Fighting misconceptions to improve compliance with influenza vaccination among health care workers: an educational project

Estimated Cost Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccination for Emergency Medical Services Professionals

INTRODUCTION

Because of their frequent contact with compromised patients, vaccination against influenza is recommended for all healthcare workers. Recent studies suggest that vaccination decreases influenza transmission to patients and reduces worker illness and absenteeism. However, few emergency medical services (EMS) agencies provide annual vaccination, and the vaccination rate among EMS personnel remains low. Reticence among EMS agencies to provide influenza vaccination to their employees may be due in part to the unknown fiscal consequences of implementing a vaccination program. In this study, we sought to estimate the cost effectiveness of an employer-provided influenza vaccination program for EMS personnel.

METHODS

Using data from published reports on influenza vaccination, we developed a cost-effectiveness model of vaccination for a hypothesized EMS system of 100 employees. Model inputs included vaccination costs, vaccination rate, infection rate, costs associated with absenteeism, lost productivity due to working while ill (presenteeism), and medical care for treating illness. To assess the robustness of the model we performed a series of sensitivity analyses on the input variables.

RESULTS

The proportion of employees contracting influenza or influenza-like illness (ILI) was estimated at 19% among vaccinated employees compared to 26% among non-vaccinated employees. The costs of the vaccine, consumables, and employee time for vaccination totaled $44.19 per vaccinated employee, with a total system cost of $4,419. Compared to no vaccination, a mandatory vaccination program would save $20,745 in lost productivity and medical costs, or $16,325 in net savings after accounting for vaccination costs. The savings were 3.7 times the cost of the vaccination program and were derived from avoided absenteeism ($7,988), avoided presenteeism productivity losses ($10,303), and avoided medical costs of treating employees with influenza/ILI ($2,454). Through sensitivity analyses the model was verified to be robust across a wide range of input variable assumptions. The net monetary benefits were positive across all ranges of input assumptions, but cost savings were most sensitive to the vaccination uptake rate, ILI rate, and presenteeism productivity losses.

CONCLUSION

This cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that an employer-provided influenza vaccination program is a financially favorable strategy for reducing costs associated with influenza/ILI employee absenteeism, presenteeism, and medical care.

Vaccine refusal - what we need to know

OBJECTIVE

Opposition to vaccines is not a new event, and appeared soon after the introduction of the smallpox vaccine in the late 18th century. The purpose of this review is to educate healthcare professionals about vaccine hesitancy and refusal, its causes and consequences, and make suggestions to address this challenge.

SOURCE OF DATA

A comprehensive and non-systematic search was carried out in the PubMed, LILACS, and ScieLo databases from 1980 to the present day, using the terms "vaccine refusal," "vaccine hesitancy," and "vaccine confidence." The publications considered as the most relevant by the author were critically selected.

SYNTHESIS OF DATA

The beliefs and arguments of the anti-vaccine movements have remained unchanged in the past two centuries, but new social media has facilitated the dissemination of information against vaccines. Studies on the subject have intensified after 2010, but the author did not retrieve any published studies to quantify this behavior in Brazil. The nomenclature on the subject (vaccine hesitancy) was standardized by the World Health Organization in 2012. Discussions have been carried out on the possible causes of vaccine hesitancy and refusal, as well as on the behavior of families and health professionals. Proposals for interventions to decrease public doubts, clarify myths, and improve confidence in vaccines have been made. Guides for the health care professional to face the problem are emerging.

CONCLUSIONS

The healthcare professional is a key element to transmit information, resolve doubts and increase confidence in vaccines. They must be prepared to face this new challenge.

Determinants of healthcare workers' willingness to recommend the seasonal influenza vaccine to diabetic patients: A cross-sectional survey in Ningbo, China

Background: Seasonal influenza vaccine uptake among diabetic patients is low in China. Recent studies showed healthcare workers'(HCWs') recommendation is an effective way to promote influenza vaccination. This study aimed to assess HCWs' willingness to recommend influenza vaccine to diabetic patients and identify the predictors of this willingness. Methods: During Dec 2016-Jan 2017, a self-administered questionnaire on perceptions, attitudes and practices related to influenza vaccination for diabetic patients was distributed to 1370 HCWs in 20 hospitals and 20 community health centers in Ningbo. Predictors of HCWs' willingness to recommend influenza vaccine were analyzed by logistic regressions. Results: Of 1340 HCWs who completed the survey, 58.13%(779/1340) participants reported willingness to recommend influenza vaccine to diabetic patients. Factors positively associated with the recommendation willingness included awareness of national influenza vaccination guideline(OR: 6.33; 95%CI: 4.66-8.60) and regional reimbursement policy(OR: 1.62; 95%CI: 1.19-2.20), training on influenza and diabetes (OR: 1.65; 95%CI: 1.21-2.23), influenza vaccination history(OR: 1.35; 95%CI: 1.01-1.79), beliefs in vaccine effects on reducing serious consequences(OR: 1.38; 95%CI: 1.01-1.91), reduction in hospitalization costs(OR: 1.43; 95%CI: 1.05-1.94) caused by influenza, and more than 10 years of practitioner experience(OR: 1.60; 95%CI: 1.04-2.46). Worries about side-effects of influenza vaccine were identified as the barriers of recommendation. Conclusion: The present study demonstrates that knowledge about national guideline and reimbursement policies, training programs, perceptions about effectiveness and safety of influenza vaccine increase HCWs' willingness to recommend the influenza vaccination to diabetic patients. These measures should be taken to ensure HCWs' role in the administration of influenza vaccination among diabetic patients.

"I don't see an added value for myself": a qualitative study exploring the social cognitive variables associated with influenza vaccination of Belgian, Dutch and German healthcare personnel

BACKGROUND

Health Authorities recommend influenza vaccination of healthcare personnel (HCP) to decrease the transmission of influenza to vulnerable patients. Recent studies have almost exclusively used quantitative questionnaires in order to identify determinants of vaccination behaviour. Interviews enable HCP to express freely why they think they are (not) willing to get vaccinated against influenza.

METHODS

By means of semi-structured one-on-one interviews with 123 Belgian, Dutch and German HCP, reasons for and against vaccination, experiences with influenza vaccination, intention to get vaccinated and possible barriers, as well as willingness to advice influenza vaccination to patients were investigated. Data were processed with QSR NVivo 8.0 and analysed using a combination of a deductive and a general inductive approach.

RESULTS

Across countries, self-protection, patient protection, and protection of family members were reported as most important reasons to get vaccinated against influenza. Reasons to not get vaccinated against influenza were fear of side effects caused by the vaccine, a low risk-perception, the disbelief in the effectiveness of influenza vaccination, organizational barriers, misconceptions, and undefined negative emotions.

CONCLUSIONS

The social cognitive variables underlying the decision of HCP to get vaccinated against influenza (or not) seem to be similar in Belgium, Germany, and the Netherlands, even though some differences surfaced. A quantitative investigation of those social cognitive variables is needed in order to determine the importance of the social cognitive variables in explaining the intention to get vaccinated and the importance of the similarities and differences between countries that have been found in this study.