Improving influenza vaccination uptake among healthcare workers by on-site influenza vaccination campaign in a tertiary children hospital

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.

Behavioral interventions for vaccination uptake: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Human behavior and more specifically behavioral insight-based approaches to vaccine uptake have often been overlooked. While there have been a few narrative reviews indexed in Medline on behavioral interventions to increase vaccine uptake, to our knowledge, none have been systematic reviews and meta-analyses covering not just high but also low-and-middle income countries.

METHODS

We included 613 studies from the Medline database in our systematic review and meta-analysis categorizing different behavioral interventions in 9 domains: education campaigns, on-site vaccination, incentives, free vaccination, institutional recommendation, provider recommendation, reminder and recall, message framing, and vaccine champion. Additionally, considering that there is variability in the acceptance of vaccines among different populations, we assessed studies from both high-income countries (HICs) and low- to middle-income countries (LMICs), separately.

FINDINGS

Our results showed that behavioral interventions can considerably improve vaccine uptake in most settings. All domains that we examined improved vaccine uptake with the highest effect size associated with provider recommendation (OR: 3.4 (95%CI: 2.5-4.6); Domain: motivation) and on-site vaccination (OR: 2.9 (95%CI: 2.3-3.7); Domain: practical issues). While the number of studies conducted in LMICs was smaller, the quality of studies was similar with those conducted in HICs. Nevertheless, there were variations in the observed effect sizes.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings indicate that "provider recommendation" and "on-site vaccination" along with other behavioral interventions can be employed to increase vaccination rates globally.

Increasing influenza vaccination coverage in healthcare workers: analysis of an intensified on-site vaccination campaign during the COVID-19 pandemic

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.

Exploring COVID-19 education to support vaccine confidence amongst the general adult population with special considerations for healthcare and long-term care staff: A scoping review

Background

Despite the demonstrated efficacy of approved COVID-19 vaccines, high levels of hesitancy were observed in the first few months of the COVID-19 vaccines' rollout. Factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy are well-described in the literature. Among the various strategies for promoting vaccine confidence, educational interventions provide a foundationally and widely implemented set of approaches for supporting individuals in their vaccine decisions. However, the evidence around the measurable impact of various educational strategies to improve vaccine confidence is limited. We conducted a scoping review with the aim of exploring and characterizing educational interventions delivered during the pandemic to support COVID-19 vaccine confidence in adults.

Methods

We developed a search strategy with a medical information scientist and searched five databases, including Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science, as well as grey literature. We considered all study designs and reports. Interventions delivered to children or adolescents, interventions on non-COVID-19 vaccines, as well as national or mass vaccination campaigns without documented interaction(s) between facilitator(s) and a specific audience were excluded. Articles were independently screened by three reviewers. After screening 4602 titles and abstracts and 174 full-text articles across two rounds of searches, 22 articles met our inclusion criteria. Ten additional studies were identified through hand searching. Data from included studies were charted and results were described narratively.

Results

We included 32 studies and synthesized their educational delivery structure, participants (i.e., facilitators and priority audience), and content. Formal, group-based presentations were the most common type of educational intervention in the included studies (75%). A third of studies (34%) used multiple strategies, with many formal group-based presentations being coupled with additional individual-based interventions (29%). Given the novelty of the COVID-19 vaccines and the unique current context, studies reported personalized conversations, question periods, and addressing misinformation as important components of the educational approaches reviewed.

Conclusions

Various educational interventions were delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic, with many initiatives involving multifaceted interventions utilizing both formal and informal approaches that leveraged community (cultural, religious) partnerships when developing and facilitating COVID-19 vaccine education. Train-the-trainer approaches with recognized community members could be of value as trust and personal connections were identified as strong enablers throughout the review.

Sustained Increase in Very Low Influenza Vaccination Coverage in Residents and Healthcare Workers of Long-Term Care Facilities in Austria after Educational Interventions

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.

Vaccine mandates for healthcare workers beyond COVID-19

We provide ethical criteria to establish when vaccine mandates for healthcare workers are ethically justifiable. The relevant criteria are the utility of the vaccine for healthcare workers, the utility for patients (both in terms of prevention of transmission of infection and reduction in staff shortage), and the existence of less restrictive alternatives that can achieve comparable benefits. Healthcare workers have professional obligations to promote the interests of patients that entail exposure to greater risks or infringement of autonomy than ordinary members of the public. Thus, we argue that when vaccine mandates are justified on the basis of these criteria, they are not unfairly discriminatory and the level of coercion they involve is ethically acceptable-and indeed comparable to that already accepted in healthcare employment contracts. Such mandates might be justified even when general population mandates are not. Our conclusion is that, given current evidence, those ethical criteria justify mandates for influenza vaccination, but not COVID-19 vaccination, for healthcare workers. We extend our arguments to other vaccines.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

Seasonal influenza vaccine uptake among healthcare workers in tertiary care hospitals, Bangladesh: Study protocol for influenza vaccine supply and awareness intervention

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs), such as doctors, nurses, and support staffs involved in direct or indirect patient care, are at increased risk of influenza virus infections due to occupational exposures. Vaccination is the most effective way to prevent influenza. Despite the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, Bangladesh lacks a seasonal influenza vaccination policy for HCWs, and thus vaccination rates remain low. The current project aims to investigate the effect of interventions on influenza vaccine awareness and availability of vaccine supply, explore HCWs’ knowledge and perceptions about influenza vaccination, understand the barriers and motivators for influenza vaccine uptake, and understand policymakers' views on the practicality of influenza vaccination among HCWs.

Method

We will conduct the study at four tertiary care teaching hospitals in Bangladesh, using a cluster randomized controlled trial approach, with the hospital as the unit of randomization and intervention. The study population will include all types of HCWs.The four different types of intervention will be randomly allocated and implemented in four study hospitals separately. The four interventions will be: i) ensuring the availability of influenza vaccine supply; ii) developing influenza vaccine awareness; iii) both ensuring influenza vaccine supply and developing influenza vaccine awareness and iv) control arm with no intervention. Both quantitative and qualitative approaches will be applied to assess the intervention effect. We will estimate the Difference in Differences (DID) with 95% CI of the proportion of vaccine uptake between each intervention and control (non-intervention) arm, adjusting for the clustering effect. The qualitative data will be summarised using a framework matrix method.

Discussion

The results of this study will inform the development and implementation of a context-specific strategy to enhance influenza vaccination rates among Bangladeshi HCWs.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05521763. Version 2.0 was registered in September 2022, and the first participant enrolled in March 2022. Retrospectively registered.

The Role of Psychological Factors and Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs in Influenza Vaccine Hesitancy and Uptake among Jordanian Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection and to lessen its severity is recommended among healthcare workers (HCWs). Health professionals have a higher risk of exposure to viruses and could transmit the influenza virus to vulnerable patients who are prone to severe disease and mortality. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the levels of influenza vaccine acceptance and uptake as well as its determinants, among Jordanian HCWs over the last influenza season of 2021/2022. This study was based on a self-administered electronic survey that was distributed in March 2022. Psychological determinants of influenza vaccine acceptance and vaccine conspiracy beliefs were assessed using the previously validated 5C scale questionnaire (confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation and collective responsibility) and the vaccine conspiracy beliefs scale. The study sample comprised a total of 1218 HCWs: nurses (n = 412, 33.8%), physicians (n = 367, 30.1%), medical technicians (n = 182, 14.9%), pharmacists (n = 161, 13.2%) and dentists (n = 87, 7.1%), among others. About two-thirds of the study sample expressed willingness to receive influenza vaccination if provided free of charge (n = 807, 66.3%), whereas less than one-third were willing to pay for the vaccine (n = 388, 31.9%). The self-reported uptake of the influenza vaccine in the last influenza season was 62.8%. The following factors were significantly associated with higher acceptance of influenza vaccination if provided freely, as opposed to vaccine hesitancy/rejection: male sex; physicians and dentists among HCW categories; higher confidence and collective responsibility; and lower complacency, constraints and calculation. Higher influenza vaccine uptake was significantly correlated with nurses and physicians among HCW categories, older age, a higher monthly income, higher confidence and collective responsibility, lower complacency and constraints and lower embrace of general vaccine conspiracy beliefs. The results of the current study can provide helpful clues to improve influenza vaccine coverage among HCWs in Jordan. Consequently, this can help to protect vulnerable patient groups and reserve valuable resources in healthcare settings. Psychological determinants appeared to be the most significant factors for vaccine acceptance and uptake, whereas the embrace of general vaccine conspiracy beliefs was associated with lower rates of influenza vaccine uptake, which should be considered in educational and interventional measures aiming to promote influenza vaccination.

Influenza vaccination coverage among emergency department personnel is associated with perception of vaccination and side effects, vaccination availability on site and the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction

Influenza is a major concern in hospitals, including the emergency department (ED), mainly because of a high risk for ED personnel to acquire and transmit the disease. Although influenza vaccination is recommended for health care workers, vaccination coverage is low.

Methods

This survey was conducted in the 2016/2017 and 2020/2021 influenza seasons. Questionnaires were sent to ED personnel in 12 hospitals in Bavaria, South-Eastern Germany. The response rates were 62% and 38% in 2016/2017 and 2020/2021, respectively. Data were compared between the two seasons as well as between vaccinated and not vaccinated respondents in 2020/2021.

Results

Significantly more ED personnel reported having been vaccinated in the 2020/2021 season. Factors associated with vaccination coverage (or the intention to get vaccinated) were profession (physician / medical student), having been vaccinated at least twice, the availability of an influenza vaccination on site (in the ED) as well as the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, significant differences in the assessment and evaluation of influenza, its vaccination side effects and ethical aspects were found between vaccinated and not vaccinated ED personnel in 2020/2021. Unvaccinated respondents estimated higher frequencies of almost all potential vaccination side effects, were less likely to accept lay-offs if employees would not come to work during an influenza pandemic and more likely to agree that work attendance should be an employee´s decision. Vaccinated participants instead, rather agreed that vaccination should be mandatory and were less likely to consider job changes in case of a mandatory vaccination policy.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic might have contributed to a higher influenza vaccination rate among ED workers. Vaccination on site and interventions targeting the perception of influenza vaccination and its side effects may be most promising to increase the vaccination coverage among ED personnel.

Two years of on-site influenza vaccination strategy in an Italian university hospital: main results and lessons learned

Although the vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs) is considered essential for preventing influenza circulation in the hospital setting, vaccination coverage (VC) in this group remains low. Among the reasons cited by HCWs is a lack of time to attend the vaccination clinic. For the 2018/2019 influenza season, active (on-site) influenza vaccination was offered directly in 44 operative units (OUs) of the Bari Policlinico hospital (50 OUs, 3,397 HCWs). At the same time, the hospital granted the HCW access to the vaccination clinic during October and December 2018. VC achieved among HCWs of Bari Policlinico during the 2018/2019 influenza season was then analyzed, and the results compared with those of the 2017/18 season. During the 2018/19 season, VC was 20.4% (n = 798) and thus higher than the 14.2% of the 2017/18 season (+6.2%). The highest VC was among physicians (33.4%), followed by other HCWs (23.8%), auxiliary staff (8.6%), and nurses (7.2%). Overall, 284 (36.5%) HCWs were vaccinated at on-site sessions. Multivariate analysis showed that vaccination uptake was associated with male gender and with work in OU where vaccination was actively offered. On the other hand, being a nurse or auxiliary staff member and working in the surgical area were deterrents. Although VC remained unsatisfactory, active on-site vaccination proved to be an important strategy to improve vaccination compliance, increasing 44% compared to the previous season. Nonetheless, mandatory vaccination directed by public health institutions may be the only way to reach a minimum level of coverage.

Demand and motivation for influenza vaccination among healthcare workers before and during the COVID-19 era: a cross-sectional survey

Protection of healthcare workers (HCWs) against influenza is essential for patient health and a functional health system. The study aimed to analyze the demand for seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) among various groups of HCWs in a tertiary care hospital before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify their motives for this season's SIV. Before this influenza season (2020/21), the hospital management offered free SIV to all HCWs and promoted it on the internal network. Out of 4,167 HCWs, 630 HCWs expressed interest in SIV and were vaccinated in the hospital. They filled in a total of 603 self-administered pen-and-paper questionnaires. The mean age of the respondents (374 females and 229 males) was 45 ± 12 years. Physicians accounted for 48% of the vaccinated persons but for only 24% (p < .001) of all HCWs to whom SIV was offered. Only 16% of respondents vaccinated this year also received SIV before the last season (2019/20), with the proportion of physicians (19%) being statistically significantly higher than that of non-physicians (13%, p = .045) and the proportion of chronically ill HCWs (22%) being higher than that of healthy individuals (13%, p = .004). Most frequently, respondents' motivation to get vaccinated this year was self-protection (61%), that is concerns about contracting influenza together with COVID-19 or alone, followed by family protection (58%) and patient protection (53%). In conclusion, COVID-19 contributed to an increased demand for SIV among HCWs and the threat of contracting it together with influenza was the most frequent motive.

The influenza vaccine for nursing and care professionals at emergency services in Flanders

Background: The Belgian Superior Health Council recommends seasonal influenza vaccination for people working in the health care sector in order to reduce the risk of the influenza virus being transmitted to people at risk. The aim of this study is to provide more insight into the current vaccination rate in nurses and health care professionals in emergency services in Flanders. In addition, the influence of influenza vaccination on absenteeism will be investigated, as well as the motivation to get vaccinated or not.Methods: A quantitative multicentre, cross-sectional study was carried out in whichnurses and health care professionals in emergency services in Flanders were questioned by means of an online questionnaire.Results: The survey of nurses and health care professionals in Flanders from 2018 shows that 54% (294/548) gets vaccinated in this year. Respondents who have been vaccinated report a lower absenteeism due to influenza compared to health workers who do not get vaccinated. There is a lack of general knowledge about influenza and vaccination. Thirty-four percent of nurses and health care professionals in emergencies do not know the correct definition of influenza. The main reasons for being vaccinated are: to protect oneself (27%), family members (21.5%) and patients (16%). Reasons for not getting vaccinated are: never having had the influenza before (30%), believing you get the influenza because of the vaccination (12%), no belief or trust in the vaccine (19%). Three percent of respondents who received the influenza vaccine were absent due to flu. The absence due to influenza was higher among the respondents who were not vaccinated, namely 11%. Being vaccinated for influenza or not has been associated with being absent for influenza.Conclusions: Given that there is a lack of general knowledge about influenza and its vaccination, the vaccination campaigns should cover this knowledge gap. Efforts to convince both nursing and care professionals about the protective role of the Influenza vaccine. These efforts can improve the influenza vaccination coverage rate and consequently minimize the absenteeism.Abbreviations: WHO: World Health Organization; UZA: University Hospital of Antwerp; SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences.

Increasing influenza vaccination coverage in healthcare workers: a review on campaign strategies and their effect

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.

Low rates of influenza vaccination uptake among healthcare workers: Distinguishing barriers between occupational groups

BACKGROUND

To gain further insights into health care workers (HCWs) attitudes toward influenza vaccination to guide future interventions to increase vaccination rates.

METHODS

A standardized anonymous questionnaire was sent to all employees of the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland following the influenza season 2013/2014. We collected information regarding HCW's demographics, experiences with flu vaccinations, and reasons for nonvaccination.

RESULTS

Vaccination rates ranged from 14.7% to 31% from 2007 to 2019. A total of 1,454 HCW participated in the survey, of which 62% reported being vaccinated. HCW not vaccinated were more commonly female and differed by occupational group and department. The main reasons for nonvaccination were fear of short-term adverse reactions, followed by assessing the evidence regarding vaccination-benefits as insufficient and fears of violation of the right to self-determination. Fear of long-term sequela and violation of the right of self-determination differed between the 4 professional groups, both being most commonly indicated by nurses and at least indicated by physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides some insight into differences regarding barriers to vaccination between different occupational groups, which might not have been adequately addressed so far. Policy makers should consider such differences when designing campaigns to raise acceptance of influenza vaccine among HCWs.

Strategies to Increase Flu Vaccination Coverage among Healthcare Workers: A 4 Years Study in a Large Italian Teaching Hospital

Flu vaccination is recommended among healthcare workers (HCWs). The low vaccination coverage registered in our hospital among HCWs called for new engaging approaches to improve flu vaccination coverage. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of different strategies implemented during the last four years (2015-2019). A quasi-experimental study was conducted, involving almost 4000 HCWs each year. Starting from the 2015-2016 campaign, new evidence-based strategies were progressively implemented. At the end of each campaign, an evaluation of the vaccination coverage rate reached was performed. Moreover, during the last three campaigns, differences in coverage among job category, wards involved or not in on-site vaccination (OSV) intervention, age classes and gender were analyzed. An increasing flu vaccination coverage rate was registered, from 6% in 2015-2016 to almost 22% at the end of 2018-2019. The overall number of vaccinated HCWs increased, especially at younger ages. OSV strategy always leads to better results, and physicians always show a higher vaccination coverage than nurses and other HCWs. The implemented strategies were effective in achieving higher flu vaccination coverage among HCWs in our hospital and therefore can be considered valuable examples of good prevention practices in hospital settings.

Behavior of nurses and nurse aides toward influenza vaccine: the impact of the perception of occupational working conditions

Although influenza vaccination of hospital healthcare workers (HCWs) has been associated with a reduction in patient mortality and morbidity, HCW vaccine coverage is low in France. Previous studies identified the role of perceptions of vaccine efficacy and safety as well as practical issues (e.g., limited time). We aimed to determine whether HCW behavior toward influenza vaccine was associated with occupation-related psycho-social issues and perceptions of management. Between February and August 2018, an anonymous online questionnaire explored the perceptions and behavior of nurses and nurse aides regarding the influenza vaccine, as well as the perceived quality of professional management, perceived psychological contract breach, perceived workload, and compassion fatigue using previously validated scales. Among the 791 respondents (mean age 36.9 ± 10 years, female 85.0%; nurses 76.4%), 28.6% had been vaccinated during the current year (i.e., the study year) and 13.0% during the previous year. Among those not vaccinated during the study year, their vaccination intention for the coming year on a 1-5 scale was 1/5 for 68.5% and 5/5 for 15.4%. Positive behavior/intention regarding the influenza vaccine (recent vaccination and/or high future intention) was positively correlated with perceptions of management and negatively correlated with feelings of a psychological contract breach and compassion fatigue. In multivariate analysis, this positive behavior/intention was correlated with management perception independently of the perceptions of vaccination itself. Among nurses and nurse aides, the propensity to be vaccinated appears to depend closely on the perceived working conditions. These factors should be addressed when promoting vaccination among these populations.