COVID-19 vaccine is regarded as the most promising means of limiting the spread of or eliminating the pandemic. The success of this strategy will rely on the rate of vaccine acceptance globally. The study aims to examine the factors that influence COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, intention, and hesitancy. PubMed was searched comprehensively for articles using the keyword “COVID-19 vaccine surveys.” Of the 192 records, 22 studies were eligible for the review. Eighty-two percent of these studies were conducted among the general population. Gender, age, education, and occupation were some of the socio-demographic variables associated with vaccine acceptance. Variables such as trust in authorities, risk perception of COVID-19 infection, vaccine efficacy, current or previous influenza vaccination, and vaccine safety affected vaccine acceptance. Globally, in March 2020, the average vaccine acceptance observed was 86% which dropped to 54% in July 2020 which later increased to 72% in September 2020. Globally, the average rate of vaccine hesitancy in April 2020 was 21%, which increased to 36% in July 2020 and later declined to 16% in October 2020. Large variability in vaccine acceptance and high vaccine hesitancy can influence the efforts to eliminate the COVID-19. Addressing the barriers and facilitators of vaccines will be crucial in implementing effective and tailored interventions to attain maximum vaccine coverage.

Aims:The objective of our study was to examine various existing chronic disease models, their elements and their role in the management of Diabetes, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and Cardiovascular diseases (CVD).Methods:A literature search was performed using PubMed and CINHAL during a period of January 2003- March 2011. Following key terms were used either in single or in combination such as “Chronic Disease Model” AND “Diabetes Mellitus” OR “COPD” OR ‘CVD”.Results:A total of 23 studies were included in the final analysis. Majority of the studies were US-based. Five chronic disease models included Chronic Care Model (CCM), Improving Chronic Illness Care (ICIC), and Innovative Care for Chronic Conditions (ICCC), Stanford Model (SM) and Community based Transition Model (CBTM). CCM was the most studied model. Elements studied included delivery system design and self-management support (87%), clinical information system and decision support (57%) and health system organization (52%). Elements including center care on the patient and family (13%), patient safety (4%), community policies (4%), built integrated health care (4%) and remote patient monitoring (4%) have not been well studied. Other elements including support paradigm shift, manage political environment, align sectoral policies for health, use healthcare personnel more effectively, support patients in their communities, emphasize prevention, identify patient specific concerns related to the transition process, and health literacy between visits and treatments have also not been well studied in the existing literature.Conclusions:It was unclear to what extent the results generated is applicable to different populations and locations and therefore is an area of future research. Future studies are also needed to test chronic disease models in settings where more racially and ethnically representative patients receive chronic care. Future program development should also include information on other barriers including transportation issues, finances and lack of services.

Purpose. This review was done to explore the impact of water treatment, hygiene, and sanitary interventions on improving child health outcomes such as absenteeism, infections, knowledge, attitudes, and practices and adoption of point-of-use water treatment. Methods. A literature search was conducted using the databases PubMed and Google scholar for studies published between 2009 and 2012 and focusing on the effects of access to safe water, hand washing facilities, and hygiene education among school-age children. Studies included were those that documented the provision of water and sanitation in schools for children less than 18 years of age, interventions which assessed WASH practices, and English-language, full-text peer reviewed papers. Results. Fifteen studies were included in the final analysis. 73% (n = 11) of the studies were conducted in developing countries and were rural based (53%, n = 8). The child's age, gender, grade level, socioeconomic index, access to hygiene and sanitary facilities, and prior knowledge of hygiene practices were significantly associated with the outcomes. Nutrition practices which are key factors associated with the outcomes were rarely assessed. Conclusion. Further research is required to assess the long-term impact of such interventions in different settings.

No abstract