Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Australian Journal of Political Science ; 58(1):105-123, 2023.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-2302599

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 pandemic, and particularly 2020-2021, young adults were often significant transmitters of the virus. Prior to the availability of vaccines for young adults, we sought to understand what would contribute to their uptake of a COVID-19 vaccine and how government policy might intervene. We undertook qualitative interviews between February and April 2021 with 19 participants (aged 18-29) in Perth, Western Australia. Despite Western Australians' lives changing little during the pandemic, almost all wanted to receive a vaccine. Motivating factors included protecting themselves and others and having life return to normal. Participants' significant levels of trust in the state government response to the pandemic did not extend to the Federal government. This research uncovers what influences young people to receive new vaccinations, how trust in governments develops, and how ideas of normality and safety influence vaccine demand.Alternate :在新冠疫情其间,尤其是2020-2021年,年轻人往往成为病毒的传播者。在新冠疫苗普及到年轻人之前,我们试图了解哪些因素会有利于他们接种新冠疫苗,以及政府应该如何进行干预。我们在2021年2月至4月间对西澳大利亚帕斯市的19位参与者做了定性访谈。虽然西澳大利亚人的生活在疫情其间变化甚小,但几乎所有人都希望接种疫苗。原因包括保护自己及他人、让生活回到常轨。参与者对州政府应对疫情的做法有显著的信任,但不延及联邦政府。本文揭示了哪些东西影响了年轻人接受新疫苗、对政府的信任如何形成、以及正常观与安全观如何影响对疫苗的需求。

2.
Australian Journal of Social Issues (John Wiley & Sons, Inc ) ; : 1, 2023.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-2250507

ABSTRACT

Australian governments have used vaccine mandates to drive high uptake of routine childhood vaccines and adult Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID‐19) and influenza vaccines. We sought to understand the attitudes of Western Australian parents regarding mandating COVID‐19 vaccines for children, interviewing 44 parents of children aged up to 18 years between May and December 2021. Transcripts were analysed to ascertain parents' attitudes and sources of reasoning. Over half of the parents supported COVID‐19 vaccine mandates for children, while the rest had opposing, nuanced or indifferent views. Participants invoked community and health‐related reasoning;policy and government‐related reasoning;and concerns based on practical implementation. There was a high degree of consistency in parents' attitudes toward COVID‐19 vaccines and whether they supported mandating them for children, although some who planned to delay vaccination nevertheless supported the idea of mandates. Some participants reported that a mandate would prompt them to vaccinate, but others were willing to accept the consequences of keeping their children unvaccinated, or said that a mandate would not affect them as they would vaccinate regardless. Understanding how parents think and feel about mandating COVID‐19 vaccines with educational exclusions or financial penalties is critical to inform policymakers, who may consider these strategies for future pandemic vaccines. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Australian Journal of Social Issues (John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ) is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

3.
PLoS One ; 17(12): e0279557, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2197109

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Western Australia , Vaccination , Health Personnel
4.
J Paediatr Child Health ; 59(3): 453-457, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2192921

ABSTRACT

AIM: Australian authorities made COVID-19 vaccines available for children aged under 5 years old with serious comorbidities in August 2022. There is presently no universal programme for young children, but crucial to any rollout's success is whether parents are motivated and able to vaccinate. By examining parents' vaccine intentions, this study aims to inform current and future COVID-19 vaccine roll-outs for children aged under 5 years. METHODS: As part of the mixed methods project 'Coronavax: Preparing Community and Government' we interviewed 18 Western Australian parents of young children about their intentions in late 2021. RESULTS: Two thirds intended to vaccinate if and when they could, with one third intending to delay for reasons including risk and safety perceptions, fears about side effects and influence from their social networks. However, even those choosing to delay were waiting rather than refusing. CONCLUSIONS: To improve uptake, targeted messaging should emphasise that COVID-19 can be a serious disease in young children, with such messaging drawing on the reputability and esteem of scientific and technical authorities. Such messaging should be oriented towards parents of children with serious comorbidities at the present time. It will be important to emphasise that government vaccine recommendations are based on supporting families to protect their children and keep them healthy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Child , Humans , Child, Preschool , COVID-19/prevention & control , Intention , Australia , Parents , Vaccination , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
5.
Vaccine ; 40(51): 7360-7369, 2022 Dec 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2184252

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The rollout of vaccines against COVID-19 is prompting governments and the private sector to adopt mandates. However, there has been little conceptual analysis of the types of mandates available, nor empirical analysis of how the public thinks about different mandates and why. Our conceptual study examines available instruments, how they have been implemented pre-COVID, and their use for COVID-19 globally. Then, our qualitative study reports the acceptability of such measures in Western Australia, which has experienced very limited community transmission, posing an interesting scenario for vaccine acceptance and acceptability of measures to enforce it. METHOD: Our conceptual study developed categories of mandates from extant work, news reports, and legislative interventions globally. Then, our empirical study asked 44 West Australians about their attitudes towards potential mandatory policies, with data analysed using NVivo 12. RESULTS: Our novel studies contribute richness and depth to emerging literature on the types and varying acceptability of vaccine requirements. Participants demonstrated tensions and confusion about whether instruments were incentives or punishments, and many supported strong consequences for non-vaccination even if they ostensibly opposed mandates. Those attached to restrictions for disease prevention were most popular. There were similar degrees of support for mandates imposed by employers or businesses, with participants showing little concern for potential issues of accountability linked to public health decisions delegated to the private sector. Participants mostly supported tightly regulated medical exemptions granted by specialists, with little interest in religious or personal belief exemptions. CONCLUSION: Our participants are used to being governed by vaccine mandates, and now by rigorous lockdown and travel restrictions that have ensured limited local COVID-19 disease and transmission. These factors appear influential in their general openness to COVID-19 vaccine mandates, especially when linked explicitly to the prevention of disease in high-risk settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , Australia , Communicable Disease Control
7.
Health Expect ; 25(6): 3062-3072, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2078474

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) groups within high-income countries are at risk of being left behind by the COVID-19 vaccination rollout. They face both access and attitudinal barriers, including low trust in government and health authorities. OBJECTIVE: To explore perceptions and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, as well as facilitators, barriers and strategies to promote uptake among CALD residents of Western Australia (WA), where there were almost no COVID-19 cases for 2 years. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Perth, WA's capital, was chosen as the state's study site because most of the state's CALD population lives there. Eleven semistructured in-depth interviews and three focus groups (with 37 participants) were conducted with CALD residents between August and October 2021. Thematic analysis was conducted, informed by the 'Capability', 'Opportunity', 'Motivation', 'Behaviour' model. RESULTS: CALD participants faced barriers including a lack of knowledge about COVID-19 and the vaccines, low self-rated English proficiency and education levels, misinformation, passive government communication strategies and limited access to vaccine clinics/providers. They were, however, motivated to vaccinate by the imminent opening of state and international borders, trust in government and healthcare authorities, travel intentions and the desire to protect themselves and others. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high levels of trust and significant desire for vaccines among CALD communities in Perth, current strategies were not meeting their needs and the community remains at risk from COVID-19. Tailored intervention strategies are required to provide knowledge, address misinformation and facilitate access to ensure uptake of COVID-19 vaccines-including for additional doses-amongst CALD communities. Governments should work with trusted CALD community members to disseminate tailored COVID-19 vaccine information and adequately translated resources. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Community Reference Group at Telethon Kids Institute consulted on this project in September 2020; Ishar Multicultural Women's Health Services consulted on and facilitated the focus groups.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , Female , Australia , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cultural Diversity , Vaccination
8.
Health Policy Technol ; 11(3): 100657, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1956156

ABSTRACT

Background: Health care workers (HCWs) are at an increased risk of catching and spreading Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared with the general community, putting health systems at risk. Several jurisdictions globally have mandated or are looking to mandate COVID-19 vaccines for this cohort, but little is known about the acceptability of this measure, especially in different contexts, and there is little qualitative data to explore nuance, depth, and the reasons behind HCWs' opinions. Methods: In-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews were undertaken with 39 HCWs in Western Australia (WA) between February-August 2021, ascertaining their views on the prospective introduction and implementation of mandates for COVID-19 vaccines. Data were thematically analysed using NVivo 20. Results: There was broad support for COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs amongst our participants, but also different views about what such a mandate would mean (redeployment versus termination) and how it would impact the rest of the workforce. One vaccine hesitant participant said that mandates would be their prompt to get vaccinated. Other participants invoked an informal code whereby HCWs have an obligation to be seen to support vaccination and to protect public health more broadly. However, they also raised concerns about implementation and procedural and policy fairness. Conclusion: Policymakers should consider how to mobilise the informal code of health promotion and public health support if introducing mandates. They should also consider whether HCWs will bring the same attitudes and approaches to mandates for additional vaccine doses.

9.
JMIR Form Res ; 6(1): e29889, 2022 Jan 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1662505

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory infection (ARI) in childhood is common, but more knowledge on the burden and natural history of ARI in the community is required. A better understanding of ARI risk factors, treatment, and outcomes will help support parents to manage their sick child at home. Digital health tools are becoming more widely adopted in clinical care and research and may assist in understanding and managing common pediatric diseases, including ARI, in hospitals and in the community. We integrated 2 digital tools-a web-based discharge communication system and the REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) platform-into the Pragmatic Adaptive Trial for Acute Respiratory Infection in Children to enhance parent and physician engagement around ARI discharge communication and our patient registry. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine the efficacy and usability of digital tools integrated into a pediatric patient registry for ARI. METHODS: Semistructured interviews and software interface usability testing were conducted with 11 parents and 8 emergency department physicians working at a tertiary pediatric hospital and research center in Perth, Western Australia, in 2019. Questions focused on experiences of discharge communication and clinical trial engagement. Responses were analyzed using the qualitative Framework Method. Participants were directly observed using digital interfaces as they attempted predetermined tasks that were then classified as success, failure, software failure, or not observed. Participants rated the interfaces using the System Usability Scale (SUS). RESULTS: Most parents (9/11, 82%) indicated that they usually received verbal discharge advice, with some (5/11, 45%) recalling receiving preprinted resources from their physician. Most (8/11, 73%) would also like to receive discharge advice electronically. Most of the physicians (7/8, 88%) described their usual practice as verbal discharge instructions, with some (3/8, 38%) reporting time pressures associated with providing discharge instructions. The digital technology option was preferred for engaging in research by most parents (8/11, 73%). For the discharge communication digital tool, parents gave a mean SUS score of 94/100 (SD 4.3; A grade) for the mobile interface and physicians gave a mean usability score of 93/100 (SD 4.7; A grade) for the desktop interface. For the research data management tool (REDCap), parents gave a mean usability score of 78/100 (SD 11.0; C grade) for the mobile interface. CONCLUSIONS: Semistructured interviews allowed us to better understand parent and physician experiences of discharge communication and clinical research engagement. Software interface usability testing methods and use of the SUS helped us gauge the efficacy of our digital tools with both parent and physician users. This study demonstrates the feasibility of combining qualitative research methods with software industry interface usability testing methods to help determine the efficacy of digital tools in a pediatric clinical research setting.

10.
Vaccine ; 40(4): 594-600, 2022 01 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1586279

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: On 8th April 2021, the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) made the Pfizer-BioNtech (Comirnaty) vaccine the "preferred" vaccine for adults in Australia aged < 50 years due to a risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following AstraZeneca vaccination. We sought to understand whether this impacted COVID-19 vaccine intentions. METHOD: We undertook qualitative interviews from February - April 2021 before and after the program change with 28 adults in Perth, Western Australia. Using our COVID-19 vaccine intentions model, we assessed changes in participants' COVID-19 vaccine intention before and after the program change. Participants were classified as 1) 'acceptors': no concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety, efficacy, access and would accept whatever vaccine is offered, 2) 'cautious acceptors': some concerns and would prefer a particular vaccine brand but would accept whatever is offered, 3) 'Wait awhile': for more data, easier access, for another vaccine brand, a greater perceived COVID-19 threat or until mandatory, or 4) 'refuser': no intention to vaccinate due to concerns about safety and/or efficacy. RESULTS: Before the change, 7/18 of those aged < 50 years were 'acceptors,' 10/18 were 'cautious acceptors' and 1/18 was 'wait awhile.' Overall, 14/18 participants had the same COVID-19 vaccine intention after the change; 4/18 became more concerned. For those aged ≥ 50 years and before the change, 5/10 were 'acceptors' and 5/10 were 'cautious acceptors.' After the change, 8/10 still had the same COVID-19 vaccine intention; 2/10 became more cautious. The major concern before the program change was COVID-19 vaccines having different vaccine efficacy; the concern pivoted to safety. CONCLUSION: The majority of participants were 'cautious acceptors' who intended on being vaccinated; many had this intention before and after the program change. The Australian government, health care providers and media need to better address COVID-19 vaccine concerns to assist those with COVID-19 vaccine intentions receive a vaccine.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adult , Australia , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Intention , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Vaccine Efficacy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL