Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun 6;9(6):e014680.
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014680.

Reaching the unreached through building trust: a mixed-method study on COVID-19 vaccination in rural Lao PDR

Affiliations

Reaching the unreached through building trust: a mixed-method study on COVID-19 vaccination in rural Lao PDR

Ketkesone Phrasisombath et al. BMJ Glob Health. .

Abstract

Introduction: The global COVID-19 vaccine rollout has been impacted by socioeconomic disparities and vaccine hesitancy, but few studies examine reasons for changed attitudes. In Lao People's Democratic Republic (Lao PDR), a nationwide government-led initiative was developed in response to COVID-19, focused on community health ownership and trust in primary healthcare. The intervention team including health and governance sectors conducted capacity-building workshops with local staff and community representatives and visited villages for vaccination outreach. This study investigates the impact of this intervention on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in rural communities.

Methods: Conducted in Xiengkhuang province, Lao PDR, from December 2022 to February 2023, the study employed a sequential mixed-methods research design. Data on vaccinated individuals from 25 villages were collected from 11 primary healthcare units; pre-post analysis was applied. Qualitative data, gathered through interviews and focus group discussions with villagers, village authorities, health staff and local government (n=102) in six villages, underwent inductive thematic analysis.

Results: First-dose vaccine uptake after the intervention increased significantly (6.9 times). Qualitative analysis identified key reasons for vaccination hesitancy: (1) mistrust due to rumours and past experiences; (2) poor communication and inconsistent messaging and (3) challenges in access for priority groups. Influencing factors during the intervention included (1) effective local-context communication; (2) leveraging existing community structures and influential individuals in a multisectoral approach and (3) increased community motivation through improved satisfaction, ownership and relationships.

Conclusion: This study highlights the impact and methods of building trust with unreached populations in health interventions, emphasising locally led solutions. Successful reversal of vaccine hesitancy was achieved by addressing root causes and fostering ownership at community and local government levels through a 'positive approach'. This diverges from conventional supplemental immunisation activities and holds potential for systematically building trust between unreached populations and health systems. Further research could explore the impacts of routine vaccination for sustained improvements in health equity.

Keywords: COVID-19; Prevention strategies; Qualitative study; Vaccines.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Map showing the location of the intervention and study area (source: UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs). Lao PDR, Lao People’s Democratic Republic.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Timeline of the intervention and research. CONNECT, Community Network Engagement for Essential Healthcare and COVID-19 responses through Trust.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(A) Change in the number of people receiving the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine by village. Villages 5 and 6 that implemented school-based campaigns were excluded from the main analyses as outliers. (B) Box plot showing the number of people vaccinated over 4 campaigns. Number of villages included in Visit-3, Visit-2, Visit-1 after intervention were 13, 22, 22 and 23.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Factors influencing the decision to be vaccinated and how these were addressed by the intervention.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. World Health Organization . COVAX calls for urgent action to close vaccine equity gap. 2023. Available: https://www.who.int/news/item/20-05-2022-covax-calls-for-urgent-action-t... - PMC - PubMed
    1. Norhayati MN, Che Yusof R, Azman YM. Systematic review and meta-analysis of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. Front Med (Lausanne) 2021;8. 10.3389/fmed.2021.783982 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marzo RR, Sami W, Alam MZ, et al. . Hesitancy in COVID-19 vaccine uptake and its associated factors among the general adult population: a cross-sectional study in six Southeast Asian countries. Trop Med Health 2022;50:4. 10.1186/s41182-021-00393-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zimmermann BM, Paul KT, Araújo ER, et al. . The social and socio-political Embeddedness of COVID-19 vaccination decision-making: A five-country qualitative interview study from Europe. Vaccine 2023;41:2084–92. 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.02.012 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ghaznavi C, Yoneoka D, Kawashima T, et al. . Factors associated with reversals of COVID-19 vaccination willingness: results from two longitudinal, national surveys in Japan 2021-2022. Lancet Reg Health West Pac 2022;27. 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2022.100540 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Substances