Vaccines Access in 2022: A Policy on a Major Public Health Issue

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

The issue of access to vaccination has become a particularly urgent issue after the eruption of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, a policy regulating access to vaccination opportunities was not only a necessary change to the existing set of healthcare regulations but also an inevitable one. Among the policies recently introduced into the U.S. healthcare context, one should mention NH S 229, or the Pharmacist Administration of Vaccines enacted in June 2022 (“State public health legislation database,” 2022). Though the policy in question has introduced a legitimate positive change into the public health environment, its implementation could be seen as ethically complicated due to the lack of a consistent law concerning the authorization requirements.

The current policy affects public health outcomes in a most obvious and quite noticeable way. Specifically, the policy has contributed to a rise in the number of people that have received essential vaccinations, including not only the COVID-19 vaccine but also those against other major public health issues. According to Islam et al. (2021), the levels of immunization have risen substantially since the adoption of the bill. Although the described correlation could be interpreted as incidental due to the small amount of time that has passed, there are strong indications that the policy will affect people’s lives positively.

The implementation of the policy affects a range of audiences. However, the general public appears to have a vested interest in the enactment of the specified bill. Namely, creating an environment where the enforcement of vaccination standards and an increase in access to immunization will lead to significant improvements, namely, a reduction of risks of contagions and the development of major health issues (Dehuma & Deguma, 2021). Additionally, local practitioners are likely to welcome the specified policy since it will introduce them to additional responsibilities and allow them to receive updated certifications (Dehuma & Deguma, 2021). Therefore, the bill in question is bound to affect an even greater range of audiences in the future.

Remarkably, before the policy was introduced, few alternatives must have been considered. Namely, the increase in vaccination options for as broad a range of audiences as possible could have been facilitated by a comparatively limited range of measures. Specifically, the costs of immunization could have been minimized, which would have made it possible for a greater number of people to address the respective resources. Additionally, the workload for experts providing immunization could have been increased alongside a rise in the number of the specified healthcare experts. However, the described measure would have taken significantly greater time and a substantially larger number of resources (Galanis et al., 2021). Therefore, the selected option for changing the current situation does not seem feasible.

The policy has been functioning marginally well, with most of its goals being gradually achieved. Firstly, one must mention a rise in the number of vaccinated individuals and the resulting increase in the levels of preparedness for future health concerns (Dehuma & Deguma, 2021). Additionally, the extent of awareness has been on the increase among general audiences, which can also be considered one of the main desirable outcomes of the policy (Galanis et al., 2021). Specifically, improved health literacy rates could be seen as central to the improvement of health rates among the target audiences. In turn, the policy is geared directly at increasing the extent of patients’ awareness about the issue of vaccination, which is correlated directly with the extent of immunization and, therefore, a drop in health risks (McBride & Singh, 2018). Thus, the described policy can be considered efficient in the implementation of its goals.

However, some of its parts could be more effective; particularly, the current control tools could use some improvement. Aside from reports on the changes in the number of vaccinated individuals, interviews and questionnaires could be introduced to identify current issues and main obstacles. Thus, the bill will be implemented with greater efficacy and success.

The extent of the bill’s effectiveness can be altered noticeably with the help of cultural practices and values. Specifically, by promoting diversity and encouraging healthcare experts to learn about the culture specifics of the target population, one can ensure that the demographic in question will not be as resistant to change as it might be at first. For instance, by locating discrepancies between the proposed healthcare solutions and culture-specific practices of the target demographic, one will design a change management tool that will encourage people to accept vaccination. Thus, the effect of cultural factors is believed to be quite profound when implementing the policy (McBride & Singh, 2018). Furthermore, cultural factors linked to traditions and beliefs may hinder the promotion of the proposed policy since people may remain reluctant to accept vaccinations due to their beliefs. Therefore, it is strongly advised that a cross-cultural framework is adopted as the basis for policy implementation.

However, the policy in question incorporates several key issues that will require future trade-offs. Specifically, the problem of promoting health literacy must be addressed accordingly. Since departing from the place of prejudice and misconceptions about vaccination and accepting the necessity of immunization requires time, policymakers and healthcare practitioners will have to accept the fact that positive results will take time. It is believed that, within several years, the acceptance of vaccination will become nationwide.

Despite its undeniable benefit of offering citizens an opportunity to receive a vaccine promptly and offering immediate access to the relevant services, the NH S 229 bill introduces a certain ethical dilemma due to the blurred lines in the standards for certification for the specified position across the United States. Therefore, the urgency to revisit the current criteria and ensure that a homogenous framework for certification is established across the country. Thus, the threat of vaccination mismanagement and the relevant health issues, as well as the lack of access to vaccination in remote areas, will be avoided.

References

Deguma, M. C., & Deguma, J. J. (2021). The possible threat of faking Covid-19 diagnostic tests and vaccination certifications: a call to an immediate action. Journal of Public Health, 43(2), e340-e341. Web.

Galanis, P., Vraka, I., Fragkou, D., Bilali, A., & Kaitelidou, D. (2021). Nurses’ burnout and associated risk factors during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of advanced nursing, 77(8), 3286-3302. Web.

Islam, M. S., Kamal, A. H. M., Kabir, A., Southern, D. L., Khan, S. H., Hasan, S. M., Sarkar, TR., Sharmin, S., Das, S., Roy, T., Harun, M. G. F., Chughtai, A. A., Homaira, N., & Seale, H. (2021). COVID-19 vaccine rumors and conspiracy theories: The need for cognitive inoculation against misinformation to improve vaccine adherence. PloS One, 16(5), 1-17. Web.

McBride, K. R., & Singh, S. (2018). Predictors of adults’ knowledge and awareness of HPV, HPV-associated cancers, and the HPV vaccine: implications for health education. Health Education & Behavior, 45(1), 68-76. Web.

State public health legislation database. (2022). NCSL. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

Vaccines Access in 2022: A Policy on a Major Public Health Issue

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)