Intention to get vaccinations against COVID-19 in French healthcare workers during the first pandemic wave: a cross-sectional survey

Perceived impact of discussions with a healthcare professional on patients' decision regarding COVID-19 vaccine

There is evidence that advice from Healthcare Professionals (HCPs) plays an important role in patients' decision to get vaccinated, but the extent to which patients perceive this impact is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the perceived impact of a discussion with a HCP on participants' decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among adults who consulted a general practitioner (GP) or a pharmacist in Ile-de-France, France, after COVID-19 vaccines became available (October-November 2021 period). A total of 344 participants were included, 65.2% of whom reported having had a discussion about COVID-19 vaccines with a HCP. Overall, 55% of participants were advised to be vaccinated by their HCP. Most of the discussions took place with a GP (n = 203, 48.9%). According to 52.5% of participants, the discussion had a positive impact, i.e. it was perceived as encouraging vaccination. The latter reported that, among HCPs, GPs had the greatest number of discussions with a positive impact on the decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19 (93.1%). In the study population, the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rate, according to the WHO definition, was high (38.1%), although the COVID-19 vaccine coverage rate was 87.1%. Vaccine hesitant participants were more likely to report a discussion that had a perceived negative impact on their decision to get vaccinated (20.0%) than non-hesitant participants (5.8%, p = .004).

COVID-19 Vaccine Intention Among Iranian Health Workers: Application of the HBM Model

The study aimed to determine the application of the health belief model (HBM) in the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination among health workers in 2021. The cross-sectional study was conducted on 3600 health workers from February to March 2021. Data was collected using a researcher-made questionnaire that included the intention to receive vaccines based on the health belief model constructs. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics indicators, Chi-square, ANOVA test, and logistic regression model at a 95% confidence level. More than 62% of the participants intended to receive the vaccine. The odds of intention to receive the vaccine among people who worked in the health center and did not have a history of hospitalization due to COVID-19 disease were 1.50 and 2.10 units more than the others. Intention to receive the vaccine in individuals with high perceived sensitivity was 1.10 units. Furthermore, in terms of perceived benefits, self-efficacy, and cue-to-action constructs were 1.15, 1.34, and 1.65 units respectively. The rate of vaccine acceptance among Iranian health care workers was relatively good and the constructs of HBM in predicting the rate of intention to receive the vaccine had good applicability.

Non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and reasons for non-uptake among healthcare workers in Uganda: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Vaccines play a crucial role in eradicating and containing disease outbreaks. Therefore, understanding the reasons behind vaccine refusal and associated factors is essential for improving vaccine acceptance rates. Our objective was to examine the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine non-uptake and explore the reasons for non-uptake among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Uganda.

METHODS

Between July and August 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional study among healthcare workers in primary healthcare facilities (private and government) in Entebbe Municipality, Uganda. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling, and consenting individuals received credentials to access an electronic database and complete a structured questionnaire. There were no established HCWs contact registers in the municipality, and the study was conducted during a national lock down, therefore, the HCWs who were on duty at the time of the study were approached. The survey questions were based on the '3Cs' model of vaccine hesitancy and focused on confidence, convenience, and complacency factors. Non-uptake of vaccines was defined as not having received any of the available vaccines in the country. We employed counts, percentages, and simple logit models to summarize the reasons for non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and to identify associated factors.

RESULTS

The study recruited 360 HCWs, 61.7% of whom were female, with an average age of 31 years (SD = 7.9). Among them, 124 (34.4%) healthcare workers did not receive any COVID-19 vaccine. Non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines was independently associated with several factors, including age [35 + years adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.13-0.66 compared with 18-24 years], facility ownership [government, aOR = 0.22 (0.10-0.49) compared with private not-for-profit], previous testing for coronavirus [yes, aOR = 0.35 (0.19-0.65)], and previous involvement in COVID-19 vaccine activities [yes, aOR = 0.17 (0.10-0.29)]. The primary reasons cited for non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines were related to a lack of confidence in the vaccines, such as concerns about side effects (79.8%) and the need for more time to understand the vaccines (89.5%), as well as the importance of weighing benefits and risks (84.7%) before being vaccinated. A smaller proportion, approximately 23%, cited reasons related to complacency and lack of convenience in accessing vaccination services.

CONCLUSION

The high proportion of non-uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among this population primarily stems from a lack of confidence and trust in the vaccines, coupled with insufficient time allowed for users to make informed decisions. This underscores the urgent need for ongoing monitoring and trend analysis of vaccine non-uptake to guide the development and implementation of strategies aimed at building and sustaining vaccine confidence. Adequate time should be allowed to explain benefits of vaccination to the population to allay fears that might exist before actual vaccination is rolled out.

Healthcare workers' attitudes toward and factors influencing their acceptance of an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine: a cross-sectional study in Palestine

BACKGROUND

The emergence of several SARS-CoV-2 variants may necessitate an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine. This study aimed to evaluate healthcare workers' (HCWs) acceptance of a COVID-19 yearly booster vaccine if recommended and its association with their attitudes and burnout levels.

METHODS

We used an online self-administered questionnaire to conduct a cross-sectional study of all HCWs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip of Palestine between August and September 2022. We used the Vaccination Attitudes Examination scale to assess HCWs' vaccination attitudes and the Maslach Burnout Inventory to assess work-related Burnout. In addition, we conducted logistic regression to identify factors independently associated with the acceptance of the booster vaccine.

RESULTS

The study included 919 HCWs; 52.4% were male, 46.5% were physicians, 30.0% were nurses, and 63.1% worked in hospitals. One-third of HCWs (95% CI: 30.5%-36.7%) said they would accept an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine if recommended. HCWs who are suspicious of vaccine benefits [aOR = .70; 95%CI: .65-.75] and those concerned about unforeseeable future effects [aOR = .90; 95%CI: .84-.95] are less likely to accept the booster vaccine if recommended, whereas those who receive annual influenza vaccine are more likely to get it [aOR = 2.9; 95%CI: 1.7-5.0].

CONCLUSION

Only about a third of HCWs would agree to receive an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine if recommended. Mistrust of the vaccine's efficacy and concerns about side effects continue to drive COVID-19 vaccine reluctance. Health officials need to address HCWs' concerns to increase their acceptance of the annual vaccine if it is to be recommended.

Assessment of Covid-19 vaccine confidence among healthcare personnel in the safety-net sector in the United States and Puerto Rico

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess COVID-19 vaccine confidence among healthcare personnel in the safety net sector of the United States and Puerto Rico. This study aimed to examine the extent to which increased knowledge and positive attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy were associated with healthcare workers' COVID-19 vaccination status and their recommendation of the vaccine to all patients.

METHODS

Online survey data were collected from health care workers working in Free and Charitable Clinics across the United States and Federally Qualified Health Centers in Puerto Rico. The survey consisted of 62 questions covering various demographic measures and constructs related to healthcare workers' vaccination status, beliefs, and recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination. Statistical analyses, including multivariate analysis, were conducted to identify the factors associated with the COVID-19 vaccine status and recommendations among healthcare personnel.

RESULTS

Among the 2273 respondents, 93% reported being vaccinated against COVID-19. The analysis revealed that respondents who believed that COVID-19 vaccines were efficacious and safe were three times more likely to be vaccinated and twice as likely to recommend them to all their patients. Respondents who believed they had received adequate information about COVID-19 vaccination were 10 times more likely to be vaccinated and four times more likely to recommend it to all their patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results indicate that healthcare workers' confidence in COVID-19 vaccines is closely tied to their level of knowledge, positive beliefs, and attitudes about vaccine safety and efficacy. The study emphasizes the significance of healthcare workers feeling well informed and confident in their knowledge to recommend the vaccine to their patients. These findings have important implications for the development of strategies to boost COVID-19 vaccine confidence among healthcare workers and increase vaccine uptake among patients.

COVID-19 vaccination among health care workers in Finland: coverage, perceptions and attitudes

AIMS

In this study, we examined the voluntary COVID-19 vaccine coverage among health care workers (HCWs) working in close patient contact. HCWs' beliefs about COVID-19 infection, their opinions of vaccination and reasons for having or declining the COVID-19 vaccination were also evaluated.

METHODS

In October 2021, a cross-sectional observational study was carried out in five hospitals in Central and Eastern Finland. The anonymous and voluntary survey was targeted at 5120 doctors and nurses working in close patient contact.

RESULTS

Some 1837 responses were included in the study. Ninety-seven per cent of the respondents had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine and 68% of the respondents agreed that all HCWs working in close patient contact should be vaccinated against COVID-19. Vaccination coverage and support for vaccination were higher among older HCWs and doctors. HCWs' main reasons for having the COVID vaccine were willingness to protect themselves, their family and their patients from COVID-19. Concerns about adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine was the main reason for declining it.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall COVID-19 vaccination coverage and support for vaccinations among HCWs working in close patient contact were high without actual mandatory policies being introduced. Prioritising HCWs for COVID-19 vaccinations and widespread vaccine availability, as well as low general vaccine hesitancy and high seasonal influenza vaccination coverage among the study population were check marks in achieving high COVID-19 vaccination coverage rapidly.

Intern nursing students' experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit and views on the COVID-19 vaccine: A phenomenological qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Improving acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among nursing students is an important strategy for both preventing infection and building public confidence in the vaccine.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe the views of intern nursing students on the COVID-19 vaccine and to evaluate their experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit.

METHODS

This was a phenomenological qualitative study with a descriptive design. The 46 intern nursing students included in this study were all trained in the COVID-19 vaccination unit. The data was collected at focus group interviews conducted during June 2021 and October 2021.

RESULTS

The mean age of intern nursing students was 22.78±0.91. From the focus group interviews, two themes were identified regarding the views of intern nursing students on the COVID-19 vaccine and their experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit: Theme 1. Positive views; Theme 2. Negative views. Intern nursing students described that they trust the COVID-19 vaccine and believe in its protection. Intern nursing students who performed their clinical practices in COVID-19 vaccination unit stated that they realized their responsibilities toward patients and the community.

CONCLUSIONS

From the INSs' point of view, confidence in the vaccine, responsibility towards patients, their families and the community, and VU practice experience, the health risk associated with COVID-19 positively affected their decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19. The participation of intern nursing students in clinical practice during the pandemic influenced both intern nursing students and population in terms of the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines.

Despite mandated primary series, health care personnel still hesitant about COVID-19 vaccine and immunizing children

IMPORTANCE

Healthcare personnel (HCP) are important messengers for promoting vaccines, for both adults and children. Our investigation describes perceptions of fully vaccinated HCP about COVID-19 vaccine for themselves and primary series for their children.

OBJECTIVE

To determine associations between sociodemographic, employment characteristics and perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines among HCP overall and the subset of HCP with children, who were all mandated to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, in a large US metropolitan region.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey of fully vaccinated HCP from a large integrated health system.

SETTING

Participants were electronically enrolled within a multi-site NYS healthcare system from December 21, 2021, to January 21, 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

Of 78,000 employees, approximately one-third accessed promotional emails; 6,537 employees started surveys and 4165 completed them. Immunocompromised HCP (self-reported) were excluded.

EXPOSURE(S) (FOR OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES)

We conducted a survey with measures including demographic variables, employment history, booster status, child vaccination status; vaccine recommendation, confidence, and knowledge.

MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy for all dose types - primary series or booster doses - among HCP.

RESULTS

Findings from 4,165 completed surveys indicated that almost 17.2 % of all HCP, including administrative and clinical staff, were hesitant or unsure about receiving a COVID-19 vaccine booster, despite the NYS recommendation to do so. Depending on age group, between 20 % and 40 % of HCP were hesitant about having their children vaccinated for COVID-19, regardless of clinical versus non-clinical duties. In multivariable regression analyses, lack of booster dose, unvaccinated children, females, income less than $50,000, and residence in Manhattan remained significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Despite mandated COVID-19 vaccination, a substantial proportion of HCP remained vaccine hesitant towards adult booster doses and pediatric COVID-19 vaccination. While provider recommendation has been the mainstay of combatting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, a gap exists between HCP-despite clinical or administrative status-and the ability to communicate the need for vaccination in a healthcare setting. While previous studies describe the HCP vaccine mandate as a positive force to overcome vaccine hesitancy, we have found that despite a mandate, there is still substantial COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, misinformation, and reluctance to vaccinate children.

Predicting intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 in older Syrian refugees in Lebanon: Findings from a multi-wave study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among refugees in the Arab region remains low. This study aimed to examine the prevalence, reasons and predictors of intention to refuse the COVID-19 vaccine among older Syrian refugees in Lebanon.

METHODS

A nested cross-sectional study within a longitudinal study among older Syrian refugees in Lebanon. The sampling frame was a complete listing of beneficiary households of a humanitarian organization with at least one adult aged 50 years or older. Telephone surveys were completed at months 1 starting September 2020 (wave 1), months 2 (wave 2), months 5 (wave 3), months 6 (wave 4) and months 17 (wave 5) in March 2022. Logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of intention to refuse the COVID-19 vaccine. Models were internally validated using bootstrap methods and the models' calibration and discrimination were presented.

FINDINGS

Of 3167 Syrian refugees, 61.3% intended to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, 31.3% refused, and 7.4% were undecided. Reasons for vaccine refusal were: preference to follow preventive measures (27.4%) and belief that the vaccine is not essential (20.7%). Furthermore, 57.1% of participants registered to take the COVID-19 vaccine in wave 5. Irrespective of vaccination intention, reasons for not registering included: not wanting to receive the vaccine, and being unsure whether to take it. Predictors of intention to refuse the COVID-19 vaccine included: being a female, older age, having elementary education or above, living outside informal tented settlements, perceiving COVID-19 as not severe and vaccines as not safe or effective, and using social media for information on COVID-19. After adjusting for optimization, the final model showed moderate discrimination (C-statistic: 0.651 (95% CI:0.630-0.672)) and good calibration (C-slope: 0.93 (95% CI: 0.823-1.065)).

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed a predictive model for vaccination intention with a moderate discriminative ability and good calibration. Prediction models in humanitarian settings can help identify refugees at higher risk of not intending to receive the COVID-19 vaccine for public health targeting.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Healthcare Workers: A Phenomenological Study of Skepticism

RATIONALE

 Despite the prioritizing the healthcare workers (HCWs) for COVID-19 in a systematized manner the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy was observed in them. HCWs are presumed to be pre-emptive in up-taking the vaccine due to their closest association and having reasonable background information. Hence, we intended to explore and investigate the phenomenology of skepticism and hesitancy toward the COVID-19 vaccine among HCWs.

METHOD

A sequential explanatory mixed methods study design incorporating a baseline cross-sectional survey followed by qualitative and semiquantitative text-mining approach was adopted in a tertiary care center in Madhya Pradesh, India. Six hundred seventy-nine HCWs for quantitative data and 30 HCWs for qualitative interviews were surveyed. After determining the quantum and baseline traits of hesitant HCWs, 30 participants were purposively selected for in-depth qualitative analysis based on grounded theory using a framework approach and consolidated from the psychological and philosophical plane of skepticism. This was complemented by a semiquantitative text-mining approach using mono/bigram analysis and network plotting.

RESULTS

Approximately one-fifth of participants (18%,122 out of 679) were initially, and one-tenth of initially hesitant (10 out of 122) were terminally hesitant. Hesitant and non-hesitant participants were similar except for comorbidity status. Five themes emerged namely individual, vaccine-related, social, system, and contextual after thematic consolidation. Words/phrases indicating individualistic desire to knowing more, internal conflicts, and conjecture were mined further. The network plot showed diversified expressions of participants.

CONCLUSION

There seems to be a requirement to prime HCWs by offering objective information beforehand and removing diffidence using a systematic approach addressing the psychology and prevalent partisan belief in similar circumstances in the future.

Public Perception Toward the Malaysian National COVID-19 Immunisation Programme (PICK) in the State of Sabah, Malaysia: A Cross-Sectional Survey

The Malaysian Government has initiated the National COVID-19 Immunisation Programme, known as PICK, to be a national strategy for addressing the spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic across the country. Although the government intensified public awareness to increase program registration, the total number that registered in the state of Sabah, located in East Malaysia, was relatively low during August 2021, accounting for only 42.9% as compared to that of Peninsular Malaysia. Therefore, this paper examines the public perception toward the PICK program in Sabah based on 4 main components: safety, communication, psychology, and milieu. This study is based on the empirical findings drawn from 1024 respondents across Sabah using online Google Form surveys. This study adopts 5 methodologies for data analysis by using K-means clustering, mean score, Mann-Whitney U test, spatial analysis, and frequency analysis. It has been revealed that the percentage of respondents (categorized as Cluster 1) who have a negative perception toward the vaccination program is higher (55.9%) than those who have a positive perception (44.1%). This study further discovered that Cluster 1 has shown high skepticism regarding the vaccination program, which can be explained through the communication component (M = 3.33, SD = 0.588), especially Co2, Co3, Co1, and Co4. Following the communication factor, a chain of negative perceptions also affects other components such as safety, psychology, and milieu among Cluster 1, all of which contribute to poor participation in the PICK program. The study outcomes are extremely useful for informing local authorities to establish policies related to public interests, primarily in the areas of public health. Understanding the community's perspectives and their obstacles in participating in such programs may assist local authorities in developing or implementing public policies and campaigns that ensure such related public programs can be conducted more effectively in the future.

Self-reported side effects of COVID-19 vaccines among the public

Background

The safety, side effects and efficacy profile of COVID-19 vaccines remain subjects of ongoing concern among the public in Malaysia. The aim of this study was to determine the types of adverse effects following immunisation with COVID-19 vaccines and the differences based on various types of COVID-19 vaccines to raise public awareness and reduce vaccine hesitancy among the public.

Methods

A total of 901 Malaysian adults (≥18 years) who received various COVID-19 vaccines were selected to participate in our cross-sectional study through an online survey between December 2021 and January 2022.

Results

A total of 814 (90.3%) of the participants reported ≥1 side effect following COVID-19 immunisation. Of these, the predominant symptoms were swelling at the injection site (n = 752, 83.5%), headache (n = 638, 70.8%), pain or soreness at the injection site (n = 628, 69.7%), fatigue or tiredness (n = 544, 60.4%), muscle weakness (n = 529, 58.7%) and diarrhea (n = 451, 50.1%). Recipients of the Pfizer-BioNTech (Comirnaty ®) vaccine reported the highest number of adverse effects (n = 355, 43.6%), followed by mixed COVID-19 vaccines (n = 254, 31.2%), the Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1-®[recombinant]) vaccine (n = 113, 13.9%) and the Sinovac (CoronaVac®) vaccine (n = 90, 11.1%). The study showed that individuals who reported significantly more side effects were of elderly age, female gender and high educational level [P value < 0.05]. Mixed COVID-19 vaccine recipients also reported significantly more local and systemic symptoms after the first dose and third dose when compared with other single vaccine recipients.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated the types of self-reported adverse effects following immunisation with single and mixed COVID-19 vaccines. These findings may provide the side effects of different COVID-19 vaccines with the hope of educating the public on the safety profiles of these vaccines and reducing vaccine hesitancy among the public.

A study on the factors influencing the intention to receive booster shots of the COVID-19 vaccine in China based on the information frame effect

Introduction

In the response to and prevention and control of the Novel coronavirus pneumonia, the COVID-19 vaccine does not provide lifelong immunity, and it is therefore important to increase the rate of booster shots of the COVID-19 vaccine. In the field of information health science, research has found that information frames have an impact in changing individual attitudes and health behaviors.

Objective

This study focuses on the effects of different influencing factors on the public's willingness to receive the booster shots of the COVID-19 vaccine under two information frameworks.

Methods

An online questionnaire was conducted to explore the effects of demographic characteristics, personal awareness, social relationships, risk disclosure, perceived booster vaccination protection rate, and duration of protection under the assumption of an information framework. T test and one-way analysis were used to testing the effect of variables.

Results

(1) The persuasion effect under the gain frame is higher than that under the loss frame (B = 0.863 vs. B = 0.746); (2) There was no significant difference in subjects' intention of booster vaccination in terms of gender, age, income, occupation, educational background and place of residence. Whether family members received booster vaccination was strongly correlated with their intention of vaccination under the loss framework (p = 0.017, M = 4.63, SD = 0.664). (3) The higher the understanding of COVID-19, the higher the degree of compliance with the government's COVID-19 prevention and control measures, and the higher the willingness to strengthen vaccination; (4) Risk disclosure has a significant impact on people's willingness to receive COVID-19 booster shots (M = 2.48, under the loss framework; M = 2.44, under the gain framework); (5) Vaccine protection rate and duration of protection have an impact on people's willingness to vaccinate. Increased willingness to vaccinate when the protection rate of booster vaccine approaches 90% (M = 4.76, under the loss framework; M = 4.68, under the gain framework). When the vaccine protection period is 2 years, people are more willing to receive a booster vaccine; and the willingness to receive a booster shot is stronger under the loss framework (M = 4.60, SD = 0.721, p = 0.879).

Conclusion

The impact of the information framework on COVID-19 vaccination intentions is different, and the disclosure of relevant health information should focus on the impact of the information framework and content on the public's behavior toward strengthening vaccination. Therefore, in the face of public health emergencies, public health departments, healthcare institutions, and other sectors can consider adopting the Gainful Information Framework tool to disseminate health information to achieve better persuasion and promote public health behavior change enhancing public health awareness, and promoting universal vaccination.

Assessment of COVID-19 vaccine take-up and its predictors among healthcare professionals in public hospitals, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Facility-based cross-sectional study

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are among the highly exposed groups for the COVID-19 pandemic and have been identified as the target population to get vaccination against the spread of the infection. Aimed to assess COVID-19 vaccine take-up and its predictors among HCPs in public hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2021. A facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 403 randomly selected participants from October 1st to November 30, 2021. Data was entered into Epi-info version 7 and analyzed using SPSS version 25. An AOR along with a 95% confidence level was estimated, and a P value <.05 was considered to declare the statistical significance. About 71% of the participants had taken any of the COVID-19 vaccines at least once. Being married (AOR: 10.79; 95% CI: 1.32-18.05); educational status of MSc degree (AOR = 7.7; CI: 2.08-15.1.6), medical doctors/GP (AOR = 5.88; CI: 1.60-15.54), MD with MSc (AOR = 9.63; CI: 2.17-17.76), PHD (AOR = 13.33; CI: 1.23-24.21) and specialist and above 3 (AOR = 3.45; CI: 2.34-42.8) holder HCPs; perceived severity of COVID-19 infection as moderate (AOR = 0.23; CI: 0.08-0.65) and mild (AOR = 0.28; CI: 0.11-0.74) and poor knowledge toward COVID-19 vaccination (AOR = 0.03; CI: 0.01-0.12) were statistically associated. This study showed that COVID-19 vaccine take-up among HCPs was relatively low to achieve herd immunity. Participants' marital status, educational status, perception of the severity of COVID-19 infection, and level of knowledge toward COVID-19 vaccines were the predictors of the COVID-19 vaccine take-up.

Decision-making on childhood vaccination against COVID-19 by nurses in Cyprus: A cross-sectional online survey

Individuals with high health literacy, such as healthcare workers, are expected to appreciate vaccination benefits and ensure the vaccination of their children. The objective of this study was to examine the factors influencing nurses' decision to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. An online cross-sectional study was conducted in December 2020 (8^th-28^th), before COVID-19 vaccine availability in Cyprus, and employed an anonymous self-administered survey with questions related to socio-demographic characteristics, general vaccine knowledge, and COVID-19 vaccination. Three hundred five nurses with at least one minor child completed the online questionnaire. A small proportion of participants (15.2%) planned to get their children vaccinated against COVID-19. Interestingly, a higher level of vaccination knowledge score was linked with increased likelihood of vaccination intention (OR = 1.35, 95% CI:1.08-1.68), which remained statistically significant after adjusting for age and gender (OR = 1.33, 95% CI:1.06-1.66), socioeconomic (OR = 1.35, 95% CI:1.07-1.70), and demographic characteristics (OR = 1.38, 95% CI:1.07-1.77). Specific characteristics such as older age and being married/in cohabitation status were linked to higher odds of accepting the childhood vaccination against COVID-19. Acceptance of childhood vaccination against COVID-19 is linked with nurses' vaccination knowledge, therefore, public health authorities may focus on educational campaigns to promote childhood vaccination.

Quantitative Synthesis of Factors Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Vaccine Hesitancy in 185 Countries

Mass vaccination against COVID-19 is the best method to ensure herd immunity in order to curb the effect of the pandemic on the global economy. It is therefore important to assess the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy on a global scale. Factors were recorded from cross-sectional studies analyzed with t-Test, ANOVA, correlation, and meta-regression analyses and synthesized to identify global trends in order to inform policy. We registered the protocol (ID: CRD42022350418) and used standard Cochrane methods and PRISMA guidelines to collect and synthesize cross-sectional articles published between January 2020 and August 2023. A total of 67 articles with 576 studies from 185 countries involving 3081,766 participants were included in this synthesis. Global COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was 65.27% (95% CI; 62.72-67.84%), while global vaccine hesitancy stood at 32.1% (95% CI; 29.05-35.17%). One-Way ANOVA showed that there was no significant difference in the percentage Gross Domestic Product spent on vaccine procurement across the World Bank income levels (p < 0.187). There was a significant difference of vaccine acceptance (p < 0.001) and vaccine hesitancy (p < 0.005) across the different World Bank Income levels. World Bank income level had a strong influence on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (p < 0.0004) and hesitancy (p < 0.003) but percentage Gross Domestic Product spent on vaccine procurement did not. There was no correlation between percentage Gross Domestic Product spent on vaccine procurement and COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (r = -0.11, p < 0.164) or vaccine hesitancy (r = -0.09, p < 0.234). Meta-regression analysis showed that living in an urban setting (OR = 4.83, 95% CI; 0.67-212.8), rural setting (OR = 2.53, 95% CI; 0.29-119.33), older (OR = 1.98, 95% CI; 0.99-4.07), higher education (OR = 1.76, 95% CI; 0.85-3.81), and being a low income earner (OR = 2.85, 95% CI; 0.45-30.63) increased the odds of high COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Factors that increased the odds of high COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were no influenza vaccine (OR = 33.06, 95% CI; 5.03-1395.01), mistrust for vaccines (OR = 3.91, 95% CI; 1.92-8.24), complacency (OR = 2.86, 95% CI; 1.02-8.83), pregnancy (OR = 2.3, 95% CI; 0.12-141.76), taking traditional herbs (OR = 2.15, 95% CI; 0.52-10.42), being female (OR = 1.53, 95% CI; 0.78-3.01), and safety concerns (OR = 1.29, 95% CI; 0.67-2.51). We proposed a number of recommendations to increase vaccine acceptance and ensure global herd immunity against COVID-19.

The disparity in hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccination between older individuals in nursing homes and those in the community in Taizhou, China

PURPOSE

Older individuals are priority coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine recipients. Our aim was to investigate the prevalence of and factors influencing vaccine hesitancy in older individuals living in nursing homes and communities.

METHODS

A self-administered COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy survey was conducted from September 2021 to December 2021 among people aged ≥ 60 years in eight nursing homes (382 participants) and the community (112 participants) in Taizhou, China. The response rate was 72.1% (382/530) for older adults in nursing homes and 68.7% (112/163) for older adults in the community.

RESULTS

We found that 58.1% of the older individuals in nursing homes and 36.6% of those in the community were hesitant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and that there was a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001). Multiple logistic regression results indicated that the main factors influencing hesitation among the older individuals in nursing homes were being male (Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.67, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.01-2.76); their cognitive level, including having a high perceived risk of COVID-19 infection (OR = 3.06, 95% CI: 1.73-5.43) or the perception of low vaccine safety (OR = 3.08, 95% CI: 1.545- 6.145); anxiety (OR = 3.43, 95% CI: 1.96-5.99); and no previous influenza vaccination (OR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.13-2.93); whereas those for older individuals in the community were comorbid chronic diseases (OR = 3.13, 95% CI: 1.11- 8.78) and community workers not recommending the vaccine (OR = 8.223, 95% CI: 1.77-38.27).

CONCLUSION

The proportion of older individuals in nursing homes who were hesitant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was significantly higher than for older individuals in the community. Targeted measures should be implemented to reduce vaccine hesitancy and improve vaccination rates in response to the special environment of nursing homes and the characteristics of this population.

A decade beyond the economic recession: A study of health-related lifestyles in urban and rural Spain (2006-2017)

The 2008 economic recession may have affected health-related indicators differently depending on the living environment. We analyze health-related indicators in Spain using data from four Spanish health surveys (2006, 2011, 2014, and 2017, 95 924 individuals aged ≥16 years). In 2006-2011, physical activity decreased among men and women, while in 2006-2017, physical activity only decreased among urban women. Daily vegetable intake, except in rural women, increased in 2006-2011 but decreased in 2006-2017 in all groups. Smoking decreased among urban women in 2006-2011 and 2006-2014 but only decreased among men, and even increased among rural women, in 2006-2017. In 2006-2017, obesity increased among men and urban women, good self-rated health status increased in all groups and flu vaccination declined. Blood pressure and cholesterol control decreased in urban women in 2006-2011 but increased in 2006-2017 in all groups, as well as mammographic and cytological control. Our findings highlight the differential impact of the economic recession on health-related lifestyles according to sex and place of residence, underscoring the need for targeted health policies to address evolving health disparities over time.

Relationship Between Fear of COVID-19, Conspiracy Beliefs About Vaccines and Intention to Vaccinate Against COVID-19: A Cross-National Indirect Effect Model in 13 Latin American Countries

The present study explored the predictive capacity of fear of COVID-19 on the intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and the influence in this relationship of conspiracy beliefs as a possible mediating psychological variable, in 13 Latin American countries. A total of 5779 people recruited through non-probabilistic convenience sampling participated. To collect information, we used the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, Vaccine conspiracy beliefs Scale-COVID-19 and a single item of intention to vaccinate. A full a priori Structural Equation Model was used; whereas, cross-country invariance was performed from increasingly restricted structural models. The results indicated that, fear of COVID-19 positively predicts intention to vaccinate and the presence of conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines. The latter negatively predicted intention to vaccinate against COVID-19. Besides, conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines had an indirect effect on the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 in the 13 countries assessed. Finally, the cross-national similarities of the mediational model among the 13 participating countries are strongly supported. The study is the first to test a cross-national mediational model across variables in a large number of Latin American countries. However, further studies with other countries in other regions of the world are needed.

Impact of the surge of COVID-19 Omicron outbreak on the intention of seasonal influenza vaccination in Hong Kong: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the intention of influenza vaccination during the Omicron pandemic of COVID-19 via a structured cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in 1,813 Hong Kong quota-sampled adults between March and September 2022, when Hong Kong was experiencing an outbreak of Omicron infections. Questions included self-reported medical and vaccination history, and perceptions and intention of influenza vaccine. A multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify significant factors associated with the vaccination intention.

RESULTS

Of the 1,813 participants, 25.8% (95% CI: 23.8%-27.8%) perceived positive impact of COVID-19 pandemic on their influenza vaccine willingness, which was more than two times the proportion of those who feel less likely to take influenza vaccine (11.5%, 95% CI: 10.1%-13.1%). Compared with males, females were less likely to receive influenza vaccine for 2022-23 influenza seasons (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.52-0.95, p = 0.023) and had less impact on their influenza vaccine willingness (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.59-0.99, p = 0.043). Participants older than 60 years old were related to a less positive impact compared with the youngers (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.30-0.93, p = 0.028). Participants with experience of influenza vaccine uptake also showed a higher intention of seasonal influenza vaccination.

CONCLUSION

The public intention of influenza vaccine has been raised in Hong Kong. With the identified subgroups (e.g., female and elderly) and reasons for being reluctant to the influenza vaccination, policy makers should rectify common misperceptions in order to increase influenza vaccination coverage at the post COVID-19 phase.

Rubella Vaccine Uptake among Women of Childbearing Age in Healthcare Settings

BACKGROUND

Rubella is a contagious viral infection that occurs most often in children and young adults. Rubella is the leading vaccine-preventable cause of birth defects. Rubella infection in pregnant women may cause fetal death or congenital defects known as congenital rubella syndrome. There is no specific treatment for rubella, but the disease is preventable by vaccination with an efficacy of over 95%. Vaccination coverage is still below the recommended levels and many cases have occurred worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the immunization programs and the quality of disease surveillance worldwide. Operators of the healthcare setting are at increased risk of infection due to their work duties and should receive preventive vaccination or serologic protection to work in a healthcare setting.

AIMS

To evaluate the serological evidence of rubella IgG antibodies in female healthcare operators of childbearing age, to assess the risk of a breakthrough infection and the need for an additional dose of vaccine.

METHODS

We collected age and antibody titers from 449 young female operators aged <50 years who underwent the periodic surveillance at the Occupational Medicine Unit of the Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome, from January to July 2022. Subjects were considered immune if the anti-rubella IgG titer was >11.00 IU/mL.

RESULTS

The rate of serologically unprotected subjects was 9.13% (41/449). The mean age of protected subjects was 26.93 years, while the mean age of unprotected subjects was 28.24 years. Age did not correlate with mean titer on statistical analysis (p = 0.10). The acceptance rate among unprotected operators was 31.7%. A positive attitude towards vaccination was found in 11/28 (39.3%) of the unvaccinated subjects, while a negative tendency was found in 2/28 (7.1%) of these subjects; most of the unvaccinated operators 15/28 (53.6%) prefer to postpone the administration of the vaccine. When compared with a similar population from the pre-pandemic period, the actual proportion of immune female subjects was not significantly different from that found in 2019 (90.87% vs. 90.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Protection against rubella was suboptimal among female healthcare workers of childbearing age. Acceptance of the rubella vaccine among these operators was low. Most of those who were hesitant intended to postpone the vaccination, while a minority had negative attitudes toward vaccination. A policy of mandatory vaccination policy should overcome the reluctance of operators.

Peri-Pandemic Acceptance of Influenza and COVID-19 Vaccination by Swiss Healthcare Workers in Primary Care 2020/21: A Cross-Sectional Study

Objectives: To assess and compare influenza and COVID-19 vaccination uptake of Swiss healthcare workers (HCWs) in primary care 2020/21. Methods: Influenza and COVID-19 vaccination uptake and recommendation behaviours of HCWs in the primary care were assessed using an online semi-structured questionnaire. Associations between vaccination rates and age, language, gender, profession, vaccination history, vaccination training and recommendation behaviours were evaluated using descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses. Results: Vaccinated against COVID-19 in 2020/21 were 91.8% of the 1,237 participating HCWs, while 60.1% were vaccinated against influenza. Physicians and pharmacists presented the highest influenza vaccination rates (87.3%, 73.7%, respectively) compared to nurses (45.8%) and medical practice assistants (52.5%) while COVID-19 vaccination rates were high across all professions. Influenza and COVID-19 vaccination rates were significantly associated with age, profession, vaccination history, vaccination training and recommendation behaviours. Conclusion: Acceptance for influenza vaccination has increased during the pandemic but is lower than that for COVID-19 among the HCWs. Demographics, vaccination status and vaccination training impact the vaccination behaviour among HCWs and should be considered in future campaigns to increase vaccination uptake.

Flu vaccination coverage in Italy in the COVID-19 era: A fuzzy functional k-means (FFKM) approach

BACKGROUND

In Europe, flu vaccination coverage has decreased, and there are complex barriers to overcome to vaccinate against flu. Many studies have been conducted to estimate vaccination coverage. The COVID-19 pandemic threatens to disrupt immunization programs in many countries, including Italy, where vaccination against the flu is recommended but not mandatory. This paper aims to understand changes in flu vaccine uptake in Italian regions.

METHODS

Using functional data analysis and fuzzy functional k-means clustering, we investigated changes in flu vaccine coverage in Italian regions before (2010-2019) and after (2020-2022) the COVID-19 vaccination period.

RESULTS

The period of COVID-19 pandemic brought an increase in vaccine coverage globally. Elbow's method determined that the optimal number of clusters in vaccination uptake is 2. Apulia, Basilicata, Emilia Romagna, Liguria, Molise, Tuscany, and Umbria in 2019 belong less to the group with low flu vaccination uptake (G1) but increase their tendency to belong to this group over time: they decrease their propensity to be vaccinated for flu. For others, it seems that COVID-19 served as a push to increase flu vaccination coverage rates. Sicily appears to be the region that has responded best to the pandemic, changing its membership value from 2019 to 2022.

CONCLUSION

The present study highlights that the COVID-19 era has resulted in a higher flu vaccination coverage rate. Moreover, the regional level's improvement or worsening in flu vaccination coverage rate is not affected by the historical gap and socio-cultural and economic differences prevailing among Italian regions.

Anxiety and Depression Symptoms Among Young U.S. Essential Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Emerging cross-sectional data indicate that essential workers in the COVID-19 era face increased mental health risks. This study longitudinally examined clinical symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among U.S. essential workers, including health care workers and workers in indispensable occupations such as manufacturing, food industry, construction, transportation, hospitality, and emergency services, during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors anticipated high symptom levels and greater symptom severity among women versus men and among younger adults compared with older adults. Analyses also explored the association between COVID-19 vaccination status and clinical symptoms.

METHODS

This four-wave online survey study assessed clinical symptoms in a convenience sample of 4,136 essential workers at baseline and 14, 30, and 90 days between August and December 2021. Symptoms of anxiety, depression, and PTSD were measured with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Primary Care PTSD Screen instruments, respectively.

RESULTS

At every time point, 74%-78% of respondents reported symptoms of anxiety and depression, which were highest among younger adults (ages 18-22 years), females, and transgender respondents. Vaccinated participants had slightly higher symptom levels than unvaccinated respondents. Rates of clinical symptoms did not change significantly over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Essential workers consistently reported symptoms of generalized anxiety, depression, or PTSD, especially younger adult, female, and transgender participants. The overwhelming and unprecedented nature of the COVID-19 pandemic underscores the need to offer mental health care to essential workers, especially those in these subgroups. Employers and administrators should support and proactively encourage employees to access care when needed.

Mobile Vaccine Clinics for Patients With Serious Mental Illness and Health Care Workers in Outpatient Mental Health Clinics

OBJECTIVE

People with serious mental illness are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 but face barriers to vaccinations. The authors describe the implementation of a mobile vaccine clinic at an outpatient mental health clinic for patients and health care workers to increase vaccination rates.

METHODS

In late 2021, mobile vaccine clinics were held in collaboration with a local pharmacy to provide COVID-19 and influenza vaccines to patients and health care workers. Participants in one clinic were asked to fill out a questionnaire about their experience.

RESULTS

Of 69 individuals who completed the questionnaire, 96% received the COVID-19 booster and 17% received the seasonal flu vaccine. Most patients and health care workers reported that the mobile vaccine clinic was easily accessible and preferable and that they would recommend it. Moreover, the mobile vaccine clinic was cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobile vaccine clinics can improve vaccine access for patients and health care workers in community mental health settings and can be cost-effective.

Modelling the Factors That Predict the Intention to Take COVID-19 Vaccine in Nigeria

This study developed a model that predicted factors that prompt the intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine among Nigerians. Data were collected from 385 respondents across Nigeria using snowball sampling technique with online questionnaire as instrument. Results indicated that cues to action, health motivation, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control positively predicted the intention to take COVID-19 vaccine in Nigeria. However, perceived susceptibility, severity, and COVID-19 vaccine benefits did not predict the intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Further findings showed that COVID-19 vaccine barrier and attitude was negatively associated with the intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

Assessing the Knowledge, Attitudes, and Vaccination Practices Towards COVID-19 Vaccination Among Mainland Chinese Nursing Students and Interns: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

Objective

This study investigated factors influencing the knowledge, attitudes, practice profiles, and vaccination intentions among Chinese nursing students and nursing interns toward the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination.

Materials and Methods

The multicenter cross-sectional study was based on a self-reported questionnaire collecting information among nursing students and nursing interns from three major geographic regions of China, and the sample was selected by consecutive sampling. The questionnaire was developed by knowledge, attitudes, and practice (KAP) theory. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used for statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 3180 nursing students and interns (effective rate: 99.8%) from six Chinese provinces were polled. The vaccine hesitation rate was 9.65% (307/3180), 2230 participants (70.1%) had gotten at least one dose of the vaccine, and 643 participants (67.7%) had indicated a readiness to be vaccinated. The results showed that older age, higher academic background, perfect vaccine management, others' recommendations, influenza vaccination history, epidemic under control, knowledge of vaccines or intervals, and vaccine knowledge training were associated with higher vaccination rates. Conversely, vaccine hesitancy was caused by a perceived lack of physical need, uncertainty about vaccination requirements, and fear of vaccination.

Conclusion

This study provided population-based estimates of COVID-19 vaccine uptake intention among mainland Chinese nursing students and interns. Factors such as age, education, vaccine knowledge, and attitudes influence COVID-19 vaccine behaviour. Relevant authorities should understand the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination from knowledge, attitude and practice, which is significant for formulating effective response strategies in future global public health crises.

Better to Be Unpaid than COVID-19 Vaccinated! A Qualitative Study on Italian Nurses Suspended from Work without Salary

In Italy, from April 2021, healthcare workers were required to receive the COVID-19 vaccine; if they refused it, an immediate unpaid suspension was implemented until they received the vaccine. Although there are numerous quantitative studies on the factors that influenced vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 pandemic, qualitative research on the causes of vaccine refusal is still missing. This research aimed to investigate the phenomenon of nurses who refused to receive COVID-19 vaccination despite being required to do so, as well as the reasons behind their refusal. Furthermore, the actions of those who abandoned this stance were explored. This was a qualitative study involving the methodological approach of grounded theory. Twenty-four nurses were interviewed virtually via Zoom from May to July 2022. Anti-vax behavior-as emerged from nurses' experiences-was based on seven themes: (1) job satisfaction, (2) the main sources of information on COVID-19, (3) the reasons for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine, (4) the attitudes of family members toward the COVID-19 vaccine, (5) previous experience with other vaccines, (6) firm opposition to the vaccine (unvaccinated nurses), (7) reluctant acceptance (vaccinated nurses). It was shown that it is imperative for health authorities to adopt timely, documented, transparent, and consistent communication when carrying out public health campaigns, especially for vaccination.

Attitude and Acceptance towards COVID-19 Booster Doses among Literacy Advantaged Population in Pakistan: A Cross-Sectional Study

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has affected billions of lives and is expected to impose a significant burden on the economy worldwide. Vaccination is the only way to prevent the infection. However, convincing people to get themselves vaccinated is challenging in developing countries such as Pakistan. Therefore, a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted (n = 982 participants) all over Pakistan to evaluate the perception, knowledge, attitude, and acceptance of the general public towards the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, in general, and a booster dose of SARS-CoV-2, in particular. The highest number of participants were from the province of Punjab (84.5%), followed by Islamabad (3.8%), Sindh (3.7%), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (2.7%), Baluchistan (2.6%), Gilgit Baltistan (1.4%), and Azad Jammu and Kashmir (1.4%). A total of 915 participants were vaccinated against COVID-19, out of which 62.2% received one booster dose, followed by double booster doses (25.5%) and single vaccine shots (12.3%). The highest number of vaccinated participants were from Punjab (85.8%), followed by Islamabad (3.9%), Sindh (2.8%); Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (2.6%); Baluchistan (2.3%); Gilgit-Baltistan (1.3%); and Azad, Jammu, and Kashmir (1.2%). Among the vaccinated individuals, 71.4% were unemployed, 27.4% were employed (653), and 1.2% were retired from service. However, no significant association was observed among genders and educational levels in regard to acceptance of the booster vaccine. The outcomes of the study revealed that the increased acceptance of booster doses of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines among the public was associated with the intent of personal and family protection. Moreover, individuals with low socioeconomic status and pregnant females showed the least acceptance towards the vaccine inoculation. The study also revealed a decline trend of accepting SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among children.

COVID-19 vaccination acceptance (uptake, hesitancy, intention to receive and timeliness of the intention to receive) and the determinants among health workers in Ebonyi state, Nigeria: an analytical cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

Health workers are at particular risk of contracting the COVID-19. However, non-acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination has been a noticeable challenge the world over and in Nigeria where supply constraints have also been an issue. We evaluated COVID-19 vaccination acceptance (the uptake, hesitancy, intention to receive and timeliness of the intention to receive) and the determinants, and the predictive power of acceptance factor compared with availability/access factor, among health workers in Ebonyi state.

METHODS

We conducted an online-offline survey, between 12 March 2022 and 9 May 2022, among all consenting health workers (clinical/non-clinical, public/private) working/living in Ebonyi state and who were selected by convenience and snowballing techniques. Data were collected using structured self-administered questionnaire distributed via WhatsApp and interviewer-administered questionnaire in KoBoCollect installed in android devices. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and generalised linear models.

RESULTS

1276 health workers were surveyed. Uptake was 68.2% vaccinated, 47.4% fully vaccinated and 20.9% partially vaccinated. Hesitancy was 22.6% or 71.2% among the unvaccinated (76.3% of hesitancy due to refusal and 23.7% to delay). Intention to receive was 36.0% of which 55.1% gave the intended time (days) to receive with a median (IQR) of 30 days (7-133). The strongest and most important predictor of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance was COVID-19 vaccination expectations and perceptions. Other important predictors were COVID-19/COVID-19 vaccination process experiences and perceptions. Acceptance factor was a stronger predictor compared with availability/access factor.

CONCLUSION

The slow pace of COVID-19 vaccination coverage among the health workers in Ebonyi state/Nigeria may encounter a bottle-neck due to the high refusal rate among the unvaccinated. COVID-19 vaccination policy interventions in Nigeria and other similar settings should, in addition to sustaining availability and access, prioritise improvement of COVID-19 vaccination expectations and perceptions (regarding importance/safety/effectiveness) and COVID-19 risk communication among the health workers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN16735844.

Uptake of the COVID-19 Vaccination and Associated Factors Among Health Care Providers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Background

The COVID-19 vaccine is intended to provide acquired immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). As a result, 12 billion doses of the COVID-19 vaccination have been given globally as of August 1, 2022. Due to occupational exposure, health professionals obtained priority for COVID-19 vaccination. However, despite the availability of COVID-19 vaccines in countries, there is a discrepancy in the uptake of vaccine among different populations including Health-Care Providers.

Objective

Assessments of the factors associated with uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among health-care providers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in 2022.

Methods

From June 10 to July 10, 2022, a facility-based cross-sectional study was carried out in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, involving 473 health-care professionals, used descriptive statistics to summarize the participant's characteristics, and multivariable logistic regression to analyze factors affecting COVID-19 vaccination uptake. P-value <0.05 was used to determine the level of significance.

Results

The response rate of the participants was 94.2%. The uptake rate of COVID-19 vaccine among health-care providers was 359 (75.8%). Vaccine uptake was positively associated with higher perceived concerns regarding COVID-19 [AOR = 7.45, (4.041-13.754)], higher monthly income, [AOR: 2.623 (1.398 -4.923)] compared those who earned lower, being married [AOR: 2.114, (1.068-4.181)] and being advanced age (36-45) years old [AOR =0.486 (0.258-0.916)] compared to 18-26 years old. However, being female professional reduced the odds of vaccine uptake [AOR = 0.486 (CI; 0.258-0.916)] in contrast of their counterpart.

Conclusion

The uptake of COVID-19 vaccine among health professionals is relatively higher than in earlier reports. However, this was not yet sufficient for the level required to achieve herd immunity. Hence, the Ministry of health should work in collaboration to address concerns about the safety and effectiveness of COVI D-19 vaccine to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Moreover, Health professionals, social media, regular media outlet should strengthen health education on concerns of covid-19 infection.

Predictors of second COVID-19 booster dose or new COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among nurses: A cross-sectional study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To assess the levels of second COVID-19 booster dose/new COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among nurses and explore the potential predictors of vaccine hesitancy.

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 full vaccination seems to be highly effective against highly contagious variants of SARS-CoV-2. Healthcare workers are at high-risk group since they have experienced high levels of COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality.

DESIGN

An on-line cross-sectional study was carried out in Greece in May 2022, using a self-administered questionnaire.

METHODS

The study population included nurses in healthcare services who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19 at the time of study. We considered socio-demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related variables, and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and pandemic as potential predictors of vaccine hesitancy. We applied the STROBE checklist in our study.

RESULTS

Among 795 nurses, 30.9% were hesitant toward a second booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine. Independent predictors of hesitancy included lower educational level, absence of a chronic condition, good/very good self-perceived physical health, lack of flu vaccination during 2021, front-line nurses that provided healthcare to COVID-19 patients, nurses that had not been diagnosed with COVID-19 and nurses that had at least one relative/friend that has died from COVID-19. Moreover, increased compliance with hygiene measures, increased fear of a second booster dose/new COVID-19 vaccine and decreased trust in COVID-19 vaccination were associated with increased hesitancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that a significant percentage of nurses are hesitant toward a second booster dose/new COVID-19 vaccine. This initial hesitancy could be a barrier to efforts to control the COVID-19 pandemic.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Nurses' role during the COVID-19 pandemic is essential since they are the front-line healthcare workers empowering the public with their passion and empathy. There is a need to communicate COVID-19 vaccine science in a way that is accessible to nurses in order to decrease COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

Nationwide Survey on Seasonal Influenza Vaccination among Health Care Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Greece: Determinants, Barriers and Peculiarities

BACKGROUND

Seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) of health care workers (HCWs) is critical in protecting patients' and HCWs' health. Our objective was to examine HCW SIV coverage and related determinants.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted among HCWs during the first half of 2021. The questionnaire (online or paper-based) included knowledge, attitude and practice questions regarding SIV, COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination.

RESULTS

Out of 6500 questionnaires administered, 2592 were completed (response rate: 39.9%). SIV coverage reached 69.4% (95% CI: 67.6-71.2%) based on self-reported vaccine uptake. Nurses and administrative staff were found to be more skeptical and have lower vaccine acceptance in comparison with physicians (aOR = 0.66 and aQR = 0.59, respectively). Other SIV hesitancy risk factors included working in secondary health care (aOR = 0.59) and working in northern Greece (aQR = 0.66). Determinants for SIV acceptance included being or living with high-risk people due to medical history (aOR = 1.84 and aOR = 1.46, respectively), positive attitudes towards routine vaccinations (aOR: 1.86), knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines (aOR = 1.53) and COVID-19 vaccine uptake (aOR = 3.45). The primary reason for SIV refusal was low risk perception (58.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

SIV coverage (2020/2021) was relatively high, but remained far from formal recommendations. Specific occupational groups were skeptical and low-risk perception was the main reason for vaccine refusal. Targeted policies should be developed and enforced.

COVID-19 Vaccination Rate under Different Political Incentive: A Counterfactual Trend Approach Using Nationwide Data

(1) Background: France implemented a COVID-19 certificate in July 2021 to incentivize the population to uptake COVID-19 vaccines. However, little is known about the variation in its impact across age groups and its dependence on socio-demographic, economic, logistic, or political factors. (2) Methods: Using France's weekly first dose vaccination rate, a counterfactual trend approach allowed for the estimation of the vaccination rate across age groups at a small geographical level before and after the implementation of the health pass. The effect of the health pass was operationalized as the vaccination rate among those who would not be vaccinated without it. (3) Results: Vaccination before the health pass varied greatly among age groups and was mainly influenced by territory (lower in rural and overseas territories when compared to urban and metropolitan ones), political beliefs, and socio-economic disparities. Vaccine logistics played a minor but significant role, while the impact of COVID-19 did not affect the vaccination rate. The health pass increased the vaccination overall but with varying efficiency across groups. It convinced mainly young people politically close to the governmental vaccination strategy and living in urban metropolitan areas with low socio-economical discrepancies. The selected variables explained most of the variability of the vaccination rate before the health pass; they explained, at most, a third of the variation in the health pass effect on vaccination. (4) Conclusions: From a public health perspective, the French health pass increased the overall vaccination, but failed to promote preventive behaviours in all segments of society, particularly in vulnerable communities.

COVID-19 Virus and Vaccination Attitudes among Healthcare Workers in Michigan: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Defining the characteristics of healthcare worker (HCW) attitudes toward the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine can provide insights into vaccine hesitancy. This study's goal is to determine HCWs' attitudes regarding the COVID-19 vaccination and reasons for vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study surveyed HCWs working in institutions in Saginaw, Sanilac, and Wayne counties in Michigan (N = 120) using tipping-scale questions. Analysis of variance and t-test were used to measure HCWs' attitudes toward the COVID-19 virus and vaccines.

RESULTS

Most HCWs received (95.9%) and recommended (98.3%) a COVID-19 vaccine. The top three factors that HCWs cited for recommending a COVID-19 vaccine were: (1) efficacy of the vaccine, (2) current exposure to patients with active COVID-19 infection and risk of virus spread, and (3) safety of vaccine and long-term follow-up. Female HCWs or HCWs aged 25-54 years were more concerned about contracting COVID-19. Physicians or HCWs aged 55-64 were less concerned regarding the effectiveness and side effects of the vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender, age, ethnicity, provider type, and medical specialty showed statistically significant differences among COVID-19 attitudes. Focusing educational efforts on HCW demographics who are more likely to have negative attitudes can potentially decrease vaccine hesitancy.

Healthcare workers' (HCWs) attitudes and related factors towards COVID-19 vaccination: a rapid systematic review

Herd immunity through vaccination is a key measure to control COVID-19 pandemic. However, vaccine hesitancy remains a public health threat, which is still common among healthcare workers (HCWs). This systematic review aimed to synthesise evidence on HCWs' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination and analyse associated factors to provide information for vaccine policy development and practice. We searched PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science and three Chinese databases for literature published on 12 February 2021. Two researchers screened the literature independently, and 13 studies were included in the systematic review. Vaccine acceptance varied widely and ranged from 27.7% to 77.3%. HCWs had positive attitudes towards future COVID-19 vaccines, while vaccine hesitancy was still common. Demographic variables such as men, older age and physicians were positive predictive factors. Women and nurses had more vaccine hesitancy. Previous influenza vaccination and self-perceived risk were facilitators. Concerns for safety, efficacy and effectiveness and distrust of the government were barriers. Influences of direct (COVID-19) patient care towards vaccination intention were less conclusive. Tailored communication strategies were needed to increase the uptake rate of COVID-19 vaccines among HCWs. More importantly, more data and information on the safety and efficacy of vaccines should be provided with transparency.

Hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine among health care practitioners in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

 The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a major public health crisis worldwide. In less than 12 months since the World Health Organization declared the outbreak, several different COVID-19 vaccines have been approved and deployed mostly in developed countries since January 2021. However, hesitancy to accept the newly developed vaccines is a well-known public health challenge that needs to be addressed. The aim of this study was to measure willingness and hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccines among health care practitioners' (HCPs) in Saudi Arabia.   Methods: A cross-sectional study using an online self-reported survey was conducted among HCPs in Saudi Arabia between April 4th to April 25th 2021 using snowball sampling. Multivariate logistic regression was employed to identify the possible factors affecting HCPs' willingness and hesitancy to receive COVID-19 vaccines.   Results: Out of 776 participants who started the survey, 505 (65%) completed it and were included in the results. Among all HCPs, 47 (9.3%) either said "no" to receive the vaccine [20 (4%)] or were hesitant to receive it [27 (5.3%)]. Of the total number of the HCPs, 376 (74.5%) already received the COVID-19 vaccine, and 48 (9.50%) were registered to receive it. The main reason of agreement to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was "wanting to protect self and others from getting the infection" (24%).   Conclusion: Our findings have shown that hesitancy toward receiving COVID-19 vaccines among HCPs in Saudi Arabia is limited and therefore may not be a serious issue. The outcomes of this study may help to understand factors that lead to vaccine hesitancy in Saudi Arabia and help public health authorities to design targeted health education interventions aiming to increase uptake of these vaccines.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Attitudes toward Vaccination: Representative Study of Polish Society

The study explored the association between individuals' attitudes toward vaccination and their actual vaccination behavior. We also examined the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the ongoing vaccination debate on changing attitudes towards vaccination, specifically within different demographic groups. The survey was conducted among a representative sample of Poles (N = 805) using computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) technology. As demonstrated, those who identified themselves as strong vaccine supporters were statistically significantly more frequently to be vaccinated with COVID-19 booster doses, to follow a physician's recommendation on any vaccine without hesitation, and to be strengthened in their confidence in vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic (p < 0.001 for all). However, over half of the responders declared themselves as moderate vaccine supporters/opponents, the groups whose further attitudes are likely to be affected by (mis)communication. Importantly, more than half of moderate vaccine supporters declared that their vaccine confidence was weakened during the COVID-19 pandemic, while 43% were not vaccinated against COVID-19. In addition, the study demonstrated that older and better-educated individuals were more likely to be COVID-19-vaccinated (p < 0.001 and p = 0.013, respectively). The results of this study imply that, in order to improve vaccine acceptance, it is essential to strengthen public health communication and avoid communication errors conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Evaluation of Nurses' Vaccine Hesitancy, Psychological Resilience, and Anxiety Levels During COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the vaccine hesitancy, psychological resilience, and anxiety levels of nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted with 676 nurses working at the survey time. Sociodemographic features, the status of hesitancy against the COVID-19 vaccine, the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale, and the Brief Resilience Scale were used in the questionnaire form to collect the data.

RESULTS

Most participants (68.6%; n=464) stated they were hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine. A sig- nificantly higher rate of hesitancy was detected in the age group of 20-39 years, those who did not have COVID-19 vaccine, and those who did not think the COVID-19 vaccine is protective (P < .05). It was determined that 6.8% (n=46) of the nurses had COVID-19 anxiety. A significantly higher rate of anxiety was detected in the age group of 40 years and older, those working in the emergency department, and those working in the COVID-19 unit during the pandemic period (P < .05). The median Brief Resilience Scale score of nurses is 19(6). A negative, weak, and significant relationship was found between the Brief Resilience Scale and Coronavirus Anxiety Scale scores (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

During the pandemic, higher rates of anxiety were detected in healthcare personnel and those working in COVID-19 units. It was also found that as the level of anxiety increased, the level of psychological resilience decreased. To reduce the anxiety level and strengthen the psychological resilience of nurses, the cornerstones of the health system, fast, effective, and curative interventions should be made.

Are surgeons ready to get the COVID-19 vaccine?

BACKGROUND

Vaccination against COVID-19 has started in several countries already and is on its way in others. However, there is an important hesitance towards the vaccine. The aim of this study is to evaluate the vaccination hesitance and main concerns towards the vaccine among surgeons.

METHODS

An anonymous survey of 16 questions was sent to 138 Belgian surgeons before the start of vaccination in Belgium. The questions were divided into sections, evaluating demographics, COVID-19 test status and symptoms, the surgeon's opinion on the COVID-19 vaccination and their main concerns.

RESULTS

Ninety-three out of 138 surgeons (67.4%) completed the survey: two-third of them were residents. Sixty-nine surgeons (74.2%) do want to get vaccinated. Forty-two surgeons (45.2%) feel like they do not have enough information about the vaccine. Residents feel significantly more underinformed than consultants (52.3% and 29.0%, respectively). Surgeons who feel to be well-informed are more willing to get vaccinated (92.2%) compared to those who feel to have a lack of information (52.4%). The main concerns among surgeons include effectiveness (26.9%), safety and side effects (19.4%) and organisation and vaccination strategy (12.9%). Twenty-five surgeons (26.9%) have no concerns at all.

CONCLUSION

Most surgeons (74.2%) are ready for their COVID-19 vaccine. However, some of the surgeons are still doubtful about the vaccine. A lack of information plays a major role in their scepticism. A strong communication strategy is necessary to educate, reassure and motivate surgeons to get vaccinated.

One-Year Follow-Up of Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Anxiety among Health Workers of a French Cancer Center: The PRO-SERO-COV Study

Infection of SARS-CoV-2 among health workers (HWs) in contact with cancer patients has been a major issue since the beginning of the pandemic. We aimed to assess the serological immune status of SARS-CoV-2 infection among these HWs. A prospective cohort study was initiated in the comprehensive cancer center of the Nouvelle-Aquitaine region (NA, France). Volunteer HWs working on March 2020 without active infection or symptoms of COVID-19 completed a self-questionnaire and had a blood test at inclusion, at 3 and 12 months. Positive serological status of SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined by anti-nucleocapsid antibodies and/or IgG anti-spike antibodies, except at 12 months due to vaccine. Half of the HWs were included (N = 517) and 89% were followed for three months (N = 500) and one year (N = 462). Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 3.5% (95% CI: 1.9-5.1), 6.2% (95% CI: 4.1-8.3), and 10% (95% CI: 7.2-12.7) on June-September 2020, September 2020-January 2021, and June-October 2021, respectively. At 12 months, 93.3% had detectable antibodies with 80% vaccinated in the first three months of vaccine availability. The COVID-19-free policy of the institution, respect for barrier gestures, high and early vaccination of HWs, and low prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in NA may explain the low rate of seropositivity among the HWs of the Institut Bergonié.

COVID-19 risk perception and vaccine acceptance in individuals with self-reported chronic respiratory or autoimmune conditions

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 disproportionately affects those with preexisting conditions, but little research has determined whether those with chronic diseases view the pandemic itself differently - and whether there are differences between chronic diseases. We theorized that while individuals with respiratory disease or autoimmune disorders would perceive greater threat from COVID-19 and be more supportive of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), those with autoimmune disorders would be less likely to support vaccination-based interventions.

METHODS

We conducted a two-wave online survey conducted in February and November 2021 asking respondents their beliefs about COVID-19 risk perception, adoption and support of interventions, willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and reasons for vaccination. Regression analysis was conducted to assess the relationship of respondents reporting a chronic disease and COVID-19 behaviors and attitudes, compared to healthy respondents adjusting for demographic and political factors.

RESULTS

In the initial survey, individuals reporting a chronic disease had both stronger feelings of risk from COVID-19 as well as preferences for NPIs than healthy controls. The only NPI that was still practiced significantly more compared to healthy controls in the resample was limiting trips outside of the home. Support for community-level NPIs was higher among individuals reporting a chronic disease than healthy controls and remained high among those with respiratory diseases in sample 2. Vaccine acceptance produced more divergent results: those reporting chronic respiratory diseases were 6% more willing to be vaccinated than healthy controls, while we found no significant difference between individuals with autoimmune diseases and healthy controls. Respondents with chronic respiratory disease and those with autoimmune diseases were more likely to want to be vaccinated to protect themselves from COVID-19, and those with an autoimmune disease were more likely to report fear of a bad vaccine reaction as the reason for vaccine hesitancy. In the resample, neither those with respiratory diseases nor autoimmune diseases reported being more willing to receive a booster vaccine than healthy controls.

CONCLUSIONS

It is not enough to recognize the importance of health in determining attitudes: nuanced differences between conditions must also be recognized.

Identifying H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among health care providers: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to describe and map the evidence on COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal by physicians, nurses, and pharmacists in North America, the United Kingdom and the European Union, and Australia.

INTRODUCTION

Since 2009, we have experienced two pandemics: H1N1 "swine flu" and COVID-19. While severity and transmissibility of these viruses varied, vaccination has been a critical component of bringing both pandemics under control. However, uptake of these vaccines has been affected by vaccine hesitancy and refusal. The vaccination behaviors of health care providers, including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, are of particular interest as they have been priority populations to receive both H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccinations. Their vaccination views could affect the vaccination decisions of their patients.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were eligible for inclusion if they identified reasons for COVID-19 or H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, or pharmacists from the included countries. Published and unpublished literature were eligible for inclusion. Previous reviews were excluded; however, the reference lists of relevant reviews were searched to identify additional studies for inclusion.

METHODS

A search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Academic Search Premier databases was conducted April 28, 2021, to identify English-language literature published from 2009 to 2021. Gray literature and citation screening were also conducted to identify additional relevant literature. Titles, abstracts, and eligible full-text articles were reviewed in duplicate by 2 trained reviewers. Data were extracted in duplicate using a structured extraction tool developed for the review. Conflicts were resolved through discussion or with a third team member. Data were synthesized using narrative and tabular summaries.

RESULTS

In total, 83 articles were included in the review. Studies were conducted primarily across the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. The majority of articles (n=70) used cross-sectional designs to examine knowledge, attitudes, and uptake of H1N1 (n=61) or COVID-19 (n=22) vaccines. Physicians, medical students, nurses, and nursing students were common participants in the studies; however, only 8 studies included pharmacists in their sample. Across health care settings, most studies were conducted in urban, academic teaching hospitals, with 1 study conducted in a rural hospital setting. Concerns about vaccine safety, vaccine side effects, and perceived low risk of contracting H1N1 or COVID-19 were the most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy or refusal across both vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

With increased interest and attention on vaccines in recent years, intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, more research that examines vaccine hesitancy or refusal across different health care settings and health care providers is warranted. Future work should aim to utilize more qualitative and mixed methods research designs to capture the personal perspectives of vaccine hesitancy and refusal, and consider collecting data beyond the common urban and academic health care settings identified in this review.

Previous Vaccination History and Psychological Factors as Significant Predictors of Willingness to Receive Mpox Vaccination and a Favorable Attitude towards Compulsory Vaccination

During the ongoing multi-country monkeypox (Mpox) outbreak, healthcare workers (HCWs) have represented a key group in mitigating disease spread. The current study aimed to evaluate the attitude of nurses and physicians in Jordan towards Mpox vaccination, as well as their attitude towards compulsory vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), influenza, and Mpox. An online survey was distributed in January 2023 based on the previously validated 5C scale for psychological determinants of vaccination. Previous vaccination behavior was assessed by inquiring about the history of getting the primary and booster COVID-19 vaccination, influenza vaccine uptake during COVID-19, and any history of influenza vaccine uptake. The study sample consisted of 495 respondents: nurses (n = 302, 61.0%) and physicians (n = 193, 39.0%). Four hundred and thirty respondents (86.9%) had heard of Mpox before the study, and formed the final sample considered for Mpox knowledge analysis. Deficiencies in Mpox knowledge were reflected in a mean knowledge score of 13.3 ± 2.7 (out of 20.0 as the maximum score), with significantly lower knowledge among nurses and females. The intention to receive Mpox vaccination was reported by 28.9% of the participants (n = 143), while 33.3% were hesitant (n = 165), and 37.8% were resistant (n = 187). In multivariate analysis, Mpox vaccine acceptance was significantly associated with previous vaccination behavior, reflected in higher vaccine uptake and with higher 5C scores, while Mpox knowledge was not correlated with Mpox vaccination intention. The overall attitude towards compulsory vaccination was neutral, while a favorable attitude towards compulsory vaccination was associated with higher 5C scores and a history of previous vaccination uptake. The current study showed a low intention to get Mpox vaccination in a sample of nurses and physicians practicing in Jordan. The psychological factors and previous vaccination behavior appeared as the most significant determinants of Mpox vaccine acceptance and of attitudes towards compulsory vaccination. The consideration of these factors is central to policies and strategies aiming to promote vaccination among health professionals in efforts to prepare for future infectious disease epidemics.

Willingness of Healthcare Workers to Recommend or Receive a Third COVID-19 Vaccine Dose: A Cross-Sectional Study from Jordan

Background: The availability of COVID-19 vaccines worldwide necessitates measuring healthcare workers’ (HCWs’) willingness to recommend or receive these vaccines. Therefore, we conducted a local study in Jordan to assess HCWs’ willingness to recommend or receive a third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and the predictors of such a decision. A cross-sectional study investigated Jordanian HCWs’ willingness regarding a third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine using a self-administered online questionnaire through WhatsApp, a mobile phone application. A total of 300 HCWs participated in the current study. Of these HCWs, 65.3% were physicians, 25.3% were nurses, and 9.3% were pharmacists. HCWs’ overall willingness regarding a third vaccine dose was 68.4% (49.4% certainly and 19.0% probably), whereas the overall willingness of HCWs to recommend a third dose to their patients was 73.3% (49.0% certainly and 24.3% probably). Males had significantly higher willingness than females (82.1% vs. 60.1%, p < 0.05). Physicians reported more willingness than nurses and pharmacists. HCWs’ willingness was not significantly affected by direct contact with a patient infected with COVID-19 or by a personal history of COVID-19 infection. Only 31% of HCWs were certainly willing to recommend the vaccine to their patients with chronic diseases, and only 28% of the participants were certainly willing to recommend it to people aged 65 or older. HCWs’ willingness to receive a third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine is limited in Jordan. This has affected their certainty in recommending this vaccine to their patients or people older than 60. Decision-makers and health-promotion programs in Jordan should focus on addressing this public health problem.

Impact of DHCWs' Safety Perception on Vaccine Acceptance and Adoption of Risk Mitigation Strategies

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the association between safety perception on vaccine acceptance and adoptions of risk mitigation strategies among dental health care workers (DHCWs).

METHODS

A survey was emailed to DHCWs in the New Jersey area from December 2020 to January 2021. Perceived safety from regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of self, coworkers, and patients and its association with vaccine hesitancy and risk mitigation were ascertained. Risk Mitigation Strategy (RiMS) scores were computed from groupings of office measures: 1) physical distancing (reduced occupancy, traffic flow, donning of masks, minimal room crowding), 2) personal protective equipment (fitted for N95; donning N95 masks; use of face shields; coverings for head, body, and feet), and 3) environmental disinfection (suction, air filtration, ultraviolet, surface wiping).

RESULTS

SARS-CoV-2 testing of dental professionals, coworkers, and patients were perceived to provide safety at 49%, 55%, and 68%, respectively. While dentists were least likely to feel safe with regular self-testing for SARS-CoV-2 (P < 0.001) as compared with hygienists and assistants, they were more willing than hygienists (P = 0.004; odds ratio, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.21 to 2.66]) and assistants (P < 0.001; odds ratio, 3.32 [95% CI, 1.93 to 5.71]) to receive the vaccine. RiMS scores ranged from 0 to 19 for 467 participants (mean [SD], 10.9 [2.9]). RiMS scores did not significantly differ among groups of DHCWs; however, mean RiMS scores were higher among those who received or planned to receive the COVID-19 vaccine than those with who did not (P = 0.004). DHCWs who felt safer with regular testing had greater RiMS scores than those who did not (11.0 vs. 10.3, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding DHCWs' perception of risk and safety is crucial, as it likely influences attitudes toward testing and implementation of office risk mitigation policies. Clinical studies that correlate risk perception and RiMS with SARS-CoV-2 testing are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of RiMS in dental care settings.

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT

Educators, clinicians, and policy makers can use the results of this study when improving attitudes toward testing and implementation of risk mitigation policies within dental offices, for current and future pandemics.

COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage among 42,565 Adults Amid the Spread of Omicron Variant in Beijing, China

Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been in use for over two years, but studies that reflect real-world vaccination coverage and demographic determinants are lacking. Using a multistage stratified random cluster sampling method, we planned to directly explore vaccination coverage and the demographic determinants of different doses of COVID-19 vaccines in Beijing, especially in older populations. All 348 community health service centers in 16 districts were involved. We performed multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify demographic determinants of different coverage rates via adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs. Of the 42,565 eligible participants, the total vaccination coverage rates for ≥1 dose, ≥2 doses, ≥3 doses, and 4 doses were 93.3%, 91.6%, 84.9%, and 13.0%, respectively, but decreased to 88.1%, 85.1%, 76.2%, and 3.8% in the older population. Among all participants, younger (aOR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.60–1.95), male (aOR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06–1.23), and better-educated residents (high school and technical secondary school aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.43–1.74; bachelor’s degree aOR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.37–1.70) were more likely to be fully vaccinated. People who lived in rural areas (aOR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.31–1.60) and held the new rural cooperative health insurance (aOR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.20–1.57) established a higher rate of full vaccination coverage. No history of chronic disease was positively associated with a higher coverage rate (aOR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.66–1.97). Occupation also affected vaccination coverage. Demographic factors influencing the rate of vaccination with at least one or three doses were consistent with the results above. Results remained robust in a sensitivity analysis. Given the highly transmissible variants and declining antibody titers, accelerating the promotion of booster vaccination coverage, especially in high-risk groups such as the elderly, is a top priority. For all vaccine-preventable diseases, rapidly clarifying vaccine-hesitant populations, clearing barriers, and establishing a better immune barrier can effectively safeguard people’s lives and property and coordinate economic development with epidemic prevention and control.

Qualitative exploration of perspectives of the pharmacists working in public-sector hospitals during COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic, a serious global health threat, has excruciating social and economic implications given its transmissibility, lack of therapy, and severity. In such a situation, pharmacists as frontline healthcare professionals hold a significant position to tackle. This study was designed to explore the perception and preparedness of pharmacists working in public sector hospitals amid such a pandemic in Pakistan.

METHODS

A total of 11 pharmacists were interviewed for this qualitative study design through a semi-structured interview guide. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim.

RESULTS

The thematic content analysis yielded six major themes; understanding of COVID-19, perceptions towards COVID-19, preventive aspects, management aspects, changes to lifestyle, and psychological aspects. Though efficient preparedness and approach to fighting against such pandemics were reported, pharmacists were found susceptible to infection and psychological stress. They also expressed lockdown as an effective measure to prevent the disease from spreading but still were concerned about its economic and social impact.

CONCLUSIONS

Adequate planning and facilities from the national level should be made available for strengthening the hospital pharmacy service that helps improve the overall healthcare system of low- and middle-income countries like Pakistan. The provision of a protective facility, incentives, and occupational health surveillance packages are deemed necessary to boost the self-esteem and morale of hospital pharmacists that safeguard the early and effective management of such disasters.

From COVID-19 vaccine candidates to compulsory vaccination: The attitudes of Italian citizens in the key 7-month of vaccination campaign

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study is to understand the evolution of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance over the key 7-month vaccine campaign in Italy, a period in which the country moved from candidate vaccines to products administered to the public. The research focus points to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine attitudes in adults and their children, propension towards compulsory vaccination, past and present adherence to anti-flu and anti-pneumococcal vaccines, and the reasons for trust/mistrust of vaccines.

METHODS

Italian residents aged 16->65 years were invited to complete an online survey from September 2020 to April 2021. The survey contained 13 questions: 3 on demographic data; 8 on vaccine attitudes; and 2 open-ended questions about the reasons of vaccine confidence/refusal. A preliminary word frequency analysis has been conducted, as well as a statistical bivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Of 21.537 participants, the confidence of those in favor of the COVID-19 vaccine increases of 50 % and the number of people who wanted more information decreases by two-third. Willingness to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 also increased from 51 % to 66.5 %. Only one-third of the strong vaccine-hesitant participants, i.e. 10 %, remained hostile. Compulsory vaccination showed a large and increasing favor by participants up to 78 %, in a way similar to their propensity for children's mandatory vaccination (70.6 %). Respondents' past and present adherence to anti-flu and anti-pneumococcal vaccines does not predict their intentions to vaccinate against COVID-19. Finally, a semantic analysis of the reasons of acceptance/refusal of COVID-19 vaccination suggests a complex decision-making process revealed by the participants' use of common words in pro-and-cons arguments.

CONCLUSION

The heterogeneity in the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, determinants and opinions detected at different ages, genders and pandemic phases suggests that health authorities should avoid one-size-fits-all vaccination campaigns. The results emphasize the long-term importance of reinforcing vaccine information, communication and education needs.