Seasonal influenza vaccination of healthcare workers: systematic review of qualitative evidence

Impact of COVID-19 on vaccine confidence and uptake: A systematic literature review

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, scheduled vaccinations were postponed, mass vaccination programmes were suspended and opportunities for healthcare workers to administer vaccines ad hoc decreased. The aims of this systematic literature review were to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vaccine confidence, intent and uptake in preexisting routine childhood or adult vaccination programmes, and to identify factors associated with changes in acceptance, intent and uptake of preexisting vaccines. Medline and Embase were searched for studies in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Japan, the USA, and European countries, published between 1 January 2021 and 4 August 2022. A complementary gray literature search was conducted between 11 and 13 October 2022, and supplemented with additional gray research in October 2023. In total, 54 citations were included in the review. Study design and geography were heterogeneous. The number of adults who received or intended to receive an influenza or pneumococcal vaccine was higher during the pandemic than in previous seasons (n = 28 studies). In addition, increased acceptance of adult vaccinations was observed during 2020-21 compared with 2019-20 (n = 12 studies). The rates of childhood vaccinations decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic across several countries (n = 11 studies). Factors associated with changes in intention to receive a vaccination, or uptake of influenza vaccine, included previous vaccination, older age, higher perceived risk of contracting COVID-19, anxiety regarding the pandemic and fear of contracting COVID-19. Acceptance and uptake of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines generally increased after onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Determinants of influenza and COVID vaccine uptake in healthcare workers: A cross-sectional survey during the post-pandemic era in a network of academic hospitals in France

OBJECTIVES

Although influenza and COVID vaccines are recommended for healthcare workers (HCWs), vaccine coverage is sub-optimal for influenza in this population, and the situation did not improve during the COVID pandemic. We aimed to estimate influenza and COVID vaccine coverage among HCWs and their determinants after the COVID pandemic.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study between May and July 2023 among HCWs to estimate influenza and COVID vaccination coverage during the 2022-2023 season, and its determinants, using a web-based anonymous questionnaire. We performed a multivariable regression analysis to assess factors associated with vaccine uptake.

RESULTS

Of the 9158 HCWs invited to participate, 1587 (16 %) completed the questionnaire, primarily paramedics (n = 479, 30 %), medics (n = 310, 20 %), administrative staff (n = 249, 16 %), and nurse assistants (n = 237, 15 %). Vaccine coverage during the 2022-2023 season was estimated at 64 % [CI95 % 61-66] for influenza, and 42 % [CI95% 39-44] for COVID. Vaccinated HCWs reported adverse events rates of 8 % (n = 122) after influenza, and 37 % (n = 579) after COVID vaccines. On multivariable analysis, being a medic or over 40 years old was associated with both influenza and COVID vaccine uptake. Suggested interventions to boost vaccine uptake were primarily to facilitate access to vaccination in the workplace, and to better inform HCWs on the risks and benefits of these vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

Easy access to COVID and influenza vaccines in the workplace, and better information about their benefits, may improve their uptake. Future vaccination campaigns should communicate more about potential adverse effects, and effectiveness.

Healthcare personnel acceptance and recommendations for influenza vaccine in twelve low- and middle-income countries: A pooled analysis from 2018 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Although healthcare personnel (HCP) are targeted for influenza vaccination they typically underutilize vaccines especially in low- and middle-income countries. We explored knowledge, attitudes, and practices of HCP about seasonal influenza vaccines (SIV) to identify factors associated with and modifiable barriers to SIV uptake.

METHODS

We pooled individual-level data from cross-sectional surveys about SIV conducted among health workers in 12 low- and middle- income countries during 2018-2020 (i.e., Albania, Armenia, Cote d'Ivoire, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Lebanon, Morocco, North Macedonia, Tunisia, Tajikistan, and Uganda). Eleven countries used a standard protocol and questionnaire based on the Health Belief Model to measure perceptions of susceptibility and severity of influenza disease, benefits of, barriers to, and motivators for vaccination. We analyzed attitudes and perceptions among HCP, including acceptance of vaccine for themselves and willingness to recommend vaccines to patients, grouped by the presence/absence of a national influenza vaccination program. Models were adjusted for geographic region.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 10,281 HCP from 12 countries representing four of the six World Health Organization regions: African, Eastern Mediterranean, European, and Western Pacific. The sample was distributed across low income (LIC) (3,183, 31 %), lower-middle (LMIC) (4,744, 46 %), and upper-middle income (UMIC) (2,354, 23 %) countries. Half (50 %) of the countries included in the analysis reported SIV use among HCP in both the year of and the year preceding data collection while the remainder had no influenza vaccination program for HCP. Seventy-four percent (6,341) of HCP reported that they would be willing to be vaccinated if the vaccine was provided free of charge. HCP in LICs were willing to pay prices for SIV representing a higher percentage of their country's annual health expenditure per capita (6.26 % [interquartile range, IQR: 3.13-12.52]) compared to HCP in LMICs and UMICs. HCP in countries with no SIV program were also willing to pay a higher percentage for SIV (5.01 % [IQR: 2.24-8.34]) compared to HCP in countries with SIV programs.. Most (85 %) HCP in our analysis would recommend vaccines to their patients, and those who would accept vaccines for themselves were 3 times more likely to recommend vaccines to their patients (OR 3.1 [95 % CI 1·8, 5·2]).

CONCLUSION

Increasing uptake of SIV among HCP can amplify positive impacts of vaccination by increasing the likelihood that HCP recommend vaccines to their patients. Successful strategies to achieve increased uptake of vaccines include clear guidance from health authorities, interventions based on behavior change models, and access to vaccine free-of-charge.

A comparative analysis of knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) towards influenza and influenza vaccination among healthcare workers in Kyrgyzstan prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

Influenza, a globally significant respiratory illness with pandemic potential, affects around 1 billion individuals annually, leading to increased risk for severe illness and mortality. Despite recommendations from the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) and MoH prioritization, influenza vaccination coverage rate among HCWs in Kyrgyzstan remains low, ranging between 16 % and 46 % over the past five years. Understanding the Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) dynamics of HCWs regarding influenza vaccinations, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic is crucial for refining national strategies and institutional approaches to enhance vaccination coverage rates in this important risk group.

METHOD

This study employed cross sectional investigations aimed at assessing KAPs among HCWs regarding influenza disease and vaccination. Conducted prior to and during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the project involved 2400 participants from diverse medical disciplines. EPI Info was utilized to run biostatistical analyses, with descriptive and logistic regression models, to elucidate the dynamics of KAP over time.

RESULTS

The findings indicate that HCWs with over 5 years of experience were more likely to get vaccinated or recommend it to patients (p = 0.000). Low confidence in vaccine effectiveness influenced on recommendations of influenza vaccination in pre-pandemic time, where insufficient (95 %CI 0.08-0.6; p = 0.003) or uncertain assurance in vaccine effectiveness (95 %CI 0.007-0.18; p = 0.000) was a barrier for vaccine promotion during the pandemic. The study underscores to consider mandatory influenza vaccination for HCWs which may impact on likelihood of flu vaccination (p = 0.001). Priority groups for influenza vaccination shifted during the COVID-19 period, emphasizing older adults, individuals with existing conditions, and HCWs, compared to the pre-pandemic focus on HCWs, children, and patients with pre-existing conditions.

CONCLUSION

Our investigation provides valuable insights into HCWs KAP concerning influenza vaccination in Kyrgyzstan, highlighting the need for targeted interventions addressing factors influencing vaccine acceptance. The study suggests policy implications, advocating for the revision of national strategies to strengthen capacity building for medical staff.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices associated with influenza vaccine uptake among healthcare personnel in Israel during three influenza seasons, 2016-2019

INTRODUCTION

Despite a longstanding Israel Ministry of Health recommendation that all healthcare personnel (HCP) receive a seasonal influenza vaccine, vaccine uptake among HCP remains below the country's target of 60% coverage. To understand factors related to vaccine hesitancy, we used data from a prospective three-year (2016-2019) influenza vaccine effectiveness study among Israeli HCP to examine knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) about influenza vaccination and their association with vaccine uptake.

METHODS

At the start of each influenza season, all participating HCP completed a questionnaire that included questions about socio-demographic and occupational characteristics, health status, and KAP related to seasonal influenza vaccination. We extracted vaccination history from electronic medical records and employee vaccination registries. We used logistic regression models to identify demographic and occupational factors, and KAP about influenza vaccination, associated with receipt of vaccination.

RESULT

A total of 2,126 HCP were enrolled and had available data on vaccination history. Their median age was 42 years [IQR 35-52], and 73 % self-identified as female. Influenza vaccine uptake in 2016, 2017 and 2018 was 46 %, 48 % and 47 %, respectively. Overall, 36 % of HCP had received an influenza vaccine in ≥ 4 of the eight years prior. HCP aged 35-49 years were less likely to receive influenza vaccine compared to HCP aged ≥ 50 years (OR: 0.81 [95 % CI: 0.67-0.98]). Nurses and allied personnel were less likely to receive influenza vaccine compared to physicians (OR: 0.63 [95 % CI: 0.50-0.78] and OR: 0.53 [95 % CI: 0.40-0.70], respectively). The emotional benefit of vaccination (e.g., anticipating regret if not vaccinated) and the perception of vaccine safety were factors associated with vaccine uptake (OR: 7.60 [95 % CI: 6.27-9.22] and OR: 3.43 [95 % CI:2.91-4.03], respectively).

CONCLUSION

Among HCP at two hospitals in Israel, less than half received an annual influenza vaccine. Older HCP, physicians, and those who reported the emotional benefit of vaccination or agreed that influenza vaccines are safe were more likely to be vaccinated. Future influenza vaccination campaigns could focus on these demographic groups and tailor messages emphasizing the emotional benefits of vaccination and vaccine safety to increase seasonal influenza vaccine uptake among HCP in Israel.

Increasing vaccination coverage among healthcare workers: Active call and mandatory laws. Data from a large general hospital in Southern Italy

Influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are respiratory pathogens which significantly impact healthcare systems. Seasonal vaccination is recommended for all healthcare workers (HCWs) to reduce the risk for both operators and patients. Puglia, a region in Southern Italy, has been enforcing since 2018 a law mandating influenza vaccination in healthcare workers. However, vaccination coverages for this category have always been suboptimal. Our study tests the effectiveness of an active recall intervention on vaccination coverage for influenza and SARS-CoV-2 in the HCWs of a large Apulian hospital (Southern Italy). During the 2023-2024 influenza vaccination season, unvaccinated HCWs of Bari's Policlinico General Hospital were contacted. The e-mail reminded them of a regional law mandating influenza vaccination to all HCWs and offered an appointment for vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was also offered. In 2022-2023, 43.16 % of HCWs were vaccinated against influenza and 21.87 % against SARS-CoV-2. Coverage changed during the 2023-2024 season to 54.11 % and 13.58 %, respectively. A regression model showed that vaccination uptake's increase was associated with the e-mail reception and with the operator being a physician vs. non-medical personnel. On the contrary, subjects who received the e-mail did not show an increased SARS-CoV-2 vaccination uptake, which was on the contrary influenced by the worker's age, sex, job title, and area of risk. Our soft-mandate intervention was effective in increasing vaccination uptake by HCWs. Communication with a trained specialist was probably useful, and the possibility to access vaccination services with dedicated appointments increased convenience. Mandatory vaccination policies and active recall seem to synergically impact vaccination uptake.

Drivers and barriers of seasonal influenza vaccination 2015/16 & 2019/20 to 2022/23 - a survey on why most Norwegians don't get the flu vaccine

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to explore the reasons adults in the general population, influenza risk groups (RGs) and health care workers (HCWs) in Norway give for their vaccination choices and whether these reasons vary between groups or over time in order to further improve influenza vaccination coverage.

METHODS

Respondents of a nationally representative telephone survey conducted by Statistics Norway were asked "What was the most important reason why you did/did not get vaccinated?". The question on influenza non-vaccination was included in 2016 and in 2020 to 2023 and the question on influenza vaccination in 2021 to 2023.

RESULTS

The study included 9 705 individuals aged 18-79 years. Influenza vaccination coverage in the RGs increased from 20.6% in 2016 to 63.1% in 2022, before a reduction to 58.3% in 2023. Common reasons for non-vaccination were similar in all groups. The most cited reasons were "no need" for the vaccine and "no specific reason", followed by "not recommended/offered the vaccine", "worry about side effects" and "vaccine refusal". The most frequent reasons for vaccination among the general population and RGs were protection against influenza and belonging to a RG, while the most frequent responses among HCWs were being offered the vaccine at work/work in health care, followed by a desire for protection against influenza. Receiving a vaccine recommendation from a health professional was mentioned in all groups. We also observed that the proportion reporting "no need" for the vaccine decreased over time, especially among HCWs, and that the proportions reporting vaccine refusal and worry about side effects as reasons for non-vaccination were temporarily reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

The general population and RGs cite protection against influenza as their primary incentive for vaccination, while HCWs mainly refer to their professional role or workplace vaccination. For non-vaccination we see a similar pattern in all groups, with "no need" and "no specific reason" as the main reasons. Of note, worry about side effects and vaccine refusal is as frequent among HCWs as in other groups. Continued efforts to maintain and increase vaccine confidence are needed.

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

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

Increasing vaccine uptake among employees within the non-health related critical infrastructure sectors: A review

This review aimed to identify barriers to employee vaccination, motivators for vaccination, and vaccine uptake strategies within the critical infrastructure sectors. We focused on non-healthcare-related sectors, including food and agriculture, manufacturing, and education where employee vaccination is rarely mandated. We conducted a search for literature published from 2012 to 2022 from MEDLINE-PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection, which resulted in 22 studies that met the inclusion criteria. We found that 1) barriers to vaccination differ by infectious disease and population; 2) common motivators for vaccination were about protecting self, family, and community; and 3) common uptake strategies for influenza (which accounted for 83% of uptake strategies in reviewed studies) addressed convenience and confidence barriers such as vaccination cost and education. Our review highlights the need for employers, policymakers, and researchers to identify infectious disease and population-specific barriers to vaccination and implement strategies aimed at addressing the identified barriers.

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

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

Identifying reasons for non-acceptance of influenza vaccine in healthcare workers: an observational study using declination form data

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers are sometimes required to complete a declination form if they choose not to accept the influenza vaccine. We analysed the declination data with the goal of identifying barriers to vaccination uptake across seasons, staff groups, and pre- and post- arrival of COVID-19.

METHODS

Reasons for declining the vaccine were gathered from N = 2230 declination forms, collected over four influenza seasons, 2017/2018, 2018/2019, 2019/2020 and 2020/2021, from a single health board in the UK. Reasons were classified according to ten categories and the resulting distribution analysed across year and staff groups. A further analysis considered the two most prevalent categories in more detail.

RESULTS

Fear of adverse reactions and Lack of perception of own risk were identified as primary reasons for not accepting the vaccine across time and across staff groups. However, there was no evidence that Lack of concern with influenza, or Doubts about vaccine efficacy was prevalent, contrary to previous findings. Overall, reasons fitted a pattern of underestimating risk associated with influenza and overestimating risk of minor adverse reactions. There were also differences across years, χ2(24) = 123, p < .001. In particular, there were relatively fewer Lack of perception of own risk responses post-COVID-19 arrival than before, χ2(8) = 28.93, p = .002.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that data collected from declination forms yields sensible information concerning vaccine non-acceptance without the difficulties of retrospective or pre-emptive reasoning suffered by questionnaires. Our findings will aid messaging campaigns designed to encourage uptake of the influenza vaccine in healthcare workers. In particular, we argue for an approach focused on risk perception rather than correction of straightforward misconceptions.

A systematic review of barriers and enablers associated with uptake of influenza vaccine among care home staff

Barriers and enablers to vaccination of care home (CH) staff should be identified in order to develop interventions to address them that increase uptake and protect residents. We aimed to synthesis the evidence describing the barriers and enablers that affect the influenza vaccination uptake of care home (CH) staff.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, AMED, IBSS, SCOPUS to identify quantitative, qualitative or mixed-method studies. Data related to health or social care workers in CHs reported barriers or enablers were extracted and mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF); the data within each domain were grouped and categorized into key factors affecting influenza vaccine uptake among CH staff.

RESULTS

We screened 4025 studies; 42 studies met our inclusion criteria. Thirty-four (81 %) were surveys. Five theoretical domains were frequently reported as mediators of influenza vaccine uptake: Beliefs about consequences (32 studies), Environmental context and resources (30 studies), Emotions (26 studies), Social influences (25 studies), Knowledge (22 studies). The low acceptance rate of the influenza vaccine among CH staff can be attributed to multiple factors, including insufficient understanding of the vaccine, its efficacy, or misconceptions about the vaccine (knowledge), perceiving the vaccine as ineffective and unsafe (beliefs about consequences), fear of influenza vaccine and its side effects (emotions), and experiencing limited accessibility to the vaccine (environmental context and resources).

CONCLUSION

Interventions aimed at increasing influenza vaccine uptake among CH staff should focus on addressing the barriers identified in this review. These interventions should include components such as enhancing knowledge by providing accurate information about vaccine benefits and safety, addressing negative beliefs by challenging misconceptions, managing concerns and fears through open communication, and improving accessibility to the vaccine through convenient on-site options. This review provides a foundation for the development of tailored Interventions to improve influenza vaccine uptake among CH staff.

Influenza vaccine coverage among healthcare workers: A cluster analysis from a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

Influenza vaccination is recommended for healthcare workers (HCWs). However, in a 1500-bed tertiary care university hospital in France, influenza vaccine coverage among HCWs was 23% in 2017.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study between 05/09/2018 and 25/09/2018 among HCWs, randomly selected independent of their vaccination status, to estimate influenza vaccination coverage rate during the 2017-2018 season, and explore factors influencing vaccination, using a questionnaire. Multivariable regression analysis to assess factors associated with vaccine uptake and hierarchical clustering on principal components to identify HCW profiles regarding factors influencing vaccine uptake, were performed after multiple imputation.

RESULTS

977 HCWs were included (68% participation rate), primarily females (84%), nurses (38%) of 18-39 years old. Influenza vaccination coverage rate reached 33[30-36]%. Frequent vaccination (aOR 39.27[21.52-74.51]) and personal/family medical history of influenza (aOR 3.33[1.16-10.02]) were independently associated with vaccination. In HCWs' patterns of influenza vaccination status, three clusters were identified: 1) (n = 438) mostly vaccinated (70%); 2) (n = 507) most unvaccinated (97%); and 3) (n = 32) unvaccinated HCWs lacking knowledge on influenza and influenza vaccine. Among the 148 (15%) HCWs reluctant to receive the vaccine the following year, 23 (16%) received it for the 2017-2018 season, while 125 (84%) did not, mostly stating they had doubts about the vaccine (82%).

CONCLUSION

This work identifies determinants of vaccine uptake and highlights HCWs profiles associated with factors influencing vaccination and a subgroup of HCWs flexible about having the vaccine during the upcoming seasonal campaign. This result opens up perspectives toward improved vaccination coverage among HCWs.

Influenza vaccination from the perspective of health care workers at university hospitals

BACKGROUND

The influenza vaccination rate of healthcare workers (HWs) in Poland is low. Before implementing methods for promoting influenza vaccination, it is crucial to identify attitudes towards vaccination. We aimed to examine the knowledge and attitudes towards influenza vaccination of HWs at university hospitals. Moreover, we evaluated the incentives for getting influenza vaccination among HWs.

METHODS

From September 2020 to October 2020, we surveyed HWs in one children's hospital and two adults' hospitals in Warsaw (Poland). We included only fully and correctly completed surveys into final analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 950 questionnaires (85% women, 45% <40 years old, 33% physicians and 48% nurses, 56% working in a children's hospital) were evaluated. Of all HWs, 25% declared they were vaccinated and 54% planned to get vaccinated in the next season. We have analyzed attitudes towards influenza vaccination and motivations to get vaccinated.

CONCLUSIONS

Among HWs in academic hospitals, males, people <40 years old, physicians and those working in children's hospital are more likely to get vaccinated and their attitudes towards influenza vaccination are more positive. Of those less likely to get vaccinated, people >40 years old and nurses could be effectively persuaded by free and on-site influenza vaccination. Moreover, free access to vaccination is the strongest motivator for vaccination among all HWs. The attitudes towards mandatory influenza vaccination differ sharply among HWs-while physicians are ready to accept it, nurses are not.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04569019.

The issue of vaccine refusal: the study of a risky behavior

Purpose

Influenza is the most common seasonal infectious disease that causes permanent social, economic, and medical problems worldwide. Therefore, the most effective way to prevent influenza is through vaccines. The aim of this study is to identify the influence of factors that determine the refusal of influenza vaccine among three subjects groups.

Materials and Methods

A survey was conducted amongst the three high-risk groups in 2018-2019 (Moscow, Russia). The survey involved 1,620 parents and pregnant women (group 1), 324 doctors (group 2), and 433 students (group 3). Poor vaccine uptake was observed among respondents in all three groups.

Results

According to the survey results, only 22.2% of children and 13.8% of adults were vaccinated against influenza. Group 2 showed increased rates with 36.7% of vaccinated adults and 58.7% of children. The lowest adherence to annual vaccinations was recorded in group 3 (only 17.3%). There is also a negative correlation between adherence to vaccination and smoking (-0.66), unhealthy diet (-0.73), poor oral hygiene (-0.61), and insufficient awareness of the need for influenza vaccine as well (-0.81).

Conclusion

Thus, a general lack of vaccination awareness has a fundamental role in forming a negative attitude toward influenza vaccine. It is necessary to conduct research to promote vaccination against influenza to improve vaccine uptake among high-risk groups, particularly students.

Healthcare workers' (HCWs) attitudes and related factors towards COVID-19 vaccination: a rapid systematic review

Herd immunity through vaccination is a key measure to control COVID-19 pandemic. However, vaccine hesitancy remains a public health threat, which is still common among healthcare workers (HCWs). This systematic review aimed to synthesise evidence on HCWs' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination and analyse associated factors to provide information for vaccine policy development and practice. We searched PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science and three Chinese databases for literature published on 12 February 2021. Two researchers screened the literature independently, and 13 studies were included in the systematic review. Vaccine acceptance varied widely and ranged from 27.7% to 77.3%. HCWs had positive attitudes towards future COVID-19 vaccines, while vaccine hesitancy was still common. Demographic variables such as men, older age and physicians were positive predictive factors. Women and nurses had more vaccine hesitancy. Previous influenza vaccination and self-perceived risk were facilitators. Concerns for safety, efficacy and effectiveness and distrust of the government were barriers. Influences of direct (COVID-19) patient care towards vaccination intention were less conclusive. Tailored communication strategies were needed to increase the uptake rate of COVID-19 vaccines among HCWs. More importantly, more data and information on the safety and efficacy of vaccines should be provided with transparency.

Identifying H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among health care providers: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to describe and map the evidence on COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal by physicians, nurses, and pharmacists in North America, the United Kingdom and the European Union, and Australia.

INTRODUCTION

Since 2009, we have experienced two pandemics: H1N1 "swine flu" and COVID-19. While severity and transmissibility of these viruses varied, vaccination has been a critical component of bringing both pandemics under control. However, uptake of these vaccines has been affected by vaccine hesitancy and refusal. The vaccination behaviors of health care providers, including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, are of particular interest as they have been priority populations to receive both H1N1 and COVID-19 vaccinations. Their vaccination views could affect the vaccination decisions of their patients.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were eligible for inclusion if they identified reasons for COVID-19 or H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, or pharmacists from the included countries. Published and unpublished literature were eligible for inclusion. Previous reviews were excluded; however, the reference lists of relevant reviews were searched to identify additional studies for inclusion.

METHODS

A search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Academic Search Premier databases was conducted April 28, 2021, to identify English-language literature published from 2009 to 2021. Gray literature and citation screening were also conducted to identify additional relevant literature. Titles, abstracts, and eligible full-text articles were reviewed in duplicate by 2 trained reviewers. Data were extracted in duplicate using a structured extraction tool developed for the review. Conflicts were resolved through discussion or with a third team member. Data were synthesized using narrative and tabular summaries.

RESULTS

In total, 83 articles were included in the review. Studies were conducted primarily across the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. The majority of articles (n=70) used cross-sectional designs to examine knowledge, attitudes, and uptake of H1N1 (n=61) or COVID-19 (n=22) vaccines. Physicians, medical students, nurses, and nursing students were common participants in the studies; however, only 8 studies included pharmacists in their sample. Across health care settings, most studies were conducted in urban, academic teaching hospitals, with 1 study conducted in a rural hospital setting. Concerns about vaccine safety, vaccine side effects, and perceived low risk of contracting H1N1 or COVID-19 were the most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy or refusal across both vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

With increased interest and attention on vaccines in recent years, intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, more research that examines vaccine hesitancy or refusal across different health care settings and health care providers is warranted. Future work should aim to utilize more qualitative and mixed methods research designs to capture the personal perspectives of vaccine hesitancy and refusal, and consider collecting data beyond the common urban and academic health care settings identified in this review.

Pharmacists' attitudes toward influenza vaccination: does the COVID-19 pandemic make a difference?

Background

Influenza vaccine uptake in most European countries remains low, despite the World Health Organization's target of 75%. Community pharmacists play a vital role in promoting vaccination; however, they have been reported to be vaccine-hesitant. This study aimed to investigate changes in pharmacists' attitudes toward influenza vaccination since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as their COVID-19 vaccination intentions.

Methods

In December 2020, all members of the Swiss Association of Pharmacists were invited to participate in an online, cross-sectional survey. This study assessed pharmacists' attitudes toward influenza vaccination by surveying influenza vaccine uptake during the 2019-20 influenza season and possible reasons for their decision(s), in addition to their intention to receive COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccination(s) during the 2020-21 influenza season. Descriptive analysis and multinomial logistic regression were used to assess predictors of vaccine uptake and intention.

Results

Of 5900 Swiss pharmacists, 569 (9.6%) completed the survey. The self-reported influenza vaccination coverage among pharmacists during the 2019-20 season was 48.0%. The primary reason for vaccine uptake was the belief that all healthcare workers should be vaccinated, whereas the main reason for refusal was a lack of concern about contracting influenza. The proportions of participants who intend to accept influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations in the 2020-2021 season, when available, were 63.3% and 66.5%, respectively. The most important predictor of high willingness to be vaccinated against influenza in 2020-21 was vaccination history (OR = 3.73; 95% CI = 1.47-9.50), while the most critical predictor of willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 was the intention to be vaccinated against influenza (OR = 3.45; 95% CI = 1.74-6.84).

Conclusions

Findings indicated that although pharmacists' readiness to accept seasonal influenza vaccination significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, influenza vaccine uptake among them remains suboptimal. This is consistent with what has been reported in the literature.

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.

Social and demographic patterns of influenza vaccination coverage in Norway, influenza seasons 2014/15 to 2020/21

AIMS

To examine influenza vaccination coverage among risk groups (RG) and health care workers (HCW), and study social and demographic patterns of vaccination coverage over time.

METHODS

Vaccination coverage was estimated by self-report in a nationally representative telephone survey among 14919 individuals aged 18-79 years over seven influenza seasons from 2014/15 to 2020/21. We explored whether belonging to an influenza RG (being >=65 years of age and/or having >=1 medical risk factor), being a HCW or educational attainment was associated with vaccination status using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Vaccination coverage increased from 27 % to 66 % among individuals 65-79 years, from 13 % to 33 % among individuals 18-64 years with >=1 risk factor, and from 9 % to 51 % among HCWs during the study period. Being older, having a risk factor or being a HCW were significantly associated with higher coverage in all multivariable logistic regression analyses. Higher education was also consistently associated with higher coverage, but the difference did not reach significance in all influenza seasons. Educational attainment was not significantly associated with coverage while coverage was at its lowest (2014/15-2017/18), but as coverage increased, so did the differences. Individuals with intermediate or lower education were less likely to report vaccination than those with higher education in season 2018/19, OR = 0.61 (95 % CI 0.46-0.80) and OR = 0.58 (95 % CI 0.41-0.83), respectively, and in season 2019/20, OR = 0.69 (95 % CI 0.55-0.88) and OR = 0.71 (95 % CI 0.53-0.95), respectively. When the vaccine was funded in the COVID-19 pandemic winter of 2020/21, educational differences diminished again and were no longer significant.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed widening educational differences in influenza vaccination coverage as coverage increased from 2014/15 to 2019/20. When influenza vaccination was funded in 2020/21, differences in coverage by educational attainment diminished. These findings indicate that economic barriers influence influenza vaccination decisions among risk groups in Norway.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

COVID-19 vaccine knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of health care workers in Perth, Western Australia: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Health care workers (HCWs) faced an increased risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Australia's COVID-19 vaccine rollout commenced in February 2021 to priority groups, including HCWs. Given their increased risk, as well as influence on patients' vaccine uptake, it was important that HCWs had a positive COVID-19 vaccination experience, as well as trusting the vaccine safety and efficacy data.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 19 public- and privately-practicing HCWs in Western Australia between February-July 2021. Data were deductively analysed using NVivo 12 and guided by the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour model.

RESULTS

15/19 participants had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine. Participants were highly motivated, mostly to protect themselves and to get back to "normal", but also to protect patients. Many had a heightened awareness of COVID-19 severity due hearing from colleagues working in settings more impacted than Western Australia. Participants trusted the COVID-19 vaccine development and approval process; their histories of having to accept vaccines for work helped them to see COVID-19 vaccination as no different. Many recalled initially being unsure of how and when they'd be able to access the vaccine. Once they had this knowledge, half had difficulties with the booking process, and some were unable to access a clinic at a convenient location or time. Participants learnt about COVID-19 vaccination through government resources, health organisations, and their workplace, but few had seen any government campaigns for the wider public. Finally, most had discussed COVID-19 vaccination with their social network.

CONCLUSION

HCWs in Western Australia demonstrated good knowledge about COVID-19 vaccination, with many reasons to vaccinate themselves and support the vaccination of others. Addressing the barriers identified in this study will be important for planning to vaccinate health workforces during future pandemics.

West Nile Virus Infection: A Cross-Sectional Study on Italian Medical Professionals during Summer Season 2022

West Nile virus (WNV) has progressively endemized in large areas of continental Europe, and particularly in Northern Italy, in the Po River Valley. During summer season 2022, Italy experienced an unprecedented surge in incidence cases of WNV infections, including its main complications (West Nile fever (WNF) and West Nile neuroinvasive disease (WNND)). As knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of medical professionals may be instrumental in guaranteeing a prompt diagnosis and an accurate management of incident cases, we performed a cross-sectional study specifically on a sample of Italian medical professionals (1 August 2022-10 September 2022; around 8800 potential recipients). From a total of 332 questionnaires (response rate of 3.8%), 254 participating medical professionals were eventually included in the analyses. Knowledge status of participants was unsatisfying, as most of them exhibited knowledge gaps on the actual epidemiology of WNV, with similar uncertainties on the clinical features of WNF and WNND. Moreover, most of participants substantially overlooked WNV as a human pathogen when compared to SARS-CoV-2, TB, and even HIV. Interestingly, only 65.4% of respondents were either favorable or highly favorable towards a hypothetical WNV vaccine. Overall, acknowledging a higher risk perception on WNV was associated with individual factors such as reporting a seniority ≥ 10 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.39, 95% Confidence interval [95%CI] 1.34 to 4.28), reporting a better knowledge score (aOR 2.92, 95%CI 1.60 to 5.30), having previously managed cases of WNV infections (aOR 3.65, 95%CI 1.14 to 14.20), being favorable towards a hypothetic vaccine (aOR 2.16, 95%CI 1.15 to 4.04), and perceiving WNV infections as potentially affecting daily activities (aOR 2.57, 95%CI 1.22 to 5.42). In summary, substantial knowledge gaps and the erratic risk perception collectively enlighten the importance and the urgency for appropriate information campaigns among medical professionals, and particularly among frontline personnel.

Influenza Vaccination Assessment according to a Value-Based Health Care Approach

Background: Seasonal influenza has a considerable public health impact, and vaccination is the key to preventing its consequences. Our aim was to describe how the value of influenza vaccination is addressed in the scientific literature considering a new value framework based on four pillars (personal, allocative, technical, and societal value). Methods: A systematic review was conducted by querying three databases. The analysis was performed on international studies focused on influenza vaccination value, and the four value pillars were taken into consideration for their description. Results: Overall, 40 studies were considered. Most of them focused on influenza vaccination in the general population (27.5%), emphasizing its value for all age groups. Most studies addressed technical value (70.4%), especially in terms of economic models and cost drivers to be considered for the economic evaluations of influenza vaccines, and societal value (63%), whereas few dealt with personal (37%) and allocative values (22.2%). Conclusions: The whole value of influenza vaccination is still not completely recognized. Knowledge and communication of the whole value of influenza vaccination is essential to guide value-based health policies. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to implement initiatives that involve all relevant stakeholders.

The Vaccine Hesitancy Profiles and Determinants of Seasonal Influenza among Chinese Community Healthcare Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study

This paper is an evaluation of seasonal influenza vaccination hesitancy (IVH) and its determinants among community HCWs in Chongqing, a city in southwest China. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 1030 community HCWs with direct or indirect patient contact was conducted from July to September 2021 using a self-administered electronic questionnaire. Possible factors for IVH among community HCWs were investigated by multivariable logistic regression to yield adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Overall, 46.2% of community HCWs were vaccinated in the 2020–2021 season, while 65.8% of community HCWs had IVH. “Don’t know the coverage in China” (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.01–2.11; 40-year-old group OR: 3.02, 95% CI: 1.92–4.76), “complacency” (OR: 4.55, 95% CI: 3.14–6.60) were positively related with having IVH. The community HCWs that had a history of influenza vaccination (OR: 0.67 95% CI: 0.48–0.95) and groups with confidence and convenience (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.06–0.12; OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.23–0.52, respectively) were more likely to completely accept vaccination. Conclusions: Measures such as improving the awareness and knowledge of influenza and vaccination and expanding the free vaccination policy, combined with improving the convenience of the vaccination service, will promote increased seasonal influenza vaccination-coverage in community HCWs in Chongqing.

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Vaccinating Front-Line Healthcare Workers: Results of a Pre-Pandemic Cross-Sectional Study from North-Eastern Italy on First Responders

First responders are front-line healthcare workers who are potentially exposed to different infectious agents. Characterizing their knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) towards immunization, therefore, has the potential to significantly improve occupational health and safety. A cross-sectional study was performed in October 2018 using a sample of 161 first responders from the Parma Province (mean age 45.1 ± 14.1 years; seniority 10.8 ± 8.6 years). The participants were questioned on three recommended vaccinations (i.e., the seasonal influenza, measles, and pertussis vaccines) and on meningococcal vaccines (not officially recommended for first responders). The participant’s knowledge status and risk perception were assessed as percentage values through a specifically designed questionnaire. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for factors associated with vaccination status were calculated by means of a binary logistic regression analysis. The internal consistency result, calculated using a general knowledge test, was good (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.894), but the corresponding score was unsatisfying (46.5% ± 32.4), evidencing uncertainties surrounding the recommendations for measles and meningococcal vaccines (39.1% and 34.2% incorrect answers, respectively). While the large majority of respondents were favorable towards the meningococcal (89.4%), measles (87.5%), and pertussis vaccines (83.0%), 55.3% exhibited a favorable attitude toward the seasonal influenza vaccine, the uptake of which in 2018, was reported by 28.0% of respondents, compared to the self-reported lifetime status for meningitis (26.1%), measles (42.2%), and pertussis (34.8%). Not coincidentally, all assessed infections were associated with a low-risk perception score, particularly influenza (33.9% ± 18.4). Interestingly enough, neither knowledge status nor risk perception were associated with vaccination rates. More precisely, the main predictor for being vaccinated against seasonal influenza in 2018 was a seniority of ≥10 years (aOR 3.26, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.35–7.91), while both pertussis and measles were positively associated with higher educational achievement (aOR 3.27, 95%CI 1.29–8.30; and aOR 2.69, 95%CI 1.09–6.65, respectively). The reasons for vaccination gaps among the sampled first responders, apparently, did not find their roots in inappropriate knowledge status and risk perception alone. However, the very low rates of sampled immunization lead us to recommend stronger and more appropriate information campaigns.

Effect of vibration associated with cryotherapy on vaccine-related pain and anxiety levels in adults: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is one of the most effective strategies for prevention and eradication of immunopreventable diseases, but community acceptance of vaccination can be influenced by different factors, such as pain and anxiety. The use of high-frequency vibration associated with cryotherapy has been used to manage pain and anxiety during the vaccination process in children, but studies with adults are still scarce. This study aims to evaluate the effect of high-frequency vibration associated with cryotherapy on the levels of self-reported pain and anxiety related to administration of the Influenza vaccine intramuscularly in adults.

METHODS

A two-arm, parallel, randomized clinical trial conducted in a Brazilian Primary Health Care Unit is proposed. A sample of 350 adults will be randomly assigned to participate in the control group, receiving the vaccine intramuscularly according to the standard protocol of the service, or in the intervention group, receiving the vaccine by the same route and using a portable device of high frequency vibration associated with cryotherapy for 30 s before and during administration. The primary endpoints will be self-reported levels of pain, assessed before and after vaccine administration. Secondary endpoints will be levels of anxiety, satisfaction with vaccine administration, and discomfort caused by high frequency vibration and temperature of the frozen bag in contact with the skin. Self-reported levels of pain and anxiety will be compared before and after vaccination as well as between the control and intervention groups.

DISCUSSION

By evaluating the effect of high-frequency vibration associated with cryotherapy on pain and anxiety levels, we expect to find evidence that will support nursing practice, in order to promote greater comfort and safety in the vaccination process and, consequently, greater compliance by the population, by minimizing its undesirable effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Human Research Ethics Committee Opinion Number: 5.138.564. Approved on December 2, 2021. Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (REBEC): Registration number RBR-5zgy25w. Registered on December 09, 2021.

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

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

COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers-A Review

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

COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccination Campaign in a Research and University Hospital in Milan, Italy

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are a historical key target of influenza vaccination programs. For the 2021–2022 season, WHO considered the coadministration of a flu and a COVID-19 vaccine as acceptable and recommended it to allow for higher uptake of both vaccines. The aim of this study was to investigate demographic and occupational features of vaccinated HCWs, reasons behind flu vaccine acceptance and a possible effect of the coadministration of a COVID-19 vaccine, in order to potentially draw general conclusions on HCWs’ attitude towards flu vaccination and inform further strategies for consistent improvement of vaccine acceptance. Methods: a promotional and educational campaign, a gaming strategy, and vaccination delivery through both a large central hub and on-site ambulatories, were the implemented strategies. In the central hub, the flu/COVID-19 vaccine coadministration was offered. Statistical descriptive analysis, multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and logistic regression models were performed. Results: 2381 HCWs received the flu vaccine, prompting a vaccination coverage rate (VCR) of 52.0% versus 43.1% in the 2020–2021 campaign. Furthermore, 50.6% vaccinated HCWs belonged to the 18–39 years-old age group. The most expressed reasons for vaccine uptake were “Vaccination is the most effective strategy of prevention” (n = 1928, 81.0%), “As HCW it’s my duty to get vaccinated to protect my patients” (n = 766, 32.2%), and the group of COVID-19-related reasons (n = 586, 24.6%). In addition, 23.3% HCWs received the flu vaccine in the current campaign but not in the previous one (newly vaccinated) and the flu/COVID-19 vaccine coadministration was more frequent in this group. A total of 51.0% HCWs were hesitant towards the coadministration, while residents and nurses showed the highest propensity to receive it. Conclusions: in the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Fondazione’s influenza VCR continued to increase, with the greatest participation among HCWs aged 18–39 years. A potential propelling role of the COVID-19 vaccine coadministration was highlighted.

'Leading from the front' implementation increases the success of influenza vaccination drives among healthcare workers: a reanalysis of systematic review evidence using Intervention Component Analysis (ICA) and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA)

BACKGROUND

Seasonal influenza vaccination of healthcare workers (HCW) is widely recommended to protect staff and patients. A previous systematic review examined interventions to encourage uptake finding that hard mandates, such as loss of employment for non-vaccination, were more effective than soft mandates, such as signing a declination form, or other interventions such as incentives. Despite these overarching patterns the authors of the review concluded that 'substantial heterogeneity' remained requiring further analysis. This paper reanalyses the evidence using Intervention Component Analysis (ICA) and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to examine whether the strategies used to implement interventions explain the residual heterogeneity.

METHODS

We used ICA to extract implementation features and trialists' reflections on what underpinned the success of the intervention they evaluated. The ICA findings then informed and structured two QCA analyses to systematically examine associations between implementation features and intervention outcomes. Analysis 1 examined hard mandate studies. Analysis 2 examined soft mandates and other interventions.

RESULTS

In Analysis 1 ICA revealed the significance of 'leading from the front' rather than 'top-down' implementation of hard mandates. Four key features underpinned this: providing education prior to implementation; two-way engagement so HCW can voice concerns prior to implementation; previous use of other strategies so that institutions 'don't-go-in-cold' with hard-mandates; and support from institutional leadership. QCA revealed that either of two configurations were associated with greater success of hard mandates. The first involves two-way engagement, leadership support and a 'don't-go-in-cold' approach. The second involves leadership support, education and a 'don't-go-in-cold' approach. Reapplying the 'leading from the front' theory in Analysis 2 revealed similar patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of intervention type a 'leading from the front' approach to implementation will likely enhance intervention success. While the results pertain to flu vaccination among HCWs, the components identified here may be relevant to public health campaigns regarding COVID-19 vaccination.

Effect of the 2020/21 season influenza vaccine on SARS-CoV-2 infection in a cohort of Italian healthcare workers

OBJECTIVES

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are a priority group for seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV). The 2020/21 SIV campaign was conducted during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccines, including SIV, may exert non-specific protective effects on other infectious diseases which may be ascribable to the concept of trained immunity. The aim of this study was to explore the association between 2020/21 SIV and SARS-CoV-2 positivity in a cohort of Italian HCWs.

METHODS

In this observational study, a cohort of HCWs employed by a large (ca 5000 employees) referral tertiary acute-care university hospital was followed up retrospectively until the start of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. The independent variable of interest was the 2020/21 SIV uptake. Both egg-based and cell culture-derived quadrivalent SIVs were available. The study outcome was the incidence of new SARS-CoV-2 infections, as determined by RT-PCR. Multivariable Cox regression was applied in order to discern the association of interest.

RESULTS

The final cohort consisted of 2561 HCWs who underwent ≥1 RT-PCR test and accounted for a total of 94,445 person-days of observation. SIV uptake was 35.6%. During the study period, a total of 290 new SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred. The incidence of new SARS-CoV-2 was 1.62 (95% CI: 1.22-2.10) and 3.91 (95% CI: 3.43-4.45) per 1000 person-days in vaccinated and non-vaccinated HCWs, respectively, with an adjusted non-proportional hazard ratio of 0.37 (95% CI: 0.22-0.62). E-values suggested that unmeasured confounding was unlikely to explain the association.

CONCLUSIONS

A lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed among SIV recipients.

Evaluating the Findings of the IMPACT-C Randomized Clinical Trial to Improve COVID-19 Vaccine Coverage in Skilled Nursing Facilities

IMPORTANCE

Identifying successful strategies to increase COVID-19 vaccination among skilled nursing facility (SNF) residents and staff is integral to preventing future outbreaks in a continually overwhelmed system.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a multicomponent vaccine campaign would increase vaccine rates among SNF residents and staff.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a cluster randomized trial with a rapid timeline (December 2020-March 2021) coinciding with the Pharmacy Partnership Program (PPP). It included 133 SNFs in 4 health care systems across 16 states: 63 and 70 facilities in the intervention and control arms, respectively, and participants included 7496 long-stay residents (>100 days) and 17 963 staff.

INTERVENTIONS

Multicomponent interventions were introduced at the facility level that included: (1) educational material and electronic messaging for staff; (2) town hall meetings with frontline staff (nurses, nurse aides, dietary, housekeeping); (3) messaging from community leaders; (4) gifts (eg, T-shirts) with socially concerned messaging; (5) use of a specialist to facilitate consent with residents' proxies; and (6) funds for additional COVID-19 testing of staff/residents.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes of this study were the proportion of residents (from electronic medical records) and staff (from facility logs) who received a COVID-19 vaccine (any), examined as 2 separate outcomes. Mixed-effects generalized linear models with a binomial distribution were used to compare outcomes between arms, using intent-to-treat approach. Race was examined as an effect modifier in the resident outcome model.

RESULTS

Most facilities were for-profit (95; 71.4%), and 1973 (26.3%) of residents were Black. Among residents, 82.5% (95% CI, 81.2%-83.7%) were vaccinated in the intervention arm, compared with 79.8% (95% CI, 78.5%-81.0%) in the usual care arm (marginal difference 0.8%; 95% CI, -1.9% to 3.7%). Among staff, 49.5% (95% CI, 48.4%-50.6%) were vaccinated in the intervention arm, compared with 47.9% (95% CI, 46.9%-48.9%) in usual care arm (marginal difference: -0.4%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 3.1%). There was no association of race with the outcome among residents.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

A multicomponent vaccine campaign did not have a significant effect on vaccination rates among SNF residents or staff. Among residents, vaccination rates were high. However, half the staff remained unvaccinated despite these efforts. Vaccination campaigns to target SNF staff will likely need to use additional approaches.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04732819.

Influenza Vaccination Coverage, Motivators for, and Barriers to Influenza Vaccination among Healthcare Workers in Wroclaw, Poland

Background: Influenza vaccination, as a key element of control activities intended to prevent nosocomial influenza transmission, is recommended each year for all healthcare workers (HCWs). The objectives were to determine the rate of influenza vaccination and to identify reasons for receiving or declining the influenza vaccine among HCWs in the 2018/19 and 2019/20 influenza seasons. Methods: This study is a cross-sectional observational study carried out between January and March 2020, in 2 hospitals and 15 primary health-care settings (PHCS) in Wroclaw (Poland). Results: A total of 165 questionnaires were completed. The majority of participating HCWs were female—137 (83.0%), and, by profession, the majority were physicians 92 (55.8%). Influenza vaccination coverage was 61.2% in 2019/20, and 47.9% in the 2018/19 season for all participants. Participants who were male, physicians and personnel from PHCS were more frequently vaccinated in both seasons. According to the statistical analysis, physicians were more likely to receive vaccinations than nurses (p < 0.01), as were HCWs who had been vaccinated in the previous season (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The identified barriers were mainly caused by misconceptions (fear of vaccine adverse effects and perception of not being at risk/no need to get vaccinated) and an organizational barriers (lack of time). These findings may prove useful for designing immunization campaigns to tailor strategies to reach specific groups.

Barriers and facilitators to influenza vaccination observed by officers of national immunization programs in South America countries with contrasting coverage rates

Influenza is a severe, vaccine-preventable disease. Vaccination programs across Latin American countries show contrasting coverage rates, from 29% in Paraguay to 89% in Brazil. This study explores how national influenza vaccination programs in the chosen South American countries address vaccine confidence and convenience, as well as complacency toward the disease. Barriers and facilitators to influenza vaccination programs in their relation to vaccine hesitancy were observed by documentary analysis and interviews with 38 national immunization program officers in high- (Brazil and Chile) and low-performing (Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay) countries. Influenza vaccination policies, financing, purchasing, coordination, and accessibility are considered good or acceptable. National communication strategies focus on vaccine availability during campaigns. In Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay, anti-vaccine propaganda was mentioned as a problem. Programming and implementation face human resource shortages across most countries. Statistical information, health information systems, and nominal risk-group records are available, with limitations in Peru and Paraguay. Health promotion, supervision, monitoring, and evaluation are perceived as opportunities to address confidence and complacency. Influenza vaccination programs identify and act on most barriers and facilitators affecting influenza vaccine hesitancy via supply-side strategies which mostly address vaccine convenience. Confidence and complacency are insufficiently addressed, except for Uruguay. Programs have the opportunity to develop integral supply and demand-side approaches.

Identifying COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccination hesitancy or refusal among health care providers across North America, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this scoping review is to describe and map the evidence on COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccination hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists across North America, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia.

INTRODUCTION

When global pandemics occur, including the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, which originated in 2020, and the swine flu influenza pandemic (H1N1) of 2009, there is increased pressure for pharmaceutical companies and government agencies to develop safe and effective vaccines against these highly contagious illnesses. Following development and approvals, it then becomes essential that priority populations, including frontline health care providers, opt to receive these vaccinations to prevent illness and potential transmission to their patients. However, vaccine hesitancy or refusal has played a significant role in suboptimal vaccination rates globally. As health care providers, including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, often administer vaccines, their vaccination views and behaviors are of great importance because they can directly affect the vaccination decisions of their patients.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

The review will identify factors affecting COVID-19 and H1N1 vaccine hesitancy or refusal among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists across a range of countries. Published and unpublished evidence, including quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods research, and gray literature, will be eligible for inclusion.

METHODS

This scoping review protocol will follow JBI methodology. The search strategy will be developed with support from a health sciences librarian scientist to identify relevant evidence. Screening and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers, with findings summarized and presented through narrative descriptions, tables, and figures.

Acceptability of the COVID-19 Vaccine among Adults in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study of the General Population in the Southern Region of Saudi Arabia

Vaccines afford protection against infectious diseases. However, a sizeable part of the population refuse vaccinations and continue to dispute the evidence supporting vaccinations. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination uptake and its determinants among the Saudi population in the southern region of Saudi Arabia. A cross-sectional survey studied COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in adults in Saudi Arabia, targeting the general population in the southwestern region. Data were collected through an online survey questionnaire tool. All data were analysed using SPSS version 23.0. The majority (57.29%) of the participants were willing to receive the new COVID-19 vaccine, whereas almost 64% believed it is necessary to take the COVID-19 vaccine to protect oneself and that the vaccine is safe, efficient and effective. The data showed that perceived risk of COVID-19 (p = 0.015), history of previous vaccination against seasonal influenza (p = 0.000), and trust in the healthcare system (p = 0.025) were significant predictors for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. We conclude that participants' trust in the healthcare system, perceived risk of contracting COVID-19, and history of previous vaccination against seasonal influenza were significant predictors for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Knowing the acceptance rates for the COVID-19 vaccination can aid state agencies, medical practitioners, and other entities in reducing the impact of vaccine avoidance.

COVID-19 Vaccine Intent Among Health Care Professionals of Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Barbados

INTRODUCTION

Due to increased exposure risk and the potential impact of COVID-19 infection, health care professionals (HCP) are a target group for COVID-19 vaccination. This study aimed to examine the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines among HCP at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Barbados.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of HCP was conducted between February 14 and 27, 2021 using an online questionnaire. The questionnaire included demographic information, knowledge of novel coronavirus, intention to accept the COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine literacy (VL), and perceptions and attitudes regarding COVID-19 vaccines. Mean VL scores were calculated. The relationship between socio-demographic variables and vaccine intent was assessed using a multivariable logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Of 343 HCPs, 55.1% indicated they would accept the COVID-19 vaccine if it were available; 44.9% expressed hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine. We assessed the impact of socio-demographic factors and previous vaccine behavior on vaccine intent; after adjustment of the multivariable logistic regression model, non-Barbadian nationality and previous flu vaccine uptake were statistically significant predictors of reported intent to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Persons who indicated that they would take the vaccine had a higher mean vaccine literacy score [3.46 95% CI (3.40, 3.52)] than those who were not ready to take the vaccine immediately [3.23 95% CI (3.15, 3.30)]. VL scores were higher among the 29.5% of HCPs who believed vaccines should be mandatory.

CONCLUSION

This study highlighted vaccine hesitancy among HCPs in the sole public tertiary hospital of Barbados. As HCP perceptions may help or hinder the campaign to promote vaccine uptake in Barbados, vaccine promotion programs targeting HCPs are needed to ensure the success of the country's COVID-19 vaccination drive.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Seasonal Influenza Vaccination of Health Workers

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the pooled effect of influenza vaccinations for health workers (HWs). Nine databases were screened to identify randomized clinical trials and comparative observational studies that reported the effect of influenza vaccination among HWs. The risk ratio (RR), standardized mean difference, and 95% confidence interval (CI) were employed to study the effect size using fixed/random-effect models. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were conducted accordingly. Publication bias was examined. Sixteen studies (involving 7971 HWs from nine countries) were included after a comprehensive literature search. The combined RR regarding the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza was 0.36 (95% CI: 0.25 to 0.54), the incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.45 to 1.06), the absenteeism rate was 0.63 (95% CI: 0.46 to 0.86), and the integrated standardized mean difference of workdays lost was −0.18 (95% CI: −0.28 to −0.07) days/person. The subgroup analysis indicated that vaccination significantly decreases the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza in different countries, study populations, and average-age vaccinated groups. Influenza vaccinations could effectively reduce the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza, absenteeism rates, and workdays lost among HWs. It is advisable, therefore, to improve the coverage and increase the influenza vaccination count among HWs, which may benefit both workers and medical institutions.

Healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communicating with people over 50 years of age about vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Infectious diseases are a major cause of illness and death among older adults. Vaccines can prevent infectious diseases, including against seasonal influenza, pneumococcal diseases, herpes zoster and COVID-19. However, the uptake of vaccination among older adults varies across settings and groups. Communication with healthcare workers can play an important role in older people's decisions to vaccinate. To support an informed decision about vaccination, healthcare workers should be able to identify the older person's knowledge gaps, needs and concerns. They should also be able to share and discuss information about the person's disease risk and disease severity; the vaccine's effectiveness and safety; and practical information about how the person can access vaccines. Therefore, healthcare workers need good communication skills and to actively keep up-to-date with the latest evidence. An understanding of their perceptions and experiences of this communication can help us train and support healthcare workers and design good communication strategies.

OBJECTIVES

To explore healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communicating with older adults about vaccination.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL and Scopus on 21 March 2020. We also searched Epistemonikos for related reviews, searched grey literature sources, and carried out reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies. We searched for studies in any language.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative studies and mixed-methods studies with an identifiable qualitative component. We included studies that explored the perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers and other health system staff towards communication with adults over the age of 50 years or their informal caregivers about vaccination.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using a data extraction form designed for this review. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of predefined criteria. We extracted and assessed data regarding study authors' motivations for carrying out their study. We used a thematic synthesis approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We examined each review finding to identify factors that may influence intervention implementation and we developed implications for practice.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies in our review. Most studies explored healthcare workers' views and experiences about vaccination of older adults more broadly but also mentioned communication issues specifically. All studies were from high-income countries. The studies focused on doctors, nurses, pharmacists and others working in hospitals, clinics, pharmacies and nursing homes. These healthcare workers discussed different types of vaccines, including influenza, pneumococcal and herpes zoster vaccines. The review was carried out before COVID-19 vaccines were available. We downgraded our confidence in several of the findings from high confidence to moderate, low or very low confidence. One reason for this was that some findings were based on only small amounts of data. Another reason was that the findings were based on studies from only a few countries, making us unsure about the relevance of these findings to other settings. Healthcare workers reported that older adults asked about vaccination to different extents, ranging from not asking about vaccines at all, to great demand for information (high confidence finding). When the topic of vaccination was discussed, healthcare workers described a lack of information, and presence of misinformation, fears and concerns about vaccines among older adults (moderate confidence). The ways in which healthcare workers discussed vaccines with older adults appeared to be linked to what they saw as the aim of vaccination communication. Healthcare workers differed among themselves in their perceptions of this aim and about their own roles and the roles of older adults in vaccine decisions. Some healthcare workers thought it was important to provide information but emphasised the right and responsibility of older adults to decide for themselves. Others used information to persuade and convince older adults to vaccinate in order to increase 'compliance' and 'improve' vaccination rates, and in some cases to gain financial benefits. Other healthcare workers tailored their approach to what they believed the older adult needed or wanted (moderate confidence). Healthcare workers believed that older adults' decisions could be influenced by several factors, including the nature of the healthcare worker-patient relationship, the healthcare worker's status, and the extent to which healthcare workers led by example (low confidence). Our review also identified factors that are likely to influence how communication between healthcare workers and older adults take place. These included issues tied to healthcare workers' views and experiences regarding the diseases in question and the vaccines; as well as their views and experiences of the organisational and practical implementation of vaccine services.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is little research focusing specifically on healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of communication with older adults about vaccination. The studies we identified suggest that healthcare workers differed among themselves in their perceptions about the aim of this communication and about the role of older adults in vaccine decisions. Based on these findings and the other findings in our review, we have developed a set of questions or prompts that may help health system planners or programme managers when planning or implementing strategies for vaccination communication between healthcare workers and older adults.

A comparative assessment of attitudes and hesitancy for influenza vis-à-vis COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare students and professionals in Malta

Introduction

Vaccine hesitancy has been a public health threat for decades, even among healthcare professionals. The study explored vaccination attitudes and hesitancy with regard to seasonal influenza and the anticipated Covid-19 vaccines among healthcare professionals and students.

Methods

Anonymous questionnaires were distributed through electronic mail to healthcare professionals working in Malta's Health Division, at University of Malta, and in community pharmacies, and to members of Malta College of Family Doctors.

Results

The response rate was 18.60% (n = 1802). The percentages of those who took the influenza vaccine last year (2019) and who will take it this year (2020) increased across professionals, highest for family doctors and lowest for trainees in family medicine. The proportion of those likelier to take the Covid-19 vaccine was directly related to likelihood of taking influenza vaccination. Both family doctor trainees and nurses showed the highest Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy. Concerns pertaining to COVID-19 vaccination were mostly related to insufficient knowledge, although pharmacists (community, academic and students) were concerned about the rapid approval of the vaccine.

Conclusion

An increase in influenza vaccine uptake is expected in view of the current Covid-19 pandemic. Of concern is the hesitancy towards Covid-19 vaccine particular within healthcare professionals, a cohort expected to be insightful and potential role models for the community. The associated hesitancy for both COVID-19 and influenza vaccination infers an intrinsic degree of vaccine hesitancy, which brings forward the need for healthcare professionals to be engaged in education, vaccination policies and administration in order to ensure compliance.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-021-01585-z.

Attitudes and Knowledge of European Medical Students and Early Graduates about Vaccination and Self-Reported Vaccination Coverage-Multinational Cross-Sectional Survey

Vaccination is one of the most useful preventive interventions in healthcare. The purpose of our study was to gain overview of the opinions, knowledge, and engagement in vaccination practices among medical students (MS) and junior doctors (JD) in Europe. The survey was distributed from March 2016 until August 2016 via the e-mail and social media of the European Medical Students' Association. In total, 1821 responses from MS and JD from 34 countries in the European region were analysed. The majority of respondents agreed that vaccines are useful (98.7%) and effective (97.2%). Although the necessity of revaccination was supported by 99.2%, only 68.0% of the respondents went through with it. Even though the potential benefit of the flu vaccination seems to be acknowledged by our participants, only 22.1% of MS and JD declared getting the flu shot every or every other season. MS and JD were in favour of specific mandatory vaccination for medical staff (86.0%) and medical students (82.7%). Furthermore, we analysed the self-reported vaccination coverage of our participants regarding 19 vaccines. Of the respondents, 89.5% claimed to provide advice about vaccination to their friends and family. In conclusion, European MS and JD have a very positive attitude towards vaccination. However, their behaviour and knowledge demonstrate certain gaps which should be further addressed in medical education.

Determinants of influenza vaccine uptake and willingness to be vaccinated by pharmacists among the active adult population in Hungary: a cross-sectional exploratory study

Background

Many studies have addressed influenza vaccine uptake in risk-group populations (e.g. the elderly). However, it is also necessary to assess influenza vaccine uptake in the active adult population, since they are considered to be a high-transmitter group. In several countries pharmacists are involved in adult vaccination in order to increase uptake. This study therefore aimed to investigate the determinants of influenza vaccination uptake and examine the willingness to be vaccinated by pharmacists.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted among Hungarian adults using a self-administered online questionnaire distributed via social media (Facebook). The questionnaire included five domains: demographics, vaccine uptake, factors that motivated or discouraged vaccination, knowledge and willingness of participants to accept pharmacists as influenza vaccine administrators. Descriptive statistics were applied and logistic regression was conducted to assess the possible determinants of vaccination uptake.

Results

Data from 1631 participants who completed the questionnaires were analysed. Almost 58% of respondents (944/1631) had occupational and/or health risk factors for influenza. Just over one-tenth (12.3%;200/1631) of participants were vaccinated during the 2017/18 influenza season, 15.4% (145/944) of whom had a risk factor for influenza. Approximately half of the participants (47.4%) believed that influenza vaccination can cause flu, and just over half of them (51.6%), were not knowledgeable about the safety of influenza vaccine ingredients. Logistic regression found that age, sex, health risk factor and knowledge on influenza/influenza vaccination were associated with influenza vaccination uptake (p < 0.05). The most frequently cited reason for having an influenza vaccination was self-protection (95.0%). The most common reason given for refusing the influenza vaccine was that the respondent stated they rarely had an infectious disease (67.7%). The number of participants who were willing to be vaccinated by pharmacists was two-times higher than the number of participants who were actually vaccinated during the 2017/18 influenza season.

Conclusion

Influenza vaccine uptake in the active adult population is low in Hungary. Public awareness and knowledge about influenza vaccination and influenza disease should be increased. The results also suggest a need to extend the role played by pharmacists in Hungary.

Adherence of nurses to annual seasonal influenza vaccination over a 5-year period

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of influenza infection with associated nosocomial transmission. Sustained adherence to seasonal influenza vaccination uptake each year is important in epidemic control.

AIM

To assess the adherence of nurses to seasonal influenza vaccination over 5 years and its associated factors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among nurses after the winter influenza season in Hong Kong in March 2019. Based on influenza vaccine uptake rates in the 2014/15-2018/19 seasons, respondents were stratified into three groups: 'full adherence' (vaccine uptake in five seasons), 'partial adherence' (vaccine uptake in one to four seasons) and 'non-adherence' (no vaccine uptake). Stepwise multi-variable logistic regression was performed to determine the associations between adherence to annual influenza vaccination, respondents' characteristics and considerations for vaccination.

FINDINGS

Of 1306 nurses recruited, the majority were female (88%) with a median age of 36 years (interquartile range 30-46 years). The influenza vaccination uptake rate increased from 36% in the 2014/15 season to 47% in the 2018/19 season. After stratification, 39%, 40% and 21% of respondents were non-adherers, partial adherers and full adherers, respectively. Full adherence was significantly associated with female gender [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.60], age ≥40 years (aOR 2.92), long-term care facility nurse (aOR 0.56), uptake during studentship (aOR 3.83), local prevalence of seasonal influenza (aOR 0.51) and expert opinion (aOR 4.04).

CONCLUSIONS

A limited proportion of nurses were fully adherent to seasonal influenza vaccination. Monitoring adherence, improving access to vaccines, and interventions targeting less-adherent HCWs are crucial.

Healthcare Workers' (HCWs) attitudes towards mandatory influenza vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Influenza is a disease responsible for thousands of deaths every year. Although healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a way of contagion for patients, vaccination coverage among them is low. Mandatory vaccination has been proposed, but controversies remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the acceptance of mandatory vaccination by HCWs, and to investigate associated characteristics. MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science were used to search for studies assessing the topic. PRISMA statements were followed. Of the 13,457 univocal records found, 52 studies were included in the systematic review and 40 in the meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of HCWs accepting the policy was of 61% (95% CI: 53%- 68%) but with great heterogeneity between continents (from 54% in Europe to 69% in Asia) and in different professionals (from 40% in nurses to 80% in students). Vaccinated HCWs agreed more frequently with mandatory vaccination than non-vaccinated ones. More studies that consider mandatory vaccination acceptance as the main outcome are needed, but the results of this study confirm that in some settings the majority of HCWs favour mandatory vaccination. This, combined with effects that a flu epidemic could have if overlapped to pandemics with similar symptoms, requires renewed considerations on mandatory vaccination.

Intention to get vaccinations against COVID-19 in French healthcare workers during the first pandemic wave: a cross-sectional survey

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at the frontline of the COVID-19 pandemic and identified as a priority target group for COVID-19 vaccines. We aimed to determine COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate in HCWs in France.

Methods

We conducted an anonymous survey from 26^th March to 2^nd July 2020. The primary endpoint was the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19 if a vaccine was available.

Results

Two-thousand and forty-seven HCWs answered the survey; women accounted for 74% of respondents. Among respondents, 1.554 (76.9%, 95% confidence interval 75.1–78.9) would accept a COVID-19 vaccine. Older age, male gender, fear about COVID-19, individual perceived risk and flu vaccination during previous season were associated with hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Nurses and assistant nurses were less prone to accept vaccination against COVID-19 than physicians. Vaccine hesitancy was associated with a decrease in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Flu vaccine rate was 57.3% during the previous season, and 54.6% of the respondents had the intention to get a flu vaccine during the next season.

Conclusions

Intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19 reached 75% in HCWs with discrepancies between occupational categories. COVID-19 pandemic had no positive effect on flu vaccine acceptance rate.