Vaccination Confidence among Healthcare Workers: Results from Two Anamnestic Questionnaires Adopted in the COVID-19 and Influenza Campaign.
COVID-19 vaccines
Influenza
SARS-CoV-2
health care workers
vaccination
vaccine acceptance
vaccine confidence
vaccine hesitancy
vaccines
Journal
Vaccines
ISSN: 2076-393X
Titre abrégé: Vaccines (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101629355
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Oct 2022
29 Oct 2022
Historique:
received:
31
08
2022
revised:
22
10
2022
accepted:
27
10
2022
entrez:
11
11
2022
pubmed:
12
11
2022
medline:
12
11
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Following the announcement of the development of COVID-19 vaccines, hesitancy about the safety of vaccinations and their side effects have spread, despite having the approval of international drug agencies. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that concern about side effects may have led people to fill out the COVID-19 anamnestic vaccine questionnaire with greater attention compared to the similar instrument used for the influenza vaccination. We analyzed vaccination questionnaires of 218 healthcare workers (HCWs) who underwent both COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in 2020/2021. Outcomes included self-reported allergies, chronic pharmacological treatments, and chronic diseases. We tested the difference in prevalence, analyzed differences using the kappa statistics and concordance correlation, and explored factors associated with differences in reporting. HCWs reported more allergies to substances other than drugs and a higher prevalence of chronic drug intake in the COVID-19 questionnaires than in the influenza ones. Technical staff reported more drug allergies than physicians, and other HCWs reported more outcomes than physicians in the COVID-19 questionnaire. We found that this population of HCWs reported higher conditions during the 2020 COVID-19 vaccination campaign compared to that of the influenza vaccine. The identification of socio-demographic characteristics of the less vaccine-confident HCWs could help in planning targeted interventions to enhance vaccine adherence.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Following the announcement of the development of COVID-19 vaccines, hesitancy about the safety of vaccinations and their side effects have spread, despite having the approval of international drug agencies. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that concern about side effects may have led people to fill out the COVID-19 anamnestic vaccine questionnaire with greater attention compared to the similar instrument used for the influenza vaccination.
METHODS
METHODS
We analyzed vaccination questionnaires of 218 healthcare workers (HCWs) who underwent both COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in 2020/2021. Outcomes included self-reported allergies, chronic pharmacological treatments, and chronic diseases. We tested the difference in prevalence, analyzed differences using the kappa statistics and concordance correlation, and explored factors associated with differences in reporting.
RESULTS
RESULTS
HCWs reported more allergies to substances other than drugs and a higher prevalence of chronic drug intake in the COVID-19 questionnaires than in the influenza ones. Technical staff reported more drug allergies than physicians, and other HCWs reported more outcomes than physicians in the COVID-19 questionnaire.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
We found that this population of HCWs reported higher conditions during the 2020 COVID-19 vaccination campaign compared to that of the influenza vaccine. The identification of socio-demographic characteristics of the less vaccine-confident HCWs could help in planning targeted interventions to enhance vaccine adherence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36366344
pii: vaccines10111835
doi: 10.3390/vaccines10111835
pmc: PMC9697632
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Postgrad Med J. 2023 Jun 15;99(1172):520-528
pubmed: 37319159
Ann Intern Med. 2021 Jun;174(6):882-885
pubmed: 33556267
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Dec 15;173(12):964-973
pubmed: 32886525
Vaccine. 2020 Oct 21;38(45):7049-7056
pubmed: 32980199
Clin Infect Dis. 2006 Apr 15;42(8):1144-7
pubmed: 16575733
Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Jul 12;9(7):
pubmed: 34358193
Am J Infect Control. 2021 Sep;49(9):1152-1157
pubmed: 33930516
Results Phys. 2021 Sep;28:104604
pubmed: 34336564
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Mar 08;18(5):
pubmed: 33800187
Viruses. 2021 Feb 26;13(3):
pubmed: 33652829
Vaccines (Basel). 2020 Mar 26;8(2):
pubmed: 32225018
Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Feb 03;9(2):
pubmed: 33546165
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Nov 16;73(10):1776-1783
pubmed: 33491049
Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Mar 04;9(3):
pubmed: 33806641
Nat Med. 2021 Feb;27(2):225-228
pubmed: 33082575
Int J Nurs Stud. 2021 Feb;114:103854
pubmed: 33326864
Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Dec 31;10(1):
pubmed: 35062727
Vaccines (Basel). 2020 Aug 07;8(3):
pubmed: 32784684
Euro Surveill. 2013 Nov 07;18(45):20627
pubmed: 24229791
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Oct;20(10):e261-e267
pubmed: 32711692
Nurs Res. 2002 Nov-Dec;51(6):404-10
pubmed: 12464761
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2021 Jun;42(6):775-777
pubmed: 33557977
J Hosp Infect. 2021 Feb;108:168-173
pubmed: 33259883
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2018 Jun 3;14(6):1311-1322
pubmed: 29485353
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2021 Mar;69(3):593-599
pubmed: 33370448
BMC Public Health. 2021 Jun 12;21(1):1129
pubmed: 34118897
Healthcare (Basel). 2017 Mar 07;5(1):
pubmed: 28272332
N Engl J Med. 2021 Feb 18;384(7):e23
pubmed: 33406324
Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Nov 11;9(11):
pubmed: 34835242
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Jul;20(7):769-770
pubmed: 32445713