Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Lancet Reg Health Eur ; 18: 100414, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1867457

ABSTRACT

Background: Emergence of new coronavirus variants and waning immunity may necessitate regular COVID-19 vaccine boosters, but empirical data on population willingness for regular vaccination are limited. Methods: In August 2021, we surveyed 3,067 quota-sampled German-speaking adults residing in the D-A-CH region (Germany, Austria, Switzerland). Using multivariable adjusted ordered logistic regression models we calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) to assess factors associated with willingness to vaccinate annually against COVID-19. Findings: Among 2,480 participants vaccinated or planning to get vaccinated, 82·4% indicated willingness to receive annual COVID-19 boosters. This willingness was higher in Austria (OR=1·47, 95% CI, 1·19-1·82; p < 0·001) and Germany (OR=1·98, 95% CI, 1·60-2·45; p < 0·001) versus Switzerland and increased with age. Having voted in the last national election (ORopposition party voters=1·51, 95% CI=1·18-1·92; p = 0·001 and ORgoverning party voters=1·57, 95% CI=1·28-1·93; p < 0·001, versus non-voters) and not regularly participating in religious meetings (OR=1·37, 95% CI=1·08-1·73; p = 0·009, versus participation at least monthly) were significantly associated with willingness to vaccinate, as was partial (OR=1·97, 95% CI=1·43-2·72; p < 0·001) or total (OR=5·20, 95% CI=3·76-7·19; p < 0·001) approval of COVID-19 mitigation measures (versus non-approval). By country, Austrians showed the strongest association of voting behavior and mitigation measure approval with willingness to vaccinate. Interpretation: Targeted promotion programs informed by political and religious engagement and mitigation measure approval are needed to increase willingness to receive regular COVID-19 boosters. Funding: Medical University of Vienna, Department of Epidemiology, Danube University Krems, Department for Knowledge and Communication Management; Austrian Society of Epidemiology.

3.
J Public Health (Oxf) ; 44(1): e106-e116, 2022 03 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216674

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic surging and new mutations evolving, trust in vaccines is essential. METHODS: We explored correlates of vaccine hesitancy, considering political believes and psychosocial concepts, conducting a non-probability quota-sampled online survey with 1007 Austrians. RESULTS: We identified several important correlates of vaccine hesitancy, ranging from demographics to complex factors such as voting behavior or trust in the government. Among those with hesitancy towards a COVID-19 vaccine, having voted for opposition parties (opp) or not voted (novote) were (95% Confidence Intervall (CI)opp, 1.44-2.95) to 2.25-times (95%CInovote, 1.53-3.30) that of having voted for governing parties. Only 46.2% trusted the Austrian government to provide safe vaccines, and 80.7% requested independent scientific evaluations regarding vaccine safety to increase willingness to vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to expected, psychosocial dimensions were only weakly correlated with vaccine hesitancy. However, the strong correlation between distrust in the vaccine and distrust in authorities suggests a common cause of disengagement from public discourse.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Austria , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Government , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Trust , Vaccination Hesitancy
4.
Int Arch Occup Environ Health ; 94(8): 1823-1837, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1193141

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore changes in quality of life and perceived productivity, focusing on the effects of working from home during the first COVID-19 50-day mitigation period in Austria. METHODS: We conducted an Austrian-representative online survey (N = 1010) of self-reported life- and work-related changes during the first COVID-19 50-day mitigation period (March 16 through May 1 2020) compared to the situation before. We used multinominal logistic regression models to identify correlates of improved/decreased quality of life in the entire sample, and of improved/decreased productivity in a subsample of the working population (N = 686). We also calculated age- and multivariable-adjusted ORs and 95% CIs of an improved/decreased quality of life and an improved/decreased productivity by work from home status. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 mitigation period, quality of life improved in 17.5%, but decreased in 20.7% of the general Austrian population; perceived productivity at work increased in 12.7%, but decreased in 30.2% of the working population. Working from home during the mitigation period was associated with an increased quality of life (vs. none, partially: OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.09-3.91; all the time: 3.69, 1.86-7.29). In contrast, perceived productivity seemed to decrease when people worked from home (vs. none, partially: 1.42, 0.86-2.35; all the time: 1.48, 0.85-2.58). Working from home and related benefits were not equally distributed among gender, age, and educational attainment. CONCLUSIONS: A transition to more flexibility of workplace and working hours for employees could have important positive consequences for family and professional life, for stakeholders, for public health, and ultimately for the environment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Efficiency , Quality of Life , Teleworking , Adult , Austria/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL