Prevalence and Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Among Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review

Healthcare workers' willingness to receive COVID-19 booster dose and associated factors in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

The COVID-19 booster dose is considered an important adjunct for the control of the COVID-19 pandemic due to reports of reduced immunity in fully vaccinated individuals. The aims of this study were to assess healthcare workers' intention to receive the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine and to identify predictive factors among healthcare workers. A cross-sectional study was conducted among healthcare workers selected in two provinces, Kasai Oriental, and Haut-Lomami. Data were collected using a questionnaire administered through structured face-to-face interviews, with respondents using a pre-tested questionnaire set up on the Open Data Kit (ODK Collect). All data were analyzed using SPSS v26.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA). Vaccination coverage for COVID-19, considering declarations by health workers, is around 85.9% for the province of Kasai Oriental and 85.8% for Haut-Lomami. A total of 975 responses were collected, 71.4% of health workers at Kasai Oriental and 66.4% from Haut-Lomami declared a definite willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine booster. The duration of protection was the main reason for accepting a booster COVID-19 dose for 64.6% of the respondents. Logistic regression analysis showed that having chronic diseases (aOR = 2.95 [1.65-5.28]), having already received one of the COVID-19 vaccines (aOR = 2.72 [1.43-5. 19]); the belief that only high-risk individuals, such as healthcare professionals and elderly people suffering from other illnesses, needed a booster dose (aOR = 1.75 [1.10-2.81]). Considering the burden of COVID-19, a high acceptance rate for booster doses could be essential to control the pandemic. Our results are novel and could help policymakers design and implement specific COVID-19 vaccination programs to reduce reluctance to seek booster vaccination.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Ontario physicians: a descriptive population-based retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To determine COVID-19 vaccine uptake among physicians in Ontario, Canada from 14 December 2020 to 13 February 2022.

DESIGN

Population-based retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

All registered physicians in Ontario, Canada using data from linked provincial administrative healthcare databases.

PARTICIPANTS

41 267 physicians (including postgraduate trainees) who were Ontario residents and registered with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario were included. Physicians who were out of province, had not accessed Ontario Health Insurance Plan-insured services for their own care for ≥5 years and those with missing identifiers were excluded.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were the proportions of physicians who were recorded to have received at least one, at least two and three doses of a Health Canada-approved COVID-19 vaccine by study end date. Secondary outcomes were how uptake varied by physician characteristics (including age, sex, specialty and residential location) and time elapsed between doses.

RESULTS

Of 41 267 physicians, (56% male, mean age 47 years), 39 359 (95.4%) received at least one dose, 39 148 (94.9%) received at least two doses and 35 834 (86.8%) received three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of those who received three doses, the proportions were 90.4% among those aged ≥60 years and 81.2-89.5% among other age groups; 88.7% among family physicians and 89% among specialists. 1908 physicians (4.6%) had no record of vaccination, and this included 3.4% of family physicians and 4.1% of specialists; however, 28% of this group had missing specialty information.

CONCLUSIONS

In Ontario, within 14 months of COVID-19 vaccine availability, 86.8% of physicians had three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, compared with 45.6% of the general population. Findings may signify physicians' confidence in the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.

Health Care Personnel Workdays Lost and Direct Health Care Salary Costs Incurred due to COVID-19 Infection in the Age of Widespread Vaccine Availability

BACKGROUND

Vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can mitigate the burden of health care worker (HCW) infection. We investigate the burden of HCW illness and its associated direct health care personnel costs in the setting of widespread vaccine availability and explore factors influencing these outcomes.

METHODS

This multicenter prospective study followed HCWs over an 8-month period from January to August 2023. Data recorded included incident COVID-19 infection, symptom burden, workdays missed, and vaccine history. Workdays lost due to illness were used to calculate direct health care personnel costs due to COVID-19 infection. Univariate analysis and multivariable regression investigated the factors associated with workdays lost and direct health care personnel.

RESULTS

In total, 1218 participants were enrolled and followed for 8 months, with 266 incidents of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, 1191 workdays lost, and health care personnel costs of €397 974. Multivariable regression revealed that workdays lost were associated with incomplete primary COVID-19 vaccination course. Being unvaccinated, older age, and male were associated with increased health care personnel costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care workdays lost remain a significant issue and are associated with health care system burden despite vaccine availability. These can be mitigated via targeted implementation of vaccine programs. Seasonal variation in health care workdays lost should inform workforce planning to accommodate surge periods.

COVID-19 vaccination among health care workers in Finland: coverage, perceptions and attitudes

AIMS

In this study, we examined the voluntary COVID-19 vaccine coverage among health care workers (HCWs) working in close patient contact. HCWs' beliefs about COVID-19 infection, their opinions of vaccination and reasons for having or declining the COVID-19 vaccination were also evaluated.

METHODS

In October 2021, a cross-sectional observational study was carried out in five hospitals in Central and Eastern Finland. The anonymous and voluntary survey was targeted at 5120 doctors and nurses working in close patient contact.

RESULTS

Some 1837 responses were included in the study. Ninety-seven per cent of the respondents had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine and 68% of the respondents agreed that all HCWs working in close patient contact should be vaccinated against COVID-19. Vaccination coverage and support for vaccination were higher among older HCWs and doctors. HCWs' main reasons for having the COVID vaccine were willingness to protect themselves, their family and their patients from COVID-19. Concerns about adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine was the main reason for declining it.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall COVID-19 vaccination coverage and support for vaccinations among HCWs working in close patient contact were high without actual mandatory policies being introduced. Prioritising HCWs for COVID-19 vaccinations and widespread vaccine availability, as well as low general vaccine hesitancy and high seasonal influenza vaccination coverage among the study population were check marks in achieving high COVID-19 vaccination coverage rapidly.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of vaccinators about expanded programs on immunization: a cross-sectional study

Introduction

The periodic evaluation of knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of healthcare workers, including vaccinators, concerning expanded programs on immunization (EPI) is very crucial for a better healthcare system. This study was carried out to assess the KAP of vaccinators about the EPI, including cold storage of vaccines and their practices related to vaccine cold chain management.

Method

A cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2022 to June 2022 among registered vaccinators in the twin cities (Islamabad and Rawalpindi) of Pakistan. A structured self-administered questionnaire (English and Urdu) was developed as per the Pakistan national EPI policy and strategic guidelines 2022 and World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines, as well as from earlier studies (Cronbach's alpha value of 0.734). The final questionnaire consisted of closed-ended questions in four sections, including sociodemographic information, knowledge (with dichotomous variables of yes/no), attitudes (with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree), and handling of vaccines and cold chain management. Completed questionnaires were entered into Microsoft Excel and then imported into SPSS version 25 for statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 186 vaccinators completely filled out their questionnaires, with a 97.9% response rate. More than half of the participants (57.5%) had no training related to EPI. Most of the respondents had a moderate to poor level of knowledge regarding EPI. The overall attitude was positive, and 57% of the participants strongly agreed that the national immunization programs can significantly contribute to the decrease in morbidity and mortality rates among children. In the current study, participants showed good practices toward EPI, vaccine storage, and cold chain management. The majority (93.5%) of the participants checked the expiry of vaccines at regular intervals to maintain the first expiry first out (FEFO) in their healthcare setting.

Discussion

In conclusion, most of the vaccinators had moderate to poor knowledge, a positive attitude, and good practices toward EPI, vaccine cold storage, and cold chain management. Lack of training among vaccinators on EPI was also observed. These findings have suggested that continuous training, education, and regular supervision of vaccinators in EPI are important for maximum immunization effectiveness and coverage.

Are COVID-19 vaccination mandates for healthcare workers effective? A systematic review of the impact of mandates on increasing vaccination, alleviating staff shortages and decreasing staff illness

INTRODUCTION

The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines is a cornerstone in the global effort to combat the pandemic. Healthcare workers (HCWs), being at the forefront of the pandemic response, have been the focus of vaccine mandate policies. This review aims to evaluate the impacts of COVID-19 vaccine mandates among HCWs, a critical step in understanding the broader implications of such policies in healthcare settings.

OBJECTIVE

The review seeks to synthesize available literature to contribute to greater understanding of the outcomes associated with COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs including vaccine uptake, infection rates, and staffing.

METHODS

A systematic search of relevant literature published from March 2020 to September 2023 was conducted. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed for quality assessment of the included articles. A total of 4,779 publications were identified, with 15 studies meeting the inclusion criteria for the review. A narrative synthesis approach was used to analyze these studies.

RESULTS

COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs were broadly successful in increasing vaccine uptake in most settings. Although the penalties imposed on unvaccinated HCWs did not lead to major disruption of health services, less well-resourced areas may have been more impacted. Furthermore, there is insufficient literature on the impact of the vaccine mandate on reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs have significant implications for public health policy and healthcare management. The findings underscore the need for tailored approaches in mandate policies, considering the specific contexts of healthcare settings and the diverse populations of HCWs. While mandates have shown potential in increasing vaccine uptake with minimal impacts to staffing, more work is needed to investigate the impacts of mandates across various contexts. In addition to these impacts, future research should focus on long-term effects and implications on broader public health strategies.

Global COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level and its determinants: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 vaccination is essential for reducing disease burden on a worldwide scale. The success of this strategy will largely depend on how well vaccines are received. Previous reviews had produced contradictory results, and there had been no umbrella review. Therefore, the objective of this umbrella review was to combine the contradictory data regarding the COVID-19 vaccination's global acceptance rate and its contributing factors.

METHODS

Using PRISMA guideline, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus and Google Scholar which reported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and/or its determinants were searched. The quality of the included studies was assessed using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). A weighted inverse variance random-effects model was applied to find the pooled estimates. The subgroup analysis, heterogeneity, publication bias and sensitivity analysis were also assessed.

RESULT

Twenty-two SRM with 10,433,306 study participants were included. The pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate globally is found to be 60.23 (95% CI: 58.27, 62.18). In low-income countries, the pooled level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was found to be 54.07(50.31, 57.83) while this magnitude is 64.32 (62.24,66.40) among studies across the globe. Higher level of education (AOR =1.96; 95% CI:1.20, 2.73), good level of knowledge (2.20; 95% CI:1.36, 3.03), favourable attitude (AOR =4.50; 95% CI:2.89, 6.12), previous history of COVID-19 infection (AOR =3.41; 95% CI:1.77, 5.06), male sex (AOR =1.62; 95% CI:1.47, 1.77), and chronic disease (AOR =1.54; 95% CI:1.18, 1.90) were predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.

CONCLUSION

The pooled level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance highly varied and found to be unacceptably low particularly in low-income countries. Higher level of education, good level of knowledge, favourable attitude, previous history of COVID-19, male sex, and chronic disease were factors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate. A collaborative effort of stakeholders such as policymakers, and vaccine campaign program planners is needed to improve the acceptance rate of COVID-19 vaccine.

Attitudes of healthcare workers toward the COVID-19 vaccine and related factors: A systematic review

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aims to examine healthcare professionals' attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine and related factors.

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers have priority among risky groups accepted as candidates for early vaccination. Therefore, it is important to consider health professionals' attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination to better address barriers to widespread vaccination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Six databases were searched for articles published between January 01, 2020, and February 31, 2022, and 1161 studies were reached. As a result of the evaluations, 10 studies were included in the systematic review. Nine studies are cross-sectional, and one is a descriptive study. A 9-item Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies from the Joanna Briggs Institute MAStARI Critical Assessment Tools (JBI-MAStARI) was used for quality assessment. High-quality studies with an average or higher methodological quality score were included in the systematic review. The PRISMA guideline was followed while selecting studies.

RESULTS

Positive attitudes of healthcare professionals toward the COVID-19 vaccine ranged from 10% to 93.7%, and negative attitudes varied between 6.3% and 41.0%. Factors such as the male gender, being a physician, advanced age, previous influenza vaccination history, and presence of chronic disease were found to be associated with vaccine acceptance. Factors such as doubt about the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine, safety concerns, and fear of unknown side effects of the vaccine were associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for confidence-building interventions and tailored communication strategies, including personalized training to change the ambiguous attitudes of healthcare professionals, increase vaccine uptake, and cope with the multifaceted impact of infection.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021290482.

Factors associated with the decision to receive bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccination among health care personnel

COVID-19 vaccination is effective at reducing SARS-CoV-2 complications, but uptake has been low. Our objective in this study was to compare the importance of factors reported to influence the decision to receive a bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccine among health care personnel (HCP) tested for SARS-CoV-2 between October 2022 and April 2023 in a 20-hospital vaccine effectiveness study in the United States (n = 1656). Compared with those who had not received the booster, the factors most likely to be reported to be important were concerns about contracting COVID-19 (84.0% of those who had received the bivalent booster vs. 47.5% of those who had not, difference 36.6% points (PP), 95% confidence interval [CI] 32.1 to 41.1%), spreading infection to family members (89.2% vs. 62.8%, difference 26.3 PP, 95% CI 22.3 to 30.4%), and spreading infection to colleagues at work (85.5% vs. 59.4%, difference 26.1 PP, 95% CI 21.7 to 30.5%). HCP who had received the booster more frequently cited the primary literature (61.7% vs. 31.8%, difference 29.9 PP, 95% CI 24.6 to 35.2%) and employer recommendations (48.3% vs. 29.8%, difference 18.5 PP, 95% CI 13.2 to 23.9%) as influencing their decision. This analysis provides insight into factors for targeting future vaccine messaging.

Behaviour and associated determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and advocacy: a nationwide survey of pharmacy professionals in Qatar

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy poses a global challenge and is acknowledged to be a complex, multifactorial phenomenon. Of particular concern is hesitancy among health professionals, as this may also impact their advocacy roles. There is a lack of theory-based investigations of pharmacy professionals.

AIM

The study aims to determine the behaviour and associated determinants influencing pharmacy professionals' attitude towards vaccine acceptance and advocacy.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of 2400 pharmacists and pharmacy technicians at government, semi-government, and private community pharmacies in Qatar. Questionnaire items captured perspectives on COVID vaccine acceptance, advocacy and associated determinants based on the domains and constructs of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Data were analysed by descriptive and inferential statistics, with TDF items subjected to principal components analysis (PCA).

FINDINGS

The response rate was 38.6% (927/2400). Almost all (n = 825, 89.0%) were willing to receive the vaccine, which was higher for males (p < 0.001) and those in polyclinics (p < 0.05). PCA of acceptance items gave five components, with response to 'emotions' being most negative, associated with acceptance (p < 0.001) and more negative in females (p < 0.001). The majority (n = 799, 86.2%) agreed that it was their professional duty to advocate vaccines. PCA for advocacy items gave two components, with the most negative responses for 'professional role and identity', which were more negative for those working in hospitals (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Respondents were least positive regarding emotion-related behavioral determinants for acceptance and professional role and identity for advocacy. Behavior change technique interventions that target these issues have the potential to influence the vaccine hesitancy of pharmacy professionals and other individuals.

COVID-19 Vaccine Knowledge, Attitude, Acceptance and Hesitancy among Pregnancy and Breastfeeding: Systematic Review of Hospital-Based Studies

The risk of unfavourable outcomes for SARS-CoV-2 infection is significant during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Vaccination is a safe and effective measure to lower this risk. This study aims at reviewing the literature concerning the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine's acceptance/hesitancy among pregnant and breastfeeding women attending hospital facilities. A systematic review of literature was carried out. Hospital-based observational studies related to vaccination acceptance, hesitancy, knowledge and attitude among pregnant and breastfeeding women were included. Determinants of acceptance and hesitancy were investigated in detail. Quality assessment was done via the Johann Briggs Institute quality assessment tools. After literature search, 43 studies were included, 30 of which only focused on pregnant women (total sample 25,862 subjects). Sample size ranged from 109 to 7017 people. Acceptance of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine ranged from 16% to 78.52%; vaccine hesitancy ranged between 91.4% and 24.5%. Fear of adverse events for either the woman, the child, or both, was the main driver for hesitancy. Other determinants of hesitancy included religious concerns, socioeconomic factors, inadequate information regarding the vaccine and lack of trust towards institutions. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy in hospitalized pregnant women appears to be significant, and efforts for a more effective communication to these subjects are required.

Healthcare Worker Characteristics Associated with SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Uptake in Ireland; a Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study

The prevention of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition and transmission among healthcare workers is an ongoing challenge. Vaccination has been introduced to mitigate these risks. Vaccine uptake varies among healthcare workers in the absence of vaccine mandates. We investigated engagement with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among healthcare workers and identified characteristics associated with lower vaccine uptake. This multi-site cross-sectional study recruited n = 1260 healthcare workers in both clinical and non-clinical roles over a three-month period from November 2022. Participants reported their engagement with the primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programme and subsequent booster programmes, as well as providing demographic, occupational and personal medical history information. Multivariable linear regression identified characteristics associated with vaccine uptake. Engagement with vaccination programmes was high, with 88% of participants receiving at least one booster dose after primary vaccination course. Younger age and female sex were associated with reduced vaccine uptake. Healthcare workers in non-clinical roles also had reduced vaccine uptake. These findings should inform vaccination strategies across healthcare settings and target populations with reduced vaccine uptake directly, in particular young, female, and non-clinical healthcare workers, both for SARS-CoV-2 and other healthcare-associated vaccine-preventable infections.

Understanding COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance among Latin American Health Workers: Implications for Designing Interventions

Health workers (HWs) have a key role in promoting vaccine acceptance. This study draws on the Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) model and our team's investigation of vaccine hesitancy in a sample of 1197 HWs across 14 Caribbean countries in 2021. We conducted a cross-sectional Internet survey of 6718 HWs across 16 countries in Latin America in spring 2022, after the COVID-19 vaccine had recently become widely available in the region. The survey assessed HWs' attitudes regarding COVID-19 vaccines and vaccines in general. As a proxy measure of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, we used the willingness to recommend the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible people. Ninety-seven percent of respondents were COVID-19 vaccine acceptant. Although nearly all respondents felt that the COVID-19 vaccine was safe and effective, 59% expressed concerns about potential adverse effects. Despite uniformly high acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine overall and across Latin American subregions, acceptance differed by sex, HW profession, and COVID-19 history. Social processes, including actions and opinions of friends, family, and colleagues; actions and opinions of religious leaders; and information seen on social networks shaped many respondents' opinions of vaccines, and the magnitude of these effects differed across both demographic and geographic subgroups. Information campaigns designed for HWs should underscore the importance of vaccine safety. Messages should be tailored to specific audiences according to the information source each is most likely to consult and trust.

Incidence and Determinants of Symptomatic and Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Breakthrough Infections After Booster Dose in a Large European Multicentric Cohort of Health Workers-ORCHESTRA Project

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections (BI) after vaccine booster dose are a relevant public health issue.

METHODS

Multicentric longitudinal cohort study within the ORCHESTRA project, involving 63,516 health workers (HW) from 14 European settings. The study investigated the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 BI after booster dose and its correlation with age, sex, job title, previous infection, and time since third dose.

RESULTS

13,093 (20.6%) BI were observed. The cumulative incidence of BI was higher in women and in HW aged < 50 years, but nearly halved after 60 years. Nurses experienced the highest BI incidence, and administrative staff experienced the lowest. The BI incidence was higher in immunosuppressed HW (28.6%) vs others (24.9%). When controlling for gender, age, job title and infection before booster, heterologous vaccination reduced BI incidence with respect to the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine [Odds Ratio (OR) 0.69, 95% CI 0.63-0.76]. Previous infection protected against asymptomatic infection [Relative Risk Ratio (RRR) of recent infection vs no infection 0.53, 95% CI 0.23-1.20] and even more against symptomatic infections [RRR 0.11, 95% CI 0.05-0.25]. Symptomatic infections increased from 70.5% in HW receiving the booster dose since < 64 days to 86.2% when time elapsed was > 130 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of BI after booster is significantly reduced by previous infection, heterologous vaccination, and older ages. Immunosuppression is relevant for increased BI incidence. Time elapsed from booster affects BI severity, confirming the public health usefulness of booster. Further research should focus on BI trend after 4th dose and its relationship with time variables across the epidemics.

The determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention: a meta-review

Background

A large number of systematic reviews have been published that synthesized various determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention (CVI). However, they reported inconsistent evidence. Therefore, we conducted a meta-review (systematic review of systematic reviews) to provide a comprehensive synthesis of factors influencing CVI.

Methods

This meta-review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL were searched for systematic reviews published from 2020 to 2022 that examined the determinants of CVI. AMSTAR-2 critical appraisal tool was used to ensure the quality of included reviews, and ROBIS tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias.

Results

Globally, the average rate of COVID-19 vaccination intention was 56.97%. We identified 21 main determinants of CVI: socio-demographic, geographical location, social, political, government role, study timeline, attitude, perceived severity, perceived susceptibility, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control, norms, trust, conspiracy theory/propaganda/misinformation, knowledge, information and communication, vaccination recommendation, vaccination history, history of COVID-19 infection, and health status and well-being.

Conclusions

These results suggest that COVID-19 vaccination intention is a complex process and is affected by numerous multidimensional factors. Therefore, integrated communication strategies and multifaceted interventions may be effective for improving vaccination intention against COVID-19.

The prevalence and determinants of SARS-CoV-2 infections among healthcare workers, results of a cross-sectional study in the Silesian Voivodeship

OBJECTIVES

A significant proportion of healthcare workers (HCWs) had been infected with SARS-CoV-2, which complicated the organization of patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the exact scale of infection prevalence among the group of HCWs is not known, therefore this study aimed to assess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs in the Silesian voivodeship, Poland, and to define its determinants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The cross-sectional study was conducted in 2 multidisciplinary hospitals in the Silesian voivodeship during the period October 2021-February 2022. The standardized WHO questionnaire Surveillance protocol for SARS-CoV-2 infection among health workers was completed by 242 HCWs. To assess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its determinants, such as personal, occupational, and work environment-related conditions and preventive behaviors, the collected data were subjected to statistical analysis. For this purpose, descriptive and analytical statistics (significance of differences in χ2 test) were used.

RESULTS

Almost half (42.6%) of subjects were infected with coronavirus, most frequently care assistants (57.1%) and paramedics (50%). People suffering from chronic diseases were infected significantly more often (p < 0.001). The majority of the infected HCWs declared previous contact with COVID-19 patients (56.3%). Unfortunately, 10.3% of respondents refused to be vaccinated against COVID-19, most often care assistants (38.1%) and nurses (10.6%). The determinants such as sex, age, occupation, place of work (ward), participation in occupational safety and health training, use of personal protective equipment (PPE), or preventive behaviors did not significantly affect the risk of infection (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Even though the PPE was used and the percentage of fully vaccinated HCWs against COVID-19 was high (89.7%), the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infected HCWs remains high at 42.6% (95% CI: 40.7-44.5%). The main determinants of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk among HCWs were previous contact with infected individuals and the presence of chronic disease. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2023;36(2):201-13.

Qualitative Insights into Vaccine Uptake of Nursing Staff in Long-Term Care Facilities in Finland

Vaccine hesitancy and refusal have undermined COVID-19 vaccination efforts of nursing staff. This study aimed to identify behavioral factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake among unvaccinated nursing staff in long-term care facilities (LTCF) in Finland. Methodology: The study was based on the Theoretical Domains Framework. Data were collected through qualitative in-depth interviews among nursing staff and managers of LTCFs. The analysis was based on thematic analysis. We identified seven behavioral domains, with several themes, that reduced the staff's intention to get vaccinated: knowledge (information overload, inability to identify trustworthy information sources, lack of vaccine-specific and understandable scientific information), beliefs about consequences (incorrect perceptions about the vaccine effectiveness, and lack of trust in the safety of the vaccine), social influences (influence of family and friends), reinforcement (limited abilities of the management to encourage vaccination), beliefs about capabilities (pregnancy or desire to get pregnant), psychological factors (coping with changing opinion), and emotions (confusion, suspicion, disappointment, and fatigue). We also identified three behavioral domains that encouraged vaccine uptake: social influences (trust in health authorities), environmental context and resources (vaccination logistics), and work and professional role (professional pride). The study findings can help authorities to develop tailored vaccine promotion strategies for healthcare workers in LTCFs.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Italian Healthcare Workers: Latent Profiles and Their Relationships to Predictors and Outcome

Vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy beliefs among healthcare workers (HCWs) represent operational priorities that require urgent attention. Identifying and classifying specific subpopulation of hesitancy is crucial to customize educational and intervention strategies to enhance the acceptance and uptake rate of vaccination. Thus, the main purpose of our study was to empirically identify latent profiles of vaccine hesitancy among Italian HCWs adopting a person-centered approach and investigating their relationships with antecedents and intention to get a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine. We conducted latent profile analyses (LPA) to identify different configurations of vaccine hesitancy based on five antecedents of vaccination: confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility among a sample of Italian HCWs (n = 573). LPA revealed four distinct profiles: believer (61.5%), middler (24.7%), hesitant (9.00%), and rejecter (4.7%). Having conspiracy beliefs was associated with a greater likelihood of membership in all but believer. Finally, the likelihood of intention to get a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine was lowest in the rejector and hesitant profiles. Theoretical contributions and implications for practice are discussed.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adults in Hawassa City Administration, Sidama Region, Ethiopia: A community-based study

Objective

The COVID-19 vaccine is one of the key measures to control the disease. However, some people are hesitant to take the vaccine. The objective of this study was to assess COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and associated factors among adults in Hawassa City Administration, South Ethiopia.

Method

From March 1 to 30, 2022, we conducted a community-based cross-sectional study among randomly selected 622 adults in Hawassa City Administration. A multi-stage sampling technique was used to recruit the study participants. Data were collected through a pretested structured questionnaire that was administered by four trained high school graduates. Data entry and analysis were done using the SPSS version 20 statistical package. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were performed. Statistically significant associations were reported at p-value <0.05.

Result

Among the participants, 400 of them (64.3%) had a high level of knowledge about the COVID-19 vaccine) and 425 of them (68.3%) had a positive attitude toward the COVID-19 vaccine. The level of vaccine hesitancy was 165 (26.5%) and vaccine acceptance was 457 (73.5%). The main reason for willingness to take the vaccine was to protect oneself from COVID-19 (364 participants, 58.5%), and for unwillingness, it was fear of the vaccine (154 participants, 24.8%). Mass media was the main source of information about the vaccine (472 participants, 75.9%). Age (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 2.1, 95% CI: 1.2-3.7), religion (AOR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.1-5.9), history of COVID-19 disease (AOR: 4.6, 95% CI: 1.4-14.9), knowledge related to the COVID-19 vaccine (AOR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.2-3.1), and attitude toward the COVID-19 vaccine (AOR: 13.2, 95% CI: 8.3-20.9) were factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.

Conclusion

A low proportion of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was observed among our study participants. Improving people's awareness could help to improve vaccine acceptance. It is important to focus interventions on the identified risk factors of vaccine hesitancy.

Uncommon Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination in the Pediatric Population

Introduction

The rapid development of vaccines followed the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. There is still significant vaccine hesitancy, especially among parents. Large-scale pediatric population-based studies or reviews about vaccine side effects are limited.

Data sources and methods

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends recipients or their providers notify possible adverse events to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). We evaluated Delaware state data from the VAERS system for the pediatric age group.

Results

A total of 111 reports were reviewed, with summaries of the reported key side effects discussed, including seizures, myocarditis, stroke, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), chest pain, hematuria, menstrual disorder, appendicitis, behavioral and otological side effects, etc.

Conclusions

We noted the approximate prevalence of reported adverse events to be <0.2%. Further studies with larger sample sizes or those focused on each key side effect are needed to evaluate these side effects in detail. An open discussion about the possible side effects and reinforcing the individual, family, and community benefits are key to promoting COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.

COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake among Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The vaccine-induced immunity of healthcare workers (HCWs) is crucial to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the COVID-19 vaccine uptake among HCWs worldwide and to identify predictors of vaccination. We searched Scopus, Web of Science, Medline, PubMed, ProQuest, CINAHL, and medRxiv up to 25 August 2022. We applied the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. We found 25 studies including 491,624 vaccinated HCWs, while the full sample included 555,561 HCWs. The overall proportion of vaccinated HCWs was 77.3%. Vaccine uptake for studies that were conducted in North America (85.6%) was higher than the proportion for studies that were conducted in Asia (79.5%), Europe (72.8%), and Africa (65.6%). The overall prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine uptake was 83.6% and 77.4% for physicians and nurses, respectively. Older age, white race, physicians' profession, seasonal influenza vaccine, direct COVID-19 patient care, and confidence in COVID-19 vaccine safety and effectiveness were positive predictors of vaccine uptake, while history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was a negative predictor. Deep understanding of the factors that influence HCWs' decisions to receive a COVID-19 vaccine is critical to implementing tailored communication strategies for HCWs who are at risk for not getting vaccinated.

Believing processes around COVID-19 vaccination: An exploratory study investigating workers in the health sector

BACKGROUND

The processes underlying believing have been labeled "creditions", which are important brain functions between emotion and cognition. Creditions are influenced by both internal and external factors, one of which is the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the vaccination against the disease.

METHODS

To investigate believing processes shortly before the implementation of a mandatory vaccination in Austria, both vaccinated and unvaccinated workers in the health sector (WHS) were surveyed in December 2021/January 2022. In total, 1,062 vaccinated and 97 unvaccinated WHS (920 females) completed the online survey. Beliefs were assessed using the parameters of the credition model (narrative, certainty, emotion, and mightiness) with regard to (1) the COVID-19 pandemic in general, and (2) the vaccination. Type of emotion and narrative were divided into positive, negative, and indifferent. Moreover, the congruence between emotion and narrative was calculated.

RESULTS

The vaccination rate of the sample was 91.6%, with a significantly higher percentage of men being in the group of vaccinated (21.1%) as compared to unvaccinated individuals (12.4%). Pertaining beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccination, unvaccinated WHS reported more negative and less positive emotions as well as content of narrative than vaccinated WHS. In addition, they showed higher levels of certainty as well as mightiness while believing and felt less sufficiently informed about governmental and workplace-related COVID-19 measures. The groups did not differ in the type of emotion or content of narrative in their beliefs about the pandemic in general.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, unvaccinated WHS had more negative and less positive emotions and thoughts than vaccinated WHS in their beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccination and their motivations for not having received it. They were more certain about their beliefs and felt stronger negative emotions in their beliefs compared to vaccinated individuals. Providing unvaccinated WHS with adequate information might be helpful in reducing their mental burden.