Abstract
Background In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic and control measures such as national lockdowns threatened to disrupt routine childhood immunisation programmes. Initial reports from the early weeks of lockdown in the UK and worldwide suggested that uptake could fall putting children at risk from multiple other infectious diseases. In Scotland and England, enhanced surveillance of national data for childhood immunisations was established to inform and rapidly assess the impact of the pandemic on infant and preschool immunisation uptake rates.
Methods and findings We undertook an observational study using routinely collected data for the year prior to the pandemic (2019), and immediately before, during and after the first period of the UK ‘lockdown’ in 2020. Data were obtained for Scotland from the Public Health Scotland “COVID19 wider impacts on the health care system” dashboard (https://scotland.shinyapps.io/phs-covid-wider-impact/) and for England from ImmForm.
Five vaccinations delivered at different ages were evaluated; three doses of the ‘6-in-1’ DTaP/IPV/Hib/HepB vaccine and two doses of MMR. Uptake in the periods in 2020 compared to that in the baseline year of 2019 using binary logistic regression analysis. For Scotland, we analysed timely uptake of immunisations, defined as uptake within four weeks of the child becoming eligible by age for each immunisation and data were also analysed by geographical region and indices of deprivation. For both Scotland and England, we assessed whether immunisations were up to date at approximately 6 months (all doses 6-in-1) and 16-18 months (first MMR) of age.
We found that uptake rates within four weeks of eligibility in Scotland for all the five vaccine visits were higher during the 2020 lockdown period than in 2019. The difference ranged from 1.3% for the first dose of the 6-in-1 vaccine (95.3 vs 94%, OR 1.28, CI 1.18-1.39) to 14.3% for the second MMR dose (66.1 vs 51.8 %, OR 1.8, CI 1.74-1.87). Significant increases in uptake were seen across all deprivation levels, though, for MMR, there was evidence of greater improvement for children living in the least deprived areas.
In England, fewer children who had been due to receive their immunisations during the lockdown period were up to date at 6 months (6-in-1) or 18 months (first dose MMR). The fall in percentage uptake ranged from 0.5% for first 6-in1 (95.8 vs 96.3%, OR 0.89, CI 0.86-0.91) to 2.1% for third 6-in-1 (86.6 vs 88.7%, OR 0.82, CI 0.81-0.83).
Conclusions This study suggests that the national lockdown in Scotland was associated with a positive effect on timely childhood immunisation uptake, however in England a lower percentage of children were up to date at 6 and 18 months. Reason for the improve uptake in Scotland may include active measures taken to promote immunisation at local and national level during this period. Promoting immunisation uptake and addressing potential vaccine hesitancy is particularly important given the ongoing pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf. AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer COVID-19 Advisory Group. RM is funded by the Health Data Research UK BREATHE hub. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Funding Statement
No specific funding for received for this work. RM is funded by the Health Data Research UK BREATHE hub.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study used publically available data therefore specific ethical approval was not required.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Contributor and guarantor information The study was conceived and designed by FM, RW and RM. The data were analysed by FM, RM, YR with oversight from RW and ET. FM drafted the manuscript. JT and JVO were responsible for the Public Health Scotland wider impacts of COVID-19 database from which the Scottish data were extracted. All authors have reviewed the statistical analysis plan and approved the manuscript.
Competing interests All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf. AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group. RM is funded by the Health Data Research UK BREATHE hub. All other authors declare no competing interests
Data sharing statement All data used in this study are publicly available on the Public Health Scotland “Wider impacts of COVID-19” dashboard which can be accessed via https://scotland.shinyapps.io/phs-covid-wider-impact/. The code used to analyse the data is publicly available via the EAVE II GitHub (https://github.com/EAVE-II).
Data Availability
All data used in this study are publicly available on the Public Health Scotland Wider impacts of COVID-19 dashboard which can be accessed via https://scotland.shinyapps.io/phs-covid-wider-impact/. The code used to analyse the data is publicly available via the EAVE II GitHub (https://github.com/EAVE-II).
