Aspects of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign differed from routine vaccines, including emergency use authorizations, the prioritization of access, and the politicization of messaging. Subsequently, many parents reported lower vaccine confidence relative to routine vaccines, and vaccination coverage stalled below targets. This study aimed to understand parental vaccine decision making and compare COVID-19 versus routine vaccine decision making. We conducted nine virtual focus groups between 25 February 2022-11 March 2022 with parents ( = 41) of the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia's patients, recruited via email and stratified by vaccine hesitancy status (non-hesitant vs. hesitant). Transcripts were analyzed using the vaccine hesitancy matrix domains. Of 41 total participants, 25 (61.0%) were non-hesitant, 16 (39.0%) were hesitant or their children were not up-to-date on adolescent vaccines, and most self-identified as female (95.1%) and White/Caucasian (61.0%). Most participants (87.5%) were fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and many of their first children ( = 26, 63.4%) were vaccinated against influenza. Several themes emerged regarding decision making: individual influences, group influences, vaccine and vaccine program influences, and contextual influences. While some influences were similar for routine and COVID-19 vaccine decision making (e.g., needing evidence-based information), other factors were vaccine- or situation-specific. Building trust requires a multi-faceted concerted effort that involves addressing the complex vaccine decision-making process.

<p>In 2017, Pennsylvania amended school-entry vaccination requirements including reduction of the provisional period from eight months to the first five days of school and requirement of meningococcal-conjugate vaccine (MCV4) for students entering 12th grade. This cross-sectional study evaluates the impact of these new requirements on clinical practice and vaccination rates among requirement-eligible adolescents within a large pediatric network in metropolitan Philadelphia. We surveyed providers from 24 pediatric primary care facilities across five Southeastern Pennsylvania counties to assess strategies for timely vaccination of children, facilitators and barriers to implementation of these strategies, and attitudes toward the new school vaccine requirements. Vaccination rates post-five-day grace period among eligible 12-18-year-old adolescents were calculated using aggregate electronic health record data and compared pre- and post-policy implementation (2016 vs. 2017) using two-sample tests of proportion. Overall, providers were supportive of the new vaccination requirements and reported that their facilities were equipped to accommodate the increased demand for vaccination visits prior to the beginning of the school year. There were modest increases in Tdap and MCV4 vaccination rates among 12-13-year-old adolescents by mid-September and a significant increase for MCV4 among 17-18-year-old adolescents ( &gt; .001) in all regions. There were also statistically significant increases ( &gt; .001) in MenB and HPV vaccination rates in this older age group. Our results suggest that these amended school-entry vaccination requirements may help improve timely vaccination rates for both required and non-required vaccines, increasing protection among students at the beginning of the school year.</p>

<p>In response to the increase in non-medical vaccine exemptions (NME), many states have adopted education mandates (EM), required vaccine education for parents requesting NMEs for their school-age children, but these EMs vary greatly in implementation. In order to learn about the administrative aspects of each state's EM, we interviewed fourteen health department officials from nine states with EMs. Interviews were conducted over the phone, transcribed by a professional transcription service, and double-coded using NVivo 12 by two members of the study staff. The coding resulted in 3698 comments overall, 98.5% inter-coder reliability, and a κ statistic of 0.691. We found no consistent format for content delivery, and methods used included in-person dialogues, web-based education, and video modules. Content of the education is not standardized, and education length ranges from 15-60 minutes. Four major themes about the EM policies emerged: 1) the use of EMs to eliminate "convenience exemptions;" 2) the importance of health department communication with healthcare providers; 3) facilitators and barriers to implementation; and 4) the positive recommendation for other states to adopt EM policies. We concluded that current EM implementation varies greatly, but officials in states which have adopted EMs for parents requesting NMEs for school-entry vaccinations overwhelmingly recommend other states to adopt them as well. Key features of successful programs may include conversations with parents requesting NMEs and strong communication channels with healthcare providers. Systematic tracking of vaccine status after exemption requests and education is necessary to quantitatively determine the effectiveness of EM programs.</p>

<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong>Immunization policies at colleges and universities differ greatly for many reasons, including prior experience with disease outbreaks and state immunization requirements. Few studies comprehensively explore the range of factors that influence the development of college vaccine policies or facilitators and barriers to their implementation.</p>

<p><strong>OBJECTIVE: </strong>To explore the perceptions and decision-making process that influence college vaccine policy development and implementation from the perspective of student health administrators.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with student health administrators (N = 10) from ten U.S. colleges and universities purposefully sampled by school type (public vs. private) and geographic region. A descriptive codebook was developed from the interview guide, and each interview was double-coded using NVivo 11 software (κ = 0.87; inter-observer reliability = 99.4%).</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>We coded 5785 phrases. Administrators positively viewed their institutions' vaccine requirements, but some expressed concerns about the acceptance of philosophical and religious exemptions. They noted that students were generally ambivalent towards vaccine requirements, and while students recognized the benefits of vaccination, they did not prioritize immunizations. All administrators cited reliance on governmental and professional organizations as well as state regulations for decisions regarding vaccine requirements and recommendations at their institutions. Partnerships with other school departments, pharmaceutical companies, immunization coalitions, and healthcare providers were frequently cited as facilitators of college vaccine programs. Costs of purchasing, storing, and tracking vaccines were identified as major barriers.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>We identified key themes that can be evaluated in subsequent studies to identify factors associated with successful implementation of university immunization programs and inform initiatives to increase vaccine acceptance and optimize immunization rates on college and university campuses.</p>

<p><strong>OBJECTIVE: </strong>We aimed to explore knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about vaccines required for college-entry and vaccine-related behaviors among college students.</p>

<p><strong>PARTICIPANTS: </strong>Thirty-three full-time undergraduate students, ≥ 18 years old, enrolled at public (2) and private (3) colleges and universities in metropolitan Philadelphia in fall 2016.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>We conducted semistructured interviews, which were double-coded with 5,015 comments overall and 99.3% intercoder reliability (κ = 0.779) using NVivo 11 software.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>Six key themes emerged: (1) low knowledge about vaccines and requirements; (2) mixed attitudes about required vs. recommended vaccines; (3) high trust in medical professionals; (4) low perceived risk for vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks; (5) substantial parental influence on students' decision-making; and (6) low utilization of Student Health Services.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>This study revealed lack of knowledge about and low prioritization of vaccination despite overall positive attitudes towards vaccines. Prematriculation education of college students is critical to increasing vaccine knowledge and use.</p>

<p><strong>OBJECTIVES: </strong>To evaluate variation in vaccine requirements, recommendations, and enforcement strategies among U.S. four-year colleges and universities.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional study abstracting information from Web sites among a sample of 216 four-year colleges and universities from all 50 states and District of Columbia. Our primary outcomes of interest included: type and number of vaccines required for school entry, vaccines recommended by schools for students, and vaccines supplied through student health services. Covariates of interest included: school type, region, school size, mention of American College Health Association recommendations, presence of an accredited health center, mention of state requirements, presence of an enforcement strategy, and exemption stringency of the state in which the school was located.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>Almost all (94%) schools required at least one vaccine for school entry, and 48% required three or more vaccines. The most commonly required vaccines were measles, mumps, and rubella (88.4%) and meningococcal vaccine (51.9%). All schools required the same vaccines included in state requirements but 65% also required additional vaccines. Most schools (67.1%) used registration hold to enforce requirements, while 14.8% restricted students from campus housing and 2.8% dismissed noncompliant students. Seventeen percent of schools had no published enforcement strategies. A higher proportion of private compared to public universities required three or more vaccines (57% vs. 37.3%, p = .014).</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>While most schools have immunization requirements, there is significant variation in number and type of vaccines required. This suggests potential inconsistent uptake of recommended vaccines for college students and underlies the need to characterize facilitators and barriers to immunization program implementation on college campuses.</p>