Introduction
It is hard to disagree that the COVID-19 pandemic has caused numerous health challenges and made it vital for healthcare professionals and policymakers to introduce new effective measures. Nevertheless, it may sometimes be impossible for the authorities to evaluate all opportunities and threats, address all problems, and take into consideration possible ethical concerns when creating a new healthcare policy. As a result, some enacted regulations may require certain improvements, alterations, or redevelopments in order to become more influential and efficient. For instance, despite all the positive effects of NH S 229 or the Pharmacist Administration of Vaccines enacted in June 2022, as well as the objectives it managed to achieve, this policy requires additional alterations and modifications. The latter can help the identified policy to become more impactful and affect a broader group of people.
Recommending Modifications to the Public Health Policy
Overall, while the regulation in question has resulted in the growing number of vaccinated persons and their improved awareness, it is still possible to recommend some developments. Thus, the first modification is related to addressing the lack of a consistent law concerning the authorization requirements. Nowadays, in the U.S., the standards for certification for positions such as pharmacy interns, pharmacists, certified pharmacy technicians, and licensed advanced pharmacy technicians have rather blurred lines (Shen & Tan, 2022). This issue makes the policy seem incomplete and highlights the need for additional clarifications.
Further, it can also be suggested to improve current control tools. For instance, to identify the key obstacles and challenges, the policy offers using reports on the changes in the number of individuals who get the vaccination. In addition to that, questionnaires and interviews can be conducted to receive the necessary data and use it for further modifications (Pandey & Pandey, 2021). Third, as stated by Ullah et al. (2021), one may recommend adding more focus on increasing people’s awareness of the need to get vaccinated and eliminating rumors and myths about the COVID-19 pandemic and the available vaccination. While the identified modifications may require additional resources, including time, it is still essential to consider them when redeveloping the policy.
How the Modifications Represent an Improvement
Further, it is crucial to prove the need for the listed alterations and explain how they can lead to the general improvement of the policy’s impacts and the situation in the country. One may say that the positive effects of the suggested modifications are evident. To begin with, if there is a consistent law related to the requirements for authorization, the practice itself will be clearer and more understandable for healthcare practitioners. According to Séroussi et al. (2020), it is always required from new regulations and bills to have detailed explanations on their matters. In case a homogenous certification framework is established in the U.S., the risks of confusion and errors on the part of pharmacists and other professionals mentioned in the policy will decrease.
Next, current control tools, namely, reports on how the number of newly vaccinated persons changes after the enactment of the bill, do not seem informative enough. Conduction of additional questionnaires and interviews can allow for gathering the essential data and information that can serve as a basis for further research and redevelopment of this and relevant policies (Pandey & Pandey, 2021). Finally, the importance and positive effects of the third recommendation cannot be overestimated. Chavda et al. (2022) state that many people tend to avoid vaccination precisely because they believe in various adverse myths about its danger or ineffectiveness and adhere to conspiracy theories. Consequently, if the policy can address this issue and focus on spreading awareness of the vaccine’s efficiency and success, it will become possible to persuade more people and improve the nation’s health outcomes (Shen & Tan, 2022). Humans always need to be provided with valuable and credible information, so the three recommendations can be rather effective and serve as a considerable enhancement of the existing policy’s positive effects.
Evaluation of Related Health Policies
There is a number of healthcare policies that are or can be considered related to the regulation under question and support the proposed changes. First of all, it is possible to evaluate Florida’s SB 1892 on the subject of the administration of vaccines. Overall, this policy broadens registered pharmacy technicians’ scope of practice by providing them with more opportunities. It authorizes “a registered pharmacy technician, who meets specified requirements regarding education and training, to become certified to administer immunizations and vaccines” (The Professional Staff of the Committee on Health Policy, 2022, p. 1). Most importantly, this practice should be performed “under the supervision of a licensed pharmacist who is also certified to administer immunizations and vaccines within the framework of an established protocol under a supervising physician” (The Professional Staff of the Committee on Health Policy, 2022, p. 1). Consequently, it is possible to notice that this policy not only refers to the regulation in question but also supports the proposed modification related to certification requirements.
Furthermore, one may also find policies that support the need to spread awareness among people. For instance, one such regulation is S.3098 (“Preventive Care Awareness Act,” 2021). In this official document, there are certain updates and changes to the existing health education campaigns (“Preventive Care Awareness Act,” 2021). The purpose of the act is to highlight the need to educate U.S. citizens about the actual causes and consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as promote the available preventive health care service. As a result, this act can make a significant contribution to the growing number of vaccinated persons, as well as support the modification to the policy in question.
How the Proposed Modifications Address Ethical Issues
It is also crucial to discuss how the recommended alterations address ethical issues identified in the policy under consideration. One moral concern noticed in the new regulation was the lack of according and efficient norms and requirements related to increasing the community’s health literacy. It is hard to disagree that people do not have enough knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic, the available means of protection from the virus, and the vaccinations. As a result, it is quite unpleasant that this ethical concern is not addressed in the initial policy. The proposed modifications, in turn, take the issue into consideration. They offer to spread truthful information among people, raise their awareness, and insist on their own research of the available medical tools and services that can strengthen their health.
The recommendation to add more focus on increasing people’s knowledge about vaccinations and eliminate rumors and myths about the COVID-19 pandemic can be addressed through social media health campaigns. What is more, it is possible to ask healthcare workers, including pharmacists, to educate their clients and patients, promote vaccinations, and talk about their safety and effectiveness. As a result, the identified ethical concern should be taken under control, and its negative consequences can be reduced promptly.
Scientific, Legal, and Regulatory Approaches
Numerous theories can support the need for the identified modifications. First, according to the scientific approach, there is indeed a necessity to address the influences of the ‘anti-vax’ movement (Benoit & Mauldin, 2021), eliminate racial disparities (Bleser et al., 2022), and spread awareness about the safety of vaccinations (Chavda et al., 2022). Then, the legal approach promotes people’s equality and the right to have access to adequate medical services, especially during the uneasy global situation (Bleser et al., 2022). Finally, the regulatory approach supports the modification related to the need for clearer standards for certification (Shen & Tan, 2022) and the need to inform the community (“Preventive Care Awareness Act,” 2021). Therefore, the proposed alterations are indeed supported by research and various approaches, which makes them more valuable and promising.
Opposing Opinions
Despite the evident usefulness and effectiveness of the proposed policy modifications, some opposing views may be identified. To begin with, it is essential to mention those people who create or support conspiracy theories, do not believe in the safety of vaccinations, or even deny the existence and danger of the coronavirus (Ullah et al., 2021). There is no doubt that the impact of such individuals is still strong, and they can control the opinions of other groups of people and significantly reduce the number of vaccinated citizens.
According to them, there should be no spreading of information and facts about the negative consequences of the COVID-19 disease. Thus, the authorities should not put any pressure on the community and insist on vaccinations (Chavda et al., 2022). Noticeably, while some deny the potential effectiveness of any vaccine, many think that “sociopolitical factors and pressures may lead to a rushed approval for the COVID vaccine without the assurances of safety and efficacy” (Benoit & Mauldin, 2021, para. 13). Consequently, the ‘anti-vax’ movement can introduce new challenges when the authorities want to redevelop the policy and make it more complete, informative, and effective. As for other opposite views, generally, there are no groups, individuals, or government representatives who would want to prevent the recommended modifications from being implemented.
Additional Policy Change for the Future
One would probably agree that all the mentioned policies and acts, as well as the offered modification, will not be enough to eliminate the issues and challenges caused by the coronavirus. Numerous current trends make it possible to evaluate the situation and predict what changes to the existing policies will be needed in the future. For instance, according to Bleser et al. (2022), the coronavirus pandemic has emphasized racial disparities and unequal access to medical services. As a result, it would be effective to address this concern in the policy under question and highlight that all people, notwithstanding their race, social status, income, age, gender, and other irrelevant characteristics, can receive vaccinations. While this is not exactly the focus of NH S 229, the community still needs to be reminded about the significance of equality, and medical workers should remember that it is their duty to serve all patients and clients, even those from minorities. If this concern is additionally addressed in the policy under question, this regulation will become even more influential and efficient.
Contributions of Culture
The ways the culture contributes to the problem are addressed both in the primary and additional recommendations. For instance, it is stated by Bleser et al. (2022) that the current cultural norms still divide persons into worthy and unworthy ones and deprive minorities of their access to adequate medical services. Unfortunately, this trend is challenging to eliminate, which is why this cultural effect is addressed in the additional modification that may be introduced in the future (Bleser et al., 2022). Second, it is also inherent in the culture of the U.S. citizens to focus on their own beliefs, culture-specific practices, and traditions when assessing the safety and effectiveness of modern medicine (McBride & Singh, 2018). Therefore, one of the key modifications is aimed at spreading awareness, promoting basic information about vaccinations, and ensuring that individuals refer to truthful facts instead of their traditions.
Conclusion
To draw a conclusion, one may say that the identified policy’s positive impacts and significant improvements cannot remain unnoticed. While it has increased the number of people who get vaccinated, achieved higher awareness, and change the situation for the better, there are several areas the policy failed to consider. As a result, three basic modifications can be recommended for the new regulation to become even more effective. First, a consistent law concerning the authorization requirements should be introduced to make the policy more complete. Second, current control tools are insufficient, and questionnaires and interviews need to be conducted. Third, more focus should be put on increasing people’s awareness of the need to get vaccinated. Although opposing opinions exist, the listed modifications seem to be rather promising. While additional ones may be required in the future, these three changes can significantly improve the current situation.
References
Benoit, S. L., & Mauldin, R. F. (2021). The “anti-vax” movement: A quantitative report on vaccine beliefs and knowledge across social media. BMC Public Health, 21(2106). Web.
Bleser, W. K., Shen, H., Crook, H. L., Thoumi, A., Cholera, R., Pearson, J., Whitaker, R., & Saunders, R. S. (2022). Pandemic-driven health policies to address social needs and health equity. Health Affairs. Web.
Chavda, V. P., Chen, Y., Dave, J., Chen, Z. S., Chauhan, S. C., Yallapu, M. M., Uversky, V. N., Bezbaruah, R., Patel, S., & Apostolopoulos, V. (2022). COVID-19 and vaccination: Myths vs science. Expert Review of Vaccines. 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.
Pandey, P., & Pandey, M. M. (2021). Research methodology tools and techniques. Bridge Center.
Preventive Care Awareness Act. (2021). Congress.gov. Web.
The Professional Staff of the Committee on Health Policy. (2022). The Florida Senate bill analysis and fiscal impact statement [PDF document]. Web.
Séroussi, B., Hollis, K. F., & Soualmia, L. F. (2020). Transparency of health informatics processes as the condition of healthcare professionals’ and patients’ trust and adoption: The rise of ethical requirements. Yearbook of Medical Informatics, 29(01), 007-010. Web.
Shen, A. K., & Tan, A. (2022). Trust, influence, and community: Why pharmacists and pharmacies are central for addressing vaccine hesitancy. Journal of the American Pharmacists Association, 62(1), 305–308. Web.
Ullah, I., Khan, K. S., Tahir, M. J., Ahmed, A., & Harapan, H. (2021). Myths and conspiracy theories on vaccines and COVID-19: Potential effect on global vaccine refusals. Vacunas, 22(2), 93-97. Web.