COVID-19 Vaccinations in EMS Professionals: Prevalence and Predictors

COVID-19 and coworker conflict among emergency medical service clinicians

Objectives

Safety policies enacted in response to the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have greatly affected the working environments of emergency medical service (EMS) clinicians. Our objective was to evaluate whether changes in the EMS environment during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with increased workplace conflict.

Methods

This evaluation was a cross-sectional analysis of a random sample of 19,497 national certified EMS clinicians who were selected to receive an electronic survey in April 2022. The survey included an assessment of their level of stress using the Perceived Stress Scale instrument and examined changes in their working environment they perceived had occurred due to the emergence of COVID-19. Logistic regression modeling was used to evaluate the associations between workforce demographics, infrastructure, scheduling, and policies to and COVID-19-induced coworker conflict.

Results

A total of 1686 responses were evaluated (response rate 10%). We found that COVID-19 was reported to have exacerbated conflict between coworkers in 51% of responses. Respondents who perceived an increase in coworker conflict due to COVID-19 self-reported higher levels of stress than the rest of the respondents. Perceptions of the impact of COVID-19 on conflict had also an association with the level of certification, indicating that national registered paramedics were more likely than emergency medical technicians to report coworker conflict due to COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.61). Multivariable analysis highlighted the impact of mandatory overtime policies, reported by 27% of the respondents and associated with higher odds of exacerbated coworker conflict in our model (AOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.62-2.60).

Conclusions

These findings indicate that conflict can be considered a potential indicator of high levels of stress in the EMS workforce and may be a reliable signal to monitor when implementing mandates that affect EMS clinicians and their workloads.

Identifying beliefs driving COVID-19 vaccination: Lessons for effective messaging

Increasing vaccination acceptance has been essential during the COVID-19 pandemic and in preparation for future public health emergencies. This study aimed to identify messaging strategies to encourage vaccine uptake by measuring the drivers of COVID-19 vaccination among the general public. A survey to assess COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and hesitancy was advertised on Facebook in February-April 2022. The survey included items asking about COVID-19 vaccination status and participant demographics, and three scales assessing medical mistrust, perceived COVID-19 risk, and COVID-19 vaccine confidence (adapted from the Oxford COVID-19 vaccine confidence and complacency scale). The main outcome was vaccination, predicted by patient demographics and survey scale scores. Of 1,915 survey responses, 1,450 (75.7%) were included, with 1,048 (72.3%) respondents reporting they had been vaccinated. In a multivariable regression model, the COVID-19 vaccine confidence scale was the strongest predictor of vaccination, along with education level and perceived COVID-19 risk. Among the items on this scale, not all were equally important in predicting COVID-19 vaccination. The items that best predicted vaccination, at a given score on the COVID-19 vaccine confidence scale, included confidence that vaccine side effects are minimal, that the vaccine will work, that the vaccine will help the community, and that the vaccine provides freedom to move on with life. This study improved our understanding of perceptions most strongly associated with vaccine acceptance, allowing us to consider how to develop messages that may be particularly effective in encouraging vaccination among the general public for both the COVID-19 pandemic and future public health emergencies.

Associations between COVID-19 Death Exposure and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Vaccine Uptake

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to determine the relation between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) death exposure and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccine uptake among Arkansans, controlling for sociodemographic factors.

METHODS

Data were collected from a telephone survey administered in Arkansas between July 12 and July 30, 2021 (N = 1500) via random digit dialing of telephone landlines and cellular telephones. Weighted data were used to estimate regressions.

RESULTS

Controlling for sociodemographic variables, COVID-19 death exposure was not a significant predictor of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (P = 0.423) or COVID-19 vaccine uptake (P = 0.318). Younger individuals, those with lower levels of education, and those who live in rural counties were more likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant. Older individuals, Hispanic/Latinx individuals, those who reported higher levels of education, and those who reported living in urban counties were more likely to have reported receiving the COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Many efforts to promote COVID-19 vaccines have focused on prosocial norms, including encouraging vaccination to protect the community from COVID-19 infection and death; however, COVID-19 death exposure was not related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy or uptake in the present study. Future research should examine whether prosocial messaging is effective in decreasing hesitancy or motivating some individuals to receive the vaccine among those who have been exposed to COVID-19 deaths.

Vaccine mistrust among Black individuals in Canada: The major role of health literacy, conspiracy theories, and racial discrimination in the healthcare system

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected Black communities in Canada in terms of infection and mortality rates compared to the general population. Despite these facts, Black communities are among those with the highest level of COVID-19 vaccine mistrust (COVID-19 VM). We collected novel data to analyze the sociodemographic characteristics and factors associated with COVID-19 VM among Black communities in Canada. A survey was conducted among a representative sample of 2002 Black individuals (51.66% women) aged 14-94 years (M = 29.34; SD = 10.13) across Canada. Vaccine mistrust was assessed as the dependent variable and conspiracy theories, health literacy, major racial discrimination in healthcare settings, and sociodemographic characteristics of participants were assessed as independent variables. Those with a history of COVID-19 infection had higher COVID-19 VM score (M = 11.92, SD = 3.88) compared to those with no history of infection (M = 11.25, SD = 3.83), t (1999) = -3.85, p < 0.001. Participants who reported having experienced major racial discrimination in healthcare settings were more likely to report COVID-19 VM (M = 11.92, SD = 4.03) than those who were not (M = 11.36, SD = 3.77), t (1999) = -3.05, p = 0.002. Results also showed significant differences for age, education level, income, marital status, provinces, language, employment status, and religion. The final hierarchical linear regression showed that conspiracy beliefs (B = 0.69, p < 0.001) were positively associated with COVID-19 VM, while health literacy (B = -0.05, p = 0.002) was negatively associated with it. The mediated moderation model showed that conspiracy theories completely mediated the association between racial discrimination and vaccine mistrust (B = 1.71, p < 0.001). This association was also completely moderated by the interaction between racial discrimination and health literacy (B = 0.42, p = 0.008), indicating that despite having a high level of health literacy, those who experienced major racial discrimination in health services developed vaccine mistrust. This first study on COVID-19 VM exclusively among Black individuals in Canada provides data that can significantly impact the development of tools, trainings, strategies, and programs to make the health systems free of racism and increase their confidence in vaccination for COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

Concerns about COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Law Enforcement Officers: Prevalence and Risk Factor Data from a Nationally Representative Sample in the United States

Scant research exists on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among law enforcement officers, hindering health messaging development for officers and, by extension, the communities they serve. This paper’s goal was to address this gap by providing the necessary data to better under hesitancy to guide training and policy interventions for officers. The objective was to conduct the first nationally representative survey of officers on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its correlates. We collected data from February 2021 to March 2022 on officer COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and examined their responses in terms of sociodemographic factors, health status, and job characteristics. We found that 40% of officers were COVID-19 vaccine hesitant. We found that officers with higher education, older officers, officers with more law enforcement experience, officers who received recent health checkups, and commanders (compared to line officers) were less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant. Critically, officers working in law enforcement agencies that provided masks for COVID-19 protection were less likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant (compared to agencies not providing masks). Ongoing research is needed to understand how evolving attitudes and barriers toward vaccination change over time for officers and to test messaging to better align officers with health guidelines.

Current Evidence for Infection Prevention and Control Interventions in Emergency Medical Services: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to summarize current evidence from the United States on the effectiveness of practices and interventions for preventing, recognizing, and controlling occupationally acquired infectious diseases in Emergency Medical Service (EMS) clinicians.

REPORT AND METHODS

PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and SCOPUS were searched from January 1, 2006 through March 15, 2022 for studies in the United States that involved EMS clinicians and firefighters, reported on one or more workplace practices or interventions that prevented or controlled infectious diseases, and included outcome measures. Eleven (11) observational studies reported on infection prevention and control (IPC) practices providing evidence that hand hygiene, standard precautions, mandatory vaccine policies, and on-site vaccine clinics are effective. Less frequent handwashing (survey-weight adjusted odds ratio [OR] 4.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 17.27) and less frequent hand hygiene after glove use (survey-weight adjusted OR 10.51; 95% CI, 2.54 to 43.45) were positively correlated with nasal colonization of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) or PPE breach were correlated with higher severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seropositivity (unadjusted risk ratio [RR] 4.2; 95% CI, 1.03 to 17.22). Workers were more likely to be vaccinated against influenza if their employer offered the vaccine (unadjusted OR 3.3; 95% CI, 1.3 to 8.3). Active, targeted education modules for H1N1 influenza were effective at increasing vaccination rates and the success of on-site vaccine clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from the United States exists on the effectiveness of IPC practices in EMS clinicians, including hand hygiene, standard precautions, mandatory vaccine policies, and vaccine clinics. More research is needed on the effectiveness of PPE and vaccine acceptance.

Perspectives of Volunteer Firefighters during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Stumbling Blocks and Silver Linings

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected the lives of almost every individual in every nation, with numbers of infections continuing to grow. Across these nations, first responders are essential in their roles addressing emergencies, despite their risk of exposure to COVID-19 in the course of their work. We sought to understand the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of volunteer firefighters in the United States, an understudied group of these first responders. Interviews were conducted with volunteer firefighters between September and November 2021. Interviews were analyzed using deductive dominant thematic analysis. Thirty-three firefighters were interviewed who had an average of 22 years of service and a mean age of 52 years. Interviewees described pandemic-related challenges including the fear of COVID exposure and frustrations with work and personal relationships. They also identified unexpected work-related benefits including a deepened commitment to serve and improvements to training and safety. Further, some volunteers noted personal benefits such as developing stronger connections with others, having a new outlook on life, and observing goodwill. Our findings provide insight into the multifaceted and complex impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volunteer firefighters.

The COVID-19 vaccine concerns scale: Development and validation of a new measure

Reasons for COVID-19 hesitancy are multi-faceted and tend to differ from those for general vaccine hesitancy. We developed the COVID-19 Vaccine Concerns Scale (CVCS), a self-report measure intended to better understand individuals’ concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. We validated the scale using data from a convenience sample of 2,281 emergency medical services providers, a group of professionals with high occupational COVID-19 risk. Measures included the CVCS items, an adapted Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale, a general vaccine hesitancy scale, demographics, and self-reported COVID-19 vaccination status. The CVCS had high internal consistency reliability (α = .89). A one-factor structure was determined by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA), resulting in a seven-item scale. The model had good fit (X2[14] = 189.26, p < .001; CFI = .95, RMSEA = .11 [.09, .12], NNFI = .93, SRMR = .03). Moderate Pearson correlations with validated scales of general vaccine hesitancy (r = .71 , p < .001; n = 2144) and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (r = .82; p < .001; n = 2279) indicated construct validity. The CVCS predicted COVID-19 vaccination status (B =  −2.21, Exp(B) = .11 [95% CI = .09, .13], Nagelkerke R² = .55), indicating criterion-related validity. In sum, the 7-item CVCS is a reliable and valid self-report measure to examine fears and concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. The scale predicts COVID-19 vaccination status and can be used to inform efforts to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

COVID-19 Booster Uptake among First Responders and Their Household Members May Be Lower than Anticipated

(1) Background: COVID-19 vaccination status varies widely among law enforcement and emergency medical services professionals. Though at high risk of exposure, these first responders have demonstrated significant vaccine hesitancy, with only 70% reportedly vaccinated. We sought to understand whether similar vaccine hesitancy exists for first responders and their household contacts around COVID-19 boosters. (2) Methods: In a prospective longitudinal cohort of first responders and their household contacts, survey data was collected, including demographics, medical history, COVID-19 exposure risks, and vaccination and/or booster status. The statistical analysis focused on primary vaccination and booster rates of both the first responders and their household contacts. (3) Results: Across 119 study participants, 73% reported having received some combination of vaccine and/or booster, and 26% were unvaccinated. Vaccinated individuals were older, reported less prior exposure to COVID-19 and had more comorbidities. Only 23% reported having received a COVID-19 booster. Pairing of the data for household contacts demonstrated a 60% agreement to receive primary vaccination but only a 20% agreement for boosters within households. (4) Conclusions: This study provides insight into the vaccination and booster rates of first responders and household contacts. Focused efforts to enhance vaccinations is essential for the protection and maintenance of this critical workforce.

Emergency Medical Services Prehospital Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic in the US: A Brief Literature Review

This study aimed to analyze prehospital Emergency Medical Services (EMS) response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the US through a brief systematic review of available literature in context with international prehospital counterparts. An exploration of the NCBI repository was performed using a search string of relevant keywords which returned n=5128 results; articles that met the inclusion criteria (n=77) were reviewed and analyzed in accordance with PRISMA and PROSPERO recommendations. Methodical quality was assessed using critical appraisal tools, and the Egger’s test was used for risk of bias reduction upon linear regression analysis of a funnel plot. Sources of heterogeneity as defined by P < 0.10 or I^2 > 50% were interrogated. Findings were considered within ten domains: structural/systemic; clinical outcomes; clinical assessment; treatment; special populations; dispatch/activation; education; mental health; perspectives/experiences; and transport. Findings suggest, EMS clinicians have likely made significant and unmeasured contributions to care during the pandemic via nontraditional roles, ie, COVID-19 testing and vaccine deployment. EMS plays a critical role in counteracting the COVID-19 pandemic in addition to the worsening opioid epidemic, both of which disproportionately impact patients of color. As such, being uniquely influential on clinical outcomes, these providers may benefit from standardized education on care and access disparities such as racial identity. Access to distance learning continuing education opportunities may increase rates of provider recertification. Additionally, there is a high prevalence of vaccine hesitancy among surveyed nationally registered EMS providers. Continued rigorous investigation on the impact of COVID-19 on EMS systems and personnel is warranted to ensure informed preparation for future pandemic and infectious disease responses.

Pandemic Experience of First Responders: Fear, Frustration, and Stress

Police officers, firefighters, and paramedics are on the front lines of crises and emergencies, placing them at high risk of COVID-19 infection. A deeper understanding of the challenges facing first responders during the COVID-19 pandemic is necessary to better support this important workforce. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 first responders during the COVID-19 pandemic, asking about the impact of COVID-19. Data collected from our study interviews revealed that, despite large numbers of COVID-19 infections among the staff of police and fire departments, some—but not all—first responders were concerned about COVID-19. A similar divide existed within this group regarding whether or not to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Many first responders reported frustration over COVID-19 information because of inconsistencies across sources, misinformation on social media, and the impact of politics. In addition, first responders described increased stress due to the COVID-19 pandemic caused by factors such as the fear of COVID exposure during emergency responses, concerns about infecting family members, and frustration surrounding new work policies. Our findings provide insight into the impact of COVID-19 on first responders and highlight the importance of providing resources for education about COVID-19 risks and vaccination, as well as for addressing first responders’ mental health and well-being.

An Opportunity to Understand Concerns about COVID-19 Vaccination: Perspectives from EMS Professionals

Some healthcare professionals, including emergency medical service (EMS) professionals, remain hesitant about receiving COVID-19 vaccines. This study sought to understand EMS professionals’ perspectives regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Using open-ended comments from a national survey deployed electronically to over 19,000 EMS professionals in April of 2021, we examined perspectives about acceptance of and hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccines. Survey comments revealed differences in perspectives between vaccinated and unvaccinated EMS professionals regarding their personal role in improving public health through COVID-19 vaccination as well as vaccine benefits and the protection conferred by vaccination. Unvaccinated individuals also expressed concerns over the research and development of the COVID-19 vaccines that led to their decision not to get vaccinated. Individuals who were vaccinated suggested ways to increase uptake of the vaccine including having healthcare professionals serve as leaders for vaccination and educating individuals about COVID-19 vaccination through credible resources. Vaccine hesitancy remains a challenge to achieving herd immunity to COVID-19 through vaccination, even among healthcare professionals. Understanding the perspectives of those who have chosen not to be vaccinated can help direct strategies to reduce confusion and concerns. The perspectives of vaccinated individuals may also be valuable in identifying opportunities to promote vaccination in the professional setting.

Motivations for Vaccine Hesitancy Among EMS Providers in the United States who Declined the COVID-19 Vaccine

Background:

Hesitancy towards the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has been a topic of considerable concern in recent months. Studies have reported hesitancy within the general population and specific facets of the health care system. Little evidence has been published about vaccine hesitancy among Emergency Medical Services (EMS) providers despite them having played a frontline role throughout the pandemic.

Methods:

A 27-question survey examining vaccination decisions and potential influencing factors among EMS providers was created and disseminated. Responses from providers who declined a COVID-19 vaccine were compared with responses from providers who did not decline a COVID-19 vaccine.

Results:

Across 166 respondents, 16% reported declining a COVID-19 vaccine. Providers who self-identified as men, providers who reported conservative or conservative-leaning beliefs, and providers surrounded by environments where the vaccine was discussed negatively or not encouraged are significantly more likely to decline a vaccine (P <.01). Providers who have declined a vaccine reported significantly greater levels of concern about its safety, effectiveness, and development (P <.01).

Conclusion:

This study answers key questions about why some EMS providers might be declining COVID-19 vaccinations. Initiatives to improve vaccination among EMS providers should focus on the areas highlighted, and further studies should continue to examine vaccine hesitancy among EMS providers as well as in other populations.

Closing the Gap on COVID-19 Vaccinations in First Responders and Beyond: Increasing Trust

Although COVID-19 vaccines are widely available in the U.S. and much of the world, many have chosen to forgo this vaccination. Emergency medical services (EMS) professionals, despite their role on the frontlines and interactions with COVID-positive patients, are not immune to vaccine hesitancy. Via a survey conducted in April 2021, we investigated the extent to which first responders in the U.S. trusted various information sources to provide reliable information about COVID-19 vaccines. Those vaccinated generally trusted healthcare providers as a source of information, but unvaccinated first responders had fairly low trust in this information source-a group to which they, themselves, belong. Additionally, regardless of vaccination status, trust in all levels of government, employers, and their community as sources of information was low. Free-response explanations provided some context to these findings, such as preference for other COVID-19 management options, including drugs proven ineffective. A trusted source of COVID-19 vaccination information is not readily apparent. Individuals expressed a strong desire for the autonomy to make vaccination decisions for themselves, as opposed to mandates. Potential reasons for low trust, possible solutions to address them, generalizability to the broader public, and implications of low trust in official institutions are discussed.