Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T03:07:10.155Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Audit on COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Hesitancy Amongst Pregnant or Postnatal Patients Under the Care of a Perinatal Mental Health Community Team

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2022

Bosky Nair*
Affiliation:
Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust, Maidstone, United Kingdom
Alex Oh
Affiliation:
Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust, Maidstone, United Kingdom
Mahdi Alsahaf
Affiliation:
Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust, Maidstone, United Kingdom
Unwana Etteh
Affiliation:
Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust, Maidstone, United Kingdom
*
*Presenting author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

Women with perinatal mental illness are at increased risk for severe illness with COVID-19. Vaccination against COVID-19 is strongly recommended by JCVI (Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation) and RCOG guidance. Mental health professionals should proactively inform their patients about COVID-19 vaccination and also address any concerns or misinformation, should they be raised. The aim of this audit was to evaluate the rate of uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine among patients under the West Kent community perinatal mental health team. In addition, we aimed to identify factors that deter patients from taking the COVID-19 vaccine. In patients who were hesitant to take the vaccine, we offered further information to aid their decision-making process.

Methods

We identified patients under the care of the West Kent perinatal mental health community team on 27/10/2021. We excluded patients who were discharged from the team in subsequent weeks during data collection. We collected patient demographics including highest level of education, ethnicity, religion and socio-economic status. Patients’ COVID-19 vaccine status was obtained via GP records or through telephone contact.

If patients had not had their COVID-19 vaccine, they were contacted to enquire whether they were planning to take the vaccine, if not, to ascertain reasons for refusal and whether they wanted additional information about the vaccine. Those women who requested additional information were offered the RCOG information sheet and decision aid.

Results

Amongst 86 patients included in the audit, 59% (n = 51) had taken both dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and 12% (n = 10) had taken a single dose. 29% (n = 25) were unvaccinated.

68% (n = 17) of unvaccinated patients were pregnant and 32% (n = 8) were postnatal. All women who did not accept COVID-19 vaccine were contacted to offer further information. Following this contact, 39% (n = 9) decided to accept the vaccine, 52% (n = 12) refused the vaccine and 26% (n = 6) were uncertain but were willing to consider taking the vaccine in the future.

The reasons for hesitancy in accepting the vaccine included a lack of trust in the vaccine, concerns around its development over a short period of time, concerns around close associates experiencing illness or side effects after taking the vaccine and scepticism over efficacy of the vaccine. Few women did not wish to take the vaccine during their pregnancy, but were willing to consider it after the birth of their baby.

Conclusion

We identified potential areas to optimise uptake of COVID-19 vaccines by discussing the importance, safety, efficacy and providing up-to-date information regarding COVID-19 vaccine in the perinatal period.

Type
Audit
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.