ABSTRACT
Background In general, COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, but minor adverse effects are common. However, adverse effects have not been measured in several countries including Greece. Objective: To estimate the prevalence of adverse effects after the first COVID-19 booster dose, and to identify possible risk factors. Material and methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study with a convenience sample in Greece during November 2022. We measured several adverse effects after the booster dose, such as fatigue, headaches, fever, chills, nausea, etc. We considered gender, age, chronic disease, self-assessment of health status, COVID-19 diagnóstico, and self-assessment of COVID-19 course as possible predictors of adverse effects. Results: In our sample, 96% developed at least one adverse effect. Half of the participants (50.2%) developed one to five adverse effects, 35.9% developed six to ten adverse effects, and 9.5% developed 11 to 16 adverse effects. Mean number of adverse effects was 5.5. The most frequent adverse effects were pain at the injection site (84.3%), fatigue (70.8%), muscle pain (61%), swelling at the injection site (55.2%), headache (49.8%), fever (42.9%), and chills (41%). Females developed more adverse effects than males (p < 0.001). The prevalence of adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines was statistically significant and positively associated with the severity of COVID-19 among COVID-recovered individuals (p < 0.05). Moreover, younger age was associated with increased adverse effects (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Almost all participants in our study developed minor adverse effects after the booster dose. Female gender, COVID-19 patients with worse clinical course, and younger individuals experienced more often adverse effects.
ABSTRACT
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To assess the levels of second COVID-19 booster dose/new COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among nurses and explore the potential predictors of vaccine hesitancy. BACKGROUND: COVID-19 full vaccination seems to be highly effective against highly contagious variants of SARS-CoV-2. Healthcare workers are at high-risk group since they have experienced high levels of COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality. DESIGN: An on-line cross-sectional study was carried out in Greece in May 2022, using a self-administered questionnaire. METHODS: The study population included nurses in healthcare services who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19 at the time of study. We considered socio-demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related variables, and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and pandemic as potential predictors of vaccine hesitancy. We applied the STROBE checklist in our study. RESULTS: Among 795 nurses, 30.9% were hesitant toward a second booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine. Independent predictors of hesitancy included lower educational level, absence of a chronic condition, good/very good self-perceived physical health, lack of flu vaccination during 2021, front-line nurses that provided healthcare to COVID-19 patients, nurses that had not been diagnosed with COVID-19 and nurses that had at least one relative/friend that has died from COVID-19. Moreover, increased compliance with hygiene measures, increased fear of a second booster dose/new COVID-19 vaccine and decreased trust in COVID-19 vaccination were associated with increased hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that a significant percentage of nurses are hesitant toward a second booster dose/new COVID-19 vaccine. This initial hesitancy could be a barrier to efforts to control the COVID-19 pandemic. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses' role during the COVID-19 pandemic is essential since they are the front-line healthcare workers empowering the public with their passion and empathy. There is a need to communicate COVID-19 vaccine science in a way that is accessible to nurses in order to decrease COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
ABSTRACT
Background: In general, COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, but minor adverse effects are common. However, adverse effects have not been measured in several countries including Greece. Objective: To estimate the prevalence of adverse effects after the first COVID-19 booster dose, and to identify possible risk factors. Material and methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study with a convenience sample in Greece during November 2022. We measured several adverse effects after the booster dose, such as fatigue, headaches, fever, chills, nausea, etc. We considered gender, age, chronic disease, self-assessment of health status, COVID-19 diagnóstico, and self-assessment of COVID-19 course as possible predictors of adverse effects. Results: In our sample, 96% developed at least one adverse effect. Half of the participants (50.2%) developed one to five adverse effects, 35.9% developed six to ten adverse effects, and 9.5% developed 11 to 16 adverse effects. Mean number of adverse effects was 5.5. The most frequent adverse effects were pain at the injection site (84.3%), fatigue (70.8%), muscle pain (61%), swelling at the injection site (55.2%), headache (49.8%), fever (42.9%), and chills (41%). Females developed more adverse effects than males (pâ¯<â¯0.001). The prevalence of adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines was statistically significant and positively associated with the severity of COVID-19 among COVID-recovered individuals (pâ¯<â¯0.05). Moreover, younger age was associated with increased adverse effects (pâ¯<â¯0.001). Conclusions: Almost all participants in our study developed minor adverse effects after the booster dose. Female gender, COVID-19 patients with worse clinical course, and younger individuals experienced more often adverse effects.
Antecedentes: En general, las vacunas COVID-19 son seguras y eficaces, pero son frecuentes los efectos adversos leves. Sin embargo, los efectos adversos no se han medido en varios países, entre ellos Grecia. Objetivo: Estimar la prevalencia de efectos adversos tras la primera dosis de refuerzo de COVID-19 e identificar posibles factores de riesgo. Métodos: Realizamos un estudio transversal con una muestra de conveniencia en Grecia durante noviembre de 2022. Se midieron varios efectos adversos tras la dosis de refuerzo, fatiga, dolores de cabeza, fiebre, escalofríos, náuseas, etc. Consideramos el sexo, la edad, la enfermedad crónica, la autoevaluación del estado de salud, el diagnóstico de COVID-19 y la autoevaluación del curso de COVID-19 como posibles predictores de los efectos adversos. Resultados: En nuestra muestra, el 96% desarrolló al menos un efecto adverso. La mitad de los participantes (50,2%) desarrollaron de uno a cinco efectos adversos, el 35,9% desarrollaron de seis a diez efectos adversos, y el 9,5% desarrollaron de 11 a 16 efectos adversos. La media de efectos adversos fue de 5,5. Los efectos adversos más frecuentes fueron dolor en el punto de inyección (84,3%), fatiga (70,8%), dolor muscular (61%), hinchazón en el punto de inyección (55,2%), cefalea (49,8%), fiebre (42,9%) y escalofríos (41%). Las mujeres presentaron más efectos adversos que los hombres (pâ¯<â¯0,001). La prevalencia de los efectos adversos de las vacunas COVID-19 fue estadísticamente significativa y se asoció positivamente con la gravedad de COVID-19 entre los individuos recuperados de COVID (pâ¯<â¯0,05). Además, la menor edad se asoció con mayores efectos adversos (pâ¯<â¯0,001). Conclusiones: Casi todos los participantes en nuestro estudio desarrollaron efectos adversos menores tras la dosis de refuerzo. El sexo femenino, los pacientes de COVID-19 con peor evolución clínica y los individuos más jóvenes experimentaron efectos adversos con mayor frecuencia.
ABSTRACT
Background: The Covid-19 pandemic stretched healthcare systems' capacity, imposed the reorganization and reprioritization of services under the burden of scarce resources, and altered the traditional way that care was provided. Palliative care, though designed to address complex needs such as relief from severe suffering, difficult decision making and complicated grief was not an exception;its holistic approach of care was seriously challenged due to infection spread restrictions. Objective: To review the impact on palliative care services from healthcare professionals' perspective. Methodology: A systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and MetaAnalysis (PRISMA) was conducted via PubMed in October 2022. Eligibility criteria included original studies that had used a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed design approach to evaluate the impact on services, delivery of care, and emotional status of palliative healthcare professionals. Results: Out of 2040 initial records, 32 studies were included in the review coming from various countries and settings with representative participation of multidisciplinary palliative care teams' members. Reported impacts concerned organizational aspects and provision of services, altered delivery of care, and implications for the mental health of involved staff. Increased workload, visiting restrictions, use of Personal Protective Equipment, and remote contact were perceived as factors compromising the quality of care provided and impeding palliative healthcare professionals from fulfilling their holistic care role. Moral distress was the most exacerbated emotional impact. Conclusions: Despite the important role that palliative care can play during a health crisis, this was not always adequately reflected on pandemic plans. In the era of the Covid-19, Palliative care entered a phase of change;whether this fact may compromise or accelerate its evolvement depends on how lessons learned will be used in future planning.
ABSTRACT
Because an annual COVID-19 booster vaccine appears to be required to control the pandemic, identifying the factors that influence individuals' decision to receive a booster dose is critical. Thus, our goal was to quantify the influence of COVID-19-related burnout on vaccination intention and to investigate the role of resilience in mediating the link between burnout and intention. We conducted a cross-sectional study with a convenience sample during October 2022. We used the COVID-19 burnout scale and the Brief Resilience Scale. The study sample included 1256 people who had received their primary COVID-19 vaccination. Among the participants, 34.1% reported being very likely to be vaccinated with a booster dose. COVID-19-related burnout was found to be inversely connected with vaccination intention. Moreover, our results suggested that resilience not only had a positive direct effect on vaccination intention but also mediated the relationship between burnout and vaccination intention. Although our study had limitations, such as a convenience sample and information bias, we demonstrate the critical role of resilience in reducing the impact of COVID-19-related burnout on the vaccination intention. Policymakers should develop and implement initiatives to address the issues of COVID-19-related burnout and enhance booster adoption by strengthening psychosocial resources such as resilience.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 booster doses for high-risk groups such as nurses are necessary to reduce the impacts of the pandemic and promote public health. We examined the relationship between COVID-19-related burnout and booster vaccination willingness among nurses, and we assessed whether social support can buffer this relationship. We conducted a cross-sectional study with 963 fully vaccinated nurses working in healthcare settings in Greece. We used the multidimensional scale of perceived social support to measure social support and the COVID-19 burnout scale to measure COVID-19-related burnout. We measured vaccination willingness with a scale from 0 (extremely unlikely to take a booster dose) to 10 (extremely likely). Among nurses, 37.1% reported being very likely to be vaccinated, 34.4% reported being uncertain about their likelihood of vaccination, and 28.6% reported being very unlikely to be vaccinated with a booster dose. We found that COVID-19-related burnout reduced vaccination willingness, while social support functioned as a partial mediator of this relationship. In conclusion, nurses who experienced burnout were less likely to accept a booster dose. Furthermore, increasing nurses' social support reduced the negative effects of burnout, resulting in improved booster vaccination willingness. Immunization awareness programs should be implemented in order to address nurses' concerns and support booster doses.
ABSTRACT
Seasonal influenza continues to be a significant public health issue causing hundreds of thousands of deaths annually. Nurses are a priority risk group for influenza vaccination and a high vaccine uptake rate among them is crucial to protect public health. Thus, the aim of our study was to estimate the levels of influenza vaccine acceptance, as well as its determinants, among nurses for the 2022/2023 season. We conducted a cross-sectional study with a convenience sample in Greece. We collected data via an online survey in September 2022. Most of the nurses in the study possessed a MSc/PhD diploma (56.2%) and had previously been infected by SARS-CoV-2 (70.3%). Among nurses, 57.3% were willing to accept the influenza vaccine, 19% were hesitant, and 23.7% were unwilling. Older age, higher levels of perceived support from significant others, and higher COVID-19-related physical exhaustion were positively related to influenza vaccination intention. In contrast, more side effects because of COVID-19 vaccination and higher levels of exhaustion due to measures taken against COVID-19 were negatively associated with vaccination intention. Since the influenza vaccination acceptance rate among nurses was moderate, policymakers should develop and implement measures tailored specifically to nurses in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic to decrease vaccine hesitancy.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The time interval between the patients' intubation and the performance of a tracheostomy has been considered as critical for the disease prognosis and outcome. The aim of the present study was to compare and contrast the outcomes of early vs late tracheostomy with regard to ICU patients' weaning from respiratory support. METHODS: This retrospective observational study, involved patients who were hospitalized in two general and one Covid-19 ICUs of two tertiary hospitals in Athens and were subjected to tracheostomy. Data were collected from the patients' medical records in order to estimate the duration of patient weaning and the number of days from the patients' intubation until the time of tracheostomy. In the present study the term earlytracheostomy denotes tracheostomy performed within 14 days from patient intubation and late tracheostomydefines the tracheostomy carried out after 14 days. For Covid-19 patients, guidelines suggested that tracheostomies should be performed 21 days following intubation, due to the high risk of virus transmission. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-one patients who underwent tracheostomy participated in the study. Most tracheostomies were performed using the percutaneous technique. The group of patients tracheostomized within 14 days after their admission in ICU weaned faster from respiratory support compared to ones who were tracheostomized after 14 days. CONCLUSIONS: The most common distinction between early and late tracheostomy is 14 days, with early tracheostomy being more beneficial in terms of patients' outcomes, and specifically ICU patients' weaning.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Tracheostomy , Critical Care , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Tracheostomy/methodsABSTRACT
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.
ABSTRACT
The emergence of breakthrough infections and new highly contagious variants of SARS-CoV-2 threaten the immunization in individuals who had completed the primary COVID-19 vaccination. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated, for the first time, acceptance of the first COVID-19 booster dose and its associated factors among fully vaccinated individuals. We followed the PRISMA guidelines. We searched Scopus, Web of Science, Medline, PubMed, ProQuest, CINAHL and medrxiv from inception to 21 May 2022. We found 14 studies including 104,047 fully vaccinated individuals. The prevalence of individuals who intend to accept a booster was 79.0%, while the prevalence of unsure individuals was 12.6%, and the prevalence of individuals that intend to refuse a booster was 14.3%. The main predictors of willingness were older age, flu vaccination in the previous season, and confidence in COVID-19 vaccination. The most important reasons for decline were adverse reactions and discomfort experienced after previous COVID-19 vaccine doses and concerns for serious adverse reactions to COVID-19 booster doses. Considering the burden of COVID-19, a high acceptance rate of booster doses could be critical in controlling the pandemic. Our findings are innovative and could help policymakers to design and implement specific COVID-19 vaccination programs in order to decrease booster vaccine hesitancy.
ABSTRACT
Given the concerns of waning immunity from the primary COVID-19 vaccines and the first booster dose, we conducted an online cross-sectional study in May 2022 to investigate willingness to receive a second COVID-19 booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine and its associated factors. Overall, 62% of the participants were willing to be vaccinated, 25.8% were unsure, and 12.3% were unwilling to be vaccinated. The main reasons against accepting a second COVID-19 booster dose/new COVID-19 vaccine were concerns about the side effects and the effectiveness and the opinion that further vaccination is unnecessary. Males, younger individuals, participants without a previous COVID-19 diagnosis, and those with good/very good self-perceived physical health were significantly more frequently willing to receive a second COVID-19 booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine. Additionally, increased fear of the COVID-19, increased trust in COVID-19 vaccinations, and decreased fear of a second booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine was associated with increased willingness. Our results show some hesitancy and unwillingness toward further COVID-19 vaccination and indicate that the fear of COVID-19 and trust in COVID-19 vaccination affects public opinion.