Evolving perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines among remote Alaskan communities

ABSTRACT

Given the dynamic nature of the ongoing pandemic, public knowledge and perceptions about COVID-19 are evolving. Limited transportation options, inconsistent healthcare resources, and lack of water and sanitation infrastructure in many remote Alaskan communities located off the road system have contributed to the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic in these areas. We used longitudinal surveys to evaluate remote Alaskan residents’ early vaccine acceptance, vaccine uptake and motivations, risk perceptions regarding COVID-19 vaccines, and likelihood of getting a booster. Slightly over half of respondents showed early vaccine acceptance (November/December 2020), with the highest rate among those over the age of 65 years. However, by March 2021, 80.7% of participants reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccine or planning to get one. Of the unvaccinated, reasons for not getting a vaccine included concerns about side effects and not trusting the vaccine. By September 2021, 88.5% of people had received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine and 79.7% said they would get the booster (third dose) when it became available. There were misconceptions about vaccine recommendations for pregnant women and effects on fertility and DNA. Although initial vaccine concerns may have subsided, the booster rollout and forthcoming vaccines for youth under 12 years of age present new hurdles for vaccine communication efforts.

KEYWORDS:

• (3 to 5): rural
• alaska
• COVID-19
• Alaska Native
• vaccine

Acknowledgments

We also want to acknowledge and thank the many residents of remote Alaskan communities who shared information about or participated in this study. Thank you also to Rebecca Van Wyck for her help putting our survey instruments online and to Christine McDonald, Tricia Howe, and Jordan Randolph for their help disseminating surveys. Thanks to Tom Hennessy and Leisha Nolan for their reviews of early drafts of our survey instruments.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was funded by the National Science Foundation RAPID Grant #2033192.