1
|
Hering C, Gangnus A, Kohl R, Steinhagen-Thiessen E, Kuhlmey A, Gellert P. [COVID-19 vaccination status among nurses and associated factors in long-term care facilities : Results of a cross-sectional survey within the Covid-Heim project]. Z Gerontol Geriatr 2024; 57:133-139. [PMID: 37380898 PMCID: PMC10914840 DOI: 10.1007/s00391-023-02210-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/23/2023] [Indexed: 06/30/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nurses working in long-term care facilities were vaccinated first before residents as a matter of priority to protect the latter. Although the vaccination rate of nursing staff eventually rose due to a facility-based vaccination requirement, studies on associated factors of vaccination status are currently not available for the long-term care setting in Germany. OBJECTIVE Associated factors of COVID-19 vaccination status among nursing staff in long-term care facilities were explored. METHODS An online survey was conducted between October 26th 2021 and January 31st 2022. A total of 1546 nurses working in long-term care in Germany responded to questions concerning the Covid-19 vaccination campaign. Logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS In this study 8 out of 10 nurses were vaccinated against COVID-19 (80.6%). Approximately 7 out of 10 nurses thought at least a few times about quitting their job since the pandemic began (71.4%). A positive COVID-19 vaccination status was associated with older age, full-time employment, COVID-19 deaths at the facility and working in northern or western Germany. Frequent thoughts of quitting their job were associated with negative COVID-19 vaccination status. CONCLUSION The present findings provide evidence on factors associated with the COVID-19 vaccination status of nurses in long-term care facilities in Germany for the first time. Further quantitative as well as qualitative studies are necessary for a more comprehensive understanding of the COVID-19 vaccination decision-making among nurses in long-term care, in order to implement target-oriented future vaccination campaigns in this care setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Hering
- Institut für Medizinische Soziologie und Rehabilitationswissenschaft, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
| | - Annabell Gangnus
- Institut für Medizinische Soziologie und Rehabilitationswissenschaft, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Raphael Kohl
- Institut für Medizinische Soziologie und Rehabilitationswissenschaft, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Elisabeth Steinhagen-Thiessen
- Medizinische Klinik für Endokrinologie und Stoffwechselmedizin, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Adelheid Kuhlmey
- Institut für Medizinische Soziologie und Rehabilitationswissenschaft, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Paul Gellert
- Institut für Medizinische Soziologie und Rehabilitationswissenschaft, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Taruvinga T, Chingono RS, Marambire E, Larsson L, Olaru ID, Sibanda S, Nzvere F, Redzo N, Ndhlovu CE, Rusakaniko S, Mujuru H, Sibanda E, Chonzi P, Siamuchembu M, Chikodzore R, Mahomva A, Ferrand RA, Dixon J, Kranzer K. Exploring COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers in Zimbabwe: A mixed methods study. PLOS GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH 2023; 3:e0002256. [PMID: 38127934 PMCID: PMC10734954 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2023] [Accepted: 11/02/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
With COVID-19 no longer categorized as a public health emergency of international concern, vaccination strategies and priority groups for vaccination have evolved. Africa Centres for Diseases Prevention and Control proposed the '100-100-70%' strategy which aims to vaccinate all healthcare workers, all vulnerable groups, and 70% of the general population. Understanding whether healthcare workers were reached during previous vaccination campaigns and what can be done to address concerns, anxieties, and other influences on vaccine uptake, will be important to optimally plan how to achieve these ambitious targets. In this mixed-methods study, between June 2021 and July 2022 a quantitative survey was conducted with healthcare workers accessing a comprehensive health check in Zimbabwe to determine whether and, if so, when they had received a COVID-19 vaccine. Healthcare workers were categorized as those who had received the vaccine 'early' (before 30.06.2021) and those who had received it 'late' (after 30.06.2021). In addition, 17 in-depth interviews were conducted to understand perceptions and beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines. Of the 3,086 healthcare workers employed at 43 facilities who participated in the study, 2,986 (97%, 95% CI [92%-100%]) reported that they had received at least one vaccine dose. Geographical location, older age, higher educational attainment and having a chronic condition was associated with receiving the vaccine early. Qualitatively, (mis)information, infection risk perception, quasi-mandatory vaccination requirements, and legitimate concerns such as safety and efficacy influenced vaccine uptake. Meeting the proposed 100-100-70 target entails continued emphasis on strong communication while engaging meaningfully with healthcare workers' concerns. Mandatory vaccination may undermine trust and should not be a substitute for sustained engagement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tinotenda Taruvinga
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
- Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Africa Centres for Diseases Prevention and Control (Africa CDC), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
| | - Rudo S. Chingono
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Edson Marambire
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
- Division of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany
| | - Leyla Larsson
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
- Division of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany
| | - Ioana D. Olaru
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
- Clinical Research Department, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Sibusisiwe Sibanda
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Farirai Nzvere
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Nicole Redzo
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Chiratidzo E. Ndhlovu
- Internal Medicine Unit, University of Zimbabwe Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Simbarashe Rusakaniko
- Department of Community Medicine, College of Health Sciences, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Hilda Mujuru
- Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Edwin Sibanda
- Bulawayo City Council Health Department, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
| | | | - Maphios Siamuchembu
- Ministry of Health and Child Care, Provincial Medical Directorate, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
| | - Rudo Chikodzore
- Ministry of Health and Child Care, Department of Epidemiology and Diseases Control, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Agnes Mahomva
- National Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, Office of the President, and Cabinet, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Rashida A. Ferrand
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
- Clinical Research Department, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Justin Dixon
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
- Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Katharina Kranzer
- The Health Research Unit Zimbabwe, Biomedical Research & Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe
- Division of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany
- Clinical Research Department, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Nienhaus A, Stranzinger J, Kozak A. COVID-19 as an Occupational Disease-Temporal Trends in the Number and Severity of Claims in Germany. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2023; 20:1182. [PMID: 36673937 PMCID: PMC9858689 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20021182] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2022] [Revised: 12/29/2022] [Accepted: 01/05/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
COVID-19 is considered an occupational disease (OD), when infection occurs at the workplace for health workers (HW). Because of the increased infection risk of these workers, they were deemed to be a priority group when the vaccination campaign started in Germany in December 2020. By December 2021, more than 90% of HW had been vaccinated twice. We studied the number and the time trend concerning the severity of OD claims related to COVID-19. Workers' compensation claims for OD are recorded in a standardized database of the Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW). We analyzed all notifiable COVID-19 related claims filed between 1 March 2020 and 30 September 2022. The proportion of severe cases was estimated by inpatient stays, injury benefit payments, rehabilitation measures, and deaths. The data analysis was descriptive. Due to COVID-19, 317,403 notifiable cases were reported to the BGW. Of these, 200,505 (63.2%) had thus far been recognized as OD. The number of notifiable cases was highest in 2022 and lowest in 2020. In total, 3289 insured individuals were admitted to rehabilitation management. This represented 1.6% of all recognized ODs due to COVID-19 at the BGW. The proportion of cases admitted to rehabilitation management decreased from 4.5% of all recognized ODs in 2020 to 3.2% in 2021 and to 0.1% of all recognized cases in 2022. For inpatient stays, injury benefit payment, and death, a similar trend was observed. Therefore, it might be concluded that the successful vaccination campaign mitigated the negative health effects of COVID-19 on HW. Even with vaccination, severe cases can occur. Therefore, infection prevention at the workplace remains paramount.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Albert Nienhaus
- Competence Center for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, Germany
- Department for Occupational Medicine, Hazardous Substances and Health Sciences (AGG), Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), 22089 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Johanna Stranzinger
- Department for Occupational Medicine, Hazardous Substances and Health Sciences (AGG), Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), 22089 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Agnessa Kozak
- Department for Occupational Medicine, Hazardous Substances and Health Sciences (AGG), Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), 22089 Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Fischer B, Knabbe C, Vollmer T. Analysis of a German blood donor cohort reveals a high number of undetected SARS-CoV-2 infections and sex-specific differences in humoral immune response. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0279195. [PMID: 36525449 PMCID: PMC9757571 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279195] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2022] [Accepted: 11/30/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Seroprevalence studies can contribute to a better assessment of the actual incidence of infection. Since long-term data for Germany are lacking, we determined the seroprevalence of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in residual plasma samples of 3,759 German regular blood donors between July 2020 and June 2021. Over almost the entire study period, the incidences determined based on our data were higher than those officially reported by the Robert Koch Institute, the public health institute in Germany. Using our serological testing strategy, we retrospectively detected natural infection in 206/3,759 (5.48%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.77-6.25) individuals. The IgG seroprevalence ranked from 5.15% (95% CI: 3.73-6.89) in Lower Saxony to 5.62% (95% CI: 4.57-6.84) in North Rhine Westphalia. The analyses of follow-up samples of 88 seropositive blood donors revealed a comparable fast decay of binding and neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. The antibody avidity remained at a low level throughout the whole follow-up period of up to 181 days. Interestingly, female donors seem to express a stronger and longer lasting humoral immunity against the new coronavirus when compared to males. Conclusion: Overall, our data emphasizes that seroprevalence measurements can and should be used to understand the true incidence of infection better. Further characterization of follow-up samples from seropositive donors indicated rapid antibody waning with sex-specific differences concerning the strength and persistence of humoral immune response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bastian Fischer
- Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Institut für Laboratoriums- und Transfusionsmedizin, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany,* E-mail:
| | - Cornelius Knabbe
- Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Institut für Laboratoriums- und Transfusionsmedizin, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany
| | - Tanja Vollmer
- Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Institut für Laboratoriums- und Transfusionsmedizin, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Trabucco Aurilio M, Mennini FS, Ferrari C, Somma G, Di Giampaolo L, Bolcato M, De-Giorgio F, Muscatello R, Magrini A, Coppeta L. Main Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake among Italian Healthcare Workers in Relation to Variable Degrees of Hesitancy: Result from a Cross-Sectional Online Survey. Trop Med Infect Dis 2022; 7:419. [PMID: 36548674 PMCID: PMC9780995 DOI: 10.3390/tropicalmed7120419] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2022] [Revised: 11/26/2022] [Accepted: 12/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Hesitancy remains one of the major hurdles to vaccination, regardless of the fact that vaccines are indisputable preventive measures against many infectious diseases. Nevertheless, vaccine hesitancy or refusal is a growing phenomenon in the general population as well as among healthcare workers (HCWs). Many different factors can contribute to hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccination in the HCWs population, including socio-demographic characteristics (female gender, low socio-economical status, lower age), individual beliefs regarding vaccine efficacy and safety, as well as other factors (occupation, knowledge about COVID-19, etc.). Understanding the determinants of accepting or refusing the COVID-19 vaccination is crucial to plan specific interventions in order to increase the rate of vaccine coverage among health care workers. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey on HCWs in seventeen Italian regions, between 30 June and 4 July 2021, in order to collect information about potential factors related to vaccine acceptance and hesitancy. Results: We found an overall vaccine uptake rate of 96.4% in our sample. Acceptance was significantly related to job task, with physicians showing the highest rate of uptake compared to other occupations. At univariate analysis, the HCWs population’s vaccine hesitancy was significantly positively associated with fear of vaccination side effects (p < 0.01), and negatively related to confidence in the safety and efficacy of the vaccine (p < 0.01). Through multivariate analysis, we found that only the fear of possible vaccination side effects (OR: 4.631, p < 0.01) and the confidence in vaccine safety and effectiveness (OR: 0.35 p < 0.05) remained significantly associated with hesitancy. Conclusion: Action to improve operator confidence in the efficacy and safety of the vaccine should improve the acceptance rate among operators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marco Trabucco Aurilio
- Department of Medicine and Health Sciences “V.Tiberio”, University of Molise, 86100 Campobasso, Italy
- Office of Medical Forensic Coordination, Italian National Social Security Institute (INPS), 00144 Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Saverio Mennini
- Economic Evaluation and HTA (EEHTA CEIS), Department of Economics and Finance, Faculty of Economics, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Via Columbia 2, 00133 Rome, Italy
| | - Cristiana Ferrari
- Department of Occupational Medicine, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, 00133 Rome, Italy
| | - Giuseppina Somma
- Department of Occupational Medicine, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, 00133 Rome, Italy
| | - Luca Di Giampaolo
- Department of Medicine and Science of Ageing, Specialization School of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, G. D’Annunzio University Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
| | - Matteo Bolcato
- Department of Neuroscience, University of Padua, 35121 Padua, Italy
| | - Fabio De-Giorgio
- Department of Healthcare Surveillance and Bioethics, Section of Legal Medicine, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario IRCCS A. Gemelli, 00168 Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Muscatello
- Office of Medical Forensic Coordination, Italian National Social Security Institute (INPS), 00144 Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Magrini
- Department of Occupational Medicine, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, 00133 Rome, Italy
| | - Luca Coppeta
- Department of Occupational Medicine, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, 00133 Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bussink-Voorend D, Hautvast JLA, Vandeberg L, Visser O, Hulscher MEJL. A systematic literature review to clarify the concept of vaccine hesitancy. Nat Hum Behav 2022; 6:1634-1648. [PMID: 35995837 DOI: 10.1038/s41562-022-01431-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 28.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2021] [Accepted: 07/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is considered a top-10 global health threat. The concept of VH has been described and applied inconsistently. This systematic review aims to clarify VH by analysing how it is operationalized. We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases on 14 January 2022. We selected 422 studies containing operationalizations of VH for inclusion. One limitation is that studies of lower quality were not excluded. Our qualitative analysis reveals that VH is conceptualized as involving (1) cognitions or affect, (2) behaviour and (3) decision making. A wide variety of methods have been used to measure VH. Our findings indicate the varied and confusing use of the term VH, leading to an impracticable concept. We propose that VH should be defined as a state of indecisiveness regarding a vaccination decision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daphne Bussink-Voorend
- Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Primary and Community Care, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| | - Jeannine L A Hautvast
- Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Primary and Community Care, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Lisa Vandeberg
- Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Olga Visser
- Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Primary and Community Care, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Marlies E J L Hulscher
- Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Viskupič F, Wiltse DL. Drivers of COVID-19 booster uptake among nurses. Am J Infect Control 2022:S0196-6553(22)00815-X. [PMID: 36427700 PMCID: PMC9683517 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2022.11.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2022] [Revised: 11/15/2022] [Accepted: 11/16/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nurses are at the forefront of efforts to contain COVID-19 and are thus at greater risk of infection from the virus than the general population. Unlike the initial vaccination, booster vaccinations are not always required, and some nurses have not received a booster shot. We investigate the predictors of booster uptake among nurses. METHODS We developed an original survey to study booster uptake among nurses. Using contact information from the South Dakota Board of Nursing, we contacted nurses in South Dakota in June and July of 2022. We conducted a multivariate logistic regression to analyze the data. RESULTS One thousand eighty-four nurses participated in our study. We found booster uptake among nurses was associated with their partisan self-identification (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.31-0.52), age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.05), flu vaccination last season (OR 5.61, 95% CI 2.6-12.1), and positive COVID-19 test in last 12 months (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.74). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS Our results show that COVID-19 booster uptake has been politicized even among nurses. As public health officials continue devising interventions to increase booster uptake among healthcare workers, they should be mindful that they would be viewed through the partisan lens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Filip Viskupič
- Address correspondence to Filip Viskupič, PhD, 219 West Hall, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57006
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Tharwat S, Nassar DK, Nassar MK, Saad AM, Hamdy F. Attitude towards COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers: a cross sectional study from Egypt. BMC Health Serv Res 2022; 22:1357. [PMCID: PMC9667438 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-022-08751-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2022] [Accepted: 10/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Herd immunity is necessary to contain the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Vaccination is the fastest and safest pandemic control strategy. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are essential in providing vaccination information. The aim of this study was to assess intent to be vaccinated against COVID-19 among HCWs in Egypt and to determine the factors that may influence their decision.
Methods
A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs who care for patients in several hospitals in Delta region, Egypt. The questionnaire included sociodemographic, clinical, and occupational data, intention to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, and beliefs and attitudes towards COVID-19 and its vaccination.
Results
The study included 455 HCWs with a mean age of 36.55 years (SD = 10.31) and 80% were females. The acceptance rate for the COVID-19 vaccine was 70.5%, while hesitancy and resistancy were both 17.6 and 11.9% respectively. About one-third (33.4%) of the subjects had previously contracted COVID-19. Most participants believed that they had a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 (71.6%). More than 64% believed they were at risk for vaccination side effects. Fear of infection and being at high risk of infection were the main drivers for COVID-19 vaccination, while the major barriers were waiting for additional experience with these new vaccines and having doubts about the vaccines’ efficacy.
Conclusions
The acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination among HCWs is very high. This crucial group needs to be the focus of educational initiatives and campaigns designed to increase public awareness of the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination.
Collapse
|
9
|
A Systematic Investigation of American Vaccination Preference via Historical Data. Processes (Basel) 2022. [DOI: 10.3390/pr10081665] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
While COVID-19 vaccines are generally available, not all people receive vaccines. To reach herd immunity, most of a population must be vaccinated. It is, thus, important to identify factors influencing people’s vaccination preferences, as knowledge of these preferences allows for governments and health programs to increase their vaccine coverage more effectively. Fortunately, vaccination data were collected by U.S. Census Bureau in partnership with the CDC via the Household Pulse Survey (HPS) for Americans. This study presents the first analysis of the 24 vaccination datasets collected by the HPS from January 2021 to May 2022 for 250 million respondents of different ages, genders, sexual orientations, races, education statuses, marital statuses, household sizes, household income levels, and resources used for spending needs, and with different reasons for not receiving or planning to receive a vaccine. Statistical analysis techniques, including an analysis of variance (ANOVA), Tukey multiple comparisons test, and hierarchical clustering (HC), were implemented to analyze the HPS vaccination data in the R language. It was found that sexual orientation, gender, age, and education had statistically significant influences on the vaccination rates. In particular, the gay/lesbian group showed a higher vaccination rate than the straight group; the transgender group had a lower vaccination rate than either the female or the male groups; older respondents showed greater preference for vaccination; respondents with higher education levels also preferred vaccination. As for the other factors that were not significant enough to influence vaccinations in the ANOVA, notable trends were found. Asian Americans had higher vaccination rates than other races; respondents from larger household sizes had a lower chance of getting vaccinated; the unmarried group showed the lowed vaccination rate in the marital category; the respondents depending on borrowed money from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) showed a lower vaccination rate than people with regular incomes. Concerns regarding the side-effects and the safety of the vaccines were the two major reasons for vaccination hesitance at the beginning of the pandemic, while having no trust in the vaccines and no trust in the government became more common in the later stage of the pandemic. The findings in this study can be used by governments or organizations to improve their vaccination campaigns or methods of combating future pandemics.
Collapse
|
10
|
Giannakou K, Kyprianidou M, Christofi M, Kalatzis A, Fakonti G. Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination for Healthcare Professionals and Its Association With General Vaccination Knowledge: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey in Cyprus. Front Public Health 2022; 10:897526. [PMID: 35646772 PMCID: PMC9130732 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.897526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2022] [Accepted: 04/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
COVID-19 compulsory vaccination for healthcare professionals (HCPs) is a sensitive and controversial topic, with different support rates worldwide. Previous studies in Cyprus identified a low COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among HCPs, however, no studies have investigated their perceptions toward mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. This is the first study to investigate the attitudes of HCPs toward mandatory COVID-19 vaccination and its association with general vaccination knowledge. A cross-sectional study was conducted, using an online self-administered, anonymous questionnaire to collect data on sociodemographic and health-related characteristics, trust and satisfaction with the healthcare system, utilization of preventive healthcare services, COVID-19 vaccination information, vaccination knowledge, and attitudes among HCPs toward mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. A total of 504 HCPs participated in the survey, with 34% being in favor of mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. A sufficient vaccination knowledge score was identified among the HCPs, with higher scores being associated with mandatory vaccination support (p < 0.001). As age increases by one year, the odds of supporting mandatory vaccination increase by 1.03 units (95% CI: 1.01-1.06). In addition, as the general vaccination knowledge score increases by one unit, the odds of supporting mandatory COVID-19 vaccination increase by 1.55 units (95% CI: 1.33-1.81). Our findings show that about two-thirds of the HCPs in Cyprus were opposed to a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy. Older age and general vaccination knowledge were found to be the strongest predictors of mandatory vaccination support. To avoid unforeseen outcomes, mandatory vaccination policies should be implemented with caution and consultation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Konstantinos Giannakou
- Department of Health Sciences, School of Sciences, European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Motivation for Vaccination against COVID-19 in Persons Aged between 18 and 60 Years at a Population-Based Vaccination Site in Manresa (Spain). Vaccines (Basel) 2022; 10:vaccines10040597. [PMID: 35455345 PMCID: PMC9027286 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10040597] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2022] [Revised: 04/08/2022] [Accepted: 04/08/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Our purpose was to identify the reasons why members of the population, aged 18–60 years, are vaccinated against COVID-19 at the mass vaccination point in Bages, Spain. This is 1 of 42 provisional spaces outside of health centres which have been set up in Catalonia in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and where people from all over Catalonia could go to be vaccinated by appointment. Methodology: We performed a cross-sectional study of users attending mass vaccination points in Bages during the months of July, August, and September 2021. Results: A total of 1361 questionnaires were statistically analysed. The most common reasons for vaccination were fear of infecting family (49.52%) and fear of self-infection (39.45%), followed by socialising (31.00%) and travel (30.56%). However, by applying a logistic regression model to each reason for vaccination, it was possible to estimate the associations regarding age, sex, marital status, educational level, production sector, mass vaccination point, previous COVID-19 infection, and COVID-19 infection of a family member. Relevance: The data generated will inform decisions and formulations of appropriate campaigns that will promote vaccination in specific population groups.
Collapse
|
12
|
Platten M, Nienhaus A, Peters C, Cranen R, Wisplinghoff H, Kersten JF, Bach AD, Michels G. Cumulative Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 in Healthcare Workers at a General Hospital in Germany during the Pandemic-A Longitudinal Analysis. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph19042429. [PMID: 35206616 PMCID: PMC8872027 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19042429] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2022] [Revised: 02/15/2022] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Health workers (HW) are at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. In order to monitor the infection dynamic on the basis of contact with patients, HW at the St. Antonius Hospital (SAH) were tested four times in one year by PCR and serology. The cumulative incidence of infection in HW was calculated. Swab and blood tests were simultaneously performed between April 2020 and April 2021. Risk factors and demographic information were assessed at the beginning of the study. The response rate was above 75% in all rounds of testing. The study comprised 1506 HW, 165 (10.6%) of which tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Working in an ICU or on wards with patient contact were risk factors (OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.73–13.6 and OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.27–8.49). At the end of the study, the majority of HW (810 of 1363 (59.4%)) had been vaccinated at least once. A total of 29.1% of unvaccinated HW and 5.3% of vaccinated HW showed an immune response typical for natural SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 73 HW who provided information on the course of the disease, 31.5% reported that their quality of life continued to be impaired. The cumulative incidence of infection was low in these HW, which may be attributed to vaccination and good hygiene. Nevertheless, a work-related infection risk was identified, highlighting the need to improve protection against infection. A high risk of developing long COVID was found after the infection has subsided. Special rehabilitation programs should be provided and HW should be compensated for reduced work capacity in the case that rehabilitation fails or takes a long time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin Platten
- Laboratory Dr. Wisplinghoff, 50931 Cologne, Germany; (M.P.); (H.W.)
| | - Albert Nienhaus
- Competence Center for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, Germany; (C.P.); (J.F.K.)
- Department for Occupational Medicine, Hazardous Substances and Health Sciences (AGG), Institution for Statutory Accident Insurance in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), 22089 Hamburg, Germany
- Correspondence:
| | - Claudia Peters
- Competence Center for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, Germany; (C.P.); (J.F.K.)
| | - Rita Cranen
- Occupational Medicine, St. Antonius Hospital Eschweiler, 52249 Eschweiler, Germany;
| | - Hilmar Wisplinghoff
- Laboratory Dr. Wisplinghoff, 50931 Cologne, Germany; (M.P.); (H.W.)
- Institute for Virology and Clinical Microbiology, University of Witten/Herdecke, 58448 Witten, Germany
| | - Jan Felix Kersten
- Competence Center for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, Germany; (C.P.); (J.F.K.)
| | - Alexander Daniel Bach
- Clinic for Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital Eschweiler, 52249 Eschweiler, Germany;
| | - Guido Michels
- Clinic for Acute and Emergency Medicine, St. Antonius Hospital Eschweiler, 52249 Eschweiler, Germany;
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage in Patients with Rheumatic Diseases in a German Outpatient Clinic: An Observational Study. Vaccines (Basel) 2022; 10:vaccines10020253. [PMID: 35214709 PMCID: PMC8880778 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10020253] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2022] [Revised: 01/31/2022] [Accepted: 02/05/2022] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: In the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, highly effective and safe vaccines became available. Since patients with rheumatic diseases show increased susceptibility to infections and typical medications raise the risk of severe COVID-19, high vaccination coverage is of significant importance to these patients. Methods: Consecutive patients with different rheumatic diseases were asked for their vaccination status regarding COVID-19, influenza and Streptococcus pneumoniae during their routine consultations. Any reported vaccination was validated with their personal vaccination card and/or by reviewing the CovPass smartphone app. Reasons for not having a COVID-19 vaccination were documented. Results: A total of 201 patients (mean age 62.3 ± 14.1 years) were included, the majority of them (44.3%) with rheumatoid arthritis, followed by spondyloarthritis (27.4%) and connective tissue diseases (21.4%). Vaccination coverage for SARS-CoV-2 was 80.1%; 85.6% got at least the first vaccination shot. Both valid influenza and pneumococcus coverage were associated with a higher probability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (odds ratio (OR) 6.243, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.637–14.783, p < 0.0001 and OR 6.372, 95% CI 2.105–19.282, p = 0.0003, respectively). The main reason for a missing SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (70%) was being sceptical about the vaccine itself (i.e., the subjective impression that the vaccine was not properly tested and fear of unwanted side effects). Conclusions: Vaccination coverage against SARS-CoV-2 is high in patients with rheumatic diseases. Nevertheless, there are unmet needs regarding vaccination education to further increase vaccination rates.
Collapse
|
14
|
Khubchandani J, Bustos E, Chowdhury S, Biswas N, Keller T. COVID-19 Vaccine Refusal among Nurses Worldwide: Review of Trends and Predictors. Vaccines (Basel) 2022; 10:230. [PMID: 35214687 PMCID: PMC8876951 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10020230] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2021] [Revised: 01/29/2022] [Accepted: 01/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy has become a major concern around the world. Recent reports have also highlighted COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy in healthcare workers. Despite media reports and scientific publications, little is known about the extent and predictors of COVID-19 vaccination refusal among nurses. Thus, the purpose of this study was to assess COVID-19 vaccine refusal rates among nurses globally and to explore the reasons for refusal and factors associated with the uptake of the vaccines. A scoping review of the published literature was conducted, and a final pool of 51 studies (n = 41,098 nurses) from 36 countries was included in this review. The overall pooled prevalence rate of COVID-19 vaccine refusal among 41,098 nurses worldwide was 20.7% (95% CI = 16.5-27%). The rates of vaccination refusal were higher from March 2020-December 2020 compared to the rates from January 2021-May 2021. The major reasons for COVID-19 vaccine refusal were concerns about vaccine safety, side effects, and efficacy; misinformation and lack of knowledge; and mistrust in experts, authorities, or pharmaceutical companies. The major factors associated with acceptance of the vaccines were: male sex, older age, and flu vaccination history. Evidence-based strategies should be implemented in healthcare systems worldwide to increase the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among nurses to ensure their safety and the safety of their patients and community members.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jagdish Khubchandani
- College of Health, Education, and Social Transformation, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA; (E.B.); (S.C.); (N.B.); (T.K.)
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Dima A, Jurcut C, Balaban DV, Gheorghita V, Jurcut R, Dima AC, Jinga M. Physicians' Experience with COVID-19 Vaccination: A Survey Study. Healthcare (Basel) 2021; 9:1746. [PMID: 34946473 PMCID: PMC8702136 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9121746] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2021] [Revised: 11/28/2021] [Accepted: 12/09/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy remains high in the general population and is the main determinant of low vaccination rates and of the fourth pandemic wave severity in Romania. Additional information is needed to raise awareness over vaccine efficiency and the safety profile. OBJECTIVE To assess self-reported experience related to COVID-19 vaccination in Romanian physicians. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A cross-sectional, self-administered questionnaire-based survey, distributed online in the period 24 March to 24 May 2021. The survey included 30 cascade questions with skip logic filters. All physicians included filled in the questionnaire voluntarily and anonymously. Not all respondents filled in all questions. Main outcome and measure: Primary outcomes addressed were related to the COVID-19 vaccine safety profile. RESULTS 407/467 (87.15%) of the respondents' physicians were fully vaccinated, mostly with the Pfizer-BioNTech (Comirnaty)-BNT162b2 vaccine, with the peak of immunization in January 2021, with almost four-fifths of the study participants. Regarding COVID-19, almost 20% physicians had the infection and one declared COVID-19 re-infection. A number of 48/420 (11.42%) and 47/419 (11.22%) of the vaccinated physicians did not report any side effects after the first or second vaccine dose. However, most of the side effects reported were minor. Only 50/360 (13.88%) physicians reported the vaccine side effects on the dedicated online national platform. Approximately 40% respondents checked the anti-spike SARS-CoV2 antibodies' titer after complete vaccination, of which two cases reported indeterminate levels. Lower anti-spike SARS-CoV2 antibodies' titer of 100-1000 times the laboratory limit was more frequent in naive physicians (36.95% versus 14.28%, p = 0.012), moderate titers were similar, while very high levels, more than 10,000 times laboratory limit, were more frequent in physicians with previous COVID-19 infection (2.17% versus 42.85%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cross-sectional survey study on the COVID-19 vaccination among Romanian physicians, we describe a safety vaccination profile among Romanian physicians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alina Dima
- Department of Rheumatology, Colentina Clinical Hospital, 020125 Bucharest, Romania;
| | - Ciprian Jurcut
- Central Military Emergency University Hospital Dr. Carol Davila, 010825 Bucharest, Romania; (C.J.); (V.G.); (A.C.D.); (M.J.)
| | - Daniel Vasile Balaban
- Central Military Emergency University Hospital Dr. Carol Davila, 010825 Bucharest, Romania; (C.J.); (V.G.); (A.C.D.); (M.J.)
- Faculty of Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania;
| | - Valeriu Gheorghita
- Central Military Emergency University Hospital Dr. Carol Davila, 010825 Bucharest, Romania; (C.J.); (V.G.); (A.C.D.); (M.J.)
- Faculty of Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania;
| | - Ruxandra Jurcut
- Faculty of Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania;
- Department of Cardiology, Institute for Cardiovascular Diseases C.C. Iliescu, 022328 Bucharest, Romania
| | - Augustin Catalin Dima
- Central Military Emergency University Hospital Dr. Carol Davila, 010825 Bucharest, Romania; (C.J.); (V.G.); (A.C.D.); (M.J.)
| | - Mariana Jinga
- Central Military Emergency University Hospital Dr. Carol Davila, 010825 Bucharest, Romania; (C.J.); (V.G.); (A.C.D.); (M.J.)
- Faculty of Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania;
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
The Role of Health Literacy among Outpatient Caregivers during the COVID-19 Pandemic. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2021; 18:ijerph182211743. [PMID: 34831499 PMCID: PMC8624592 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182211743] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2021] [Revised: 11/03/2021] [Accepted: 11/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Health literacy became an important competence during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite outpatient caregivers being a particularly vulnerable occupational group, their health literacy has hardly been examined yet, especially during the pandemic. Hence, this study aimed to explore this field and provide first empirical insights. Data were collected based on a cross-sectional online survey among 155 outpatient caregivers. In particular, health literacy (HLS-EU-Q16), diet and physical activity, pandemic-related worries, perceived information sufficiency and stress perception were examined. Descriptive and ordinal logistic regression analyses were run to test explorative assumptions. The majority of outpatient caregivers reported high values of health literacy (69% on a sufficient level). Although no significant associations between health literacy and health behaviours or perceived information sufficiency were found, perceived information sufficiency and perceived stress (OR = 3.194; 95% CI: 1.542-6.614), and pandemic-related worries (OR = 3.073; 95% CI: 1.471-6.421; OR = 4.243; 95% CI: 2.027-8.884) seem to be related. Therefore, dissemination of reliable information and resource-building measures to reduce worries may be important parameters for improving outpatient caregivers' health. Our results provide first explorative insights, representing a starting point for further research. Considering outpatient caregivers' mobile work setting, they need to be provided with adequate equipment and comprehensible information to ensure physically and mentally healthy working conditions.
Collapse
|
17
|
Štěpánek L, Janošíková M, Nakládalová M, Ivanová K, Macík J, Boriková A, Vildová H. Motivation for COVID-19 Vaccination in Priority Occupational Groups: A Cross-Sectional Survey. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2021; 18:ijerph182111726. [PMID: 34770240 PMCID: PMC8583662 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182111726] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2021] [Revised: 10/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Due to the limited availability of COVID-19 vaccines, occupational groups with priority access were identified prior to vaccination. The study aimed to analyze motives for vaccination in these occupational groups. Methods: Members of occupational groups, who were vaccinated at the vaccination center of University Hospital Olomouc before 30 April 2021, were asked to fill in an online questionnaire. Results: A total of 3224 completed questionnaires were obtained from 1332 healthcare workers, 1257 school employees, 363 social service workers, 210 security force members, and 62 critical infrastructure workers. The most frequent motive for vaccination was the effort to protect family members (76.2%), the effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in one’s profession (72.3%), followed by concerns about COVID-19 itself (49.1%) and exemptions from anti-epidemic measures (36.8%). Only for social services, the motive focused on one’s profession was mentioned more often (75.2%) than the motive focused on the family (71.1%). At the level of detailed profession-oriented motives, a collegial effort of security force members to protect co-workers and not to endanger the workplace was dominant. Conclusions: The effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the professional environment is a strong motive for vaccination, and strongest among social service workers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ladislav Štěpánek
- Department of Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Olomouc, Palacký University Olomouc, I. P. Pavlova 6, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic; (M.J.); (M.N.); (J.M.); (A.B.); (H.V.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +420-608757316
| | - Magdaléna Janošíková
- Department of Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Olomouc, Palacký University Olomouc, I. P. Pavlova 6, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic; (M.J.); (M.N.); (J.M.); (A.B.); (H.V.)
| | - Marie Nakládalová
- Department of Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Olomouc, Palacký University Olomouc, I. P. Pavlova 6, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic; (M.J.); (M.N.); (J.M.); (A.B.); (H.V.)
| | - Kateřina Ivanová
- Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacký University Olomouc, Hněvotínská 3, 77515 Olomouc, Czech Republic;
| | - Jakub Macík
- Department of Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Olomouc, Palacký University Olomouc, I. P. Pavlova 6, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic; (M.J.); (M.N.); (J.M.); (A.B.); (H.V.)
| | - Alena Boriková
- Department of Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Olomouc, Palacký University Olomouc, I. P. Pavlova 6, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic; (M.J.); (M.N.); (J.M.); (A.B.); (H.V.)
| | - Helena Vildová
- Department of Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital Olomouc, Palacký University Olomouc, I. P. Pavlova 6, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic; (M.J.); (M.N.); (J.M.); (A.B.); (H.V.)
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Cascini F, Pantovic A, Al-Ajlouni Y, Failla G, Ricciardi W. Attitudes, acceptance and hesitancy among the general population worldwide to receive the COVID-19 vaccines and their contributing factors: A systematic review. EClinicalMedicine 2021; 40:101113. [PMID: 34490416 PMCID: PMC8411034 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 189] [Impact Index Per Article: 63.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2021] [Revised: 08/06/2021] [Accepted: 08/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND High rates of vaccination worldwide are required to establish a herd immunity and stop the current COVID-19 pandemic evolution. Vaccine hesitancy is a major barrier in achieving herd immunity across different populations. This study sought to conduct a systematic review of the current literature regarding attitudes and hesitancy to receiving COVID-19 vaccination worldwide. METHODS A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science was performed on July 5th, 2021, using developed keywords. Inclusion criteria required the study to (1) be conducted in English; (2) investigate attitudes, hesitancy, and/or barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among a given population; (3) utilize validated measurement techniques; (4) have the full text paper available and be peer-reviewed prior to final publication. FINDINGS Following PRISMA guidelines, 209 studies were included. The Newcastle Ottawa (NOS) scale for cross-sectional studies was used to assess the quality of the studies.Overall, vaccine acceptance rates ranged considerably between countries and between different time points, with Arabian countries showing the highest hesitancy rates compared with other parts of the world. INTERPRETATION A variety of different factors contributed to increased hesitancy, including having negative perception of vaccine efficacy, safety, convenience, and price. Some of the consistent socio-demographic groups that were identified to be associated with increased hesitancy included: women, younger participants, and people who were less educated, had lower income, had no insurance, living in a rural area, and self-identified as a racial/ethnic minority.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fidelia Cascini
- Section of Hygiene, Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome 00168, Italy
| | - Ana Pantovic
- Faculty of Biology, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
| | - Yazan Al-Ajlouni
- New York Medical College School of Medicine, Valhalla, New York, United States
| | - Giovanna Failla
- Department of Public Health, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Walter Ricciardi
- Section of Hygiene, Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome 00168, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Nienhaus A. COVID-19 among Health Workers in Germany-An Update. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2021; 18:ijerph18179185. [PMID: 34501773 PMCID: PMC8431697 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18179185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2021] [Revised: 08/27/2021] [Accepted: 08/29/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
This is an update of our report on COVID-19 among health and social welfare workers in Germany. Workers' compensation claims for occupational diseases (OD) are recorded in a standardized database of the Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW). We analyzed which workers in the health and welfare sector are most often affected by COVID-19. For the different sectors in healthcare and welfare, the number of full-time workers is known (FTW), allowing for calculation of claim rates by sector. The period for data presentation was extended to 3 May 2021 for this update. The cumulative number of COVID-19 claims increased from 4398 by May 2020 to 84,728 by May 2021. The majority of claims concern nursing homes (39.5%) and hospitals (37.6%). Nursing is the profession most often concerned (68.8%). Relative to the number of workers, the claim rate is highest for hospitals (41.3/1000 FTW). Seventy-seven workers died (0.09%) and three hundred and seventy-five (0.4%) were hospitalized. A total of 65,693 (77.5%) claims were assessed, and for 81.4% of these claims, the OD was confirmed. The number of health and welfare workers affected by COVID-19 is high. With most HW vaccinated by now in Germany, within the next few weeks or months, the number of new cases should decrease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Albert Nienhaus
- Competence Center for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, Germany; ; Tel.: +49-40-20207-3220
- Department for Occupational Medicine, Hazardous Substances and Health Sciences (AGG), Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), 22089 Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|