While most people vaccinate according to the recommended schedule, this success is challenged by individuals and groups who delay or refuse vaccines. The aim of this article is to review studies on vaccine hesitancy among healthcare providers (HCPs), and the influences of their own vaccine confidence and vaccination behaviour on their vaccination recommendations to others. The search strategy was developed in Medline and then adapted across several multidisciplinary mainstream databases including Embase Classic & Embase, and PschInfo. All foreign language articles were included if the abstract was available in English. A total of 185 articles were included in the literature review. 66% studied the vaccine hesitancy among HCPs, 17% analysed concerns, attitudes and/or behaviour of HCPs towards vaccinating others, and 9% were about evaluating intervention(s). Overall, knowledge about particular vaccines, their efficacy and safety, helped to build HCPs own confidence in vaccines and their willingness to recommend vaccines to others. The importance of societal endorsement and support from colleagues was also reported. In the face of emerging vaccine hesitancy, HCPs still remain the most trusted advisor and influencer of vaccination decisions. The capacity and confidence of HCPs, though, are stretched as they are faced with time constraints, increased workload and limited resources, and often have inadequate information or training support to address parents' questions. Overall, HCPs need more support to manage the quickly evolving vaccine environment as well as changing public, especially those who are reluctant or refuse vaccination. Some recommended strategies included strengthening trust between HCPs, health authorities and policymakers, through more shared involvement in the establishment of vaccine recommendations.

One of the strategic objectives of the 2011-2020 Global Vaccine Action Plan is for the benefits of immunisation to be equitably extended to all people. This approach encompasses special groups at increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases, such as preterm infants and pregnant women, as well as those with chronic and immune-compromising medical conditions or at increased risk of disease due to immunosenescence. Despite demonstrations of effectiveness and safety, vaccine uptake in these special groups is frequently lower than expected, even in developed countries with vaccination strategies in place. For example, uptake of the influenza vaccine in pregnancy rarely exceeds 50% in developed countries and, although data are scarce, it appears that only half of preterm infants are up-to-date with routine paediatric vaccinations. Many people with chronic medical conditions or who are immunocompromised due to disease or aging are also under-vaccinated. In the US, coverage among people aged 65years or older was 67% for the influenza vaccine in the 2014-2015 season and 55-60% for tetanus and pneumococcal vaccines in 2013, while the coverage rate for herpes zoster vaccination among those aged 60years or older was only 24%. In most other countries, rates are far lower. Reasons for under-vaccination of special groups include fear of adverse outcomes or illness caused by the vaccine, the inconvenience (and in some settings, cost) of vaccination and lack of awareness of the need for vaccination or national recommendations. There is also evidence that healthcare providers' attitudes towards vaccination are among the most important influences on the decision to vaccinate. It is clear that physicians' adherence to recommendations needs to be improved, particularly where patients receive care from multiple subspecialists and receive little or no care from primary care providers.

Vaccines are different from most medicines in that they are administered to large and mostly healthy populations including infants and children, so there is a low tolerance for potential risks or side-effects. In addition, the long-term benefits of immunisation in reducing or eliminating infectious diseases may induce complacency due to the absence of cases. However, as demonstrated in recent measles outbreaks in Europe and United States, reappearance of the disease occurs as soon as vaccine coverage falls. Unfounded vaccine scares such as those associating the combined measles-mumps-rubella vaccine with autism, and whole-cell pertussis vaccines with encephalopathy, can also have massive impacts, resulting in reduced vaccine uptake and disease resurgence. The safety assessment of vaccines is exhaustive and continuous; beginning with non-clinical evaluation of their individual components in terms of purity, stability and sterility, continuing throughout the clinical development phase and entire duration of use of the vaccine; including post-approval. The breadth and depth of safety assessments conducted at multiple levels by a range of independent organizations increases confidence in the rigour with which any potential risks or side-effects are investigated and managed. Industry, regulatory agencies, academia, the medical community and the general public all play a role in monitoring vaccine safety. Within these stakeholder groups, the healthcare professional and vaccine provider have key roles in the prevention, identification, investigation and management of adverse events following immunisation (AEFI). Guidelines and algorithms aid in determining whether AEFI may have been caused by the vaccine, or whether it is coincidental to it. Healthcare providers are encouraged to rigorously investigate AEFIs and to report them via local reporting processes. The ultimate objective for all parties is to ensure vaccines have a favourable benefit-risk profile.

In a Perspective, Lawrence Stanberry and colleagues discuss impacts of climate change on children.

While vaccines are a well-established method of controlling the spread of infectious diseases, vaccine hesitancy jeopardizes curbing the spread of COVID-19. Through the Vaccine Information Network (VIN), this study explored barriers and motivators to COVID-19 vaccine uptake. We conducted 18 focus group discussions with male and female community members, stratified by country, age group, and—for Zimbabwe only—by HIV status. Participants’ median age across both countries was 40 years (interquartile range of 22–40), and most (65.9%) were female. We conceptualized the key themes within the World Health Organization’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) 3C (convenience, confidence, complacency) vaccine hesitancy model. Barriers to vaccine uptake—lack of convenience, low confidence, and high complacency—included inaccessibility of vaccines and vaccination sites, vaccine safety and development concerns, and disbelief in COVID-19’s existence. Motivators to vaccine uptake—convenience, confidence, and low complacency—included accessibility of vaccination sites, user-friendly registration processes, trust in governments and vaccines, fear of dying from COVID-19, and knowing someone who had died from or become infected with COVID-19. Overall, vaccine hesitancy in South Africa and Zimbabwe was influenced by inconvenience, a lack of confidence, and high complacency around COVID-19 vaccines.

Background: The burden of neonatal mortality is primarily borne by low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including deaths due to healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Few studies have assessed infection prevention and control (IP&C) practices in African units caring for small and/or sick newborns aimed to reduce HAIs. Methods: We performed a mixed-methods study composed of a survey and virtual tour to assess IP&C and related practices. We created a survey composed of multiple-choice and open-ended questions delivered to site respondents via Zoom or video equivalent. Respondents provided a virtual tour of their unit via video and the study team used a checklist to evaluate specific practices. Results: We recruited 45 units caring for small and sick newborns in 20 African countries. Opportunities to optimize hand hygiene, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) practices, Kangaroo Mother Care, and IP&C training were noted. The virtual tour offered further understanding of IP&C challenges unique to individual sites. All respondents expressed the need for additional space, equipment, supplies, education, and IP&C staff and emphasized that attention to maternal comfort was important to IP&C success. Discussion: This study identified opportunities to improve IP&C practices using low-cost measures including further education and peer support through learning collaboratives. Virtual tours can be used to provide sitespecific assessment and feedback from peers, IP&C specialists and environmental engineering experts.