Pattern of Violence Among Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Care Government Hospital and a Multi-Specialty Private Hospital in Sagar, India: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background Workplace violence in hospitals is an occupational hazard that affects healthcare workers (HCWs) negatively in many aspects and causes deterioration of the doctor-patient relationship, resulting in providence of substandard healthcare. This study was conducted to compare the pattern of violence in a tertiary care government teaching hospital and a multi-specialty private trust hospital in Sagar district, Madhya Pradesh, India. Methodology After ethical clearance of this cross-sectional, observational study, participants (frontline healthcare workers, including doctors and nurses) were asked about the type, frequency, department, and place of violence, etc., along with its perceived causes, solutions, and arrangements made by hospitals for dealing with it using a pretested, semi-structured questionnaire. Data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Categorical variables were described using frequency and percentages, and inferential analysis was conducted using the chi-square/Fisher's exact test. A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Among the 113 participants, 67 (59.3%) were female, 53 (46.9%) were doctors, and 60 (53.1%) were nurses. The mean age of participants was 30.9±7.3 years. Predominantly verbal, emotional, and physical violence were present in 96.5%, 43.4%, and 6.2% of participants, respectively. Violent incidents against healthcare workers were more frequent in government hospitals as compared to private hospitals. Most healthcare workers (87.6%) tried to resolve violent incidents peacefully, and 1.8% tried to fight back. The most perceived cause of violence in both setups was a lack of morality and literacy among patients and their relatives (i.e., 83.2%), followed by a lack of proper facilities and a lack of trust in healthcare workers. Conclusion Both setups faced a substantial amount of violence. The loopholes in both setups, considering resources, security, and other facilities, are clearly visible, and specific steps must be adopted to protect both systems from violence.

COVID-19 Vaccine Knowledge and Attitude Among Healthcare Workers in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Background On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) proclaimed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a pandemic. COVID-19 can result in asymptomatic infection, severe pneumonia, and death. In this study, healthcare workers in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, were asked to reflect on their knowledge of and attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine. Methods Online anonymous polling of healthcare professionals in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, was done. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the respondents' demographic information and knowledge of and attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine were gathered through a questionnaire. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. Results The knowledge of the responders for each vaccine is as follows: Pfizer-BioNTech, 96.1%; AstraZeneca-Oxford, 66.1%; Moderna, 56.9%; and Johnson & Johnson's Janssen, 18.2%. A small percentage of responders (5.7%) believe that COVID-19 vaccination may alter their DNA, while 70% believe it can prevent them from getting sick with COVID-19 infection. Half of the responders had a wrong opinion of COVID-19 vaccinations. Conclusion The findings imply that improving healthcare workers' knowledge of vaccines and changing attitudes toward vaccination may increase vaccine acceptability. This would involve addressing the respondents' concerns about vaccine side effects and their general mistrust of vaccine benefits.