Vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers in Europe: A qualitative study

Influenza Vaccination Behaviour of Healthcare Workers in Switzerland: A Cross-Sectional Study

Objectives: As no data are available regarding the influenza vaccination status of Swiss healthcare workers (HCW) in the ambulatory setting, this study aims to investigate their influenza vaccination behaviours.

Methods: We conducted an online survey using a four-item, semi-structured questionnaire to assess HCWs influenza vaccination coverage and behaviour. Associations between influenza vaccination status, age and language as well as recommendation behaviour and reasons for vaccination were assessed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses.

Results: Of the 1057 completed questionnaires, 425 (40.2%) HCW were vaccinated and 632 (59.8%) not. 78.1% of the physicians and 47.3% pharmacists were vaccinated, compared to only 29.1% of the nurses, 24.3% pharmacy technicians and 13.0% medical practice assistants (MPA). There was a significant association between influenza vaccination status and HCW profession, age, language and how often an influenza vaccination recommendation was made.

Conclusion: Demographic factors seem to influence HCWs’ attitudes towards influenza vaccination, which in turn affects the prospect of them recommending the influenza vaccination. Diverse strategies might be necessary to encourage HCW to get vaccinated and hence, promote influenza vaccination.

Measles Immunization Status of Health Care Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study Exploring Factors Associated with Lack of Immunization According to the Health Belief Model

Suboptimal levels of measles vaccination coverage make Italy a country where the circulation of the virus is still endemic. In the past decade, several nosocomial outbreaks of measles occurred in Italy that rapidly spread the infection among large numbers of hospitalized patients and susceptible healthcare workers (HCWs). A cross-sectional study was conducted at the University Hospital of Palermo (Italy) to estimate the rate of HCWs immunization and to investigate the factors associated with lack of immunization. The attitude to the immunization practice was evaluated by exploring the Health Belief Model. Overall, 118 HCWs were enrolled, with a mean age of 31 years and 59.3% male. About half of the sample (45.8%, n = 54) was found not to be immunized against measles. Multivariable analysis showed that the factors directly associated with the non-immunization status against measles were female sex (OR = 3.70, p = 0.056), being an HCW different from a physician (OR = 10.27, p = 0.015), having a high perception of barriers to vaccination (OR = 5.13, p = 0.047), not being immunized for other exanthematous diseases such as chickenpox (OR = 9.93, p = 0.003), mumps (OR = 33.64, p < 0.001) and rubella (OR = 10.12, p= 0.002). There is a need to contrast the low adherence of HCWs to measles vaccination by identifying effective strategies to increase immunization coverage and limiting the risk of further nosocomial measles outbreaks.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy Among Health Care Workers in Lebanon

BACKGROUND

Lebanon endured its worst economic and financial crisis in 2020-2021. To minimize the impact of COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to improve the overall COVID-19 vaccination rate. Given that vaccine hesitancy among health care workers (HCWs) affects the general population's decision to be vaccinated, our study assessed COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among Lebanon HCWs and identified barriers, demographic differences, and the most trusted sources of COVID-19 information.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted between January and May 2021 among HCWs across nine hospitals, the Orders of Physicians, Nurses, and Pharmacists in Lebanon. Descriptive statistics were performed to evaluate the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, and univariate and multivariable to identify their predictors.

RESULTS

Among 879 participants, 762 (86.8%) were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, 52 (5.9%) refused, and 64 (7.3%) were undecided. Males (226/254; 88.9%) and those ≥ 55 years (95/100; 95%) had the highest rates of acceptance. Of the 113 who were not willing to receive the vaccine, 54.9% reported that the vaccine was not studied well enough. Participants with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and those who did not know if they had a previous infection (p = 0.002) were less likely to accept the vaccine compared to those with no previous infection. The most trusted COVID-19 sources of information were WHO (69.3%) and healthcare providers (68%).

CONCLUSION

Lebanese HCWs had a relatively high acceptance rate for COVID-19 vaccination compared to other countries. Our findings are important in informing the Lebanese health care authorities to establish programs and interventions to improve vaccine uptake among HCWs and the general population.

Protective Vaccination Used by Doctors for Prevention of Infections

Doctors, as with all healthcare workers, are a specific risk group due to a high probability of contact with contagious pathogens. An online survey was conducted among Polish doctors to establish their use of protective vaccination to decrease their personal risk of infection. The online survey was conducted using questions about medics' vaccination decisions and approaches. The results revealed that immunization against VPDs for most participants was not adequate based on recommendations or developments in vaccinology. To increase vaccination as a prophylactic method among doctors, especially those not involved in the immunization of patients, an educational campaign is demanded. As non-immunized medics are at risk themselves and are also a threat to the safety of patients, legal changes and the monitoring of vaccine acceptance and perception among medics are required.

Acceptance, Advocacy, and Perception of Health Care Providers on COVID-19 Vaccine: Comparing Early Stage of COVID-19 Vaccination with Latter Stage in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia

Vaccination of healthcare providers has recently gained focused attention of public health officials. As HCPs have direct contact with the population, and HCPs significantly influence the population, this study aimed to compare the acceptance rate, advocacy rate, and beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine among HCPs in two time periods. In this repeated cross-sectional study, different HCPs were assessed in two periods ten months apart, i.e., November to December 2020 and September to October 2021, which were before and after COVID-19 vaccine approval by authorities. The study was conducted in Qatif Central Hospital, Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia. There were 609 respondents: 236 participants in the first period and 373 participants in the second period. Only 13 participants did not get the COVID-19 vaccine. There was around a 40% difference in the acceptance rate between the two study periods; the latter period was higher at 94.7%. Furthermore, 24.1% was the difference between the willingness to advocate the COVID-19 vaccine for others; the first period had a lower percentage (60.1%). Overall, results of the study showed that vaccine hesitancy, as well as the willingness to advocate for the vaccine, were improved between the pre-vaccine approval period and post-vaccine approval period, showing that the efforts made by the government improved COVID-19 acceptance and advocacy among HCPs. However, vaccine hesitancy is not a new issue, and for a better understanding of HCPs' beliefs, a qualitative study is needed.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of health care workers in a cardiology department on influenza vaccination

BACKGROUND

Evidence has accrued that influenza vaccination may be effective in preventing myocardial infarction (MI). However, vaccination rates in both adults and health care workers (HCW) are low, and hospitalisation is often a missed opportunity for vaccination. We hypothesised that knowledge, attitude and practices of health care workers regarding vaccination impacts vaccine uptake in hospitals. The cardiac ward admits high-risk patients, many of whom are indicated for influenza vaccine, especially those caring for patients with acute MI.

AIM

To understand the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of HCW in cardiology ward within a tertiary institution, on influenza vaccination.

METHODS

We used focus group discussions with HCW caring for AMI patients in an acute cardiology ward, to explore the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of HCW regarding influenza vaccination for patients under their care. Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed using NVivo software. In addition, participants completed a survey on their knowledge and attitudes towards the uptake of influenza vaccination.

RESULTS

A lack of awareness regarding the associations between influenza, vaccination and cardiovascular health was identified amongst HCW. Participants did not routinely discuss the benefits of influenza vaccination or recommend influenza vaccinations to patients under their care; this may be due to a combination of a lack of awareness, not seeing it as part of their job and workload issues. We also highlighted difficulties in access to vaccination, and concerns of adverse reactions to the vaccine.

CONCLUSION

There is limited awareness among HCW of the role of influenza on cardiovascular health and the benefits of influenza vaccine in the prevention of cardiovascular events. Improved vaccination of at-risk patients in hospital may need active engagement of HCW. Improving the health literacy of HCW regarding the benefits of vaccination as a preventative strategy may result in better health care outcomes for cardiac patients.

Exploring nurses' experiences of a tailored intervention to increase MMR vaccine acceptance in a Somali community in Stockholm, Sweden: a qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

To explore nurses' experiences of a tailored intervention that supported them with knowledge and tools to use during encounters and dialogue with parents with low vaccine acceptance.

DESIGN

A qualitative study with in-depth interviews conducted in 2017. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

SETTING

This study was part of a multicomponent intervention targeting Somali parents and the nurses at child health centres in the Rinkeby and Tensta neighbourhoods of Stockholm. An area with documented low measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccination coverage. Previous research has revealed that Somali parents in the community delayed MMR vaccination due to fear of autism despite lack of scientific evidence. The interventions were implemented in 2015-2017.

PARTICIPANTS

Eleven nurses employed at the child health centres involved in the intervention participated in interviews. The tailored intervention targeting nurses included a series of seminars, a narrative film and an information card with key messages for distribution to parents.

RESULTS

The qualitative analysis revealed an overarching theme: perception of improved communication with parents. Two underlying themes were identified: (1) feeling more confident to address parents' MMR vaccine concerns and (2) diverse tools as useful support to dispel myth and reduce language barriers.

CONCLUSION

From the nurses' perspective, the tailored intervention was useful to improve communication with parents having vaccine concerns. Nurses have a crucial role in vaccine uptake and acceptance. Interventions aiming to strengthen their communication with parents are therefore essential, especially in areas with lower vaccine acceptance.

Uptake of Influenza Vaccine and Factors Associated with Influenza Vaccination among Healthcare Workers in Tertiary Care Hospitals in Bangladesh: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

Influenza, highly contagious in hospital settings, imposes a substantial disease burden globally, and influenza vaccination is critical for healthcare workers (HCWs) to prevent this illness. This study assessed influenza vaccine uptake, including its associated factors among HCWs of tertiary care hospitals in Bangladesh. Between September and December 2020, this multicenter study included 2046 HCWs from 11 hospitals. Face-to-face interviews were conducted using a semi-structured questionnaire to collect data from physicians, nurses, and cleaning and administrative staff for the survey. Only 13.8% (283/2046) of HCWs received the influenza vaccine, of which the majority (76.7%, 217/283) received it for free from the hospital. Nurses had the highest (20.0%, 187/934) influenza vaccine coverage, followed by physicians at 13.5% (71/526), whereas cleaning staff had the lowest at 6.0% (19/318). Among unvaccinated HCWs, the desire to get vaccinated was high (86.2%), with half of the respondents even being willing to pay for it. The HCWs who were aware of the influenza vaccine were over five times more likely to get the vaccine (OR 5.63; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.88) compared to those who were not. HCWs in Bangladesh were vaccinated against influenza at a very low rate. Free and mandatory influenza vaccination programs should be initiated to optimize vaccine coverage among HCWs.

Vaccine Hesitancy among Medical Students at a Tertiary Hospital-Affiliated Medical School

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused a global pandemic with long-lasting economic and cultural impacts. International governments have attempted to scale up vaccine production to mitigate this crisis. However, vaccine hesitancy, particularly among healthcare providers, remains an understudied subject that may hinder vaccine effectiveness.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study to evaluate vaccine hesitancy among medical students using a pre-validated survey based on the 5C model of psychological antecedents, which includes confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility.

RESULTS

The majority of medical students had high scores for confidence (79.7%), non-complacency (88%), and not having constraints against receiving the COVID-19 vaccine (97.4%). Surprisingly, students had low scores for calculation (38%) and collective responsibility (14.7%). Many predictors of the psychological antecedents included in the 5C model have been reported, including academic year and gender.

CONCLUSION

We observed moderate levels of vaccine hesitancy among the medical students included in our study. We urge medical students to be more aware of community public health concerns. We recommend that authorized institutions lay out urgent reforms to increase awareness of COVID-19 and available vaccines.

Research progress on specific and non-specific immune effects of BCG and the possibility of BCG protection against COVID-19

Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the only approved vaccine for tuberculosis (TB) prevention worldwide. BCG has an excellent protective effect on miliary tuberculosis and tuberculous meningitis in children or infants. Interestingly, a growing number of studies have shown that BCG vaccination can induce nonspecific and specific immunity to fight against other respiratory disease pathogens, including SARS-CoV-2. The continuous emergence of variants of SARS-CoV-2 makes the protective efficiency of COVID-19-specific vaccines an unprecedented challenge. Therefore, it has been hypothesized that BCG-induced trained immunity might protect against COVID-19 infection. This study comprehensively described BCG-induced nonspecific and specific immunity and the mechanism of trained immunity. In addition, this study also reviewed the research on BCG revaccination to prevent TB, the impact of BCG on other non-tuberculous diseases, and the clinical trials of BCG to prevent COVID-19 infection. These data will provide new evidence to confirm the hypotheses mentioned above.

Low influenza vaccine uptake by healthcare workers caring for the elderly in South African old age homes and primary healthcare facilities

BACKGROUND

The elderly bear the highest burden of South Africa's estimated annual > 10 million influenza cases and > 11,000 influenza-related deaths. Unvaccinated healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high occupational risk of contracting influenza, and may transmit influenza to elderly patients in their care. Thus, the South African National Department of Health recommends that HCWs receive annual influenza vaccination. This study aimed to determine influenza vaccination coverage among HCWs; identify reasons for their vaccination status; and investigate if HCWs recommend vaccination to their elderly patients.

METHODS

A descriptive study was conducted in 18 community health centres and 44 private sector and non-governmental organisation managed old age homes across South Africa, using a self-administered structured questionnaire, which was distributed to 360 HCWs present on the day of data collection. Data were captured using Microsoft Excel® and imported to Epi Info™ 7 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA) for descriptive statistical analysis. Ethics approval (SMUREC/P/36/2018: PG) and permission to conduct the study at the facilities were obtained. All participants provided informed consent.

RESULTS

The response rate was 76.7% (276/360). Most participants were female (90.9% [251/276]), nursing professionals (81.2% [224/276]) with a mean age of 41.1 ± 11.7 years. Although 62.7% of participants indicated having ever received at least one dose of the influenza vaccine, influenza vaccine uptake for 2017 and 2018 was 24.36% (41/276) and 33.3% (92/276) respectively. The main reasons given for never being vaccinated against influenza were related to the unavailability of the vaccine (70.9%) and vaccine hesitancy (27.2%). Most participants (67.8% [187/276]) recommended vaccines to elderly patients in their care.

CONCLUSION

The main reasons behind low influenza vaccine uptake by HCWs in South Africa who care for the elderly were related to unavailability of the vaccine and vaccine hesitancy. Strategies to educate HCWs on the importance of influenza vaccination, while concurrently increasing sustained and easy access to the vaccine by HCWs are needed to preserve public health.

Sleep quality was associated with adverse reactions after coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination among healthcare workers: A longitudinal paired study

Background

Many countries have currently relied on various types of vaccines for the public to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The adverse reactions (ARs) after vaccination may affect vaccination coverage and confidence. However, whether sleep quality was associated with ARs after vaccination remains unclear.

Methods

We designed a longitudinal paired study within a hospital setting. We collected data about the side effects within 7 days after two doses of scheduled vaccination among healthcare workers (HCWs). All HCWs were asked to complete a sleep survey indexed by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) before vaccination and after a 1-month follow-up. Then, we explored the relationship between sleep quality before or after vaccination and the occurrence of ARs.

Results

A total of 345 HCWs were recruited to receive COVID-19 vaccination. The sleep quality became worse after vaccination. All local and systemic reactions were mild or moderate in severity (32.46%), and no serious adverse event was reported. Binary logistic regression showed participants with poor sleep quality (PSQI > 5) than good sleep quality (PSQI ≤ 5) before the two doses of vaccination, respectively, exhibited 1.515 and 1.107 times risk of ARs after each vaccination (both p < 0.001).

Conclusion

There is an apparently complex bidirectional relationship between sleep quality and COVID-19 vaccination adverse effects. Poor sleep quality significantly increases the risk of mild ARs after vaccination, while vaccination may cause a temporary decline in sleep quality.

What impact does the attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination have on physicians as vaccine providers? A cross sectional study from the German outpatient sector

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccination is recognized as a key component in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic. Physicians' attitudes toward vaccination are known to play a defining role in the management and dissemination of medical advice to patients. In Germany, outpatient practitioners are predominantly responsible for the dissemination of vaccines.

METHOD

Using a cross-sectional online survey, 932 outpatient general practitioners, gynecologists, and pediatricians in Germany were asked in fall, 2021, about their attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination and - among others - their communication in vaccine discussions, their assessment of vaccine safety, and reporting of suspected adverse events. Physicians were divided into two groups along their attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination. In addition, multivariate linear regression models were constructed to assess differences in communication strategies.

RESULTS

92 % of physicians had a positive or very positive attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination. Own vaccination status, practice-based vaccination delivery, and estimated vaccination coverage among patients were significantly associated with the attitude toward vaccination. Confidence in vaccine safety was significantly lower among physicians with negative attitudes. There were no differences between the two groups in self-assessment of the ability to detect suspected adverse events, but there were differences in the observing and reporting of adverse events. For the linear regression models, we found that a more negative attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination was significantly associated with increased acceptance of patient refusal of COVID-19 vaccination and empathic behavior for patient concerns. In contrast, willingness to engage in a detailed persuasion consultation was significantly lower. Pediatricians showed significantly higher empathy for patient-side concerns compared to general practitioners, whereas gynecologists showed less empathy than general practitioners.

DISCUSSION

The physician's attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination influences the physician's practices as a vaccine provider. However, when providing medical advice and healthcare, the physician should focus on the actual needs of the patient.

Factors influencing healthcare professionals' confidence in vaccination in Europe: a literature review

Health-care professionals (HCPs) have a fundamental role in vaccination, their own beliefs and attitudes affecting both their uptake and recommendation of vaccines. This literature review (n = 89) summarises evidence on HCPs’ perceptions of the risks and benefits of vaccination, trust, and perceptions of mandatory vaccination in Europe. HCPs across studies believed that vaccination is important to protect themselves and their patients. However, beliefs that some diseases such as influenza are less risky were reported by some HCPs as a reason for not getting vaccinated. Concerns about both short- and long-term side effects were identified among HCPs in most studies, such as those affecting the immune or neurological system. Mistrust toward health authorities and pharmaceutical industry was reported in some studies. The question of mandatory vaccination revealed mixed opinions, with some favoring self-determination and others viewing vaccination as a duty. This review highlights key factors influencing HCPs’ confidence in vaccination in Europe.

Design and implementation of tailored intervention to increase vaccine acceptance in a Somali community in Stockholm, Sweden - based on the Tailoring Immunization Programmes approach

Objectives

Sweden has had a high and stable vaccination coverage for measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine (>96%) through the national immunization program (NIP), but coverage rates highlight local pockets of lower vaccination coverage. This project addressed low MMR vaccine acceptance among parents in a Somali community, in Stockholm. The objective of the intervention was to increase vaccine confidence and MMR-vaccine uptake and also to inform practices addressing vaccine acceptance.

Study design

This paper describes the design and implementation of a multi-component intervention based on the Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP) approach, developed by the WHO European Regional Office.

Methods

The theoretical underpinning of TIP is the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model (COM-B model) and Behaviour Change Wheel framework (BCW), adapted for vaccination. The COM-model was used to identify barriers and drivers to vaccination and intervention types. The TIP-phases described in this paper are: pre-TIP (planning), three succeeding TIP phases (situational analysis, formative research, intervention design) and the post-TIP phase (implementation).

Results

The situation analysis and formative research revealed that parents feared the MMR vaccine due to autism or that their child would stop talking following vaccination, despite lack of scientific evidence for an association between autism and MMR vaccines. Barriers were linked to their associated COM-B factors and mapped to appropriate intervention types for two target groups: Somali parents and nurses at the Child Health Centres (CHC). Selected intervention types targeting parents were education, persuasion and modelling whereas education and training were selected for CHC nurses. The intervention activities included community engagement for parents, while the activities for nurses focused on improving encounters and dialogue with parents having low vaccine acceptance. Following the intervention design the activities were developed, pilot tested and implemented.

Conclusion

This study confirm that the TIP approach is valuable for guiding a stepwise working process for a thorough understanding of barriers and drivers for MMR vaccination among parents in this Somali community. It facilitated the design of a theory and evidence-informed intervention targeting parents and nurses.

A mixed methods study of health care professionals’ attitudes towards vaccination in 15 countries

Background

Health care professionals are widely considered to be the most trusted source of information on vaccine-related topics. However, several are reporting their own hesitancy around certain vaccines, influencing their intention to vaccinate themselves as well as influencing their recommendations to their patients and target population.

Methods

A mixed-methods approach was used including an online survey (n = 1,504) in 15 countries which aimed to determine drivers of HCPs vaccine confidence and examine how these drivers vary across nations. Thirty in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 HCPs in a subset of three countries (France, Greece and Hungry) to explore barriers to HCPs vaccine uptake and their role in addressing vaccine hesitancy among patients.

Findings.

The survey’s regression analysis identified that nurses/midwives and HCPs from Hungary, Italy, Romania and Switzerland were less confident in the safety, importance or effectiveness of vaccines in general. Morocco (35%), Turkey (53%) and Greece (69%) reported the lowest influenza vaccination coverage among HCPs. Morocco also reported the lowest rates of HCPs who were “highly likely” to recommend MMR vaccine (34%), HPV vaccine (31%) and Covid-19 vaccines (29%). More than third of HCPs reported a lack of trust in health authorities and in the information they provide. Thematic analysis revealed that concerns over the risk of side-effects associated with vaccines, preference for natural immunity, whether it was necessary to be vaccinated against influenza every year, not having any chronic disease risk factors, and vaccines mandates as the key barriers to HCPs vaccination against influenza and Covid-19.

Conclusion

HCPs have an important role in vaccination and their confidence in vaccination and health authorities must be improved as this may affect their uptake of vaccines and influence their recommendations to their patients. Investigating the impact of political, socio-economic and cultural contexts on concerns about vaccination among HCPs is also necessary.

Intervention hesitancy among healthcare personnel: conceptualizing beyond vaccine hesitancy

We propose an emerging conceptualization of "intervention hesitancy" to address a broad spectrum of hesitancy to disease prevention interventions among healthcare personnel (HCP) beyond vaccine hesitancy. To demonstrate this concept and its analytical benefits, we used a qualitative case-study methodology, identifying a "spectrum" of disease prevention interventions based on (1) the intervention's effectiveness, (2) how the intervention is regulated among HCP in the Israeli healthcare system, and (3) uptake among HCP in the Israeli healthcare system. Our cases ultimately contribute to a more nuanced conceptualization of hesitancy that HCP express towards disease prevention interventions. Our case interventions included the seasonal influenza vaccine, the Mantoux test, and the hepatitis B (HBV) vaccine. Influenza and HBV are vaccine-preventable diseases, though their respective vaccines vary significantly in effectiveness and uptake among HCP. The Mantoux test is a tuberculin skin test which provides a prevention benchmark for tuberculosis (TB), a non-vaccine preventable disease. We conducted semi-structured interviews with relevant stakeholders and analyzed them within Israeli and international policy context between 2016 and 2019, a period just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. We propose the conceptualization of "intervention hesitancy"-beyond "vaccine hesitancy"-as "hesitancy towards a wide range of public health interventions, including but not limited to vaccines". Results suggested that intervention hesitancy among HCP is rooted in weak trust in their employer, poor employment conditions, as well as mixed institutional guidelines and culture. Conceptualizing intervention hesitancy expands the ability of healthcare systems to understand the root of hesitancy and foster a supportive institutional culture and trust, cognizant of diverse disease prevention interventions beyond vaccination.

PROTOCOL: Exploring education to support vaccine confidence amongst healthcare and long-term care staff amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: A protocol for a living scoping review

Despite the demonstrated effectiveness of vaccines, varying levels of hesitancy were observed among healthcare and long-term care workers, who were prioritized in the roll out of COVID-19 vaccines due to their high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 transmission. However, the evidence around the measurable impact of various educational interventions to improve vaccine confidence is limited. The proposed scoping review is intended to explore any emerging research and experiences of delivering educational interventions to improve COVID-19 vaccine confidence among health and long-term care workforces. We aim to identify characteristics of both informal and formal educational interventions delivered during the pandemic to support COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Using the guidance outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute, we intend to search five databases including, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science, as well as grey literature. We will consider all study designs and reports in an effort to include a breadth of sources to ensure our review will capture preliminary evidence, as well as more exploratory experiences of COVID-19 vaccine education delivery. Articles will be screened by three reviewers independently and the data will be charted, and results described narratively.

Global Policy to Reduce the Incidence of Infection Spreading in Non-Vaccinated Healthcare Workers: A Literature Review

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection because of their occupational exposure. Moreover, they can be a vehicle for the virus transmission among patients. The vaccination of healthcare personnel against COVID-19 is crucial in fighting the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, together with strict sanitary procedures that aim to limit the risk of contagion. Unfortunately, even if COVID-19 vaccination has been proved one of the most effective tools for protecting against COVID-19, many healthcare professionals are not yet vaccinated. The aim of the current review is to contribute to identifying an effective strategy for COVID-19 prevention especially among non-vaccinated HCWs. In this review, we collected the most recent and relevant findings from literature on the protection of unvaccinated HCWs, identifying three types of measures as principal actions to protect those operators: addressing vaccine hesitancy, improving non-pharmaceutical interventions and promoting actions at personal level (respiratory hygiene, hand hygiene and use of PPE). All these interventions are very effective in preventing contagion, if well respected and conducted; nevertheless, it is essential to promote vaccination, as it is the most effective measure.

Models of determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in non-pregnant and pregnant population: Review of current literature"

Vaccination has proven to be the most effective tool in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. While pregnant individuals are considered to be a high-risk population and are more likely to experience adverse effects from COVID-19, vaccination rates among pregnant individuals are significantly lower than in the general population. The Health Belief Model (HBM), Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), 3C model, 5C model, and 5A model have been used to assess vaccination hesitancy behaviors. In this paper, we review the use of each of these models to address vaccine hesitancy, with a focus on the pregnant population and the COVID-19 vaccine. The HBM, TPB, 3C model, and 5C model have demonstrated great versatility in their ability to evaluate, explain, and modify vaccine hesitancy and behavior. Up to date, the HBM and 3C models appear to be the most effective models to study and address vaccination hesitancy within the pregnant persons.

Health Care Professionals' Interest in Vaccination Training in Switzerland: A Quantitative Survey

Objectives: Health care professionals (HCPs) play an important role for patients' vaccination decisions. To counsel patients/clients appropriately, HCPs need current factual knowledge about vaccines and strong communication skills. Methods: We conducted an online survey with physicians, pharmacists, nurses, and midwives in Switzerland (01.11.2020-31.03.2021). We evaluated: 1) interest in vaccination knowledge and counseling training; 2) vaccination recommendation practices; 3) experience with vaccination counseling/administration; 4) comfort level in addressing vaccine hesitancy (VH); 5) perspectives on patient/client VH, delays, and refusals. Results: In total, 1,933 practicing HCPs responded (496 physicians, 226 pharmacists, 607 nurses, 604 midwives). 43% physicians, 31% pharmacists, 15% nurses, and 23% midwives felt comfortable counseling VH patients/clients. 96% physicians, 98% pharmacists, 85% nurses, and 91% midwives were interested in additional vaccination-related training. All professionals mentioned safety, efficacy, and side effects as topics of most interest for additional training. Conclusion: Results demonstrate a high interest among HCPs for additional vaccination-related training. In addition to factual information about vaccination, such training will likely benefit from a communication component, given the low rates of comfort reported by HCPs when counseling VH patients/clients.

Multifactorial influences underpinning a decision on COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers: a qualitative analysis

COVID-19 vaccination in healthcare workers (HCW) is essential for improved patient safety and resilience of health systems. Despite growing body of literature on the perceptions of COVID vaccines in HCWs, existing studies tend to focus on reasons for 'refusing' the vaccines, using surveys almost exclusively. To gain a more nuanced understanding, we explored multifactorial influences underpinning a decision on vaccination and suggestions for decision support to improve vaccine uptake among HCWs in the early phase of vaccination rollout. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with thirty-three HCWs in Singapore. Transcribed data was thematically analyzed. Decisions to accept vaccines were underpinned by a desire to protect patients primarily driven by a sense of professional integrity, collective responsibility to protect others, confidence in health authorities and a desire to return to a pre-pandemic way of life. However, there were prevailing concerns with respect to the vaccines, including long-term benefits, safety and efficacy, that hampered a decision. Inadequate information and social media representation of vaccination appeared to add to negative beliefs, impeding a decision to accept while low perceived susceptibility played a moderate role in the decision to delay or decline vaccination. Participants made valuable suggestions to bolster vaccination. Our findings support an approach to improving vaccine uptake in HCWs that features routine tracking and transparent updates on vaccination status, use of institutional platforms for sharing of experience, assuring contingency management plans and tailored communications to emphasize the duty of care and positive outlook associated with vaccination.

Beliefs and Sociodemographic and Occupational Factors Associated with Vaccine Hesitancy among Health Workers

Introduction: Vaccine hesitancy has been implicated in the low-vaccination coverage in several countries. Knowledge about vaccine hesitancy predictors in health workers is essential because they play a central role in communication about the importance and safety of vaccines. This study aimed to assess beliefs and sociodemographic and occupational factors associated with vaccine hesitancy in health workers. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study among 453 health workers in primary and medium complexity services in a municipality in the state of Bahia, Brazil. The variable vaccine hesitancy was operationalized based on the answers related to incomplete vaccination against hepatitis B, measles, mumps and rubella, and diphtheria and tetanus. Associations between variables were expressed as prevalence ratios (PR) and their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Endemic disease combat agents, administrative service workers, and support staff had the highest levels of vaccine hesitancy. Among the analyzed variables, the following were associated with vaccine hesitancy: working in secondary health care services (PR: 1.21; CI: 1.07-1.36), working as an endemic disease combat agent (PR = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.165-1.75), not sharing information about vaccines on social media (PR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.05-1.28), distrusting information about vaccinations (PR: 0.86; CI: 0.75-0.99), and not feeling safe receiving new vaccines (PR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.06-1.28). Conclusions: Strategies to enhance confidence in vaccination among health workers should consider differences in occupations and their working settings. Improving vaccination-related content in training and continuing education activities and facilitating access to onsite vaccinations at the workplace are crucial elements to reduce vaccine hesitancy among health workers.

An Examination of US COVID-19 Vaccine Distribution in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York

COVID-19 quickly spread across the United States (US) while communications and policies at all government levels suffered from inconsistency, misinformation, and lack of coordination. In order to explain the discrepancy between availability and population uptake, a case study was conducted analyzing vaccine rollout plans, social media, and Health Officer/Other Key Informant interviews in New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. Key research questions included, "What were the barriers and facilitators of early COVID vaccine distribution?" and "What mechanisms in the community emerged to alleviate strains in early vaccination?" Findings from this study revealed that pre-existing emergency preparedness infrastructures and plans developed since the 9/11 tragedy were seemingly abandoned. This caused health departments at all levels of government to make impromptu, non-uniform decisions leading to confusion, vaccine hesitancy, and ultimately low uptake. The results indicate that future vaccine rollout best practices must include evidence-based decision-making, coordinated communications, and outreach to high-priority and vulnerable communities.

Understanding Primary Care Physician Vaccination Behaviour: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy decreases adult vaccination coverage and has been recognized by WHO as a major health threat. Primary care physicians (PCP) play a key role in vaccination by giving vaccine counselling to their patients. The aim of this systematic review is to identify the knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and barriers (KBAB) associated with own vaccination and patient recommendation in primary care physicians.

METHODS

MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were used to search and identify relevant studies based on their title and abstract. In the next step, the full text of each previously selected article was read for eligibility. Articles were selected by two independent reviewers and data extraction was performed using tables. The following information was extracted: methodological characteristics, demographic factors, professional characteristics, and intrinsic or extrinsic factors influencing vaccination or recommendation.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 41 eligible papers, data-sources, previous practices, belief in the effectiveness or safety of the vaccine, perceived risk, and trust in health authorities were all shown to be related to own vaccination and patient recommendation.

CONCLUSION

Internet is the main source of information for PCP related to vaccine hesitancy. It is therefore essential to increase the presence and access to pro-vaccination content in this area. In addition, involving PCP in the establishment of vaccination recommendations could improve their credibility in the institutions. On the other hand, training in communication skills and establishing reminder systems could reflect higher vaccination coverage among their patients.

Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccination Intention among Health Care Workers in France: A Qualitative Study

COVID-19 vaccines are one of the best tools to limit the spread of the virus. However, vaccine hesitancy is increasing worldwide, and France is one of the most hesitant countries. From the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, health care workers (HCW) have been prioritized in the vaccination strategy but were also hesitant. This study was conducted to identify and understand the determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention in the French context, with a view to promoting HCW vaccination. A qualitative study using individual semi-structured interviews of HCWs was carried out at the beginning of the vaccination campaign (January to April 2021) in a French university hospital. Interviews indicated that the vaccination intention of HCWs was influenced by confidence in the proposed vaccines, past experience with vaccines and disease, the opinions and vaccination status of others, and media handling of information related to COVID-19 vaccination. Improving HCW vaccination intention regarding COVID-19 vaccines could be achieved through the dissemination of clear, reassuring, scientific information. Information should be disseminated by HCWs and vaccination experts and adapted to local contexts. To improve the level of confidence and vaccination uptake through a compliance effect, it would be useful to promote positive COVID-19 vaccination experiences and increased rates of immunization.

Race, ethnicity and COVID-19 vaccination: a qualitative study of UK healthcare staff

OBJECTIVE

COVID-19-related inequities experienced by racial and ethnic minority groups including healthcare professionals mirror wider health inequities, which risk being perpetuated by lower uptake of vaccination. We aim to better understand lower uptake among racial and ethnic minority staff groups to inform initiatives to enhance uptake.

DESIGN

Twenty-five semi-structured interviews were conducted (October 2020-January 2021) with UK-based healthcare staff. Data were inductively and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Vaccine decision-making processes were underpinned by an overarching theme, 'weighing up risks of harm against potential benefits to self and others'. Sub-themes included 'fear of harm', 'moral/ethical objections', 'potential benefits to self and others', 'information and misinformation', and 'institutional or workplace pressure'. We identified ways in which these were weighted more heavily towards vaccine hesitancy for racial and ethnic minority staff groups influenced by perceptions about institutional and structural discrimination. This included suspicions and fear around institutional pressure to be vaccinated, racial injustices in vaccine development and testing, religious or ethical concerns, and legitimacy and accessibility of vaccine messaging and communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Drawing on a critical race perspective, we conclude that acknowledging historical and contemporary abuses of power is essential to avoid perpetuating and aggravating mistrust by de-contextualising hesitancy from the social processes affecting hesitancy, undermining efforts to increase vaccine uptake.

Acceptability of the Vaccine against COVID-19 in Spanish Health Sciences Students: A Cross-Sectional Study

Healthcare professionals must play an exemplary role in the field of vaccinology. It is convenient that they are trained during their time at university. The objective of this study was to determine the acceptability of the vaccines against COVID-19 in health sciences students in Spanish universities. A cross-sectional study was performed regarding the acceptance of the vaccines against COVID-19 in students in the Health Sciences Degrees in Spanish universities was performed on a sample of students of nursing, medicine, and pharmacy during the spring of 2021, via an online questionnaire with 36 questions designed ad hoc, self-administered, anonymized, and standardized. There were 1222 students participating, of Spanish nationality (97.4%), women (80.5%) and with an average age of 22.0 ± 4.8 years old. Of those, 12.3% had had the disease, 44.0% had to quarantine, 70.8% had undergone diagnostic tests, out of which 14.1% were positive. In total, 97.5% of those surveyed indicated their desire of being vaccinated, if possible, with Comirnaty^® (74.9%). At the time of the study, 49.6% were already vaccinated. The reasons for vaccination differed according to the degree and the doubts about vaccine safety was the largest reason for reluctance. Some 37.7% suspected that there are unknown adverse effects and 85.6% of those vaccinated experienced some mild effects after injection. Vaccine acceptance and confidence in the recommendations given by health authorities is high in health sciences students.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Health Professional Students: Cross-Sectional Data from the First Wave of the HOLISTIC Cohort Study

Vaccine hesitancy has been observed around the world, but there is a paucity of data among a broad range of U.S. health professional students. The goal of this report is to present findings about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among a cross-section of U.S. health professional students and determine if hesitancy varies by demographic characteristics, health science college, and other factors. A cross-sectional analysis of HOLISTIC Cohort Study participants enrolled from April 14 2021 to May 5 2021 at seven health sciences colleges in the University of Illinois Chicago was used. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were used to evaluate vaccine hesitancy items and identify domains. Among 555 health professional students, three domains (perceived benefit, trustworthiness, and risk) contribute to vaccine hesitancy. Significant differences were observed in the domains among students of different races as well as vaccination history. Compared to students in the College of Medicine, students in the Colleges of Applied Health Science (OR 0.43; CI [0.19–0.96]), Pharmacy (OR 0.38; CI [0.17–0.87]), Nursing (OR 0.35; CI [0.16–0.78]), and Social Work (OR 0.30; CI [0.11–0.78]) reported lower perceived benefit. Compared to students in the College of Medicine, students in the College of Applied Health Sciences (OR 0.39; CI [0.17–0.94]), Dentistry (OR 0.27; CI [0.10–0.76]), Nursing (OR 0.38; CI [0.16–0.94]), and Social work (OR 0.31; CI [0.11–0.86]) reported more trustworthiness and more concerns about risk (OR 2.80; CI [1.15–6.81] for College of Applied Health Sciences, OR 9.12; CI [2.80–29.75] for Dentistry, OR 3.77; CI [1.47–9.65] for Nursing, OR 3.14; CI [1.02–9.67] for Social Work). Our findings suggest the need for a tailored vaccination strategy among different subgroups of health professional students.

Targeting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among nurses in Shanghai: A latent profile analysis

Objectives

This study aims to clarify the profiles of the psychological antecedents of vaccine hesitancy among Shanghai nurses with a person-centered approach.

Methods

A population-based cross-sectional online survey was conducted on Shanghai nurses from July to August 2021 (N = 1,928). In the online survey, participants were asked to report their sociodemographic, the 5C vaccine hesitancy components, their knowledge level of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination, and the COVID-19 vaccination uptake intention and attention to vaccine news. Latent profile analysis was used to reveal distinct profiles of vaccine hesitancy.

Results

The results revealed four profiles, including "believers" (68.9%; high confidence and collective responsibility), "free riders" (12.7%; similar characteristics to believers, except for a low collective responsibility), "middlemen" (14.6%; middle in all 5C constructs), and "contradictors" (3.7%; high in all 5C constructs). Compared to believers, middlemen were younger, more likely to be female, childless, less educated, held lower professional titles, had fewer years of nursing service, sometimes or never complied with recommended vaccinations, had satisfactory or poor self-assessed health status, had no work experience during the COVID-19 epidemic, and possessed greater levels of knowledge. Free riders were more likely to work in community health centers and have a lower degree than believers. Contradictors were more likely to work in community health centers, had junior college degrees or lower, and had no work experience during the COVID-19 epidemic than believers. From the highest to the lowest on vaccination intention and attention to vaccine news were believers, then free riders, contradictors, and finally middlemen.

Conclusion

This study could aid in the development of personalized vaccination strategies based on nurses' vaccine hesitancy profiles and predictors. In addition to vaccine believers, we identified other three profiles based on their 5C psychological antecedents, emphasizing the significance of establishing tailored vaccination campaigns. Further research into the prevalence of profile structure in other groups of healthcare workers is required.

COVID-19 Vaccination Rollout: Aspects of Acceptability in South Africa

Unprecedented in scale, immense COVID-19 immunization programs have been rolled out globally. This article explores aspects of hypothetical vaccine acceptability in Soweto, South Africa, shortly before such vaccines became available. Whereas hypothetical acceptance was normative, this has not translated into uptake today, which remains concerningly low in South Africa, especially in Soweto. For that reason, we mobilize anthropological concepts to analyze acceptance, hesitancy, and denial to gauge public proclivity to inoculate. We found that COVID-19′s haphazard mediatization generated a ‘field of suspicion’ towards authorities and vaccination, which, amplified by dis- and misinformation, fostered othering, hesitancy, and denialism considerably. Further, we demonstrate that stated intent to immunize cannot be used to predict outcome. It remains paramount during vaccination rollouts to unveil and address aspects detrimental to vaccine confidence and selectivity, especially in lower-income groups for underlying context-specific cultural, spiritual, historical, and socioeconomic reasons. Appropriate mediazation alongside a debunking of counterfactual claims is crucial in driving forward immunization.

Beliefs, barriers and hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine among Bangladeshi residents: Findings from a cross-sectional study

Background

COVID‐19 vaccination acceptance is important, and combating hesitancy which is generally based on the individuals’ beliefs and perceptions is essential in the present pandemic. This study assesses COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy and associated factors, beliefs and barriers associated with COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was carried out among 492 Bangladeshi residents (76% male; mean age = 24.21 ± 4.91 years; age range = 18–50 years) prior to the nationwide mass COVID-19 vaccination campaign (September 28, 2021). A semi-structured e-questionnaire included three sections (demographic variables, beliefs around the vaccination, and perceived barriers regarding COVID-19 vaccination).

Results

More than a quarter of participants (26.42%) were hesitant, 70.33% reported to accept the vaccine, and 3.25% refused to be vaccinated. While (54%) believed that mass vaccination would be the most effective method to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns regarding the side effects of the vaccine (58%), inadequate vaccine trials before human administration (43%), commercial profiteering (42%), and mistrust of the benefits of the vaccine (20%) were also reported. In addition, other barriers including a short supply of vaccines, unknown future adverse effects (55%), low confidence in the health system (51%), doubts regarding its effectiveness (50%) and safety (45%), and insufficient information regarding potential adverse effects (44.7%) were reported. In bivariate analysis, variables such as current political affiliation, previous vaccination history, and health status were significantly associated with the COVID-19 vaccine uptake variable (acceptance, hesitancy, refusal). Regression analysis showed that participants who identified with the opposing current political parties, and not having been vaccinated since the age of 18 years were significantly more likely to report vaccine hesitancy.

Conclusions

The current findings relating to COVID-19 vaccination demonstrate that government and policy makers need to take all necessary measures to ensure the effectiveness of the vaccination program among the Bangladeshi people.

UK ethnic minority healthcare workers' perspectives on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK ethnic minority community: A qualitative study

Background

The experiences of UK ethnic minority (UKEM) healthcare workers are crucial to ameliorating the disproportionate COVID-19 infection rate and outcomes in the UKEM community. We conducted a qualitative study on UKEM healthcare workers' perspectives on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (CVH) in the UKEM community.

Methods

Participants were 15 UKEM healthcare workers (11 females; age range: 26-58 [43.3 ± 9.4] years). Data were collected using individual and joint interviews, and a focus group, and analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results

We generated three themes: heterogeneity (two subthemes), mistrust (six subthemes), and mitigating (six subthemes). Therein, participants distinguished CVH in the UKEM community in educational attainment and ethnicity. They pointed to the role of mistrust in CVH in the UKEM community. They opined that the mistrust underlying CVH in the UKEM community is rooted in history and religion, conspiracy theories, the speedy development and novelty of the vaccines, post-vaccination complications/side effects, false positive test results, and social media and social support/influence. Participants recommended that interventions targeted at mitigating CVH in the UKEM community need to, in a non-judgmental way, tackle dis/misinformation and provide education, and incorporate UKEM healthcare worker endorsement. They also suggested such interventions be community-oriented, enhance the convenience of vaccination centers and the possibility of vaccine choice, and appreciate that overcoming CVH and accepting vaccination is a gradual process involving personal assessment of risks and benefits.

Conclusion

CVH in the UKEM community is a multifaceted phenomenon requiring multicomponent interventions.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and intent in California registered nurses

Despite a national vaccination effort prioritizing frontline healthcare workers, COVID-19 vaccination rates among nurses have been lower than necessary to protect workforce and patient health. Historically, nurses have been more vaccine hesitant than other healthcare workers. To assess the vaccine attitudes and COVID-19 vaccine intent of California's registered nurses, we conducted a statewide cross-sectional survey among 603 licensed RNs working in direct patient care. Of 167 respondents (27.7%), 111 met inclusion criteria. Their mean score of 3.01 on a 6-point rating scale on the Vaccine Attitudes Examination scale measuring general vaccine hesitancy was comparable to previous findings among U.S. West Coast adults. Greater vaccine hesitancy was significantly associated with lower COVID-19 vaccine intent, after controlling for relevant confounders. Since nurses make up the largest portion of the healthcare workforce, it is crucial to specifically address this group's vaccine hesitancy.

"Intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers: a comparison between two surveys"

BACKGROUND

Considering the importance of intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers and its role in maintaining their health and inhibiting the epidemic spread of Covid-19, the present study was done to identify the changes in intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine rate in two different time points and it's determinants based on the dimensions of the health belief model among healthcare workers in Iran.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional surveys performed to investigate COVID-19 vaccination intent and associated factors based on the health belief model. The first conducted on 1244 participants from August 18 to 23, 2020, and the second on 1514 participants from February 5 to April 29, 2021, both using a questionnaire of intent to accept COVID-19 vaccination. The questionnaire distribution platform in both surveys was similarly, WhatsApp and Telegram social and working virtual groups of HCWs. Data were analyzed with SPSS-16 software for descriptive and analytical statistics.

RESULTS

In the first survey, 58.4% (95% CI: 0.55-0.61%) of healthcare workers intended to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, the rate dropped to 45.7% (95% CI: 0.43-0.48%) in the second survey (P < 0.001). The regression analysis indicated six factors that were significantly associated with higher intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine: being a female (OR = 1.84, 95% CI (1.11-3.03)), history of Covid-19 infection (OR = 1.54, 95% CI (1.09-2.18), perceptions of Covid-19 disease (OR = 1.13, 95% CI (1.01-1.28)), perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccine (OR = 1.34, 95% CI (1.22-1.47)), prosocial norms for COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 1.25, 95% CI (1.21-1.29)), and COVID-19 vaccine safety/cost concerns (OR = 1.25, 95% CI (1.17-1.33)).

CONCLUSIONS

Present study showed an undesirable rate of intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers, especially decreasing over the time, emphasize the need of interventions to promote healthcare workers' intention to receive the vaccine and reduce the spread of COVID-19 disease.

Vaccine hesitancy and health care providers: Using the preferred cognitive styles and decision- making model and empathy tool to make progress

Low vaccination rates among health care providers (HCPs) pose a risk to themselves, their colleagues, their patients, and the general public. This paper seeks to frame the issues surrounding health care provider vaccine hesitancy and vaccination rates, as well as explore factors influencing respective decision-making, including health care occupation and demographic characteristics. This paper will then propose the use of the Preferred Cognitive Style and Decision-Making (PCSDM) Model and the Empathy Tool to increase health care provider vaccination rates, and will end by discussing several recommendations. It is important while discussing HCP vaccination rates to not view them as a monolithic group or apply “one-size-fits-all” approaches, and thus it is essential to present information and engage in conversations in ways that align with how the HCP takes in and processes information and decisions. Furthermore, it is vital to increase health literacy across the spectrum of HCP programs and professions. To this end, it is important to teach and incorporate the PCSDM Model and Empathy Tool, along with information about how individuals think and make decisions, into vaccine education programs and training sessions.

Discussion of the Trust in Vaccination against COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced serious challenges to global public health security, and the benefits of vaccination via public health interventions have been recognized as significant. Vaccination is an effective means of preventing and controlling the spread of COVID-19. However, trust is a major factor that influences vaccine hesitancy; thus, the distrust of vaccination has hindered the popularization of COVID-19 vaccines. This paper aims to discuss the main problems and the role of trust in the vaccination against COVID-19 to effectively promote and implement policy to promote the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.

Pneumococcal and influenza vaccination coverage among at-risk adults: A 5-year French national observational study

INTRODUCTION

The risk of developing pneumococcal infections increases with certain chronic conditions and in immunocompromised patients. We aimed to monitor pneumococcal vaccination coverage in at-risk patients and to examine factors associated with pneumococcal vaccination in France.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this annual cross-sectional study, at-risk patients were extracted between 2014 and 2018 from the National Health Insurance's (NHI) General scheme's claims database with their vaccine reimbursements. Descriptive analyses and a logistic model were performed to assess the influence of healthcare use and medical and demographic factors on pneumococcal vaccination.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In 2018, 4.5% of 4,045,021 at-risk adults were up to date with their pneumococcal vaccination. During the study period, the number of patients with chronic medical conditions (86% of 4,045,021) increased by 10.1%, but vaccination coverage decreased from 12.9% to 2.9%. The population with immunocompromised status (14% of 4,045,021) increased by 16.2% and vaccination coverage from 10.3% to 18.8%. Influenza vaccination coverage was much higher and stable (around 45.0%). Factors associated with pneumococcal vaccination were: immunocompromised status vs. having a chronic medical condition (odds ratio [OR] 4.72), influenza vaccination (OR 2.36-3.42), hepatitis B vaccination (OR 2.82), DTPolio vaccination (OR 1.52), ≥5 specialist physicians' visits (OR 1.17), and age above 74 (OR 1.12). Pneumococcal vaccine dispensing was extremely low (median of 9per GP,1per specialist over 9 years) despite frequent healthcare visits.

CONCLUSION

Pneumococcal and influenza vaccination coverage of adults at risk of pneumococcal disease fell well below public health expectations. Invitations for pneumococcal vaccination should be sent by the NHI to high-risk patients. Patient management protocols should include pneumococcal vaccination. Patients with multiple comorbidities are a high-priority population given the large potential health gains offered by pneumococcal vaccination. Commitment of both scientific societies and health authorities is urgently needed to increase vaccination coverage in at-risk populations.

Pilot Study of Evaluating Attitudes toward Childhood Immunization among Healthcare Workers in Japan

Providing appropriate immunization information during the perinatal period is important for improving immunization rates among infants and children; however, the distribution of immunization information by healthcare workers (HCWs) is not standardized in Japan. We investigated HCWs’ attitudes toward childhood immunization and factors related to vaccine hesitancy. We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive survey of HCWs involved in childhood immunization in Niigata City, Japan, from November 2017 to January 2018. We assessed contextual, individual and group, and vaccine/vaccination-specific influences. Of 290 HCWs, 139 (47.9%) returned completed questionnaires. Most HCWs (87/139, 64.9%) reported providing immunization information verbally to parents; 51/87 (58.6%) spent fewer than five minutes doing so. Pediatricians provided vaccines based on the parents’ best interest, whereas public health nurses and midwives emphasized government policy. Nurses had greater hesitancy related to personal perceptions and social/peer factors than pediatricians (p < 0.001). Nurses were significantly more likely than pediatricians to suggest that children receive more shots than necessary (p < 0.01). Nurses tended to have more negative attitudes toward vaccination and little awareness of immunization promotion compared to pediatricians. Thus, all HCWs involved in childhood immunization should receive sufficient information to provide timely and appropriate immunization to infants and children.

Knowledge, attitude, and hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccine among university students of Bangladesh

Global vaccination coverage is an urgent need to recover the recent pandemic COVID-19. However, people are concerned about the safety and efficacy of this vaccination program. Thus, it has become crucial to examine the knowledge, attitude, and hesitancy towards the vaccine. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among university students of Bangladesh. Total of 449 university students participated. Most of these students used the internet (34.74%), social media (33.41%), and electronic media (25.61%) as a source of COVID-19 vaccine information. Overall, 58.13% and 64.81% of university students reported positive knowledge and attitude towards the COVID-19 vaccine. 54.34% of these students agreed that the COVID-19 vaccine is safe and effective. 43.88% believed that the vaccine could stop the pandemic. The Spearman’s Rank correlation determined the positive correlation between knowledge and attitude. The negative correlation was determined between positive knowledge and hesitancy, and positive attitude and hesitancy. University students with positive knowledge and attitude showed lower hesitancy. Multiple logistic regression analyses determined the university type and degree major as the predictors of knowledge, whereas only degree major was the predictor of attitudes. 26.06% of the study population showed their hesitancy towards the vaccine. University type and degree major were also determined as predictors of this hesitancy. They rated fear of side effects (87.18%) and lack of information (70.94%) as the most reasons for the hesitancy. The findings from this study can aid the ongoing and future COVID-19 vaccination plan for university students. The national and international authorities can have substantial information for a successful inoculation campaign.

Knowledge and Attitude on Childhood Vaccination among Healthcare Workers in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia

(1) Background: Vaccine hesitancy is recognized as an important issue globally and healthcare workers (HCWs) have a powerful influence on the public. Recent studies have reported that there are increasing numbers of vaccine hesitancies among HCWs. This study was conducted to assess the knowledge and attitudes on childhood vaccinations among HCWs in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM). (2) Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted among one hundred and ninety-eight HCWs in HUSM, Kubang Kerian, Kelantan who were selected via convenient sampling. Data on their socio-demographic details, working experience, and main source of information regarding childhood vaccination were collected. A validated, Malay version of the knowledge and attitude on childhood vaccination (KACV) questionnaire was used during the study. (3) Results: Female (OR (95% CI):3.15, (1.39, 7.12), p < 0.05) and a higher education level (degree and above) (OR (95% CI): 2.36 (1.14, 4.89), p < 0.05) are significantly associated with good knowledge. Respondents with a history of side effects of the vaccines among their relatives were about 66% less likely to have good knowledge (OR (95% CI): 0.342 (0.16, 0.73), p < 0.05). A positive attitude towards childhood vaccination was significantly associated with a higher level of education participants, who had significantly better knowledge than participants with a lower education level (OR (95% CI): 3.81, (1.92, 7.57), p < 0.001). On the contrary, participants having direct contact with patients were less likely to have a good attitude towards childhood vaccination (OR (95% CI): 0.207 (0.043, 0.10), p < 0.05), and those with a history of severe side effects of the vaccines among their relatives were also significantly associated with a poor attitude towards childhood vaccination (OR (95% CI: 0.342 (0.16, 0.76), p < 0.05).; (4) Conclusions: The survey findings showed a good level of knowledge and a good attitude of participants towards childhood vaccination. Good knowledge is important for the HCWs to have a favourable attitude to educate the general population on childhood vaccination.

Nurses’ Influenza Vaccination and Hesitancy: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Literature

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is defined as “delaying or refusing a secure vaccine despite its availability”. This hesitancy affects caregivers and more specifically nurses. The purpose of this study is to assess determinants of influenza VH in the nurse’s community. We conducted a systematic review of qualitative literature according to criteria of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis and Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the synthesis of Qualitative Research from 2009 until October 2020. Eleven qualitative studies analysed (ten thematic content analyses and one grounded theory method) found three main factors in VH. The first determinant was the benefit–risk equation considered as unfavourable due to an ineffective vaccine and fears about adverse effects as the pain of the injection. Wrong immunological beliefs brought into hesitancy. Disease barriers (hand washing and masks) and personal immunity were regarded as more effective than the vaccine. Lastly, dehumanised vaccination and the difficulties of access to healthcare were institutional determinants. Nurses ask for a vaccine promotion by hierarchy and doctors with transparent information and respect for autonomy. The availability of vaccines and methods of pain control seem to be some tracks to reduce nurses’ VH.

Flu and COVID-19 Vaccination: What Happens to the Flu Shot When the Campaigns Overlap? Experience from a Large Italian Research Hospital

Influenza represents a threat to global health and health care workers (HCWs) have an increased risk of contracting the influenza virus in the workplace. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought back the importance of influenza vaccination, as the influenza virus can circulate together with SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this report is to describe the actual flu vaccination coverage among healthcare workers of a research hospital and the trend changes, with respect to the past flu vaccination campaigns, in light of the present pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination. A Pearson’s χ2 test was used to test the correlation of flu vaccination coverage, across all professional categories, between the last two years. A linear regression model was adopted to predict the total vaccination coverage of this year. A statistically significant decrease (p < 0.01) was observed in vaccination coverage among all the professional categories with a 50% reduction in vaccination trends between the last two years. Analyzing the data from the previous six flu vaccination campaigns, the expected value, according to the linear regression model, was estimated to be 38.5% while the observed value was 24%. The decrease in vaccination coverage may be due to the fear of the pandemic situation and especially to the uncertainty related to the consequences of a concurrent administration which may overload the immune system or may be more reactogenic. The COVID-19 pandemic represents an opportunity to promote and support large-scale influenza vaccination among HCWs through structured programs, adequate funding, and tailored communication strategies.

COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers-A Review

The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated vaccine have highlighted vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCWs). Vaccine hesitancy among this group existed prior to the pandemic and particularly centered around influenza vaccination. Being a physician, having more advanced education, and previous vaccination habits are frequently associated with vaccine acceptance. The relationship between age and caring for patients on COVID-19 vaccination is unclear, with studies providing opposing results. Reasons for hesitancy include concerns about safety and efficacy, mistrust of government and institutions, waiting for more data, and feeling that personal rights are being infringed upon. Many of these reasons reflect previous attitudes about influenza vaccination as well as political beliefs and views of personal autonomy. Finally, several interventions to encourage vaccination have been studied, including education programs and non-monetary incentives with the most effective studies using a combination of methods.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake and its associated factors among Palestinian healthcare workers: Expectations beaten by reality

BACKGROUND

In response to this extraordinary outbreak, many countries and companies rush to develop an effective vaccine, authorize, and deliver it to all people across the world. Despite these extensive efforts, curbing this pandemic relies highly upon vaccination coverage. This study aimed to determine SARS-COV-2 vaccine uptake among Palestinian healthcare workers, the factors that influence vaccination uptake, and the motivators and barriers to vaccination.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online anonymous self-administered questionnaire during April and May 2021, after the Palestinian Ministry of Health launched the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. The questionnaire collected socio-demographic characteristics, vaccination attitude and vaccination uptake status, and motivators and barriers towards vaccination. In addition, multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the influencing factors of vaccination uptake.

RESULTS

The study included 1018 participants from different professions, including 560 (55.0%) females. Of the participants, 677 (66.5%; 95% CI: 63.5-69.4%) received the vaccine. Higher uptake was observed among males (aOR = 1.5; 95 %CI: 1.1-2.1), single HCWs (aOR = 1.3; 95 %CI: 1.1-1.8), HCWs working in the non-governmental sector (aOR = 1.6; 95 %CI: 1.2-2.4), higher monthly income (aOR = 1.9; 95 %CI: 1.4-2.8) and smoking (aOR = 1.5; 95 %CI: 1.1-3.5). The lower level of negative vaccination attitudes predicted higher intake; mistrust of vaccine belief (aOR = 1.6; 95 %CI: 1.4-1.7) and worries over unforeseen future effects (aOR = 1.2; 95 %CI: 1.1-1.3).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the COVID-19 vaccination uptake was comparable to other studies worldwide but still needs to be improved, especially in the context of this ongoing global pandemic. It is imperative to invest resources to promote vaccination uptake and target all the vaccine misconceptions and fears.

Parental socioeconomic and psychological determinants of the 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) vaccine uptake in children

BACKGROUND

Before COVID-19, the previous pandemic was caused by influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus in 2009. Identification of factors behind parental decisions to have their child vaccinated against pandemic influenza could be helpful in planning of other pandemic vaccination programmes. We investigated the association of parental socioeconomic and psychosocial factors with uptake of the pandemic influenza vaccine in children in 2009-2010.

METHODS

This study was conducted within a prospective birth-cohort study (STEPS Study), where children born in 2008-2010 are followed from pregnancy to adulthood. Demographic and socioeconomic factors of parents were collected through questionnaires and vaccination data from electronic registers. Before and after the birth of the child, the mother's and father's individual and relational psychosocial well-being, i.e. depressive symptoms, dissatisfaction with the relationship, experienced social and emotional loneliness, and maternal anxiety during pregnancy, were measured by validated questionnaires (BDI-II, RDAS, PRAQ, and UCLA).

RESULTS

Of 1020 children aged 6-20 months at the beginning of pandemic influenza vaccinations, 820 (80%) received and 200 (20%) did not receive the vaccine against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09. All measures of parents' psychosocial well-being were similar between vaccinated and non-vaccinated children. Children of younger mothers had a higher risk of not receiving the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine than children of older mothers (OR 2.59, 95% CI 1.52-4.43, for mothers < 27.7 years compared to ≥ 33.6 years of age). Children of mothers with lower educational level had an increased risk of not receiving the vaccine (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.00-2.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Mother's younger age and lower education level were associated with an increased risk for the child not to receive the 2009 pandemic influenza vaccine, but individual or relational psychosocial well-being of parents was not associated with children's vaccination. Our findings suggest that young and poorly educated mothers should receive targeted support in order to promote children's vaccinations during a pandemic.

The COVID-19 vaccine intentions of Australian disability support workers

OBJECTIVES

Describe perceptions of COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, information sources, and levels and reasons for vaccine hesitancy among disability support workers (DSWs).

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey of 252 DSWs from across Australia, between early March and early April 2021. Perceptions of risk of COVID-19; government and media representations; vaccination status (Y/N); vaccine intentions (when offered, delayed vaccinators, vaccine refusers); reasons for hesitancy; confidence in safety and efficacy of vaccine; and information sources.

RESULTS

At the time of the survey, fewer than 1% of DSWs had been vaccinated and 17% had been offered vaccination. Of those who had not had the vaccine, 47% said they would get it as soon as it was offered; 19% would not get the vaccine; 12% would have if required; 13% hadn't decided; and 8% would wait until it was available for a while. Reasons for hesitancy included inadequate safety data (70% delayed vaccinators, 79% vaccine refusers), side effects (63% delayed vaccinators, 58% refusers), and distrust in the government (17% delayed vaccinators, 52% refusers). DSWs most trusted sources of information were their own doctor, Chief Medical Officers, and governments. 61% believed that COVID-19 will only stop if most of the community is vaccinated and 53% agreed the chances of them or their clients getting COVID-19 would be reduced if they were vaccinated.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailored information is needed to reduce vaccine hesitancy and increase confidence in COVID-19 vaccines among DSWs. The importance of getting vaccinated to prevent COVID-19 among people with disability should be emphasised.