Vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers in Europe: A qualitative study

Active offer of Tdap vaccination in a cohort of healthcare workers of Maternal and Neonatal Department: Data from a large hospital in Southern Italy

Pertussis is a vaccine-preventable respiratory disease. Pertussis vaccination is currently mandatory for all children in Italy, and is administered in three doses at the beginning of the third, fifth, and twelfth month of life, respectively. Booster doses are also recommended at five-six years, at eleven-twelve years, and then once every ten years. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are a high-risk population for pertussis. Strategies to increase HCWs' compliance to this vaccination have not been investigated in depth. Our study investigates the determinants of acceptance of a "soft nudge" vaccination campaign in a large hospital in Apulia (Southern Italy). HCWs from the Gynaecology and Neonatology Units of Bari's Policlinico General Hospital were screened in June 2023 for pertussis vaccination. Non-vaccinated subjects were offered a vaccination appointment. Vaccination determinants were studied, and a logistic regression model was built to identify determinants that significantly influence vaccination acceptance. At the time of screening, only 31.34% of target HCWs (68/217) had already been vaccinated. After the active call intervention, vaccine coverage rose to 70.00% (152/217). Significantly higher coverage was found in the Neonatology Unit (30/43, 69.77%) than in the Gynaecology unit (54/106, 50.94%) (Chi2: 4.41; p-value: 0.036). A logistic regression model confirmed a higher compliance to vaccination in HCWs staffed in the Neonatology Unit (Chi2: 2.08; 95%CI: 1.04 - 4.73; p-value: 0.038). Our intervention increased vaccination coverage in a high-risk cohort. The solicitation was effective, as communication with a trained specialist might have improved the subjects' perception of vaccination and individual risk of contagion and transmission to others. A synergistic approach, mixing active call with a vaccination mandate, might have greater effectiveness.

Guarding the gatekeepers: a comprehensive approach to control nosocomial measles

PURPOSE

Despite substantial vaccination progress, persistent measles outbreaks challenge global elimination efforts, particularly within healthcare settings. In this paper, we critically review the factors contributing to measles outbreak and effective control measures for nosocomial transmission of measles.

METHODS

We systematically searched electronic databases for articles up to 17th May, 2023. This was performed by two independent reviewers, with any disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We also searched governmental and international health agencies for relevant studies.

RESULTS

Forty relevant articles were systematically reviewed, revealing key factors fuelling measles outbreak in healthcare settings, including high transmissibility capability; high intensity exposure; delayed care; failure to use protective equipment and implement control measures; vaccine failure; unclear immunisation history and lack of registries; and lacking recommendation on healthcare workers' (HCWs) measles vaccination. To combat these challenges, successful control strategies were identified which include early notification of outbreak and contact tracing; triaging all cases and setting up dedicated isolation unit; strengthening protective equipment use and physical measures; improving case detection; determining immunity status of HCWs; establishing policy for measles vaccination for HCWs; management of exposed personnel; and developing a pre-incident response plan.

CONCLUSION

A coordinated and comprehensive approach is essential to promptly identify and manage measles cases within healthcare settings, necessitating multifactorial strategies tailored to individual settings. These findings provide a valuable foundation for refining strategies to achieve and maintain measles elimination status in healthcare environments.

Mapping Adult Vaccine Confidence in Future Health Professionals: A Pilot Study among Undergraduate Students at Two Universities in Greece

Health professionals' recommendations increase vaccine uptake. We aimed to document stances, practices regarding adult vaccination, and their predictors among undergraduate medical and biomedical science students, as well as their perspectives on increasing vaccine confidence. Among the 430 participants, third-year students from two universities in Greece, only 25.4% were in favor of all vaccines, while no refuters were detected. Predictors of recommending vaccination were the Attitudes Towards Adult Vaccination (ATAVAC) Value (OR 3.26, p < 0.001) and ATAVAC Safety subscales scores (OR 1.36, p < 0.05), being a medical student (OR 2.45, p < 0.05), and having better self-rated health status (OR 2.27, p < 0.05). The importance of getting vaccinated as health professionals was recognized by participants with a higher ATAVAC value (OR 5.39, p < 0.001), ATAVAC Safety scores (OR 1.46, p < 0.05), and increased knowledge regarding the National Immunization Program (OR 1.31, p < 0.05). The God Locus of Health Control (GLHC) was a predictor only in vaccination against COVID-19 (OR 0.91, p < 0.05). Improving community health literacy and health providers' education, boosting trust in authorities, and adopting a person-centered approach emerged as the main themes regarding how to increase vaccine confidence. Mapping health professionals' confidence in vaccines and providing lifelong training support is pivotal in supporting positive attitudes, enhancing their competence, and promoting vaccination in the post-COVID-19 era.

Analyzing the 7C psychological antecedents of vaccine acceptance throughout the COVID-19 pandemic among healthcare sector workers in France: A repeated cross-sectional study (CappVac-Cov)

BACKGROUND

Across various stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and related vaccine recommendations in France, we assessed the association of the 7C-psychological antecedents with vaccine uptake/intention for booster vaccination among healthcare-sector workers (HCSWs). We also assessed whether 7C-antecedent profiles changed over time.

METHODOLOGY

The Research Group for the Prevention of Occupational Infections in Healthcare Workers (GERES) conducted three repeated web-surveys which were disseminated by email chain-referral among HCSWs throughout France. The questionnaires waves took place: July-November 2021, February-March 2022 and January-March 2023 (P2, P3 and P4). We also reanalysed data from a prior similar study conducted late 2020-early 2021 (Moirangthem et al. (2022)) (P1). To evaluate the association of 7C-items with vaccine uptake-intention for future vaccination, we estimated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) using robust variance Poisson regression. We report the 7C-item population attributable loss in vaccine intention.

RESULTS

The four surveys (P1-P4) encompassed 5234, 339, 351 and 437 participants. At earlier stages of the vaccine campaign, the principal antecedents of vaccine intention were favorable perception of vaccination benefit-risk-balance (BRB) (vs. unfavorable, aPR: 2.32), reactance to employer encouragement for vaccination (motivates vs. dissuades-me, aPR:2.23), vaccine confidence (vs. not-being-confident, aPR: 1.71) and social conformism towards vaccination (favorable vs. skeptical opinion in private environment, aPR: 1.33). Under a vaccine mandate for HCSWs, only perceiving vaccination as a collective action was associated with current vaccine status (agree vs. disagree, aPR: 2.19). At later stages of the epidemic, hypothetical booster vaccine intentions were strongly associated with BRB perception (favorable vs. unfavorable, aPR: 2.07) and perceiving vaccination as a collective action (agree vs. disagree, aPR: 1.69). Fearing a severe side effect from vaccination decreased population vaccine intention by 26.2 %.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that both 7C-antecedents and their association with vaccine behaviour can change over time, and underscore the importance of assuring confidence in vaccine safety.

Healthcare Professionals' Discursive Constructions of Parental Vaccine Hesitancy: A Tale of Multiple Moralities

Healthcare professionals play a crucial role in addressing the concerns of vaccine-hesitant parents since they form a trusted source for vaccine-related information. An increasing body of evidence suggests that healthcare professionals are faced with complexities when navigating the sensitive topic of parental vaccine hesitancy, as they balance their own vaccine- and context-specific concerns with institutional and societal pressures to vaccinate. Furthermore, health choices, such as parental choices for childhood vaccination, are often linked to moralisation. Given the emphasis on effective communication with vaccine-hesitant parents in the patient-centred care literature, it is important to consider healthcare professionals' interpretations of parental vaccine hesitancy. Hence, a deeper understanding of how healthcare professionals make sense of, and moralise, childhood vaccination can help us understand how moralisation might appear in their communication with hesitant parents (in)directly. Drawing on a critical social-psychological framework for discourse analysis, this study analyses 39 semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals in Flanders, Belgium, and presents the discursive patterns articulated by healthcare professionals on parental vaccine hesitancy. The findings elucidate how healthcare professionals perpetuate, or resist, moral discourse in their accounts of vaccine hesitancy by constructing five different interpretative repertoires, that is, a "good" or "bad" parenting repertoire, a freedom of choice repertoire, an individual risk-benefit repertoire, a public health repertoire, and an accessibility repertoire. Our study highlights the complexities healthcare professionals experience in negotiating vaccine hesitancy, as their understandings of vaccine hesitancy are affected by, and contribute to, existing moral dilemmas and dominant discourses surrounding health and parenting.

Serosusceptibility and hesitancy for booster HBV vaccination among health care workers in Italy: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Health care workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of exposure to hepatitis B virus (HBV). The most effective prevention measure is vaccination, with a serum hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) titre > 10 mIU/ml considered protective. To date, the sociodemographic and occupational characteristics related to HBV serosusceptibility and factors associated with booster hesitancy remain unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors associated with maintaining a protective HBsAb titre in a large sample of HCWs and to evaluate factors potentially associated with hesitancy towards vaccine boosters.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs who underwent a health surveillance visit between 2017 and 2022. If the serum HBsAb titre was < 10 MIU/ml, a vaccine booster dose was offered. Based on their willingness to be vaccinated, employees were classified into three groups: acceptance, hesitation, and refusal. Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed to assess the association of demographic and occupational characteristics with serosusceptibility and attitudes towards vaccination.

RESULTS

A total of 1632 (27%) employees were shown to be nonimmune. A lower median age and being a physician were significantly associated with a protective HBsAb titre. A total of 706 nonimmune employees (43.3%) accepted the vaccination, 865 (53%) hesitated, and 61 (3.7%) refused. The median age of those who refused vaccination was significantly higher than that of those who hesitated and those who were vaccinated. Acceptance of vaccination was significantly higher among nurses, while nurse aides hesitated more; among nonmedical graduate staff both hesitation and refusal were higher than expected. In the multivariable analysis, higher age, female sex, and employment as an allied health care professional were shown to be significantly associated with hesitation/refusal, while being born abroad turned out to be protective.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that approximately a quarter of HCWs were not immune to HBV infection, and of these, more than half were hesitant towards or refused the booster dose. The risk of hesitation/refusal was higher with age in women and among allied health care staff. Based on these findings, further studies are needed to prospectively evaluate HBV seroprevalence, vaccination adherence, factors associated with hesitancy, and the effectiveness of health surveillance strategies in a high-risk population susceptible to infection.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Healthcare Workers: An Exploration of Hesitancy Reasons and Suggestions to Improve Vaccination Rates

Objective

Vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCWs) represents a significant challenge and threat in pandemics. This study aims to identify the predictive factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCWs and offer strategies to increase the COVID-19 vaccination rate in healthcare settings.

Materials and Methods

This study constitutes the qualitative portion (second part) of a mixed-methods doctoral thesis employing an explanatory design. It was conducted in two distinct pandemic hospitals and involved 23 vaccine-hesitant HCWs. To conduct the interviews, the researchers developed a semi-structured interview form based on the Health Belief Model (HBM).

Results

Upon analyzing the in-depth interviews, we identified six primary reasons for vaccine hesitancy and four different sub-reasons that reinforce vaccine hesitancy. We also collected four key suggestions from vaccine-hesitant HCWs that could potentially persuade them to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

Conclusion

This study's findings, which encompass the identification of reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, clarification of underlying factors contributing to hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccines, and gathering suggestions from HCWs on how to persuade them to get vaccinated, hold significant value for guiding vaccination campaigns during potential future pandemics.

Trust matters: The Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Europe Study

This article presents the design of a seven-country study focusing on childhood vaccines, Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Europe (VAX-TRUST), developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study consists of (a) situation analysis of vaccine hesitancy (examination of individual, socio-demographic and macro-level factors of vaccine hesitancy and analysis of media coverage on vaccines and vaccination and (b) participant observation and in-depth interviews of healthcare professionals and vaccine-hesitant parents. These analyses were used to design interventions aimed at increasing awareness on the complexity of vaccine hesitancy among healthcare professionals involved in discussing childhood vaccines with parents. We present the selection of countries and regions, the conceptual basis of the study, details of the data collection and the process of designing and evaluating the interventions, as well as the potential impact of the study. Laying out our research design serves as an example of how to translate complex public health issues into social scientific study and methods.

Exploring pre-pandemic patterns of vaccine decision-making with the 5C model: results from representative surveys in 2016 and 2018

BACKGROUND

The 5C psychological antecedents of vaccination (Confidence, Complacency, Constraints, Calculation, and Collective Responsibility) facilitate understanding vaccination decisions in specific target groups as well as the general public's informational needs. This study aims to explain pre-pandemic vaccination behaviour (a) in general, (b) for specific vaccines such as influenza, and (c) for certain target groups (e.g. people over the age of 59 years, parents, healthcare workers), using the 5C model and sociodemographic variables. The intention to get an influenza vaccination was also analysed for target groups.

METHODS

The 5C, self-reported vaccination behaviour and the intention to vaccinate were collected in two representative telephone surveys in Germany - one in 2016 (n1 = 5,012) and another in 2018 (n2 = 5,054). Parents, people over the age of 59 years, chronically ill people, people with a migratory background, pregnant women and healthcare workers were target groups.

RESULTS

Overall, the 5C model had higher explanatory power than sociodemographic variables. The pattern of vaccine hesitancy slightly differed between vaccinations and target groups. Confidence in safety and effectiveness was always a significant predictor. Complacency (the underestimation of disease risks) and Constraints were significant predictors as well. Calculation (of risks and benefits) was important for influenza vaccination intentions.

CONCLUSIONS

This work builds an important benchmark for understanding potential changes in vaccine acceptance due to the pandemic. The benchmark can be used in research on potential effects of the pandemic on vaccination behaviours. Intervention designers can also use the results to understand specific audiences and their vaccination decisions.

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

IMPORTANCE

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

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

SETTING

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

PARTICIPANTS

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

EXPOSURE(S) (FOR OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES)

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

MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURES

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

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

Experiences of Malaysian primary healthcare providers with vaccine hesitancy: A qualitative study

Introduction

Vaccine hesitancy was declared as one of the ten threats to global public health by the World Health Organization in 2019. It undermines the effort towards eradication of vaccine-preventable diseases. Healthcare providers, who are directly involved in vaccination services and vaccine advocacies, are important in combating vaccine hesitancy. Studies have shown that vaccine refusers have various reasons for refusal including distrust towards healthcare providers. Hence, it is important to understand healthcare providers' perspectives. This study aimed to explore primary healthcare providers (PHCPs)' experiences in dealing with vaccine hesitancy.

Methods

This qualitative study was conducted among public PHCPs across six states in Malaysia. Purposive and snowball sampling methods were used. Fifteen primary healthcare doctors and nurses underwent in-depth interviews. Recruitment was stopped when data saturation was achieved. Data were thematically analysed.

Results

Four themes emerged: 1) views towards vaccination and vaccine hesitancy, 2) disparity in strategies and resources used among PHCPs, 3) fixed-minded vaccine deniers and religious incompatibility: the two towering hurdles and 4) negative impact after encounters with vaccine hesitancy.

Conclusion

Malaysian PHCPs encounter negative experiences with vaccine hesitancy, impacting them negatively. These experiences are attributed to the challenges and lack of standardised resources for reference. These findings suggest the development of a more flexible policy, a training module inclusive of all professional roles and a standardised repository of resources for managing vaccine hesitancy.

UK healthcare professionals' attitudes towards the introduction of varicella vaccine into the routine childhood vaccination schedule and their preferences for administration

BACKGROUND

Varicella (chickenpox) is a highly contagious disease caused by the varicella-zoster virus. Although typically mild, varicella can cause complications leading to severe illness and even death. Safe and effective varicella vaccines are available. The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has reviewed the evidence and recommended the introduction of varicella vaccine into the UK's routine childhood immunisation schedule.

OBJECTIVES

To explore UK healthcare professionals' (HCPs) knowledge and attitudes towards varicella vaccination, its introduction to the UK routine childhood immunisation schedule, and their preferences for how it should be delivered.

DESIGN

We conducted an online cross-sectional survey exploring HCPs' attitudes towards varicella, varicella vaccine, and their preferences for delivery of the vaccine between August and September 2022 prior to the recommendation that varicella vaccine should be introduced.

PARTICIPANTS

91 HCPs working in the UK (81 % nurses/health visitors, 9 % doctors, 10 % researcher/other, mean age 48.7 years).

RESULTS

All respondents agreed or strongly agreed that vaccines are important for a child's health. However, only 58% agreed or strongly agreed that chicken pox was a disease serious enough to warrant vaccination. Gaps in knowledge about varicella were revealed: 21.0% of respondents disagreed or were unsure that chickenpox can cause serious complications, while 41.8% were unsure or did not believe chickenpox was serious enough to vaccinate against. After receiving some basic information about chickenpox and the vaccine, almost half of the HCPs (47.3%) in our survey would prefer to administer the varicella vaccine combined with MMR.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the positive influence of HCPs on parents' decisions to vaccinate their children, it is important to understand HCPs' views regarding the introduction of varicella vaccine into the routine schedule. Our findings highlighted areas for training and HCPs' preferences which will have implications for policy and practice when the vaccine is introduced.

Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Meghalaya, India: Multiple correspondence and agglomerative hierarchical cluster analyses

Meghalaya, a state in the northeastern region of India, had a markedly low vaccine uptake compared to the other states in the country when COVID-19 vaccines were being rolled out in 2021. This study aimed to characterize the distinct vaccine-hesitant subpopulations in healthcare and community settings in Meghalaya state in the early days of the vaccination program. We used data from a cross-sectional survey that was administered to 200 healthcare workers (HCWs) and 200 community members, who were a priori identified as 'vaccine-eligible' and 'vaccine-hesitant,' in Shillong city, Meghalaya, in May 2021. The questionnaire collected information on participants' sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19 history, and presence of medical comorbidities. Participants were also asked to provide a dichotomous answer to a set of 19 questions, probing the reasons for their hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines. A multiple correspondence analysis, followed by an agglomerative hierarchical cluster analysis, was performed to identify the distinct clusters of vaccine-hesitant participants. We identified seven clusters: indecisive HCWs (n = 71), HCWs skeptical of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines (n = 128), highly educated male tribal/clan leaders concerned about infertility and future pregnancies (n = 14), less educated adults influenced by leaders and family (n = 47), older adults worried about vaccine safety (n = 76), middle-aged adults without young children (n = 56), and highly educated ethnic/religious minorities with misinformation (n = 8). Across all the clusters, perceived logistical challenges associated with receiving the vaccine was identified as a common factor contributing to vaccine hesitancy. Our study findings provide valuable insights for local and state health authorities to effectively target distinct subgroups of vaccine-hesitant populations with tailored health messaging, and also call for a comprehensive approach to address the common drivers of vaccine hesitancy in communities with low vaccination rates.

Effectiveness of interventions to increase healthcare workers' adherence to vaccination against vaccine-preventable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis, 1993 to 2022

BackgroundVaccination adherence among healthcare workers (HCWs) is fundamental for the prevention of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) in healthcare. This safeguards HCWs' well-being, prevents transmission of infections to vulnerable patients and contributes to public health.AimThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to describe interventions meant to increase HCWs' adherence to vaccination and estimate the effectiveness of these interventions.MethodsWe searched literature in eight databases and performed manual searches in relevant journals and the reference lists of retrieved articles. The study population included any HCW with potential occupational exposure to VPDs. We included experimental and quasi-experimental studies presenting interventions aimed at increasing HCWs' adherence to vaccination against VPDs. The post-intervention vaccination adherence rate was set as the main outcome. We included the effect of interventions in the random-effects and subgroup meta-analyses.ResultsThe systematic review considered 48 studies on influenza and Tdap vaccination from database and manual searches, and 43 were meta-analysed. A statistically significant, positive effect was seen in multi-component interventions in randomised controlled trials (relative risk (RR) = 1.37; 95% CI: 1.13-1.66) and in observational studies (RR = 1.43; 95% CI: 1.29-1.58). Vaccination adherence rate was higher in community care facilities (RR = 1.58; 95% CI: 1.49-1.68) than in hospitals (RR = 1.24; 95% CI: 0.76-2.05).ConclusionInterventions aimed at increasing HCWs' adherence to vaccination against VPDs are effective, especially multi-component ones. Future research should determine the most effective framework of interventions for each setting, using appropriate study design for their evaluation, and should compare intervention components to understand their contribution to the effectiveness.

Vaccine hesitancy among physicians: a qualitative study with general practitioners and paediatricians in Austria and Germany

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to understand reasons for vaccine hesitancy (VH) among general practioners (GPs) and paediatricians. We aim to analyse how and when the healthcare workers (HCWs) developed vaccine-hesitant views and how they transfer these to patients.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Semistructured interviews with vaccine-hesitant GPs and paediatricians were conducted in Austria and Germany using an explorative qualitative research design.

PARTICIPANTS

We contacted 41 physicians through letters and emails and 10 agreed to participate, five were male and five female.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Ten interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymised. The material was analysed inductively following a grounded theory approach with open coding using the software atlas.ti.

RESULTS

Key themes that were identified were education and career path, understanding of medicine and medical profession, experiences with vaccines, doctor-patient interactions and continuous education activities and the link to VH. GPs and paediatricians' vaccine-hesitant attitudes developed during their medical training and, in particular, during extracurricular training in homeopathy, which most of the participants completed. Most participants work in private practices rather than with contracts with social insurance because they are not satisfied with the health system. Furthermore, they are critical of biomedicine. Most of the interview partners do not consider themselves antivaccination, but are sceptical towards vaccines and especially point out the side effects. Most do not vaccinate in their practices and some do only occasionally. Their vaccine-hesitant views are often fostered through respective online communities of vaccine-hesitant HCWs.

CONCLUSIONS

More studies on a connection between complementary medicine and vaccine-hesitant views of HCWs are needed. Education about vaccines and infectious diseases among healthworkers must increase especially tailored towards the use of internet and social media. Physicians should be made aware that through time and empathy towards their patients they could have a positive impact on undecided patients and parents regarding vaccine decisions.

Investigation of COVID-19 vaccination among maintenance hemodialysis patients in Sichuan, China

AIM

To investigate the current status of COVID-19 vaccination in maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients and its influencing factors.

METHODS

In total, 585 patients undergoing regular hemodialysis in Sichuan Province of China from January to March 2022 were selected to complete a questionnaire survey on their knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Independent t tests and logistic multivariate analysis were used to analyze the influencing factors of COVID-19 vaccination in hemodialysis patients.

RESULTS

The survey showed that 37.44% of MHD patients had been vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine. Being married was associated with COVID-19 vaccination in patients with MHD (odds ratio [OR] = 1.969 95% CI 0 .870 ~ 4.453). MHD patients living in county areas have higher rates of COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 0.572 95% CI 0.301 ~ 1.087). Family /relatives/friends who are healthcare workers are associated with COVID-19 vaccination for MHD patients (OR = 1.840 95% CI 1.140 ~ 2.970). Other vaccination history within 5 years was a factor in COVID-19 vaccination for MHD patients (OR = 5.592 95% CI 2.997 ~ 10.434). Attitude (OR = 0.885 95% CI 0.808 ~ 0.905), and practice (OR = 0.756 95% CI 0.697 ~ 0.819) scores on the COVID-19 vaccination knowledge and practice questionnaire were related to the vaccination status of MHD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

MHD patients had lower rates of COVID-19 vaccination. Marital status, living environment, whether family/relatives/friends were medical workers, and the score of the COVID-19 vaccine knowledge and practice questionnaire were the factors influencing their vaccination status. Clinical attention should be given to the adverse reactions of COVID-19 vaccination in MHD patients to improve the awareness of primary medical staff on hemodialysis, and families and society should pay more attention to COVID-19 vaccination in MHD patients.

Exploring COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers in Zimbabwe: A mixed methods study

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.

High vaccine confidence and strong approval of the mandatory immunization schedule among Bulgarian general practitioners in 2022

In a context of recently decreasing childhood immunization coverage and low uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in Bulgaria, this study measures vaccine hesitancy among general practitioners (GPs) in the country, as they are central to forming patients' attitudes. In 2022, a face-to-face survey was conducted through a simple random sample from an exhaustive national database of Bulgarian GPs. This study measured attitudes on vaccine importance, safety, and effectiveness, and attitudes toward the Bulgarian immunization schedule. Information was collected on demographic and GP practice characteristics and possible predictors of vaccine confidence in order to test for associations with attitudes toward immunization. GP attitudes toward vaccines and the immunization schedule in Bulgaria were generally positive. Among 358 respondents, 351 (98%,95%CI96-99%) strongly agreed/agreed that vaccines are important, 352 (98%,95%CI96-99%) that vaccines are effective, and 341 (95%,95%CI93-97%) that vaccines are safe. 347 respondents (97%,95%CI95-98%) affirmed that "it's good that vaccines from the children's immunization schedule are mandatory", and 331 (92%,95%CI89-95%) agreed with the statement "Bulgaria's childhood immunization has my approval". Trust in information from official institutions was among the strongest predictors of vaccine confidence. Respondents' vaccine confidence levels are within the ranges reported by GPs in other European countries and above those reported within the general Bulgarian population. GPs' vaccine confidence is highly associated with trust in official institutions. It is important to maintain trust in official institutions and to support GPs in communicating vaccine knowledge with patients so that vaccine hesitancy in the general population is countered.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among health and social care workers during mass vaccination in Scotland

Health and social care workers (HSCWs) have an essential role in the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccination is an emotionally charged issue and perceptions of risk associated with COVID19 can contribute towards vaccine hesitancy (VH). The aim of this study was to explore the role of emotion and risk perception associated with HSCWs' uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine during the initial mass roll-out of the vaccine in Scotland. A cross-sectional online survey with a correlational design was used. An online survey was conducted with HSCWs (N = 1189) aged 18 to 67 years (M = 44.09 yrs, SD = 11.48) working in Scotland during the third lockdown period (26 December - 31 March 2021) of the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey collected data relating to sociodemographic characteristics, vaccine uptake and VH, emotions associated with the COVID-19 vaccine, and risk perception. Open-ended free text data were also collected on HSCWs' main reasons for VH. Most participants (83.96%) felt positively about the roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine, stating it would be beneficial for themselves and others to receive it. Nonetheless, 16.04% of HSCWs expressed VH. Occupational group, age, gender and risk perceptions did not affect variance in VH, but positive emotions associated with the COVID-19 vaccine and years of experience did. We emphasise the importance of future interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake by enhancing positive emotions and reducing ambivalent emotions associated with the COVID-19 vaccine particularly among less experienced HSCWs.

Vaccination willingness, vaccine hesitancy, and estimated coverage of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among healthcare workers in Tanzania: A call for action

BACKGROUND

The global COVID-19 pandemic presented an immense obstacle to public health, with vaccination emerging as a crucial measure to curb transmission. This study aimed to evaluate the willingness, hesitancy, and coverage of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Tanzania and reveal their concerns about SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and the reasons that might prevent them from getting vaccinated.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study using an anonymous online survey from October to November 2022. The multivariate logistic regression model explored the factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccine willingness, hesitancy, and coverage.

RESULTS

The study included 560 HCWs, with the largest group being doctors (47.9%), followed by nurses (26.9%) and other HCWs (25.2%). A total of 70.5% of HCWs reported being vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The primary driver for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was collective responsibility. A total of 81.4% of HCWs reported being willing to accept SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, while 62.5% of HCWs reported vaccine hesitancy. HCWs with higher educational qualifications were likelier to take the vaccine, while the respondents aged 18-30 years had the highest SARS-CoV-2 vaccination refusal (71.9%). We also investigated the role of HCWs as a source of information to promote COVID-19 vaccine uptake. 79.4% of HCWs provided information and advice on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

CONCLUSION

To increase vaccine acceptance among HCWs and the general population, targeted messaging is needed to deliver transparent information on vaccine safety, efficacy, and development.

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

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

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers in Cameroon and Nigeria: a web-based cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the determinants of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Cameroon and Nigeria.

METHODS

This analytic cross-sectional study was conducted from May to June 2021, including consenting HCWs aged ≥18 y identified using snowball sampling. Vaccine hesitancy was defined as indecisiveness or unwillingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Multilevel logistic regression yielded adjusted ORs (aORs) for vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

We included a total of 598 (about 60% women) participants. Little or no trust in the approved COVID-19 vaccines (aOR=2.28, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.20), lower perception of the importance of the vaccine on their personal health (5.26, 2.38 to 11.6), greater concerns about vaccine-related adverse effects (3.45, 1.83 to 6.47) and uncertainty about colleagues' acceptability of the vaccine (2.98, 1.62 to 5.48) were associated with higher odds of vaccine hesitancy. In addition, participants with chronic disease (aOR=0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.97) and higher levels of concerns about getting COVID-19 (0.40, 0.18 to 0.87) were less likely to be hesitant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCWs in this study was high and broadly determined by the perceived risk of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines on personal health, mistrust in COVID-19 vaccines and uncertainty about colleagues' vaccine acceptability.

Disturbances of menstrual cycle after immunization against SARS-CoV-2 and their risk factors: Cross-sectional clinical study

OBJECTIVE

Abnormalities of the menstrual cycle were reported after infection with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccination against it, but the available data are very heterogeneous, do not reflect intermenstrual variations or regional differences, and their risk factors are missing.

METHODS

We performed a survey-based study among 6383 employees and students of Ulm University Hospital in Germany between March 1 and 31, 2021. Attributes of menstrual cycles such as cycle length (CL), menses duration (MD), and bleeding volume (BV) were reported as categorical variables before and after immunization against SARS-CoV-2 (first, second, third vaccination or infection). Additionally, the potential risk factors for cycle changes were evaluated and all participants reported the subjective perception of changes, their duration, and time of occurrence.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 1726 participants. CL and BV significantly changed after vaccination, but not MD. The subjective perception showed only slight levels of agreement with the objective changes, with the highest Cohen's kappa for CL. The risk factors for the variations in CL were previous cycle irregularities, and risk factors for the changes in BV were age and body mass index. The combination of vaccines (homogenous or heterogeneous) and different types of immunization (infection and vaccination) had no significant effect on cycle irregularities.

CONCLUSION

In summary, immunization against SARS-CoV-2 causes changes in the characteristics of the menstrual cycle, which are mostly temporary. The individual risk factors, but not the type of immunization, can affect the mentioned changes.

Vaccine Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in Europe: A Systematic Review

This study analyzes vaccine hesitancy (VH) among healthcare workers (HCWs) in 15 European countries. We have undertaken a systematic review by synthesizing data from 46 articles (between 2015 and 2022) encompassing 55,612 subjects. Despite the heterogeneity of the methods in the various studies, we found that physicians had consistently higher vaccination rates than nurses across different countries and different vaccines. Physicians' average vaccination rate was 79% across a selection of vaccines, while that of nurses was 62%. Concerns regarding vaccine safety, information gaps, and the responsibility of healthcare authorities in managing VH are highlighted by qualitative insights. This research contributes to our comprehension of the ways in which VH among HCWs is impacted by healthcare roles, vaccine types, and regional disparities. The insights gleaned from this analysis can serve as a guide for targeted interventions aimed at increasing vaccine acceptance and coverage in Europe, ultimately strengthening public health.

Bulgarian General Practitioners' Communication Styles about Child Vaccinations, Mainly Focused on Parental Decision Making in the Context of a Mandatory Immunization Schedule

The communication practices of general practitioners in relation with vaccines have not been a topic of wide scientific interest. In this article, we outline them in the context of Bulgaria. A representative, cross-sectional, quantitative, face-to-face survey was conducted among 358 Bulgarian general practitioners in 2022 using simple random sampling. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis using questions about the role of the GPs, which measure models of communication. Based on the factor analysis, we distinguished four communication styles. They were called: active communicator, restrictive communicator, informing communicator, and strained communicator. One-way ANOVA and the T-test were carried out to explore the connections between factor scores (communication styles) and other variables. One of the most important results in the study was that the informing physician (emphasizing the choice of the parents) was the most common model in Bulgaria. This is somewhat contradictory, because of the mandatory status of most vaccines. We found connections between the communication styles and other variables-such as the type of settlement, having a hesitant parent in the practice, recommendations of non-mandatory vaccines, and experience with vaccine-preventable diseases. On the basis of the factor analysis and analysis of relationships with other variables, we reached the conclusion that in Bulgaria, hesitant parents are not sufficiently involved in active, effective communication about vaccines by GPs.

Pharmacists' approaches to vaccination consultations in Switzerland: a qualitative study comparing the roles of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and biomedicine

BACKGROUND

Many community pharmacies in Switzerland provide complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches in addition to providing biomedical services, and a few pharmacies specialise in CAM. A common perception is that CAM providers are sceptical towards, or opposed to, vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

Key objectives of this study are to examine the potential roles of biomedically oriented and CAM-specialised pharmacists regarding vaccine counselling and to better understand the association between vaccine hesitancy and CAM.

DESIGN

We conducted semistructured, qualitative interviews. Transcripts were coded and analysed using thematic analysis. Interview questions were related to: type of pharmaceutical care practised, views on CAM and biomedicine, perspectives on vaccination, descriptions of vaccination consultations in community pharmacies and views on vaccination rates.

SETTING

Qualitative interviews in three language regions of Switzerland (German, French and Italian).

PARTICIPANTS

We interviewed 18 pharmacists (N=11 biomedically oriented, N=7 CAM specialised).

RESULTS

Pharmacist participants expressed generally positive attitudes towards vaccination. Biomedically oriented pharmacists mainly advised customers to follow official vaccination recommendations but rarely counselled vaccine-hesitant customers. CAM-specialised pharmacists were not as enthusiastic advocates of the Swiss vaccination recommendations as the biomedically oriented pharmacists we interviewed. Rather, they considered that each customer should receive individualised, nuanced vaccination advice so that customers can reach their own decisions. CAM-specialised pharmacists described how mothers in particular preferred getting a second opinion when they felt insufficiently advised by biomedically oriented paediatricians.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination counselling in community pharmacies represents an additional option to customers who have unmet vaccination consultation needs and who seek reassurance from healthcare professionals (HCPs) other than physicians. By providing individualised vaccination counselling to vaccine-hesitant customers, CAM-specialised pharmacists are likely meeting specific needs of vaccine-hesitant customers. As such, research and implementation efforts should more systematically involve pharmacists as important actors in vaccination provision. CAM-specialised pharmacists particularly should not be neglected as they are important HCPs who counsel vaccine-hesitant customers.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine confidence among primary care providers in Kazakhstan, March-April 2021

Introduction

Vaccination is a critical public health intervention, and vaccine hesitancy is a major threat. Globally, confidence in COVID-19 vaccines has been low, and rates of routine immunizations decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Because healthcare providers are a trusted source of information on vaccination in Kazakhstan, it was vital to understand their knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) related to both routine and COVID-19 vaccines.

Methods

From March to April 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional study among the healthcare providers responsible for vaccination in 54 primary care facilities in three cities in Kazakhstan. All consenting providers anonymously completed structured online questionnaires at their place of work. A provider was classified as having COVID-19 vaccine confidence if they planned to get a COVID-19 vaccine, believed that COVID-19 vaccines are important to protect their community and either believed the vaccine was important to protect themselves or believed that getting a vaccine was safer than getting COVID-19. Statistical analysis included chi-square, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, and Poisson regression.

Results

Of 1,461 providers, 30% had COVID-19 vaccine confidence, 40% did not, and 30% would refuse vaccination. Participants were mostly female (92%) and ≤ 35 years old (57%). Additionally, 65% were nurses, 25% were family physicians, and 10% were pediatricians. Adequate KAP for routine vaccines was low (22, 17, and 32%, respectively). Adequate knowledge was highest among pediatricians (42%) and family physicians (28%) and lowest among nurses (17%). Misconceptions about vaccines were high; 54% believed that influenza vaccines cause flu, and 57% believed that there is a scientifically proven association between vaccination and autism and multiple sclerosis. About half (45%) of the practitioners felt confident answering patient vaccine-related concerns. In adjusted models, COVID-19 vaccine confidence was positively associated with adequate knowledge of vaccines (prevalence ratio: 1.2, 95% confidence interval: 1.0-1.4) and adequate attitudes related to routine vaccines (3.1, 2.7-3.6).

Conclusion

Our study uncovers critical areas for interventions to improve KAP related to routine immunizations and COVID-19 vaccine confidence among providers in Kazakhstan. The complex relationship between KAP of routine vaccines and COVID-19 vaccine confidence underscores the importance of addressing vaccine hesitancy more broadly and not focusing solely on COVID-19.

Addressing vaccine concerns through the spectrum of vaccine acceptance

RATIONALE/OBJECTIVE

Several studies have examined attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines, giving prominence to hesitancy and conceptual models that seek to explain its prevalence, mostly in high-income contexts. An alternative conceptual approach that prioritises an understanding of vaccine concerns, the rationality of the questions people have, the political and media ecologies that raise them, will help recommend ways in which such concerns can be addressed. This current study employs the Spectrum of Vaccine Acceptance as a conceptual framework to explain vaccine concerns, in a low-income context.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was designed by drawing on the extant literature on indirect impacts of COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was administered face to face to a stratified random sample of 459 healthcare professionals in Uganda, from 1st to July 31, 2021. Key findings from the survey were explored using focus group interviews. Descriptive analysis was performed to quantify key responses on socio-demographic characteristics, feelings and views about COVID-19 and vaccines. Qualitative themes from the survey and focus groups were explained through the framework of the Spectrum of Vaccine Acceptance.

RESULTS

Vaccine acceptance was the most dominant attitude among healthcare professionals, with 74.9% of all respondents (N = 224) having been vaccinated. The findings highlight a relationship between vaccine acceptance, vaccine questioning and vaccine hesitancy, in that nearly 60% (N = 127) of those that were already vaccinated had several concerns about the vaccines they had received, suggesting that questions do not necessarily equate to refusal. This led to a partial reframing of the Spectrum of Vaccine Acceptance.

CONCLUSION

Factors which determine and differentiate vaccine concerns among healthcare professionals in a low-income context show that rational concerns far outweigh non-sensical and conspiratorial views. The findings will act as a useful input into the importance of understanding and addressing vaccine concerns, and the role of managing information voids in pandemic management.

Efficacy and Safety of Vaccinations in Geriatric Patients: A Literature Review

With the progressive lengthening of the average age of the population, especially in some countries such as Italy, vaccination of the elderly is a fixed point on which most of the public health efforts are concentrating as epidemic infectious diseases, especially those of the winter, have a major impact on the progression of severe disease, hospitalization, and death. The protection of the elderly against acute infectious diseases should not only limit mortality but also have a positive impact on the fragility of these people in terms of less disability and fewer care needs. However, vaccination of the elderly population differs in efficacy and safety compared to that of other population categories since aging and the consequent loss of efficiency of the immune system lead to a reduction in the immunogenicity of vaccines without achieving a lasting antibody coverage. There are various strategies to avoid the failure of immunization by vaccines such as resorting to supplementary doses with adjuvant vaccines, increasing the dosage of the antigen used, or choosing to inoculate the serum relying on various routes of administration of the vaccine. Vaccination in the elderly is also an important factor in light of growing antibiotic resistance because it can indirectly contribute to combating antibiotic resistance, reducing theoretically the use of those agents. Furthermore, vaccination in old age reduces mortality from infectious diseases preventable with vaccines and reduces the same rate of resistance to antibiotics. Given the importance and complexity of the topic, in this review, we will deal with the main aspects of vaccination in the elderly and how it can influence mortality and healthcare costs, especially in those countries where population aging is more evident. Therefore, we conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed to identify all types of studies published up to 31 May 2023 that examined the association between vaccination and the elderly. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two reviewers (PC and TC) who independently extracted the following data and assessed the quality of each study.

Understanding Trust Determinants in a Live Chat Service on Familial Cancer: Qualitative Triangulation Study With Focus Groups and Interviews in Germany

BACKGROUND

In dealing with familial cancer risk, seeking web-based health information can be a coping strategy for different stakeholder groups (ie, patients, relatives, and those suspecting an elevated familial cancer risk). In the vast digital landscape marked by a varied quality of web-based information and evolving technologies, trust emerges as a pivotal factor, guiding the process of health information seeking and interacting with digital health services. This trust formation in health information can be conceptualized as context dependent and multidimensional, involving 3 key dimensions: information seeker (trustor), information provider (trustee), and medium or platform (application). Owing to the rapid changes in the digital context, it is critical to understand how seekers form trust in new services, given the interplay among these different dimensions. An example of such a new service is a live chat operated by physicians for the general public with personalized cancer-related information and a focus on familial cancer risk.

OBJECTIVE

To gain a comprehensive picture of trust formation in a cancer-related live chat service, this study investigates the 3 dimensions of trust-trustor, trustee, and application-and their respective relevant characteristics based on a model of trust in web-based health information. In addition, the study aims to compare these characteristics across the 3 different stakeholder groups, with the goal to enhance the service's trustworthiness for each group.

METHODS

This qualitative study triangulated the different perspectives of medical cancer advisers, advisers from cancer support groups, and members of the public in interviews and focus group discussions to explore the 3 dimensions of trust-trustor, trustee, and application-and their determinants for a new live chat service for familial cancer risk to be implemented at the German Cancer Information Service.

RESULTS

The results indicate that experience with familial cancer risk is the key trustor characteristic to using, and trusting information provided by, the live chat service. The live chat might also be particularly valuable for people from minority groups who have unmet needs from physician-patient interactions. Participants highlighted trustee characteristics such as ability, benevolence, integrity, and humanness (ie, not a chatbot) as pivotal in a trustworthy cancer live chat service. Application-related characteristics, including the reputation of the institution, user-centric design, modern technology, and visual appeal, were also deemed essential. Despite the different backgrounds and sociodemographics of the 3 stakeholder groups, many overlaps were found among the 3 trust dimensions and their respective characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Trust in a live chat for cancer information is formed by different dimensions and characteristics of trust. This study underscores the importance of understanding trust formation in digital health services and suggests potential enhancements for effective, trustworthy interactions in live chat services (eg, by providing biographies of the human medical experts to differentiate them from artificial intelligence chatbots).

Bibliometric and visual analysis of vaccination hesitancy research from 2013 to 2022

Although vaccination is regarded as one of the most significant achievements of public health, there also exists the phenomenon of vaccination hesitancy which refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. In this study, we conducted a bibliometric analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of vaccination hesitancy research from 2013 to 2022. All related publications were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection Database. Information on annual publications, countries, organizations, journals, authors, keywords, and documents was analyzed adopting the bibliometix R-package, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace software. A total of 4042 publications were enrolled. The annual publications increased slightly before 2020 but had an extremely dramatic increase from 2020 to 2022. The United States contributed the most articles and had the greatest collaboration with other countries and organizations. The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine was the most active institution. Vaccine was the most cited and influential journal while Vaccines was the most productive journal. It was Dube E who was the most productive authors with the highest h-index. The most frequent keywords were "vaccine hesitancy," "COVID-19," "SARS-CoV2," "immunization," "attitudes," and "willingness." Vaccination hesitancy to some extent hinders the achievement of global public health. The influencing factors vary across time, space, and vaccines. The COVID-19 pandemic and the development of COVID-19 vaccines have made this issue the focus of interest. The complexity and specific contexts of influencing factors of vaccination hesitancy require further study and will potentially be the focus of future research direction.

Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptability among Healthcare Workers in Kenya-A Mixed Methods Analysis

Healthcare workers (HCWs) were a priority group for COVID-19 vaccination. Adopting the World Health Organization's 3C and the expanded 5C vaccine hesitancy models, we assessed the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among HCWs in Kenya. In a mixed methods study, respondents were from eight selected counties across the country. An online survey (n = 746), key informant interviews (n = 18) and focus group discussions (n = 3) were conducted. The data were analyzed concurrently. Quantitative data showed that all the 3C antecedents were strong predictors of vaccine acceptability. The association of vaccine acceptability was strongest with convenience (aOR 20.13, 95% CI 9.01-44.96), then complacency (aOR 10.15, 95% CI 4.63-22.21) and confidence (aOR 6.37, 95% CI 2.90-14.02). Marital status was a significant independent factor associated with vaccine acceptability (aOR 2.70, 95% CI 1.20-6.08). Qualitatively, convenience presented as the no-cost availability of vaccines at the health facilities, whereas non-complacency manifested from the first-hand observed experience of COVID cases, and the need to protect oneself and family members. Confidence was mainly attributed to increased knowledge, resulting from multiple training sessions and trust in regulatory authorities. Other social factors including workplace pressure, religion and misinformation had a role in influencing HCW vaccination decisions. In the background of a pandemic, the 3C model is a strong predictor of vaccine acceptability, and making the vaccines easily available and convenient to HCWs significantly impacts their uptake.

Attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination of healthcare workers in Israel and vaccination rates during vaccine rollout

A new COVID-19 vaccine was introduced in a remarkably short period of time. Public and healthcare workers (HCWs) were concerned about the safety of the vaccine, especially in light of the use of new technologies. A review regarding attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination found a 22.5% hesitancy rate among HCWs. Online anonymous questionnaires were delivered using a web-based surveying platform to community HCWs in a central district in Israel from 3 to 19 January 2021. The real COVID-19 vaccination data were collected between the beginning of the vaccination rollout and the end of the month after the survey as well as the real vaccination rate among the general population. Of the 3,172 HCWs, 549 (17%) responded to the questionnaire. The highest positive attitude towards the vaccine was among physicians (95%), while nurses showed the highest level of hesitation (14%) for a specific sector (P < 0.05). However, the real vaccination rates were similar among physicians (63%) and nurses (62%). Surprisingly, the total vaccination rate of HCWs was substantially lower (52%) than that of the general population (71%). The main vaccination motivators were the social and economic effects of the COVID-19 epidemic. Focused strategies to reduce the level of hesitancy among HCWs are needed.

Exploring COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers in Zimbabwe: A mixed methods study

With COVID-19 no longer categorized as a public health emergency of international concern, vaccination strategies and priority groups for vaccination have evolved. Africa Centers 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 2905 healthcare workers employed at 37 facilities who participated in the study, 2818 (97%, 95% CI [92%-102%]) 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.

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

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

The Role of Medication Beliefs in COVID-19 Vaccine and Booster Uptake in Healthcare Workers: An Exploratory Study

Illness and medication beliefs have shown to predict COVID-19 vaccination behaviour in the general population, but this relationship has yet to be demonstrated in healthcare staff. This research aimed to explore the potential explanatory value of illness and medication beliefs on the COVID-19 vaccination uptake of a sample of patient-facing healthcare workers (HCWs). A web-based questionnaire-measuring beliefs about vaccinations (the BMQ), perceptions of COVID-19 (the BIPQ), vaccine hesitancy, and vaccine uptake-was targeted to HCWs via social media platforms between May-July 2022. Open text responses allowed participants to provide explanations for any delay in vaccine uptake. A total of 91 participants completed the questionnaire. Most respondents (77.1%, n = 64) had received three doses of the COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccination uptake (number of doses received) was predicted by Vaccine Concerns, Vaccine Hesitancy, and their Necessity-Concerns Differential score. Vaccine Hesitancy was predicted by Necessity, Concerns, and Overuse scores, as well as Necessity-Concerns Differential scores. Delay in Vaccine Uptake could only be predicted for Dose 3 (Booster). Qualitative data revealed that hesitant respondents were "unable to take time off work" for vaccination and that some had concerns over vaccine safety. In conclusion, illness and medication beliefs have potential value in predicting vaccine hesitancy and uptake in healthcare workers. Interventions to improve vaccination uptake in this population should address concerns about vaccine safety and releasing staff for vaccination booster appointments should be prioritised. Future research should further investigate the relationship between illness and medication beliefs and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in a larger sample of healthcare workers.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance, Attitude, Hesitancy, and Its Associated Factors among Wolaita Sodo University Students: A Mixed-Method Study

Background

Countries in the world have been experiencing the ongoing impact and spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) virus pandemic. The health and financial burden of the pandemic has prompted the need for timely and effective vaccination to be considered as the best strategy for controlling disease transmission. However, vaccine acceptability remains an area of concern in developing countries like Ethiopia.

Objective

To assess attitude, hesitancy in the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, and associated factors among health science students at Wolaita Sodo University.

Methods

A triangulated mixed-method study was conducted. Quantitative data were entered into SPSS Windows version 25 for analysis, and the qualitative data were transcribed using open code version 4.3. A binary logistic regression model was used to establish the association between dependent and independent variables. Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to measure the strengths of the association. Thematic approach was used for qualitative data analysis.

Results

A total of 352 students participated in this study. Having family members who were infected with COVID-19, information about COVID-19 vaccine, the need for a vaccine with the level of concern, intention to take COVID-19 vaccine, and academic year were strongly associated with vaccine acceptability. Graduating class and other senior students were about 4 and 2 times more likely to accept vaccination as compared to freshman-year students (AOR = 4.128; 95% CI: 1.351-12.610;P = 0.012) and (AOR = 2.195; 95% CI: 1.182-4.077; P value = 0.013), respectively. Even if 67% of students had a good attitude towards the vaccine, 56% of the students hesitated to take the vaccine.

Conclusion

The majority of respondents had a constructive attitude towards the COVID-19 vaccine, and only a few of them were vaccinated against the COVID-19 virus. It is of utmost importance to design an evidence-based strategy to increase the uptake of vaccination for healthcare students and other nonhealth science students in universities.

To Get Vaccinated or Not? The Vaccination Decision-Making by Healthcare Professionals Working in Haematology: A Qualitative Study

Haematological patients are more susceptible to infections. Vaccination has always been the most effective primary prevention strategy, even during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the efficacy of vaccines for some haematological patients is low. Although vaccination of Healthcare Workers (HCWs) could protect patients from vaccine-preventable diseases, there is evidence of a high level of hesitation among healthcare workers in Italy. The aim of this study was to explore the attitudes towards vaccination of HCWs caring for haematology patients. Qualitative descriptive design was conducted. Twenty-one HCWs were interviewed. Content analysis was applied to the qualitative data. The following themes were generated from the analysis: "Trust", "Decision-making process focusing on individual health", "Decision-making process focusing on community health", "Changing opinion", and "Two sides of vaccination commitment". The most hesitant HCWs were oriented towards individual health. They perceived a lack of benefit from vaccines, feared side effects, or were influenced by negative experiences of others. In contrast, community-health-oriented HCWs showed more positive attitudes towards vaccination. Some hesitant HCWs changed their opinion on vaccination because they began to reflect on the importance of vaccination for the community. The change in opinion of some HCWs interviewed provided insight into the importance of focusing organisational efforts on collective responsibility.

Why Turkish Parents Refuse Childhood Vaccination? A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Anti-vaccination is spreading among parents. In 2017, 23000 families in Turkey refused vaccinations for their children. Meanwhile an increase in infectious diseases was observed, which might be caused by vaccination rejection. The reasons why families do not vaccinate their children may be very different, such as side effects, or advocation for "healthy life" by gurus. However, the real reasons for vaccine refusal are unknown. Our aim is to determine the reasons for anti-vaccination in Turkey.

METHODS

In order to reveal the real reasons for not taking the vaccine, we planned to conduct interviews with the representatives of the vaccine rejection group using qualitative research methodology with the "grounded theory" method. We searched some anti-vaccination blogs to find candidates for interviews. Within the scope of our study, parental concerns about vaccinations were classified by analyzing the data obtained from semi-structured questions and interviews recorded with voice recorders in face-to-face interviews with 21 parents in 13 cities of Turkey.

RESULTS

The obtained findings were classified under the headings of ''mistrust'', ''vaccine efficacy-importance'', ''decision-making processes - bases'', and ''law-ethics''. Mistrust was the main theme, almost singularly, as the most important reason for vaccine rejection. The salient reasons for mistrusts were: Companies which produce vaccines especially international companies because of conspiratory beliefs; health authorities, because of the belief about non-transparency in epidemiologic data, immunization council etc. and healthcare professionals, because of their non-communicative and non-concerned attitude.

CONCLUSION

Mistrust is hard to overcome. The beliefs of the patients cannot be easily changed. As a result of our study, we made some recommendations for health authorities, healthcare professionals, companies and other related stakeholders.

Impact of social media news on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior

In order to take advantage of the power of social media to promote vaccination, this study reveals the mechanisms of positive and negative impacts of social media news on vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior. Based on the stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) framework, we developed a research model to understand the effects of vaccine safety news and risk news from social media (external stimuli) on individuals' psychological organism (i.e., safety perception and risk perception) and consequent behavioral response, vaccine hesitancy and vaccination behavior. The proposed model was tested by partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) on a sample gathered in China from September 2021 to November 2021 and from February 2022 to April 2022 (valid responses = 1579). The results found that the relationship between vaccine risk news from social media and risk perception was higher than the relationship between vaccine safety news from social media and safety perception. Individuals are more sensitive to vaccine risk news than safety news on social media. Moreover, both safety perception and risk perception explained the critical psychological mechanisms behind vaccine hesitancy. Interestingly, ego network density mitigated the effect of safety news on safety perception and the effect of risk news on risk perception. The findings contribute to the S-O-R model, the research on social media effects, and the literature on vaccination attitudes and behaviors. This study also informs public health officials about leveraging the power of social media to motivate the public to accept the COVID-19 vaccines.

Reasons for not getting COVID-19 vaccine in Ardabil, a Northwestern province in Iran: Based on an ecological approach

BACKGROUND

Understanding the reasons for not getting the COVID-19 vaccine can help to increase acceptability and tackle vaccine hesitancy and consequently reach high coverage for this new vaccine. Using an ecological approach, the reasons for not getting the vaccine in the Iranian population was investigated.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

This study was conducted from October to December 2021 on 426 participants who had not received the COVID-19 vaccine. The following subsets of questions were included in the questionnaire: intrapersonal level factors, interpersonal level factors, group and organization, and society and policy-making. Multivariable logistic regression was used, and the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for vaccine hesitancy (dependent variable) according to the reasons for not getting COVID vaccine scores (independent variable) using multivariable logistic regression in 3 different models, including Model 0: unadjusted, Model 1: adjusted for age, gender, and underlying disease, and Model 2: adjustment for age, gender, underlying disease, education, place of living, income, marital status, and employment.

RESULTS

A significant difference was found regarding gender between likely and not likely groups (P = 0.016). A significant association was observed between the vaccine hesitancy and interpersonal (unadjusted model: OR = 0.833 (CI: 0.738-0.942), P for trend = 0.003; model 1: OR = 0.820 (CI: 0.724-0.930), P for trend = 0.002; model 2: OR = 0.799 (CI: 0.703-0.909), P for trend = 0.001) and group and organization (unadjusted model: OR = 0.861 (CI: 0.783-0.948), P for trend = 0.002; model 1: OR = 0.864 (CI: 0.784-0.952, P for trend = 0.003; model 2:OR = 0.862 (CI: 0.781-0.951, P for trend = 0.003). There was no significant association between vaccine hesitancy and intrapersonal and society and policy-making (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that a high score of "interpersonal" and "group and organization" factors were associated with lower intention to COVID vaccine. Moreover, women had higher vaccination intentions than men.

Multi-Perspective Views and Hesitancy toward COVID-19 Vaccines: A Mixed Method Study

The worldwide uptake of COVID-19 vaccines was suboptimal throughout the pandemic; vaccine hesitancy played a principle role in low vaccine acceptance both globally and in Armenia. In order to understand the factors behind the slow vaccine uptake in Armenia, we aimed to explore the prevailing perceptions and experiences of healthcare providers and the general public related to COVID-19 vaccines. The study applied a convergent parallel mixed-methods study design (QUAL-quant) through in-depth interviews (IDI) and a telephone survey. We completed 34 IDIs with different physician and beneficiary groups and a telephone survey with 355 primary healthcare (PHC) providers. The IDIs found that physicians held variable views on the need for COVID-19 vaccination which, combined with mixed messaging in the media landscape, fueled the public’s vaccine hesitancy. The survey results were mostly consistent with the qualitative findings as 54% of physicians hypothesized that COVID-19 vaccines were rushed without appropriate testing and 42% were concerned about the safety of those vaccines. Strategies to improve vaccination rates must target the main drivers of hesitancy, such as physicians’ poor knowledge of specific vaccines and spiraling misconceptions about them. Meanwhile, timely educational campaigns with targeted messaging for the general public should address misinformation, promote vaccine acceptance, and empower their capacity to make decisions about their health.

Culture of vaccine acceptability or resistance: The curious case of Chile's COVID-19 vaccine rollout and anthropology's role in increasing vaccination uptake

Castillo and colleagues have described the curious case of Chile's COVID-19 vaccine rollout that how Chile has revealed a great success to vaccine a greater population. Interestingly, there are several factors responsible for that success and a lesson learnt for many countries who are lagging in this regard. Building on these authors arguments, I have defined the "culture of vaccine acceptability." In contrast, I explain the "culture of vaccine rejectability" based on own fieldwork in Pakistan. Chilean case has demonstrated how a culture is developed and influences vaccine uptake. For that, the countries lagging need to engage (medical) anthropologists as they are the culturologists.

Vaccine Acceptance, Knowledge, Attitude and Practices Regarding the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study among Dentists in Trinidad and Tobago

Background: This study’s aim was to assess Trinidad and Tobago dentists’ vaccine acceptance, knowledge, attitude and practices regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: All dentists registered with the Trinidad and Tobago Dental Association were invited to complete an online anonymous questionnaire between June and October 2021. Results: A total of 46.2% of dentists responded. The majority of respondents had excellent knowledge of COVID-19 (94.8%), use of personal protective equipment (98.7%) and N95 masks (93.5%), but had poor knowledge about the reuse of N95 masks (27.5%). A total of 34.9% were comfortable providing emergency care to positive or suspected cases of COVID-19, and 64.5% were afraid of becoming infected from a patient. PPE usage was reported at 97.4% and 67.3% for N95 masks. All surfaces of waiting areas were disinfected every 2 h by 59.2%. A total of 90.8% agreed to be vaccinated straight away if a vaccine were made available. Conclusion: Dentists in Trinidad and Tobago have good levels of knowledge, attitude, practices regarding COVID-19. Dentists also have high levels of vaccine acceptance and can play a role in advocating for the COVID-19 vaccine.

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.