Department of Public Health Sciences and Paediatrics, University of Turin, 5/bis Via Santena, I-10126 Turin, Italy.
Northern Metropolitan Department Direction, Local Health Authority Turin 3 (ASL TO3), 152 Via Don Giovanni Sapino, I-10078 Venaria Reale, Italy.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Sep 3;19(17):11044. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191711044.
The debate on vaccination mandate was fuelled over the past two years by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed at overviewing vaccination strategies and corresponding vaccine coverages for childhood vaccinations before the pandemic and for SARS-CoV-2 in high-income countries. A qualitative comparison was also performed between the two contexts: unlike for childhood vaccinations, only one European country (Austria) imposed generalised COVID-19 mandates, most countries preferring targeted mandates for higher-risk categories (Italy, Greece) or workers in key public services (Finland, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Germany). Many countries (Norway, Sweden, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain) confirmed their traditional voluntary vaccination approach also for COVID-19, while others (Slovenia and Hungary), historically relying on compulsory vaccination strategies, surprisingly opted for voluntary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, with unsatisfactory results in terms of immunisation rates. However, no tangible relationship was generally found between vaccination policies and immunisation coverages: data show that, unlike some countries with mandates, countries where vaccinations are merely recommended could achieve higher coverages, even beyond the recommended 95% threshold. The COVID-19 experience has enriched pre-existent vaccination strategy debates by adding interesting elements concerning attitudes towards vaccines in a novel and unexplored context. Interpreting the available results by considering the different cultural contexts and vaccine hesitancy determinants can help to better understand the complexity of the relationship between policies and achieved coverages.
过去两年,COVID-19 大流行推动了疫苗接种授权的辩论。本研究旨在综述大流行前儿童疫苗接种策略和相应的疫苗覆盖率,以及高收入国家针对 SARS-CoV-2 的疫苗接种策略和相应的疫苗覆盖率。还对这两种情况进行了定性比较:与儿童疫苗接种不同,只有一个欧洲国家(奥地利)实施了普遍的 COVID-19 授权,大多数国家更喜欢针对高风险人群(意大利、希腊)或关键公共服务部门的工作人员(芬兰、澳大利亚、新西兰、英国、德国)实施有针对性的授权。许多国家(挪威、瑞典、荷兰、葡萄牙、西班牙)也确认对 COVID-19 保持传统的自愿疫苗接种方法,而其他一些(斯洛文尼亚和匈牙利)历史上依赖强制性疫苗接种策略,出人意料地选择了自愿的 SARS-CoV-2 疫苗接种,但接种率不尽如人意。然而,一般来说,疫苗接种政策和免疫覆盖率之间并没有明显的关系:数据显示,与一些实施授权的国家不同,仅建议接种疫苗的国家可以实现更高的覆盖率,甚至超过建议的 95%阈值。COVID-19 疫情在一个新颖而未知的背景下增加了人们对疫苗的态度这一有趣元素,丰富了先前的疫苗接种策略辩论。通过考虑不同的文化背景和疫苗犹豫决定因素来解释现有结果,可以帮助更好地理解政策和实现覆盖率之间关系的复杂性。