancy about specific vaccines has not been measured. METHODS: Data from the National Immunization Survey-Child COVID-19 Module (NIS-CCM) were analyzed to assess the proportion of children ages 6 months-17 years who have a parent with hesitancy about: COVID-19, influenza, human papillomavirus (HPV) (for children ≥ 9 years) vaccines, and "all other childhood shots." Interviews from October 2022 through April 2023 were analyzed. RESULTS: The percentage of children with a vaccine-hesitant parent varied by vaccine. 55.9% of children had a parent hesitant about COVID-19 vaccine, 30.9% hesitant about influenza vaccine, 30.1% hesitant about HPV vaccine, and 12.2% had a parent hesitant about other vaccines such as measles, polio, and tetanus. CONCLUSION: The study findings suggest that differential interventions and communications to parents be used to educate about COVID-19, influenza, HPV, and routine childhood vaccinations because the hesitancy levels differ widely.

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 role of vaccine hesitancy on influenza vaccination is not clearly understood. Low influenza vaccination coverage in U.S. adults suggests that a multitude of factors may be responsible for under-vaccination or non-vaccination including vaccine hesitancy. Understanding the role of influenza vaccination hesitancy is important for targeted messaging and intervention to increase influenza vaccine confidence and uptake. The objective of this study was to quantify the prevalence of adult influenza vaccination hesitancy (IVH) and examine association of IVH beliefs with sociodemographic factors and early-season influenza vaccination. METHODS: A four-question validated IVH module was included in the 2018 National Internet Flu Survey. Weighted proportions and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify correlates of IVH beliefs. RESULTS: Overall, 36.9% of adults were hesitant to receive an influenza vaccination; 18.6% expressed concerns about vaccination side effects; 14.8% personally knew someone with serious side effects; and 35.6% reported that their healthcare provider was not the most trusted source of information about influenza vaccinations. Influenza vaccination ranged from 15.3 to 45.2 percentage points lower among adults self-reporting any of the four IVH beliefs. Being female, age 18-49 years, non-Hispanic Black, having high school or lower education, being employed, and not having primary care medical home were associated with hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Among the four IVH beliefs studied, being hesitant to receiving influenza vaccination followed by mistrust of healthcare providers were identified as the most influential hesitancy beliefs. Two in five adults in the United States were hesitant to receive an influenza vaccination, and hesitancy was negatively associated with vaccination. This information may assist with targeted interventions, personalized to the individual, to reduce hesitancy and thus improve influenza vaccination acceptance.

Pregnant women* and their infants are at increased risk for serious influenza, pertussis, and COVID-19-related complications, including preterm birth, low-birth weight, and maternal and fetal death. The advisory committee on immunization practices recommends pregnant women receive tetanus-toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine during pregnancy, and influenza and COVID-19 vaccines before or during pregnancy. Vaccination coverage estimates and factors associated with maternal vaccination are measured by various surveillance systems. The objective of this report is to provide a detailed overview of the following surveillance systems that can be used to assess coverage of vaccines recommended for pregnant women: Internet panel survey, National Health Interview Survey, National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, Vaccine Safety Datalink, and MarketScan. Influenza, Tdap, and COVID-19 vaccination coverage estimates vary by data source, and select estimates are presented. Each surveillance system differs in the population of pregnant women, time period, geographic area for which estimates can be obtained, how vaccination status is determined, and data collected regarding vaccine-related knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and barriers. Thus, multiple systems are useful for a more complete understanding of maternal vaccination. Ongoing surveillance from the various systems to obtain vaccination coverage and information regarding disparities and barriers related to vaccination are needed to guide program and policy improvements.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare personnel (HCP) are at risk for acquiring and transmitting respiratory infections in the workplace. Paid sick leave benefits allow workers to stay home and visit a healthcare provider when ill. The objectives of this study were to quantify the percentage of HCP reporting paid sick leave, identify differences across occupations and settings, and determine factors associated with having paid sick leave. METHODS: In a national nonprobability Internet panel survey of HCP in April 2022, respondents were asked, "Does your employer offer paid sick leave?." Responses were weighted to the U.S. HCP population by age, sex, race/ethnicity, work setting, and census region. The weighted percentage of HCP who reported paid sick leave was calculated by occupation, work setting, and type of employment. Using multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with having paid sick leave were identified. RESULTS: In April 2022, 73.2% of 2,555 responding HCP reported having paid sick leave, similar to 2020 and 2021 estimates. The percentage of HCP reporting paid sick leave varied by occupation, ranging from 63.9% (assistants/aides) to 81.2% (non-clinical personnel). Female HCP and those working as licensed independent practitioners, in the Midwest, and in the South were less likely to report paid sick leave. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of HCP from all occupational groups and healthcare settings reported having paid sick leave. However, differences by sex, occupation, type of work arrangement, and Census region exist and highlight disparities. Increasing HCP access to paid sick leave may decrease presenteeism and subsequent transmission of infectious diseases in healthcare settings.

COVID-19 vaccine booster doses are safe and maintain protection after receipt of a primary vaccination series and reduce the risk for serious COVID-19-related outcomes, including emergency department visits, hospitalization, and death (1,2). CDC recommended an updated (bivalent) booster for adolescents aged 12-17 years and adults aged ≥18 years on September 1, 2022 (3). The bivalent booster is formulated to protect against the Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants of SARS-CoV-2 as well as the original (ancestral) strain (3). Based on data collected during October 30-December 31, 2022, from the National Immunization Survey-Child COVID Module (NIS-CCM) (4), among all adolescents aged 12-17 years who completed a primary series, 18.5% had received a bivalent booster dose, 52.0% had not yet received a bivalent booster but had parents open to booster vaccination for their child, 15.1% had not received a bivalent booster and had parents who were unsure about getting a booster vaccination for their child, and 14.4% had parents who were reluctant to seek booster vaccination for their child. Based on data collected during October 30-December 31, 2022, from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) (4), 27.1% of adults who had completed a COVID-19 primary series had received a bivalent booster, 39.4% had not yet received a bivalent booster but were open to receiving booster vaccination, 12.4% had not yet received a bivalent booster and were unsure about getting a booster vaccination, and 21.1% were reluctant to receive a booster. Adolescents and adults in rural areas had a much lower primary series completion rate and up-to-date vaccination coverage. Bivalent booster coverage was lower among non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) and Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) adolescents and adults compared with non-Hispanic White (White) adolescents and adults. Among adults who were open to receiving booster vaccination, 58.9% reported not having received a provider recommendation for booster vaccination, 16.9% had safety concerns, and 4.4% reported difficulty getting a booster vaccine. Among adolescents with parents who were open to getting a booster vaccination for their child, 32.4% had not received a provider recommendation for any COVID-19 vaccination, and 11.8% had parents who reported safety concerns. Although bivalent booster vaccination coverage among adults differed by factors such as income, health insurance status, and social vulnerability index (SVI), these factors were not associated with differences in reluctance to seek booster vaccination. Health care provider recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination; dissemination of information by trusted messengers about the continued risk for COVID-19-related illness and the benefits and safety of bivalent booster vaccination; and reducing barriers to vaccination could improve COVID-19 bivalent booster coverage among adolescents and adults.

We initiated an epidemiological investigation following the death of a previously healthy 17 year-old boy with neuro-melioidosis. A case was defined as a culture-confirmed melioidosis patient from Udupi district admitted to hospital A from January 2013-July 2018. For the case control study, we enrolled a subset of cases admitted to hospital A from January 2017- July 2018. A control was resident of Udupi district admitted to hospital A in July 2018 with a non-infectious condition. Using a matched case-control design, we compared each case to 3 controls using age and sex groups. We assessed for risk factors related to water storage, activities of daily living, injuries and environmental exposures (three months prior to hospitalization), using conditional regression analysis. We identified 50 cases with case fatality rate 16%. Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus was present in 84% cases and 66% of cases occurred between May and October (rainy season). Percutaneous inoculation through exposure to stagnant water and injury leading to breakage in the skin were identified as an important mode of transmission. We used these findings to develop a surveillance case definition and initiated training of the district laboratory for melioidosis diagnosis.

INTRODUCTION: CDC estimates that influenza resulted in 9-41 million illnesses, 140,000-710,000 hospitalizations, and 12,000-52,000 deaths annually during 2010-2020. Persons from some racial and ethnic minority groups have historically experienced higher rates of severe influenza and had lower influenza vaccination coverage compared with non-Hispanic White (White) persons. This report examines influenza hospitalization and vaccination rates by race and ethnicity during a 12-13-year period (through the 2021-22 influenza season). METHODS: Data from population-based surveillance for laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations in selected states participating in the Influenza-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (FluSurv-NET) from the 2009-10 through 2021-22 influenza seasons (excluding 2020-21) and influenza vaccination coverage data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) from the 2010-11 through 2021-22 influenza seasons were analyzed by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: From 2009-10 through 2021-22, age-adjusted influenza hospitalization rates (hospitalizations per 100,000 population) were higher among non-Hispanic Black (Black) (rate ratio [RR] = 1.8), American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN; RR = 1.3), and Hispanic (RR = 1.2) adults, compared with the rate among White adults. During the 2021-22 season, influenza vaccination coverage was lower among Hispanic (37.9%), AI/AN (40.9%), Black (42.0%), and other/multiple race (42.6%) adults compared with that among White (53.9%) and non-Hispanic Asian (Asian) (54.2%) adults; coverage has been consistently higher among White and Asian adults compared with that among Black and Hispanic adults since the 2010-11 season. The disparity in vaccination coverage by race and ethnicity was present among those who reported having medical insurance, a personal health care provider, and a routine medical checkup in the past year. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE: Racial and ethnic disparities in influenza disease severity and influenza vaccination coverage persist. Health care providers should assess patient vaccination status at all medical visits and offer (or provide a referral for) all recommended vaccines. Tailored programmatic efforts to provide influenza vaccination through nontraditional settings, along with national and community-level efforts to improve awareness of the importance of influenza vaccination in preventing illness, hospitalization, and death among racial and ethnic minority communities might help address health care access barriers and improve vaccine confidence, leading to decreases in disparities in influenza vaccination coverage and disease severity.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and CDC recommend that all health care personnel (HCP) receive annual influenza vaccination to reduce influenza-related morbidity and mortality among these personnel and their patients (1). ACIP also recommends that all persons aged ≥6 months, including HCP, be vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines and remain up to date (2,3). During March 29-April 19, 2022, CDC conducted an opt-in Internet panel survey of 3,618 U.S. HCP to estimate influenza vaccination coverage during the 2021-22 influenza season as well as receipt of the primary COVID-19 vaccination series and a booster dose. Influenza vaccination coverage was 79.9% during the 2021-22 season, and 87.3% of HCP reported having completed the primary COVID-19 vaccination series; among these HCP, 67.1% reported receiving a COVID-19 booster dose. Among HCP, influenza, COVID-19 primary series, and COVID-19 booster dose vaccination coverage were lowest among assistants and aides, those working in long-term care (LTC) or home health care settings, and those whose employer neither required nor recommended the vaccines. Overall, employer requirements for influenza and COVID-19 primary series vaccines were reported by 43.9% and 59.9% of HCP, respectively; among HCP who completed the primary series of COVID-19 vaccines, 23.5% reported employer requirements for COVID-19 booster vaccines. Vaccination coverage for all three vaccine measures was higher among HCP who reported employer vaccination requirements and ranged from 95.8% to 97.3% for influenza, 90.2% to 95.1% for COVID-19 primary series, and 76.4% to 87.8% for COVID-19 booster vaccinations among HCP who completed the primary series of COVID-19 vaccines, by work setting. Implementing workplace strategies demonstrated to improve vaccination coverage among HCP, including vaccination requirements or active promotion of vaccination, can increase influenza and COVID-19 vaccination coverage among HCP and reduce influenza and COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality among HCP and their patients (4).

Understanding the role of vaccine hesitancy in undervaccination or nonvaccination of childhood vaccines is important for increasing vaccine confidence and uptake. We used data from April to June interviews in the 2018 and 2019 National Immunization Survey-Flu (n = 78,725, United States), a nationally representative cross-sectional household cellular telephone survey. We determined the adjusted population attributable fraction (PAF) for each recommended childhood vaccine to assess the contribution of vaccine hesitancy to the observed nonvaccination level. Hesitancy is defined as being somewhat or very hesitant toward childhood vaccines. Furthermore, we assessed the PAF of nonvaccination for influenza according to sociodemographic characteristics, Department of Health and Human Services region, and state. The proportion of nonvaccination attributed to parental vaccine hesitancy was lowest for hepatitis B birth dose vaccine (6.5%) and highest for ≥3-dose diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis vaccine (31.3%). The PAF of influenza nonvaccination was highest for non-Hispanic Black populations (15.4%), households with high educational (17.7%) and income (16.5%) levels, and urban areas (16.1%). Among states, PAF ranged from 25.4% (New Hampshire) to 7.5% (Louisiana). Implementing strategies to increase vaccination confidence and uptake are important, particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with certain medical conditions are at substantially increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to assess COVID-19 vaccination among U.S. adults with reported medical conditions. METHODS: Data from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module collected during August 1-September 25, 2021 were analyzed in 2022 to assess COVID-19 vaccination status, intent, vaccine confidence, behavior, and experience among adults with reported medical conditions. Unadjusted and age-adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs and APRs) were generated using logistic regression and predictive marginals. RESULTS: Overall, COVID-19 vaccination coverage with 1 dose was 81.8% among adults with reported medical conditions, and coverage was significantly higher compared with those without such conditions (70.3%) Among adults aged 18 years with medical conditions, COVID-19 vaccination coverage was significantly higher among those with a provider recommendation (86.5%) than those without (76.5%). Among all respondents, 9.2% of unvaccinated adults with medical conditions reported they were willing or open to vaccination. Adults who reported high risk medical conditions were more likely to report receiving a provider recommendation, often or always wearing masks during the last 7 days, concerning about getting COVID-19, thinking the vaccine is safe, and believing a COVID-19 vaccine is important for protection from COVID-19 infection than those without such conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 18.0% of those with reported medical conditions were unvaccinated. Receiving a provider recommendation was significantly associated with vaccination, reinforcing that provider recommendation is an important approach to increase vaccination coverage. Ensuring access to vaccine, addressing vaccination barriers, and increasing vaccine confidence can improve vaccination coverage among unvaccinated adults.

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.

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.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare personnel are at increased risk for COVID-19 from workplace exposure. National estimates on COVID-19 vaccination coverage among healthcare personnel are limited. METHODS: Data from an opt-in Internet panel survey of 2,434 healthcare personnel, conducted on March 30, 2021-April 15, 2021, were analyzed to assess the receipt of ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination intent. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination and intent for vaccination. RESULTS: Overall, 68.2% of healthcare personnel reported a receipt of ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, 9.8% would probably/definitely get vaccinated, 7.1% were unsure, and 14.9% would probably/definitely not get vaccinated. COVID-19 vaccination coverage was highest among physicians (89.0%), healthcare personnel working in hospitals (75.0%), and healthcare personnel of non-Hispanic White or other race (75.7%-77.4%). Healthcare personnel who received influenza vaccine in 2020-2021 (adjusted prevalence ratio=1.92) and those aged ≥60 years (adjusted prevalence ratio=1.37) were more likely to report a receipt of ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Non-Hispanic Black healthcare personnel (adjusted prevalence ratio=0.74), nurse practitioners/physician assistants (adjusted prevalence ratio=0.55), assistants/aides (adjusted prevalence ratio=0.73), and nonclinical healthcare personnel (adjusted prevalence ratio=0.79) were less likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccine. The common reasons for vaccination included protecting self (88.1%), family and friends (86.3%), and patients (69.2%) from COVID-19. The most common reason for nonvaccination was concern about side effects and safety of COVID-19 vaccine (59.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding vaccination status and intent among healthcare personnel is important for addressing barriers to vaccination. Addressing concerns on side effects, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines as well as their fast development and approval may help improve vaccination coverage among healthcare personnel.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20,000 people died from influenza in the US in the 2019 - 2020 season. The best way to prevent influenza is to receive the influenza vaccine. Persons who are foreign-born experience disparities in access to, and utilization of, preventative healthcare, including vaccination. METHODS: National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data were analyzed to assess differences in influenza vaccination coverage during the 2012-13 through 2017-18 influenza seasons among adults by nativity, citizenship status of foreign-born persons, race/ethnicity, and language of the interview. RESULTS: Influenza vaccination coverage increased significantly during the study period for US-born adults but did not change significantly among foreign-born racial/ethnic groups except for increases among foreign-born Hispanic adults. Coverage for foreign-born adults, those who completed an interview in a non-English language, and non-US citizens, had lower vaccination coverage during most influenza seasons studied, compared with US-born, English-interviewed, and US-citizen adults, respectively. CONCLUSION: Strategies to improve influenza vaccination uptake must consider foreign-born adults as an underserved population in need of focused, culturally-tailored outreach. Achieving high influenza vaccination coverage among the foreign-born population will help reduce illness among the essential workforce, achieve national vaccination goals, and reduce racial and ethnic disparities in vaccination coverage in the US.

Researchers strive to design and implement high-quality surveys to maximize the utility of the data collected. The definitions of quality and usefulness, however, vary from survey to survey and depend on the analytic needs. Survey teams must evaluate the trade-offs of various decisions, such as when results are needed and their required level of precision, in addition to practical constraints like budget, before finalizing the design. Characteristics within the concept of fit for purpose (FfP) can provide the framework for considering the trade-offs. Furthermore, this tool can enable an evaluation of quality for the resulting estimates. Implementation of a FfP framework in this context, however, is not straightforward. In this article, we provide the reader with a glimpse of a FfP framework in action for obtaining estimates on early season influenza vaccination coverage estimates and on knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and barriers related to influenza and influenza prevention among civilian noninstitutionalized adults aged 18 years and older in the United States. The result is the National Internet Flu Survey (NIFS), an annual, two-week internet survey sponsored by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In addition to critical design decisions, we use the established NIFS FfP framework to discuss the quality of the NIFS in meeting the intended objectives. We highlight aspects that work well and other survey traits requiring further evaluation. Differences found in comparing the NIFS to the National Flu Survey, the National Health Interview Survey, and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System are discussed via their respective FfP characteristics. The findings presented here highlight the importance of the FfP framework for designing surveys, defining data quality, and providing a set a metrics used to advertise the intended use of the survey data and results. © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis B vaccination is routinely recommended for adults with diabetes mellitus aged <60 years and for those aged ≥60 years at the discretion of their healthcare provider. The purpose of this study is to assess hepatitis B vaccination coverage among adults with and without diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Data from the 2014-2018 National Health Interview Survey were analyzed in 2020 to determine hepatitis B vaccination series completion (≥3 doses) among adults aged 18-59 and ≥60 years with diabetes mellitus. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify the factors independently associated with hepatitis B vaccination among adults aged 18-59 and ≥60 years with diabetes mellitus. RESULTS: In 2018, among adults aged 18-59 years with diabetes mellitus, 33.2% had received hepatitis B vaccination (≥3 doses), an increase of 9.7 percentage points from 2014 (p<0.05). Among adults aged ≥60 years with diabetes mellitus, coverage was 15.3% in 2018 and did not increase during 2014-2018. Coverage was not significantly different among adults with diabetes mellitus compared with those without diabetes mellitus, even after controlling for the assessed factors. Among adults with diabetes mellitus aged 18-59 and ≥60 years, younger age, having some college or college education, having been tested for HIV, being healthcare personnel, or having traveled to hepatitis B virus-endemic areas were independently associated with an increased likelihood of vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported hepatitis B vaccination coverage among adults with diabetes mellitus remains suboptimal. Healthcare providers should assess patients' diabetes status, recommend and offer needed vaccinations to patients, or refer them to alternate sites for vaccination.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Adults are at risk for illness, hospitalization, disability and, in some cases, death from vaccine-preventable diseases, particularly influenza and pneumococcal disease. CDC recommends vaccinations for adults on the basis of age, health conditions, prior vaccinations, and other considerations. Updated vaccination recommendations from CDC are published annually in the U.S. Adult Immunization Schedule. Despite longstanding recommendations for use of many vaccines, vaccination coverage among U.S. adults remains low. REPORTING PERIOD: August 2017-June 2018 (for influenza vaccination) and January-December 2018 (for pneumococcal, herpes zoster, tetanus and diphtheria [Td]/tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis [Tdap], hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccination). DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is a continuous, cross-sectional national household survey of the noninstitutionalized U.S. civilian population. In-person interviews are conducted throughout the year in a probability sample of households, and NHIS data are compiled and released annually. NHIS's objective is to monitor the health of the U.S. population and provide estimates of health indicators, health care use and access, and health-related behaviors. Adult receipt of influenza, pneumococcal, herpes zoster, Td/Tdap, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and at least 1 dose of HPV vaccines was assessed. Estimates were derived for a new composite adult vaccination quality measure and by selected demographic and access-to-care characteristics (e.g., age, race/ethnicity, indication for vaccination, travel history [travel to countries where hepatitis infections are endemic], health insurance status, contacts with physicians, nativity, and citizenship). Trends in adult vaccination were assessed during 2010-2018. RESULTS: Coverage for the adult age-appropriate composite measure was low in all age groups. Racial and ethnic differences in coverage persisted for all vaccinations, with lower coverage for most vaccinations among non-White compared with non-Hispanic White adults. Linear trend tests indicated coverage increased from 2010 to 2018 for most vaccines in this report. Few adults aged ≥19 years had received all age-appropriate vaccines, including influenza vaccination, regardless of whether inclusion of Tdap (13.5%) or inclusion of any tetanus toxoid-containing vaccine (20.2%) receipt was measured. Coverage among adults for influenza vaccination during the 2017-18 season (46.1%) was similar to the estimate for the 2016-17 season (45.4%), and coverage for pneumococcal (adults aged ≥65 years [69.0%]), herpes zoster (adults aged ≥50 years and aged ≥60 years [24.1% and 34.5%, respectively]), tetanus (adults aged ≥19 years [62.9%]), Tdap (adults aged ≥19 years [31.2%]), hepatitis A (adults aged ≥19 years [11.9%]), and HPV (females aged 19-26 years [52.8%]) vaccination in 2018 were similar to the estimates for 2017. Hepatitis B vaccination coverage among adults aged ≥19 years and health care personnel (HCP) aged ≥19 years increased 4.2 and 6.7 percentage points to 30.0% and 67.2%, respectively, from 2017. HPV vaccination coverage among males aged 19-26 years increased 5.2 percentage points to 26.3% from the 2017 estimate. Overall, HPV vaccination coverage among females aged 19-26 years did not increase, but coverage among Hispanic females aged 19-26 years increased 10.8 percentage points to 49.6% from the 2017 estimate. Coverage for the following vaccines was lower among adults without health insurance compared with those with health insurance: influenza vaccine (among adults aged ≥19 years, 19-49 years, and 50-64 years), pneumococcal vaccine (among adults aged 19-64 years at increased risk), Td vaccine (among all age groups), Tdap vaccine (among adults aged ≥19 years and 19-64 years), hepatitis A vaccine (among adults aged ≥19 years overall and among travelers aged ≥19 years), hepatitis B vaccine (among adults aged ≥19 years and 19-49 years and among travelers aged ≥19 years), herpes zoster vaccine (among adults aged ≥60 years), and HPV vaccine (among males and females aged 19-26 years). Adults who reported having a usual place for health care generally reported receipt of recommended vaccinations more often than those who did not have such a place, regardless of whether they had health insurance. Vaccination coverage was higher among adults reporting ≥1 physician contact during the preceding year compared with those who had not visited a physician during the preceding year, regardless of whether they had health insurance. Even among adults who had health insurance and ≥10 physician contacts during the preceding year, depending on the vaccine, 20.1%-87.5% reported not having received vaccinations that were recommended either for all persons or for those with specific indications. Overall, vaccination coverage among U.S.-born adults was significantly higher than that of foreign-born adults, including influenza vaccination (aged ≥19 years), pneumococcal vaccination (all ages), tetanus vaccination (all ages), Tdap vaccination (all ages), hepatitis B vaccination (aged ≥19 years and 19-49 years and travelers aged ≥19 years), herpes zoster vaccination (all ages), and HPV vaccination among females aged 19-26 years. Vaccination coverage also varied by citizenship status and years living in the United States. INTERPRETATION: NHIS data indicate that many adults remain unprotected against vaccine-preventable diseases. Coverage for the adult age-appropriate composite measures was low in all age groups. Individual adult vaccination coverage remained low as well, but modest gains occurred in vaccination coverage for hepatitis B (among adults aged ≥19 years and HCP aged ≥19 years), and HPV (among males aged 19-26 years and Hispanic females aged 19-26 years). Coverage for other vaccines and groups with Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices vaccination indications did not improve from 2017. Although HPV vaccination coverage among males aged 19-26 years and Hispanic females aged 19-26 years increased, approximately 50% of females aged 19-26 years and 70% of males aged 19-26 years remained unvaccinated. Racial/ethnic vaccination differences persisted for routinely recommended adult vaccines. Having health insurance coverage, having a usual place for health care, and having ≥1 physician contacts during the preceding 12 months were associated with higher vaccination coverage; however, these factors alone were not associated with optimal adult vaccination coverage, and findings indicate missed opportunities to vaccinate remained. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: Substantial improvement in adult vaccination uptake is needed to reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases. Following the Standards for Adult Immunization Practice (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/adults/for-practice/standards/index.html), all providers should routinely assess adults' vaccination status at every clinical encounter, strongly recommend appropriate vaccines, either offer needed vaccines or refer their patients to another provider who can administer the needed vaccines, and document vaccinations received by their patients in an immunization information system.

Despite the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ (ACIP) recommendations for routine vaccination of adolescents, vaccination coverage remains low for many adolescent vaccines, particularly the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine [1]. In 2018, 68.1% of adolescents aged 13–17 years had received ≥ 1 dose of HPV vaccine, and only 51.1% were up to date with the HPV vaccine series, well below the Healthy People 2020 target of 80% [2,3]. More efforts are needed to understand barriers to vaccination and improve coverage for all recommended vaccines in this population.

As of February 8, 2021, 59.3 million doses of vaccines to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had been distributed in the United States, and 31.6 million persons had received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (1). However, national polls conducted before vaccine distribution began suggested that many persons were hesitant to receive COVID-19 vaccination (2). To examine perceptions toward COVID-19 vaccine and intentions to be vaccinated, in September and December 2020, CDC conducted household panel surveys among a representative sample of U.S. adults. From September to December, vaccination intent (defined as being absolutely certain or very likely to be vaccinated) increased overall (from 39.4% to 49.1%); the largest increase occurred among adults aged ≥65 years. If defined as being absolutely certain, very likely, or somewhat likely to be vaccinated, vaccination intent increased overall from September (61.9%) to December (68.0%). Vaccination nonintent (defined as not intending to receive a COVID-19 vaccination) decreased among all adults (from 38.1% to 32.1%) and among most sociodemographic groups. Younger adults, women, non-Hispanic Black (Black) persons, adults living in nonmetropolitan areas, and adults with lower educational attainment, with lower income, and without health insurance were most likely to report lack of intent to receive COVID-19 vaccine. Intent to receive COVID-19 vaccine increased among adults aged ≥65 years by 17.1 percentage points (from 49.1% to 66.2%), among essential workers by 8.8 points (from 37.1% to 45.9%), and among adults aged 18-64 years with underlying medical conditions by 5.3 points (from 36.5% to 41.8%). Although confidence in COVID-19 vaccines increased during September-December 2020 in the United States, additional efforts to tailor messages and implement strategies to further increase the public's confidence, overall and within specific subpopulations, are needed. Ensuring high and equitable vaccination coverage across all populations is important to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and mitigate the impact of the pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the prevalence of parental vaccine hesitancy (VH) in the United States and examine the association of VH with sociodemographics and childhood influenza vaccination coverage. METHODS: A 6-question VH module was included in the 2018 and 2019 National Immunization Survey-Flu, a telephone survey of households with children age 6 months to 17 years. RESULTS: The percentage of children having a parent reporting they were "hesitant about childhood shots" was 25.8% in 2018 and 19.5% in 2019. The prevalence of concern about the number of vaccines a child gets at one time impacting the decision to get their child vaccinated was 22.8% in 2018 and 19.1% in 2019; the prevalence of concern about serious, long-term side effects impacting the parent's decision to get their child vaccinated was 27.3% in 2018 and 21.7% in 2019. Only small differences in VH by sociodemographic variables were found, except for an 11.9 percentage point higher prevalence of "hesitant about childhood shots" and 9.9 percentage point higher prevalence of concerns about serious, long-term side effects among parents of Black compared with white children. In both seasons studied, children of parents reporting they were "hesitant about childhood shots" had 26 percentage points lower influenza vaccination coverage compared with children of parents not reporting hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: One in 5 children in the United States have a parent who is vaccine hesitant, and hesitancy is negatively associated with childhood influenza vaccination. Monitoring VH could help inform immunization programs as they develop and target methods to increase vaccine confidence and vaccination coverage.

Influenza vaccination is the primary way to prevent influenza, yet influenza vaccination coverage remains low in the United States. Previous studies have shown that children residing in rural areas have less access to healthcare and lower vaccination coverage for some vaccines. Influenza vaccination coverage among children 6 months-17 years by rural/urban residence during the 2011-12 through 2018-19 influenza seasons was examined using National Immunization Survey-Flu data. The Council of American Survey Research Organizations response rates for National Immunization Survey-Flu ranged from 48% to 65% (2011-12 through the 2017-18 seasons) for the landline sample and 20%-39% (2011-12 through the 2018-19 seasons) for the cellular telephone sample. Children residing in rural areas had influenza vaccination coverage that ranged from 7.9 (2012-13 season) to 12.6 (2016-17 season) percentage points lower than children residing in urban areas, and ranged from 4.5 (2012-13 season) to 7.4 (2016-17 season) percentage points lower than children residing in suburban areas. The differences in influenza vaccination coverage among rural, suburban, and urban children were consistent over the eight seasons studied. Lower influenza vaccination coverage was observed among rural children regardless of child's age, mother's education, household income, or number of children under 18 years of age in the household. Rural versus urban and suburban differences in influenza vaccination coverage remained statistically significant while adjusting for selected sociodemographic characteristics. A better understanding of the reasons for lower childhood influenza vaccination coverage for children in rural and suburban areas is needed.

BACKGROUND: Annual vaccination is the most effective strategy for preventing influenza. We assessed trends and demographic and access-to-care characteristics associated with place of vaccination in recent years. METHODS: Data from the 2014-2018 National Internet Flu Survey (NIFS) were analyzed to assess trends in place of early-season influenza vaccination during the 2014-15 through 2018-19 seasons. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to identify factors independently associated with vaccination settings in the 2018-19 season. RESULTS: Among vaccinees, the proportion vaccinated in medical (range: 49%-53%) versus nonmedical settings (range: 47%-51%) during the 2014-15 through 2018-19 seasons were similar. Among adults aged ≥18 years vaccinated early in the 2018-19 influenza season, a doctor's office was the most common place (34.4%), followed by pharmacies or stores (32.3%), and workplaces (15.0%). Characteristics significantly associated with an increased likelihood of receipt of vaccination in nonmedical settings among adults included household income ≥$50,000, having no doctor visits since July 1, 2018, or having a doctor visit but not receiving an influenza vaccination recommendation from the medical professional. CONCLUSION: Place of early-season influenza vaccination among adults who reported receiving influenza vaccination was stable over five recent seasons. Both medical and nonmedical settings were important places for influenza vaccination. Increasing access to vaccination services in medical and nonmedical settings should be considered as an important strategy for improving vaccination coverage.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with higher risk of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality from influenza. We assessed influenza vaccination coverage among adults aged ≥ 18 years with diabetes during the 2007-08 through 2017-18 influenza seasons and identified factors independently associated with vaccination during the 2017-18 season. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2007-2018 National Health Interview Surveys, using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to estimate season-specific influenza vaccination coverage. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to examine whether diabetes was independently associated with self-reported influenza vaccination in the past 12 months and identify factors independently associated with vaccination among adults with diabetes using the 2017-18 data. RESULTS: During the 2007-08 through 2017-18 influenza seasons, influenza vaccination coverage among adults aged ≥ 18 years with diabetes ranged from 62.6% to 64.8%. In the 2017-18 influenza season, coverage was significantly higher among adults with diabetes (64.8%) compared with those without diabetes (43.9%). Having diabetes was independently associated with an increased prevalence of vaccination after controlling for other factors. Among adults with diabetes, living at or above poverty level, having more physician contacts, having usual place for health care, and being unemployed were independently associated with increased prevalence of vaccination; being 18-64 years and non-Hispanic black were independently associated with decreased prevalence of vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Despite specific recommendations for influenza vaccination among people with diabetes, more than one-third of adults with diabetes are unvaccinated. Targeted efforts are needed to increase influenza vaccination coverage among adults with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare estimates of childhood influenza vaccination across 7 consecutive influenza seasons based on 2 survey systems. METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the National Immunization Survey-Flu (NIS-Flu) using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to estimate receipt, based on parental report, of at least 1 dose of influenza vaccine among children aged 6 months to 17 years. RESULTS: We found no significant increasing trend in influenza vaccination coverage among children overall from 2012 to 2018 based on the NHIS or from 2012 to 2019 based on the NIS-Flu. We found 4 seasons with a significant increase in influenza vaccination coverage compared with the previous season (2012-2013 [NHIS, NIS-Flu], 2013-2014 [NIS-Flu], 2017-2018 [NHIS], and 2018-2019 [NIS-Flu]). As of the 2018-2019 season, based on NIS-Flu, influenza vaccination coverage was only 62.6%. Children with health conditions that put them at increased risk for complications from influenza had higher influenza vaccination coverage than children without these health conditions for all the seasons studied except 2014-2015. For all seasons studied, influenza vaccination coverage estimates for children were higher based on NIS-Flu data compared with NHIS data. Trends across seasons and differences in vaccination coverage between age groups were similar between the 2 surveys. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination coverage among children appears to have plateaued. Only about half of the children in the United States were vaccinated against influenza. Improvements in measurement of influenza vaccination and development and review of strategies to increase childhood influenza vaccination coverage are needed.

The revised Standards for Adult Immunization Practice ("Standards"), published in 2014, recommend routine vaccination assessment, strong provider recommendation, vaccine administration or referral, and documentation of vaccines administered into immunization information systems (IIS). We assessed clinician and pharmacist implementation of the Standards in the United States from 2016 to 2018. Participating clinicians (family and internal medicine physicians, obstetricians-gynecologists, specialty physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners) and pharmacists responded using an internet panel survey. Weighted proportion of clinicians and pharmacists reporting full implementation of each component of the Standards were calculated. Adjusted prevalence ratio (APR) estimates of practice characteristics associated with self-reported implementation of the Standards are also presented. Across all medical specialties, the percentages of clinicians and pharmacists implementing the vaccine assessment and recommendation components of the Standards were >80.0%. However, due to low IIS documentation, full implementation of the Standards was low overall, ranging from 30.4% for specialty medicine to 45.8% in family medicine clinicians. The presence of an immunization champion (APR, 1.40 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.26 to 1.54]), use of standing orders (APR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.27 to 1.57]), and use of a patient reminder-recall system (APR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.26 to 1.54]) were positively associated with adherence to the Standards by clinicians. Similar results were observed for pharmacists. Nonetheless, vaccination improvement strategies, i.e., having standing orders in place, empowering an immunization champion, and using patient recall-reminder systems were underutilized in clinical settings; full implementation of the Standards was inconsistent across all health care provider practices.

INTRODUCTION: In 2006, zoster vaccine live was recommended for adults aged >/=60 years. In 2011, zoster vaccine live was approved for use but not recommended for adults aged 50-59 years. This study assessed zoster vaccine live coverage among adults aged 50-59 years and >/=60 years. METHODS: Data from the 2013-2017 National Health Interview Surveys were analyzed in 2019 to estimate national zoster vaccine live coverage among adults aged >/=50 years. State-specific zoster vaccine live coverage among adults aged >/=50 years was assessed using 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data. RESULTS: Among adults aged 50-59 years, zoster vaccine live coverage was 5.7% in 2017, ranging from 4% to 6% during 2013-2017 (test for trend, p>0.05). Zoster vaccine live coverage among adults aged 50-59 years ranged from 5.8% in Pennsylvania to 14.7% in South Dakota. By 2017, zoster vaccine live was received by 34.9% of adults aged >/=60 years, a significant increase from 24.2% in 2013. Zoster vaccine live coverage among adults aged >/=60 years in 2017 ranged from 26.0% in Mississippi to 51.8% in Vermont. In 2017, major characteristics significantly associated with increased likelihood of zoster vaccine live vaccination among adults aged 50-59 years and >/=60 years were older age, having 4 to 9 physician contacts in the past 12 months, and having a usual place for health care. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an assessment of zoster vaccine live coverage among adults aged >/=50 years before the newly recommended recombinant zoster vaccine came into widespread use. Providers should routinely assess adults' vaccination status and strongly recommend or offer needed vaccines to their patients.

Previous research has shown that increasing the size of incentives can increase response rates for probability-based, cross-sectional surveys. However, the effects of incentives on web panels have not been extensively studied. We sought to answer the question: What is the effect of larger, postpaid incentives on (1) response, (2) data quality, and (3) nonresponse bias for individuals in a web panel? We analyzed data from the 2015 and 2016 National Internet Flu Survey, a survey that uses the GfK KnowledgePanel as its sampling frame. We compare panel members who received a postpaid, standard 1,000-point (the equivalent of US$1) incentive in 2015 to panelists who received a larger, 5,000-point (the equivalent of US$5) incentive in 2016. We found that larger incentives were associated with increased interview completion rates with minimal impact on data quality or bias.

INTRODUCTION: Influenza is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among adults. The most effective strategy for preventing influenza is annual vaccination. However, vaccination coverage has been suboptimal among adult populations. The purpose of this study is to assess trends in influenza vaccination among adult populations. METHODS: Data from the 2010-2016 National Health Interview Survey were analyzed in 2018 to estimate vaccination coverage during the 2010-2011 through 2015-2016 seasons. Trends of vaccination in recent years were assessed. Vaccination coverage by race/ethnicity within each group was examined. Multivariable logistic regression and predictive marginal models were conducted to identify factors associated with vaccination, and interactions between race/ethnicity and other demographic and access-to-care characteristics were assessed. RESULTS: Vaccination coverage among adults aged >/=18 years increased from 38.3% in the 2010-2011 season to 43.4% in the 2015-2016 season, with an average increase of 1.3 percentage points annually. From the 2010-2011 through 2015-2016 seasons, coverage was stable for adults aged >/=65 years and changed by -0.1 to 9.9 percentage points for all other examined subgroups. Coverage in 2015-2016 was 70.4% for adults aged >/=65 years, 46.4% for those aged 50-64 years, and 32.3% for those aged 18-49 years; 47.9% for people aged 18-64 years with high-risk conditions; 64.8% for healthcare personnel; and 50.3% for pregnant women. Among adults aged >/=18 years for the 2015-2016 season, coverage was significantly lower among non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics compared with non-Hispanic whites. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, influenza vaccination coverage among adults aged >/=18 years increased during 2010-2016, but it remained below the national target of 70%. Vaccination coverage varied by age, risk status, race/ethnicity, healthcare personnel, and pregnancy status. Targeted efforts are needed to improve coverage and reduce disparities.

INTRODUCTION: Very few studies have explored the associations between self-identified sexual orientation and comprehensive vaccination coverage. Most of the previous studies that reported health disparities among lesbian, gay and bisexual populations were not based on a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults, limiting the generalizability of the findings. Starting in 2013, the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) included questions to ascertain the adult's self-identified sexual orientation that allowed national level vaccination estimation by sexual orientation. This study examined associations of self-reported vaccination coverage for selected vaccines among U.S. adults by their sexual orientation. METHODS: We analyzed combined data from 2013-2015 NHIS, a nationally representative probability-based health survey of the noninstitutionalized U.S. population >/=18 years. For vaccines other than influenza, weighted proportions were calculated. Influenza coverage was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier procedure. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted prevalence differences for each vaccine overall and stratified by sexual orientation and to identify factors independently associated with vaccination. RESULTS: Significant differences were observed by sexual orientation for self-reported receipt of human papillomavirus (HPV), hepatitis A (HepA), hepatitis B (HepB), and influenza vaccination. Bisexual females (51.6%) had higher HPV coverage than heterosexual females (40.2%). Gay males (40.3% and 53.6%, respectively) had higher HepA and HepB coverage than heterosexual males (25.4% and 32.6%, respectively). Bisexual females (33.9% and 58.5%, respectively) had higher HepA and HepB coverage than heterosexual females (23.5% and 38.4%, respectively) and higher HepB coverage than lesbian females (45.4%). Bisexual adults (34.1%) had lower influenza coverage than gay/lesbian (48.5%) and heterosexual adults (43.8%). Except for the association of having self-identified as gay/lesbian orientation with greater likelihood of HepA, HepB, and influenza vaccination, sexual orientation was not associated with higher or lower likelihood of vaccination. Health status or other behavioral characteristics studied had no consistent relationship with vaccination among all populations. CONCLUSION: Differences were identified in vaccination coverage among the U.S. adult population by self-reported sexual orientation. This study is the first to assess associations of sexual orientation with a comprehensive list of vaccinations. Findings from this study can serve as a baseline for monitoring changes over time. All populations could benefit from improved vaccination.