1
|
Clari M, Albanesi B, Comoretto RI, Conti A, Renzi E, Luciani M, Ausili D, Massimi A, Dimonte V. Effectiveness of interventions to increase healthcare workers' adherence to vaccination against vaccine-preventable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis, 1993 to 2022. Euro Surveill 2024; 29:2300276. [PMID: 38426238 PMCID: PMC10986662 DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.es.2024.29.9.2300276] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2023] [Accepted: 12/13/2023] [Indexed: 03/02/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marco Clari
- Department of Sciences of Public Health and Paediatrics, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- These authors contributed equally to this work and shared first authorship
| | - Beatrice Albanesi
- Department of Sciences of Public Health and Paediatrics, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- These authors contributed equally to this work and shared first authorship
| | | | - Alessio Conti
- Department of Sciences of Public Health and Paediatrics, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Erika Renzi
- Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Michela Luciani
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano - Bicocca, Milan Italy
| | - Davide Ausili
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano - Bicocca, Milan Italy
| | - Azzurra Massimi
- Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Valerio Dimonte
- Department of Sciences of Public Health and Paediatrics, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schumacher S, Salmanton-García J, Liekweg A, Rolfes M, Seidel D, Mellinghoff SC, Cornely OA. Increasing influenza vaccination coverage in healthcare workers: analysis of an intensified on-site vaccination campaign during the COVID-19 pandemic. Infection 2023; 51:1417-1429. [PMID: 36853494 PMCID: PMC9972307 DOI: 10.1007/s15010-023-02007-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2023] [Accepted: 02/16/2023] [Indexed: 03/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Influenza infections have substantial impact on healthcare institutions. While vaccination is the most effective preventive measure against influenza infection, vaccination coverage in healthcare workers is low. The study investigates the impact of an intensified influenza vaccination campaign in a maximum-care hospital on influenza vaccination coverage in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020/21. METHODS Building on findings from our previously published review Schumacher et al. (Infection 49(3): 387, 2021), an intensified influenza vaccination campaign comprising a mobile vaccination team providing on-site vaccination and vaccination at a recurring central vaccination site in addition to promotional measures was performed and analysed regarding vaccination coverage. A survey querying vaccination motivation was performed. Campaign strategies and vaccination coverage of influenza seasons between 2017/18 and 2019/20 were analysed. RESULTS The influenza vaccination campaign 2020/21 led to a significant 2.4-fold increase yielding an overall vaccination coverage of 40% among healthcare workers. A significant increase in vaccination coverage was observed across all professional fields; especially among nurses, a 2.7-fold increase, reaching a vaccination coverage of 48%, was observed. The COVID-19 pandemic positively influenced vaccination decision in 72% of first time ever or first time in over ten years influenza vaccinees. Vaccination coverage during prior vaccination campaigns focusing on educational measures did not exceed 17%. CONCLUSION A mobile vaccination team providing on-site vaccination and vaccinations at a central vaccination site in addition to promotional measures can be implemented to increase influenza vaccination coverage in healthcare workers. Our concept can inform influenza and other vaccination campaigns for healthcare workers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sofie Schumacher
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, St. Elisabeth Hospital, Cologne, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Translational Research (CECAD), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Herderstr. 52, 50931, Cologne, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD) and Excellence Center for Medical Mycology (ECMM), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Bonn-Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Jon Salmanton-García
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Translational Research (CECAD), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Herderstr. 52, 50931, Cologne, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD) and Excellence Center for Medical Mycology (ECMM), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Bonn-Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Andrea Liekweg
- Pharmacy Department, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Muriel Rolfes
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Translational Research (CECAD), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Herderstr. 52, 50931, Cologne, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD) and Excellence Center for Medical Mycology (ECMM), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Bonn-Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Danila Seidel
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Translational Research (CECAD), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Herderstr. 52, 50931, Cologne, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD) and Excellence Center for Medical Mycology (ECMM), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Sibylle C Mellinghoff
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Translational Research (CECAD), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Herderstr. 52, 50931, Cologne, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD) and Excellence Center for Medical Mycology (ECMM), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Bonn-Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Oliver A Cornely
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Translational Research (CECAD), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Herderstr. 52, 50931, Cologne, Germany.
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD) and Excellence Center for Medical Mycology (ECMM), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
- German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Bonn-Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Clinical Trials Centre Cologne (ZKS Köln), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Collini F, Bonaccorsi G, Del Riccio M, Bruschi M, Forni S, Galletti G, Gemmi F, Ierardi F, Lorini C. Does Vaccine Confidence Mediate the Relationship between Vaccine Literacy and Influenza Vaccination? Exploring Determinants of Vaccination among Staff Members of Nursing Homes in Tuscany, Italy, during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Vaccines (Basel) 2023; 11:1375. [PMID: 37631943 PMCID: PMC10458978 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11081375] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2023] [Revised: 08/11/2023] [Accepted: 08/16/2023] [Indexed: 08/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low coverage of influenza vaccination in nursing home (NH) staff may be attributed to factors such as vaccine confidence (VC) and vaccine literacy (VL). Our study aimed to evaluate the role of VL and VC in predicting the intention to get the influenza vaccine in a sample of employees of NHs in Tuscany, Italy. METHODS Data from staff members in Tuscany were collected using an online questionnaire that examined influenza vaccination history, intentions, demographic information, health status, and VL. Statistical analyses explored the relationships between VC, VL, and vaccination intentions. RESULTS The study included 1794 respondents, (86.3%) and assistants/aides (58.1%), with a median age of 46 years. The intention to get vaccinated was significantly higher among those with health risk conditions, and there was a positive association between VC and VL, specifically its interactive/critical component. The mediation analysis showed that VC completely mediated the relationship between VL and the intention to get vaccinated, with significant effects observed in different subgroups. CONCLUSIONS VC is a key factor that mediates the effect of VL on vaccine intention. These results suggest that interventions aimed at improving VL alone may not be sufficient to increase vaccine uptake unless VC is also addressed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Collini
- Quality and Equity Unit, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, 50141 Florence, Italy
| | | | - Marco Del Riccio
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy
| | - Mario Bruschi
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy
| | - Silvia Forni
- Quality and Equity Unit, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, 50141 Florence, Italy
| | - Giacomo Galletti
- Quality and Equity Unit, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, 50141 Florence, Italy
| | - Fabrizio Gemmi
- Quality and Equity Unit, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, 50141 Florence, Italy
| | - Francesca Ierardi
- Quality and Equity Unit, Regional Health Agency of Tuscany, 50141 Florence, Italy
| | - Chiara Lorini
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Boyer J, König E, Friedl H, Pux C, Uhlmann M, Schippinger W, Krause R, Zollner-Schwetz I. Sustained Increase in Very Low Influenza Vaccination Coverage in Residents and Healthcare Workers of Long-Term Care Facilities in Austria after Educational Interventions. Vaccines (Basel) 2023; 11:1066. [PMID: 37376455 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11061066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2023] [Revised: 05/30/2023] [Accepted: 06/02/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are particularly at risk for influenza infections. We aimed to improve influenza vaccination coverage among residents and healthcare workers (HCWs) in four LTCFs by implementing educational programs and enhanced vaccination services. We compared vaccination coverage before and after the interventions (2017/18 and 2018/19 seasons). Data on vaccination adherence were recorded during a four-year observational period (2019/20 to 2022/23 seasons). Following the interventions, vaccination coverage increased significantly from 5.8% (22/377) to 19.1% (71/371) in residents and from 1.3% (3/234) to 19.7% (46/233) in HCWs (p < 0.001). During the observational period (2019/20 to 2022/23 seasons), vaccination coverage remained high in residents but decreased in HCWs. Vaccination adherence was significantly higher in residents and HCWs in LTCF 1 compared to the other three LTCFs. Our study suggests that a bundle of educational interventions and enhanced vaccination services can be an effective method for improving influenza vaccination coverage in LTCFs in both residents and HCWs. However, vaccination rates are still well below the recommended targets and further efforts are needed to increase vaccine coverage in our LTCFs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johannes Boyer
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, 8036 Graz, Austria
| | - Elisabeth König
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, 8036 Graz, Austria
| | - Herwig Friedl
- Institute of Statistics, Graz University of Technology, 8010 Graz, Austria
| | - Christian Pux
- Geriatric Health Centers of the City of Graz, 8020 Graz, Austria
| | - Michael Uhlmann
- Geriatric Health Centers of the City of Graz, 8020 Graz, Austria
| | | | - Robert Krause
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, 8036 Graz, Austria
| | - Ines Zollner-Schwetz
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, 8036 Graz, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Vilhelmsson A, Sant'Anna A, Wolf A. Nudging healthcare professionals to improve treatment of COVID-19: a narrative review. BMJ Open Qual 2021; 10:e001522. [PMID: 34887299 PMCID: PMC8662583 DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2021-001522] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2021] [Accepted: 11/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Andreas Vilhelmsson
- Centre for Person-Centred Care (GPCC), University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Lund University Faculty of Medicine, Lund, Sweden
| | | | - Axel Wolf
- Centre for Person-Centred Care (GPCC), University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Berry SD, Baier RR, Syme M, Gouskova N, Bishnoi C, Patel U, Leitson M, Gharpure R, Stone ND, Link-Gelles R, Gifford DR. Strategies associated with COVID-19 vaccine coverage among nursing home staff. J Am Geriatr Soc 2021; 70:19-28. [PMID: 34741529 PMCID: PMC8657529 DOI: 10.1111/jgs.17559] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2021] [Revised: 10/08/2021] [Accepted: 10/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Background After the first of three COVID‐19 vaccination clinics in U.S. nursing homes (NHs), the median vaccination coverage of staff was 37.5%, indicating the need to identify strategies to increase staff coverage. We aimed at comparing the facility‐level activities, policies, incentives, and communication methods associated with higher staff COVID‐19 vaccination coverage. Methods Design. Case–control analysis. Setting. Nationally stratified random sample of 1338 U.S. NHs participating in the Pharmacy Partnership for Long‐Term Care Program. Participants. Nursing home leadership. Measurement. During February 4–March 2, 2021, we surveyed NHs with low (<35%), medium (40%–60%), and high (>75%) staff vaccination coverage, to collect information on facility strategies used to encourage staff vaccination. Cases were respondents with medium and high vaccination coverage, whereas controls were respondents with low coverage. We used logistic regression modeling, adjusted for county and NH characteristics, to identify strategies associated with facility‐level vaccination coverage. Results We obtained responses from 413 of 1338 NHs (30.9%). Compared with facilities with lower staff vaccination coverage, facilities with medium or high coverage were more likely to have designated frontline staff champions (medium: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.6, 95% CI 1.3–10.3; high: aOR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1–7.7) and set vaccination goals (medium: aOR 2.4, 95% 1.0–5.5; high: aOR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6–8.3). NHs with high vaccination coverage were more likely to have given vaccinated staff rewards such as T‐shirts compared with NHs with low coverage (aOR 3.8, 95% CI 1.3–11.0). Use of multiple strategies was associated with greater likelihood of facilities having medium or high vaccination coverage: For example, facilities that used ≥9 strategies were three times more likely to have high staff vaccination coverage than facilities using <6 strategies (aOR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2–8.9). Conclusions Use of designated champions, setting targets, and use of non‐monetary awards were associated with high NH staff COVID‐19 vaccination coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah D Berry
- Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Medicine, and Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Rosa R Baier
- Center for Long-Term Care Quality & Innovation, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.,Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
| | - Maggie Syme
- Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Natalia Gouskova
- Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Courtney Bishnoi
- Center for Health Policy and Evaluation in Long-Term Care, American Health Care Association/National Center for Assisted Living, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Urvi Patel
- Center for Health Policy and Evaluation in Long-Term Care, American Health Care Association/National Center for Assisted Living, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Michael Leitson
- Center for Health Policy and Evaluation in Long-Term Care, American Health Care Association/National Center for Assisted Living, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Radhika Gharpure
- COVID-19 Response Team, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Nimalie D Stone
- COVID-19 Response Team, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Ruth Link-Gelles
- COVID-19 Response Team, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.,US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, Rockville, Maryland, USA
| | - David R Gifford
- Center for Long-Term Care Quality & Innovation, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.,Center for Health Policy and Evaluation in Long-Term Care, American Health Care Association/National Center for Assisted Living, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Silva MT, Galvao TF, Chapman E, da Silva EN, Barreto JOM. Dissemination interventions to improve healthcare workers' adherence with infection prevention and control guidelines: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Implement Sci 2021; 16:92. [PMID: 34689810 PMCID: PMC8542414 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-021-01164-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2021] [Accepted: 10/09/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged health systems worldwide since 2020. At the frontline of the pandemic, healthcare workers are at high risk of exposure. Compliance with infection prevention and control (IPC) should be encouraged at the frontline. This systematic review aimed to assess the effects of dissemination interventions to improve healthcare workers’ adherence with IPC guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases in the workplace. Methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs that assessed the effect of any dissemination strategy in any healthcare settings. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. We synthesized data using random-effects model meta-analysis in Stata 14.2. Results We identified 14 RCTs conducted from 2004 to 2020 with over 65,370 healthcare workers. Adherence to IPC guidelines was assessed by influenza vaccination uptake, hand hygiene compliance, and knowledge on IPC. The most assessed intervention was educational material in combined strategies (plus educational meetings, local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, reminders, tailored interventions, monitoring the performance of the delivery of health care, educational games, and/or patient-mediated interventions). Combined dissemination strategies compared to usual routine improve vaccination uptake (risk ratio [RR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54 to 1.81, moderate-certainty evidence), and may improve hand hygiene compliance (RR 1.70; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.83, moderate-certainty). When compared to single strategies, combined dissemination strategies probably had no effect on vaccination uptake (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07, low-certainty), and hand hygiene compliance (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.36, low-certainty). Knowledge of healthcare workers on IPC improved when combined dissemination strategies were compared with usual activities, and the effect was uncertain in comparison to single strategy (very low-certainty evidence). Conclusions Combined dissemination strategies increased workers’ vaccination uptake, hand hygiene compliance, and knowledge on IPC in comparison to usual activities. The effect was negligible when compared to single dissemination strategies. The adoption of dissemination strategies in a planned and targeted way for healthcare workers may increase adherence to IPC guidelines and thus prevent dissemination of infectious disease in the workplace. Trial registration Protocol available at http://osf.io/aqxnp.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Tais Freire Galvao
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Janssen C, Maillard A, Bodelet C, Claudel AL, Gaillat J, Delory T. Hesitancy towards COVID-19 Vaccination among Healthcare Workers: A Multi-Centric Survey in France. Vaccines (Basel) 2021; 9:547. [PMID: 34067490 PMCID: PMC8224571 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines9060547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2021] [Revised: 05/10/2021] [Accepted: 05/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Vaccination programs against COVID-19 are being scaled up. We aimed to assess the effects of vaccine characteristics on vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers in a multi-center survey conducted within French healthcare facilities from 1 December 2020 to 26 March 2021. We invited any healthcare workers naïve of COVID-19 vaccination to complete an online self-questionnaire. They reported on their socio-demographic characteristics, as well as their perception and beliefs towards vaccination. We measured their willingness to get vaccinated in eight scenarios for candidates' vaccines presented sequentially (1 to 4-point scale). Candidates' vaccines varied for efficacy (25%, 50%, 100%), length of immunization (1 year or lifetime), frequency (<1/100, <1/10,000), and severity (none, moderate, severe) of adverse events. We analyzed 4349 healthcare workers' responses with interpretable questionnaires. The crude willingness to get vaccinated was 53.2% and increased over time. We clustered the trajectories of responses using an unsupervised classification algorithm (k-means) and identified four groups of healthcare workers: those willing to get vaccinated in any scenario (18%), those not willing to get vaccinated at all (22%), and those hesitating but more likely to accept (32%) or reject (28%) the vaccination depending on the scenario. In these last two subgroups, vaccine acceptance was growing with age, educational background and was higher among men with condition. Compared to an ideal vaccine candidate, a 50% reduced efficacy resulted in an average drop in acceptance by 0.8 (SD ± 0.8, -23.5%), while it was ranging from 1.4 (SD ± 1.0, -38.4%) to 2.1 (SD ± 1.0, -58.4%) in case of severe but rare adverse event. The acceptance of a mandatory immunization program was 29.6% overall and was positively correlated to the willingness to get vaccinated, ranging from 2.4% to 60.0%. Even if healthcare workers represent a heterogeneous population, most (80%) could accept the vaccination against COVID-19. Their willingness to get the vaccine increased over time and as immunization programs became available. Among hesitant professionals, the fear of adverse events was the main concern. Targeted information campaigns reassuring about adverse events may increase vaccine coverage, in a population with a strong opinion about mandatory immunization programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cécile Janssen
- Centre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois, Infectious Diseases Unit, F-74374 Annecy, France;
| | - Alexis Maillard
- Centre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois, Clinical Research Unit, F-74374 Annecy, France; (A.M.); (A.-L.C.); (J.G.)
| | - Céline Bodelet
- Laboratoire Inter-universitaire de Psychologie (LIP-PC2S), Université Grenoble, Alpes 1251 Avenue Centrale, 38400 Saint-Martin-d’Hères, France;
| | - Anne-Laure Claudel
- Centre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois, Clinical Research Unit, F-74374 Annecy, France; (A.M.); (A.-L.C.); (J.G.)
| | - Jacques Gaillat
- Centre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois, Clinical Research Unit, F-74374 Annecy, France; (A.M.); (A.-L.C.); (J.G.)
| | - Tristan Delory
- Centre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois, Clinical Research Unit, F-74374 Annecy, France; (A.M.); (A.-L.C.); (J.G.)
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Increasing influenza vaccination coverage in healthcare workers: a review on campaign strategies and their effect. Infection 2020; 49:387-399. [PMID: 33284427 PMCID: PMC7720031 DOI: 10.1007/s15010-020-01555-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2020] [Accepted: 11/06/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Purpose Increasing influenza vaccination coverage in healthcare workers is a challenge. Especially during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, high vaccination coverage should be attained. This review analyzed strategies to increase influenza vaccination coverage in healthcare workers. Methods A literature search using PubMed was conducted and 32 publications on influenza vaccination campaigns for healthcare workers were reviewed for key interventions and resulting vaccination coverage. Results Among key interventions analyzed, mandatory vaccination policies or multifaceted campaigns including a vaccinate-or-wear-a-mask policy as well as mandatory declination reached vaccination coverage in healthcare workers of over 90%. Although campaigns solely based on education and promotion or on-site-vaccination did not regularly exceed an absolute vaccination coverage of 40%, a substantial relative increase in vaccination coverage was reached by implementation of these strategies. Conclusion Mandatory vaccination policies are effective measures to achieve high overall vaccination coverage. In clinics where policies are infeasible, multifaceted campaigns comprising on-site vaccination, vaccination stands and educational and promotional campaigns as well as incentives should be implemented. Lessons learned from influenza campaigns could be implemented in future SARS-CoV-2 vaccination campaigns.
Collapse
|
10
|
Promoting Influenza Vaccination among Staff of Nursing Homes According to Behavioral Insights: Analyzing the Choice Architecture during a Nudge-Based Intervention. Vaccines (Basel) 2020; 8:vaccines8040600. [PMID: 33053868 PMCID: PMC7712811 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines8040600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2020] [Revised: 10/05/2020] [Accepted: 10/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: Influenza vaccination uptake in nursing home (NH) workers is uncommon. The aim of this study was to understand the choice architecture of influenza vaccination acceptance or refusal among them and to promote vaccination acceptance using the nudge approach. (2) Methods: In autumn 2019, a nudge intervention with a contextual qualitative analysis of choice architecture of vaccination was performed among the staff of eight Tuscan NHs. In summer 2020, a cross-sectional study including the staff of 111 NHs (8 in the nudge, 103 in the comparison group) was conducted to assess the impact of the nudge intervention in promoting vaccination uptake. (3) Results: Macro-categories of motivations for vaccination uptake that emerged from the qualitative analysis were risk perception, value dimension, and trust, while those regarding refusal were risk perception, distrust, value dimension, and reasons related to one’s health. Considering the cross-sectional study, influenza vaccination uptake in the 2018–2019 season was similar in the two groups (23.6% vs. 22.2% respectively, in the nudge and comparison group), but significantly different in the 2019–2020 season: 28% in the nudge vs. 20% in the comparison group. Also, the intention to get the vaccine in the 2020–2021 season was significantly different in the two groups: 37.9% in the nudge and 30.8% in the comparison group. (4) Conclusions: Nudge interventions-simple, fast, low cost-could be effective in promoting vaccination acceptance among NH workers and the analysis of choice architecture could be useful in improving tailored, new nudge interventions aimed at modifying irrational biased and cognitive errors.
Collapse
|
11
|
Rauh LD, Lathan HS, Masiello MM, Ratzan SC, Parker RM. A Select Bibliography of Actions to Promote Vaccine Literacy: A Resource for Health Communication. JOURNAL OF HEALTH COMMUNICATION 2020; 25:843-858. [PMID: 33719890 DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2021.1878312] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
In this bibliography, the researchers provide an introduction to the available evidence base of actions to promote vaccine literacy. The research team organized interventions to create a tool that can inform health communicators and practitioners seeking a resource focused on strategy and implementation design for actions that support vaccine literacy. This scoping bibliography is honed specifically to respond to the urgency of the current pandemic, when supporting and increasing vaccine literacy offers promise for achieving the critically needed high levels of vaccination. Over the course of the coming months and year, this bibliography will be a dynamic and "living" document hosted and maintained on vaccineliteracy.com.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren D Rauh
- Department of Community Health and Social Sciences, City University of New York Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hannah S Lathan
- Department of Community Health and Social Sciences, City University of New York Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Scott C Ratzan
- Department of Community Health and Social Sciences, City University of New York Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ruth M Parker
- Division of General Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Mellucci C, Tamburrano A, Cassano F, Galletti C, Sguera A, Damiani G, Laurenti P. Vaccine Hesitancy among Master's Degree Students in Nursing and Midwifery: Attitude and Knowledge about Influenza Vaccination. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2020; 17:E7191. [PMID: 33019559 PMCID: PMC7579204 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17197191] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2020] [Revised: 09/27/2020] [Accepted: 09/29/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Influenza vaccination among healthcare workers may reduce morbidity and protect fragile patients. Most of the evidence concerning the vaccine hesitancy of healthcare workers reported lack of knowledge and wrong attitude. The aims of this study were to explore the knowledge and attitudes about influenza vaccination among master's degree students in Nursing and Midwifery, and to evaluate the effectiveness of their involvement in the hospital vaccination campaign in order to increase intention to receive immunization. The students of nurses and midwives were involved in the vaccination sessions of the 2018-19 hospital campaign. They were recruited to complete an online survey. Students of the 2nd year (involved in the vaccination campaign) and the 1st year (not involved) were compared. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed for data analysis. Students who intend to receive influenza vaccination in the following year registered a percentage of 83.6% and showed an overall attitude of 66.8%. The involvement of the students in the vaccination campaign led to a significant increase in their positive vaccination attitude (80.9% vs. 87.0%) and in their intention to receive flu vaccination in the following year (67.7% vs. 100%). A positive attitude towards vaccinations was observed by nurses and midwives. Their involvement in the planning and activities during the vaccination campaign could positively influence their opinions and intention to receive vaccination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudia Mellucci
- Section of Hygiene, Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy; (C.M.); (F.C.); (C.G.); (G.D.); (P.L.)
| | - Andrea Tamburrano
- Section of Hygiene, Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy; (C.M.); (F.C.); (C.G.); (G.D.); (P.L.)
| | - Fabiana Cassano
- Section of Hygiene, Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy; (C.M.); (F.C.); (C.G.); (G.D.); (P.L.)
| | - Caterina Galletti
- Section of Hygiene, Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy; (C.M.); (F.C.); (C.G.); (G.D.); (P.L.)
- Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy;
| | - Anna Sguera
- Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy;
| | - Gianfranco Damiani
- Section of Hygiene, Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy; (C.M.); (F.C.); (C.G.); (G.D.); (P.L.)
- Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy;
| | - Patrizia Laurenti
- Section of Hygiene, Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy; (C.M.); (F.C.); (C.G.); (G.D.); (P.L.)
- Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Bechini A, Lorini C, Zanobini P, Mandò Tacconi F, Boccalini S, Grazzini M, Bonanni P, Bonaccorsi G. Utility of Healthcare System-Based Interventions in Improving the Uptake of Influenza Vaccination in Healthcare Workers at Long-Term Care Facilities: A Systematic Review. Vaccines (Basel) 2020; 8:vaccines8020165. [PMID: 32260594 PMCID: PMC7348755 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines8020165] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2020] [Revised: 03/31/2020] [Accepted: 04/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Healthcare workers (HCWs) in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) can represent a source of influenza infection for the elderly. While flu vaccination coverage (VC) is satisfactory in the elderly, HCWs are less likely to be vaccinated. There is no definitive evidence on which types of healthcare system-based interventions at LTCFs would be more useful in improving the vaccination uptake among HCWs. We performed a systematic review in different databases (Pubmed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Health Evidence, Web of Science, Cinahl) to provide a synthesis of the available studies on this topic. Among the 1177 articles screened by their titles and abstracts, 27 were included in this review. Most of the studies reported multiple interventions addressed to improve access to vaccination, eliminate individual barriers, or introduce policy interventions. As expected, mandatory vaccinations seem to be the most useful intervention to increase the vaccination uptake in HCWs. However, our study suggests that better results in the vaccination uptake in HCWs were obtained by combining interventions in different areas. Educational campaigns alone could not have an impact on vaccination coverage. LTCFs represent an ideal setting to perform preventive multi-approach interventions for the epidemiological transition toward aging and chronicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela Bechini
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Viale GB Morgagni 48, 50134 Florence, Italy; (A.B.); (C.L.); (S.B.); (P.B.); (G.B.)
| | - Chiara Lorini
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Viale GB Morgagni 48, 50134 Florence, Italy; (A.B.); (C.L.); (S.B.); (P.B.); (G.B.)
| | - Patrizio Zanobini
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Viale GB Morgagni 48, 50134 Florence, Italy; (A.B.); (C.L.); (S.B.); (P.B.); (G.B.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-366-343-5179
| | - Francesco Mandò Tacconi
- Nuovo Ospedale delle Apuane, North-West Tuscany LHU, Via Enrico Mattei, 21, 54100 Massa, Italy;
| | - Sara Boccalini
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Viale GB Morgagni 48, 50134 Florence, Italy; (A.B.); (C.L.); (S.B.); (P.B.); (G.B.)
| | - Maddalena Grazzini
- Careggi, University Hospital, Largo G. Alessandro Brambilla, 3, 50134 Florence, Italy;
| | - Paolo Bonanni
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Viale GB Morgagni 48, 50134 Florence, Italy; (A.B.); (C.L.); (S.B.); (P.B.); (G.B.)
| | - Guglielmo Bonaccorsi
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Viale GB Morgagni 48, 50134 Florence, Italy; (A.B.); (C.L.); (S.B.); (P.B.); (G.B.)
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Health Literacy, Vaccine Confidence and Influenza Vaccination Uptake among Nursing Home Staff: A Cross-Sectional Study Conducted in Tuscany. Vaccines (Basel) 2020; 8:vaccines8020154. [PMID: 32235481 PMCID: PMC7348841 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines8020154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/29/2020] [Revised: 03/26/2020] [Accepted: 03/28/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
The aim of this cross-sectional study is to address whether health literacy (HL) and vaccine confidence are related with influenza vaccination uptake among staff of nursing homes (NHs). It was conducted in Tuscany (Italy) in autumn 2018, including the staff of 28 NHs. A questionnaire was used to collect individual data regarding influenza vaccination in 2016–2017 and 2017–2018 seasons; the intention to be vaccinated in 2018–2019; as well as demographic, educational, and health information. It included also the Italian Medical Term Recognition (IMETER) test to measure HL and eight Likert-type statements to calculate a Vaccine Confidence Index (VCI). The number of employees that fulfilled the questionnaire was 710. The percentage of influenza vaccination uptake was low: only 9.6% got vaccinated in 2016–2017 and 2017–2018 and intended to vaccinate in 2018–2019. The VCI score and the IMETER-adjusted scores were weakly correlated (Rho = 0.156). At the multinomial logistic regression analysis, the VCI was a positive predictor of vaccination uptake. In conclusion, vaccine confidence is the strongest predictor of influenza vaccination uptake among the staff of NHs. The development of an adequate vaccine literacy measurement tool could be useful to understand whether skills could be related to vaccine confidence.
Collapse
|