PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Patrik Bachtiger AU - Alexander Adamson AU - William A Maclean AU - Jennifer K Quint AU - Nicholas S Peters TI - Increasing but inadequate intention to receive Covid-19 vaccination over the first 50 days of impact of the more infectious variant and roll-out of vaccination in UK: indicators for public health messaging AID - 10.1101/2021.01.30.21250083 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.01.30.21250083 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/01/2021.01.30.21250083.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/01/2021.01.30.21250083.full AB - Objectives To inform critical public health messaging by determining how changes in Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy, attitudes to the priorities for administration, the emergence of new variants and availability of vaccines may affect the trajectory and achievement of herd immunity.Methods >9,000 respondents in an ongoing cross-sectional participatory longitudinal epidemiology study (LoC-19, n=18,581) completed a questionnaire within their personal electronic health record in the week reporting first effective Covid-19 vaccines, and then again after widespread publicity of the increased transmissibility of a new variant (November 13th and December 31st 2020 respectively). Questions covered willingness to receive Covid-19 vaccination and attitudes to prioritisation. Descriptive statistics, unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and natural language processing of free-text responses are reported, and how changes over the first 50 days of both vaccination roll-out and new-variant impact modelling of anticipated transmission rates and the likelihood and time to herd immunity.Findings Compared with the week reporting the first efficacious vaccine there was a 15% increase in acceptance of Covid-19 vaccination, attributable in one third to the impact of the new variant, with 75% of respondents “shielding” – staying at home and not leaving unless essential – regardless of health status or tier rules. 12.5% of respondents plan to change their behaviour two weeks after completing vaccination compared with 45% intending to do so only when cases have reduced to a low level. Despite the increase from 71% to 86% over this critical 50-day period, modelling of planned uptake of vaccination remains below that required for rapid effective herd immunity – now estimated to be 90 percent in the presence of a new variant escalating R0 to levels requiring further lockdowns. To inform the public messaging essential therefore to improve uptake, age and female gender were, respectively, strongly positively and negatively associated with wanting a vaccine. 22.7% disagreed with the prioritisation list, though 70.3% were against being able to expedite vaccination through payment. Teachers (988, 12.6%) and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) (837, 10.7%) groups were most cited by respondents for prioritisation.Interpretation In this sample, the growing impact of personal choice among the increasingly informed public highlights a decrease in Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy over time, with news of a new variant motivating increased willingness for vaccination but at levels below what may be required for effective herd immunity. We identify public preferences for next-in-line priorities, headed by teachers and BAME groups, consideration of which will help build trust and community engagement critical for maximising compliance with not only the vaccination programme but also all other public health measures.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementFunding: Imperial Health Charity, Imperial Biomedical Research Centre of the National Institute of Health Research, British Heart Foundation, Pfizer Independent Grants, NHSX, Rosetrees Foundation. This work is supported by BREATHE - The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health [MC_PC_19004]. BREATHE is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval: The weekly questionnaire was a direct care tool for patients to self-monitor their wellbeing during the Covid-19 pandemic. Review by the Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust Data Protection Office advised ethical approval for data analysis and publication was not required. Participants were informed prior to completing responses that these would be anonymised to inform local and national health policy and were free to opt out.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesData availability: Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust is the data controller. The datasets analysed in this study are not publicly available but can be shared for scientific collaboration subject to meeting requirements of the institution's data protection policy.